Barter Shane Joshua. Explaining the Genetic Footprints of Catholic and Protestant Colonizers

Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. — 167 p.Explaining the Genetic Footprints of Catholic and Protestant Colonizers by Shane Joshua Barter points out a novel pattern in colonial intimacy - that Catholic colonizers tended to leave behind significant mixed communities while Protestant colonizers were more likely to police relations with local women. The varied genetic footprints of Catholic and Protestant colonizers, while subject to some exceptions, holds across world regions and over time. Having demonstrated that this pattern exists, this book then seeks to explain it, looking to religious institutions, political capacity, and ideas of nation and race.Throughout the colonial world, European colonizers initiated liaisons with local women and sired mixed communities, but they did so at different rates and understood it in different ways. Observers have long noted the Portuguese proclivity to produce mixed families, while Spanish and French colonizers literally spawned métis and mestizo populations. Meanwhile, the British, American, German, and Dutch colonizers worked to limit intimate contacts with the colonized in a variety of ways; although never as
successful as they believed, the rate of unions and offspring with local women were comparatively low. Some scholars have explained these distinctions in broad civilizational terms, speaking of Latin and Anglo-Saxon approaches. Less noted is the fact that colonizers that did and did not mix can be grouped according to faith. Why did Catholic colonizers leave behind deep genetic footprints, while Protestant colonizers seemingly did not? This study begins by providing some important caveats and definitions. It then looks to relevant academic work, supporting the claim that religious patterns of sexual encounters have somehow escaped dedicated scrutiny. This groundwork laid, Part II shows that this broad pattern of Catholic mixing and Protestant reluctance exists on a global scale. I provide regional comparisons between Catholic and Protestant colonizers first in Southeast Asia, home to especially enduring and diverse forms of colonial rule, and then East Asia, South Asia, Africa, the Americas, and Oceania. Although I note some important exceptions, it is generally true that Catholic colonizers left behind mixed communities, as well as creole languages and cultures, whereas Protestants typically did not, instead leaving behind legacies of segregation. This section also draws out some fascinating corollaries, finding that when Protestants did mix, they tended to do so with mixed Catholic communities, and that within Protestant colonies, individual Catholics were more likely to establish local families.After showing that this pattern generally holds across world regions, Part III assesses five potential explanations that I have found in the academic literature. The first is that the distinction is entirely religious. The Catholic faith entails a transnational identity and a Papal hierarchy, while Protestantism is more fragmented among small flocks and many are exclusivist, evident in the Calvinist concept of the elect. A second potential explanation relates to geography and historical contact. Perhaps the dominant explanation for varied civilizational patterns of mixing, Mediterranean countries are said to have longer histories of mixing with world cultures, while northern nations tend to be more isolated and exclusivist. Another potential explanation is rooted in political economy, in that native communities necessary for labor are kept apart while those with ownership of land are suitable for mixing. A fourth explanation revolves around the varied political capacities of different colonial powers, a factor that shapes the ability of colonial administrators to police interracial liaisons as well as to send European women and forestall the need to mix. A final explanation is rooted in the emergence of ideas such as nations and then race among colonial powers. Protestant communities tended to be at the forefront of these ideas, namely scientific ideas of race, whereas Catholics typically lagged behind. This best explains not only the “miscegenation” gap between Catholic and Protestant colonizers, but also temporal trends away from mixing for all colonizers. The nation/race argument is not totally distinct from rival explanations, nor does it stand at their expense—this is not an exercise in falsification. These factors are obviously interrelated, though some are more convincing than others and their effects are felt through interaction. Elements of Catholicism mitigated the development of concepts such as nation and race, while Protestantism emerged in tandem with and embraced them. Meanwhile, more developed Protestant colonizers slowly established the political capacity to police color lines. This explains the ability to police sexual liaisons, however identifying as a nation and race explains the will to do so.ContentsAcknowledgmentsIntroduction
Exploring the Religious Divide
Explaining the Religious Divide
ImplicationsBibliography
Index