Race boxes in US censuses, 1790-2020
Two centuries of creeping government racialization
By William Wetherall
Drafted 9 September 2013
First posted 23 September 2014
Last updated 5 June 2023
National censuses
State censuses
•
Personal information and other census data
•
Reliability of census data
Racial classifications
1790-1820
•
1830
•
1840-1850
•
1860
•
1870
•
1880
•
1890
•
1900
•
1910
•
1920
•
1930
•
1940
•
1950
•
1960
•
1970
•
1980
•
1990
•
2000
•
2010
•
2020
Case as ideology
"Black / white" versus "Black / White" and "black / white"
1990-03 Normant Ebony
•
2020-06-18 Appiah The Atlantic
•
2020-06-30 Carswell The Washington Post
•
2020-07-29 WashPostPR The Washington Post
•
2023-05-12 Adichie The Atlantic
National censuses
National censuses have been taken in the United States every 10 years since 1790. By law they are open to public examination after 70 years, hence 1940 is the latest available census. Enumeration standards have changed over the decades, and earlier censuses were not complete.
Enumeration dates
The "as of dates" of "datums" of censuses have varied as follows.
1st-4th 1790-1820 1st Monday in August 5th-10th 1830-1880 1 June (Datum 31 May) 11th 1890 2 June 12th 1900 1 June 13th 1910 15 April 14th 1920 1 January From 15th 1930- 1 April
The datum date determines a person's qualification for inclusion in the census as well as the person's age. Say that, in 1920, the population of a certain locality was enumerated on 12 January. Since the datum of the census was 1 January, someone born on 2 January, or who was living somewhere else on 1 January, should not have been counted. And a person born on 7 January 1910 would have been considered 9 rather 10 years old, based on their last birthday before the datum.
State censuses
In addition to national censuses every 10 years, a few states have carried out full or partial censuses between the national censuses. Iowa, for example, conducted its own censuses in the following years.
1856 80 of 81 organized counties (community sheets) 1885 All 99 counties (community sheets) 1895 1905 All 99 counties (individual cards) 1915 All 99 counties (individual cards) 1925 All 99 counties (community sheets)
Iowa stands out as a very pro-census state. The nativity data on its 1925 census includes not only the places of birth but the names of a person's parents and where they were married.
Personal information and other census data
Enumeration standards evolved as quickly as the growing and spreading nation, and each census has been from slightly to radically different that earlier censuses. There are, however, some notable trends in the kinds of personal information and other data collected by census takers.
1790-1840 censuses
The censuses from 1790 to 1840 are valuable for many purposes, but they centered on information about households rather than about their individuals. They enumerated the name of the head of each household, but little personal information about the head. Other household members are reflected only as tallies broken down by sex and age-group within status categories like free whites, slaves, free colored people, and non-taxed Indians.
The status and age-group breakdowns become increasingly detailed. To the extent they characterize each household, they sometimes allow one to speculate as to whether the household in one census is the same as the household in a later household.
1850-1860 censuses
From 1850, censuses began list individuals within households, and provide information about each individual. From this point, censuses become valuable as sources of information on individuals. It also becomes easier to differentiate households with heads having similar names.
The 1850 and 1860 censuses show the name of the head of each household, followed by the name of each member of the household, and the sex, age, and color (white, black, mulatto), of each free inhabitant, plus columns for other information about each member, including whether the person was deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, a pauper, or a convict. These two censuses had separate slave schedules, which had columns for writing the name of the slave owner, and the age, sex, and color (but not the name) of each slave, and whether the slave had become a fugitive from the state, or had been manumitted, or was deaf and dumb, blind, insane, or idiotic.
1870-1890 censuses
Since 1870, following the emancipation of slaves after the Civil War of the 1860s, censuses have included all people by name, showing their sex, age, and color (white, black, mulatto, Chinese, Indian). The color classification on the 1890 census included white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian. However, practically all of the 1890 census was destroyed in a fire, hence its data is unavailable.
Knowing a person's "nativity" -- where the person was born -- is a very valuable piece of information. But knowing also the nativity of a person's parents can help differentiate people with similar names and otherwise similar identities. The 1880 census began showing nativity breakdowns by the places of birth of the person, and of the person's mother and father.
1900-1940 censuses
Censuses from 1900 had a column for "Color or race". While earlier "color" categories are also clearly racial, the "racialization" of people began to embrace also "national origin" within broader skin-color classifications -- such as "Chinese" in the 1860 and 1870 censuses, and "Japanese" in the 1890 census.
The 1930 and 1940 censuses, following several earlier censuses, had supplementary schedules for the American Indian population, defined as Indians enrolled as members of federally recognized tribes. Indians on these separate schedules were classified by sex, age, and whether they were "full blood or mixed blood". This is partly due to the declaration by the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act that all therebefore non-citizen Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States were thereafter citizens of the United States.
Non-citizen Indians, who were not taxed, usually lived on reservations, where they were formally affiliated with a tribe and were subject to its jurisdiction. Citizen Indians lived in, and were regarded as part of, the general population, and were subject to the same treatment as other citizens, including taxation. However, an increasing number of non-citizen Indians had moved off their reservation and were living in the general population.
Reliability of census data
Census data is subject to all manner errors, especially spelling errors. Census enumerators often spelled names the way they sounded to their ear, without confirming their spellings with the family informant -- assuming informant knew the spellings.
Place of birth, and places of birth of parents, are subject to misreporting and misrecording. Informants relied on memory, including memory of hearsay information, and there are cases when memory and hearsay information changes from census to census.
Sex, age, marital status, and race are also subject to erroneous reporting or recording. Reliability is limited by the nature of the classification.
Sex, age, and marital status
Sex, allowing for the lack of categories for rare cases of people who weren't unequivocally either male or female, was perhaps the easiest trait to accurately classify. Age was subject to errors of memory and calculation, but the effects of such errors on age-group breakdowns is negligible. Marital status was accurate to the extent that people didn't lie about their status -- such as by claiming they were married, single, or widowed, rather than admit they were divorced. All census reports I have seen on my own ancestral relatives, however, suggests that people frankly disclosed their actual status.
Race -- despite attempts by race scientists to objectively define racial classifications -- was subject to extremely impressionistic judgments, especially for persons whose features allowed them, or the enumerator, a degree of freedom in choice of classification. This was especially the case for putatively "mixed" persons, but some people who did not think of themselves as "mixed" -- such as an "Chinese" or "White" -- might also be misclassified.
Racial classifications
Changes in racial classifications on United States censuses tell the history of the official racialization of the country, from its establishment on the foundations of slavery, to the shackles of federal race boxes today.
The information in the following table is based mainly on direct examination of censuses from 1810-1940 (except 1890, which was destroyed in a fire), and the following publication, which celebrated the 100th anniversary of the Census Bureau (1902-2002), formerly the Census Office.
Measuring America 2002
Measuring America: The Decennial Censuses From 1790 to 2000
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau
Washington, D.C.: April 2002
140, 6 pages, PDF file
Also of interest are the following publications.
Indian Affairs Report 1876
Commissioner for Indian Affairs, Office of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior
The Annual Report of the Commissioner for Indian Affairs to the Secretary of the Interior for the Year 1876
Washington: Government Printing Office, 1876
XXV, 357 pages (archive.org)
Hochschild and Powell 2008
Jennifer L. Hochschild and Brenna M. Powell
Racial Reorganization and the United States Census 1850-1930: Mulattoes, Half-Breeds, Mixed Parentage, Hindoos, and the Mexican Race
Studies in American Political Development
Volume 22, Number 1 (Spring 2008)
Pages 59-96 (Jennifer L. Hochschild, Harvard College
The following website has images of census forms and scans of enumerator instructions for all United States censuses from 1850 to 2010.
IPUMS
Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS)
Minnesota Population Center, University of Minnesota
United States census categories related to status, color, or race, 1790-2020 The evolution of America's obsession with skin color and ethnonational ancestry |
|
1790-1840 Free white, 1850-1880 Color, 1890-1940 Color or race, 1950 Race, 1960-1970 Color or race, 1980 Is this person, 1990-2020 Race | |
1790 | Free white males (≥16, <16), Free white females, All other free persons (sex, color), Slaves |
1800 | Free white males (age), Free white females (age), All other free persons (except Indians not taxed), Slaves |
1810 | Free white males (age), Free white females (age), All other free persons (except Indians not taxed), Slaves |
1820 |
Free white males (age), Free white females (age), Slaves (sex, age), Free colored persons (sex, age), All others except Indians not taxed Foreigners not naturalized (White persons) |
Indians not taxed"Indians not taxed" referred to Indians who were living on a reservation under tribal jurisdiction, who were therefore not U.S. citizens. "Taxed Indians" lived as U.S. citizens outside reservations, where they were subject to federal, state, and other applicable laws, and paid taxes like other citizens. Foreigners not naturalizedThe term seems odd, since a foreigner who naturalizes is no longer a foreigner. |
1830 |
Free white persons, Slaves, Free colored persons, Slaves (all by sex and age) Deaf and dumb, blind (White persons, Slaves and colored persons) Aliens -- Foreigners not naturalized (White persons) |
First use of uniform schedulePreviously, the states or census marshalls produced their own schedules. Deaf and dumb, and AliensThe 1830 census included spaces to tally -- in the words of Measuring America -- "the number of White persons and of "slaves and colored persons," aged under 14 years, 14 and under 25, and 25 years and upward, who were deaf and dumb, but without distinction of sex in either case, and also the number of each of these two classes named who were blind, but without distinction of sex or age; and a statement, of White persons only, who were aliens, i.e., foreigners not naturalized" (Measuring America 2002: 7). |
1840 | Free white persons, Free colored persons, Slaves (all by sex and age) |
1850 |
6. Color -- (White, black, or mulatto) 13. Deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper, or convict |
Names of household members listedCensuses through 1840 showed only the name of the head of each household, followed by the number members in each household broken down by status and sex, and within each status and sex category by gradually more detailed age groups. Censuses from 1850 showed the names of all members of each household, beginning with the head of the household, usually a male, followed by his wife, then his children in the order of their birth, then others living in the household, including relatives, servants, and non-relative boarders. Each individual was identified a number of traits, which eventually included their relation to the head of household (wife, son, daughter, mother-in-law, servant, boarder, et cetera), sex, age at time of census, color or race, and marital status -- and other traits depending on the particular census. Census divided into separate "Free" and "Slave" schedulesFrom 1850, the census was divided into separate "Free Inhabitants" and "Slave Inhabitants" schedules. "Color" introduced as new classificationBoth the "Free Inhabitants" and "Slave Inhabitants" schedules had a "Color" classification. First "Color" breakdown was White, Black, and MulattoThe instructions enumerators received regarding entries in the "Color" space for each enumerated person were somewhat different in the two schedules.. "Color" on "Free Inhabitants" scheduleMarshalls and assistants received the following instruction the "Color" column on the "Free Inhabitants" schedule (Measuring America 2002: 10, IPUMS 1850). 6. Under heading 6, entitled "Color," in all cases where the person is white, leave the space blank; in all cases where the person is black, insert the letter B; if mulatto, insert M. It is very desirable that these particulars be carefully regarded. "Color" on "Free Inhabitants" scheduleEnumerators of the "Slave Inhabitants" schedule received the following instructions concerning "Color" (Measuring America 2002: 12). Under heading 5, entitled "Color," insert in all cases, when the slave is black, the letter B; when he or she is mulatto, insert M. The color of all slaves should be noted. No mention is made of "white", which is not to rule out the existence, still, if indentured (not free) whites. If they were found, presumably the "Color" space was left blank, as on the Free Inhabitants schedule. Rationale for "Mulatto" as sub-classification of "Color"The justification for including "Mulatto" in the "Color" breakdown the desire of race scientists to attempt to determine the degree to which the "black" population -- defined by a "one-drop" rule -- had become mixed. Some scientists also thought that -- in conjunction with data on birth, death, and marriage, and whether a person was deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, a pauper, or a convict -- blood quanta data might shed light on the extent to which racially mixed people might be physically or mentally, if not also morally, degenerate. (See Hochschild and Powell 2008 a detailed overview of the debate over the purpose and usefulness of "Mulatto" data.) Indians not taxedEnumerators of the "Free Inhabitants" schedule were explicitly instructed that "Indians not taxed are not to be enumerated in this or any other schedule" (Measuring America 2002: 10). Persons who cannot read or write, and anyone deaf and dumb, et ceteraThe 1850 census enumerated "Persons over 20 years of age who can not read and write" and anyone who was "Deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper, or convict" (Measuring America 2002: 11) |
1860 |
6. Color -- (White, Black, or Mulatto) 13. Whether deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper, or convict. |
Taxed (citizen) Indians classified as "Indian"From the 1860 census, enumerators were instructed to classify a "Taxed Indian" as "Indian". "Taxed Indians" were Indians who lived as U.S. citizens outside Indian reservations and were subject to U.S. laws and courts -- as opposed to "Indians not taxed", who generally lived on reservations, and were under tribal jurisdiction and hence were not U.S. citizens. In earlier censuses, taxed Indians had been classified as "White". Enumerator instructions read as follows (IPUMS 1860). 5. Indians. -- Indians not taxed are not to be enumerated. The families of Indians who have renounced tribal rule, and who under State or Territorial laws exercise the rights of citizens, are to be enumerated. In all such cases write "Ind." opposite their names, in column 6, under heading "Color." 9. Color. -- Under heading 6, entitled "Color," in all cases where the person is white leave the space blank; in all cases where the person is black without admixture insert the letter "B;"if a mulatto, or of mixed blood, write "M;"if an Indian, write "Ind." It is very desirable to have these directions carefully observed. Slave inhabitantsThe 1860 census, like the 1850 census, also had a "Slave Inhabitants" schedule separate from the "Free Inhabitants" schedule. The enumerator instructions read as follows (IPUMS 1860). 5. Color.-- Under heading 5, entitled "Color," insert, in all cases where the slave is black, the letter "B." When he or she is a mulatto insert "M." You are to note the color of every slave. Those who are in any degree of mixed blood are to be termed mulatto, "M." |
1870 |
6. Color -- White (W.), Black (B.), Mulatto (M.), Chinese (C.), Indian (I.) 18. Whether deaf and dumb, blind, insane, or idiotic. |
"Chinese" and "Indian" added to "Color" ClassificationsFrom the 1870 census, "Chinese" and [American] "Indians" became permanent subclassifications of "Color". "any perceptible trace of African blood"Marshalls and assistants enumerating the general "Inhabitants" schedule [Schedule 1] received the following instructions concerning the "Color" column (Measuring America 2002: 14, IPUMS 1870). Color. -- It must not be assumed that, where nothing is written in this column, "White" is to be understood. The column is always to be filled. Be particularly careful in reporting the class Mulatto. The word is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results depend upon the correct determination of this class in schedules 1 [Inhabitants] and 2 [Mortality]. Deaf and dumb, et ceteraInstructions concerning deafness and dumbness, among other physical handicaps, were very specific (Measuring America 2002: 15). Deaf and dumb, Blind, Insane, or Idiotic.. -- Great care will be taken in performing this work of enumeration, so as at once to secure completeness and avoid giving offense. Total blindness and undoubted insanity only are intended in this inquiry. Deafness merely, without the loss of speech, is not to be reported. The fact of idiocy will be better determined by the common consent of the neighborhood, than by attempting to apply any scientific measure to the weakness of the mind or will. CitizenshipThe census had a column called "Constitutional Relations" for specifying the relationship between an enumerated person and the Constitution of the United States -- i.e., whether the person was a citizen, and the quality of the person's citizenship (Measuring America 2002: 15). Constitutional Relations
Naturalization
IndiansInstructions concerning "Indians" makes reference to the "statistical purposes" of accurately classifying "Indians" wherever they are found (Measuring America 2002: 15, IPUMS 1870). Indians. -- "Indians not taxed" are not to be enumerated on schedule 1 [Inhabitants]. Indians out of their tribal relations, and exercising the rights of citizens under state or Territorial laws, will be included. In all cases write "Ind." in the column for "Color." Although no provision is made for the enumeration of "Indians not taxed," it is highly desirable, for statistical purposes, that the number of such persons ["Indians not taxed"] not living upon reservations should be known. Assistant marshals are therefore requested, where such persons ["Indians no taxed"] are found within their subdivisions, to make a separate memorandum of names, with sex and age, and embody the same in a special report to the census office. |
1880 |
4. Color -- White, W.; Black, B.; Mulatto, Mu.; Chinese, C.; Indian, I. 16. Blind, 17. Deaf and Dumb, 18. Idiotic, 19. Insane, 20. Maimed, Crippled, Bedridden, or otherwise disabled |
"Important scientific results"Instructions to enumerators continue to stress that "important scientific results" depend on careful reporting of the blood quanta of persons in "the class mulatto" (IPUMS 1880). Color. -- It must not be assumed that, where nothing is written in this column, "white" is to be understood. The column is always to be filled. Be particularly careful in reporting the class mulatto. The word is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results depend upon the correct determination of this class in schedules 1 [Population] and 5 [Manufacturing]. New Indian policy principlesIn The Annual Report of the Commissioner for Indian Affairs to the Secretary of the Interior for the Year 1876, the Commissioner for Indian Affairs, Office of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior stated that the department should adopt the following three policy principles (Indian Affairs Report 1876: VII).
First. Concentration of all Indians on a few reservations. The report includes statistics on the populations by Males, Females, Total, and Number of Mixed-Bloods for the tribes of each agency by state. There were a total of 266,151 Indians in the United States exclusive of Alaska, of whom 40,639 (15.3 percent) are "mixed-bloods" and 104,818 (39.4%) wear "citizens' dress" (Indian Affairs Report 1876: 222, my percents). "Indian Division" questionnaireThe 1880 census, reflecting the desire of the Interior Department to have demographic data on Indians, included a special "Indian Division" questionnaire for enumerating Indians living on reservations -- i.e., Indians not taxed. Data included whether the Indian was of full or mixed blood, had been adopted into the tribe, the time the person had lived on a reservation, and the time the person had worn "citizens' dress" -- among numerous other questions (Measuring America 2002: 21). |
1890 |
5. Color or race -- Whether white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian |
"Color" becomes "Color or race"Quadroon" and "octoroon" join "mulatto" as black-blood quanta"Japanese" joins "Chinese" as raciopigmental subclassificationThe instructions to enumerators of the general schedule for the 1890 census read as follows (Measuring America 2002: 27, IPUMS 1890). 4. Whether white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon,
Chinese, Japanese, or Indian.
Federal government privatizes tribal landsThe Dawes Severalty Act of 1887, which authorized a government survey of Indian tribal lands with the object of dividing them into parcels for allotment to individual Indians who would thereby own the parcel in severalty. Severalty refers to terms of ownership in which a person possesses full and exclusive legal rights to a parcel of land. The 1887 act attached the condition that an Indian who wished to receive such an allotment of land had to agree to be a U.S. citizen, and thereby be subject to the laws and courts of the state and federal governments, rather to tribal laws. This move on the part of the federal government also resulted in a special survey of Indians in conjunction with the 1890 census. The introduction to the census includes the following remarks, among others, on Indians (Measuring America 2002: 24). By the phrase "Indians not taxed" is meant Indians living on reservations under the care of Government agents or roaming individually or in bands over unsettled tracts of country. Indians not in tribal relations, whether full-bloods or half-breeds, who are found mingled with the white population, residing in white families, engaged as servants or laborers, or living in huts or wigwams on the outskirts of towns or settlements, are to be regarded as a part of the ordinary population of the country, and are to be embraced by the enumeration.
|
1900 | 5. Color or Race -- Whether white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian |
"Negro" used in definition of "black"White-blood quantum noted for IndiansGeneral instructions to enumerators of the 1900 census included the following guidance (Measuring America 2002: 36, IPUMS 1900). 126. Column 5. Color or race. Write "W" for white; "B" for black (negro or negro descent); "Ch" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese, and "In" for Indian, as the case may be. Indian PopulationThe Indian Schedule required enumerations such as these (Measuring America 2002: 44). Column 33. -- If the Indian has no white blood, write 0. If he or she has white blood, write 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, whichever fraction is nearest the truth.
|
1910 |
6. Color or Race -- White, Black, Mulatto, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Other 31. Whether blind (both eyes), 32. Whether deaf and dumb |
"Other" added to "Color or race" choices"Quadroon" and "octoroon" dropped as subclassificationsInstructions to enumerators of the general census included this guidance concerning "Color or race" (Measuring America 2002: 48, IPUMS 1910). 108. Column 6. Color or race. -- Write "W" for white; "B" for black; "Mu" for mulatto; "Ch" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "In" for Indian. For all persons not falling within one of these classes, write "Ot" (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated.
Mixed-blood IndiansThe turn of the century witnessed further controversy over questions of effects of blood mixture involving Indians, and whether a person's blood quantum should determine whether the person could own or inherit a parcel of land allotted to an Indian. Census Bureau (as the Census Office was renamed in 1902) instructed enumerators of the special Indian Population schedule associated with the 1910 census as follows regarding the items on the "B" side of survey sheet (Measuring America 2002: 56) Columns 36, 37, and 38. Proportions of Indian and other blood. -- If the Indian is a full-blood, write "full" in column 36, and leave columns 37 and 38 blank. If the Indian is of mixed blood, write in column 36, 37, and 38 the fractions which show the proportions of Indian and other blood, as (column 36, Indian) 3/4, (column 37, white) 1/4, and (column 38, negro) 0. For Indians of mixed blood all three columns should be filled, and the sum, in each case, should equal 1, as 1/2, 0, 1/2; 3/4, 1/4, 0; 3/4, 1/8, 1/8; etc. Wherever possible, the statement that an Indian is of full blood should be verified by inquiry of the older men of the tribe, as an Indian is sometimes of mixed blood without knowing it. |
1920 | 10. Color or Race -- White, Black, Mulatto, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Hindu, Korean, Other |
"Filipino", "Hindu", and "Koreans" added to subclassificationsSome publications added categories like Asian Hawaiians, part Hawaiian, "Mixed (rather than Chamorro or Polynesian)," and "Mixed (rather than Filipino)". (See Hochschild and Powell 2008.) Enumerators received the following instructions regarding "Color or race" (IPUMS 1920). 120. Column 10. Color or race.-Write "W" for white, "B" for black; "Mu" for mulatto; "In" for Indian; "Ch" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "Fil" for Filipino; "Hin" for Hindu; "Kor" for Korean. for all persons not falling within one of these classes, write "Ot" (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated.
|
1930 | 12. Color or Race -- White, Black, Mexican, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Hindu, Korean, Other |
Indians again classified on general schedule"Mulatto" droppedAll "White and Negro" mixture "Negro" no matter how small the blood quantumAll "White and Indian" mixture "Indian" unless degree of Indian blood smallAll "White" and "nonwhite" mixture classified by color of "nonwhite" parentAll mixtures of "colored races" classified by color of father"Mexican" addedMexicans are "Mexicans" unless definitely of another color or raceThe enumerator instructions regarding "Color or race" in the 1930 census read as follows (cited from IPUMS 1930; only paraphrased in Measuring America 2002: 59. 150. Column 12. Color or race. -- Write "W" for white, "B" for black; "Mex" for Mexican; "In" for Indian; "Ch" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "Fil" for Filipino; "Hin" for Hindu; "Kor" for Korean. For a person of any other race, write the race in full.
The 1930 census included a Supplemental Schedule for the Indian Population, which included a "Full Blood or Mixed Blood" box before the "Tribe" box. |
1940 |
10. Color or Race -- White (W), Negro (Neg), Indian (In), Chinese (Ch), Japanese (Jp), Filipino (Fil), Hindu (Hin), Korean (Kor), Other races, spell out in full 16. Citizenship of the foreign born -- Naturalized (Na), Having first papers (Pa), Alien (Al), American citizen born abroad (Am Cit) |
"Negro" replaces "Black""Mexicans" are "white" unless definitely Indian or other"Mulatto" -- introduced from 1850 census -- dropped from 1940 census."Other mixed races" rule on 1930 census becomes "Mixed races" on 1940 census."Mixtures of non-white races" distinction on 1930 census continues in 1940 census.Measuring America states that, "With regard to race, the only change from 1930 was that Mexicans were to be listed as White unless they were definitely Indian or some race other than White" (Measuring America 2002: 64). The specific instructions were as follows (IPUMS 1940). 453. Column 10. Color or Race.-- Write "W" for white; "Neg" for Negro; "In" for Indian; "Chi" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "Fil" for Filipino; "Hi" for Hindu; and "Kor" for Korean. For a person of any other race, write the race in full.
|
1950 |
9. Race -- White (W), Negro (Neg), American Indian (Ind), Japanese (Jap), Chinese (Chi), Filipino (Fil), Hindu (Hin), Korean (Kor), Other race -- spell out |
"Color or race" becomes just "Race"2-letter "Race" abbreviations become 3 lettersThe evolution from "Free" and "Slave" statuses to "Race" -- via "Color" and "Color and race" -- is complete. The classification scheme becomes more complicated. Instructions concerning the completion of the "Race" box on the 1950 census form were as follows (IPUMS 1950). Item 9. Race
"Jap" abbreviationIt appears that all racial classifications -- except "White" -- were abbreviated by their first 3 letters -- Neg, Ind, Chi, Jap, Fil. On earlier censuses, there were both 2-letter and 3-letter abbreviations. |
1960 |
Enumerator-completed schedule(P5) Is this person -- White, Negro, American Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Part Hawaiian, Aleut, Eskimo, (etc.)? ____________________ Respondent-completed machine-readable scheduleColor or race |
1960 census first to use forms for self-enumerationPart HawaiianSelf-completed FOSDIC (Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer) forms were mailed out to respondents living outside large cities. The machine-readable forms had circles, beside or below the choices, which respondents blackened with a pencil, though some items required writing. Enumerators continued to complete forms for people living in large cities. Measuring America characterizes the instructions for "Race or color" as follows (Measuring America 2002: 72). The instructions for completing P5 (race or color) by observation [by enumerator] directed that Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, or other persons of Latin descent would be classified as "White" unless they were definitely Negro, Indian, or some other race. Southern European and Near Eastern nationalities also were to be considered White. Asian Indians were to be classified as "Other," and "Hindu" written in. "Part Hawaiian" included as specific racial classification. |
1970 |
4. COLOR OR RACE. Fill one circle. If "Indian (American)," also give tribe. If "Other," also give race. ◯ White ◯ Negro or Black ◯ Indian (Amer.) Print tribe 13a. Where was this person born? |
"Black" restored but secondary to "Negro"All forms designed for self-identification"Aleut" and "Eskimo" on Alaska questionnairesSoliciation of south-of-the-border descentMeasuring America characterizes the 1970 census design like this (Measuring America 2001: 77). All answers were designed for self-identification on the part of the respondent, but the enumerator was allowed to fill in blanks by observation when this was possible. For item 4 (color or race), it was assumed that the respondent's relatives living in the unit were also of the same race unless the census taker learned otherwise. The enumerator's manual included a long list of possible written-in entries and how they were to be classified: For example, "Chicano," "LaRaza," "Mexican American," "Moslem," or "Brown" were to be changed to White, while "Brown (Negro)" would be considered as Negro or Black for census purposes. A note at the bottom of the general form reads as follows (IPUMS). Note: On the questionnaires used in Alaska, the categories "Aleut" and "Eskimo" were substituted for "Hawaiian" and "Korean" in question 4. This was the first census to facilitate self-identification as someone of south-of-the-border origin or descent. The solicitation was made in the place of birth question. |
1980 |
4. Is this person -- Fill one circle 7. Is this person of Spanish/Hispanic origin or descent? |
"Black" becomes primary to "Negro"Alaskan and Pacific racesVietnamese and Asian Indians"Spanish/Hispanic"Alaskan (Eskimo, Aleut) and Pacific (Guamanian, Samoan) races included for first time. "Vietnamese" and "Asian Indians" added to expanding list of Asians. South-of-the-border descents grouped under overarching "Spanish/Hispanic" label. |
1990 |
4. RACE 7. Is this person of Spanish/Hispanic origin? |
Provisions for writing in specific regional racesIntroduction of "Asian Pacific Islander" categoryRacial empowerment lobbyists succeeded in expanding the scope of the "Race" box to facilitate writing in specific regional races, and to group "Asian" and "Pacific Islanders" under the overarching "API" label. There is now a sharp delineation between (1) "White", (2) "African", (3) "American Indian" and Alaskan, and (4) "Asian and Pacific Islander" people. |
2000 |
Note: Please answer BOTH questions 5 and 6. 5. Is this person Spanish/Hispanic/Latino? 6. What is this person's race? |
One or more races"African American" added beween "Black" and "Negro"Alaskan Natives, Native HawaiiansAlphabetical ordering of Asian racesSpanish/Hispnaic/LatinoThe 2000 census was the first to permit a choice of more than one race. As with earlier recent censuses, it continued the practice of listing "White" first. and other races in order of their "importance" or "dominance" in the political history of the population of the United States beginning from the 1st census in 1790. "African American" added to "Black or Negro" label ahead of "Negro". The term "African descent" had been used in some U.S. laws since the 19th century, but this is first time the "black" and/or "negro" classification was "Africanized" in a the U.S. census. Eskimos and Aleuts conflated in "Alaskan Native" category, and Hawaiians also "upgraded" to "Native" status. Asian racial categories listed in Alphabetical order. "Latino" added to "Spanish/Hispanic" label. |
2010 |
NOTE: Please answer BOTH Question 5 about Hispanic origin andQuestion 6 about race. For this census, Hispanic origins are not races 5. Is this person of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin? 6. What is this person's race? Mark ☒ one or more boxes. |
Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin"Spanish" downgraded to end of collective label. "Spaniard" also comes at end of examples of "Other" specific labels related to this group. |
2020 |
NOTE: Please answer BOTH Question 6 about Hispanic origin and Question 7 about race. For this census, Hispanic origins are not races. 6. Is this person of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin? 7. What is this person's race? Mark ☒ one or more boxes. |
"Negro" dropped leaving only "Black or African American""Negro", which became popular from the 1920s, and was widely embraced by organizations, media, and federal and state governments, replaced "Black" in the 1940-1960 censuses. Following the civil rights movements of the 1950s and 1960s, and the rise of "black" advocacy, "Black" was added to "Negro" -- following "Negro" -- in the 1970 census. The 1980 and 1990 censuses listed "Negro" after "Black". The 2000 and 2010 censuses added "African American" to the list after "Black" and before "Negro". The 2020 census dropped "Negro" from the list, leaving only "Black" and "African American". Expansion, elaboration, and refinement of all "Race" classificationsUnlike earlier censuses, Census 2020 respondents are asked to specify the "origin" of all the races they mark. The examples include conventional "national origin" labels as well as "tribal" or "community" labels. As in censuses since 2000, respondents could mark the "Some other race" box in addition to one or more of the other race boxes -- and specify the other "race or origin". |
Case as ideology"Black / white" versus "Black / White" and "black / white"2020 witnessed a shift in attitudes toward the writing of "black" and "white" as one major American newspaper or magazine after another adopted the practice of capitalizing "Black" as a matter of style. Many publishers continued to write "white" in lower case but some also began to capitalize "White". The movement to write "black" with a big "B" was not new. But the use of "black" and "white" as racial terms is old. The United States conducted its first decennial census in 1790. But the 1850 census was the first to use "black" along with "white" and "mulatto". As classifications of "Color or race" on enumeration sheets, these words were capitalized, and uppercase W, B, and M were used to mark race in boxes under the "Color or race" column.boxes. In definitions, however these three terms were not capitalized. Lowercase "negro" was first used in definitions of lowercase "black" from the 1900 census. And from the 1910 census, "negro" also figured in the definition of "mulatto". Hence census takers read instructions like these. 1900 Write "W" for white; "B" for black (negro or negro descent) 1910 For census purposes, the term "black" (B) includes all persons who are evidently full-blooded negroes, while the term "mulatto" (Mu) includes all other persons having some proportion or perceptible trace of negro blood. "mulatto" (M) was dropped from the 1930 census, and "negro" (N) replaced "black" (B) from the 1940 census. The 1970 census used "Negro or Black", the 1980 and 1990 censuses "Black or Negro", the 2000 and 2010 censuses "Black, African Am., or Negro", and the 2020 census "Black or African Am." The capitalization of "Black" and "White" on census forms was not, however, a recognition of "black" and "white" as proper nouns. The capitalization was simply an artifact of the stylistic practice of capitalizing these terms when used in lists of "Color or race" or "Race" choices. In definitions and explanations, both "black" and "white" -- and "mulatto" when it was used -- were generally written in lower case. The recent (21st century) push for the capitalization of "black" on a par with the capitalization of geographical or national ethnonyms like African or Nigerian, Asian or Indian, and European or Irish began in earnest after George Floyd (1973-2020) died on 25 May 2020 from the effects of what a court ruled was excessive use of police force. The incident triggered the Black Lives Movement, which gave momentum to the on-going movement in journalism and elsewhere to capitalize "black" in order to recognize not only biological descent but membership in a distinct racioethnic "community" that shared a common history and culture. On 20 June 2020, less than a month after Floyd was killed, the Associated Press, in an article titled AP changes writing style to capitalize "b" in Black, announced that, on the previous day, it had adopted the practice of capitalizing "black" but was still considering whether to also capitalize "white". The Associated Press Stylebook is widely considered the gold standard of usage and mechanics in American journalism, and many major papers and other publications began to declare their adoption of big "B" policy. Prior to this, most style books preferred writing both "black" and "white" in lower case as descriptors of race. A growing number of individuals and organizations, however, argued that people who considered themselves "black" were members of a "community" that shared a degree of so-called "blackness" -- a distinctly "black" culture or ethnicity. Ergo, "black" should be capitalized in the manner of other so-called "ethnic groups" defined by common geographical, national, or cultural origins. Radical proponents of "black" capitalization argue that "white" should not be capitalized because "white" is not an ethnicity. People who consider themselves "white" do not share a common historical experience or culture. Moreover, as the dominant race, they have been privileged, whereas "blacks" and other "people of color" continue to suffer discrimination on the part of whites. Some people also see the capitalization of "white" as siding with white supremacists who capitalize "white" as an expression of pride in their putative "whiteness" as a standard of purity to be protected from mixture with "colored" races. Capitalization has been invested with a variety meanings, all related to visual stress. Here the stress is ideological. Apart from the problem of whether such stress is warranted, it travels only in writing. For case is graphic, not linguistic. Case distinctions are moot in speech. Linguistically, they are useless. Case distinctionsUsers of English don't make case distinctions in speech, because language is what the mouth does to express thoughts and feelings in sounds to be heard by the ear and processed and understood in the brain. While writing is intended to represent language, it is not itself language, but script to be seen by the ear and processed and understood in the brain. Not all elements of speech are recorded when transcribing what someone has said, and not all elements of writing are expressed when reciting what someone has written. Dialect differences are usually not reflected in writing. The same word, pronounced differently, will generally be spelled the same way. Conversely, no written word pronounces itself -- hence pronunciations vary according to the reader. The meanings of words, while to some degree shared, are never perfectly shared. No word, spoken or written, defines itself. Whatever meanings a speaker or writer intends, are at the mercy of the understandings of the listener or reader. In English and most other languages that use alphabetic scripts, there are "case" options -- meaning choices between "big" (capital) and "small" (non-capital) letters. "Big" letters are also called "upper case", and "small" letters are called "lower case" -- because printers customarily sort type for big letters in the upper part of a case of type, and type for small letters in the lower part. Every writing system with case options, however, has it own conventions regarding how case is used. In English, the first word of a sentence is usually capitalized, but there are exceptions. "i" used as a personal pronoun is usually capitalized "I", but again there may be exceptions. The first letters of nouns considered "proper" -- place names, personal names, the names of organizations and official titles -- are usually capitalized. Words invested with sacred or other special meanings may be capitalized -- as were "Faith" or "Charity" or even "Virginity" in some Victorian writing, and in a few religious tracts even today. "god" creates problems for religious people -- from those who believe in a pantheon of gods and impute various traits to "the gods that be", to monotheists who believe in a single, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent "God". But when speaking English, there is no distinction between "god" and "Gods". "do you believe in god? and "Do you believe in God?" are linguistically the same. Yet most writers and editors will write "Do you believe in God?" Even an atheist might refrain from writing "I don't believe in god." The point is that "case" is 100 percent in the head. Big/small letter conventions have absolutely zero linguistic significance -- remembering, again, that writing is not language. Language pleases or assaults the ears. Writing indulges or insults the eyes. People who feel good reading "Black and white" in reference to putative races will balk or frown at "Black and White" and "black and white", and will cringe at "black and White". But case is not linguistic. "b/w" and "B/w" and "b/W" and "B/W" are the same when recited. The ear cannot hear case. Case distinctions -- whether "i" or "I" or "god" or "God" -- or even "asia" and "Asian" -- are inventions of one or another spelling ideology. Why, then, have not a few writers and editors -- especially in the United States -- adopted the practice of writing "Black" while writing "white"? What are the intentions of such a distinction? And what are the objections? 1990-03Lynn Norment on who's Black or notRacial mixture poses threat for "Black community"Lynn Norment The March 1990 issue of Ebony carried a 4-page cover story titled "Who's Black And Who's Not?" by Lynn Norment. At time, she was one of the magazine's three staff editors. Later she became a managing editor. Norment's article is typographically the most conspiciously billed cover story -- not withstanding the story on cover girl actress Robbin Givens. "The New Ethnicity" alludes to people of mixed-race, specifically black-white descent, who choose not identify as either of the two putative races. Norment takes the position that all such people should identify as "Black" and not "White" -- she capitalizes both races. Putatively mixed people have the choice of identifying as both black and white, black but not white, white but not black, or neither black nor white. They also also have the choice of identifying as biracial or multiracial -- or even raceless, i.e., just human. If pushed to racially classify themselves, they also have the option of saying "Whatever I am, or think I am, is none of your business." Norment examines the question of "Who's Black And Who's Not" by looking at how celebrities and others of mixed racial descent identify. She laments that some such celebrities are quick to avow that they are not "Black" but slow to avow that they are not "White". The story editorially argues that people with both "Black" and "White" ancestors should not only identify as "Black", but should feel obliged recognize that they are members of a "Black" community that shares a "Black" culture. As mixed marriages increase, mixed offpsring increase. And every mixed person who chooses not to check the "Black" box on a census or other race and/or ethnicity survey means one less "Black" person -- hence fewer "Blacks" in companies and schools, or on committes and boards, that use racial racial statistics to determine ratios of representation in employment, admissions, or membership. 2020-06-18Kwame Anthony Appiah "White" as well as "Black"To signify that whiteness is not the invisible normKwame Anthony Appiah In this article, Kwame Anthony Appiah, a British-American philosopher and professor of philosophy and law at New York University, reviews all manner of opinion about whether or not to capitalize words for putative races. The manner in which he weaves different opinions together creates the impresson that racialist ideology lurks behind all arguments, which makes them arbitrary. The illustration at the start of the article shows an example of editorial markup -- three lines under a lowercase letter -- for changing "black" to "Black". The subhead under the title, however, advocates that -- whatever case is used to write the names of putative races -- racial labels should be written in the same case. Appiah's concluding graph begins like this. Reasoned arguments about linguistic usages must always reckon with the fact that language is a set of conventions, to be determined by the consensus of language users. (That's why I've been content here to comply with the punctuating conventions of this publication.) There's no objectively correct answer to the question of whether to capitalize black and white in advance of such a consensus. Appiah's usage of "black and white" is contrary to the "Black and white" usage that one finds in practically all articles that appear in The Atlantic. As for puncutation -- writers not infrequently find themselves at odds with editorial changes of their punctuation. And discussions between editors and writers over a single comma can get heated. In such arguments, house style does not necessarily have the upper hand. In publications edited by people who strongly favor one or another ideological standard for choice and case of racial labels, however, writers are under enormous pressure to either submit, or have their submissions declined. 2020-06-30Shirley Carswell declares capitalized "Black" a win"Who "gets it" versus who has the authority to "make the call"Shirley Carswell Carswell's article, classified as "Opinion", begins with this anecdote (The Washington Post, 30 June 2020). Every semester at least a few of my journalism students at Howard University objected when I told them the letter "b" should be lowercase in their news articles about black people. Carswell is essentially confessing her willingness to accept the status quo rather than advocate for change. The authority of stylebooks -- or rather of editors who insist on conforming to the dictates one or another stylebook, or a house style substitute -- intimidates most writers, who will similar say "it's not my call." However, Carswell continues, "On June 19, AP became the latest media organization to change its policy to capitalize "Black" when the word is used in "a racial, ethnic or cultural context." After listing a number of newspapers that jumped on the "Black" rather than "black" bandwagon, Carswell writes that "there is not uniformity among black Americans about black vs. Black" (ibid). Sensibilities also vary among audiences. Black-focused publications such as Ebony magazine, the Afro-American Newspapers and others have long rendered "Black" with a capital "B." But there is not uniformity among black Americans about black vs. Black. Some argue that if black is capitalized as a racial identifier, then brown must also be capitalized. The same treatment would extend to white, which, problematically, is a style often used by white supremacist groups. Others see capitalizing black as a change that legitimizes perceived racial differences at a time when the focus should be tearing down race constructs created to elevate those of European descent over those they enslaved. Still others dismiss the debate as a distraction from more important issues such as economic inequality and criminal justice reform. 2023-07-29The Washington Post jumps on the "Black" bandwagonBut also declares equal treatment of "Whites" as a discrete cultureWashPostPR Note that Carswell's 30 June 2020 article in The Washington Post states that "black Americans" -- not "Black Americans" -- did not have unform views of the "black vs. Black" issue. Assuming that she personally supported the "Black" faction, then it appears that the "black" was not her call. At the time her article was published, The Washington Post was in fact following a lower-case "b" standard. A month later, however, the newspaper ran a PR piece announcing its decision to adopt the upper-case "B" standard. The article also disclosed that upper-case "White" would be similarly be used as a "racial or ethnic identifier" or "racial descriptor" -- because "Whites" also represent a "distinct cultural identity" (The Washington Post (29 July 2020). This style change [from "black" to "Black"] also prompts the question of how America's largest racial community should be identified. Stories involving race show that White also represents a distinct cultural identity in the United States. The Washington Post article, like all endorsements of upper case for putative "races" or "ethnicities", resorts to the articles of its kind, adoptsresorts to the same sort of ""community" 2023-05-12Chimamanda Adichie prefers "White" as well as "Black"To signify that whiteness is not the invisible normChimamanda Adichie Americanah, Chimamand Ngozi Adichie's 3rd novel, is an extremely readable story about a young Nigerian woman who comes to American and discovers what it's like to be an African in America. Ifemelu, the protagonist, accompany's a friend, Ginika, to a clothing store where there are two thin-armed sales clerks in all black. Ine was "chocolate-skinned" and her was was a "long black weave highlighted with auburn". The other was "white" and her "inky hair" was "floating behind her" as she came up to help them. Ginika selects a dress and takes it to the blonde cashier, who asks which salesperson helped them, to credit her for the sale so she gets the commission. Ginika didn't get her name. "Was it the one with long hair?" the cashier asks. Both had long hair. "The one with dark hair?" Both had dark hair. Never mind, the cashier says, she'll ask them when they come out from the back where they were busy in the fitting rooms. Outside the store, Ifemelu asks why the cashier didn't simply ask "Was it the black girl or the white girl?" Ginika explains, "Because this is America. You're supposed to pretend that you don't notice certain things." (Page 126-127). In an earlier episode, Ginika -- a friend from Nigeria who came to America before Ifemelu -- tells her that, in America, "half-caste" is a bad word, hence she began to call herself bi-racial. (Pages 123-124) Ifemelu, intrigued by race issues in America, writes an anonymous blog called Raceteenth or Various Observations About American Blacks (Those Formerly Known as Negroes) by a Non-American Black. Ifemelu writes of "blacks" and "whites" -- as does her creator Adichie, except when writing for publications that prefer "Blacks" and "whites". In an article from the May 2023 issue of The Atlantic, in which she revisits Americanah a decade after its release, she writes this paragraph, using "Black" and "White" -- and qualifies her use of "White" for readers of The Atlantic, who are accustomed to the magazines (poltiically correct) "Black" and "white" editorial policy. Shortly after the Black American George Floyd was murdered by a White police officer, a woman told me she had just read Americanah. "You are a prophet; you foresaw this," she said, as if my novel were preparation for the social and cultural reckoning about Blackness that began as a result of Floyd's murder. And yet, even though mainstream women's magazines now include braids in general roundups of style choices, the shift is hardly seismic. The Black experience is not yet so ordinary that it becomes, as the White experience has been for centuries in America, invisible, and therefore the norm. (I capitalize White in my writing, like Black, because to lowercase it perpetuates this idea of whiteness as the invisible norm.) |