A diagrammatics of race: Samuel George Morton's ‘American Golgotha’ and the contest for the definition of the young field of anthropology

History of the Human Sciences (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Between the last decades of the 18th century and the middle of the 19th century, something of paramount importance happened in the history of anthropology. This was the advent of a physical anthropology that was about the classification of ‘human races’ through comparative measurement. A central tool of the new trade was diagrams. Being inherently about relations in and between objects, diagrams became the means of defining human groups and their relations to each other – the last point being disputed between the monogenists and the polygenists. James Cowles Prichard, a proponent of the comparative historical approach, was able to do without images in his pioneering Researches Into the Physical History of Man of 1813, but the third edition, which appeared in five volumes between 1836 and 1847, was richly illustrated with ‘ethnic types’ and skulls, including diagrams. What was happening is a process I engage with in detail for Samuel George Morton, who collected and distributed human skulls as lithographs in Crania americana (1839) and Crania aegyptiaca (1844). Along with the paper skulls travelled detailed instructions of how to look at them through a set of lines and to set their individual parts in relation to each other as well as to those of other types. Drawing on Johann Friedrich Blumenbach and Peter Camper, the Crania thus played a pivotal role in establishing what I call a diagrammatics of race – a diagrammatics that became overtly political with Types of Mankind (1854), which was written in Morton's honour by Josiah Nott and George Gliddon.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Gould on Morton, Redux: What can the debate reveal about the limits of data?Jonathan Kaplan, Massimo Pigliucci & Joshua Banta - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 52:22-31.
The Existential Demands of Race: Dialogues in Theological Anthropology.Hue Woodson - 2020 - Journal of African American Studies 24 (2):223-237.
Collingwood and Racial Considerations.S. K. Wertz - 2021 - Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 27 (1):99-115.
Romanticism, Race, and Recapitulation.Gabriel Finkelstein - 2001 - Science 294 (5549):2101-2102.
Janus‐faced race: Is race biological, social, or mythical?Adam Hochman - 2020 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology 1.
The assisted reproduction of race.Camisha A. Russell - 2018 - Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
I—A More Radical Solution to the Race Problem.Quayshawn Spencer - 2019 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 93 (1):25-48.
Race Science and Definition.Albert Atkin - 2017 - In Naomi Zack (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Race. New York, NY, USA: pp. 139-149.


Added to PP

13 (#1,041,239)

6 months
9 (#317,143)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

The Mismeasure of Man.Stephen Jay Gould - 1983 - Ethics 94 (1):153-155.
Diagrams as Centerpiece of a Peircean Epistemology.Frederik Stjernfelt - 2000 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 36 (3):357 - 384.

View all 14 references / Add more references