Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Historians have drawn a line between scientific racism, exemplified in the typological approach of German race scientists, and population-based approaches toward races or human genetic diversity. The postwar time is often understood as a watershed in this respect. My argument is that typological and population-based race concepts cannot be so easily segregated either before or after World War II. In spite of noteworthy differences between the two, on closer inspection, one finds population-based concepts in German race science before World War II as well as typologies and typological aspects in human population genetics after World War II, and continuities between them. In this paper I aim at viewing German race science in its contemporary international context up to the 1960s. With regard to its theoretical groundings, research problems, research designs, methods, practices, results, and interpretations, German race science was far more embedded in contemporary research on human diversity around the world than is generally assumed. Most notably, researchers in the field have been preoccupied with identifying and examining “isolated” and “mixed” populations from the mid-nineteenth century until the present. Yet instead of rendering German race science harmless, this contextualization aims at drawing attention to the generally precarious aspects of research into “human variation” or “human diversity.”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Veronika Lipphardt (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: