BI-RACIAL – ANOTHER “RACE” – SOME AFRICAN AMERICANS ARE FOR IT – SOME AGAINST IT – IT IS PREDICTED (TO THE ANGUISH OFTHEKU KLUX KLAN AND ARYAN BROTHERS – AS WELL AS EUROCENTRIC “INDO-EUROPEAN “RYAN” – “INDO-EUROPEAN” “RACIAL” ORIGIN OF THE “HUMAN RACE: !
African American Professor Frank Snowden, Howard University Professor, author of book “Blacks in “Antiquity” on the “True Negro” and Nilotic Negro
Snowden on the true Negro and the Nilotic Negro traits of the negroid race in their most marked form appear in a subtype that anthropologists have designated as the ‘true’ or ‘purest’ type of African Negro. This group possesses, among others, these characteristics:
(1) color varying from reddish-brown to deep brownish-black;
(1) tightly curled and wiry hair described as woolly, frizzly, or kinky;
(2) a broad, flattened nose;
(3) thick lips, usually puffy and everted;
(4)prognathism, often marked in the subnasal region. [Footnote: M. J. Herskovits, Encyclopaedia Britannica, XVI (Chicago, London, Toronto 1960): s.v. Negro 193 explains the usage of ‘true’ Negro;
Hooton, Ape 622 uses the term ‘purest’type of African Negro. For a discussion of this and other subtypes of Negroes, see Herskovits 193-194, and Hooton 619-623. See Chapter II for examples in classical art of Negroid traits in their most marked form. [Herskovit – Encylclopedia Britannica (1959)
Roots of the racial classification “Mediterranean” people: Hamitic, Nilo-Hamitic:
On the negro (Nilotic Hamitic Nilo-Hamitic – the Hamitic myth), Frank Snowden in Blacks in Antiquity stated:
Another subtype of Negro known to the ancients apparently assembled a group described variously by anthropologists as ‘Nilotic,’ ‘Hamitic,’ or ‘Nilo-Hamitic’ (designated hereafter as Nilotic). [Footnote: See L. Oschinsky, The Racial Affinities of the Baganda and Other Bantu Tribes of British East Africa (Cambridge, England, 1954), Table LIX) for the designations ‘Hamitomorphs,’ Nilomorphs, and Nilohamitomorphs as applied to certain East African Negroes.] (emphasis added)
Hamitic Nilotic compared with the “true Negro,” according to Snowden:
An African American Professor Frank Snowden stated: “the true Negro”
“This type is black or bluish-black in color, has reduced prognathism (often absent), less platyrrhiny, and lips probably less thick or everted than in the ‘true’ Negro, with hair, according to M. LJ. Herskovitz, ranging from less tightly curled to almost straight, and with long narrow faces.
Though the numerous likenesses of Negroes are the work of artists and not of photographers, there can be little doubt that the Greeks and Romans were well acquainted with types we today call Negroes and that their artists have left us a rather accurate picture of the Negroid Ethiopians whom they saw in their daily life.
‘The African race came late in the development of humankind – and was not a part of the Dynatic Egyptian civilization – Junker –
And tries to provide evidence in support of the Hamitic myth. Dr. Junker (German Anthropologist – H. Junker, First Appearance Of Negroes In History,Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology, volume vii, pp. 121:52, in 1924, denied that the Negro was the founder of the earliest Egyptian civilization. ‘based on in the back of Junker’s mind – was the conventional picture of the negro – blubber lips, ape-like face, lark heel, pepper-corn hair – between which the scalp is visible, ’thinness of calves’ and ‘long, narrow skull,’ said Joel A. Rogers. Rogers indicated that Jjunker ‘says he was able to find none of these characteristics in the graves of the oldest period accessible to use, i.e. roughly from 5,000 to 3,600 B.C. and that the Ethiopians, or Nubians, described by Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, Ammianus, and others as ‘black and woolly-haired,’ were Hamites.
‘It is no wonder that he didn’t find any of that type, however because the kind of negro created by the right-wing ethnologists is a rarity. It is no more characteristic of the race than the ape-like creature of the bogs that was once used to represent the Irish was true of all Irishmen.’
and that Ainwood Reade said: >the typical negro is a rare variety even among negroes.=
“Frobinius in Smithsonian Institution, (1866) says
‘Open an illustrated geography and compare >the type of the African negro, “the bluish-black fellow of the protuberant lips, the flattened nose, the stupid expression, and the short curly hair,” with the tall, bronze figures from dark Africa with which we have of late become familiar, their almost fine-cut features, slightly arched nose, long hair In other respects, too, the genuine African of the interior bears no resemblance to the accepted Negro type. …
“The very black people of the Congo and New Guinea have experienced a natural process, the reverse of that of the blonds of Scandinavia. Kinky hair probably is due to the same cause. The pepper-corn hair of the Bushman might have once been like the hair of the of the Sudan. The sparse grains of hair on a Bushman’s scalp reminds one strikingly of the sparse growth of vegetation on the American deserts.
“ ‘Generally speaking, the hairiest men, like the hairiest animals, live in cold countries. The very black man, like the corn-silk, blond, therefore, seems to be an extreme type caused from too long living in one environment and with little or no race mixture.’
Joel A. Rogers, Sex and Race, Volume I: The Old World (Helga M. Rogers: New York), 1967, p. 29, citing G. Spiller, Papers on Interracial Problems, p. 14, London, 1911 and Von Luschan, Races and Peoples, p. 43.
“As Professor Dorsey says,
‘Pure types are extreme types. blue eyes, flaxen hair, white skin is an extreme type. the huge African with kinky hair, black skin, thick lips, high, smooth brow, hairless body is equally extreme. One is as pure as the other; one is as high as the other.’
“Despite the truth of the above, it should be noted that Sir Harry Johnston (Sir Harry Johnston, The Uganda Protectorate, Volume Ii, London, 1902), supposedly the foremost authority on the African negro, was quoted as saying:
‘The Hamitic stock – racial type – was the main racial type of the ancient Egyptians (Johnston – 1902).
“The Hamite, that negroid stock, which was the main stock of the ancient Egyptians, is best represented at the present day by the Somali, Galla, and the blood of Abyssinia and Nubia. And that Sir M. W. Flinders Petrie (Sir M. W. Flinders Petrie, Royal Society of Arts Journal, Volume XLIX, 1901), famed Egyptologist, says that the pharaohs of the Xth dynasty were of the Galla type, and the Gallas are clearly what are known in our day as Negroes.”
[Source: Joel A. Rogers, Sex And Race, Volume I: The Old World (Helga M. Rogers: New York), 1967, p. 29, citing g. Spiller, Papers On Interracial Problems, p. 14, london, 1911 and Von Luschan, Races And Peoples, p. 43.
The continuation of “the Hamitic myth” in the late 20th cemtury and the beginning of 21st century – re: “Creating A Bi-Racial Race,” Lee D. Baker, Professor In The Department Of Cultural Anthropology at Duke University, in “Profit, Power, And Privilege: The Racial Politics Of Ancestry,” in Souls: A Critical Journal Of Black Politics, Culture, And Society, volume 3, number 4, fall, 2001 Editor, Manning Marable, Columbia University, who indicated:
“In March 2000, each adult residing in the United States was supposed to receive a census form – and was then confronted, once again, by those ominous racial boxes. This time you could check more than one box. Your ability to check more than one box was a compromise worked out by the Commerce Department and two opposing efforts to lobby the administration. One effort was launched by people who identify as biracial, or of mixed-race descent, and who wanted their own box. The other effort was led by theN.A.A.C.P. and the National Council of La Raza, who argued that the boxes should remain the same.
“Although virtually every Latino, Black, or Native American person should go ahead and check ‘all of the above,’ the powerful biracial lobby did not want to force its constituents to choose between identifying with one ancestor of another. The NAACP and others argued that the census was about identification – not identity – and pressed the administration to make an accurate count of people who are identified as racial minorities in order to gain a better understanding of intercity demographics and to maintain the ability todemonstrate disparate impact. these organizations wanted to be able to account for all people identified as Black, Hispanic, and so on.
“In this case, the biracial lobby viewed race as a proxy for ancestry, whereas the NAACP viewed race as a proxy for political status.
“ … From the centuries-old ‘one-drop’ rule to the complex equations used to claim tribal membership, race, culture, and heritage have always been used inconsistently in a struggle to define social, political, and economic relationships. Although it appears in the above cases that race, ancestry, and political status are applied in a sort of catch-as-catch-can manner, there is a simple and usually predictable logic that shapes these >contradictory forces, facts and tendencies. Profit, power and privilege. like the investigative reporter who >follows the money,= a scholar is wellserved if he or she looks for the way people use race to acquire or protect any one of these three ‘p’s. It appears that these advocates are trying to institutionalize a mixed-race category which, in other countries at least, turns on a claim to white privilege.
“We can learn from South Africa, Jamaica, Haiti, and even Louisiana and South Carolina that efforts to institutionalize not a hybrid-heritage but a mixed-race category actually advances racial injustice. [Minkah Makalani, in A Bi-Racial Identity Or A New Race? The Historical Limitations And Political Implications Of A Bi-Racial Identity,”
In Souls: A Critical Journal Of Black Politics, Culture, And Society, Volume 3, Number 4, Fall 2001, it was also indicated:
“Over the past fifteen years in the United States, there has emerged a concerted push to racially reclassify persons with one black and one white parent as biracial. advocates of racial reclassification are calling for the establishment of a biracial identity that is both socially and officially recognized. they are joined by a cohort of scholars, many of whom are themselves biracial identity advocats, who argue that such an identity is more appropriate for persons of mixed parentage than a black one.
“They maintain that a biracial identity would better recognize the complete racial background of persons of mixed parentage and offer a more mentally healthy racial identity than a black racial identity. moreover, they exalt a biracial identity as a positive step in moving society beyond issues of race and toward the realization of a color-blind society. Focusing on the scholarship advocating a biracial identity for people with one black and one white parent, I argue that such an identity has no historical basis, and would have a negative political impact on African Americans.
The Creation of a “New Race” – “positioned as an intermediary between blacks and whites in a reordered racialized social system”: “Bi-Racial – the new American race”!:
“Historically, and currently, white supremacy in the united states has hinged on the oppression of people of African descent. the position of African Americans in the political economy has served as the basis for the development of a racialized social system, the restructuring of that system at different historical moments, and the incorporation of new social groups as races (bi-racial African Americans, Hispanics) into that hierarchy. Given this theoretical perspective, we must keep in mind that the push for a biracial category has come, and made its greatest strides, amid predictions that by the year 2050 whites will be a numerical minority and that proponents have shown considerable enmity toward the black community and have received the backing of conservative political figures such as Newt Gingrich, George Will, and Ward Connerly. At issue is not merely creating a new personal identity, but the creation of a new race. this new racial group would be positioned as an intermediary between blacks and whites in a reordered, racialized social system.
“Rather than erase the current color line of racial oppression, it would draw an additional one that would present new problems for the black freedom movement and the black community. Thus, it is a racist project. the central concern, therefore, is the impact that a racial reclassification of people of mixed parentage will have on the structure of racial oppression and the black community.
“… Hardly any work advocating a biracial identity addresses racism in the white community, and most portray whites as increasingly liberal on racial issues. … Lewis R. Gordon argues that with regard to black people: the impact of social policy being premised on mixed racial parentage >is that it fails to account for political realities that are already premised against= black people. … Biracial identity scholars have drawn several conclusions that are based on false assumptions,
Biological determinism and an unwillingness to seriously engage the black historical experience
“Caucasian race” – “Nordic Race”: “The Nordic race is one of the racial subcategories into which the Caucasian race was divided by anthropologists in the first half of the 20th century.
“Nordicism” (also “Nordic theory”): “is an ideoogy of racial superiority which claims that a Nordic race within the greater Caucasian race, or Germanic peoples (i.e. Germans, Flemish, Danes, Dutch, Norwegians, Icelandic, Earoe Islanders, English, Swedes), constitute a master race. [Footnotes: 10: James A. Gregor (1960): “Nordicism Revisited” Phylon, 352-360; 11; The racial ideology of Nordicism should not be confused with the political movement of Nordism (Pan-Scandinavianism).
“Nordic Race”: Madison Grant:
“People from the areas of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and northern Poland were also considered by Madison Grant, the author of The Passing of the Great Race to be a part of the Nordic Race. Maybe due to the high percentages of light hair color and eye color in these areas. … This ideology was mainly prevalent in the late-19th and early 20th centuries in Western Europe and North America and achieved mainstream espousal in the Third Reich.
William Ripley, American economist, tried to define scientifically the “Nordic race” in his book “The Races of Europe” (1899). He created a tripartite model that was later popularized by Madison Grant.
It divided Europeans into three main subcategories: (1) Teutonic, (2) Alpine, and (3) Mediterranean.
(1) Teutonic race resided in Scandinavia, north Germany, Baltic states and East Prussia, north Poland, north Russia, in Benelux countries, Britain, Ireland, parts of central and southern Europe and was typified by “very light” hair, blue eyes, tall stature, and narrow, aquiline nose. Georges Vacher de Lapouge had called this race “Homo Europaeus” while Joseph Deniker had used the term “Nordic.”
“European Racial Types” according to Ripley: [Footnote: 16: Ripley (1899), The Races of Europe, p. 121; Synonyms column shortened]
Head Face Hair Eyes Stature Nose
(2) Alpine (Celtic): Round Broad Light chestnut Hazel gray Medium, Variable,
Stocky Rather broad;
Homo Alpinus (Lapouge)
(3) Mediterranean Long Long Dark brown or black Dark Medium Rather broad
Synonyms (Not listed)
Long Long Very light Eyes: Blue Tall Narrow, aquiline
Synonyms: Nordic (Deniker), Homo Europaeus (La pouge)
“Nordic” or “Baltic Type”:
Madison Grant in his book “The Passing of the Great Race,” defined the “Nordic” or “Baltic” type as “long skulled, very tall, fair skinned, with blond or brown hair and light colored eyes. The Nordics inhabit the countries around the North and Baltic Seas and include not only the great Scandinavian and Teutonic groups, but also other early peoples who first appear in southern Europe and in Asia as representative of “Aryan” language and culture. [Footnote: 17: Madison Grant, The PaSSING OF THE Great Race, Scribner’s Sons, 1921, p. 167
It is now known that many times the Nordic or other phenotypes of external features of physiognomy inherited do not correlate or recombine with any particular direct blood lines, even from those of non-European origin. [Footnote: 97
“The emergence of population genetics further undermined the categorization of Europeans into clearly defined “racial groups.” A 2007 study using samples exclusively from Europe found an unusually high degree of European homogeneity: ‘there is low apparent diversity in Europe with the entire continent-wide samples only marginally more dispersed than single population samples elsewhere in the world. [Footnotes: 93, 94, 95, 96: ]
Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups:
“Listed here are notable ethnic groups within Europe that were considered “Nordic,” and those assumed to have received considerable “Nordic” input at some time in History from those population groups above and this is their inner percentages of variability by human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups based on relevant studies done recently on tested members of its population.
“The samples are taken from individuals identified with the ethnic and linguistic designations in the first two columns, the third column gives the amount of total Sample Size studied, and the other columns gives the Percentage of the particular genetic Y haplogroup. Those ethnic groups formerly considered “racially pure nordic” or “mostly Nordic” show again and again to be a mixed composition of different European lineages within varied degrees, but none unique or exclusive to those from “other Europeans considered before southern or eastern (not “Nordic”) and, or, racially different.”
Then came the conclusion
“It is now known that many times the Nordic or other phenotypes of external features of physiognomy inherited do not correlate or recombine with any particular direct blood lines, even from those of non-European origin. [Footnote: 97
Column 1: Column 2:
Swedes (Northern) Indo Europe (Germanic, North) 48
Swedes Indo-European (Germanic North) 110
Swedes Indo-European (Germanic, North) 160
Norwegians Indo-European (Germanic North) 52
Norwegians Indo-European (Germanic North) 25.9 17 40
Danes Indo-Eurpean (Germanic North) 194
Orcadians Indo-European (Germanic West)
Sami (Sweden) Uralic (Finnie) 38
Ashkenazi Jews Indo-European, West) 79
Ashkenazi Jews Indo-European, West) 442
Austrians Indo-European, West)
Bavarians Indo-European (Germanic, West)
Belgians Indo-Eurpean (Germanic, (Italic)
Belarusians Indo-European ((Slavic, East)
British Indo-European (Germanic, West) 32
Czechs Indo-European (Slavic, West) 257
Czechs and Slovaks Indo-European (Slavic, West) 26.7
Czechs and Slovaks Indo-European (Slavic, West) 198
Dutch Indo-European (Germanic West) —
English (Central) Indo-European (Germanic West) 215
Estonians Uralic (Finnic) 325
Finns Eralic (Finnic) 57
Finns Uralic (Finnic) 38
Frisians Indo-European (Germanic West) 56
Frisians Indo-European (Germanic West) 55.3
Germans Indo-European (Germanic West) 48
Germans Indo-European (Germanic West) 16
Germans Indo-European (Germanic Berlin) 103
Greeks Indo-European (Greek) 77
Hungarians Uralic (Ugric) 45
Latvians Indo-European (Baltic 148
Ethnic Macedonians Indo-European (Slavic, South) 211
Macedonians (Skopje) Indo-European (Slavic, South) 52
Poles Indo-European (Slavic, West) 93
Russians Indo-European (Slavic, East) 122
Russians (Northern) Indo-European (Slavic, East) 380
Russians (Belgorod region) Indo-European (Slavic, East) 143
Scots Indo-European (Celtic) 178
Swiss Indo-European (German,/Italic) 144
Welsh (Anglesey) Indo-European (Celtic) 88
“The Nordic race is one of the racial subcategories into which the Caucasian race was divided by anthropologists in the first half of the 20th century The debates about this “Nordicism” (also “Nordic theory”): “is an ideoogy of racial superiority which claims that a Nordic race within the greater Caucasian race, or Germanic peoples (i.e. Germans, Flemish, Danes, Dutch, Norwegians, Icelandic, Earoe Islanders, English, Swedes), constitute a master race. [Footnotes: 10: James A. Gregor (1960): “Nordicism Revisited” Phylon, 352-360; 11.”
END OF CHAPTER 11 MIGRATION TO MIDDLE EAST / EVOLUTION OF THE CAUCASOID – AFTER CHAPTER 11 HOMO SAPIENS SAPIENS – THE AFRICAN ODYSSEY: THE AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE IN WORLD HISTORY AND HUMAN BIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY: FROM PREHISTORIC TIMES AND THE EARLIEST CIVILIZATIONS TO THE 21ST CENTURY BY HAROLD L CARTER (2013)