Race and Language

Introduction

Race has played a great part in the history of the world. What it really means is yet a task to be determined with precision. Race denotes heredity, and heredity includes all the moral, social and intellectual qualities that man can trans­mit. The racists hold that the racial traits – somatological or bodily characteristics and all psychological predispositions and impulses – are immutable. They therefore put the theory that the operation of the law of universal suffrage will establish man of average intelligence into public offices rather than the person of high integrity, education and birth by heredity. It will lead to the perpetuation of inferior types of men causing corresponding loss in efficiency in the social and national frame­work.

The Concept of the term ‘Race’

The term race does not possess any definite connotation of its own either in literature or in social sciences. It is used in a variety of senses. To an ethnologist race is merely a physio­logical and anatomical concept concerned with such factors as head-form, shape of the nose, stature, hair, etc. Culturally homogenous group of people is sometimes called a race. The popular conception of race is highly unscientific. Politicians very often exploit it to suit their personal ends. They try to make capital out of it by an appeal to scientists. Anthropologists, geneticists, etc., differ in the way of their approach to racial problems. Everybody has an idea of the concepts of race. The term race at times denotes a body of people living here­ditarily in a country for quite a number of generations, say like English or French people.

Etymology of the term “Race”

The etymology of the term race is still involved in mystery. It is debatable whether it is of Semitic or Slavonic origin. It is certain that the term is late in origin in Western European languages. It entered the English literature during the Tudor Period. In France it appeared in the sixteenth century. In Germany Leibnitz used it for the first time. In 1775 Immanuel Kant employed the word in his “Von den Verschidenen Races den Menschen.”Joseph Richter in his “Grammatisches Woterbuch der deutschen Sprache,”(1791) introduced the word under the spelling “rasze” (cf. Italian “razza”). It probably entered Italian from Arabic or Hebrew, ras “head.”

­Originally the term indicated a descendant of single pair or couple, cf. The Race of Abraham (Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, 1510 Edition). In Milton we have the “Race of Satan” (Para­dise Lost 1887). It is absent in the Authorised Version of the Bible where “seed” or “generation” replaces race. A number of etymologies has been offered. It has been derived from Latin radix “root” or reiza “line.” It is compared at times to Czeck raz “artery or blood.” It is linked up to Basque arraca or arraze “male stud animal.” It occurs in Spanish as “raza”, Portuguese “raca,” Old Castilian raz “head or piece.”

Characteristics of a Race

It is difficult to state definitely the characteristics a race­ possesses. The very term race eludes all explanations. The, question is raised: “Is it a biological or an anthropological concept? Are the characteristics attributed to it “hereditary”? Are the traits, again immutable? Taking everything into consideration we will lay down a few traits with their noticeable features.

i. Skin-Colour (Pigmentation): It once played a dominant role in the classification of human races. With the progress of science diminishing, stress is being laid on it by ethnologists, as it is adaptive to climatic changes. It should be noted that black and white skins are characters of physiological importance. A black skin is associated with regions of high temperatures and is adaptive to the effects of solar radiation. Similarly white skin is associated with cooler climates and moderate degrees of sunlight. On the basis of pigmentation a broad and convenient scheme was once formulated.

A.     White Skin (Leucoderm) – Pinkish white to tawny white
B.     Yellow Skin (Xanthoderm) – Light brown to dark brown
C.     Black Skin (Melanoderm) – Dark chocolate brown to black.

Each one of them covers a wide variety of colours. It is taken as a mere convenient label. It does not show any genetic relationship. African Negros are in no way related to Australian aborigines.

ii. Stature: It varies more widely than any other characters. It is readily subject to modifications by environmental conditions. Despite its modificability intense differences still prevail and various ethnic groups are differentiated. Tallest of mankind (cf. the Patagonians whose average height is five feet eleven inches) and shortest of mankind (cf. the Bushmen whose average height is four feet six inches) are found to exist side by side in the world. Take the Swedes whose average height is five feet seven inches and who live with the Lapps who are on an average not more than five feet in height.

iii. Eye-Colour and Eye-Form: Eye-forms differ according to different races – slit or opening being horizontal (common in South Europe, North Africa and the Near East) oblique (among the Xanthodermous Asiatics, Epicanthic Fold or Mongolian Fold (among the Mongolian people, also among the leucoderms or Negros).

The colour of the iris is different among different races–blue (among the true Nordics), dark brown (among the Xantho­derms), shades of black (among the Melanoderms).

iv. Face: i. Projection of the lower-face-Prognathous “forward-jawed”; ii. No projection of the lower face – Orthognathus “upright-jawed”.  !

v. Nose: Several types of nose – formations are recognised: i. Platyrrhine – when the breadth is above 85% (Nordic). ii. Mesorrhine – when the breadth is below 85% (Mediterranean). iii. Leptorrhine – when it is less than 70% (Jewish). iv. Hair-­Form and Hair - Colour. Three types are recognised – A. Leio­trichy – Straight lank hair (cf. – Asiatic Xanthoderms – Chinese, Japanes, Eskimo, B. Cymotrichy – Smooth, wavy and curly hair (cf. West Asia, Europe, North East Africa, India and Australia). C. Ulotrichy – Wooly and frizzly hair (cf. Papuans, Melanesians, Negritos, Bushmen, etc.).

vii. Head - Form: This is the most frequent method employed by the physical anthropologists and is independent of environmental changes. It takes into account the relation bet­ween the length, breadth and less frequently the height of the head. The measurement of the head of a living being or skull of a dead person is called “Cephalic Index” in the case of a lilting human being and “Cranial Index” in the case of a skull. It takes into account the relation of the breadth of the head or skull to its length, the length is usually put as 100. Three arbitary groups are recognised – A. Dolichocephalic – Long­headed, B. Mesocephalic – Medium - headed, C. Brachycephalis ­Short - headed.

viii. Blood: The term is used as an equivalent to “relation­ship.” It is a great biological error to think that blood passes from the mother to the child in the womb. This misconception is traced to the writings of Aristotle. Internationally four groups of blood–O A B AB, are distinguished. Its importance is well-proved in blood transfusion.

Classification of Races

Due to lack of standard techniques of measurements and definite criterion in physical traits, various authorities have devised various schemes of classifications - i. Linnaeus and Cuvier divided humanbeings into 3 races. ii. Blumen(1950-1840) classi­fied man into 5 races –white (Caucasic), yellow (Mongoloid), Tawny (Malayan), Red (American) and black (Ethiopic). iii. Denniker established 13 races and 30 sub-races. iv. A. B. Keith found 4 races. v. Eickstedt and Eugen Fischer distinguished 3 main races – Ethiopic, Mongoloid and Negroid. vi. Elliot Smith divided mankind into 6 races - Negro, Mongol , Nordic, Alpine, Australian and Mediterranean.

Divisions of races into sub-races are sometimes met with. Thus: i. Caucasoid – 4 sub-races (Nordic, Alpine, Dinaric ­Mediterranean) ii. Mongoloid – 6 sub-races. iii. Negroid.

Myth of an Aryan Race

Sir William Jones (1746-1794) introduced the term “Arya” into European literature. He used it in a purely linguistic, sense. The term “arya” is Sanskritic in origin and means noble. It occurs in Avesta as Airya “venerable”, in Old Persian as Ariya “an Aryan and of Aryan descent”, and as name of a German tribe called “Arii”. The Romans use the term “Ariana” to indicate Eastern Persia. That is the region now called Afghanistan. In course of time the term came to denote a group of languages – Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Avestan, etc., as having certain distinctive features in common.

In the year 1953 Max Mueller (1923 - 1900) introduced into current usage the term “Aryan” with two implications – a linguistic, that is, an Indo-Iranian sub-group of Indo-European and the other a geographic, that is, the cradle of these Aryan speaking languages in Ariana in Central Asia. He at the same time introduced an element of discord by adumbrating a corresponding “Aryan Race”. Max Mueller ultimately realised the grave error he committed and made amends. In 1888 he wrote “The Aryans are those who speak Aryan languages, whatever their colour, whatever their blood.”

Nordic Superiority

This evil that Max Mueller committed in attributing a racial colour to the term “Aryan” fired the imagination of a group of self-interested ethnologists in Europe and America. The English group is represented by T. Carlyle (1795-1881), T. A. Froude (1818-1894), C. Kingsley (1819-1895) and J. R. Green (1837-1883). In Germany the idea of “Aryan Superiority” became very popular. It was taken as basis of a propaganda by Houseton Stewart Chamberlain in Germany and Madison Grant and others in America. In France Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau (1816-22) – Essai sur l’inegalite’ des races humaines (1853-55), advocated the superiority of a so-called Aryan Race, Lapouge, a Frenchman in his work L’Aryen(1899) identified the Aryans with the Nordic Race – fair, tall, long-headed, etc. Gustav Kossinna, the East Prussian nationalist anthropologist, advanced the theory that throughout the pre-historic ages all progress of mankind was due to the people whom he called the Nordic, the Germanic, the Aryan, all being used interchangeably. This theory supplied the inspiration to Adolf Hitler for his Mein Kampf. After the first world war, the Germans became frustrated and felt lonely. They were after a new philosophy and the theory of superior race (Herrenvolk) filled the gap to propagate a new “Weltanschaung.”

Are the Jews a Race?

In popular parlance everybody is familiar with the jews as a race. Even the very scientists, the medical men, the historians, politicians and the like speak of the Jews as a race. What does it then mean? It means a group of people, though widely scattered, inherit a group of physical and behavioural pattern in common – short to middle in stature, a long hooked nose, greasy skin, dark complexion, thick lips, etc. Even the Jews pride themselves as “Gods chosen people”. They sometimes feel that they belong to a distinct race – the Jewish Race.

From the standpoint of an anthropologist the Jews do not constitute a race but they form a distinct group. To support their case the Old Testament is sometimes quoted. But it is not consistent. Moreover from Old Testament we can glean that the early Jews lived on the western bank of the Euphrates. Terah, father of Abraham, was an inhabitant of Ur of the Chaldees, close to the Persian Gulf. Here and to the south-west dwelt several Arab tribes speaking closely related dialects. The converts drawn by Abraham for his religion belonged to members of some of these tribes. Their physical differences were negligible. When they developed as a religious group, intermixture commenced first with the Canaanites of the lowlands and then with the Amorites of the highlands of the south-west. In course of time, the Hittites, the Amalekites, the Kenites and even the Egyptians got mixed up with them.

Thus we see, from the very early antiquity, the Jews a mixed people. It was during the period of Exodus (1220 B. C.) there were further mixtures with other races. At the time of Diaspora the Jews came into contact practically with almost all races of the globe. During the Babylonian Captivity (5th century B. C.) the Jews met many Mesopotamian peoples. The Jews penetrated the Hallenistic world in the fourth century B. C. During the time of the Maccabees in the second century B. C. the Jews made their movements to the Roman world - to Spain: Italy and France – and even to Rhineland. At the time of the First Crusade (11th century A. D.) due to massacre by the Christian knights, the Jews started movements towards the east. The Jews of Rhineland settled in Galicia, Bukovina and southern and western Ukraine. Here the Jews met their earlier sett­lers, adopted the speech of Rhineland group called “Yiddish” and became known as Askenazim (Hebrew name for German and Polish Jews) as distinguished from Sephardin (Jews of Spain and Portugal). In such a long sojourn diversity in physical traits is bound to occur.

Racial Classification of Languages

Various types – geographical, genealogical, typological, etc.–­of classification of languages have been evolved at one time or another. It was once proposed that all languages should be classified on racial basis, that is, each race having a language of its own. The racial languages, so far as the theory goes, seem to be quite good. The study of history and anthropology has shown that race and language are not identical. This confused identity has been strengthened by the misleading nomenclatures adopted by certain writers, that is, terms used in anthropology’ (cf. Caucasian, Dravidian, etc.) were taken over by the linguistics to use them in linguistic sense. There could be no greater mistake than this. Language is certainly a great bond that cements various races which, in course of time under common social, political and religious conditions, would develop a common speech. So the question of identity of race and language is chimerical. The non-identity of race and language is demonstrated by examples drawn from history.

i. Greek Colonies in the ancient world – The Greeks planted a number of colonies in different parts of the ancient world–­Mediterranean shores, France, Italy, Spain, Africa, etc. The earliest Greek settlement in Italy was Cumae in Campania on the Tyrrhenian Sea. Chalcis in Sicily was the earliest colony founded by the Greeks. Of the many Greek settlements in south Italy, Locri, Rhegium and Tarentum were famous. Massilla (modern Marseilles in France) was founded by the Ionian Greeks.

ii. Norman Settlements in France – The Normans who landed in Normandy in northern France were Danish heathen barbarians who spoke Teutonic languages. They accepted the language and customs of the natives. In course of a century or more, they disappeared from history as a Scandinavian pirate and became a foremost representative of the Roman speech and religion.

iii. Wends in Prussia – The eastern part of Germany has a Slavic substratum now represented by the descendants of the Wends. They infiltrated as far west as the Elbe, occupied lands left vacant by the Teutons. In course of time these Wends were Teutonised and were regarded as Germans of good standing. This total loss of language and identity of the Wends sets us a thinking of the modern Prussians (Barussians).

iv. Malaya-Polynesian Languages – These language_ are spoken by a well-defined group which stretches a wide area of the earth’s surface. It extends from Madagascar to Easter Island and from Hawaii to New Zealand and represents no less than three distinct races – the Negro-like Papuans and Melanesians, Malaya Race of Indonesia and Polynesians of the outer area.

v. Huguenot refugees in Europe – The Huguenots, a body of French Protestants of the 16th century, came into prominence in England in the region of Henry II. In 1572 some thousands of Huguenots were slain in the Massacre of St. Earthelomew. With the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, large number of Huguenots fled to Switzerland, Germany, Low countries and England.

vi. Finns of Finland – The Finns, originally a peaceful people, had their home in Central Asia north of the Sayan mountains and between Lake Baikal and headwaters of the Yenesei. Ethnologically they belong to the Altaic group of races but linguistically they are put in the Uralic or Finno-Ugric language-family.

vii. Infiltration of population – During the declining days of the Roman Empire the southern parts of Italy became the habitat of a large number of non-descript slaves of all races. They were brought to the coasts of the Mediterranean sea to work for the Roman overlords.

viii. The Aryans as invaders – The Aryans (that is, people speaking the Aryan language) entered India, met the abori­gines having distinct racial affinities and imposed their Aryan speech.

ix. Veddas of Ceylon – The Veddas, a people of pre­-Dravidic group, inhabit Ceylon and lead a very peaceful-exist­ence. They speak of a modified form of Ceylonese.

x. The Japanese in North Japan – The Japanese in the northern part of Japan speak Japanese but are to a very considerable part Ainu in blood.

xi. Yukaghir of Siberia – The Yukaghirs belong to the north-east of Siberia. Racially they preserve to a considerable extent their own blood but linguistically they are in a melting pot. In most cases they borrow the language of their neigh­bours – the Turks, etc.

xii. Magyars of Europe – Magyar is the name given ethnologically to the pre-dominant group in the population of Hungary. These people were originally Asiatic in origin. They migrated from the eastern European steppes and settled down in the Carpathian basin in 889 A. D. under the leadership of Arpad. They are now largely assimilated by the general European type in their physical features. Their language belongs to the Finno-Ugric group and bears no relationship with any other Indo-European languages.

xiii. Negros of Africa – The name Negro (Lat. Niger­–black) is given to the dark-skinned peoples of Africa who had been carried away to different parts of the world, particularly America to act as slaves. The Negros as a race belong to the Negroto division of mankind. They speak different languages in the countries of their settlements – in USA they speak English. In Cape, Briton, Island Gaelic, in Haiti Spanish, etc.