Edit filter log

[ 0 => ':''See [[Demographics of India]] for information about population of India. ''', 1 => false, 2 => 'Various attempts have been made, under the [[British Raj]] and since, to '''classify the [[demographics of India|population of India]] according to a [[typology (anthropology)|racial typology]]'''. After the [[independence of India|independence]], in pursuance of the Government's policy to discourage distinctions between communities based on race, the 1951 Census of India did away with racial classifications. The national Census of independent India does not recognize any racial groups in India.<ref name=Kumar>Kumar, Jayant. [http://www.censusindia.gov.in/ Indian Census] 2001. September 4, 2006.</ref>', 3 => false, 4 => 'Some scholars of the colonial epoch attempted to find a method to classify the various groups of India according to the predominant racial theories popular at that time in Europe. This scheme of racial classification was used by the British census of India. It was often mixed with considerations about the [[Indian caste system|caste system]].', 5 => false, 6 => '==Great races==', 7 => '[[Scientific racism]] of the late 19th and early 20th centuries divided mankind into three "great races", [[Caucasoid race|Caucasoid]] ([[white people|white]]), [[Mongoloid race|Mongoloid]] ([[yellow people|yellow]]) and [[Negroid race|Negroid]] ([[black people|black]]) in accordance with their own world-view.{{cn|date=February 2014}}', 8 => false, 9 => 'The populations of the Indian subcontinent however were problematic to classify under this scheme.{{cn|date=February 2014}} They were assumed to be a mixture of "Dravidian race", tentatively with an "[[Australoid race|Australoid]]" grouping, with an [[Aryan race]], identified as a sub-race to the Caucasoid race, but some authors also assumed Mongolic admixture, so that India, for the purposes of scientific racism, presented a complicated mixture of all major types.{{cn|date=February 2014}}', 10 => false, 11 => '[[Edgar Thurston]] identified a "Homo Dravida" who had more in common with the [[Australian aboriginal]]s than their [[Indo-Aryans|Indo-Aryan]]. As evidence, he adduced the use of the boomerang by [[Kallar(caste)|Kallar]] and [[Maravar]] warriors and the proficiency at tree-climbing among both the [[Kadirs]] of the [[Anamalai]] hills and the [[Dayaks]] of [[Borneo]].<ref>C. Bates, 'Race, Caste and Tribes in Central India' in: ''The Concept of Race'', ed. Robb, OUP (1995), p. 245, cited after Ajay Skaria, ''Shades of Wildness Tribe, Caste, and Gender in Western India'', The Journal of Asian Studies (1997), p. 730.</ref>', 12 => false, 13 => 'The "Negroid" status of the Dravidians however remained disputed. In 1898, ethnographer Friedrich Ratzel remarked about the "Mongolian features" of "Dravidians", resulting in he described as his "hypothesis of their [Dravidians] close connection with the population of Tibet", whom he adds "Tibetans may be decidedly reckoned in the Mongol race".<ref name=Ratzel>Ratzel, Freidrich. The History of Mankind. Macmillan and Co.:New York, 1898. ISBN 978-81-7158-084-2 p.358</ref> In 1899, ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'' summarized Ratzel's findings over India with, "India is for the author [of the History of Mankind, Ratzel], a region where races have been broken up pulverized, kneaded by conquerors.<ref name=Mason /><!--p.21--> Doubtless a pre-Dravidian negroid type came first, of low stature and mean physique, though these same are, in India, the result of poor social and economic conditions.<ref name=Mason /><!--p.21--> Dravidians succeeded negroids, and there may have been Malay intrusions, but Australian affinities are denied.<ref name=Mason /><!--p.21--> Then succeeded Aryan and Mongol, forming the present pot porri through conquest and blending."<ref name=Mason>Mason, O.T. "Scientific Books." ''Science'' Volume 10 (1899) p.21</ref>', 14 => false, 15 => 'In 1900, anthropologist [[Joseph Deniker]] said, "the Dravidian race is connected with both the Indonesian and Australian...<!--287--> the Dravidian race, which it would be better to call South Indian, is prevalent among the peoples of Southern India speaking the Dravidian tongues, and also among the [[Kols]] and other people of India... The Veddhas... come much nearer to the Dravidian type, which moreover also penetrates among the populations of India, even into the middle valley of the Ganges.<!--290-->".<ref name="Deniker">Deniker, Joseph. ''The Races of Man: An Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography.'' Charles Scribner's and Sons: London, 1900. ISBN 0-8369-5932-9 p.498</ref> Deniker groups "Dravidians" as a "subrace" under "Curly or Wavy Hair Dark Skin" in which he also includes the "Ethiopian" and "Australian".<!--285--><ref name="Deniker"/> Also, Deniker mentions that the "Indian race has its typical representatives among the Afghans, the Rajputs, the Brahmins and most of North India but it has undergone numerous alterations as a consequence with crosses with Assyriod, Dravidian, Mongol, Turkish, Arab and other elements."<!--290--><ref name="Deniker"/> His theories have been discarded by post-modern anthropologists.{{cn|date=February 2014}}', 16 => false, 17 => 'Carleton S. Coon, in his book ''[[The Races of Europe]]'' (1939), classified the [[Dravidian people|Dravidians]] as "Caucasoid" due to their "Caucasoid skull structure" and other physical traits such as noses, eyes and hair.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=toDUP8bcauMC&pg=PA153 |title=Apart Type Screenplay - Everett C. Borders - Google Books |publisher=Books.google.ca |date= |accessdate=2013-06-25}}</ref>', 18 => false, 19 => '==Martial races theory==', 20 => '{{Main|Martial Race}}', 21 => 'The [[Martial Race|Martial races theory]] was a [[British Empire|British]] [[ideology]] based on the assumption that certain peoples were more martially inclined as opposed to the general populace or other peoples.<ref name="heather_streets_martial">Heather Streets. ''Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857-1914''</ref> The British divided the entire spectrum of Indian [[ethnic]] groups into two categories: a "martial race" and a "non-martial race". The martial race was thought of as typically brave and well built for fighting.<ref>Rand,Gavin. Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857–1914. European Review of History.</ref> The non-martial races were those whom the British believed to be unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyle.', 22 => false, 23 => 'The question of loyalty and disloyalty cannot be debated on the simple fact that many of the races mentioned as "loyal" actually did participate in the rebellion. The [[Indian rebellion of 1857]] may have played a role in British reinforcement of the martial races theory. During this rebellion, some Indian troops, particularly in Bengal, mutinied, but the "loyal", [[Dogra]]s, [[Gurkha]]s, [[Garhwal Rifles|Garhwalis]], [[Devars]], [[Sikhs]], [[Jats]] and Pakhtuns ([[Pathans]]) did not join the mutiny and fought on the side of the British Army. Modern scholars have suggested that this theory was propagated to accelerate recruitment from among these races, while discouraging enlistment of "disloyal" Indians who had sided with the rebel army during the war. This may have been because of the fact that these rebellious forces were the one that helped the British in the annexation of Punjab in not too distant past. So these "loyal" forces sided with the British when the time came for getting even.<ref>[http://countrystudies.us/pakistan/8.htm Country Studies: Pakistan] - [[Library of Congress]]</ref>', 24 => false, 25 => '==The races of modern India==', 26 => false, 27 => 'Most contemporary anthropologists classify Indians as belonging to one of four major ethno-racial groups, which often overlap with each other because of a continuous process of racial admixture: [[Caucasoids]], [[Mongoloids]] and [[Negritos]]. Mongoloids are largely confined to the Northeastern region of the country and for the most part, speak Tibeto-Burman languages; and Negritos are found on the Andaman Islands located on the southeastern side of the country. These speak a group of languages known as [[Andamanese languages|Andamanese and Ongan languages]], linguistic isolates not related to any known languages. And finally, Austro-Asiatic languages are spoken by only tribals or [[Adivasis]], who can be of either Australoid or Mongoloid racial stock.<ref>http://www.imtech.res.in/raghava/reprints/IGVdb.pdf</ref>', 28 => false, 29 => 'According to a 2009 study published by Reich et al., the modern Indian population is composed of two genetically divergent and heterogeneous populations which mixed in ancient times (about 1,200-3,500 BC), known as Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI).<ref>{{cite web|author=Nature |url=http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/abs/nature08365.html |title=Reconstructing Indian population history : Abstract |publisher=Nature |date= |accessdate=2013-06-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ichg2011.org/cgi-bin/showdetail.pl?absno=20758 |title=Abstract/Presentation |publisher=Ichg2011.org |date=2011-10-12 |accessdate=2013-06-25}}</ref>', 30 => false, 31 => '==See also==', 32 => '* [[Brown people]]', 33 => '* [[Ethnic groups of South Asia]]', 34 => '* [[Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia]]', 35 => '*[[Afro Asians (African Asians)]]', 36 => false, 37 => '==References==', 38 => '{{Reflist|2}}', 39 => false, 40 => '{{Historical definitions of race}}', 41 => false, 42 => '{{DEFAULTSORT:Historical Definitions Of Races In India}}', 43 => '[[Category:Historical definitions of race|India]]', 44 => '[[Category:Scientific racism]]', 45 => '[[Category:Colonialism]]', 46 => '[[Category:Indigenous peoples of South Asia]]', 47 => '[[Category:Demographic history of India| ]]' ]