RSS

Neanderthal as sprinters?

31 Jan
This is what some researchers from Moscow State University are proposing, according to Russia-InfoCenter. Neanderthals would have been actually specialist sprinters and that was what (allegedly) allowed them to hunt with heavy spears:

The ancient hunter could have crawled towards an animal as close as possible, and then had run as fast as he could, throwing a javelin, while running. However, a heavy spear is much more effective at small distances, than a light javelin. Calculations show that Neanderthal men had been able to cover 15-20 meters within 1-2 seconds, which is enough for a unexpected and successful attack. This means that Homo neanderthalensis were fast and accurate hunters, not clumsy snails as some may think.

Other details of their physiognomy are that they surely preferred to squat above sitting, because they lacked an intermediate layer of fat and muscle on their butts. They also got easily tired of long term standing, the researchers suggest.

Originally from Stone Pages’ Archaeo News.

Advertisements
 
82 Comments

Posted by on January 31, 2011 in human evolution, Middle Paleolithic, Neanderthal

 

82 responses to “Neanderthal as sprinters?

  1. Andrew Oh-Willeke

    January 31, 2011 at 6:07 pm

    Plausible. Most other top of food chain hunters are good sprinters. Neanderthals didn't have bows and arrows, and it isn't even clear that Neanderthals had an atlatl, so they'd have had to have gotten pretty close.

     
  2. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 12:54 am

    Hi Maju! I think this may be interesting to you, it's about North Africa and the origins of modern humans; I found it very interesting, because these archaic skulls resemble a lot the first modern Europeans, and also people from Skhul/Qafzeh:http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/North+Africa+(+Aterian)+possible+source+of+Eurasian+modern+humans–Balter+Science+news.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1058837-p173624756

     
  3. eurologist

    February 1, 2011 at 4:03 am

    Maria,That is the same paper I referred to in the "Coastal Route" thread. Nice short review, isn't it?As to the squatting, I believe to this date there are regional differences, which may also have anatomical reasons. For example, it seems to me that some Asians and Native Americans – particularly from South America – still prefer squatting.

     
  4. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 9:49 am

    Eurologist: it's not a paper but a press article. I wouldn't mind having the paper's reference, if it exists (sometimes news go ahead of papers). Re. squatting, there's a cultural element to it and also has some advantages: hygiene (less contact with the ground), quicker repositioning… What the authors say is not that Neanderthals would prefer squatting because of cultural reasons but that they lacked a butt proper and therefore they probably preferred squatting as sitting would be not comfortable.

     
  5. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 10:01 am

    ML: thanks for the link. I really do not think that North Africa was so important in the OoA and rather converge with Trinkaus in the "cul-de-sac" model. However I would say that "Aterians" were fully modern (H. sapiens, regardless of molar size) and that some lineages carried maybe upon the Aterian colonization are still today relevant among North Africans and may have permeated into Europe to some extent as well: L2a1j, L3k, L3d1c and L3b1b. However they are all 8-12 transitions under L3, what means that they are quite comparable to U6 and hence probably an arrival in the context of the recolonization from (partly) Eurasia c. 40 Ka. Anyhow the characteristic back-tipped point of Aterian somehow survived through all demic and cultural changes.

     
  6. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 10:03 am

    Sorry, Eurologist, I just realized your post was adressed to Maria Lluisa and the paper is a different one. :/

     
  7. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    Eurologist:"That is the same paper I referred to in the "Coastal Route" thread. Nice short review, isn't it?"I think it's not. This one is called "Was North Africa the launch pad for modern human migrations?" but it's not a research article I think.Maju: "However I would say that "Aterians" were fully modern (H. sapiens, regardless of molar size) and that some lineages carried maybe upon the Aterian colonization are still today relevant among North Africans and may have permeated into Europe to some extent as well: L2a1j, L3k, L3d1c and L3b1b. However they are all 8-12 transitions under L3, what means that they are quite comparable to U6 and hence probably an arrival in the context of the recolonization from (partly) Eurasia c. 40 Ka. "They don't seem fully modern to me, or at least modern humans are quite different from them. Modern humans don't have such a pronounced supraorbital torus, for example. As for the teeth, I read they bear some similarity with those of neanderthals, but I'm not sure, because sometimes it's quite difficult to trace a line between neanderthals and other closely related hominids, including H. sapiens.Anyway, mousterian sites have been found in North Africa (mostly in Morocco) and they appear to be more ancient than the Aterian ones. Giving the proximity to the Iberian peninsula and Europe where neanderthals lived, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of some cultural and/or genetic exchange, although rather limited. The Aterians don't resemble modern Europeans at all. For example, their teeth are much bigger. As for the mtDNA lineages, it's unknown. North Africa is a very diverse region. Many North Africans resemble Asians, others Europeans, and others, sub-saharan Africans. More research is needed to clarify what's the % of Aterian ancestry, if they didn't go extinct. The author of that "study" thinks it's possible they migrated to East or South.

     
  8. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    I found this blog (in Spanish) talking about ancient hominid contacts in North Africa and Europe.http://afroiberia.blogspot.com/2010/02/murcia-neandertal-esteta-o-ham.htmlThe author(s) of this post think it's possible that archaic modern humans like Jebel Irhoud were living in the Iberian peninsula, rather neanderthals. He/she thinks there's no hard evidence at all to think neanderthals were living in Murcia by 50-60Ka, because only a few skeletons have been found, and many of them show some modern human affinities (like those of Palomas) and similar cultures also (like the painted shells), but for example in el Sidrón we know that by 50Ka there were only neanderhals living in the region, and that has been proved by mtDNA.

     
  9. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    If the molars are like those of Pestera cu Oase, then they are not like Neanderthals but like Australopitehcus and maybe H. erectus.If the matter is the browridge, there are many moderns who have that feature, for instance Charles Darwin. It is in fact quite common depending on which population (for instance in Europe, I'd say it's more common towards the North). Here there's a photo and the skull looks very modern, more than Skhul 5, I'd say. "Anyway, mousterian sites have been found in North Africa (mostly in Morocco) and they appear to be more ancient than the Aterian ones".Yes. This is an important point. Did Jebel Irhoud (and co.) learn Mousterian from Neanderthals. If so, how does this correlate with Mousterian among H. sapiens in Palestine. Or did Jebel Irhoud (or relatives) taught Mousterian to Neanderthals?The hypothesis by Afroiberia is interesting indeed and I have already suggested at some moment a related idea (that the Neanderthals of Las Palomas borrowed the decorative ideas from North African H. sapiens – but without meaningful genetic flow).

     
  10. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    "Here there's a photo and the skull looks very modern, more than Skhul 5, I'd say. "If the skull looks so modern, then why was it classified as a neanderthal until recently? There are still some pages which classify J.I as H. neanderthalensis:https://www.msu.edu/~heslipst/contents/ANP440/neanderthalensis.htmI'm not saying the people from J.I are neanderthal, but if archaeologists had some problems with J.I's classification it's because the skull is not fully modern. I guess no archaeologists would ever classify mine or yours skulls as H. neanderthalensis."Yes. This is an important point. Did Jebel Irhoud (and co.) learn Mousterian from Neanderthals. If so, how does this correlate with Mousterian among H. sapiens in Palestine."I'm not sure if neanderthals crossed the sea, but the fact that very few sites with mousterian tools have been discovered in North Africa, and these ones are geografically very close to the strait give points to some kind of acculturation."Or did Jebel Irhoud (or relatives) taught Mousterian to Neanderthals?"I think it's quite unlikely if we accept J.I were more akin to H. sapiens. Mousterian appears to be very related to neanderthals and widespread among Europe and Asia. J.I people lived in North Africa, there's no evidence they once migrated to Europe, and first modern humans into Europe theorically made Aurignacian and not Mousterian.

     
  11. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    "The hypothesis by Afroiberia is interesting indeed and I have already suggested at some moment a related idea (that the Neanderthals of Las Palomas borrowed the decorative ideas from North African H. sapiens – but without meaningful genetic flow)."Yes, but we should not forget the dates. J.I are 160Ka old, and neanderthals from Las Palomas and their decorative ideas are less than 50Ka old. Does archaeology support continuous presence of people living in North Africa since the last 160.000 years?

     
  12. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 6:19 pm

    It's very simple: Shanidar is Neanderthal, Qahfez 5 is not Neanderthal at all: you can quickly identify the differences, specially in profile shoots. For the same reason Skhul 5 is not Neanderthal: he/she has a too high vault and a too "brachicephalic" head (front to back length is short).However in that list the profile shot of Jebel Irhoud has a quite marked dolicocpehaly. This is typical from African H. sapiens, so inconclusive (yet probably the why of the misclassification) but then you see that JI has a much more vertical forehead, lesser prognathism and even the typical "Caucasoid" pear-like nose-hole (Neanderthals had "Negroid"-like round nose-holes). JI could never be a true Neanderthal (though arguing for hybridization to some extent is always possible: I'm hybrid and you wound not notice, right?)That site is pretty bad anyhow, look at what they call "H. sapiens": Dali, Jinniushan, Ngandong (all H. erectus), Hathnora (doubtful but not H. sapiens in any case because forehead is too low and sloped), LH18 (H. rhodesiensis?, similar to Hathnora: large cranial capacity but low forehead), Atapuerca 5 (H. heidelbergensis, "Miguelón"), Steinheim and Swanscombe (H. heidelbergensis or neanderthalensis).

     
  13. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    In regards to Mousterian in North Africa, it may be indeed a case of acculturation by H. neanderthalensis. My question was if the Mousterian of Palestine may be derived from that of North Africa, after all the Palestinian early humankind was clearly related by other elements to North Africa and it is possible that they did not meet any Neanderthals in West Asia from which to learn Mousterian tech anyhow. "Yes, but we should not forget the dates. J.I are 160Ka old, and neanderthals from Las Palomas and their decorative ideas are less than 50Ka old. Does archaeology support continuous presence of people living in North Africa since the last 160.000 years?"That's what Aterian new chronology supports: continuity since at least 145 Ka (I think), what is almost the age of JI (160 Ka). Anyhow, I was not thinking in JI but in Aterian use of shells and ochre, no doubt related to that of Palestine and South Africa (and much older than that of Murcia). What some people are suggesting anyhow is that maybe our 2.4% Neanderthal is actually a legacy of early admixture in North Africa. This can only be tested by checking Neanderthal admixture levels in North Africans, Sahelians and Arabian. Something to be done, though it's very possible that it happens to be uninformative anyhow because of extreme dilution or otherwise non-visibility.

     
  14. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 7:47 pm

    "For the same reason Skhul 5 is not Neanderthal: he/she has a too high vault and a too "brachicephalic" head (front to back length is short)."I agree. I can distingish easily when a skull is from a modern human or from an European neandertal. However, near-easterner neanderthals are sometimes very difficult to classify. Amud 1, although he is a neanderthal, he has more "gracile" traits. Some of these Skhul/Qafzeh have changed of species many times since they were discovered. "JI could never be a true Neanderthal (though arguing for hybridization to some extent is always possible: I'm hybrid and you wound not notice, right?)"Not all neanderthals look the same, but yes, I agree J.I doesn't look like a typical European neanderthal. You're a bit mixed, but only 2-3% and this can't be appreciated in your looks, that's pretty low; to make a comparison, people with an 1/16 black ancestor can look 100% white, even people with 1/8 could pass as a typical European, but we're discussing if the population from J.I had an important % of neanderthal ancestry (more than 20%). If it was less than 10% it can't be detected looking at their skulls."That site is pretty bad anyhow, look at what they call "H. sapiens": Dali, Jinniushan, Ngandong (all H. erectus), Hathnora (doubtful but not H. sapiens in any case because forehead is too low and sloped), LH18 (H. rhodesiensis?, similar to Hathnora: large cranial capacity but low forehead), Atapuerca 5 (H. heidelbergensis, "Miguelón"), Steinheim and Swanscombe (H. heidelbergensis or neanderthalensis)."Yes I agree, it's not a good site, but anyhow some fossil classifications have changed a lot in the past 50 years, mostly because they show a mixture of modern and archaic traits, like the Zhiredong mandible.

     
  15. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    "In regards to Mousterian in North Africa, it may be indeed a case of acculturation by H. neanderthalensis. My question was if the Mousterian of Palestine may be derived from that of North Africa, after all the Palestinian early humankind was clearly related by other elements to North Africa and it is possible that they did not meet any Neanderthals in West Asia from which to learn Mousterian tech anyhow."That's a very interesting possibility. If neanderthals only arrived in the Near East by 60Ka, then these modern humans perhaps learned mousterian from another site."What some people are suggesting anyhow is that maybe our 2.4% Neanderthal is actually a legacy of early admixture in North Africa. This can only be tested by checking Neanderthal admixture levels in North Africans, Sahelians and Arabian. Something to be done, though it's very possible that it happens to be uninformative anyhow because of extreme dilution or otherwise non-visibility."Yes, that's interesting, and the authors never said the admixture happened in the near East, but people are sure that was the place because theorically neanderthals were living there when the ancestors of all Eurasians left Africa. Of course, some neanderthals could have been living in North Africa, but since then, and how many? North Africa hasn't been sampled, it's a very forgotten region, archaeologically and genetically speaking. Some north Africans have weird looks, and I'm not sure if their origins have been clarified yet, because in most genetic studies the authors only take a sample of "mozabytes". Anyway, if there's any difference, it must be very low and pretty diffused, because it didn't affect Europeans nor sub-saharan Africans.

     
  16. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    "… but we're discussing if the population from J.I had an important % of neanderthal ancestry (more than 20%)".For me not – at least it's not apparent enough. Let's not confuse mere archaic features with Neanderthal-specific features. I do not see anything clearly Neanderthaloid in JI but of course genetics may one day say the opposite.

     
  17. Maju

    February 1, 2011 at 9:05 pm

    "North Africa hasn't been sampled, it's a very forgotten region, archaeologically and genetically speaking".True. A million people just marched in Egypt protesting against this discrimination… ;)Seriously: true. "Some north Africans have weird looks, and I'm not sure if their origins have been clarified yet, because in most genetic studies the authors only take a sample of "mozabytes"".That's true also. I think that there is an old layer in North Africans that relates to very old settlers from Africa and West Asia, which does not fit well our racial stereotypes (sometimes is said to be "Khoisanid", other times "Ethiopid", others "Veddoid" maybe). Additionally there are more recent layers, mostly from Eurasia.

     
  18. Maria Lluïsa

    February 1, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    "That's true also. I think that there is an old layer in North Africans that relates to very old settlers from Africa and West Asia, which does not fit well our racial stereotypes (sometimes is said to be "Khoisanid", other times "Ethiopid", others "Veddoid" maybe). Additionally there are more recent layers, mostly from Eurasia."See this man, for example. He's the son of one moroccan emperor:http://www.canalpatrimonio.com/imagftp/im153473king-mohammed-iv.jpgHe doesn't look Caucasian nor African, and reminds me of an East Asian person.Apparently there are some Asian-looking (others say Khoisanid) in North Africa, this has been discussed in this forum, but apparently no one knows about their origins:http://www.anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?t=8312Unfortunately there aren't enough (if any) studies to clarify why is northern Africa so diverse, and why some of these persons look khoisanid or Asian, if Khoisans and Asians live far apart from them.

     
  19. Maju

    February 2, 2011 at 12:31 am

    His father Hassan II was even more "Khoisanid". However it's a type you find even in Andalusia occasionally. I had this debate at Anthroplanet some months ago.

     
  20. Maria Lluïsa

    February 2, 2011 at 1:44 am

    "His father Hassan II was even more "Khoisanid". However it's a type you find even in Andalusia occasionally."I've seen many of these faces in Catalonia, although the typical European is more common here. Most Andalusians I've seen don't look khoisanid, but like "normal" southern europeans; I don't know how common are these traits in Europe, it's a very interesting discussion, but I have the impression our knowledge is rather limited.Many would think these people arrived to Europe due to Arabs, but these people look very different from Arabs to me. In another post you told me they could have arrived during the Roman empire. It's an interesting possibility, but if they're relative common in Iberia, there may be other explanations.

     
  21. terryt

    February 2, 2011 at 1:54 am

    "some fossil classifications have changed a lot in the past 50 years, mostly because they show a mixture of modern and archaic traits" Which suggests to me that the transition from archaic to modern was far from simple.

     
  22. Maju

    February 2, 2011 at 7:08 am

    @ML: I did not mean to claim that there were many migrations under the Roman Empire, you probably got me wrong in that. However I cannot judge your "Catalan Khoisanid" type without first looking at some photos because I'm not even sure what you're talking about. I have never seen them and I'm relatively familiar with Catalan faces. In general Catalans are between Basque, Mediterranean (Iberian and Italian mostly) and Continental European. They are particularly akin to Occitans (or vice versa).

     
  23. Maju

    February 2, 2011 at 7:13 am

    @Terry: "archaic" and "modern" are arbitrary words. They can just mean tendencies. However, in the context of your comment, "archaic" means other species and it also means that paleoanthropologists have been very confused on what is H. sapiens and what is something else. But careful, non-ideological, classification is almost always possible, specially when most of the skull has been preserved. When you have people saying that Dali is "sapiens" is when the confusion begins. But I'm not interested in that mud-throwing strategy: I'm interested in throwing light and only that.

     
  24. terryt

    February 3, 2011 at 6:20 am

    "it also means that paleoanthropologists have been very confused on what is H. sapiens and what is something else". Exactly. There are many individuals that are difficult to classify as being one or the other. The transition was not sudden. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to draw a definite line between whatever you care to call the various 'archaic' species and whatever you care to call 'modern'.

     
  25. Maju

    February 3, 2011 at 10:55 am

    But also a lot of classifications as "H. sapiens" were made in a conceptual context where H. sapiens was a much wider category than modernly, including Neanderthals (then excluded in this particular site) and others (kept). It's not really so difficult in most cases. Anyone looking at Dali skull knows immediately that is not an anatomically modern human: many would even think it is a non-human ape or some kind of weird falsification of the kind you find in sensationalist sites sometimes. So the classification of Dali and the other "advanced" Oriental H. erectus really beats me. Also I prefer not to use the terms "archaic" and "modern" but call each species by its own scientific name (what is possible in most particular cases with little or no doubt). I think that you, Terry, are just trying to mud the waters so you can go on with your hidden multirregionalist agenda. You often make a point of not being clear about such things, for instance when you claim that "humans" were in Altai since the MP… while never really addressing what category of "humans" we can accept for that time frame. For me that is playing dirty and I just do not like playing dirty: it's so Indoeuropean! 😦

     
  26. Ken

    February 3, 2011 at 1:42 pm

    Nonsense, even if the animals did not hear or smell the hunters approach. The final rush would immediately startle the prey into fligh., No human could cover 15-20 meters fast enough to catch a animal stationary (if he could catch it at al, which I doubt). It would certainly be moving away from the hunter and so the spear strike would have very little actual velocity.Also Neanderthals lived in woodland so they could not charge in a straight line for 20M because of trees ect. What they did was lurk around the game trails and wait for the prey animals to walk into a prepared ambush then pop up to surround them.

     
  27. Maju

    February 3, 2011 at 2:13 pm

    "Neanderthals lived in woodland"…That's at least partly incorrect. The habitat of Neanderthals was the same as that of Paleolithic H. sapiens, which was diverse but largely steppary anyhow. As for the rest, I would certainly agree in principle that solo hunting looks like making little sense, yet the Hadza do it often, depending on season and such. However they use poisoned arrows, which is a much more efficient way of hunting than just spearing down the prey. In any case, I understand that if they claim that Neanderthals had good sprinting muscles they probably did and therefore they probably used them often. Hunting looks like a good reason for that, even if it may have been done in small groups rather than solo.

     
  28. Maria Lluïsa

    February 4, 2011 at 1:00 am

    "However I cannot judge your "Catalan Khoisanid" type without first looking at some photos because I'm not even sure what you're talking about. I have never seen them and I'm relatively familiar with Catalan faces. In general Catalans are between Basque, Mediterranean (Iberian and Italian mostly) and Continental European. They are particularly akin to Occitans (or vice versa)."Catalan actors/actresses:http://encuentrosdigitales.rtve.es/2010/p/470_big.jpghttp://www.tv3.cat/multimedia/jpg/7/9/1191845289197.jpghttp://www.tv3.cat/multimedia/jpg/6/8/1258719008786.jpghttp://www.ventdelpla.cat/multimedia/jpg/1/6/1268912183261.jpgI'm not saying there are "khoisanid Catalans", nor that Catalans don't resemble their neighbours, I'm just saying there are people here, where I live, that don't look Caucasian nor white, and it seems they're not so uncommon among the Catalan population. I can't say about Occitans or Basques, because I'm not familiar with them. I suppose there might be also some "khoisanids" among them, although Occitans for example can vary a lot in looks, because Occitania includes a very large region from southern France, which is anything but homogeneous. These actors/actresses are just "light" examples. I've seen people who look anything but white, but that isn't the topic of this thread, which is about neanderthal sprinters; I'm telling this to you because I'm curious about north Africans and why genetics apparently can't explain all we see.

     
  29. Maju

    February 4, 2011 at 1:22 am

    "I'm not saying there are "khoisanid Catalans""…You better don't: they are typical South European Caucasoids. The most no. 2 could have a more marked Mediterranean vibe (but rather "Frenchy" than "Moorish" IMO). The only trait in common I can see among them is a rather broad nose (???) but they are well within the Iberian ranges in everything and even in some cases slanting towards France. "I'm just saying there are people here, where I live, that don't look Caucasian nor white"…If these are your examples, you certainly have a very narrow concept of Caucasoid ("Caucasian" means inhabitant of the Caucasus region, "Caucasoid" means "Caucasian-like" and therefore West Eurasian physiognomically and is the correct term to use). "… but that isn't the topic of this thread, which is about neanderthal sprinters; I'm telling this to you because I'm curious about north Africans and why genetics apparently can't explain all we see".Well, I do not mind going offtopic a bit if the matter is interesting but I really think that your perception of what fits within European typology seems extremely narrow. All these people, compared around the World, can only fit in subsets that are European (or at best circum-European, such as West Asia, which is very similar in looks, specially the northern part, or North Africa maybe). No. 4 reminds me to Hillary Clinton, go figure! While no. 1 is like that stupid Spanish famous woman… Obregón, and no. 2 is very similar to Africa Baeta (a Basque TV anchor) and also a late friend of my sister who killed herself years ago. Admittedly both have narrower noses but that's all.

     
  30. Maria Lluïsa

    February 4, 2011 at 2:29 am

    "You better don't: they are typical South European Caucasoids. The most no. 2 could have a more marked Mediterranean vibe (but rather "Frenchy" than "Moorish" IMO). The only trait in common I can see among them is a rather broad nose (???) but they are well within the Iberian ranges in everything and even in some cases slanting towards France. "Ok, maybe the examples aren't too representative, because it's just only 4 photos and they're have nothing in common at all… but for example, one of my neighbours looks Asian: slanted eyes, pale-yellowish skin, very dark hair… another neighbour looks I don't know what, but he has a flat and broad nose, slanted eyes, brown-yellow skin, very dark hair and a weird head shape. Another neighbour has brown skin, flat nose, and black hair. Maybe it's just me, but these people don't look "normal". Even my mother and other families, when spoken about these persons, recognize they're "dark" and/or from another race, even though they are 100% Catalan. I'll try to get photos from them, even though that's nearly impossible, because I'm not lying when I say they don't look like the average southern European. Of course, I could be wrong, but when you told me their description reminded you of khoisanids and North Africans, I found that, efectively, they're somewhat akin to these peoples, and giving the fact that North Africa it's geographically and genetically quite close… "Well, I do not mind going offtopic a bit if the matter is interesting but I really think that your perception of what fits within European typology seems extremely narrow. All these people, compared around the World, can only fit in subsets that are European (or at best circum-European, such as West Asia, which is very similar in looks, specially the northern part, or North Africa maybe). "Maybe. That could be because most Europeans look quite different… but again, that's my impression."No. 4 reminds me to Hillary Clinton, go figure! While no. 1 is like that stupid Spanish famous woman… Obregón, and no. 2 is very similar to Africa Baeta (a Basque TV anchor) and also a late friend of my sister who killed herself years ago. Admittedly both have narrower noses but that's all."Oh my God… that's terrible. I feel sorry for her… Well I remember Obregon's face, I thought that girl from a TV soap opera seems quite dark compared with others and not Caucasoid at all. I thought typical Caucasoids looked different, but I recognize I'm not an expert.

     
  31. Maju

    February 4, 2011 at 1:41 pm

    I think what you mean is people with more markedly Transmediterranean phenotypes, who may resemble some "more extreme" North Africans or East Mediterraneans. I can't think of anything else. My mother always says that my uncle in law (from Avila, who actually resembles Adolfo Suárez somewhat) must have "Filipino" blood and that this is apparent in some of my cousins. But the one who has "chinky" eyes looks like Brad Pitt, who also has "chinky" eyes but is archetypically Caucasoid at the same time. The other "exotic" looking cousin is quite dark ("brown") in pigmentation and also has very dark ("bluish black" as in contrast to my "brownish black") hair (straight). She could really pass as admixed Brazilian for example but I think that all her genetic components are in fact Mediterranean. A problem is that the huge diversity of Mediterranean phenotypes has not been researched. In part because they are very mixed, not forming clear clusters, at least not in Europe. And in part because phenotype obsessed scholars have almost only be Northern Europeans with a Nordic obsession, with their peculiar biased pair of glasses.

     
  32. Maria Lluïsa

    February 4, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    "I think what you mean is people with more markedly Transmediterranean phenotypes, who may resemble some "more extreme" North Africans or East Mediterraneans. I can't think of anything else. "Yes, maybe. Well, in my opinion, sometimes East Asians can look more European than them, that's why I don't think they're just weird caucasians, and also because I've seen some familiar faces among North Africans."My mother always says that my uncle in law (from Avila, who actually resembles Adolfo Suárez somewhat) must have "Filipino" blood and that this is apparent in some of my cousins. But the one who has "chinky" eyes looks like Brad Pitt, who also has "chinky" eyes but is archetypically Caucasoid at the same time. The other "exotic" looking cousin is quite dark ("brown") in pigmentation and also has very dark ("bluish black" as in contrast to my "brownish black") hair (straight). She could really pass as admixed Brazilian for example but I think that all her genetic components are in fact Mediterranean. "It may be that "mediterranean" people really come from many different and unrelated groups, yes, I think that's the most likely explanation. "A problem is that the huge diversity of Mediterranean phenotypes has not been researched. In part because they are very mixed, not forming clear clusters, at least not in Europe. And in part because phenotype obsessed scholars have almost only be Northern Europeans with a Nordic obsession, with their peculiar biased pair of glasses."Yes, genetically it has been shown that europeans are a very homogeneous population, which doesn't convince me, at least in some cases. If these weird mediterraneans can pass as "normal" Europeans I don't see any reason to not include Japanese people, native americans and indians as well under the "caucasian" category.

     
  33. Maju

    February 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    "If these weird mediterraneans can pass as "normal" Europeans I don't see any reason to not include Japanese people, native americans and indians as well under the "caucasian" category".Well, please show me some photos because Japanese and other East Asians are almost invariably very distant in genetics and aspect from Europeans/Caucasoids. Unless you are thinking in less important traits like skin color.

     
  34. Maria Lluïsa

    February 4, 2011 at 6:02 pm

    "Well, please show me some photos because Japanese and other East Asians are almost invariably very distant in genetics and aspect from Europeans/Caucasoids. Unless you are thinking in less important traits like skin color."Yao Ming (Chinese basketball player): http://www.nba.com/media/allstar2006/yao_300_051215.jpghttp://www.aropasado.com/images/xurris/yaomingyeli.jpghttp://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/multimedia/photo_gallery/0901/allstar09.westjerseys/images/yao_jersey.jpgI found his face very familiar, except perhaps for the eyes.Khoisan/Bushmen:http://www.tourismnorthwest.co.za/mafikeng/images/khoisan.jpghttp://www.africanholocaust.net/img%20of%20people/khoisan-man-south-africa.pnghttp://www.nma.gov.au/shared/libraries/images/temporary_exhibitions/extremes/extremes_large/africa/a_khoisan_woman_northern_cape_south_africa/files/6399/nma.img-ex20042116-263-vi-vs1.jpgExcept perhaps for their hair and skin color, some of them look very akin the Caucasians -others don't.Japanese singers:http://images.smh.com.au/2009/11/10/848802/noriko420-420×0.jpghttp://shrani.si/f/1D/11Z/453wDOBK/1/wadaayaka2625-2.jpghttp://www.studentsoftheworld.info/sites/musique/img/2263_198463410_small.jpghttp://kojaproductions.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/mika_kjp.jpghttp://www.chinadaily.com.cn/showbiz/images/attachement/jpg/site1/20090613/0023ae606f170b9d8ec911.jpghttp://img207.imageshack.us/i/masaharufukuyama.jpg/http://krnloop.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/lee-dong-gun-jap-single.jpghttp://desertheart.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/hirai_fakin.jpgNative Americans:http://blog.wfuv.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/native-american.jpghttp://ushistoryimages.com/images/sioux-native-americans/fullsize/sioux-native-americans-2.jpghttp://www.archives.gov/research/native-americans/pictures/images/indians-101a.jpghttp://kirbysattler.sattlerartprint.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/nativeamericanart.jpgDo you know that in the past, Hollywood chose southern Europeans to represent native Americans in some old movies?As I said above, I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure most of these people could pass as European if they were born and educated here. I don't find them so "distant", but that's maybe because I'm familiar with weird faces.

     
  35. Maju

    February 4, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    I was asking for photos of exotic looking Iberians/Catalans…. Maybe Nadal, the tennis player? He looks quite exotic looking to me yet his type is absolutely Iberian and hard to find elsewhere. I know that there are Europeans who look vaguely East Asian, I have often discussed a type very common among Basque women (extreme archetype Maddalen Iriarte, former director of EiTB informatives before fascism came back). And obviously there are some East Asians who may look somewhat like West Eurasians, specially after some hairdo or if their nose is large (typical of Japanese) or their epicanthic fold is incomplete. If you ignore pigmentation and hair texture, even some Africans can look "European". That's one of the things of being human: that our in-group variation is much larger (like 90%) than our between-groups variation (10% at most). But still I do not think Jeronimo looks European, sorry.

     
  36. Maria Lluïsa

    February 4, 2011 at 8:16 pm

    Maybe Nadal, the tennis player? He looks quite exotic looking to me yet his type is absolutely Iberian and hard to find elsewhere.Nadal, of course! He looks like a native american to me, it's kinda exotic.http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_tHaumj7GrMA/TAvGPgJq_GI/AAAAAAAAW5A/vIt5MkmiLwA/s1600/rafa-nadal.jpghttp://prensacorazon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/boda-rafa-nadal.jpghttp://goldinero.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/rafael-nadal.jpgSome persons think Carles Puyol looks neanderthal; I don't believe it, but still I think he looks a bit "savage" due to his hair style:http://www.football-wallpapers.com/wallpapers/puyol_2_1024x768.jpghttp://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ef49iGqXiEE/SpP1wet-W4I/AAAAAAAACcQ/Wd–lgdxhU0/s320/carles-puyoljpg.jpghttp://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ebkKjWakuxA/TPF-izYpbCI/AAAAAAAACO4/Ad0pbSfdKCI/s1600/puyol.jpgI had a teacher who looks exactly like the first Japanese woman I posted; even she once told us that when she was a child, people used to call her "the little Chinese girl".Some etarras have exotic faces as well, although this has nothing to do with being an etarra, I suppose:http://llanesnet.blogia.com/upload/etarras.jpghttp://4.bp.blogspot.com/_vb-2nlYieEk/STwFPD5tDsI/AAAAAAAABEI/u6E4ij-bHXM/s400/etarras+neandertales.jpghttp://2.bp.blogspot.com/_oWTMojbwAXg/Rbfpua9vzSI/AAAAAAAAAT0/c35wQkJgclg/s320/otegi–200×300.jpgOtegi can look a bit Asian sometimes. About the Chinese-looking Basques, I have read a comment from an user who read a book written by Eduard Punset. In that book, Eduard aparently explains that some mongoloid (from Asia) population established around the Pyrenees and Ampurdan in Catalonia, and mixed with the natives.I don't know if I should believe it or not, but here's the the link:http://www.hislibris.com/gengis-kan-el-soberano-del-cielo-pamela-sargent/"Estimado Richar. Me llamo Antonio.He leído su comentario sobre este libro de Gengis Kan y quisiera hacerle una pregunta a usted o a quien pueda contestarla.¿Han oida hablar de una incursión de los mongoles en España?Resulta que en el último libro de Eduardo Punset éste afirma que llegaron al Ampurdan y que incluso se cruzaron con la población nativa. De hecho, en medicina se denomina lunar mongoloide a una mancha morada en la espalda, cerca de la cadera, que presentan algunos niños al nacer. Al parecer es una herencia genética que dejaron aquellos mongoles."Muchas gracias.""If you ignore pigmentation and hair texture, even some Africans can look "European". That's one of the things of being human: that our in-group variation is much larger (like 90%) than our between-groups variation (10% at most). "I agree. To me, differences within the same group or race are much larger than between two different "races". But I'm not sure if genetics can detect all this variation, nor if a population which is so diverse like the Mediterranean one can be descended from an unique "Caucasoid-like" population."But still I do not think Jeronimo looks European, sorry."Here's a Mapuche woman who looks Iberian:http://vasta.blogsome.com/uploads/vasta/mujer_mapuche.jpgMapuche girls, but I don't know if they're mixed: http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/jpg/es-mapuche3901.jpg

     
  37. Maju

    February 4, 2011 at 9:02 pm

    Mapuches are quite admixed AFAIK. As I say, Nadal's type is almost impossible to find outside Iberia. He does not look East Asian but he does look "gracile Mediterranean", whatever that means. Puyol looks typical West European. Otegi does have a rather strange face and in this he reminds of his predecessor Jon Idigoras, who had an even more curious strange face. There are many Basques with rare faces (Mr. Spock Ibarretxe for example) but on the other hand, there are many more with super-archetypal West European faces. You are just hallucinating a bit about the diversity of types found in any population. IMO. It is interesting but all I have seen are local types, sign of the high diversity we enjoy.

     
  38. terryt

    February 5, 2011 at 12:45 am

    "You often make a point of not being clear about such things, for instance when you claim that 'humans' were in Altai since the MP… while never really addressing what category of 'humans' we can accept for that time frame". I use the term 'humans' in that case precisely because we are absolutely unsure of what 'species' of human they were. As for the time frame, if H. sapiens was already present in India why on earth should it not also be present in Altai. Or, more likely, south of Altai.

     
  39. Maju

    February 5, 2011 at 1:06 am

    "if H. sapiens was already present in India why on earth should it not also be present in Altai. Or, more likely, south of Altai".For three reasons:1. H. neanderthalensis remains are known from pre-Sapiens Altai period2. Mousterian tech, typically associated to H. neanderthalensis is also found there for the same period3. H. sapiens is not biologically adapted to cold nor even to low solar radiation levels before developing "white skin", so it's easier for our species to colonize warm tropical/subtropical India than freezing subarctic Altai. But what really irks me is that you know all that and just seem to love making me repeat things once and again like some sort of bothersome imp…

     
  40. Maria Lluïsa

    February 5, 2011 at 1:10 am

    "Puyol looks typical West European. "I really don't know how a West European looks like :)"You are just hallucinating a bit about the diversity of types found in any population. IMO. It is interesting but all I have seen are local types, sign of the high diversity we enjoy."I'm not "hallucinating". Looking at the people's face, I found that, as you said, there's an high diversity, specially in the Mediterranean. I think that's really interesting, because we come from many different ancestors, and perhaps our origins haven't been clarified yet.

     
  41. terryt

    February 5, 2011 at 2:00 am

    "H. sapiens is not biologically adapted to cold nor even to low solar radiation levels before developing 'white skin'" I can't see why you think of that as being a problem. Haven't you consistently emphasised the versatility and adaptability of our species? "Mousterian tech, typically associated to H. neanderthalensis is also found there for the same period" And I've consistently pointed out to you that 'technology' does not define 'species'.

     
  42. Maju

    February 5, 2011 at 2:46 am

    "I can't see why you think of that as being a problem. Haven't you consistently emphasised the versatility and adaptability of our species?"Sure but even today living north of the tropics is problematic: you need to spend a lot more energy in heating, you need to have better homes and clothes than in the tropics… if you are dark skinned particularly, you need to follow a fish rich diet, specially if mother or young… It's a lot simpler at the tropics. Cold low insolation areas are marginal zones only exploited because there was no other place to go, no doubt. One thing is that we can overcome the obstacles and another thing is that it's the easy way to go. And the easy way to go is invariably the first option. "And I've consistently pointed out to you that 'technology' does not define 'species'"But what about the Neanderthal remains of Okladnikov, associated with the Mousterian industry? That settles the issue, so why do you insist once and again in ignoring this fact?This is also true for Uzbekistan and the Zagros area and for everywhere where Mousterian is found except Palestine (at some dates) and North Africa.

     
  43. terryt

    February 5, 2011 at 8:37 am

    "Sure but even today living north of the tropics is problematic: you need to spend a lot more energy in heating, you need to have better homes and clothes than in the tropics… if you are dark skinned particularly, you need to follow a fish rich diet, specially if mother or young…" Possibly. But early European visitors to Tasmania remarked that the Tasmanian Aborigines walked around in the snow with no clothing, and didn't seem to be bothered in the slightest. I'd imagine they felt rather cold but were used to it. Tasmania is at latitude 41 to 43 degrees south, similar to relevant parts of Central Asia, although at a lower altitude and less continental than those regions. And we don't know whether any H. sapiens were able to get the idea of clothing off local Neanderthals, or whatever you like to call them. "And the easy way to go is invariably the first option". Not if it's already completely occupied. "This is also true for Uzbekistan and the Zagros area and for everywhere where Mousterian is found except Palestine (at some dates) and North Africa". And parts of East and Southeast Asia where it's doubtful if we can call the technology 'Mousterian' even. The Australian Aborigines hardly had even a Mousterian technology when Europeans first arrived.

     
  44. Maju

    February 5, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    "Not if it's already completely occupied".If it's already occupied then it's not the first option nor it's easy anymore. WTF!"And parts of East and Southeast Asia"…There are no Neanderthal remains there. Again WTF!

     
  45. Maria Lluïsa

    February 6, 2011 at 1:03 am

    Finally, I found it! A berber man who looks EXACTLY like two of my neighbours:http://identidadandaluza.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/bereber.jpgIn that page you can also find a genetic study who links berbers with basques and spaniards, but not other Europeans. I think that's intriguing and might interest you.http://identidadandaluza.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/vascos-adn-y-linguistica-dan-origen-bereber/

     
  46. Maju

    February 6, 2011 at 1:28 am

    The guy is quite dark but otherwise he's like Chanquete of Verano Azul. That type looks basically Iberian to me. If not, he is in any case a West Eurasian with a heavy tan.Do your neighbors also have that almost full epicanthic fold? I ask because that trait is much more rare among Iberians and is instead more common in North Europe (but varies).The most anomalous thing about that guy is his quite wide mouth. Otherwise he looks totally normal (just darker than most Europeans but with Caucasoid features mostly if not totally). My opinion anyhow…."In that page you can also find a genetic study who links berbers with basques and spaniards"…No. In that page there is nothing like that. There is no link to nor quote of any genetic study. There is vague mention of something like that but no link nor data nor anything. The author of that blog doesn't seem to know what he's talking about. The linguistic section is a total nonsense as the term "segur" probably tells anyone that does not swallow everything blindly. Sure, there are probably some Vasconic (Iberian) terms in Berber, dating maybe from the Megalithic period (adstrate) or the Oranian culture (substrate) but most of those presented as such, for instance in that article you mention are not (not Basque, not Berber and/or not related). It's a huge falsification repeated by ignorants.

     
  47. terryt

    February 6, 2011 at 4:25 am

    "There are no Neanderthal remains there. Again WTF!" So? I'm sure there's no need to be so abusive. Anyway the Australian Aborigines did not have anything like an 'Upper Paleolithic' technology when the Europeans arrived. Does that mean the Aborigines do not belong to the species Homo sapiens? "If it's already occupied then it's not the first option nor it's easy anymore. WTF!" There you go again. Exactly my point. Entry to India was not mtDNA N's first option. India was already occupied. I know you don't yet agree with me but the discussion we had regarding mtDNA M convinced me that the members of that haplogroup entered India along a narrow corridor: across the headwaters of the Indus River into the Punjab. In other words from Afghanistan. The route that most migrations into India that we know anything at all about have all taken. Makes sense to me. So how long ago did M enter India? Perhaps 120,000 years ago? Certainly long before the development of the Upper Paleolithic. You've several times mentioned that mtDNA X is centred on Pakistan. Of course it actually has two centres: the Middle East and Afghanistan. It makes sense to me that haplogroups M and N parted company in Afghanistan. M1 may even have originated there. Until 120,000 years ago the climate was actually quite a bit warmer and wetter than it is today. The Gobi Desert was almost certainly lush pastureland. Full of yaks or bison, horses or onagers, chiru or saiga antelope, camels, musk oxen. Possibly even mammoths and rhinos. Prime human habitat. For a while at least. To me it seems obvious that in the east mtDNA N spread south from Japan, perhaps as the climate cooled, not north from SE Asia. Or at least from somewhere round the Yellow Sea. One of the three branches of mtDNA N9 (Y) is extremely common amoung the Nivkh who live around the northern point of the Sea of Japan. The same haplogroup is also present in the Ainu and another branch (N9b) is also very common in Japan. I think you know the rest. Although my guess would be that the short period of greatly lowered sea level about 60,000 years ago was what allowed these East Asians to reach Australia.

     
  48. Maria Lluïsa

    February 6, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    "Do your neighbors also have that almost full epicanthic fold? I ask because that trait is much more rare among Iberians and is instead more common in North Europe (but varies)."Don't know but yes, they have tiny eyes, much like those of this guy.North Europe? I can't remember any case, except if these northern europeans are mixed with lapps, which is relatively common among Finns, and even native americans. Some native american ancestry has been discovered among Icelandics recently."The most anomalous thing about that guy is his quite wide mouth. Otherwise he looks totally normal (just darker than most Europeans but with Caucasoid features mostly if not totally). "I don't see too many caucasoid features in him, but of course, I could also say that most Asians and Africans have caucasoid features as well. I don't know exactly what "caucasoid" means."It's a huge falsification repeated by ignorants."I know there are some falsifications among Spanish historicists. For example, I read once a theory which said Basques were berbers who arrived at the iberian peninsula during the roman times, which makes me laugh.

     
  49. Maju

    February 6, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    "So? I'm sure there's no need to be so abusive".How "abusive"? You are the one being abusive in this matter, specially with my patience. Once and again we come to the same "dead end", where I point to Neanderthal skeletal remains and you keep talking about technology… "Anyway the Australian Aborigines did not have anything like an 'Upper Paleolithic' technology"…See what I mean: you keep talking about technology ignoring the skeletal facts. And again WTF?!: there was no "Upper Paleolithic" (understood as mode 4 industries: blades) in Eastern Eurasia (at least until much later than the initial H. sapiens colonization). But there was also no Mousterian either – nor Neanderthal remains… "Entry to India was not mtDNA N's first option. India was already occupied".I am not in agreement with this but at least here you are logically consistent. "So how long ago did M enter India? Perhaps 120,000 years ago?"Either that or c. 80 Ka ago, IMO. Though I would not use the word "enter" but "coalesce". Because we do not know if M formed already in SA or just before the arrival to the subcontinent. "You've several times mentioned that mtDNA X is centred on Pakistan".Wrong. X is centered around Palestine. W is centered in Pakistan.Anyhow, I do not care bout your sloppy discourse about particular sublineages of N, the greatest diversity of this clade by far is in SEA-Australia. And there's not a single such haplogroup that is centered in Central Asia. It's repetitive and methodologically wrong.

     
  50. Maju

    February 6, 2011 at 3:35 pm

    "North Europe? I can't remember any case"…If you pay some attention to North Europeans you'll soon notice they often have partial Epicanthic fold and "small eyes". Not always, not at all, but it's much more common than in the South. Your usual Holywwood actors like Brad Pitt or that arrogant guy, whatshisname… Tom Cruise, have similar small semi-slanted eyes caused by partial epicanthic folds. However they are different in shape of those of East Asians because of skull differences probably. "I don't know exactly what "caucasoid" means".Like everything, it's a bit relative, but maybe this helps:http://www.redwoods.edu/Instruct/AGarwin/anth_6_ancestry.htmFore example here there is a comparison of Caucasoid and Mongoloid skulls. The differences are quite subtle to be honest and when you look at thousands of skulls they probably get quite blurry. These categories have only limited statistical importance, when you come to individuals things vary a lot!"I know there are some falsifications among Spanish historicists. For example, I read once a theory which said Basques were berbers who arrived at the iberian peninsula during the roman times, which makes me laugh".That's exactly the same falsification. I do not know who invented it but I know that Spanish nationalists love it.But my central point is that the list of alleged Basque-Berber cognates is totally untenable: I've seen more credible comparisons of Basque and Ainu and such (not much more admittedly but not worse either). In all that junk however there may be a few real words (1% at best) but that's another story.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: