Human Ancestry from a Genetical Point of View

Abstract

THE subdivision of modern man into distinct species rather than into "races" is justified in the first instance, says Prof. R. Ruggles Gates in his new book, on the score of "convenience"(p. 11). "Consistency in nomenclature and methods of classification necessitate the recognition of several species of living man", he adds (p. 406). Like Prof. Kuggles Gates, anthropologists well appreciate the difficulty of distinguishing (except arbitrarily) clear cut races of mankind and of specifying the criteria by which they are to be recognized. Indeed, at the recent International Anthropological Congress at Brussels the complexity of the problem received fresh affirmation. One might have hoped then that the first-fruits of Ruggles Gates' advocacy of the "convenience and cogency"of human species would be that the latter would prove easier to detect than the conventionally recognized 'races' or variants. However, he does not appear ready yet to adjudicate on the taxonomic rank of the many more or less distinctive groups which he recognizes. (The elaboration and adornment of the charts on p. 56 and p. 161 illustrating these groups need not be taken too seriously.) Towards the end of the book (p. 388) he puts forward five strong claimants to the rank of species in the Caucasian, Mongolian, Australian, Negroid and Bushman stocks ; but he does not, unfortunately, justify this selection by any detailed reference to the taxonomic and phylogenetic criteria which he insists are at hand to establish species differences ; nor is it made plain in which way these particular 'species' exemplify "consistency in nomenclature and methods of classification". Indeed,-it comes rather as an anticlimax to find, near,the end of the work (p. 378), that for the conferment of species rank one may have, after all, to fall back on the "opinions of a competent systematist".

Human Ancestry from a Genetical Point of View

By Professor R. Ruggles Gates. Pp. xvi+422+27 plates. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press; London: Oxford University Press, 1948.) 42s. net.