...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
caucasianism and modern science
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by supercar: [QB] I think we have to be careful when describing facial features, particularly the nose. This is because we play into the hands of Euro-anthropologists’ and Eurocentrics’ definition of race. So when S. Mohammad objected to Homeylu’s description of "the Beja tribe has the same nasal indices of a swedish person, or that Japadhola of Uganda has same facial features of Austrailian Aboriginals, and so on", he appropriately does so, in that the description is almost like using the term "Caucasoid" features. It is like saying that the Nubian woman possesses the features of [b]other races[/b], like those of the Arabs, Western Asians, and the Swedes. S.O.Y has gone to great lengths to show that there is no such basis for describing people, and he even debunks it, as you’ll see in the following paragraph. As for Homeylu's objection to the impact of climate on the shape of the nose, the highlighted portion of following paragraph explains this: 1. In the most recent well-known anthropological work attacking Afrocentric positions on the "race" of the Egyptians, Brace et al. (1993) commit the decades old error of giving greater variabilty to those traditionally labeled "Caucasoids." While, Brace et al. attempt to avoid using such labels, their classification methods nonetheless show that they subscribe to the same idea (only under the guise of "clusters and clines").[b]In attempting to show that greater gene flow has occured between Somalis and Europeans, they assign undue importance to the traits like narrow noses and narrow faces, while discounting evidence such as dark complexion and "supra-Negroid" limb ratios (long, slender limbs. Thus, while suggesting that the dark skins of Egyptians may not be due to gene flow at all, but only to adaptation, they see narrow noses in Somalia as suggestive of gene flow with northwest Europe more subtantial than that with the geographically contiguous sub-Saharan Africa!:[/b] "There is the very real possibility, for example,that the darker skin pigmentation visible in the people of the Upper Nile is not caused by the mixing of a population that come from somewhere else." (Brace et al., 1993, p. 20) "As our data show, the people of the Horn of Africa are craniofacially less distinct from a spectrum of samples marginally including South Asia and running all the way from the Middle East to northwest Europe than they are to any group in sub-Saharan Africa." (Brace et al., 1993, p. 19) That gene flow is suggested by the Brace et al., data is proven by the following quote: "Our own battery of craniofacial measurements, however, deals with traits that , for the most part, have little demonstrable relationship to specific selective forces. For this reason, their use are largely indicators of the genetic relationship of the groups compared." (Brace et al., 1993, p. 19) However, Brace et al.'s "own battery" of tests is based mainly on measurements of the nose.[b] According to the same article, nasal "elevation and elongation" is influenced by adaptation to the environment. In fact, there is little to suggest that any of the nasal measurements that make up the vast majority of the twenty-four variables used by Brace et al., are not influenced by selective forces. Since these make up the vast number of variables used, the distances, or relative similarity, shown in the Brace et al. graphs (dendograms) do not support their argument on genetic relationship. Evidence shows that the structure of the nose, both bony and soft tissue, may undergo radical changes to adapt to the environment (Molnar, 1991). Thus, nose shape would give little evidence of genetic relationship. Eskimos, American Indians, Northern Chinese, etc., all have narrow noses but show little other evidence of gene flow with Europeans. Indeed, genetic studies have shown that the belief that straight, narrow noses among Nilotic peoples is due to migrations from Europe or Asia is [i]not[/i] correct. (Molnar, 1991) [/b] [b] Related to the previous point, there was, and to a great extent, still is a practice of labeling traits according to race. Thus, the long, high narrow nose becomes "Caucasoid." Indeed, the importance of the nose in Western anthropology is so great that one might label it "nasal science." [/b] For in the division of the races, the nose has played a greater part than the skull altogether. The nasal nature of the Brace et al. study is reminiscent of an earlier work by Risley (1915), that sought to racially classify the castes of India according to nasal index. According to Risley's thinking, the higher castes would have been primarily of Caucasoid ancestry and thus would have longer noses. Later studies by Ghurye (1961) and Dutt et al.(1973), however, show Risley's studies were invalid. The glaring discrepancy of the data in the two Indian studies as compared with Risley, despite measuring the same populations, was also startling. [b] The fact that one of the most discriminating nasal characteristics is often ignored in studies of population affinities is revealing.[/b] This is the shape of the nasal profile, a non-metric trait. In forensic anthropology, it is this profile that allows investigators to determine the difference in ancestry between the Amerind or Polynesian, who might have narrow noses, as compared to Caucasians. [b] The Caucasian type is one of the only groups that possesses almost entirely a straight profile, while most other groups have concave or concavo-convex. Most "Negroids," have either concave or straight profiles.[/b] Interestingly, in ancient and modern Egypt, the nasal profile is also a mixture of concave and straight. In an interesting study by forensic anthropologists of the Egyptian scribe, Pepi (Kennedy et al., 1986), the following interesting comments are made concerning the racial identification traits of ancient Egyptians: "While the Upper Nile Egyptians show phenotypic features that occur in higher frequencies in the Sudan and southward into East Africa (namely, facial prognathism, chamaerrhiny, and paedomorphic cranial architecture with specific modifications of the nasal aperature), these so-called Negroid features are not universal in the region of Thebes, Karnak, and Luxor." Notice while the described traits are not "universal" in certain areas of Upper Egypt, yet these features definitely predominate even in these areas. In fact, the studies of Keita have shown this is so, and such traits are by no means uncommon in Lower Egypt (Keita, 1993). However, even such a trait as the concave nasal profile alone would not prove much. Any reasonable study would have to avoid any labeling of traits whether explicit or implied. [b] The choice of variables is broad, and Keita makes few attempts at gauging the selective quality of each trait. Indeed, views like those expressed by Brace et al., (1993) e.g., that the elongation and elevation of the nose is related to the local rate of moisture in the air is inconsistent with a number of examples found throughout the world. For example, the native Australians, despite living in one of the driest regions of the world for tens of thousands of years, have one of the broadest noses of any peoples.[/b] You can read the full page at : [URL=http://asiapacificuniverse.com/pkm/anthro.htm]http://asiapacificuniverse.com/pkm/anthro.htm[/URL] [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 07 July 2004).] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3