Britannica 1911 example
From: Deborah
Date: Sat Apr 3, 2004 8:38 am
Subject: Britannica 1911 example
Here is an example of the commonly acceptable
style of discussing race and racial differences and racial characteristics
of 100 years ago.
Deborah
FULA
FULA (FULBF, FELLATAIT or PEuL5), a numerous and powerful African
people, spread over an immense region from Senegal nearly to
Darfur. Strictly they have no country of their own, and nowhere
form the whole of the population, though nearly always the dominant
native race. They are most numerous in Upper Senegal and in the
countries under French sway immediately south of Senegambia,
notably Futa Jallon. Farther east they rule, subject to the control
of the French, Segu and Massena, countries on both banks of the
upper Niger, to the south-west of Timhuktu. The districts within
the great bend of the Niger have a large Fula population. East
of that river Sokoto and iti tributary emirates are ruled by
Fula princes, subject to thi control of the British Nigerian
administration. Fula are settlec in Bornu, Bagirmi, Wadai and
the upper Nile Valley,1 but have no political power in those
countries. Their most southerly emirate is Adamawa, the country
on both sides of the upper Benue. In this vast region of distribution
the Fula populations are most dense towards the west and north,
most scattered towards the east and south. Originally herdsmen
in the western and central Sudan, they extended their sway east
of the Niger, under the leadership of Othman Dan Fodio, during
the early years of the I9th century, and having subdued the Hausa
states, founded the empire of Sokoto with the vassal emirates
of Kano, Gando, Nupe, Adamawa, &c.
The question of the ethnic
affinities of the Fula has given rise to an enormous amount of
speculation, but the most reasonable theory is that they are
a mixture of Berber and Negro. This is now the most generally
accepted theory. Certainly there is no reason to connect them
with the ancient Egyptians. In the district of Senegal known
as Fuladugu or Fula Land, where the purest types of the race
are found, the people are of a reddish brown or light chestnut
color, with oval faces, ringlety or even smooth hair, never woolly,
straight and even aquiline noses, delicately shaped lips and
regular features quite differentiating them from the Negro type.
Like most conquering races the Fula are, however, not of uniform
physique, in many districts approximating to the local type.
They nevertheless maintain throughout their widespread territory
a certain national solidarity, thanks to common speech, traditions
and usages. The ruling caste of the Fula differs widely in character
from the herdsmen of the western Sudan. The latter are peaceable,
inoffensive and abstemious. They are mainly monogamous, and by
rigidly abstaining from foreign marriages have preserved racial
purity. The ruling caste in Nigeria, on the other hand, despise
their pastoral brethren, and through generatiori~ of polygamy
with the conquered tribes have become more Negroid in type, black,
burly and coarse featured. Love of lu~ury, pomp and finery is
their chief characteristic. Taken as a v hole, the Fula race
is distinguished by great intelligence, frankness of disposition
and strength of character. As soldiers they- are renowned almost
exclusively as cavalry; and the race has produced several leaders
possessed of much strategical skill. Besides the ordinary Negro
weapons, they use iron spears with leatherbound handles and swords.
They are generally excellent rulers, stern but patient and just.
The Nigerian emirs acquired, however, an evil reputation during
the I9th century as slave raiders. They have long been devout
Mahommedans, and mosques and schools exist in almost all their
towns. Tradition says that of old every Fula boy and girl was
a scholar; but during the decadence of their power towards the
close of the 19th century education was not highly valued. Power
seems to have somewhat spoilt this virile race, but such authorities
as Sir Frederick Lugard believe them still capable of a great
future, The Fula language has as yet found no place in any African
linguistic family. In its rudiments it is akin to the HamitoSemitic
group. It possesses two grammatical genders, not masculine and
feminine, but the human and the non-human; the adjective agrees
in assonance with its noun, and euphony plays a great part in
verbal and nominal inflections. In some ways resembling the Negro
dialects, it betrays non-Negroid influencesin the use of suffixes.
The name of the people has many variations. Fulbe or Fula (sing.
Pullo, Peul) is the Mandingan name, Follani the Hausa, Fellatah
the Kanuri, Fullan the Arab, and Fulde on the Benue. Like the
name Abate, white, given them in Kororofa, all these seem to
refer to their light reddish hue.
...................................................................................................................................
From: Peter Staudenmaier
Date: Sat Apr 3, 2004 9:50 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Britannica 1911 example
Deborah wrote:
Here is an example of the commonly acceptable
style of discussing race and racial differences and racial characteristics
of 100 years ago.
This is an excellent indication of why the "political correctness"
line is entirely beside the point. The question is not whether
Steiner's racial doctrines are or were "commonly acceptable".
The question is not whether they are or were immoral, pathological,
or anything else. The question we have been debating is quite
simply, are some of these doctrines racist? I politely recommend
that those who answer "no" to that question pay attention
to just which question they are answering.
Peter
...................................................................................................................................
From: at
Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 5:40 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Britannica 1911 example
Deborah:
Here is an example of the commonly acceptable
style of discussing race and racial differences and racial characteristics
of 100 years ago.
Peter Staudenmaier:
This is an excellent indication of why
the "political correctness" line is entirely beside
the point. The question is not whether Steiner's racial doctrines
are or were "commonly acceptable". The question is
not whether they are or were immoral, pathological, or anything
else. The question we have been debating is quite simply, are
some of these doctrines racist? I politely recommend that those
who answer "no" to that question pay attention to just
which question they are answering.
Daniel:
Peter, the above is a perfect example of how
you are unable to move from the printed words that mean what
you want them to, to the what the author intended when he or
she wrote or spoke the words. The question is not whether or
not Steiner's words can be made to look racist if properly arranged.
The question is whether Steiner's concepts, as expressed in his
words, are or are not racist.
Deborah was attempting to show how language that at first glance
might appear to be racist can actually express ideas that themselves
are not racist. Deborah is not arguing that Steiner or the Encyclopedia
Britannica were actually expressing ideas that are racist, only
that both use language in a way that today would probably be
easily confused for racism. In both cases, it is necessary to
use a little historical imagination and try to understand what
the author was thinking, and judge that; getting overly excited
about the appearance of the word "race" or "Negro"
in the text and claiming that this proves racism is historically
naive. Polemically useful, but historically naive.
I maintain that Steiner's concepts are not racist. I do not deny
that Steiner can be made to look racist with enough selective
quotation.
Daniel Hindes
...................................................................................................................................
From: Peter Staudenmaier
Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 8:00 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Britannica 1911 example
Hi Daniel, you wrote:
The question is whether Steiner's concepts,
as expressed in his words, are or are not racist.
I very much agree. That is indeed the question I had hoped to
address here. Steiner's concepts include the following: that
some races are higher than other races, that some races are backward
while others are advanced, that the negro race is substantially
determined by childhood characteristics, that black people do
not belong in Europe, and so forth. Those concepts are racist,
no matter what words one uses to express them. Maybe you could
explain again why you think that these concepts are not racist.
Thanks,
Peter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
April/May
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
