| Revision as of 19:45, 22 March 2007 edit69.232.54.151 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:25, 19 December 2024 edit undoRsk6400 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,248 edits Undid revision 1263734778 by AngelusVastator3456 (talk) - not relevantTag: Undo | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Short description|Outdated grouping of human beings}} | |||
| ], claimed to be the last full-blooded native Tasmanian, photographed c1870]] | |||
| {{EngvarB|date=October 2023}} | |||
| '''Australoid''' is a broad racial classification, no longer widely used by anthropologists, of ]n peoples, most notably the ] and ]. An alternative label is '''Australo-Melanesian'''.<ref>; </ref>They were described as having dark skin with wavy hair, in the case of Aboriginal Australians, or hair ranging from straight to kinky in the case of Melanesian and ] groups. According to this racial classification model, Australoid peoples range from areas of ] (particularly the ], ], some parts of ] and the ], ] and ]). The ], aboriginal inhabitants of the ], display a similar phenotype. ] are a hybrid of Australoid and Mongoloid. | |||
| {{Use dmy dates|date=October 2023}} | |||
| '''Australo-Melanesians''' (also known as '''Australasians''' or the '''Australomelanesoid''', '''Australoid''' or '''Australioid race''') is an outdated ] of various people indigenous to ] and ]. Controversially, some groups found in parts of ] and ] were also sometimes included. | |||
| While most authors included ], ] and ] (mainly from ], ], ] and ]), there was controversy about the inclusion of the various Southeast Asian populations grouped as "]", or a number of ] tribal populations of the ].<ref name="p. 26" /><ref name="Kulatilake">{{Cite journal |last=Kulatilake |first=Samanti |title=Cranial Morphology of the Vedda people - the indigenes of Sri Lanka|url= https://www.academia.edu/9637404}}</ref> | |||
| The concept of dividing humankind into three, four or five races (often called ], ], ], and Australoid) was introduced in the 18th century and further developed by Western scholars in the context of "]"<ref name="AAPARace" /> during the age of ].<ref name="AAPARace">{{cite web|author=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|title=AAPA Statement on Race and Racism |website=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|access-date=19 June 2020 |date=27 March 2019 |url=https://physanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement-race-and-racism-2019/}}</ref> With the rise of modern ], the concept of distinct human races in a biological sense has become obsolete. In 2019, the ] stated: "The belief in “races” as natural aspects of human biology, and the structures of inequality (racism) that emerge from such beliefs, are among the most damaging elements in the human experience both today and in the past."<ref name="AAPARace" /> | |||
| ==History of the theory==('''Note: This paragraph needs fixing. Australoids were never considered Malay. The two have distinct physical differences, especially skin color. This can be seen with the naming of Melanesia as well as Negrito and other names. As far as Malays, they were later grouped in with Southern Mongoloids'''.) | |||
| As of 1795 such groups typically were classified Malay (the brown race) according to ]'s influential color-coded five race model, and contrasted with the white, black, red, and yellow races. In an attempt to simplify human diversity and account for everyone, this model was reduced down to a just three main races: The red and yellow race were grouped together and called ], the white race was called caucasoids, and the black race was called negroid. The exact location of the brown race in this new world view was inconsistent. Some lumped them in with negroids because of their dark skin and ] while others believed they were caucasoid because of their wavy multi-colored hair. By the early twentieth century, ] studies led to the argument that they constituted a distinct racial group, which was labelled Australoid. This model is most associated with the anthropologist ]. Mesolithic Southeast Asians were found to display similarities to modern and ancient Australians, from which fact it was concluded that Australoids represented a distinct lineage surviving from an ancient wave of human migrations. Descendents were supposed to have survived in geographically isolated locations, while on the mainland early Australoids were assimilated or displaced by ]s. | |||
| ==Terminological history== | |||
| Isolated populations such as the ]s in northern India were thought to represent vestiges of earlier Australoid populations. It was also argued that the ] peoples of South India may be related to such populations. Indeed, some Dravidians today commonly are described phenotypically using various synonyms such as ''Australoid'', '']'' or ''Negrito-Australoid''.<ref> Zvelebil, Kamil V. " Accessed 01-07-2007.</ref> Most, however, were placed by Coon in the Caucasoid category.<ref>For an overview of theories of racial classification in south India see M.K. Bhasin, ''Genetics of Castes and Tribes of India: India Population Milieu'', 2006 </ref> | |||
| The term "Australoid" was coined in ethnology in the mid 19th century, describing tribes or populations "of the type of native Australians".<ref>J.R. Logan (ed.), ''The Journal of the Indian archipelago and eastern Asia'' (1859), .</ref> The term "Australioid race" was introduced by ] in 1870 to refer to certain peoples indigenous to ] and ] and ].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Pearson|first1=Roger|title=Anthropological Glossary|date=1985|publisher=Krieger Publishing Company|pages=20, 128, 267|isbn=9780898745108 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HjANAAAAYAAJ|access-date=2 February 2018}}</ref> In ], ''Australoid'' is used for morphological features characteristic of Aboriginal Australians by ] in his ''Text-book of Anatomy'' (1902). An ''Australioid'' (''sic'', with an additional ''-i-'') racial group was first proposed by ] in an essay ''On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind'' (1870), in which he divided humanity into four principal groups (Xanthochroic, ], ], and Australioid).<ref></ref> His original model included the native inhabitants of ] in ] under the Australoid category, specifically "in a well-marked form" among the hill tribes of the Deccan Plateau. Huxley further classified the ] (Peoples of the ]) as a mixture of the ] (northern Europeans) and Australioids.<ref>Huxley, Thomas. On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind. 1870. 14 August 2006. </ref> | |||
| In the mid-twentieth century an argument emerged that Australoids were linked to proto-Caucasoids. R. Ruggles Gates argued in 1960 that they are "best classified as archaic Caucasians".<ref>Ruggles Gates, R. "The Australian Aboriginals in a New Setting", ''Man'', April 1960, pp. 53-6, </ref> | |||
| Huxley (1870) described Australioids as ]; their hair as usually silky, black and wavy or curly, with large, heavy jaws and ], with skin the color of chocolate and irises which are dark brown or black.<ref name="aleph0.clarku.edu">] "" (1870) ''Journal of the Ethnological Society of London''</ref> | |||
| However, as with other phenotypical classifications of humanity, the value of the term Australoid has been in part challenged by genetic studies which have identified significant differences between distinct peoples who have been placed together within the category. As a result, most anthropogists have abandoned the system of racial classification of which this term is a part. One of the main problems with confirming an australoid race at the genetic level is that this population has been genetically absorbed into much larger oriental and caucasoid populations that have invaded their habitat; very few relatively pure australoids still exist. | |||
| {{Template:Carleton S. Coon Racial Definitions}} | |||
| The term "Proto-Australoid" was used by ] in his ''Racial History of Man'' (1923). In ''The Origin of Races'' (1962), ] expounded his system of five races (Australoid, Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Congoid and Capoid) with separate origins. Based on such evidence as claiming Australoids had the largest, megadont teeth, this group was assessed by Coon as being the most archaic and therefore the most primitive and backward. Coon's methods and conclusions were later discredited and show either a "poor understanding of human cultural history and ] or his use of ] for a racialist agenda."<ref name="Fluehr-Lobban2011">{{cite book |last=Fluehr-Lobban |first=C. |title=Race and racism : an Introduction |publisher=Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield |date=2005 |pages=131–133 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=3lq3XDz39pIC&pg=PA132|isbn=9780759107953 }}</ref> | |||
| ==Modern findings== | |||
| Modern genetic studies of human migration ] suggest that a population lineage stemming from an early out-migration may account for some commonality in the ancestry of groups who have been included in the Australoid category. In 2002, geneticist ], based on genetic studies, concluded that there was an early human migration approximately 60,000 years ago from Africa to India and then on to Australia. Wells found DNA markers that linked African ] populations with a Tamil, or Dravidian, man living in ] and to Australian Aboriginals whose DNA his team examined. | |||
| Terms associated with outdated notions of racial types, such as those ending in "-oid" have come to be seen as potentially offensive<ref name="Black2011">{{cite book|last1=Black|first1=Sue|last2=Ferguson|first2=Eilidh|title=Forensic Anthropology: 2000 to 2010|date=2011|publisher=Taylor and Francis Group|page=127|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=306ruTniZmcC&pg=PA127|access-date=3 July 2018|isbn=9781439845899}} "There are considered to be four basic ancestry groups into which an individual can be placed by physical appearance, not accounting for admixture: the sub-Saharan African group ("Negroid"), the European group ("Caucasoid"), the Central Asian group ("Mongoloid"), and the Australasian group ("Australoid"). The rather outdated names of all but one of these groups were originally derived from geography"</ref> and related to ].<ref name="Fluehr-Lobban2011"/><ref name="oxford">{{cite web| title = Ask Oxford – Definition of Australoid| publisher = ]|year=2018| url = https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/australoid| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180627202220/https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/australoid| url-status = dead| archive-date = 27 June 2018| access-date = 28 June 2018}}</ref> | |||
| ==The first Americans?== | |||
| == Controversies == | |||
| Skulls comparable to Australoid peoples have been found in the Americas, leading to speculation that peoples with phenotypical similarities to modern Australoids may have been the earliest occupants of the continent. <ref></ref><ref> | |||
| {{MeyersLexikonEthnographicMap}} | |||
| </ref> These have been termed by some ]. These early Americans left signs of settlement in Brazil which may date back as many as 50,000 years ago. | |||
| The populations grouped as "]", such as the ] (from the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean), the ] and ] peoples (from Malaysia), the ] (from Thailand), the ], the ], and certain other ], the ] of Sri Lanka and a number of ] tribal populations in the interior of the ] (some ] tribes and ] ]) were also suggested by some to belong to the Australo-Melanesian group,<ref name="p. 26">{{cite book|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=ErE0DwAAQBAJ&pg=PP26 |first1=T |last1=Pullaiah |first2=KV |last2=Krishnamurthy |first3=Bir |last3=Bahadur |title=Ethnobotany of India, Volume 5: The Indo-Gangetic Region and Central India |year=2017 |page=26|publisher=CRC Press |isbn=9781351741316 }} names the tribes of Chota Nagpur, the Baiga, Gond, Bhil, Santal and Oroan tribes; counted as of partial Australoid and partial ] ancestry are certain Munda-speaking groups (Munda, Bonda, Gadaba, Santals) and certain Dravidian-speaking groups (Maria, Muria, Gond, Oroan).</ref><ref name="Coon 1939 425–431">{{cite book |last=Coon |first=Carleton Stevens |year=1939 |location=] |publisher=] |title=The Races of Europe|url= https://archive.org/details/racesofeurope031695mbp |author-link=Carleton S. Coon |pages=–431}}</ref> but there were controversies about this inclusion. | |||
| The inclusion of Indian tribes in the group was not well-defined, and was closely related to the question of the original ], and the possible shared ancestry between Indian, Andamanese, and ] populations of the Upper Paleolithic.{{Citation needed|date=June 2024}} | |||
| One of earliest skulls recovered by archaeologists is a specimen scientists have named Lucia. According to ] Walter Neves of the ], detailed measurements of the skull revealed that Lucia revealed that she "was anything but mongoloid." Further, when a ] artist reconstructed Lucia's face, "the result was surprising: 'It ha<nowiki></nowiki> all the features of a negroid face"....<ref>.." BBC News, Sci/Tech. August 26, 1999. Accessed 01-07/2007.</ref> | |||
| The suggested Australo-Melanesian ancestry of the original South Asian populations has long remained an open question. It was embraced by Indian anthropologists as emphasising the deep antiquity of Indian prehistory. Australo-Melanesian hunter-gatherer and fisherman tribes of the interior of India were identified with the ] described in the ]. ] (1923) following Vincenzo Giuffrida-Ruggeri (1913) recognises a Pre-Dravidian ''Australo-Veddaic'' stratum in India.<ref>P. Mitra, ''Prehistoric India'' (1923), p. 48.</ref> | |||
| Scientists believe these Australoid first Americans later were displaced relatively recently by peoples with more brachycephalic profiles, projecting zygomas and monolids (]) approximately 7,000 to 9,000 years ago. A small number of peoples living in ] are speculated to be a possible remnant of these earliest known Americans. | |||
| Alternatively, the ] themselves have been claimed as originally of Australo-Melanesian stock,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Sarat Chandra Roy (Ral Bahadur)|title=Man in India - Volume 80|date=2000|publisher=A. K. Bose|page=59|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wPhEAQAAIAAJ|access-date=21 May 2018}}</ref> a view held by ] among others.<ref>R. R. Bhattacharya et al. (eds., ''Anthropology of B.S. Guha: a centenary tribute'' (1996), p. 50.</ref> | |||
| <blockquote>The pre-European Fuegeans, who lived stone age-style lives until this century, show hybrid skull features which could have resulted from intermarrying between mongoloid and negroid peoples. Their rituals and traditions also bear some resemblance to the ancient rock art in Brazil."....<ref>.." BBC News, Sci/Tech. August 26, 1999. Accessed 01-07/2007.</ref></blockquote> | |||
| South Indian tribes specifically described as having Australo-Melanesian affinities include the ], ], ], ], ], the ] of Kerala, the ] and ] of the ], the ] of Malabar, the ], ], ] and ].<ref>Mhaiske, Vinod M., Patil, Vinayak K., Narkhede, S. S., ''Forest Tribology And Anthropology'' (2016), . Bhuban Mohan Das, ''The Peoples of Assam'' (1987), .</ref> | |||
| ==Homo floresiensis== | |||
| The recent discovery of diminutive humans on the isle of Flores has led to debate about whether or not they constitute a a distinct species, labelled ], or a subspecies or homo sapiens. Teuku Jacob, chief paleontologist of the Indonesian Gadjah Mada University and other scientists reportedly disagree with the placement of the new finds into a new species of Homo, stating instead, "It is a sub-species of Homo sapiens classified under the Austrolomelanesid race".<ref name=Jacob>{{cite web |url=http://iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1099738261892B253 |title=Flores man not a new species |accessmonthday=October 11 |accessyear=2006 |author= |authorlink= |coauthors= |date=November 6, 2004 |year= |month= |format= |work= |publisher= }}</ref> | |||
| In 1953, the Australoid race were believed to be part of the "Archaic Caucasoid race", along with ], Dravidians and ].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Beals |first1=Ralph L. |title=An Introduction to Anthropology |last2=Hoijer |first2=Harry |publisher=The Macmillan Company |year=1953 |place=New York}}</ref> | |||
| ==Notes== | |||
| <div class="references-small"> | |||
| <references /> | |||
| <!--READ ME!! PLEASE DO NOT JUST ADD NEW NOTES AT THE BOTTOM. See the instructions above on ordering. --> | |||
| </div> | |||
| == Criticism based on modern genetics == | |||
| ⚫ | ==See also== | ||
| {{See also|Genetic studies on Indigenous Australians|Race and genetics}} | |||
| *] | |||
| After discussing various criteria used in biology to define subspecies or races, ] concludes in 2016: "he answer to the question whether races exist in humans is clear and unambiguous: no."<ref name="Templeton2016"> {{cite book |last1= Templeton |first1= A. |chapter= Evolution and Notions of Human Race |editor1-last= Losos |editor1-first= J. |editor2-last= Lenski |editor2-first= R. |title= How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society |date=2016 |pages=346–361 |doi=10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv7h0s6j.26 |access-date= |publisher=Princeton University Press |location=Princeton, Oxford |jstor= j.ctv7h0s6j.26 |isbn=978-1-4008-8138-3}}</ref>{{rp|360}}<ref>That this view reflects the consensus among American anthropologists is stated in: {{cite journal |last1=Wagner |first1=Jennifer K. |last2=Yu |first2=Joon-Ho |last3=Ifekwunigwe |first3=Jayne O. |last4=Harrell |first4=Tanya M. |last5=Bamshad |first5=Michael J. |last6=Royal |first6=Charmaine D. |date=February 2017 |title=Anthropologists' views on race, ancestry, and genetics |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |volume=162 |issue=2 |pages=318–327 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.23120 |issn=0002-9483 |pmc=5299519 |pmid=27874171}} See also: {{cite web |author=American Association of Physical Anthropologists |author-link=American Association of Physical Anthropologists |date=27 March 2019 |title=AAPA Statement on Race and Racism |url=https://physanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement-race-and-racism-2019/ |access-date=19 June 2020 |website=American Association of Physical Anthropologists}}</ref> | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| The Pan-Asian genome project concluded that Negrito populations in Malaysia and the Negrito populations in the Philippines were more closely related to non-Negrito local populations, rather than to each other, highlighting the non-existence of a distinct Australo-Melanesian grouping.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Stoneking |first1=Mark |last2=Delfin |first2=Frederick |date=23 February 2010 |title=The Human Genetic History of East Asia: Weaving a Complex Tapestry |journal=Current Biology |language=English |volume=20 |issue=4 |pages=R188–R193 |doi=10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.052 |issn=0960-9822 |pmid=20178766|s2cid=18777315 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2010CBio...20.R188S }}</ref> | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| ⚫ | ==See also== | ||
| * | |||
| *] | |||
| * | |||
| *] | |||
| ==References== | |||
| {{anthropology-stub}} | |||
| {{Reflist|30em}} | |||
| {{Historical definitions of race}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 12:25, 19 December 2024
Outdated grouping of human beingsAustralo-Melanesians (also known as Australasians or the Australomelanesoid, Australoid or Australioid race) is an outdated historical grouping of various people indigenous to Melanesia and Australia. Controversially, some groups found in parts of Southeast Asia and South Asia were also sometimes included.
While most authors included Papuans, Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians (mainly from Fiji, New Caledonia, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu), there was controversy about the inclusion of the various Southeast Asian populations grouped as "Negrito", or a number of dark-skinned tribal populations of the Indian subcontinent.
The concept of dividing humankind into three, four or five races (often called Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid, and Australoid) was introduced in the 18th century and further developed by Western scholars in the context of "racist ideologies" during the age of colonialism. With the rise of modern genetics, the concept of distinct human races in a biological sense has become obsolete. In 2019, the American Association of Biological Anthropologists stated: "The belief in “races” as natural aspects of human biology, and the structures of inequality (racism) that emerge from such beliefs, are among the most damaging elements in the human experience both today and in the past."
Terminological history
The term "Australoid" was coined in ethnology in the mid 19th century, describing tribes or populations "of the type of native Australians". The term "Australioid race" was introduced by Thomas Huxley in 1870 to refer to certain peoples indigenous to South and Southeast Asia and Oceania. In physical anthropology, Australoid is used for morphological features characteristic of Aboriginal Australians by Daniel John Cunningham in his Text-book of Anatomy (1902). An Australioid (sic, with an additional -i-) racial group was first proposed by Thomas Huxley in an essay On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind (1870), in which he divided humanity into four principal groups (Xanthochroic, Mongoloid, Negroid, and Australioid). His original model included the native inhabitants of Deccan in India under the Australoid category, specifically "in a well-marked form" among the hill tribes of the Deccan Plateau. Huxley further classified the Melanochroi (Peoples of the Mediterranean race) as a mixture of the Xanthochroi (northern Europeans) and Australioids.
Huxley (1870) described Australioids as dolichocephalic; their hair as usually silky, black and wavy or curly, with large, heavy jaws and prognathism, with skin the color of chocolate and irises which are dark brown or black.
The term "Proto-Australoid" was used by Roland Burrage Dixon in his Racial History of Man (1923). In The Origin of Races (1962), Carleton Coon expounded his system of five races (Australoid, Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Congoid and Capoid) with separate origins. Based on such evidence as claiming Australoids had the largest, megadont teeth, this group was assessed by Coon as being the most archaic and therefore the most primitive and backward. Coon's methods and conclusions were later discredited and show either a "poor understanding of human cultural history and evolution or his use of ethnology for a racialist agenda."
Terms associated with outdated notions of racial types, such as those ending in "-oid" have come to be seen as potentially offensive and related to scientific racism.
Controversies
| Caucasoid: Aryans Semitic Hamitic Negroid: African Negro Khoikhoi Melanesian Negrito Australoid Uncertain: Dravida & Sinhalese | Mongoloid: North Mongol Chinese & Indochinese Korean & Japanese Tibetan & Burmese Malay Polynesian Maori Micronesian Eskimo & Inuit American |
The populations grouped as "Negrito", such as the Andamanese (from the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean), the Semang and Batek peoples (from Malaysia), the Maniq people (from Thailand), the Aeta people, the Ati people, and certain other ethnic groups in the Philippines, the Vedda people of Sri Lanka and a number of dark-skinned tribal populations in the interior of the Indian subcontinent (some Dravidian-speaking tribes and Austroasiatic-speaking Munda peoples) were also suggested by some to belong to the Australo-Melanesian group, but there were controversies about this inclusion.
The inclusion of Indian tribes in the group was not well-defined, and was closely related to the question of the original peopling of India, and the possible shared ancestry between Indian, Andamanese, and Sahulian populations of the Upper Paleolithic.
The suggested Australo-Melanesian ancestry of the original South Asian populations has long remained an open question. It was embraced by Indian anthropologists as emphasising the deep antiquity of Indian prehistory. Australo-Melanesian hunter-gatherer and fisherman tribes of the interior of India were identified with the Nishada Kingdom described in the Mahabharata. Panchanan Mitra (1923) following Vincenzo Giuffrida-Ruggeri (1913) recognises a Pre-Dravidian Australo-Veddaic stratum in India.
Alternatively, the Dravidians themselves have been claimed as originally of Australo-Melanesian stock, a view held by Biraja Sankar Guha among others.
South Indian tribes specifically described as having Australo-Melanesian affinities include the Oraon, Munda, Santal, Bhil, Gondi, the Kadars of Kerala, the Kurumba and Irula of the Nilgiris, the Paniyans of Malabar, the Uralis, Kannikars, Muthuvan and Chenchus.
In 1953, the Australoid race were believed to be part of the "Archaic Caucasoid race", along with Ainus, Dravidians and Veddas.
Criticism based on modern genetics
See also: Genetic studies on Indigenous Australians and Race and geneticsAfter discussing various criteria used in biology to define subspecies or races, Alan R. Templeton concludes in 2016: "he answer to the question whether races exist in humans is clear and unambiguous: no."
The Pan-Asian genome project concluded that Negrito populations in Malaysia and the Negrito populations in the Philippines were more closely related to non-Negrito local populations, rather than to each other, highlighting the non-existence of a distinct Australo-Melanesian grouping.
See also
References
- ^ Pullaiah, T; Krishnamurthy, KV; Bahadur, Bir (2017). Ethnobotany of India, Volume 5: The Indo-Gangetic Region and Central India. CRC Press. p. 26. ISBN 9781351741316. names the tribes of Chota Nagpur, the Baiga, Gond, Bhil, Santal and Oroan tribes; counted as of partial Australoid and partial Mongoloid ancestry are certain Munda-speaking groups (Munda, Bonda, Gadaba, Santals) and certain Dravidian-speaking groups (Maria, Muria, Gond, Oroan).
- Kulatilake, Samanti. "Cranial Morphology of the Vedda people - the indigenes of Sri Lanka".
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ American Association of Physical Anthropologists (27 March 2019). "AAPA Statement on Race and Racism". American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Retrieved 19 June 2020.
- J.R. Logan (ed.), The Journal of the Indian archipelago and eastern Asia (1859), p. 68.
- Pearson, Roger (1985). Anthropological Glossary. Krieger Publishing Company. pp. 20, 128, 267. ISBN 9780898745108. Retrieved 2 February 2018.
- Huxley, Thomas On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind. 1870. August 14, 2006
- Huxley, Thomas. On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind. 1870. 14 August 2006.
- Huxley, T. H. "On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind" (1870) Journal of the Ethnological Society of London
- ^ Fluehr-Lobban, C. (2005). Race and racism : an Introduction. Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 131–133. ISBN 9780759107953.
- Black, Sue; Ferguson, Eilidh (2011). Forensic Anthropology: 2000 to 2010. Taylor and Francis Group. p. 127. ISBN 9781439845899. Retrieved 3 July 2018. "There are considered to be four basic ancestry groups into which an individual can be placed by physical appearance, not accounting for admixture: the sub-Saharan African group ("Negroid"), the European group ("Caucasoid"), the Central Asian group ("Mongoloid"), and the Australasian group ("Australoid"). The rather outdated names of all but one of these groups were originally derived from geography"
- "Ask Oxford – Definition of Australoid". Oxford Dictionary of English. 2018. Archived from the original on 27 June 2018. Retrieved 28 June 2018.
- Coon, Carleton Stevens (1939). The Races of Europe. New York: The Macmillan Company. pp. 425–431.
- P. Mitra, Prehistoric India (1923), p. 48.
- Sarat Chandra Roy (Ral Bahadur) (2000). Man in India - Volume 80. A. K. Bose. p. 59. Retrieved 21 May 2018.
- R. R. Bhattacharya et al. (eds., Anthropology of B.S. Guha: a centenary tribute (1996), p. 50.
- Mhaiske, Vinod M., Patil, Vinayak K., Narkhede, S. S., Forest Tribology And Anthropology (2016), p. 5. Bhuban Mohan Das, The Peoples of Assam (1987), p. 78.
- Beals, Ralph L.; Hoijer, Harry (1953). An Introduction to Anthropology. New York: The Macmillan Company.
- Templeton, A. (2016). "Evolution and Notions of Human Race". In Losos, J.; Lenski, R. (eds.). How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press. pp. 346–361. doi:10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26. ISBN 978-1-4008-8138-3. JSTOR j.ctv7h0s6j.26.
- That this view reflects the consensus among American anthropologists is stated in: Wagner, Jennifer K.; Yu, Joon-Ho; Ifekwunigwe, Jayne O.; Harrell, Tanya M.; Bamshad, Michael J.; Royal, Charmaine D. (February 2017). "Anthropologists' views on race, ancestry, and genetics". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 162 (2): 318–327. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23120. ISSN 0002-9483. PMC 5299519. PMID 27874171. See also: American Association of Physical Anthropologists (27 March 2019). "AAPA Statement on Race and Racism". American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Retrieved 19 June 2020.
- Stoneking, Mark; Delfin, Frederick (23 February 2010). "The Human Genetic History of East Asia: Weaving a Complex Tapestry". Current Biology. 20 (4): R188–R193. Bibcode:2010CBio...20.R188S. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.052. ISSN 0960-9822. PMID 20178766. S2CID 18777315.