Darwin, the Monkey and Skin: Was the Naturalist Racist?
Exploring the complex relationship between Charles Darwin's theories, scientific racism, and the misuse of evolutionary concepts
An Uncomfortable Legacy
The name Charles Darwin resonates as the father of the theory of evolution. Yet, in the shadow of this scientific revolution looms a troubling question: did his ideas fuel racism?
After all, "On the Origin of Species" (1859) speaks of "natural selection" and "struggle for existence." It's easy to imagine how these concepts were distorted to justify the supremacy of one "race" over another. But the reality is more nuanced.
Key Work
"On the Origin of Species" (1859) introduced the concept of natural selection but did not explicitly address human races.
Social Context
Victorian England was marked by colonial prejudices and emerging racial theories that influenced scientific discourse.
Darwin, a Man of His Time?
Contrary to a common misconception, Charles Darwin was fiercely anti-slavery. His voyage on the Beagle exposed him to the horrors of slavery, which he vehemently condemned. In his writings, he expresses a deep conviction of the biological unity of humanity - what is called monogenism.
For him, all human races belong to a single species, Homo sapiens, descending from a common ancestor.
However, Darwin was also a product of Victorian England, imbued with colonial prejudices. In "The Descent of Man" (1871), he sometimes describes non-European peoples in terms that shock us today, qualifying them as "savages" and placing them lower than "civilized races" on a scale of civilization.
Darwin Himself
Believed in the unity of the human species and opposed slavery. His observations on "races" were tinged with ethnocentrism, but not with essentialist biological racism.
Social Darwinists
Thinkers like Herbert Spencer forcibly applied the concept of "survival of the fittest" to human societies, creating eugenics. This ideology, which Darwin disapproved of, aimed to "improve" the human species.
Key Timeline
1831-1836
Darwin's voyage on HMS Beagle exposes him to slavery and diverse human cultures
1859
Publication of "On the Origin of Species" introducing natural selection
1871
Publication of "The Descent of Man" addressing human evolution more directly
The Key Experiment: Samuel Morton's Cranial Measurements
While Darwin was developing his theory, other scientists were seeking to "scientifically" prove the inequality of races. The most famous case is that of American physician Samuel George Morton (1799-1851) and his collection of skulls.
Methodology: Apparently Rigorous Science
Morton methodically measured hundreds of human skulls from around the world. His procedure was as follows:
- Collection: He gathered over 900 skulls, classified into five "races": Caucasoid (Europeans), Mongoloid (Asians), Native Americans, Ethiopians (Africans), and Malays.
- Measurement of cranial capacity: To estimate brain size, he used a simple but imperfect technique: filling the cranial box with pepper seeds, then pouring the contents into a graduated cylinder to measure the volume.
- Statistical analysis: He compiled average volumes for each group and drew conclusions about supposed intellectual capacities.
Morton's Collection
Morton assembled one of the largest collections of human skulls in the 19th century, using them to support his racial hierarchy theories.
Samuel George Morton with his skull collection
Cranial Capacity According to Morton's Original Data
| Race (according to Morton's classification) | Average Cranial Capacity (cubic inches) |
|---|---|
| Caucasoid (Europeans) | 87 |
| Mongoloid (Asians) | 83 |
| Native Americans | 82 |
| Malays | 81 |
| Ethiopians (Africans) | 78 |
| Source: "Crania Americana" (1839) by Samuel Morton | |
Modern Reanalysis
In 1978, paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould reanalyzed Morton's data. He discovered flagrant methodological biases:
- Ignoring body size effects: Men, generally taller, have larger skulls. Morton did not account for this.
- Unconscious subsampling: He included small skulls in the "Caucasoid" group (such as Hindus) while excluding them from the average, and did the opposite for the "Ethiopian" group.
Gould showed that once these biases were corrected, the differences in average cranial volume between groups became negligible. Morton's experiment was therefore pseudoscience, biased by the racial prejudices of its author.
Interpretation Comparison
| Perspective | Interpretation | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 19th Century (Morton) | Proof of innate biological hierarchy of races | Scientific justification for slavery and colonialism |
| Modern (Gould et al.) | Data biased by prejudices; no evidence of hierarchy | Demonstrates how prejudices can influence scientific analysis |
The 19th Century Scientist's Toolkit
Here are the essential "research solutions" used in experiments like Morton's, and their functions.
Skull Collection (Osteotheque)
Physical database for the comparative study of human anatomy across the world.
Pepper Seeds / Shot
Filling agent to measure the internal volume (capacity) of a closed cavity like the skull.
Graduated Cylinder
Measuring instrument to quantify the volume of filling (seeds or shot) after transfer.
Anthropometric Calipers
Precision tool for measuring distances and angles between bone landmarks of the skull.
Pre-established Racial Classification
A (biased) reading grid used to categorize samples before any objective measurement. This predetermined classification system fundamentally influenced how data was interpreted.
A Hijacked Theory, a Man Rehabilitated
The real danger did not come from Darwin's writings, but from their misappropriation. The theory of evolution, by emphasizing variation and competition, provided fertile ground for ideologues seeking natural justification for their prejudices.
Scientific racism, illustrated by Morton's biased experiment, preceded and outlived Darwin.
Today, genetics has definitively buried these old demons. DNA sequencing has confirmed what Darwin intuited: the fundamental unity of humanity.
The genetic differences between two individuals of the same "race" are much greater than the average differences between racial groups. Skin color is only a superficial adaptation to sunlight, with no connection to intelligence or moral value.
Darwin's legacy reminds us of a crucial lesson: science is a powerful tool, but it is not immune to the biases of those who practice it. Vigilance is necessary to distinguish scientific objectivity from its ideological instrumentalization.
Genetic Unity
Modern genetics confirms that all humans share 99.9% of their DNA, with superficial variations like skin color accounting for minimal genetic differences.
Key Takeaway
The distinction between scientific evidence and its ideological interpretation remains critically important in understanding the history and impact of evolutionary theory.