Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables

“Evolutionary theory transformed human thought during the nineteenth century. Nearly every question in the life of sciences was reformulated in its light (Gould, 142).” The preceding chapters exploited the data of brain size to support the ideas on distinctions among race, class, and gender. Now, chapter 4 discusses two more direct arguments created from the theory of evolution. The first argument is called recapitulation also know as, “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny,” which is a general evolutionary defense for ranking of groups. The second is a more precise evolutionary hypothesis labeled Lombroso’s criminal anthropology. For it states a relationship between biological nature and human criminal behavior. Both theories will use apish morphology to help determine which groups of humans are superior and inferior.

The ape in all of us: recapitulation

Once evolution was a known fact, nineteenth century naturalist began the process of reconstructing the “tree of life“, but the fossil record was extremely imperfect and major trunks, branches, and limbs were lost forever. The only solution was to find an indirect process to understanding the evolutionary tract. The answer was found with the great German zoologist Ernst Haeckel. Haeckel suggested that reconstructing the path of evolution can be directly traced through embryological development of higher forms. He proclaimed “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” stated that an individual through its own growth, passes through stages representing adult ancestral forms. The recapitulation theory became one of the most influential theories of the late nineteenth century, where it dominated and influenced several fields of science that include embryology, comparative morphology, and paleontology. Recapitulation was regarded as the key to understanding the evolutionary tract. Recapitulation branched from biology and influenced other areas of interest. Freud used it to complain his Oedipus complex. Recapitulation became an anatomical theory for ranking humans based on the entire body instead of the brain size. It was able to state that adults of an inferior group must be like children of a superior group, for the children from a superior group represented a primitive adult ancestor. The theory was able to state that adults blacks and women were like white male children, and they were considered a living representation of an ancestral stage of white males (Gould, 144). This severed as a general theory of biological determinism, which was able to rank inferior groups in relations to race, sex, and class. As a result of recapitulation, E.D. Cope, an influential American paleontologist, was able to focus on anthropometric particularity craniomerty to support the ranking of races, and once again apish features applied to the inferior races will play a dominate role. The recapitulationists not only used anatomy has an argument for ranking races, but also extended it to use psychic development of how savages and women were emotionally like children of white males. They also compared prehistoric art to drawings from civilized children and primitive adult groups. Herbert Spencer goes as far to state that, “The intellectual traits of the uncivilized… are traits of the recurring children of the civilized (Gould, 146).” Some recapitulationists even took greater leaps in their ideas. For example, G. Stanley Hall relates the higher suicide rates of women as a primitive evolutionary trait (Further explanation found on pg. 147). However by 1920 the theory of recapitulation had collapsed, and was replaced by the theory of neoteny, which was a new way of ranking human groups. Neoteny takes on the opposite role or retard development of recapitulation, and states that it is superior to retain the traits of childhood, because it was better to develop slowly. Louis Bolk who proposed the theory, created a list of features shared by adult humans and fetal/juvenile apes, but lost in adult apes. These features are: vaulted cranium, large brain in relation to body size, small face, hair confined largely to head, armpits, and pubic regions, and un-rotated big toe. The biggest problem with this new theory is that it suggested white male adults were the inferior group. For nearly seventy years scientists were under the impression that recapitulation had collected data to support the superiority of white male; however, all that data collected actually proved the inferiority of the upper-class white male to their lower class whites, women, and black adults. An old argument never dies, and several scientists try to wiggle around this dilemma. Havelock Ellis would suggest urban males were developing womanly anatomy, and it proclaimed the superiority of urban life. While Bolk would try on proclaim that the white male race was the most progressive, as in terms of most retarded. Unfortunately, Bolk over looked all the features from recapitulation that placed white males far from the conditions of a child. He also overlooked that Orientals are far more retarded, and suggested the differences between Orientals and white males was too close to call. Lastly, H.J. Eysenck created a neotenic argument for black inferiority. He used three facts to forage his story. 1. Black babies and young black children exhibit more rapid sensorimotor development that white babies, suggesting black children develop more quickly away from the fetal state. 2. Average white IQ surpasses black IQ by age three. 3. There is a slight negative correlation between sensorimotor in the first year of life and later IQ. Eysenck is stating that children who develop more rapidly will in later life have a lower IQ. However, Eysenck theory doesn’t hold true for his argument is based on non- causal correlations, and he is clearly showing his hereditarian bias.

Why do you think American paleontologist agree with E. D. Cope as proclaiming the inferiority of Southern Europeans over Northern Europeans?

In reference to the neoteny theory. Why was it more difficult to prove that white adult males had more child like traits? Can you think of any others arguments to support white adult males as the superior group?

The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology

The subject of this theory is about Cesare Lombroso’s theory of l’uomo delinquente, the criminal man, which discusses anatomical differences between criminals and sane men. It wasn’t until he examined the skull of Vihella (the Italian version of Jack-the-Ripper) that he was able to support his theory. “For he saw in the skull a series of atavistic features recalling an apish past rather than a human present (Gould, 153).” Lombroso’s evolutionary theory was based on anthropometric data, which stated criminals are evolutionary throwbacks. Their atavism is both physical and mental, but it is the anatomical signs of apishness that are decisive. “We are governed by silent laws which never cease to operate and which rule society with more authority than the laws inscribes on our statute books. Crime….appears to be a natural phenomenon’ (Lombroso, 1887, pg. 157). In order for Lombroso to prove men with apish features were naturally born criminals. He needed to prove inferior animals displayed criminal behaviors. He was able to compile one of the most ludicrous excursion analyses of criminal behaviors in animals. He cited such examples as: ant driven by rage to kill and dismember an aphid, an adulterous stork who, with her lover murdered her husband, and a criminal association of beavers who ganged up to murder a solitary compatriot. After proving criminal behavior in animals his next step was a comparison of criminals to inferior groups. Lombroso used the cultural group Dinka of the Upper Nile to identify criminality within inferior people. The following features were used to display the criminality of the Dinka: heavy tattooing, heavy threshold of pain, breaking their incisors, and a display of apish stigmata as normal parts of their body. Lombroso’s theory of comparing atavistic criminals with animals, savages, and people of lower races resembles the basic argument of recapitulation. However, one of Lombroso’s major flaws was found in the apish stigmata he used. Some of these features used were: greater skull thickness, large jaws, relatively long arms, precocious wrinkles, absence of baldness, darker skin, diminished sensitivity to pain, and even noted that the feet of prostitutes are often prehensile as in apes. The problem that his anatomical stigmata was citing extreme values on a normal curve that approaches average measures for the same trait in apes. Just like Eysenck, his theory didn’t hold true for his argument of criminal features found in inferior races. However, this flaw didn’t stop him for he included other factors into his stigmata to prove the criminality was found in inferior races. While comparing canine teeth and flattened palate he used the anatomy of lemurs and rodents. His stigmata even included social factors. Some of these social factors were: criminals had their own language, tattoos on the body, and the ability not to blush. Eventually, his theory came under heated debate. He did back down from his theory of atavism, but not for one moment did he dispute his idea that crime is biological.

The recapitulation theory failed because of the neoteny theory. What similarities does Lombroso’s theory have with recapitulation, and why does his theory hold so much influence in criminal anthropology even though it is flawed?

“Evolutionary theory transformed human thought during the nineteenth century. Nearly every question in the life of sciences was reformulated in its light (Gould, 142).” Do you think the theories of recapitulation and criminal anthropology were a direct influence of evolution or do you think there were others factors contributing to the development of these two theories?

The influence of criminal anthropology

Criminal anthropology became the subject of discussion in legal and penal circles for years. Lombrosian anthropology had primary influence on how to understand the crime. Lombroso said study the criminal, not his upbringing, education, or what inspired his crime, but study the criminal in his natural place. His theory became a prescreening of criminals, which became a primary judgment in many criminal trials. It also invoked the argument should the punishments must fit the criminal not the crime. This was widely adopted by the United States for our modern apparatus of parole, early release, and indeterminate sentencing stems from Lombroso’s theory. Another influence that has stemmed from Lombroso theory is to sequester the dangerous and for Lombroso this meet criminal with his apish stigmata, but today the dangerous often means the defiant, the poor, and the black.

Now we live in a more subtle century, but the arguments of the old never die. Instead of cranial measurements it’s the complexity of intelligence testing. Additionally, the Lombroso’s features of apish stigmata are no longer being used, but linking genes and structure of the brain are trying to define the of the behaviors of criminals. For example the XYY an chromosomal anomaly where the extra Y is linked to male aggression, which is thought to lead to an increase in criminal behavior.

What might be other causes of innate criminal behavior that scientists are looking at?