Ethnic Elements in Indian Population | Anthropology Optional for UPSC PDF Download

Introduction

• No two individuals are alike. We differ from each other in terms of certain morphological, physiological, and genetic traits. Incidentally, certain traits and characters become an identity for a particular group of people. We could differentiate people based on certain physical traits, such as height, skin colour, hair form, etc. Population defined by their mating patterns have more or less similar morphological and genetic traits. One group varies from other group in terms of physical, physiological, genetic attributes. 
• Apart from these, there will be intra population variation too. Such variations – both inter and intra population – could be attributed to various factors, mainly an interaction of genetics and environment and adaptive responses to varied environmental conditions. Anthropologists are very much interested to understand how such variations arise between human population groups. The present unit will not only talk about how such variation arises but will also discuss the extent of such variation in understanding the ethnicity of the Indian populations.

Extent of Human Variation

Historical views of Human Variation

• The history of human variation is as old as human civilization. However, it is believed that the ancient Egyptians as early as 1350 B.C. had attempted to classify humans based on skin colour, such as red for Egyptian, yellow for people to the east, white for those to the north, and black for sub-Saharan Africans. The period of exploration and colonization by the European countries in the sixteenth century has brought awareness of human diversity. It led to the European scholars describing and classifying human variations. It was Linnaeus who, for the first time, attempted to classify humans scientifically into four separate categories, but somehow it depicted the hierarchical classification with European being superior, as each group was beingassigned with behavioral and intellectual qualities. Later, Blumenbach (1752-1840), a German anatomist, classified humans into five races based on skin colour: white, yellow, red, black, and brown. 
• Apart from skin colour, he also took other characters into consideration in classification. He also suggested that there could be cases that did not fit in a particular category as there could be characters which do not belong to any group. Skin colour is one of the important characters that has been employed for human classification, besides other characters such as head shape,hair type, physique etc. Such classification of humans, based on skin colour, was often associated with behavioral and cognitive differences. It even resulted in dependence and other racial exploitation of dark-skinned individuals, considering they were at the bottom of the hierarchical classification. Overall, there is a notion of classifying the human population based on physical, physiological, and genetic traits into several different groups. Besides, human variation can also be explained in terms of cultural variation too.

Concept of ethnicity

• When we talk about human variation, we often use race and ethnicity interchangeably. In general, ethnicity represents groups that share a common identity-based ancestry, language, or culture. It is also often based on religion, beliefs, and customs, as well as memories of migration or colonization (Cornell & Hartmann, 2007). The word ethnicity comes from Greek word ethnikos, which means national. Smith (1986) defined ethnicity as the ethnic group or groups that people identify with or feel they belong to. Gabbert (2006) defined as a specific form of social differentiation whereby people use cultural or phenotypic markers to distinguish themselves from others.
• Some scholars like Edward Shils (1957) and Clifford Geertz (1973) explain ethnicity as an expression of primordial attachments. Ethnic identity among the group is based on physical appearance, birthplace, name, language, history, religion, and nationality, all of which will normally be influenced, in some cases determined, by circumstances beyond the control of the individual (Gabbert, 2006). Cornell and Hartmann (2007) define ethnicity as a sense of common ancestry based on cultural attachments, past linguistic heritage, religious affiliations, claimed kinship, or some physical traits. In short, ethnicity can be summarised as it is socially constructed groups wherein the members have the common ancestor, and share common biological (physical, physiological, genetic) and cultural (language, customs, rituals, etc.) traits. Apart from these, an ethnic group is also usually characterized through a sense of community, a feeling of ethnocentrism, territoriality too.

Ethnicity and Race

• There is a thin line of difference between ethnicity and race when we talk about human variation. Before we go for the differences, let us understand what is race first. Race, as defined by Hooton (1926), is a great division of mankind, the member of which though individually varying are characterized as a group by certain combinations of morphological, metrical features, principally non-adaptive, which have been derived from their common descent. In the population genetic concept, Dobzhansky (1970) has defined race as genetically distinct Mendelian populations, which differ genetically among themselves.
• Further, Montagu (1972) has defined race in genetical context as a population that differs in the frequency of some gene or genes, which exchange or capable of exchanging genes across boundaries and separate it from other populations of the species. In short, the race is an anthropologically constructed term to refer the human populations, who have primarily varied inheritable physical or morphological traits from others. The basis of racial classification is purely biological, in the sense that the differences between human population groups or races are developed based on physical or genetic characters such as skin colour, head shape, hair type, physique, blood groups, etc.

Johann Friedrich Blumenbach theorized that humans could be divided into five groups based on geography and appearance: Mongolian: for most other inhabitants of Asia, including China and Japan, Malayan: for the Polynesians and Melanesians of the Pacific and for the aborigines of Australia, Ethiopian: for the dark-skinned people of Africa, American: for most native populations of the New World and Caucasian: light-skinned people of Europe and adjacent parts of Asia and Africa.

Blumenbach’s classification of human population: (clockwise from top right) Mongolian, Malayan, Ethiopian, American and Caucasian (centre)

• The differences between ethnicity and race lie in the concept that ethnicity is culturally determined while the race is biologically determined. Race mainly refers to biological variation, of which skin colour is one of the important determining characters to assign. On the other hand, ethnicity refers to a social group that has a common national and cultural tradition, though there are some aspects of biological variation too. The race is unitary in the sense that a person can belong to one race only. 
• Although he belongs to just one race, he can still have multiple ethnic connections, thereby making an ethnicity not unitary. Race, unlike ethnicity, is still mostly a term that is assigned by other groups, which often leads to one claiming superiority over the other, though it is against humanity. In another sense, race is also a socially constructed concept like ethnicity though it is purely biological. 5

Racism and Society

• It is accepted that humans are born with varied characteristics that give him/her an identity, and the race is assigned to these varied characteristics. However, these variations at certain points create the problem of varied preferences in society. People are often judged by his physical characters which lead to discrimination for his physical characters. These characters are purely biological in the sense that they are expressed as a result of his DNA constituents and environmental  interaction. The human society without understanding the complexity of biological basis put up the notion of racial superiority and inferiority. As an example, dark skin colour was considered as inferior, and as a result of that, the white skin coloured individuals often exploited and even used them as a slave.
• Such discrimination based on his/her physical looks, colour, behavior, etc. put forth the concept of racism. Racism involves the assertion that inequality is absolute and unconditional, i.e., that a race is inherently and by its very nature superior or inferior to others quite independently of the physical condition of its habitat and social factors (Comas, 1961). Thus, two different schools of thought came up in the first half of the 19th century, one of those who are against the discrimination of individuals based on physical characters and the other one racist who are in favor of discrimination.
• According to racist, racial discrimination was a part of the struggle for existence, as explained by Charles Darwin. According to them, the superior race provided a condition for the inferior race to survive in the harsh environment of discrimination, allowing them as a slave of the former group. Otherwise, the inferior race could have extinct. Racists were also against the racial admixture citing such an act would lower the quality of the superior race. Different scholars like Juan Comas came up against the racism claiming all human belongs to a single species, and variation is a part of environmental response to adaptation. 

Indian population: A Brief

• India is the second-largest populated country in the world with a population of 1.21 billion (Census of India, 2011), representing almost 17% of the total world population. Apart from being the second largest populated country, India is also diverse in terms of its population structure and culture. The country is the home to both tribal and non-tribal populations. Linguistically, the Indian population speaks languages and dialects that belong to four major language families: the Austro Asiatic, the Dravidian, the Indo European, the Tibeto-Burman.
• Few tribes mainly speak Austro-Asiatic languages of Central and Eastern India, Dravidian languages are confined to South India. The North eastern Indians speak languages that belong to Tibeto-Burman. Indo-European languages are spoken in almost all the parts of India, but mainly in North, West, East and Central India. These Indian populations also have varied religious views, such as Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, etc. 

Ethnic Elements of Indian Population

The classification of Indian population by different scholars is given below.
H.H. Risley’s Classification

• H.H. Risley, for the first time, tried to classify the Pan Indian population based on anthropometric measurements in 1901 when he was the operational head of the Census for India. He published the findings in 1915 under the title ‘The People of India’. According to him, there are three principal racial types in India, i.e., The Dravidian, the Indo-Aryan, and the Mongoloid (Risley, 1915). Risley’s Classification of Indian population is discussed as below:
  • The Dravidian Type: This population is characterized by short or below medium stature, dark skin colour, even approaching to black, dark and plentiful hair with an occasional tendency to curl, dark eye, long head with a broad nose, sometimes depressed root. This Dravidian type is found distributing from Ceylon to the Ganges valley, including West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh (Hyderabad), Central India, and Chotanagpur. The Paniyans of Malabar (South India) and the Santals of the Chotanagpur are the true representative of this type. Risley believed these people could be autochthones of India who later influx with new arrivals: the Aryans, the Scythians, and the Mongoloids.
  • The Indo-Aryan Type: This type is characterized by dolichocephalic (longhead) and leptorrhine (narrow and long) nose, tall stature, fair skin colour, dark eyes, and abundant facial and body hair.The type is mainly found in Punjab, Rajasthan, and Kashmir; and represented by the Kashmiri Brahmins, Rajputs, Jats, and the Khattris. They are believed to represent the traditional Aryans who colonized India.
  • The Mongoloid Type: This type has characteristic features such as broadhead, dark complexion with yellowish eyes and thin facial and body hair, short or below medium stature, fine to broad nose, oblique, and epicanthic eyefold on the typically flat face. This type is concentrated along the Himalayan region, North-East India, including Nepal and Burma. The notable populations of this type are the Lepchas, the Limbus, the Murmis, the Gurungs, the Kanets, the Bodo etc.
  • The Aryo-Dravidian Type (Hindustani Type): This type has medium to long heads with more towards the medium, light brown to black skin colour, below-average stature, medium to broad nose with broader than the first type. It is believed that this type is formed due to the interbreeding of the Aryans and the Dravidians in varying extents, which are distributed in Uttar Pradesh, in some parts of Rajasthan and Bihar.
  • The Mongolo-Dravidian Type: This type is also known as the Bengalian type characterized by broad and round heads with a tendency towards medium dark complexion and plenty body and facial hair, medium to broad nose, short to medium stature. The Bengali Brahmins and Kayasthas of Bengal and Orissa represent this type. Risley believed that this type arises due to admixture of the Mongolians, the Dravidians, and also the IndoAryan type.
  • The Scytho-Dravidian Type: These people have low to medium stature, medium to broad head, light skin colour, small nose, thin hair on face and body. It is regarded that the intermixture of the Scythians and the Dravidians have brought up this type. The Maratha Brahmins of Western India, the Kunbis, and the Coorgs represent this type. It seems the Scythian elements are more in higher social groups, and the Dravidian features more among the lower groups.
  • The Turko-Iranian Type: This type is identified by broad heads, fine to medium, as well as long prominent nose, tall stature, dark eye colours with occasionally grey eyes, fair complexion, plenty hair on face and body. This type is evident among the inhabitants of the present Afghanistan, Baluchistan, and North-west Frontier Provinces (now in Pakistan). This type could have formed by intermingling the Turki and Persian elements with Turki elements being more (Risley, 1915).

B.S. Guha’s Classification

• The racial classification of B. S. Guha came from the Census of India 1931 data, based on anthropometric measurements. Guha’s racial classification was more systematic, standardized, and elaborate, consisting of anthropometric measurements on 38 characters and 63 coefficients of racial likeness (Guha, 1935). He classified the major Indian population into six major racial strains and nine sub-types:
  • The Negrito: They are characterized by dark pigmy like skin colour, spirally curved hair, small to broad head with a bulbous forehead, flat or broad nose, and thick and everted lips. They are believed to be the original settlers of the Indian sub-continent. The Kadars, the Irulas, the Paniyans, etc., of the southern region, tribes of the Rajmahal hills represent this type. The Indian Negrito is closer to the Melanesian pygmies than those of Andamanese or African pygmies to the head and hair forms.
  • The Proto-Australoid: This type is probably the second oldest racial stocks in India, having features of short stature, dark brown to nearly black skin colour, dolichocephalic head, broad and flat nose depressed at the root, wavy or curly hair, and prominent supraorbital ridges. This type is evident more among the tribal populations of Deccan, central, southern, and western India. The notable representatives of this type in the Chota Nagpur region are the Oraons, the Santhals, the Mundas. In southern India, it is represented by the Chenchus, the Kurumbas, the Yeruvas, the Badagas, while the Bhils, and the Kolsin of the central and western India.
  • The Mongoloid: This type has scanty hair on face and body, oblique eyes with an upper eye epicanthic fold, flat face with prominent cheek bones, and straight hair as characteristic features. This group has two sub groups:
    • Paleo-Mongoloid Group: This type is considered to be primitive and further divided into long headed group having the characteristics of medium stature, dark to light brown skin colour, slanting eyes and not much marked epicanthic fold with an important characteristic of long-headed features: medium to long head with prominent occipital protuberances, which can be further divided into long-headed groups represented by Sema Naga, Limbus of the sub-Himalayan region. The other broad headed group is characterized by dark complexion, rounded face, more marked epicanthic fold, represented by the hill tribes of Chittagong, e.g., the Chakmas and the Maghs, etc.
    • Tibeto-Mongoloid Group: The group is characterized by tall stature, broad and massive head, light brown complexion, long and flat face, oblique eyes with an epicanthic fold, medium to long nose, scanty body hair, and represented by Tibetans of Bhutan and Sikkim.
  • The Mediterranean: This type was again sub-grouped into three groups:
    • Palaeo-Mediterranean: This type, probably traced to Megalithic cultures of India, have long head, high vault, bulbous forehead and projected occiput, medium stature, broad nose, narrow face with pointed chin, less hair on the face and body, dark complexion. The Tamil Brahmans of Madura, the Nairs of Cochin, and the Telugu Brahmans are the best examples.
    • Mediterranean: This population, probably linked to the Indus Valley civilization, has long medium to tall stature, light complexion, head with arched forehead, narrow nose, well-developed chin; dark-coloured hair and eyes, brownish to dark facial hair, and thick body hair. This type is distributed in UP, Maharashtra, Bengal, Malabar, with the Nambudiri Brahmans of Cochin, Brahmins of Allahabad, and Bengali Brahmins being the ideal representation.
    • Orientals: This type has features similar to the Mediterranean except for the long and convex nose. The group is represented by the Punjabis,the Chattris, the Bania of Rajasthan and the Pathans.
  • The Western Brachycephals: They were subdivided into three groups:
    • Alpinoid: This group has medium stature, broad head with a rounded occiput, prominent nose, rounded face, abundant hair on face and body, light skin colour, and represented by Bania (Gujarat), the Kathi (Kathiawar) and the Kayasthas (Bengal).
    • Dinaric: This type can be linked with the Indus valley civilization, have typical traits of this group include broad head, rounded occiput, and high vault, long, thin and convex nose, long face, projected chin with thin lips, tall stature, dark colour skin and eyes. It is believed that both the Alpino and the Dinaric might have come India through Baluchistan, Sind, Gujarat and Maharashtra, Ceylon, Karnataka, Hyderabad, and Tirunelveli.
    • Armenoid: This group has features similar to Dinarics except to the flat occiput, high sloping forehead, everted lower lips, abundant body hair, and broad nose, truly represented by Parsis (Bombay),Vaidyas and Kayasthas (Bengal).
  • The Nordics: The characteristic features of this group include tall stature, long head, protruding occiput, and arched forehead, robust body build, straight and high bridged nose, strong jaws, blue or grey eye colour, fair complexion. They are found in different parts of the North India, especially Punjab and Rajasthan. Historically, the Nordics came from the north, probably from south-east Russia and south-west Siberia, and entered India through Central Asia (Guha, 1935).

Geographical distribution of racial types of the people of India (BS Guha, 1935).

S.S. Sarkar’s Classification

• S.S. Sarkar developed the racial classification of Indian populations based on the cephalic index. Sarkar identified dolichocephalic as the predominant type of Indian population, and mesocephalic and brachycephalic types restricted to some regional populations (Sarkar 1961). According to Sarkar’s classification, there are three main racial types:
  • The Dolichocephals: Sarkar identified three main groups under this type: Veddids, the Dravidians of South India, and the Indo-Aryans. Veddids were considered to be autochthonous of India, and most tribes of south India exhibit the Veddids traits, e.g., the Uralis, the Kannikars, the Muthuvans, the Kurumbas, the Irulas, the Chenchus, the Kadars. In the north, it is represented by the Male and the Pahir. The presence of hyper dolichocephalic skulls in Mohenjo-daro exhibits the Veddid feature. The other attributes of this type are short stature, dark complexion, platyrrhine nose, and wavy hair. The Dravidian could have evolved from Veddids in Peninsular India through various evolutionary forces, and most of the non-tribal populations of South India represent this ethnic type. Sarkar regarded the dolichocephalic of IndoAryans might have entered India around 1200 BC from the north-west and distributed at the plains of the Indus and the Ganges extending till Bengal border. This type became admixed with the autochthonous population and spread all over the subcontinent. In general, this type has features: tall stature, light skin and eye colours. The cranial capacity of Indo-Aryans is high, and their physique is well built and robust (Sarkar, 1961). The Baltis of the Hindu Kush mountains represent this type. 
  • Mundari-speakers: The Mundari-speakers are also of dolichocephalic type, with sturdy, short-statured, robust build. They have lighter skin colourthan the Australoids and thick straight black hair kin to the Mongoloids. The Mundari-speakers are mainly concentrated in the river valleys and plateaus of eastern and central India, Chota Nagpur plateau, Orissa, and Madhya Pradesh, where they show the highest concentration. The migration of Mundari-speakers from the east towards the north-eastern parts is still controversial.
  • The Mesocephals: Sarkar opined mesocephals influx owed to broad headed Irano-Scythians occurred after that of Indo Aryan. The Irano-Scythian racial type hasmedium stature, mesocephalic head different from those of IndoAryans, and found among populations of eastern Bihar, Bengal, and Assam. The Irano-Scythian type spread all over the country. Their distribution has been recorded up to the north of Mysore, the Deccan, and further moves to southwards.
  • The Brachycephals: Sarkar identified three zones of brachycephaly in India: Zone A comprising of NWFP, Punjab, Rajputana, and its southern extension, Zone B comprising of the Himalayan foot hills and Zone C comprising of the Chittagong Hill tracts, Bengal and Assam. According to Sarkar, brachycephaly in Gujarat, Maharashtra, etc., were the southward extension of Zone A that can be traced back to Pamirs. The notable representation of Zone A is Kakar of NWFP. Limbu of Nepal represents Zone B type that traced back to Mongoloids. The Mongoloid racial elements generally have yellowish skin colour, sparse facial and body hair, and epicanthic eye fold. Zone C traces back to South-east Asia (Malaya). Since pre-historical times, there had been cultural contacts and movements between the Indian subcontinent with those of South-east Asian countries, which has more impact in the eastern parts of Bangladesh through Burma. Sarkar describes this as a Malayan strain having brachycephalic head, short stature, dark skin colour, and slight obesity, which is found to be quite distinct from other racial elements (Sarkar, 1961). The frequencies of brachycephaly were diluted out from the center gradually in Zone A and C, while Zone B appeared to be somewhat confined in the center and behave differently from the other two zones as Sarkar observed.

Balakrishnan’s Classification

• V. Balakrishnan attempted to classify the Indian population based on the genetic distance constructed through two genetic markers: ABO and Rh complex blood system. He classified the Indian population into four:
  • Caucasoid (Aryan): It consists of populations that of mainly castes belong to higher varna: Brahmins and others of North-west, North, and West India. It also includes Muslim and few tribes.
  • Caucasoid (Dravidian): It consists of populations of mainly castes belong to both higher and lower castes. It also includes semi tribal communities. 
  • Australoid: This type consists of both tribal and non-tribal populations of mainly East and South India. They have Australoid content.
  • Mongoloid: This group consists of tribal and semi-tribal populations of North-east India with one tribal population of South India. Balakrishnan recommended that populations with large numbers of small distances are likely to be those with a high common element or those who have contributed substantially to the composition of large number of populations. While populations with a large number of intermediate distances are likely to be those with small contributions from a large number of populations or those contributing small amounts to a large number of populations. Furthermore, populations with a large number of large distances are likely to be those with minimal common elements with most other populations. These are also likely to be the more primitive (Balakrishnan, 1978). The presence of Mongoloid was quite distinct from the other element(s).

Critical appraisal of classification

• Risley’s classification was criticized for small and inadequate sample size of 42 castes and tribes of the total 87 diverse castes and tribes. Risley used anthropometric measurement and somatoscopic observation for classification, but it was not clear the selection of individuals for the study. Caste as the basis of Risley classification of the Indian population has been criticized, as caste is more social category than biological given the caste mobility and caste tribal amalgamation along Hinduism (Malhotra and Vasulu, 2019). Classification based on anthropometric measurements has also been criticized, as these measurements show greater intra population diversity than intergroup, due to non-random mating existed among the populations.
• Risley did not give much importance to the varied environmental factors of India, such as climate, soil,food, etc.Risley’s identification of the Indo-Aryan type in the northern areas was based on the historical aspects of the Aryan migration. He ignored other such movements (as an example: Iranian, Scythian, Hun, Mongol, Persian,etc.). Risley mistook Mon-Khmer populations spread over central India and extending to Assam as Dravidian that spread among the tribes of central India and northern plains (Malhotra and Vasulu, 2019). Risley’s Dravidian is also a linguistic group, and three races have been constituted in this linguistic group. Risley thought Scythian to be Mongoloid, but later, researchers proved they belong to Caucasoid. There is hardly historical evidence to support his claim of Marathas,originally hailed from Scythians and migrated and intermingled in the south, being considered as Dravidian. 
• Risley’s conclusions were unclear and have been often questioned. His notion of India as inaccessible from other Asian countries and inhabited by savage tribes until the Aryan invasion c.1500 BC, has been proved to be wrong with the discoveryof Mohenjo-daro’ (Hutton, 1933). P.C. Mahalanobis has analyzed Risley’s anthropometric data from Bengal and has found several more or less severe mistakes and non-uniformity in the calculation of average values and indices of records of individual measurements. Like Risley, Guha considered racial and linguistic criterion for classification of Indian population; the identification of Negrito elements and attribution of foreign origin of Indian racial types has been criticized (Kalla, 1994).
• He has been appreciated for adopting standardized international protocol on anthropometric measurements for the classification of racial types. Though, he was criticized for smaller sample sizes as some of the populations have sample lesser than the average sample size of (64.4). The four main racial types of Guha’s classification came from 275 samples that belonged to four tribal groups also raised questions about the selection of the tribal groupsand the number of individuals as well (Malhotra and Vasulu, 2019). Guha’s claim of Proto-Nordics being associated with the Indo-Aryan invasion also face criticism, as Indo Aryan invasion must have been constituted of other types such as Alpino-Dinarics. Besides, Guha’s identification of the brachycephalic Mongolid elements in West-Bengal, west coast, down south in Deccan, and of the Himalayan region has been opposed.
• Sarkar criticized brachycephalic form has restricted in some populations, as against the major racial type as viewed by Guha (Malhotra and Vasulu, 2019). Sarkar’s classification too faces criticism as he gave sole importance on the cephalic index, ignoring other traits. Similarly, Balakrishnan classification also covers only two classical genetic markers that have varied selection intensity. 

Conclusion

The classification of the Indian population has been a subject of interest and debate among anthropologists for many years. Various scholars have attempted to classify the diverse Indian population based on different factors such as anthropometric measurements, linguistic, and genetic markers. However, these classifications have faced criticism due to issues like small sample sizes, inadequate representation of the diverse population, and focusing on a single aspect for classification. While these classifications provide valuable insights into the Indian population's ethnicity and race, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations and consider the complex interaction of genetic, environmental, and cultural factors in understanding human variation in India. As our understanding of genetics and population studies improves, it would be essential to revisit these classifications and develop more comprehensive and accurate ways to understand and classify the diverse and complex Indian population.