Origins of the Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia Divide | Tripartite Division of Oceania

Summary

This video explores the origins of the racialized division of Oceania into Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia. The division, which was created by European scholars like Jean de Monteville in the 19th century, was based on outdated racial theories that categorized Pacific Islanders by skin color. This false classification, which linked lighter-skinned populations to civilization and darker-skinned populations to savagery, shaped how the world still views the Pacific region today. The video delves into the historical roots of these labels and their impact on the perception of Pacific Island cultures.

Takeaways

• 😀 The geographic divisions of Oceania, including Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia, were created by Europeans and don't reflect how Pacific islanders traditionally viewed their regions.
• 😀 These divisions, which were originally based on racial and superficial grounds, were imposed by European scholars and not based on geographic characteristics.
• 😀 Frenchman Judo Monteville is credited with formalizing the tripartite division of Oceania in 1832, but this was influenced by earlier racial theories from the 18th century.
• 😀 The racial theory that shaped these divisions categorized Pacific islanders into two distinct races: a 'yellow' race (lighter skin, civilized) and a 'black' race (darker skin, uncivilized).
• 😀 Monteville linked Polynesia and Micronesia to the 'yellow' race, while Melanesia was associated with the 'black' race, reflecting racial hierarchy and prejudice.
• 😀 The origins of racial thinking about Oceania can be traced back to 1756 with French scholar Charles de Bros, who linked the people of the Pacific Islands to a racial theory, with a focus on skin color and civilization.
• 😀 Johann Reinhold Foster in 1778 proposed dividing Pacific islanders into two races based on skin color—light-skinned islanders (Polynesians) and dark-skinned islanders (Melanesians).
• 😀 Foster's categorization laid the groundwork for the racial opposition between Melanesians and Polynesians, with darker-skinned groups seen as less civilized.
• 😀 The term 'Melanesia' was coined in 1825 by Frenchman Jean-Baptiste Bordier to classify dark-skinned islanders, and this distinction further entrenched racial divisions in the Pacific.
• 😀 The term 'Micronesia' first appeared in 1819 in a map by Italian Bartolome Borgie, marking the distinction of smaller islands in the Pacific. This division was refined based on cultural practices and language by later scholars.
• 😀 By the 20th century, the tripartite division of Oceania into Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia became the widely accepted standard in both academic and popular discourse, despite its racially motivated origins.

Q & A

What was the primary reason for the creation of the divisions of Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia?

The divisions of Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia were created by Europeans to categorize the peoples of Oceania. These categories were based on superficial racial theories rather than the perspectives of the Pacific Islanders themselves.

How did the racial theories influence the creation of the three divisions of Oceania?

Racial theories in the 18th and 19th centuries linked people of the Pacific Islands to two distinct races: a 'yellow race' with lighter skin (Polynesians and Micronesians) and a 'black race' with darker skin (Melanesians). These racial divisions were applied to the geographical regions of Oceania.

Who is credited with the creation of the tripartite division of Oceania into Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia?

The tripartite division is commonly credited to Frenchman Jean-Baptiste Du Mont de Ville in 1832, though his work was based on earlier racial theories from scholars like Charles de Bros and Johann Reinhold Foster.

What were the main characteristics that distinguished Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia in the eyes of early scholars?

The divisions were largely based on skin color and cultural practices. Polynesia and Micronesia were associated with lighter-skinned peoples, considered more 'civilized,' while Melanesia was linked to darker-skinned peoples, who were deemed 'uncivilized' according to the racial theories of the time.

How did Charles de Bros contribute to the racial categorization of Oceania?

Charles de Bros, in 1756, proposed the concept of 'Polynesia' and linked the darker-skinned inhabitants of Australia and Southeast Asia to an ancient 'black race.' He was the first to apply emerging racial theories to the people of Oceania, setting the stage for later divisions.

What was Johann Reinhold Foster's role in the racial categorization of Pacific Islanders?

Johann Reinhold Foster, in 1778, further developed the racial divide between light-skinned Polynesians and darker-skinned Melanesians, attributing cultural and racial differences to skin color. He categorized them as two distinct racial groups, influencing later divisions.

How did the term 'Melanesia' come into existence?

The term 'Melanesia' was coined by Frenchman Jean-Baptiste Du Mont de Ville in 1825, derived from the Greek word 'melas' meaning 'black,' to classify the dark-skinned peoples of Oceania, in contrast to the lighter-skinned Polynesians.

What does the term 'Micronesia' mean, and how did it come into use?

Micronesia, derived from the Greek word 'mikros' meaning 'small,' first appeared on an 1819 map by Italian Bartolomeo Borgie. It was used to refer to smaller islands in the Pacific and later became a distinct geographic category.

How did cultural practices like the taboo influence the division of Polynesia and Micronesia?

The distinction between Polynesia and Micronesia was partly based on cultural practices, specifically the practice of taboo. Scholars like Gregorio Luis Dominici categorized Pacific Islanders who practiced taboo as Polynesians, while those who did not were considered Micronesians.

Why is it important to understand the racial origins of the terms Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia?

Understanding the racial origins of these terms is crucial because they were constructed based on European racial hierarchies and do not reflect the true cultural, social, or political perspectives of the Pacific Islanders themselves. These terms have had a lasting impact on how Pacific Island nations are viewed and categorized.