How do you determine the race of a skull?

[Omega_Glory]

If you found a skull, what measurements would you use to determine the person’s race? The following quote is is from the What is an African American? thread

Originally Posted by gabriela
Now it is very easy to tell apart straight examples of these three races, so easy that after a little training I could do it; but in America, you just don’t get very many who aren’t mixtures. A cool thing that I always loved about the pure Negroid skull was that the brain case is carried sort of behind as well as above the face, where the pure Caucasoid brain case is directly above the face. Think of that classic enamel bust of Queen Nefertiti. A pencil laid downwards along the forehead misses the chin by a wide angle. On contrast, you lay a pencil on my forehead and it goes straight to my chin. Any African-American whose forehead is in a straight line above his chin is at least thirty percent white.

How much weight is something like forehead slant given? It seems like the pencil would come closer to the chin on, Oprah, for example than it would on Michael Imperioli (Christopher on the Sopranos) or Michael Richards (Kramer on Seinfeld). Are there other things with the skull that could point you towards their correct dominant race?

[slortar]

From my forensic anthropology class about a decade ago, I recall it being very difficult and unreliable. There were a set of measurements you could take from a skull and apply them to a table of averages or a few relatively simple formulas, but the results would be very tentative and unreliable.

The problem is, that the concept of race isn’t biological–it’s socially defined. No matter what physical trait you try to isolate, you can find examples of those traits that are more pronounced in other ethnic groups.

Just my two cents.

[astro]

Doesn’t say anything about forehead angles.

Forensic Fact Files

The question of racial affiliation is difficult to answer because, although racial classification has some biological components, it is based primarily on social affiliation. Nevertheless, some anatomical details, especially in the face, often suggest the individual’s race. In particular, white individuals have narrower faces with high noses and prominent chins. Black individuals have wider nasal openings and subnasal grooves. American Indians and Asians have forward-projecting cheekbones and specialized dental features.

But this does (and lots more too!)

Human Race
Catholic Encyclopedia on CD-ROM

[KP]

@gabriela

Now it is very easy to tell apart straight examples of these three races, so easy that after a little training I could do it;

Though I have not read the other thread, my respect for gabriela leads me to wonder if she’s not being misinterpreted.

When she says it is very easy to tell apart “straight examples”, I think she means “classic examples” – exemplars of the type, as are often kept for instructional purposes by pathology, anthropology and other departments. This does not mean that all or even most of an “unmixed” native population is such a classic exemplar, or even adheres to the expected type at all. I did my medical training in an inner city, and by the end of my first clinical year, I could identify the ‘classic faces’ of many more ethnic subgroups than I ever imagined I would-- even though I had travelled widely throughout my childhood, and through exposure and experience, could already make more ethnic distinctions than most of my classmates. Note: I’m NOT claiming that physiognomy is extremely reliable, just that such distinctions can often be made: most of us have learned to make some guesses of ethnicity from the face, but few of us have much experience with skulls.

I doubt anyone would claim that a typical Nigerian has the same type of skull as a ‘typical’ Ethiopian or any of the Khoisan groups (“bushmen”, “Hottentots”, etc. In fact, if I recall correctly, Ethiopians and Somalis are generally classed as having “Caucasian” type skulls, and the Khoisan have more classically “Mongoloid” skulls (I apologize for the use of terms that may be considered somewhat derogatory by the groups themselves. I am simply trying to use terms of the common parlance for clarity in a lay discussion – and I am admittedly not particularly expert in currently preferred anthropological usage) Meanwhile, South Indian groups are classed as having more classically “Negroid” skulls.

The “map” of skull classifications is much more patchwork than the terms suggest, and there can be a fair uncertainly or outright inaccuracy in the final determination for any individual. Indeed, studies have shown that there can be fair disagreement among practitioners, and only a handful of practitioners worldwide are considered “expert”. Let me be clear on what I mean by that: of the many gifted postdoctorally trained anthropologists, forensic pathologists, etc. very few make extensive use of these determination, consult much outside their own workplace, or would be eager to testify in court to justify their determinations (Most stick to minimal use as a “shorthand” in their ordinary duties)

There is a great deal of science in this field, but though anthropological reconstructionists often throw around a blizzard of numbers ("the thickness of the skin at the apex of the the zygomatic arch of in a female of X ethnicity and Y body size is typically Z mm, per the standard tables "), this precision shouldn’t be mistaken for equivalent accuracy. In fact, many/most of the leading facial reconstructors in the US are primarily sculptors who have studied the anthropometry and data, rather than the PhDs who gather that data.

These determinations can be more useful when doing bulk determinations (e.g. burial mounds) than in individual cases. I presume teh original thread “What is an African American?” dealt with individuals, since the politically correct"-American" appendage is clearly a descriptor for individuals in an ethnic group, not the entire group.