{"id":63566,"date":"2016-02-04T10:47:37","date_gmt":"2016-02-04T08:47:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.myza.co.za\/how-the-origin-of-the-khoisan-tells-us-that-race-has-no-place-in-human-ancestry-the-conversation\/"},"modified":"2016-02-04T10:47:37","modified_gmt":"2016-02-04T08:47:37","slug":"how-the-origin-of-the-khoisan-tells-us-that-race-has-no-place-in-human-ancestry-the-conversation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myza.co.za\/press\/how-the-origin-of-the-khoisan-tells-us-that-race-has-no-place-in-human-ancestry-the-conversation\/","title":{"rendered":"How the origin of the KhoiSan tells us that \u2018race\u2019 has no place in human ancestry | The Conversation"},"content":{"rendered":"
The annual 'Living Landscapes' procession is aimed at raising awareness of the Cedarberg's KhoiSan cultural heritage. <\/span> Reuters\/Mike Hutchings<\/span><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The ancient origins, anatomical, linguistic and genetic distinctiveness of southern African San and Khoikhoi people are matters of confusion and debate. They are variously described as the world\u2019s first or oldest people; Africa\u2019s first or oldest people, or the first people of South Africa.<\/p>\n

They are in fact two evolutionarily related but culturally distinct groups of populations that have occupied southern Africa for up to 140,000 years. Their first-people status is due to the fact that they commonly retain genetic elements of the most ancient Homo sapiens<\/em>.<\/p>\n

This conclusion is based on evidence from specific types of DNA. This evidence also demonstrates that other sub-Saharan human populations retain genetic bits and pieces of DNA from non-KhoiSan primordial humans. These pre-date their out-of-Africa colonisation of the balance of the world.<\/p>\n

What is important in the debate on the origins of, and diversity among, population groups of Homo sapiens<\/em> is to establish what cannot, and should not, be derived from the various DNA evidence used to support the KhoiSan-as-first-people hypothesis.<\/p>\n

This is that the KhoiSan, or any other groups of humans, can be assigned to evolutionarily meaningful \u201craces\u201d \u2013 or subspecies in biological classification.<\/p>\n

The DNA evidence, if interpreted incorrectly, could be used to support the findings of \u201cscientific\u201d racial anthropologists such as Carleton S. Coon.<\/p>\n

As recently as 1962, Coon \u201crecognised\u201d the KhoiSan as the Capoid race. He based this on the distinctive anatomical features of the Capoids from those he used to designate the Congoid race. These include golden brown rather than sepia-coloured skin, the presence of epicanthic eye folds, prominent cheekbones and steatopygia.<\/p>\n

But, if correctly interpreted, the scientific evidence points quite to the contrary.<\/p>\n

Human evolution cannot be drawn like a tree<\/h2>\n

If one were to compare the entire DNA genomes from representatively sampled human populations from around the world, the resulting relationships would look more like an evolutionarily reticulated chain-link fence. In other words, a network rather than a tree. This applies to even purportedly racially important anatomical features.<\/p>\n

This is because human population groups worldwide are highly homogeneous (99.5% similar) genetically and their anatomical features vary in an uncorrelated fashion over the landscape.<\/p>\n

These groups are, in evolutionary terms, very recent entities that have no biological or taxonomic significance.<\/p>\n

The DNA evidence used to discover the human genetic \u201cfootprints\u201d that characterise the KhoiSan, and other diverging populations, is today easily put together. Forensic pathologists use it to determine an unidentifiable corpse\u2019s population group. This process has been popularised on television shows such as CSI and Bones.<\/p>\n

This DNA evidence comes from:<\/p>\n