Pseudo-science to justify racism

The growing trend of blatant racism in Malta is worrying enough in itself. That certain individuals have resorted to invoking "science" to justify their beliefs is even more odious.

I refer specifically to recent comments by Norman Lowell and to a letter by Andrew Sciberras (The Sunday Times, February 13). While many of our scientists have rightly set the record straight with regard to Mr Lowell, I am particularly worried by Mr Sciberras's racist overtones and complete skewing of the scientific and palaeoanthropological record.

Mr Sciberras is alas not alone in resorting to pseudo-science to justify racist ideas. Past approaches have included the use of craniometry, which involves the measurement of cranial features to classify people according to race, criminal temperament, intelligence, etc.

The underlying assumption is that this determines brain size, which in turn determines intelligence and the capacity for "moral behaviour". There is no empirical evidence for this, but this has not hindered people from making many preposterous claims. In particular, the Nazi regime made use of this dubious technique to distinguish between "Aryans" and "non-Aryans".

Worryingly, some individuals also wish to resort to eugenics (for example Mr Jean Govè on the recent Bondìplus, which I was able to watch via www.di-ve.com). Eugenics involves tyrannical control over people's reproductive abilities.

It aims to "restrict" the gene pool by eliminating "undesirable" elements, which have variously included people of colour and people whose intellectual capabilities were considered sub-par. While such a concept is distasteful in itself, it is also worth noting again what our geneticists have pointed out, "genetic purity" is not biologically healthy.

On another level, no one has the right to determine which traits might be considered undesirable. Unlike Mr Govè, Mr Sciberras has not specifically mentioned eugenics, but his claims that there has been "no breeding with Africans" have odious undertones. I suggest that anyone interested in origins and genetics should have a look at the excellent book What it means to be 98% chimpanzee: Apes, people and their genes, by Jonathan Marks.

With reference to Mr Sciberas's attempt to explain the origins of humanity, his summary of the Out-of-Africa and the Multiregional (which he terms Regional Continuity Theory) models, fails to take into account that there are numerous versions of these two models, for example Fred Smith's Assimilation Hypothesis, which broadly falls under the Multiregional umbrella.

Be that as it may, neither model recognises the existence of any race as defined by Mr Lowell and his ilk. When a palaeonthropologist speaks of race, he/she is referring to anatomical variation over large geographical distances (also known as cline variation) and not to separate biological entities.

Contrary to Mr Sciberras's claims, the Multiregional model does not recognise parallel evolution (i.e. the appearance of similar anatomical characteristics in different places under different conditions through different processes, with an emphasis on difference). It is the Out-of-Africa supporters who, to a degree, recognise parallel evolution and use it as an argument against the former.

Additionally, there is disagreement over whether Homo erectus should be classified as a species according to phylogenetic or evolutionary species constructs. In practice, this means species are defined according to anatomical differences, as in the former, or according to a single lineage that maintains its anatomical identity distinct from other lineages over a long period of time.

This is not the place to give a detailed summary of evolutionary and palaeoanthropological studies. Milford Wolpoff's Palaeoanthropology, Richard Klein's The Human Career and Ernest Mayr's What Evolution Is should provide enough material as a starting point.

As a final note on this subject, what Mr Sciberras fails to point out is that both models recognise that the vast majority of our DNA comes from Africa - what is disputed is whether there were genetic contributions (and therefore a degree of interbreeding) between African and Eurasian Homo.

Having dispensed with the oversimplification of human evolutionary processes, I now turn your readers' attention to Mr Sciberras's attempt to link the Siberian site of Mal'ta (please note the spelling) and our fair isle, Malta. The simple act of misspelling it gives a very false impression to the reader.

The Siberian site dates to the middle stages of the Upper Palaeolithic, c.23,000 BC, although recent studies claim that some of the remains could date to even earlier. Both spatially and temporally, this is very far from the island of Malta and I join many archaeologists in assuring Mr Sciberras that despite the presumed similarities in nomenclature, there is no connection between the two.

Sites in Siberia and Russia are not identical to those found in Malta. For one thing, Malta has as yet not yielded any traces of the Palaeolithic, while the Neolithic sites in Eastern Europe are significantly different to those in Malta.

I strongly suggest that Mr Sciberras read Steven Mithen's After the Ice: A Global human history 20,000 to 5000 BC and Richard Klein's The Human Career. Since Mr Sciberras seems to be so interested in Siberian prehistory, might I recommend The Palaeolithic of Siberia: New Discoveries and Interpretations, by Anatoliy P. Derev'Anko, Demitri Boris Shimkin et al.

The first inhabitants of our fair isles came from Sicily, not Eastern Europe, and they date to the Holocene, not the Palaeolithic. This hypothesis is not simply based on geographical proximity, but also on similarity in what is often referred to as the Neolithic kit, which includes domesticated animals and plants, tools and pottery.

Radiocarbon dates from the village of Skorba in Mgarr place the first arrival of humans in Malta to c. 5000 BC. Two excellent, accessible books on Maltese prehistory are Anthony Bonanno's Il-Preistorja and David Trump's Malta: Prehistory and Temples.

At this point it is also worth noting that the Indo-European language arose during the Holocene, i.e. post-Upper Palaeolithic in northern India. This in itself rules out Indo-Europeans as being the occupants of the Mal'ta settlement in southern Siberia, whether one accepts a Multiregional or Out-of-Africa model.

As for the claimed proto-Nordic race, it is with regret that I inform Mr Sciberras that no such race existed; there is absolutely no biological or genetic entity as a pure "race".

With reference to the claim that after the Arab period we "interbred" within the European genetic framework, may I point out that there is absolutely no evidence for this, unless Mr Sciberras is aware of some ground-breaking studies he would like to share. May I also point out that while we were under the influence of Sicilian Arab Muslims, the cultural group known as the Arabs hail originally from the Near East, they subsequently migrated to North Africa and interbred with the local populations.

It should also be brought to the readers' attention that there is more genetic variation between relatively neighbouring populations within Africa than there is between Africans and the rest of the world. Any breeding between peoples from different continents is welcome to sustain the long-term viability and continuity of the peoples. Peoples have interbred for thousands of years. As any geneticist will point out, it is wise to continue to allow natural evolution to continue its course of biological evolution.

On a personal note, I wish to encourage more of our eminent scientists to continue to speak out and correct various misconceptions. May I also encourage the education authorities to strengthen general science education in Malta and the teaching of physical and cultural anthropology.

Knowledge is the most powerful tool a human being has. Armed with correct knowledge, we can swiftly quash any ridiculous claims of the type being made by Mr Lowell and his ilk. Coupled with a deeper understanding of human cultural difference, this will put an end to the many nonsensical claims currently making the rounds.

Ms Vella Gregory is reading for an M.Phil. in Archaeology at the University of Cambridge.