The American Indian: Part 3

The American Indian: Part 3:Origins

Thomas Allen

    Several hypotheses have been proposed for the origins of the American Indians. These hypotheses consist of five groups: Asiatic, Asiatic-Oceanic, Asiatic-European, autochthonous, and mythical.

    According to the Asiatic hypothesis, all the Indians of America are descended from various Turanian racial types or peoples who crossed from Siberia to Alaska in several waves of migration. This hypothesis is the most widely held hypothesis.

    According to the Asiatic-Oceanic hypothesis, most Indians are descended from various Turanians crossing from Siberia to Alaska. However, some Indians are descended from Australians (Indo-Australian). This hypothesis has several variants.  Some have the Australians entering South America by a southern route. Others have them entered America by crossing from Siberia to Alaska. Still others claim that in addition to Australians entering through Alaska, Melanesians also came to South America. Another variant is that while some of the ancestors of the American Indian came through Alaska, others cross the equatorial Pacific to settle in Central and South America. This hypothesis is second only to the Asiatic hypothesis in popularity.

    According to the Asiatic-European hypothesis, some American Indians are descended from Turanian immigrants from Asia. The others are descended from immigrants from Europe — probably Cro-Magnards or people related to Cro-Magnards. (Cro-Magnards were of the Melanochroi species.) The European immigrants most likely came across the North Atlantic although some hold that they came through Alaska. A variant of this hypothesis substitutes North Africa for Europe. This hypothesis has few followers.

    According to the autochthonous hypothesis, American Indians originated in America. Autochthonous creationists hold that the original ancestors of the American Indian were created in America. Autochthonous evolutionists hold that the American Indian evolved from a pre-Homo sapiens humanoid or from a very primitive Homo sapiens who had not yet evolved into races. Not many people hold this view. This hypothesis is perhaps the lease favored one.

    According to the mythical hypothesis, at least some Indians are descendants of people from Atlantis or Mu who fled to America when Atlantis or Mu sank. Although this hypothesis is popular in some circles, it currently has little to support it.

    Several other hypothesis, which are not discussed in this article in any detail, have been proposed. They included:

    1.    The Lost-Tribe-of-Israel Hypothesis: The lost tribes of Israel came to America and created the civilization of Mexico and Central America. Some maintain that they were the progenitors of all Indians. They probably came by way of the Bering Straight although they might have come across the Atlantic.[72]

    2.    The Malay Hypothesis: The Malays came to Mexico and Central America and established the civilizations there.[73]

    3.    The Phoenician Hypothesis: The Phoenicians are the originators of the Mexican and Central American civilizations.[74]

Asiatic Hypothesis
    The Asiatic Hypothesis is perhaps the most widely accepted hypothesis for explaining the origins of the American Indians. According to this hypothesis the original ancestors of the American Indian is found in Asia.

    Edward Brerewood (1622)[75] was perhaps the first to identify the American Indians with Turanians. He concluded that they were related to the Tatars.

    George Louis Leclerc, Conte de Buffon (1749)[76] is among the earliest advocate of the Asian origins of the American Indians. He bases his conclusion on the morphological resembles that he recognizes between Indians and Turanians, such as Japanese, Chinese, and Turks.

    Johann F. Blumenbach (1775)[77] is another early supporter of the Asian origin theory. He believes that the American Indians originated in northeastern Asia as Mongoloids (Turanians). These Asians came to America in several migrations and at different times. Eskimos are the most recent arrivals and resemble the Asian Mongoloids the most.

    Oscar Peschel (1885)[78] maintains that ancestors of the American Indians entered America by crossing the Bering Strait. At the time of the crossing, mostly an isthmus occupied what is now the Bering Strait. The Arctic Ocean did not connect with the North Pacific; thus, the climate was much milder then than now. However, even if the geography of this region was in ancient times as it is now, early man could have crossed the strait in boats. As land in America could be seen from Asia, the voyage was not a leap into the dark, but a journey to visible land. The greatest proof that the ancestors of the Indians originated in Asia, the land of the Turanian species, is the Mongoloid characteristics of the present Indians.

    O. T. Mason (1894)[79] believes that the American Indian is the progeny of Indo-Malaysians. People from Indo-Malaysia skirted the East Asiatic and American Northwest coast until they reached the Columbia River or some adjacent area. From this region, these people spread across the Americas to become the American Indians. These voyages from Indo-Malaysia continued for thousands of years until the Chinese and other civilized people settled along the Asiatic coasts and halted them. To support his theory, he notes the physical similarities between Malayans and Indians and possible linguistic affinities along  the primeval route, and similarity of social institutions, arts, and industries.

    Ales Hrdlička (1917)[80] maintains that the American Indians are of northeast Asian origin and that they are exclusively Mongolian immigrants, who came in successive waves. He links various Neolithic men from eastern Siberia to tribes of America. The southern Eneolithics resemble the high-vaulted Algonkin type. Contemporary Chukchi are related to the Bering Sea Eskimo. The Aleuts descended from the round-headed Tungus. Their path of migration was across the Bering Straight. They came by water, not by land. He supports the late arrival of man in America. The arrival of the first wave was after the Wisconsin glaciation, the last North American glaciation, which is approximately 20,000 to 25,000 years ago, and most likely no earlier than 3000 years ago.

    A.C. Haddon (1925)[81] supports, like Hrdlička, the north Asiatic route for the progenitors of the American Indian and holds that they are all Turanians. He eliminates Europe as the home of any of their ancestors.

    Haddon identifies several migrations of people from Asia. First the pre-glacial people are the paleo-ethnic inhabitants of America. They are the Lagoa-Santa type of South America, who are short in stature with a high and narrow head. They are found in eastern Brazil, in southern Patagonia, and Tierra del Fuego, on the islands of western and southern Chile, on the Ecuador coast, and in southern California. He identifies the descendants of these people as the Paleo-Amerinds.

    The second pre-glacial people are the inhabitants between the Rocky Mountains and the Atlantic Ocean. They are tall in stature with a head that varies about the lower limit of bracycephaly. They probably migrated to North America by the north Pacific bridge before the last glacial period. They are the ancestors of the North American Indians.

    Later came a more brachycephalic (i.e., round-headed or broad-headed) people from Asia. These immigrants moved down the Pacific Ocean and settled in Central and South American and the southwestern United States. The Neo-Amerind descended from them.

    Robert B. Bean (1932)[82] identifies four basic migrations to or invasions of America. These migrations to America began during the Paleolithic era and continued into the Neolithic era. During the Paleolithic era, man began migrating from the Iranian Plateau and across the plateaus of Turkestan and Siberia. From these plateaus, the population gradually spread over northern Asia and then into America. Part of these people crossed into Alaska and spread over the Americas. These early Paleolithic immigrants were followed by Neolithic immigrants.

    The first people to enter America were long-headed (dolichephic). Their descendants include the Algonquin, Iroquois, Shoshonean, and Prman Aztec tribes. The Lagoa Santa race were part of this first invasion.

    Next came a brachycephalic type from whom came the Toltecs. People of this second invasion settled along the northwest coast and in the Gulf States, Mexico, Central America, and Peru.

    The third invaders were the Athapascan. They spread across Alaska and northwest Canada. They were also brachycephalic people. Although most remained in Alaska and Canada, some migrated south. The Hupa, Navaho, and Apache are descendants of these southern migrants.

    Finally came the Eskimo. They came from the extreme northeast corner of Asia and adjacent Alaska. They spread across the northern part of North America to Greenland.

    Christy Turner (1985)[83] uses dental studies to support the Mongoloid Asiatic origins of American Indians. Turner’s studies show that the teeth of ancient Americans closely resemble the teeth of northeastern Asians. The teeth of these Mongoloids distinctly differ from the teeth of other races of men.

    The ancestors of the American Indians originated in northern China. From here they spread into eastern Mongolia. Then they migrated northward through the Vitim and Lena river basins until they reached the Laptev Sea, which would have been the western edge of Beringia. At this time Beringia was an extremely cold tundra steppe. They then turned east and traveled across Beringia to Alaska where they arrived about 10,000 to 13,000 B.C. From here they eventually spread across North and South America. These first arrivals were the Paleo-Indians. From them all other Indians descended except the Aleuts and Eskimos and the Greater Northwest Coastal Indians.

    Next to arrive were the Aleuts and Eskimos. Their ancestors also originate in northern China. They cross Manchuria and traveled down the Amur river basin to the Sea of Okhotsk. From here they gradually migrated around the Kamchatka Peninsula and finally crossed into Alaska before 3000 B.C.

    The third and final group of Asiatics to enter America were the Athapaskans (Na-Dene), the Greater Northwest Coast Indians. They came from eastern Siberia.

    Stephen Zegura (1985)[84] believes that the ancestors of the American Indians crossed Beringia into Alaska sometime between 30,000 and 15,000 years ago. Their descendants spread across North and South America. The ancestors of the Athapaskans and the Aleuts and Eskimos arrived at a much later date. As no Aleut or Eskimo skeletal remains dating before 2000 B.C. have been found, the arrival of their ancestors was probably not much before then.

    Dumond (1987)[85] dates the movement of the Athapaskans southward to the northwest coast to be about 10,000 to 8,000 years ago. About 4,500 years ago, the Aleuts and Eskimos appeared in Alaska.

    M.S. Schanfield (1990)[86] uses genetic evidence (immunoglobulin variations in Siberian, Eskimo, and American Indian populations) to identify four migrations from Asia. The earliest group is the ancestor of the South American Indians. The third group is the Athapaskans. Last are the Aleuts and Eskimos.

    R.A. Roger and E.C. Pielou (1991)[86] argue that the Asians entered by coastal routes. Coastal routes had to be used because the ice-free corridor would not have provided adequate food, clothing, or firewood.

    Crawford (1998)[88] hypothesizes that the ancestors of the American Indians came from Asia and were Mongoloids. He bases his conclusion on genetic similarities, morphological resemblance in contemporary populations, craniometric affinities, and cultural similarities.

    In kind and frequency of genetic markers of the blood, Indians resemble Mongoloids of northeast Asia. Several genetic makers occur only in American and Asian populations. These makers includes Diego allele, DI*A; gamma globulin allotypes, GM*A T; Factor 13B*3; transferrin, TF*C4; and complement, C6*B2 alleles. (These makers do not occur in every individuals or population group; however, they do occur in a high frequency in both Turanians of Asia and Indians of America.) Crawford identifies several other genetic markers that these two populations have in common.

    Another genetic trait that American Indians share with Asian Mongoloids is a high frequency of dry or brittle earwax. In the other species of men, sticky or wet earwax is the type most common.

    Among the morphological characteristics that American Indians generally share with Asian Mongoloids are straight black hair, sparse beards and body hair, and Mongoloid sacral spot. The face of both is relatively flat with small brow ridges and broad zygomatic arches, which gives a high-cheekbone appearance. The epicanthic fold is common in Asian Mongoloids and some American Indians. Shovel shape incisors is common in both populations, but occurs at a much lower frequency in Aryans and Negroes.

    Cultural similarities exist between northeastern Siberians and Americans. Both hold a belief in spirits who must be placated with ritual. Both have shamans or medicine men, who have visionary power given to them by direct contact with the supernatural. Their primary function is curing disease. The Plains Indians and Taiga of Siberia have a similar type of dwelling. Both use calendar sticks.

    Crawford identifies two times that a land bridge occurred between Siberia and Alaska. They were between 45,000 and 70,000 years ago and between 25,000 and 14,000 years ago. The absent of a land bridge, however, would not necessarily deter human migration. During severe winters the sea between Asia and Alaska freezes sufficiently to allow human migration.

    Once man crossed the land bridge, he needed the opportunity to migrate southward. The glaciation that lowered the sea level to create the land bridge also resulted in glaciers covering much of Canada into the northern part of the United States. During the Wisconsin glaciation, which occurred between 12,000 and 70,000 years ago, two great ice sheets covered much of northern North America. The smaller one covered the central mountains of British Columbia and stretched from the Aleutian Islands to the Columbian River valley. The larger one extended from the Arctic Ocean to the Ohio River valley and from the Atlantic Ocean to the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains of Alberta. At peak periods of glacial expansion, the two sheets most likely meet. These peak periods occurred between 15,000 to 18,000 years ago and 62,000 and 65,000 years ago. During these periods, human migration southward would have been blocked. (Even when the corridor was open, Fladmark questions whether it was used. He doubts that the corridor was large enough to support the herds necessary to sustain hunters as they migrated from Alaska to the central plains.) Crawford concludes that Asian Mongoloids entered America between 30,000 and 40,000 years ago in a minimum of three or four migrations.

    A major problem with the Asiatic Hypothesis is the total lack of interchange of useful commodities between the Old World and the New World. The people of the Americas did not receive from Asia silk, iron, cereals, such as wheat, rice, and millet, from Asia, or beasts of burden, such as the horse, donkey, and camel. The people of Asia did not receive from the Americas such useful foods as maize, potatoes, and tomatoes or such desirable products like tobacco. This criticism is especially true for theorists who have large scale migrations to America of the Neolithic era. Of coarse, if man came from Asia during the Paleolithic era or early to mid Neolithic era as many of the Asiatic theorists hold, they can rightly claim that these useful items had not yet been discovered or developed in the Old World. However, why should man cease coming from the Old World to the New World during the Neolithic era? After all, as time past, man’s ability to navigate both on water and land increased. Furthermore, why were the migrations essentially one direction, from Asia to America?

    A significant problem with Hrdlička’s hypothesis, and those who have followed him, is that it is based on the hypothetical existence of an average American Indian type. He compared this representative type to Turanians of northeast Asia. He relies primarily on tegumentary characteristics (external appearances) and generalizations, many of which have not been proven statistically. He also fails to consider essential points of differences pertaining to the skeleton and skull, such as height and orbital, cormic, and facial indices. His major flaw is that he lumps all American Indians together as one racial type. He ignores the great somatic variation displayed in American Indians.

    A problem with Mason and many other Asiatic theorists is either the inability or failure to account for the presence of two types of primitive man in southern South America.

    Furthermore, except for the Eskimos and Aleuts, the languages of the American Indians do not resemble any of the languages of the Old World.

Asiatic-Oceanic Hypothesis
    Although not as popular as the Asiatic hypothesis, the Asiatic-Oceanic hypothesis does a better job of explaining the racial differences of the American Indian. According to this hypothesis, most Indians are of Turanian origin. However, the ancestry of some important racial types among the American Indian seems to come from Australians or Melanesians of Oceania..

    Paul Rivet’s (1925)[89] maintains that the Indians of America are the result of migrations of four racial types. The Mongolian and Eskimo elements migrated across the Bering Straight. The Australian and Melanesian (Malayan-Polynesian) elements entered the southern part of South America via a southern route. He dates the Australian arrival to have occurred about 4000 B.C. The Mongolian type represents the preponderance of the immigrating groups who arrived in several waves over an extended period, usually via the Bering Straight.

    To support his thesis, Rivet uses osteometric and somatometric characteristics of various tribes who inhabit the southern extremes of South America. He compares these characteristics to Australians. He also compares languages of South American tribes to those of the Australians.

    Besides Australian elements in South America, Rivet also identifies a Melanesian element. This element is identified with Paleo-Amerindian or Lagoa-Santa type. This race has been formerly found from Lower California through the southwest United States and as far as Colombia, Ecuador, and Brazil. Skulls of these Indians clearly resemble those of Melanesia. He also uses linguistic and ethnographic data to support his thesis.

    Unlike the Australians, the Melanesians were excellent navigators and skilled boatmen. They could have reached South America — especially since currents and winds are favorable for such a trip.

    A. Mendes Corrêa (1925)[90] suggests the possibility of Australian Tasmanians migrating across Antarctica to South America. If in an earlier epoch, the climate of Antarctica was more favorable than now, which it probably was, the journey could be made following the then existing string of islands, straights, peninsulas, and channels. This route eliminates the need for long transoceanic voyages. This explanation of the route taken by the Australians eliminates a major difficulty with Rivet’s thesis. (Rivet believes that Mendes Corrêa adequately explains how the Australians traveled to South America.) 

    G. Montandon (1933)[91] provides a different explanation of how Australians came to South America. Polynesians enslaved Australians to build megalithic monuments like those on Easter Island. Perhaps Polynesians brought Australians to South American to procure raw materials. On one of these voyages, some of the Australian slaves escaped. From these escaped slaves came the Indian tribes descended from the Australians. 

    J. Imbelloni (1938)[92] identifies seven waves of immigration. First came the Tasmanian Australian. Imbelloni believes that the Australians migrated northward along the Asiatic coast, crossed the Bering Strait, and then migrated down the American coast to the southern part of South America. They were dolichocephalic (i.e., long-headed or narrow-headed) and short. From these people came the Fuegians — the extant Yamana, Alakaluf, and Chono, and extinct tribes who lived on the coast of Chile and northern California.

    Melanesians, who came by land, comprised the second wave. They were short with an exceptionally high cranial vault and pronouncedly narrow temples and ultradolichocephalic. The ancient skulls found in Lagoa Santa, Punin, Texas, and Lower California are theirs. Culturally, these people were seed gathers. They were the ancestors of the Laguian racial type of Brazil.

    The third wave was a very tall, dolichocephalic people similar in part to the Australian type. They also entered by land. Culturally they were nomadic hunters. They were the progenitors of the Dakota (Plains Indians) of North American and Pampeans of South American.

    The fourth group were a Proto-Malayan (or Proto-Indonesian) people, who were of medium height and dolichocephalic. These people arrived by sea. Their culture ranged from head-hunters like that of Borneo to agriculturalists like that Indonesia. Settling in South America, they became the progenitors of the Amazonians of South America.

    The fifth contingent was predominately Mongoloid, probably Tungus or Paleo- Siberians. They were the ancestors of the Pueblo-Andeans.  Culturally, they practiced intensive agriculture and had patrilineal institutions.

    The sixth component resembled the most civilized people of Indonesia, the Deutro-Malayans. Their characteristics were identical with the Pueblo-Andeans, but they were more intensive. That is, they were of lower height and greater brachyskelia (short legs and a long trunk) and were ultrabrachycephalic. They arrived in the first century A.D. and created the Middle American Civilization. They were the progenitors of the Isthmians.

    The seventh wave consisted of the Aleutians (or Columbians) and Eskimos.

    Thus, Imbelloni identifies seven waves as constituting 10 racial types of American Indians. These waves consisted of at least six racial types of two different species of men entering America. They are the Tasmanian and Melanesian types of the Australian (Indo-Australian) species and the Proto-Malayan, Deutro-Malayan, Tungus, Paleo-Siberian, Eskimo, and perhaps other types of the Turanian species. Based on his thesis, the Fuegians and Laguians are Australians, and the remainder are Turanians.

    Harold S. Gladwin (1947)[93] offers an interesting and unusual Asiatic-Oceanic hypothesis. He identifies six migrations consisting of several races. These migrations began around 25,000 years ago and ended about 500 A.D.

    The first migration to America began about 25,000 years ago, plus or minus 5000 years, and continued for several thousand years. These first immigrants were Australoids. Physically, they were dolichocephalic with long, narrow faces, broad flat noses, prominent overhanging brow ridge, and protruding muzzles. They came out of eastern Asia, crossed into North America via the Bering Isthmus, and migrated southward along the Pacific coast to southern California. From here some spread eastward into Texas and eventually scattered over much of the United States. Others continued into Central and South America and eventually scattered over much of South America. Most of these immigrants settled in the southwest United States, northern and eastern Mexico, eastern Central American, Ecuador, northern South America, and eastern Brazil.

    The second migration began about 15,000 B.C. These immigrants were Negroids. These Negroids, who were related to the Negritos and Melanesians, came from southeast Asia. They crossed the Beringia into Alaska, migrated through the Yukon and Mackenzie valleys into the western plains, and scattered over much of the United States. Folsom man and related people descended from these Negroids.

    The third immigrants were the Algonquins. Beginning around 1000 B.C., the Algonquins started migrating from Siberia to Alaska. This migration lasted until about 500 B.C. The Algonquins followed the route used by the Negroids into the western plains. From here they spread across the northern United States and southern Canada. From these immigrants descended the Mohican, Delaware, Shawnee, Sauk, Fox, Menominee, Ojibway, Cree, Blackfoot, Kootenay, and Salish. 

    The fourth immigrants were the Eskimos. About 500 B.C., at the end of the Algonquin migration, came the Eskimos. They came from Siberia and spread across Alaska and northern Canada into Greenland. This migration lasted about 200 or 300 years. These people had an unusually long and high skull, a broad flat face with prominent cheekbones, a very narrow nose, and an epicanthic eye fold. They were the first true Mongoloid people to enter North America. The Eskimos were the first people to arrive in the Americas who possessed truly Mongoloid physical features or any evidence of Mongoloid culture.

    The fifth migration to America began about 300 B.C. and lasted until around 600 A.D. These immigrants were Mongoloids. Physically these people were brachycephalic broad-headed with brown eyes, slanted eyelids, prominent  cheekbones, straight black hair, scant facial hair, and yellowish-brown skin. Although some may have come from southeast Asia, most probably came from northern China. They crossed into Alaska, traveled through the Yukon and Mackenzie river basins into the plains east of the Rocky Mountains. Then they spread southward and eastward. (The Uto-Aztecans followed a different route. They came down the western side of the Rockies.) Some migrated into Mexico; a few continued farther south into Columbia and down the Pacific coast of South America. From these Mongoloids came the Penutian, Uto-Aztecan, and Athabascan tribes. The fifth wave of immigrants were probably the progenitors of the people whom Haddon describes as Neo-Amerinds, and Dixon, as Paleo-Alpines.

    The sixth migration began about 300 B.C. and lasted until about 500 A.D. These immigrants were Polynesians and Melanesians, both of whom Gladwin considers a polyglot of Greeks, and various people of the Middle East, India, Indonesia, and Malaysia. From these people descended the Arawaks, who were more closely related to the Polynesians, and the Caribs, who were more closely related to the Melanesians. These immigrants crossed the Pacific Ocean and landed along the coast of Central and South America. Some of these Polynesians also settled along the coast of British Columbia.

    Calvin Kephart (1960)[94] also presents an Asiatic-Oceanic hypothesis. He believes that perhaps the earliest people to arrive in America were Pre-Dravidians (i.e., people of the Australian species). These people originated in India and migrated through Farther India and across Indonesia to Australia. From here they moved to South America across the South Pacific during the height of the glacial period when mountain peaks projected above the water. This migration probably occurred during the Buhl glacial advance about 10,000 years ago.

    They were the ancestors of the Aymara and other Quichua-speaking people, including the Incas. These people have quite a broad nose and appear intermediate between the Veddas and Papuans (two racial types of Australians). At one time the descendants of these Pre-Dravidians spread over much of South American. They may have ranged as far north as southern California.

    They were also the ancestors of other tribes in the eastern Brazil highlands, Ecuador, and Peru, who show an affinity to the Veddas. These people are short. They are dolichocephalic with a small and very high skull. Their face is short and wide with a concave nose of medium width and prognathic profile. They have yellowish-brown skin and long black wavy or curly hair. These non-Turanian Indians of South America constitute Haddon’s Paleo-Amerinds.

    The first Turanian immigration to American occurred about 20,000 years ago across the Bering Sea. The earlier immigrants were tall to medium height and dolichocephalic. Most of the later arrivals were short and brachycephalic.

    With the exception of the Eskimos, most of the dolichocephalic Turanians were of the Min racial type. Mins are a racial type of the Turanian species who originated in Szechwan province of China. This is the predominate racial type of this province today. While most Turanians are brachycephalic, Mins are dolichocephalic.

    Over the centuries various tribes of Mins from Szechwan spread across much of China and into eastern Siberia. Some of these tribes continued northeastward. About 20,000 years ago some of these Mins crossed the Bering Straight, traveled through the Yukon and Mackenzie River valleys, and eventually settled in Colorado and New Mexico along the eastern edge of the Rocky Mountains. Other tribes of Mins continued to arrive in North American until about 6500 B.C. After the initial contingency of Mins arrive, the second contingency came in several waves between 17,000 and 14,000 years ago. Perhaps the most significant contingency came around 8000 B.C. As these various waves of Mins came, they spread over the central plains of Canada and the United States, the Mississippi valley, and the northern and eastern woodlands. Among the descendants of the Mins are the Indians of New England, Lenni-Lenape, Iroquois, Chippewa, Blackfoot, Kootenai, Apaches, and probably the Pimas, and Otomi. Most, if not all, tribes of eastern and central North America are their descendants. These Indians constitute Haddon’s Northern Amerinds.

    The later Min tribes to arrive were a mix of Mins and Ugrians. Unlike the Mins, who were dolichocephalic, the Ugrians were brachycephalic. They were also shorter. These people migrated southward into Central and South American. They were the progenitors of the Patagonians (Tehuelche), Pampeans, and Borroro tribes of Matto Grosso, Brazil. 

    The second distinct Turanian migration was more purely Ugrian in racial type although some tribes may have been mixed with Tunguses. These Ugrians entered North America via the Aleutian Islands and migrated southward along the Pacific coast to Central and South America. Among their descendants are the Papago, Maya, Toltec, Aztec, Huaxteca, and Totonac of Mexico and Central America. They were also the progenitors of the Indians of Guiana and the Arawaks of the West Indies. These Ugrians constituted part of Haddon’s Neo-Amerinds.

    The third distinctive Turanian migration to North American was the Tunguses. The Tunguses were primarily brachycephalic. They came from Mongolia. The earlier arriving Tunguses probably included the most brachycephalic of Haddon’s Neo-Amerinds. They settled on the American plateau and in Mexico and Central and South America. The later arriving Tunguses settled along the Pacific coast from
 60̊ north latitude southward to the United States border. These later arriving Tunguses constitute Haddon’s Northwest Coast Amerinds.

    The fourth and final distinctive migration was that of the Eskimos. About 3000 B.C. Eskimos were driven from the Khingan Mountains to northeast Asia. From here they later crossed into North America and spread across the northern Alaska and Canada to Greenland. Their arrival in the Arctic may not have occurred until after the first century A.D.

    A major difficulty with the Australians is explaining how they arrived. Arrival by way of the Bering Straight is highly unlikely. These primitive people would have had to travel tens of thousands of miles through hostile environments and hostile people. They had little or no knowledge of navigation. Without such knowledge, it is inconceivable that they could have crossed the Pacific Ocean on their own. 

    Another problem with Rivet’s hypothesis is that he dates the arrival of the Australians at about 4000 B.C. Yet evidence shows humans inhabiting Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego before 8700 B.C. A major short-coming of hypothesis like Mendes Corrêa’s that have an Antarctic migration route is that it lacks archeological proof to support the Antarctic route. 

    A major problem with the Polynesian slave theory is that Polynesians do not appear to have reached Easter Island until about 400 A.D. Moreover, evidence that man occupied islands of the southeastern Pacific early enough to serve as a staging point for colonization of the Americas is lacking. The distances from the islands of the south Pacific to South America are great (Easter Island, one of the closest, is about 2000 miles from Chile).  Although evidence has been found indicating that people from the South Pacific did land in South America, they arrived long after others had inhabited the continent.

Endnotes ‒ Continued

72. John D. Baldwin, Ancient America, in Notes on American Archaeology (New York, New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1872), pp. 166-167. Brinton, American Race, p. 18. Wauchope, pp. 50ff.

73. Ibid., pp. 167-171.
 

74.  Ibid., pp. 171-174.

75. Kenneth MacGowan, Early Man in the New World (New York, New York: The Macmillian Company, 1950), p. 12.

76. Michael H. Crawford, The Origins of Native Americans: Evidence from Anthropological Genetics (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 3.

77. Ibid., p. 3.

78. Oscar Peschel, The Races of Man, and Their Geographical Distribution (New York, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1885), pp. 400-401.

79. Keane, Ethnology, p. 365.

80.Comas, pp. 625-628. Crawford, pp. 27-28. Jeffrey Goodman, American Genesis: The American Indians and the Origins of Modern Man (New York, New York: Summit Books, 1981), pp. 43-44;
MacGowan, pp. 15-17. 

81. A.C. Haddon, The Wandering of Peoples, 1912; reprint. (Washington, D. C.: The Cliveden Press, 1984), pp. 74-114.

82. Bean, pp. 62, 66, 81.

83. Crawford, pp. 221-223. Christy G. Turner II, “The Dental Search for Native American Origins,” Out of Asia: Peopling of the Americas and the Pacific, Editors Robert Kirk and Emöke Szathmary (Canberra, Australia: The Journal of Pacific History, Inc., 1985), pp. 30-58.

84. Stephen Zegura, “The Initial Peopling of the Americas: An Overview,” Out of Asia: Peopling of the Americas and the Pacific, Editors Robert Kirk and Emöke Szathmary (Canberra, Australia: The Journal of Pacific History, Inc., 1985), p. 13.

85. Crawford, p. 30.

86. Ibid., p. 22.

87. Ibid., p. 13.

88. Ibid., pp. 4ff.

89. Comas, pp. 628-629. MacGowan, p. 169.

90.Comas, pp. 629-632. MacGowan, p. 169.

91. Comas, pp. 632-633.

92. Comas, pp. 633, 635-637. MacGowan, p. 170.

93. Harold S. Gladwin, Man Out of Asia (New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 1947), pp. 65-69, 87, 93, 95, 97-100, 136-139, 148, 150, 158-162, 164-166, 172-175, 226, 245, 252, 261, 335, 349. MacGown, pp. 170-174.

94. Calvin Kephart, Races of Mankind: Their Origin and Migration (New York, New York: Philosophical Library, Inc., 1960) pp. 93-97, 99, 103-114.

Copyright © 2010 by Thomas Coley Allen. 

Part 1   Part 2   Part 4

 More articles on anthropology. 

The American Indian: Part 2

The American Indian: Part 2: Types Continued

Thomas Allen 

    A. C. Haddon (1925)  identifies six racial types of the American Indians. They are the Eskimo, Northwest Coast Amerind, Northern Amerind, Neo-Amerind, Tehuelche, Paleo-Amerind or Lagoa Santa type. A description of each type follows:

    1. Eskimo:[41] Skin color: brownish- or reddish-yellow. Head hair: black, straight, leiotrichy. Face: flat, very broad; prominent cheekbones. Eyes: black, straight; epicanthic fold occasionally occurs. Head shape: very dolichocephalic; some mesocephalic; very low; very high. Feet and Hands: relatively small hands and feet. Stature: short to medium.

    Eskimos range along the Arctic Coast from Greenland across Canada and Alaska into extreme northeast Asia.

    2. Northwest Coast Amerind:[42] Skin color: lighter than Northern Amerind. Head hair: lighter than Northern Amerind; frequently brownish; frequently slightly wavy; leiotrichy. Face: very broad; moderate height in north to great height in south. Nose: in north: concave or straight, rarely convex, of slight elevation; in south: very high, rather narrow, frequently convex. Head shape: brachycephalic. Body characteristics: short body; long arms. Stature: medium (below average in south; above average in north).

    Northwest Coast Amerinds are found along the northwest coast of North America from the northern border of Washington to 60̊ north latitude. The Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian, and Kwakiutl are of this type.

    3. Northern Amerind:[43] Skin color: yellow-brown. Head hair: black; long; straight; leiotrichy. Nose: straight or aquiline. Head shape: dolichocephalic; mesocephalic with tendency toward brachycephalic. Stature: tall.

    Northern Amerinds are the Indians of the Plains and northern and eastern woodlands of North America. North Amerinds include the Cree, Ojibway (Chippewa), Sioux, Fox, Micmac, Huron, and Iroquois.

    4. Neo-Amerind:[44] Skin color: warm yellowish brown; cinnamon. Head hair: black; long; straight; leiotrichy. Nose: straight or concave; rarely aquiline. Head shape: brachycephalic. Stature: short to tall.

    Neo-Amerinds are the Indians of the North American plateau, Central America, and South America. Among the Neo-Amerinds are the Huaxteca, Totonac, Warrau, Arawak, Wapiana, and Carib.

    5. Tehuelche:[45] Skin color: brown, dark coppery. Head hair: black; long; straight; lank; leiotrichy. Head shape: brachycephalic. Statue: very tall.

    Tehuelche are found in Patagonia south of Rio Negro and in Tierra del Fuego. The Tehuelche and Pampeans of Patagonia are of this type. The Ona of Tierra del Fuego and the Borroro of Matto Grosso are also of the Tehuelche type.

    6. Paleo-Amrind:[46] Skin color: yellow, brownish, or reddish-yellow. Head hair: black; wavy or curly, smooth; leiotrichy. Face: prominent brow ridge; narrow fore-head; long face. Eyes: deep set. Nose: leptorrhine; sunk; narrow at root. Head shape: formerly very dolichocephalic, now mostly mesocephalic; hypsicephalic with high vault; small skull, archaic. Stature: short.

    Although Paleo-Americans ranged over a large area in the past, today they are found in only a few places in South America. In eastern Brazil they are found among the Tapuya, such as Botocudo (Aymoro or Buru). This type is also found in southern Patagonia, Tierra del Fuego, the islands of western and southern Chile and the coast of Ecuador. Besides the Botocudo, the Yaghan and Alakaluf are also of this type.

    Remy Cottevieille-Giraudet (1928)[47] identifies five basic racial types of American Indians. They are H. s. atlanticus or Cro-Magnon, which corresponds to Deniker’s North American; H. s. asiaticus, which corresponds to Deniker’s Central American; H. s. oceanicus, which corresponds to Deniker’s South American or Lagoa Santa; H. s. australensis, an Australoid, which is nearly extinct; and H. s. hyperboreus or Eskimo.

    A description of each of the first three subspecies follows:

    H. s. atlanticus: “Very tall dolichocephals with short, extremely wide face, protruding cheekbones, prominent and leptorrhine nose, well-defined chin, stiff black hair, normal eyes, dark reddish skin.”[48]

    H. s. asiaticus: “Short stature, brachycephals, with euryene, flat and rounded face, prominent cheekbones, wide flattened nose, stiff dark hair, eye with epicanthic fold, yellowish skin.”[49]

    H. s. oceanicus: “Hyperdolichocephals of medium height, with small skull, short and wide face pyramidal in appearance; mesorrhine nose, sometimes concave; wavy hair; brownish skin.”[50]

    J. Imbelloni (1943) provides one of the most extensive classifications. He identifies eleven racial types of American Indians. They are as follows:

    1. Subartids (Eickstedt's Eskimids, Sergi’s Hesperanthropus Columbii eskimensis,  Biasulti's H. sapiens neo-arcticus, Brinton’s Arctic Group, Deniker’s Eskimo, Haddon’s Eskimo): Skin color: yellowish-brown. Head hair: black, coarse and stiff. Face: pentagonoid; broad; extreme development of the jaws and cheekbones. Eyes: epicanthic fold present in a large percentage. Nose: rather prominent. Head shape: mostly dolichocephalic although there are meso- and even brachycephalic occur in Alaska; keel-shaped. Body characteristics: plump and sturdy; arms and legs relatively short; the Mongolian or sacral spot is frequently present. Feet and hands: small. Statue: medium.

    “They inhabit the Arctic coast from northeast Asia to Greenland.”[52]

    2. Columbids (Eickstedt's Pacijids, Biasutti's Aleutian race, Briton’s Northern Pacific Group, Deniker’s Pacific North American, Haddon’s Northwest Coast Amerind):[53] Skin color: light. Facial hair: sparse. Head shape:  very brachycephalic. Body characteristics: the trunk is short and compact; very long arms and short legs. Stature: tall or medium.

    “They occupy the North American northwest on the Pacific coast from Alaska to the Columbia River.”[54]

    3. Planids (Eickstedt's Sylvids; Sergi’s  H.c. planitiae, Biasutti's Dakota race, Brinton’s North Atlantic Group, Deniker’s Atlantic North American, Haddon’s Northern Amerind):[55] Skin color: reddish-brown skin, rather light. Head hair: dark. Face: high cheekbones; extreme physiognomic sexual dimorphism. Eyes: dark iris. Nose: long and aquiline. Chin: square, heavy, protruding. Head shape: mesocephalic. Stature: tall.

    “They inhabit the region in North America from Alaska to the Atlantic bounded on the north by the Arctic zone and on the south by the Rocky Mountains and Alleghenies, penetrating deeply into the Mississippi basin.”[56]

    4. Sonorids (Eickstedt's Margids, Biasutti's Sonorid race, Sergi's H.c. sonorae, Brinton’s North Pacific and Mexico Groups, Deniker’s Pacific North American and Atlantic North American): Skin color:  much darker than Planids, with reddish highlights. Face: narrow receding forehead; face with rounded contours. Head shape: mesocephalic; small head. Body characteristics: macroskelia. Statue: rather tall.

    “They occupy the Pacific Coast south of the Columbia River, that is, the States of Oregon and California and also the State of Sonora (Mexico), west of the occidental Sierra Madre."[57]

    5. Pueblo-Andids (Eickstedt's Andids, Sergi's H.c. andinus, Biasutti's Pueblo-andid race, Brinton’s North Pacific and Mexican Groups [Pueblo] and South Pacific Group [Andids], Deniker’s Pacific North American [Pueblo] and South American [Andids], Haddon’s Neo-Amerind):[58] Skin color: variable with dark pigmentation predominating. Head hair: straight, coarse; black. Body hair:  sparse. Face: short face; large bizygomatic diameter. Nose: broad base but prominent bridge. Head shape: meso- and brachycephalic; small head without platycephaly. Body characteristics: extremely developed trunk in relation to the extremities. Stature: short.

    “They are found in two areas; the so-called Pueblo Indians live to the north in the basins of the Grande, Colorado, and part of the Gila and Salado Rivers (Arizona, New Mexico). In the south they inhabit the Andean highlands of Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, northern Chile and Argentina. These are called the Andids.”[59]

    6. Isthmids (Eickstedt's Centralids, Biasutti's Pueblo-andid race, subrace Isthmid, Brinton’s Inter Isthmus Group, Deniker’s Central American, Haddon’s Neo-American):[60] Head hair: black; straight, coarse. Face: broad and short. Eyes: black, extremely pigmented iris. Nose: wide at the base and platyrrhine. Head shape: brachycephalic. Chin: receding. Body characteristics: brachyskelic. Statue: short.

    “They inhabit the south of Mexico and extend as far as Colombia, although the limits in this zone are rather uncertain.”[61]

    7. Amazonids (Eickstedt's Brasilids, Sergi's H.c. amazonicus, Biasutti's Amazonid race, Brinton’s South Atlantic Group, Deniker’s South American, Haddon’s Neo-Amerind):[62] Skin color: varying skin tones with a yellow base. Head shape: dolichoids tending to bracycephaly. Body characteristics: robust body; long strong arms and relatively weak and short legs. Statue: medium or short.

    “They occupy a very broad zone from west to east that extends from the Andes to the Atlantic, including the Amazon and Orinoco basins, infiltrating to the south by way of the Paraguay River to the Rio de la Plata.”[63]

    8. Pampids (Eickstedt's Patagonids, Sergi's H.c. patagonicus,  Biasutti's Pampid race, Brinton’s South Atlantic Group, Deniker’s Pampeans, Haddon’s Tehulche):[64] Skin color: intense skin pigmentation with reddish tones. Head hair: straight, coarse. Face: long face; heavy protruding cheekbones. Nose: leptorrhine. Chin: heavy and pronounced. Head shape: brachycephalic in the case of deformed skulls while the Onas and also the inhabitants of the Chaco are dolichocephalic; the skull is large and very thick. Body characteristics: robust skeleton, at times enormous but harmonious in proportions. Statue: tall and even very tall.

    “They are localized in a zone of the Matto-Grosso, Brazil, the central plains of Argentina including the ‘banda oriental or eastern belt,’ and the southern steppes as far as Tierra del Fuego.”[65]

    9. Laguids (Eickstedt's Lagids Biasutti’s Lagid, Brinton’s South American Group, Deniker’s South American):[66] Face: wide, low face. Nose: platyrrhine. Head shape: markedly dolichocephalic; high cranial vault, hypsicephalic. Body characteristics: the shoulders, chest, arms and legs more developed and muscular than in the Amazonids; sexual dimorphism quite marked. Statue: short.

    “They inhabit the eastern highlands of Brazil, besides certain isolated nuclei in the southernmost part of the California Peninsula, ancient burials in Coahuila (Mexico), various shell mounds along the Chilean coast, etc.”[67]

    10. Fueguids (Eickstedt's Lagids, Biasutti’s Magallanic or Fueguid race, Brinton’s South Atlantic and South Pacific Groups, Deniker’s Paleo-American, Haddon’d Paleo-Amerind):[68] Face: narrow forehead, long face; well developed brow-ridges. Nose: leptorrhine. Head shape: dolichocephalic; platycephalic. Body characteristics: under-developed legs. Statue: short.

    “The area of dissemination is discontinuous as occurred with the Pueblo-Andids. Their principal focus is in Tierra del Fuego, but they have also been found on the Chilean coast, in shell mounds of Valdivia, Talcahuano, Coquimbo; among the Piaroa, Goajiro and Motilon Indians of Colombia; in northern California; among the Botocudos of the Atlantic Coast and the extinct Sambaquis.”[69]

    11. Appalachids (Eickstedt’s Sylvids, Biasutti’s Alleganys or Appalachids, Brinton’s North Atlantic, Deniker’s North American, Haddon’s Northern Amerind) are the Huron-Iroquois. Comas does not provide Imbelloni’s description. A compilation of various sources yields the following description: Face: high protruding forehead; low, broad orbits; prominent cheekbones; short extremely wide face. Nose: medium narrow; generally aquiline. Chin: pronounced. Head shape: dolichocephalic; pentagonoid skull. Statue: tall.

    They inhabit the region from Newfoundland to South Carolina in the east and Louisiana and Mississippi in the west and from the Atlantic to east Illinois and Louisiana in the west.[70]

    Carleton S. Coon (1965) like Brinton sees uniformity among the American Indians. He identifies two racial types: Eskimos and Aleuts and all the other Indians. Eskimos and Aleuts are Siberian Mongoloids. The remainder are Mongoloids who descended from a small band that crossed the Bearing Straight toward the end of the Wisconsin glaciation.[71]

Endnotes ‒ Continued
41. A.C. Haddon, The Races of Man and Their Distribution (New York, New York: The Macmillian Company, 1925), p. 31.

42. Ibid., p. 36.

43. Ibid., pp. 32-33.

44. Ibid., p. 35.

45. Ibid., pp. 35-36, 145.

46. Ibid., p. 24.

47. Juan Comas, Manual of Physical Anthropology, Revised and enlarged English edition (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas • Publisher, 1960).  pp. 634-635.

48. Ibid., p. 634.

49. Ibid.

50. Ibid., p. 635.

51. Ibid., pp. 637-638.

52. Ibid., p. 637.

53. Ibid., p. 639.

54. Ibid.

55. Ibid.

56. Ibid.

57. Ibid.

58. Ibid., p. 640.

59. Ibid., pp. 639-640.

60. Ibid., p. 640.

61. Ibid.

62. Ibid.

63. Ibid.

64. Ibid., pp. 640-641.

65. Ibid., p. 640.

66. Ibid., p. 643.

67. Ibid.

68. Ibid.

69. Ibid.

70. Ibid.

71. Carleton S. Coon, and Edward E. Hunt, Jr., The Living Races of Man (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1965), pp.152-154.


Copyright © 2010 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Part 1   Part 3   Part 4

 More articles on anthropology. 

The American Indian: Part 1

    The American Indian: Part 1: Types

   Thomas Allen

    The American Indian is a subspecies of the great Turanian species of man although an argument can be made that he is a species in his own right. An exception is the Paleo-American (Haddon) or Fuegian (Imbelloni), whom others call Laguian and Magallanic, should be considered part of the Australian or Indo-Australian species.

    A general description of the American Indian follows:[1]
    Skin color:  generally, various shades of brown with a reddish undertone, yellowish-brown; reddish or coppery; cinnamon; burnt coffee; some very dark brown; some yellowish.
    Hair color:  black or black with faint reddish undertone.
    Head hair:  long, straight, coarse, stiff; occasionally fine and silky or slightly wavy or curly; round in transverse section; thick, baldness rare.
    Facial hair:  beardless or nearly beardless although some have beards.
    Body hair:  scant, weakly developed.
    Face:  large, broad.
    Jaws:  massive with moderate, though sometimes weak, projection; predominately mesognathous although some orthognathous.
    Cheekbone:  moderately prominent or prominent; wide.
    Forehead:  straight or slightly sloping; well-developed superciliary ridge.
    Eyes:  moderately wide eye slot; small; round; straight; sunken; eye slits straight or moderately oblique.
    Eye color:  dark brown or black; bluish conjunctiva in child, pearly white in adolescent, dirty-yellowish in adult.
    Eyelids:  fold on upper eyelids, but epicanthus very rare except in Eskimo and found only in males.
    Nose:  mesorrhine or leptorrhine; large, prominent, highly projecting; medium to very high bridge; usually aquiline although occasionally straight; base average width.
    Lips:  medium; sometimes thick.
    Mouth:  large.
    Teeth:  mesodont, medium; shovel-shaped upper incisors; deeply concave.
    Chin:  medium; well developed.
    Ears:  rather large.
    Head shape:  variable; mesocephalic typical although dolichocephalic or brachycephalic common.
    Cranial volume:  slightly less than Aryan’s.
    Cranial walls:  slightly thinker than Aryan’s.
    Body characteristics:  mesomorphous or brachymorphous; medium or short legs compared to trunk; typically rather slender calf; medium length neck; chest deeper than Aryan’s; moderate lumbar curvature; arms longer in proportion to other members than in Aryans, but not as much as in Negroes; the disproportion between the female pelvic region and shoulders is less marked than in Aryans.
    Female breast:  more or less conical in form.
    Feet and hands:  moderate but smaller than Aryan of same height.
    Statute:  short to tall, generally above average.
    Body odor:  generally free.
    Pulse:  slow.
    Expression:  stolid (caused by strong tonus of the muscles) except Eskimo who expresses a happy face.
    Temperament:  generally reserve; moody, taciturn, wary; deep feelings masked by an impassive exterior towards strangers; indifference to physical pain; high sense of personal dignity though somewhat colored in romance; keen sense of justice.

    No consensus exists on the number of racial types of Indians. They range from one or two to more than eleven. Below are a few of these classifications.

    Daniel G. Brinton (1890) contends that only slight variation exists among the American Indians. He divides them by regions into seven groups. They are:
    1. Arctic Group:[2] Skin color: dark. Hair: black, coarse. Facial hair: Scant. Face: check bones high. Head: long, dolichocephalic. Statue: medium.

    They stretch from the Aleutian Islands along the west coast of Alaska to the Arctic Ocean then along the Arctic coast to the Straits of Belle Isle, Labrador,  and Greenland.[3]

    2. North Atlantic Group:[4] Skin color: varies but tends toward brown. Face: broad: prominent cheek bones. Head shape: long. Body characteristics: superior muscular development. Statue: average.

    They inhabit the region between the crests of the Rocky Mountains and the Atlantic Ocean and from Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico.[5]

    3. North Pacific Group: Brinton provides no description.

    They range along the Pacific coast from the southern coast of Alaska south to Mexico and east through New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado.[6]

    4. Mexican Group:[7] Skin color: light to dark brown. Head hair: occasionally wavy. Facial hair: presents more beard than most other Indians. Face: broad, narrow forehead. Nose: prominent. Ears: large. Head shape: long or medium, though a few are brachycephalic. Body characteristics: strongly built and muscular. Statue: medium or less.

    They inhabit Mexico.[8]

    5. Inter-Isthmian Group:[9] Skin color: dark. Nose: prominent. Head shape: usually long, dolichocephalic. Body characteristics: muscular force superior. Statue: medium height.

    They range between the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and the Isthmus of Panama.[10]

    6. South Atlantic Group:[11] Skin color: dark (Bakairi), dark olive-brown (Tehuelche). Eyes: long, narrow (Fuegians). Nose: well-shaped. (Fuegians); large, narrow (Bakairi). Lips: thin. Mouth: wide. Head shape: long skulls (Fuegians, Bakairi). Body characteristics: robust (Tehuelche); finely formed (Bakairi). Statue: tall (Tehuelche).

    They stretch from Haiti and the Lesser Antilles through Brazil, across the Pampas to the tip of South America and from the Andes to the Atlantic.[12]

    7. South Pacific Group:[13] Face: round. Nose: short, rather flattened. Head shape: brachycephalic. Body characteristics: robust. Statue: tall.

    They range along the Pacific Coast of South American inland into the Andes.[14]

    J. Deniker (1900) identifies seven racial types of the American Indian. They are the Paleo-American, Patagonian, South American, Central American, Atlantic North American, Pacific North American, and Eskimo. He describes them as follows:

    1. Paleo-American:[15] Skin color: yellow. Head hair: wavy even frizzy. Body hair: scant. Eyes: dark or black. Nose: prominent, straight or concave. Head shape: dolichocephalic. Statue: short.

    They are found in a small part of California and the western and southern coast of Tierra del Fuego.[16]

    2. Patagonian:[17] Skin color: warm yellow. Head hair: straight. Face: square. Nose: straight. Head shape: brachycephalic. Statue: tall.

    They inhabit the Chaco, Pampas, and Patagonia, i.e., the area south of 30̊  latitude and east of the Andes.[18]

    3. South American:[19] Skin color: yellow. Head hair: straight although wavy found in some. Body hair: scant, Face: cheekbone slightly prominent to prominent. Nose: prominent, aquiline. Head shape: mesocephalic, some brachycephalic. Body Characteristics: broad chest; typically thick set. Statue: short although some tall.

    They occupy the Antilles and most of South America north of 30̊  latitude. They also inhabit Chile and the southern Andes.[20]

    4. Central American:[21] Skin color: warm yellow to dark brown. Head hair: straight. Face: high prominent cheek bones. Nose: prominent, aquiline or straight. Head shape: brachycephalic. Statue: short.

    They range from central Mexico through Central America.[22]

    5. Atlantic North American:[23] Skin color: warm yellowish. Nose: straight or aquiline. Head shape: mesocephalic. Statue: tall.

    They occupy most of the United States and Canada into Mexico.[24]

    6. Pacific North American:[25] Skin color: warm yellowish. Head hair: straight. Body hair:  better developed pilous system. Face: rounded though some elongated. Eyes: straight. Nose: straight or aquiline. Head shape: sub-brachycephalic or brachycephalic; more rounded than Atlantic North American. Statue: tall but shorter than Atlantic North American.

    They inhabit Alaska and British Columbia through Oregon and California down into Baja California and Sonora and Sinaloa, Mexico and eastward into Arizona and New Mexico and southern Utah and northern Mexico.[26]

    7. Eskimo:[27] Skin color: brownish yellow. Head hair: straight. Face: round, flattened; projecting cheekbones. Eyes: black, straight. Nose: somewhat prominent. Lips: rather thick. Head shape: dolichocephalic. Statue: short.

    They range from Greenland along the Arctic coast of Canada to the mouth of the Copper River, Alaska.[28]

    Ronald B. Dixon (1923) identifies eight basic racial types based on three indexes. These indexes are the cephalic index, length-height index, and nasal index. The first six contributed to the formation of today’s Indians. The last two contributed little or nothing. The eight racial types are:[29]

    1. Proto-Negro: dolichocephalic, hypsicephalic, platyrrhine.
    2. Proto-Australoid: dolichocephalic, camaecephalic, platyrrhine.
    3. Mediterranean: dolichocephalic, camaecephalic, leptorrhine.
    4. Caspian: dolichocephalic, hypsicephalic, leptorrhine.
    5. Alpine: brachycephalic, hypsicephalic, leptorrhine.
    6. Paleo-Alpine: brachycephalic, hypsicephalic, platyrrhine.
    7. Ural: brachycephalic, camaecephalic, leptorrhine.
    8. Mongoloid: brachycephalic, chamaecephalic, platyrrhine.

    By Proto-Negro, Dixon does not mean that these people look like modern-day Negroes with black skin, woolly hair, etc. He means that the cephalic index, length-height index, and nasal index are similar to the skull of the Negro. Likewise, for the other ancestral stock of the Indian, he does not mean that their outward appearances are like those of the people today who bear this label.

    Using these eight basic racial stocks, Dixon identifies six racial types of Indians. They are:

    1. Northeastern Dolichocephals:[30] This group includes “(1) all the Eskimo tribes of Greenland and the Arctic archipelago and those of the mainland living east of Point Barrow in Alaska; (2) the eastern Algonkian tribes south of the St. Lawrence to and including the Lenape or Delaware; and (3) the proto-historic and early historic Iroquoian tribes of Ontario and New York.”[31] They are various mix of Caspian, Mediterranean, Proto-Negroid, and Proto-Australoid types with perhaps some Alpine. The Caspian and Mediterranean type dominate the north and east while the Proto-Negroid and Proto-Australoid dominate in the south and west.

    2. Southwestern Dolichocephals:[32] This group extends “from the southern part of the British Columbia coast south to the tip of Lower California, and eastward through southern Nevada, northern Arizona and southern Utah, into the states of Sonora and Chihuahua in northern Mexico.”[33] They are a mixture of Caspian, Mediterranean, Proto-Australoid, Alpine, and Paleo-Alpine types. The Caspian followed by the Mediterranean dominates northern and southern California. Dominating the Lower California Peninsula is the Proto-Australoid. The Alpine characteristic is found primarily in the south, and the Paleo-Alpine, in the north. As for the Proto-Negro type, it contributes but little; it appears slightly in the Ute and Paiute. In the present population, the Alpine and Paleo-Alpine types dominate while in the ancient population the other three types dominate.

    3. Central Brachycephals:[34] This group covers “(1) what may be called the Plateau Area comprising the region lying west of the Rocky Mountains and south of the Columbia River; (2) an Appalachian Area including the whole of the southeast of the continent, and (3) all the remainder, covering the vast plains which extend from the Gulf of Mexico northward to the Arctic Ocean, together with all the rugged mountain country west of the Rocky Mountains and north of the Columbia.”[35]

    In the Plateau Area, the Paleo-Alpine dominates with some Alpine overlay. Traces of the Mongoloid type are found in the Indians of this area.

    In the Appalachian Area, a mix of Alpines (e.g., Choctaw) and Paleo-Alpine (e.g., Chickasaw and Creeks) occurs. Some dolichocephalic characteristics appear. To the north the Alpine and Paleo-Alpine types overlay the Proto-Australoid and  Proto-Negroid types.

    In the third area, the predominant type is the Alpine. However, toward the southwest, the Paleo-Alpine dominates. The Alpine appears to overlay the Paleo-Alpine in the northwest (British Columbia and Northwest Coast). Moreover, traces of the Mongoloid type (e.g., Ojibwa and Ponca) and Caspian or Mediterranean (e.g., Kiowa, Caddo, and Tonkawa) are found. A considerable amount of the Mediterranean type appears in the Algonkian tribes of the plains (e.g., Blackfoot, Arapaho, and Cheyenne).

    4. Southeastern Dolichocephals:[36] This group is found in “Patagonia, Tierra del Fuego, at least the southern portion of the Chilean archipelago, and the coastal districts of Brazil south of Rio Janeiro, where the ancient but not the historic population were of this type.”[37] Among these people, the leptorrhine, dolichocephalic form, i.e., the Caspian type, prevails. However, they show some mix with the Alpine, Proto-Australoid, and Proto-Negroid.

    5. Brazilian Highlands and Western Dolichocephals:[38] They occupy the Brazilian highlands, Chile, and the Pacific coast into Ecuador. In the Brazilian highlands, the ancient population was predominantly Proto-Negroid mixed with about an equal amount of the Proto-Australoid and Caspian. This type is still common today among some tribes, e.g., the Caraya, Arawakan Mehinaku, and Paressi. The other tribes are primarily brachycephalic with a predominance of the platyrrhine element in some (e.g., the Borroro) and the leptorrhine in others (e.g., the Trumai and Aueto). In Chile, they are a mix of the Proto-Negroid and Alpine types with the Proto-Negroid being more prominent in the south.

    6. South American Brachycephals:[39] They are scattered over most of South America, but are concentrated in the western and central regions. They are predominantly of the Alpine type. However, mixes with Paleo-Alpine, Caspian, Mediterranean, and Proto-Australoid are found. In southwest Bolivia, the Paleo-Alpine prevails.

    Because of a lack of data, Dixon does not identify the Indians of Mexico and Central America as an independent group or assign them to another group. Those in the north appear to be predominantly Paleo-Alpine with a large element of Proto-Negroid and Proto-Australoid present. The remainder of the Indians in Mexico is a mixture of Paleo-Alpine and Alpine types. Likewise, for the northern part of Central America, the Indians are Paleo-Alpine and Alpine types. For southern Central America, no data exist.[40]

Endnotes
 1. Robert B. Bean, The Races of Man: Differentiation and Dispersal of Man (New York, New York: The University Society, Inc. 1932) pp.38, 51, 108. Daniel G. Brinton, The American Race (New York, New York: N.D.C. Hodges, Publisher, 1891), pp. 38-40.  Robert Claiborne, “The First Americans” in The Emergence of Man (New York, New York: Time-Life Book, 1973), p. 11. A.H. Keane, Ethnology (London, England: C. J. Clay and Sons, 1896), pp. 228,336-337, 349-350. A.H. Keane, Man: Past and Present, revised and rewritten by A. Hingston Quiggin and A.C. Haddon (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1920), pp. 332-333. A.H. Keane, The World’s Peoples: A Popular Account of Their Body & Mental Characters, Beliefs, Traditions, Political and Social Institutions (New York, New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), p. 22. M. Nesturkh, The Races of Mankind, Translator George Hanna (Moscow, Russia: Progress Publishers, 1963), pp. 28, 93-94. Robert Wauchope, Lost Tribes & Sunken Continents: Myths and Methods in the Study of American Indians (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1962), pp. 28ff.

2. Daniel G. Brinton, Races and Peoples: Lectures of the Science of Ethnography (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: David McKay, Publisher, [1901]),  pp. 249-250.

3. Ibid., pp. 249-250.

4. Ibid., p. 252.

5. Ibid., pp. 251-257.

6. Ibid., pp. 257-259.

7. Ibid., p. 259.

8. Ibid., pp. 259-263.

9. Ibid., p. 264.

10. Ibid., pp. 263-267.

11. Ibid., pp. 268, 271.

12. Ibid., pp. 267-271.

13. Ibid., p. 276.

14. Ibid., pp. 271-276.

15. J. Deniker, The Races of Man: An Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography (London, England: Walter Scott, Limited, 1900) pp. 286-292.

16. Ibid., pp. 524, 533, 575.

17. Ibid., p. 286.

18. Ibid., pp. 571-576.

19. Ibid., pp. 286, 292, 547, 550, 554-555, 559, 565, 566, 569.

20. Ibid., pp. 543-571.

21. Ibid., pp. 286, 291, 538, 540.

22. Ibid., pp. 535-542.

23. Ibid., pp. 286, 524.

24. Ibid., pp. 521-530, 535.

25. Ibid., pp. 286, 292, 524, 531, 534.

26. Ibid., pp. 531-534.

27. Ibid., pp. 286, 521.

28. Ibid., pp. 520-521.

29. Roland B. Dixon, The Racial History of Man (New York: New York: Charles Scriber’s Sons, 1923), p. 21.

30. Ibid., pp. 407-414.

31. Ibid., p. 407.

32. Ibid., pp. 415-419.

33. Ibid., p. 415.

34. Ibid., pp. 420-439.

35. Ibid., p. 420.

36. Ibid., pp. 454-458.

37. Ibid., p. 454.

38. Ibid., pp. 459-464.

39. Ibid., pp. 465-472.

40. Ibid., pp. 440-442.

Copyright © 2010 by Thomas Coley Allen.


Part 2   Part 3   Part 4

 More articles on anthropology.

Southern History: Epilogue

Epilogue
Thomas Allen

    The foregoing history of the South should not be interpreted as blaming Yankees, Negroes, carpetbaggers, scalawags, or anyone else except Southerners for the demise of Southern civilization. Southerners have no one to blame for the death of their civilization and the destruction of their heritage but themselves. They have allowed these things to happen with almost no resistance.

    Their ancestors were willing to sacrifice everything that they had to protect the heritage, culture, way of life, economy, political institutions, society, and civilization of the South. In the end, many did sacrificed everything that they had to protect them. Today far too many Southerners belittle and jeer this sacrifice by doing nothing to preserve and rebuild Southern civilization. Even worse too many Southerners have joined the enemies of the South to destroy the few remaining remnants of Southern civilization.

    When rule by military despotism followed defeat on the battlefield, did Southerners submissively endure oppression? When the abolitionists and Radical Republicans tried to use the Negro to destroy the South, did Southerners submissively accept genocide? The answer to both these questions is an emphatic no! They organized to resist military rule and to prevent those who sought to use the Negro in a genocidal war against the South from fulfilling their evil plan. Thus, the Klan was born. (Southern Whites are in the South today only because of the heroic deeds of organizations like the Klan during the early days of Reconstruction.) They also used the weapons of ostracism and boycotting against those who would destroy the South. Once the majority had regained their political rights, or at least enough of their political rights to make their political weight felt, the Klan was abandoned. They had a new and more powerful weapon to use: an established political process that was recognized and accepted by their enemies. Through the political process, they were able to regain control of their States. When the critical moment came when their foes needed the South to keep themselves in power in Washington, a deal was cut. Southerners could govern their internal affairs as they saw fit. They were able to do so unmolested for forty years.

    Unfortunately, Southerners did not achieve economic independence. They did not drive away the quislings within. Too many Southerners let the quislings within convince them to imitate the North. To imitate the North required capital. It required capital that the South had lost during the War and Reconstruction. Thus, came the oppressive debt cycle. Too many Southerners who remained on the farm became virtual serfs of their creditors. Debt drove many, too many, from the farm to the factory. For the most part, the factories to which Southerners fled were designed on the basis of Northern industrialism, i.e., production for mass markets, instead of being designed on the basis of Southern agrarianism, i.e., production on local markets. Again Southerners have no one to blame but themselves. They chose this path. They are the ones who wasted the resources of the South.

    Furthermore, Southerners looked to the North for too many of their cultural needs and too many of their goods. Part of this was the legacy of the antebellum South. In the antebellum South, most of the finer things of life were imported. (Not all of the antebellum South was desirable or virtuous.) A common complaint was, and often still is, that a Southern writer or artist could not be accepted or recognized in the South unless he came via New York. Southerners had, and continue to have, no one to blame but themselves for failing to provide for their cultural needs independent of the North.

    The Gentlemen’s Agreement that ended Reconstruction began to become unraveled with the end of World War I, and the Cold War against the South began. Northern writers, journalists, and politicians, among others, began verbal assaults against the South and the Southern way of doing things. Sadly a number of Southerners joined in this assault. A few brave souls stood against this assault and counterattacked. For the most part, though, Southerners did nothing.

    Worse than nothing, Southerners throw away their political power during this era of the Cold War. Southerners blindly supported the Democratic Party. Even when the Democratic Party was captured by the foes of the South, too many Southern continued to support the Democratic Party. Southerners failed to use their political power to maintain control of the South. They did not use it to replace the leadership of the Democratic Party with persons favorable to the South. (Groups much smaller than the South have been able to capture both parties at various times and bend the parties to their will.) They did not use it to play the Democrats against the Republicans. (Groups much smaller than the South have been able to play successfully one party against the other in order to achieve their agenda.) They did not do what Northerners had done successfully nearly a century ago — that is form a new, essentially regional, political party. (The South made a feeble attempt to form a new political party in 1948 and 1968, but they effectively abandoned the new party soon after each attempt. Here is one time that the South should have imitated the North. The North formed the Republican Party in 1854. Instead of abandoning the party after a failed election, they continued to work for their party. As a result, the Republican Party dominated national politics from 1861 to 1933.) Southerners have no one to blame for their loss of political power but themselves.

    With the loss of their political power came the Second Reconstruction. With the Second Reconstruction came a loss of self-government. The United States government would rule the South during the Second Reconstruction as it did during the First Reconstruction — only more stealthily and covertly. The adversaries of the South have used the Negro much more effectively this time around in their genocidal war to destroy the South and all that is Southern. All that remains is the mop-up operation: the removal of Confederate monuments and the few remaining Confederate emblems and songs. Although Southerners initially meet federal tyranny with protest, it was weak, ineffective, and short-lived. As a result, social conditions have been changed so that the Negro can now be effectively used to breed the Southerners out of existence. Again Southerners have no one to blame but themselves.

    When the Second Reconstruction first began and when the United States government invaded Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi, there was much bellicose bravado. Southerners claimed that they would cease employing, feeding, clothing, or otherwise assisting or aiding Negroes if they (Negroes) did not cease their disruptive action. These threats came to nothing. Neither Negroes ceased their disruptive activities nor Southerners ceased their intercourse with Negroes. Southerners claimed that if a showdown was forced on the South, Southerners would prove themselves stronger, smarter, richer, and more numerous than their enemies. The showdown came, and Southerners backed down with little more than a vociferous protest. However, by the late 1960s such defiant boasting ceased because the only thing that Southerners had done was to brag about what they were going to do without doing anything — or if they did act, their actions lasted only for a short time. The enemy had more resolve and patience than the Southerners had. Because they failed to stand their ground and carry out their threats, Southerners have been in retreat ever since.

    What remains of the South, its culture, civilization, and history, must be destroyed if the New World Order is to succeed. If the New World Order’s Nimrodic dream of a world with one government, one race, one culture, and one religion is to succeed, the South must die. The South, the Old South, is the epitome of everything that the New World Order hates and despises and fears and dreads. If the South’s past can be degraded, disgraced, and repudiated, the South will perish: “for a people with no past have no future.” They are a people easily controlled: Because not knowing from where they came, they do not know where they are going. Every compromise made by Southerners in this war is a victory for the New World Order. Southerners still have the power to defeat their enemies. But do they have the will and resolve to use it?

    The South needs to abandon the cruel god of “progress.” The South needs to elevate her philosophical giants instead of ignoring them. The South needs to stop being the tail of a dying kite.

    Instead of presenting a united front against those seeking to destroy them, Southerners bicker among themselves over tactics and strategy. Instead of charging, they argue over who will lead the charge. Instead of attacking, they argue over what to attack. While Southerners waste their vanishing resources fighting among themselves, the reconstructionists are conquering and destroying the South. Tactics, strategy, and objectives are important, but there comes a time for disputation to end and action to begin. That time is long past!

    Southerners need not and should not look to government to save them from the genocidal war being waged against them. Government is the instrument through which the war is being waged. They need not look to the Democratic or Republican Parties to save them. These parties are part of the establishment and government. They are comrades in arms in the war to destroy the South. Southerners need to look to God and themselves if they are to end this genocidal war and save their nation.

    Southerners cannot save themselves until they recognize their enemies. Anyone who supports the New World Order, who supports the concentration and centralization of political or economic power, or who supports integration or miscegenation is an enemy of the South. Anyone who opposes States' rights, who opposes the decentralization and dispersal of political and economic power, or who opposes racial integrity is an enemy of the South.

    If the South dies and if the Southerner perishes, Southerners will have no one to blame but themselves. They will deserve extinction. With rare exceptions, they have offered no resistance to their demise. They are an embarrassment to their ancestors who pledge everything in 1861 in defense of the South and Southern civilization. They have surrendered much of their natural resources to aliens. Often they have even paid aliens to come and exploit them. Instead of perpetuating the best of the antebellum South, they have perpetuated the worse. Instead of generating the finer things of life and satisfying their cultural needs domestically, they import them. What is imported is far too often animus toward the South. Instead of ostracizing and boycotting the destroyers of the South, Southerners far too often support them. Southerners have lost their political power. It is questionable whether they will ever regain it. Southerners have wasted much of their meager resources in attacking the Negro while almost completely ignoring those who manipulate the Negro to destroy the South. If they would concentrate their resources against those who manipulate the Negro, they might well prevent the manipulators from achieving their goal of breeding the Southerner out of existence. If they were able to thwart the manipulators, the Negro problem would, most likely, fade. (This does not exonerate the Negro. He is guilty of having allowed himself to be manipulated.) Southerners continue to offer little or no resistance to the destruction of the South and their death. To illustrate how far the South has sunk, when was the last time a public figure in the South openly condemned the genocidal war being waged against the South? When was the last time a public figure in the South openly condemned miscegenation, the conditions that inevitably lead to miscegenation, or using Negroes to breed Southerners out of existence? If Southerners do not defend the South, no one else will. Why should they? The hour is late. Southern civilization is gasping its last breath. Southerners must act now!

    Where there is no vision the people perish – Proverbs 29:18a.
    I will say to the North, Give up, and to the South, Do not withhold – Isaiah 43:6a.
    But I will remove far off from you the northern army, and will drive him into a land barren and desolate – Joel 2:20a.

Copyright © 1995 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on the South. 

Southern History: The Second Reconstruction

The Second Reconstruction
Thomas Allen

The Second Reconstruction began in 1954. Like the First Reconstruction, the Second Reconstruction is a political assault against the South. It seeks to destroy Southerners by the genocide of integration.

Along with the Second Reconstruction has come an even more intense attack against that which is uniquely Southern: the Confederate flag; songs of the South, such as “Dixie,” “Maryland, My Maryland,” and “Old Virginny;” the immortal, eternal Confederate soldier and the monuments that honor him, etc. Even major corporations have entered the genocidal attack against the South. A major motel company took down the Georgia flag because it bears a Confederate emblem. (This old Georgia flag has been replaced with a new Georgia flag.) A major telecommunication company and a major bank joined the gang to remove the Confederate battle flag from the capitol dome in South Carolina. (The Confederate battle flag has been removed.) Major Southern universities proscribe flying the Confederate flag. At least one university has gone so far as to proscribe flying the flag of the State whose taxpayers support it.

Those who condemn the Confederate flag as being a symbol of slavery, racism, White supremacy, etc., should with more vigor and vehemence condemn the Unites States flag. The United States flag flew over slavery, segregation, and White supremacy in the North before the Confederate flag did, while the Confederate flag did, and after the Confederate flag ceased to in the South.

Blacks have shown no hesitation, concern, or sensitivity about imposing, nay forcing, their company on people who do not want to associate with them. Southerners should not sacrifice the Confederate flag in the name of sensitivity about the feelings of Blacks towards the Confederate flag. Some of those who love that flag see Black hostility towards it as just another attempt to impose the Black man’s will on them to deprive them of one of their few remaining liberties in the Black man’s attempt to establish Black supremacy. If Blacks find the Confederate flag offensive, then they should avoid associating with those who display and revere the flag. After spending a lifetime trying to outlaw freedom of association by forcing their company on others, such an obvious solution cannot be accepted. The Confederate flag must bow to their prejudices.

The Confederate flag flew in Lithuania when the Lithuanians were struggling to free themselves from the oppression of the Soviet Union. The Confederate flag flew in Berlin as the Berlin Wall fell. Oppressed Europeans recognize the Confederate flag for what it is: the symbol of liberty. Perhaps this explains the antagonism against the flag. It represents what the enemies of the South despise: LIBERTY!

That big business is among the leaders in the genocidal war against the South is not difficult to understand. Big business, like all bureaucracies, strives for uniformity. The big corporations generally operate as self-contained businesses. They also strive to become self-contained social entities. They expect employees, especially at the managerial level, to place loyalty to the company (although the company feels no loyalty towards its employees) above loyalty to the community and even often above loyalty to their family and God. Such loyalty to the company makes for highly mobile personnel among its various units. (An employee who does not place the company first seldom advances beyond the lower ranks.) Anything that stands in the way of loyalty to the company and standardization must be destroyed. Because traditional Southerners place loyalty to God, family, and community above all, the Southern way of life must be destroyed. To Southerners, loyalty to the company that employs them ranks down on his list of loyalties. They may be highly loyal to an employer they know personally, but they have difficulty being loyal to an abstract corporation and a board of directors whom they do not know and who are far removed. Thus, big business is among the leaders of the assault against the South.

The role of the establishment media is so obvious, it hardly needs commenting on. The establishment media “revel in smearing the South and Southerners by adjective and innuendo.”[1] These attacks appear not only in editorials but also in so-called objective news articles. The media are also notorious for seeking out the ignorant, inarticulate, uncultured, spokesman to present the pro-Southern view instead of knowledgeable, articulate, respectable spokesman.

One of the most useful and effective weapons being used against Southern males is “affirmative action.” This weapon destroys the White male economically, politically, and socially as it gives other races preferential treatment and special privileges at the expense of White males. But this is not the worst aspect. The most hideous aspect of affirmative action is that it treats White women as part of the privileged minority. Thus, it attempts to drive a wedge between White men and women and thereby create discord where there should be harmony. The purpose is to drive White women to non-White men. The objective is the demise of the White race.

The Reverend Ray Aycock provides a cogent concise description of what the Second Reconstruction has brought the South:

They have taken over our schools, forced their laws on us, destroyed our customs, mongrelized and brainwashed our children, allowing the murder of millions of unborn children. They used deadly chemicals on our men and theirs, and they performed medical experiments on people that would make Hitler blush. They killed more people than Nazi Germany. They have not only made the sick practice of homosexuality acceptable, but they are glorifying it. They sent a message to all churches in the United States, and it occupied states by telling Bob Jones, the Mormons and the Branch Davidians, “Worship like we tell you or be burned out!” Now they want to tax our products, tobacco, to pay their medical bills.[2]

This sentiment is echoed by the author in Southern Manifesto:

Being a chivalrous, charitable, Christian people, we do not request or require reparation or restitution from those who came to conquer us, to pillage our lands, to plunder our wealth, to imprison our forefathers and friends, to desecrate that which we hold sacred, to destroy our culture and heritage, to pollute our race, to indoctrinate us with alien philosophies, to coerce us to pay tribute to finance our enslavement and their follies, to force us to die in their wars, to corrupt our leaders, to subvert our governments, and to impose multitudes of repugnant and oppressive laws upon us. We require only that they depart and leave us in peace. We recognize that our liberties and prosperity can only be protected and expanded and preserved for ourselves and our posterity through a free and independent confederation of free and independent Southern States.

The South and all that is Southern must be destroyed. It must be remade into the image of Yankeedom. As long as the South retains any of its unique character and identity, the spark of freedom lives. This spark must be smothered out so that all can live under the enslavement of Yankeedom.

As vile as the external forces are in seeking the destruction of the South and the death of the Southerners, those exerted by the New South Southerners are infinitely more satanic. The New South Southerner has sold his soul for what? Nothing of lasting value. He is a worse miscreant than opportunistic demagogic Fourth of July orators that the Reverend James O. Branch described in his sermon on public opinion, “It [public opinion] chains the rebel, Jefferson Davis, in a dungeon because he was the unsuccessful leader of Sovereign States in their assertion of the right of self-government; and, from the throats twenty thousand fourth of July orators, it fills the ears of the unsuccessful rebel in prison with the praise of the successful rebel, George Washington, who led revolting colonies against the armies of their lawful sovereign.”[4] Traitor of tradition and worshiper of “progress” that he is, the New South Southerner admires one and condemns the other because one won and the other lost, although both fought for the same thing. The New South Southerner is worse than a traitor of tradition. He betrays his State, his race, his ancestors, and God — albeit not his gods, for his gods are the god of equality, the god of envy, the god of material progress, and the god of political power. (One wonders why good Southerners keep voting these demagogic quislings into political office.) These are the people whom Richard Weaver described as “the obnoxious professional Southerners. These people have been quite willing to use whatever they possess of Southern inheritance to procure what is, traditionally, anti-Southern, and they have been impatient with those who remind them of the contradiction.”[5]

The New South Southerner is typified by George Allen, a Republican Governor of Virginia. He is a scalawag who has nothing but total contempt for Southern heritage. He offered Disney millions of dollars to destroy battlefields on which many patriotic Southerners shed their blood for independence. Disney proposed to build a historical theme park. Based on whom Disney chose for its historical advisor, the South would surely have been depicted in a derogatory, ignoble way.

The genocidal war against the South is often overt and obvious, but it also contains its subtle and covert aspects. One of these is in the education of the children of the South. There is much truth in Dr. Hunter McGuire’s assertion that one of the worst crimes committed against the South has been committed by those men “who immediately after the war . . . brought Northern men and Northern historians into our schools and for years employed them to teach us why and how Southern men fought against the North.”[6] The situation in Southern schools today is much worse than when this statement was made a century ago. The South looks to Northerners and Southern renegades to write their history and to teach their children. Why?

Donald Davidson is correct when he writes, “The South, because of its regional differentiations, some of which are certainly valuable, is at a disadvantage, and so long as political and economic power dwells where it long has dwelt, it will continue to be at a disadvantage.”[7] This power has long dwelt in Yankeedom. Only through independence can the South break this bondage and regain its political and economic power.

Even if many Southerners fail to see this war of genocide being waged against them, foreigners see it. In one of his editorials, Albert H. Baxendale, Jr., describes a conversation between a Britisher and a Southerner:

“We English,” he told the Southerner, “think of you Southerners as the Welsh of your country.” Asked what he meant, the Britisher replied, “The English have been trying for decades to stamp out the Welsh traditions — their language, their music, their speech, their customs. The rest of American is trying to do the same to you Southerners.” He was right. There are two forces at work today, engaged in a continual effort to destroy the last vestige of the Southern heritage. Those forces are knee jerk liberal Yankees and Southern renegades, also known as gutless politicians, spineless school administrators, and over-educated academic types.[8]

Edward Lawton describes the situation in the South following the war:

Since 1865 the situation of the South has been unique in the Western World. Asides from rights and wrongs, a population and an area appropriate to a pre-World War I great power have been, following conquest, ruled against their will by a neighboring people, and have had imposed upon them social and economic controls they dislike. And the great majority of these people are of Anglo-Saxon or Celtic descent. This is the only case in modern history of a people of Britannic origin submitting without continued struggle to what they view as foreign domination. . . . It is amazing that a people as proud and warlike as Southerners should have been as docile as they have.[9]

The docility of Southerners defies explanation. The time has long passed for Southerners to rise up and throw off their oppression. No other people of their stock would have so meekly tolerated the oppression that Southerners have endured for as long as they have.

Unreconstructed Southerners continue to resist for a number of reasons. Among the most important are as Alexander Stephen wrote, “Time changes and men often change with them, but principles never!” and as T. S. Eliot wrote, “We fought for lost causes because we knew that our defeat and dismay may be the preface to our successor’s victory. . . . we fight rather to keep something alive than in the expectation that it will triumph.”[10] Jefferson Davis wrote, “The contest is not over, the strife is not ended. It has only entered on a new and enlarged arena. The champions of constitutional liberty must spring to the struggle . . . until the government of the United States is brought back to its constitutional limits.”[11] A Massachusetts writer corroborated Mr. Davis when he wrote, “Such character and achievement were not all in vain; that though the Confederacy fell as an actual physical power, it lives eternally in its just cause — the cause of constitutional liberty.”[12] Whenever an unreconstructed Southern hears that the Confederacy is dead, he needs to reply, as Sheldon Vanauken did, “Not while it [the Confederacy] lives in the hearts of thousands of Southerners.”[13]

The unreconstructed Southerner is in firm agreement with General Lee’s statement that “a Union held together by bayonets has no charms for me.”[14] Like all empires, the Union today is still held together by bayonets.

Richard Weaver reminds both Southerners and Northerners:

that the Southerner today is the only involuntary tenant of the American Union. . . . he is where he is as the result of a settlement of force against him. . . . Therefore, in the national legend the typical American owes his position to a virtuous and effective act of his will; but the Southern owes his to the fact that his will was denied; and this leaves a kind of inequality which no amount of political blandishment can remove entirely.[15]

William Workman gives an excellent explanation of why Northerners find forgetting the War easy and Southerners find it difficult:

Forgetfulness comes easy to victors who fought and won on what to them was foreign soil. It does not come so easily for the vanquished whose homeland was ravaged and laid desolate, whose manhood was blighted by death and war by the aftermath, and whose leaders were stigmatized by imprisonment and ignoble treatment after giving all they had to a cause in which they believed. And as insult added to injury, the South was taxed by the national government to pension the very Federal servicemen who devastated the South, while being taxed by their own Southern states to provide for the Confederate servicemen who defended their homes and ideals.[16]

When Southerners are accused of living in the past, they need to recall the words of John Peale Bishop, “Without a past we are living not in the present, but in a vague and rather unsatisfactory future.”[17] Southerners are among the few Americans with a deep firm tap root in the past. Therefore, they are among the few that will bear true fertile fruit in the future.

Furthermore, Southerners also need to remember John Peale Bishop’s words, “Long after the Confederacy is lost in the national archives and the last old lady has forgotten in the grave that this was conquered territory, there will still be, regardless of the government, a deep division between states that grow cotton and those which first manufactured it into cloth.”[18] A great division still exists, which helps explain the intense genocidal war being waged against the South and Southerners. Only by the annihilation of the South can the empire be preserved.

Unreconstructed Southerners agree with Woodrow Wilson’s words, “I would rather fail in a cause that I know some day will triumph than to triumph in a cause that I know some day will fail.”[19] (Mr. Wilson also told us that “No people should be compelled to live under a sovereignty which it does not willingly accept.”[20]) When accused of trying to perpetuate a lost cause, Southerners need to remember the words of Henry A. Wise, Governor of Virginia, just after the War: “A lost cause! If lost it was false; if true, it was not lost.”[21] The cause is not yet lost. It is true. It lives on. In the meantime, they need to recall M. E. Bradford's advice, “If our friends tell us that these days are dark then we should recite something like the hopeful formula ‘that in order to get better, it must get a good deal worse.’”[22]

Southerners need to remember the enemy that they fight against and the dream for which they fight. Allen Tate describes the beast against whom all unreconstructed Southerners war as:

Regionalism without civilization — which means, with us, regionalism without the classical-Christian culture — becomes provincialism; and world regionalism . . . becomes world provincialism [i.e., one world citizenship with one world government, i.e., the new world order]. For provincialism is that state of mind in which regional men lose their origins in the past and its continuity into the present, and begin every day as if there had been no yesterday.[23]

“It is, in short,” as Donald Davidson writes, “life without principle, which is hardly life at all above the bestial level — that is to say, the low-grade but often pretentious life reflected in the succulent pages of Life and Time, in the T-V show, in the blaring radio with its singing commercials, and in the stream of ‘remorseless motors’ on street and highway.”[24] Samuel T. Francis adds to this description the following:

The lifestyles, aspirations, and values of the current elite are bound together, rationalized, and extended by what may be called the “cosmopolitan ethic.” This ethnic expresses an open contempt for what Edmund Burke called the “little platoons” of human society — the small town, the family, the neighborhood, the traditional class identities and their relationships — as well as for authoritative and disciplinary institutions — the army, police forces, parental authority, and the disciplines of school and church. The cosmopolitan ethic, reversing a Western tradition as old as Aesop, finds virtue in the large city, in the anonymous (and therefore, “liberated”) relationships of declassed, desexed, demoralized, and deracinated atoms that know no group or national identities, accept no given moral code, and recognize no disciplines and no limits. The ethic idealizes material indulgence, the glorification of the self, and the transcendence of conventional values, loyalties, and social bonds. At the same time, it denigrates the values of self-sacrifice, community, and moral and social order. Its most perfect (though extreme) expression is perhaps Mick Jagger, but a more typical and vapid form is portrayed in advertisements that tell us What Kind of Man Reads Playboy.[25]

The enemies of the South include liberals, neo-conservatives, internationalists, unionists, integrationists, socialists, capitalists, public educationists, and egalitarians.

William Workman offers this description of the hypocrisy of those who seek to destroy the South: “. . . the very individuals who evidence the greatest willingness to compel Southern submission to Northern domination are the very ones who scream loudest about ‘dictatorship’ in the South when Southern whites seek to retain control of their own affairs.”[26]

In contrast to the enemy, Allen Tate describes the dream for which true Southerners fight as “the classical-Christian world, based upon the regional consciousness, which held that honor, truth, imagination, human dignity, and limited acquisitiveness could alone justify a social order however rich and efficient it may be; and could do much to redeem an order dilapidated and corrupt, like the South today, if a few people passionately hold those beliefs.”[27] Unreconstructed Southerners must continue the struggle against the Leviathan of Yankeedom until these truths and beliefs burn in the heart of every Southerner throughout the South.

While this struggle continues, Southerners need to keep in mind the words of John Crowe Ransom:

The Southerner must know, and in fact he does very well know, that his antique conservatism does not exert a great influence against the American progressivist doctrine. The Southern idea today is down, and the progressive or American idea is up. But the historian and the philosopher, who take views that are thought to be respectively longer and deeper than most, may very well reverse this order and find that the Southern idea rather than the American has in its favor the authority of example and the approval of theory. And some prophet may even find it possible to expect that it will yet rise again.The future belongs to the unreconstructed South.[28]

While the struggle continues, unreconstructed Southerners should look to their forefathers and draw council from their experience, which General Basil Duke of Kentucky expressed, “that safety is never consulted by giving heed to the suggestions of timidity, and that the manliest and most consistent course, is also the most truly expedient, and that the interest and honor of a people go hand-in-hand, and are inseparable.”[29]

Edward Lawton observes that:

. . . most Northerners are content to continue indefinitely with many — perhaps most — Southerners considering themselves a sort of Free World captive satellite, somewhat like Ireland before its independence or like Alsace before the German defeat in 1918. This is not good enough for people who claim Liberty is the cornerstone of their national unity. For the truth is that Southerners, along with the Katangese, are the only people in the past century for whom the United States has opposed the right of self-determination.[30]

He adds:

American patriotism has tended to strengthen the ideological argument that preservation of the Union justified extreme measures. But this emotional view does not stand up unless a preponderance of the material and spiritual facts support it. From our survey of the evolution of American society in the past century it is evident that such is not the case. There is good reason to believe that most Southerners would be better off materially, culturally and spiritually if they had been allowed to establish their own republic.[31]

With the collapse of the Soviet Empire, there is now even less excuse for maintaining the American Empire. Only through independence will the South be able to survive.

In their struggle for independence, Southerners must continue to contend with what Thomas R. Waring, editor of the Charleston News and Courier, termed the “Paper Curtain.” The Paper Curtain is a ban on pro-South views. This ban has been extremely effective during much of the Second Reconstruction. According to Mr. Waring, “A frank statement of the Southern viewpoint is simply unacceptable for publication in the North.”[32] He had first-hand experience with the Paper Curtain. His pro-South manuscripts were rejected more than once by Northern publishers.

Andrew Grayson provides an excellent, precise, and accurate summary of the Second Reconstruction:

Instead, all that these two post-World War II Southern generations have ever known is an “America,” a “Union,” a “North”’ a “Federal government” that hates, despises and contemptuously look down on the South; that slanders and defames their ancestors; that mocks and ridicules living Southerners as ignorant, stupid, backward rednecks; that passes laws specifically against them and the white South; that sends in Federal marshals and U. S. combat troops to herd them at bayonet point like animals and criminals; that has intentionally destroyed every Southern institutions and nullified almost every right they ever had; that gloats over grinding down white people while uplifting Negroes; that has racially discriminated against them in every way imaginable; that has racially discriminated for Negroes in every way possible; that has allowed the Negro to run loose as a wilder and more rampaging savage than any other civilization has ever known; that has in many ways placed the Negro above the law; that has confiscated a large portion of their wages in order to elevate the Negro to a position of a nonworking welfare-aristocracy; that has made it economically impossible for whites to have more than two or three children while making it economically profitable for Negroes to breed and breed and breed; that has created an economic system that makes it mandatory for most white mothers to work while black mothers are paid not to work; that has created an economic system that causes working whites to scrimp and do without while nonworking blacks never have to worry about anything; that has robbed them of educational, economic, occupational, cultural and other opportunities and given these opportunities to unqualified Negroes who have not earned them and never could earn them; that treats the South as an economic colony and exploits its resources and labor; that has in countless other ways made plain that, to “America,” Southerners are the scum of the earth and Dixie is the cesspool in which they live.[33]

Grayson concludes:

Just as America may never again produce a group of men equal to the founding fathers (the best and brightest of whom were Southern), the South may never again produce a group of men equal to the Confederates. But by God we deserved better than what we had a century after the war. We can do betters than that; we can produce better sons than they.[34]

The War will end and the cause for which it was fought will die when the last unreconstructed Southerner is liquidated — hence, when the South finally dies as a distinct entity — or when the South is freed from the shackles of Yankeedom. When the South returns to its heritage, when the South unashamedly embraces Christianity, when the South cleanses itself of all the alien doctrines of Yankeedom, i.e., when the last vestige of egalitarianism, socialism and fascism, democracy, miscegenation and integration, unisexism, statism, and secular humanism in all its denominations vanish from the South, and when the South becomes a free and independent confederation of free and independent Southern States, then the War will end. The South will once again enjoy a free market agrarian economy with all the wealth and freedom such an economy entails. The South will once again become a Christian land where the word of God is revered and is supreme. The South will once again become a land where the family is respected, promoted, and protected, where children honor their parents, and where men are gentlemen and women are ladies. The South will once again become a land where racial purity and integrity are important, desired, and protected. The South will once again be a land where old times are not forgotten. Until then Southerners must remember John C. Calhoun’s admonishment, “I hold concession or compromise to be fatal.”[35]

Until the South gains its freedom, the political leaders need to do as Ross Barnett, Governor of Mississippi, exhorted public officials to do three years before the United States invaded Mississippi:

We will not surrender to the evil and illegal forces of tyranny. We must either submit to the unlawful dictates of the federal government or stand up like men and tell them, “Never!” Every public official, including myself, should be prepared to make the choice tonight whether he is willing to go to jail, if necessary, to keep faith with the people who have place their welfare in his hands. We will not drink from the cup of genocide. Hold fast against this grave threat to our liberties. Stand together, hand in hand, mind to mind, unyielding and unafraid.[36]

In the end, no one followed Barnett’s sage advice, not even Barnett. In the end, they all chose to “drink from the cup of genocide.” Southerners need to remove from office and forever ostracize all political leaders who follow Barnett’s actions and drink from the cup of genocide instead of following Barnett’s words and holding fast against tyranny!

Endnotes
1. William D. Workman, Jr., The Case for the South (New York, 1960), p. 65.

2. Roy E. Aycock, “Partisan Letters,” Southern Partisan (Second Quarter, 1994), pp. 3-4.

3. Thomas Allen, Southern Manifesto, p. 2.

4. James O. Branch, Sermons (Oxford, 1909), p. 118.

5. Richard M. Weaver, The Southern Essays of Richard M. Weaver, ed. George M. Curtis III and James J. Thompson Jr. (Indianapolis, 1987), Southern Essays, p. 30.

6. Hunter McGuire and George L. Christian, The Confederate Cause and Conduct in the War Between the States, Addendum (Richmond, 1907), pp. 10-11.

7. Donald Davidson, The Attack on Leviathan: Regionalism and Nationalism in the United States (Chapel Hill, 1938), p. 299.

8. Albert H. Baxendale, Jr., “Campaign on to Destroy Southern Heritage,” Citizen Informer (Spring, 1994), p. 9.

9. Edward P. Lawton, The South and the Nation (Fort Myers Beach, 1963), pp. 14-15.

10. Holmes Alexander, “Living with a Lost Cause,” Southern Partisan (Winter, 1986), p. 43.

11. Stephen Cain, “The Question Still Lives,” The Freeman (May, 1993), p. 195.

12. McGuire and Christian, p. 3.

13. Sheldon Vanauken, “Warning Symbol,” Southern Partisan, XIV, (Third Quarter, 1994), p. 13.

14. Weaver, p. 243.

15. Ibid., p. 202.

16. Workman, p. 10.

17. John Peale Bishop, The Collected Essays of John Bishop Peale, ed. Edmund Wilson (New York, 1948), p. 13.

18. Ibid., p. 447.

19. William Freehoff, “Southern Sampler,” Southern Partisan, VIII (Fall, 1988), p. 9.

20. Maurice Muret, The Twilight of the White Race (Westport, 1926, reprinted 1970), p. 37.

21. William F. Freehoff, “Southern Sampler,” Southern Partisan, V (Spring, 1985), p. 33.

22. M. E. Bradford, “Conclusion: Not in Memoriam, But in Affirmation” in Why the South Will Survive (Athens, 1981), p. 223.

23. Donald Davidson, Southern Writers in the Modern World, (Athens, 1958), p. 59.

24. Ibid., p. 59.

25. Samuel T. Francis, “Message from Marx,” in The New Right Papers, ed. Robert W. Whitaker (New York, 1982), p. 69.

26. Workman, p. 16.

27. Ibid., p. 59.

28. John Crowe Ransom, “Reconstructed But Unregenerate,” in I'll Take My Stand: The Southern and Agrarian Tradition (Baton Rouge, 1958), p 3.

29. Weaver, Southern Tradition, 194.

30. Lawton, p. 18.

31. Ibid., p. 207.

32. Ibid., p. 66.

33. Andrew Grayson, The Black Death: Reconstruction I and II, p. 50.

34. Ibid., p. 91.

35. John C. Calhoun, Union and Liberty: The Political Philosophy of John C. Calhoun, ed. Ross M. Lence (Indianapolis, 1992), p. 470.

36. Grayson, p. 96.

Copyright © 1995 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on the South.