posted
For decades it has been believed that the first peoples to populate North and South America crossed over from Siberia by way of the Bering Strait on a land-ice bridge.
However, a new study examining the largest collection of South American skulls ever assembled suggests that a different population may have crossed the bridge to the New World 3,000 years before those Siberians.
Scientists occasionally discover skulls in South America that look more like those belonging to indigenous Australians and Melanesians than Northern Asians, but researchers tend to regard these skulls as anomalies due to natural variation rather than a norm, mainly because there were too few to study.
Now scientists have compared 81 skulls from the Lagoa Santa region of Brazil to worldwide data on human variation.
While the skulls of Native Americans and Northern Asians — the descendents of the early Siberian settlers — generally feature short, wide craniums, a broader face and high, narrow eye sockets and noses, this collection was remarkably different.
The skulls belonging to the earliest known South Americans — or Paleo-Indians — had long, narrow craniums, projecting jaws and low, broad eye sockets and noses. Drastically different from American Indians, these skulls appear more similar to modern Australians, Melanesians and sub-Saharan Africans.
This indicates that these skulls — which date to between 7,500 and 11,000 years ago — were not merely anomalies but rather were the majority, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct populations colonized the Americas.
People with skulls resembling Paleo-Indians were present in Asia around 20,000 years ago, and lacking the technology to cross the Pacific Ocean by boat, they probably crossed the land bridge to Alaska several thousand years before the Siberians, said study co-author Mark Hubbe of the Universidade de São Paulo.
[Nonesense: it is much more likely that these Negroid people came by way of boat - this is one of the rare occassions where I will say Negroid only to stress the point of their African origins]
“We don’t know for sure, but we believe at least 3,000 years earlier,” Hubbe told LiveScience. “We have a difference of 3,000 years in South America, and we can assume the difference is the same in North America.”
The research was published online this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and will appear in the Dec. 20 issue of the journal.
The third reconstruction is of a Homo sapiens woman from Brazil (around 16,000 years old). Extensive work by Dr Walter Neves at the University of Sao Paolo on numerous skulls from this period demonstrate that they are Negroid people as opposed to Mongoloid people, as previously thought.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^So why is Kennewick Man so famous now in scholarly circles as well as in laymen circles, but Luzia isn't?
Why has Kennewick Man gotten all the media attention while Luzia has not, considering that she and her people represent perhaps the 1st humans to enter the Americas and they date back earlier than Kennewick??
Does it all have to do with Kennewick's infamous misclassification/label as "caucasoid"? If so, why doesn't Luzia recieve as much attention for her label of "negroid"??
Kennewick Man was been turned into somewhat of a 'star' with his appearance on National Geographic and other science magazines and more recently on Time magazine but where is Luzia's limelight?
It's because she's a black woman isn't it? LOLPosts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whatever "limelight" the so-called Kennewick Man has over the Luzia one, has no bearings on the likes of the Olmecs, whose legacy is there for all to see, in the form of the various impressive artistic expressions they left behind. These are visible indicators that ancient America too, had seen successive waves of extra-territorial migrations which would ultimately have implications on the phenotypic representations now seen in the regions, and that the general contemporary populations aren't the same as the original inhabitants. The colossal Olmec heads are a testament to this revelation...and shall do the talking for the likes of Luzia.
Ps - of course, this does not preclude the presence of different groups in the Americas by the time the culture of the Olmecs proceeded into the high culture it has become identified with.
----
Speaking of the impact of multiple waves of migration on the pre-existing phenotypes found in "ancestral" or "indigenous" populations of designated regions, how about a post of the "contemporary" Egyptian army that approximates the phenotypes, which were then apparently predominant in the Egyptian armies by the 11th Dynasty, as in the following sculptures of that era?...
I mean when I see these images, there is no mistaking of the subjects being Africans. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Kennewick Man was been turned into somewhat of a 'star' with his appearance on National Geographic and other science magazines and more recently on Time magazine but where is Luzia's limelight?
The answer in a nutshell is Narcissism! Eurocentric narcissism is a potent force that explains a wide range of phenomena including the stardom of Kennewick man. It explain's why Thutmosis's "Berlin" bust of Nefertiti is so celebrated while the more Africanized renderings by Bak are comparatively obscure. It also explains the many contortions that Eurocentrics go through to whiten Nile valley civilizations.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: That one bust is celebrated and the other is not does not speak to the validity of either one.
To what are you referring to, Hore?
If you speak of Nefertiti, the Berlin bust is reknowned as thee image of what the queen looked like despite the dozens of other depictions which show more Africa features.
If by the earliest Americans, Kennewick man was given more European features but was later revised. Perhaps the same will be done with Luzia, but for now the fact still stands she and her people represent the earliest known group to enter the Americas.
By the way, I think more should be done to look into the aboriginal Ainu people of Japan. Not many people have heard of them and they are unfortunately a marginalized minority group both in Japan and in the world view.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: SAYS NEGROID GROUP DISCOVERED AMERICA Special to The New York Times. New York; Dec 30, 1922; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times. Pg 8 SAYS NEGROID GROUP DISCOVERED AMERICA
Dr. Dixon Startles Scientists by Asserting Black Types Were Among Indian’s Ancestors.
Cambridge, Mass., Dec. 29. A new theory of the origins of the American Indians, which puts Negroes or Negroid types among their ancestors.
Dr. Roland B. Dixon of Harvard said that a study of the earliest Indian skulls indicated that some were descended from blacks or negroids, others from primitive Australian stock, others from whites resembling the Nordics and others from Mongol or Turkish strains, all of whom crossed the Bering Straits in prehistoric time. Many other important and interesting contributions to science were made at a score of sessions during the day. Dr. Dixon’s paper, in which he declared that negroid groups which crossed the Bering Straits were among the American Indians’ ancestors caused a great stir in the anthropology section. From his statement negroid peoples would appear to have been the first discoverers of America. Others who crossed the Bering Straits thousands of years ago to become the ancestors of the American Indian were people of white stock related to the so-called Caucasian group, according to Dr. Dixon. Turkish tribes and other Mongolians and the black Australians, blended in various proportions, formed the different races of America by the infusion of white blood.
Based on Skull Measurement.
The earliest skull of the Iroquois and some other Indians show some strong negroid features, continually modified from age to age as the Iroquois extended their power and territory, taking captives from other tribes and absorbing them. The whole theory is based on the minute measurement of skulls. The different types of man in the Old Stone Age, according to this theory, differed sharply in the shape of their skulls. The middle type, combining the characteristics of the long heads and the broad heads, was probably rare in early times and was formed by the blending of sharply differentiated ancient types, according to Dixon. His method was to measure thousands of Indian skulls of the present day and thousands of years ago in the effort to trace their characteristics to earlier Asiatic and European stock. The formation of the nasal bone played a prominent part in the inquiry. Dr. Dixon, who is a scientist of high standing, had hardly finished his paper before two noted anthropologists, Professor Franz Boaz of Columbia University and Dr. Ales Hrdlicka of the United States national museum at Washington were on their feet to oppose him, denying that such far reaching conclusions could be adduced on the basis of skull measurements, though hailing the paper as an important contribution to anthropology. After explaining his method of tracing racial genealogies, Dr. Dixon continued as follows: “For Europe, Asia and Africa, the outcome was, in general, in close accord with the best conclusions reached by other students, although in some instances the results were decidedly novel. It was in the new world, however, that the method led to conclusions most at variance with accepted doctrine and which may be described as revolutionary. It is therefore of these conclusions which I wish to speak briefly. “The current orthodox theory in regard to the aboriginal inhabitants of the American continent seems to be that they constitute a single race, allied most closely to the people ordinarily grouped together as Mongoloid and that they were derived originally from the Asiatic continent.”
Bering Straits Migrations
Dr. Dixon asserted, however, that his investigation indicated a series of migrations across the Bering Straits. The variations of the Indian types, which had been regarded as random varieties, formed a distinct pattern and indicated something about the history of the various types, according to the speaker, who said: “They show a striking arrangement analogous to that found in Europe or Asia, in that some are relegated to extreme marginal positions or refugee areas, as if they were the surviving members of ancient groups, while others occupy central positions such as befit more recent and dominant types. “Historically , also, the several types show a definite and orderly sequence, repeated in both North and South America. On this basis, I believe we assume that the aboriginal population of America at the period of earliest European contact was the result of the blending of a series of different racial types, coming into the North American continent at different periods across Bering Straits from Asia.” After giving a technical description of one type of Indian skull found in different parts of the geographical pattern, the speaker continued: “In both continents thus this type is clearly an ancient one, as shown both by archaeological evidence and geographical distribution. The affiliation which is suggested for this type will, I know, meet with incredulity and strong opposition, for on the basis of the method followed its nearest relatives are to be found in the negroid and australoid populations of Melanesia, Australia and portions of Southern Asia. “By this I do not mean to imply, however, that it means a trans-Pacific drift from Melanesia to American shores, but rather that it had reached the new world at an early date by way of the Eastern Asiatic coast and the Bering Straits. While at present day there is not much superficial evidence of negroid and australoid peoples in Eastern Asia, there are, I believe, clear indications that peoples blended of them once extended all along these shores. In Neolithic times such types were present in Cambodia and Tonkin, and some of the wild tribes of Indo-China still show unmistakable evidences of their survival there. For China the data are as yet too meager to be of much value, although traces of the type seem to found. In the Ainu of Japan, and especially of Sakhalin, the evidence of its persistence is unmistakable: moreover certain supposedly ancient crania from the Aleutian Islands afford still another link.
Hopeful of Substantiation.
“If one follows this type geographically from Southern India, for example, east and north along the Asiatic coast to the American areas in which it occurs, a progressive weakening in the superficial negroid characteristics may be observed, the minimum pigmentation growing lighter, the hair straighter, the face less prognathous and certain well recognized negroid characteristics of the skull, such as the nasal fossae, become more and more attenuated, until they almost wholly disappear. “Absurd as the suggestion appears at first sight, I believe that with fuller archaeological material from America and Eastern Asia, the fact of a very early negroid-australoid stratum will be fully substantiated.” ...
Djehuti, You might find the above article interesting and pertinent to this thread. I didn't paste the entire article only a portion of it. I've never heard of Professor Dixon or his findings before reading this article. The presence of Franz Boaz would indicate that he was indeed a respected scientist. Perhaps Rasol, Supercar or Ausar may have heard of Professor Dixon and can comment on the validity of his methods. It may be that he did find evidence of a "negroid" stratum among early paleo-american crania; but the hostile reception to such an idea effectively forced it into the background where it remained until the discovery of Luzia.
The original article is (a microfiche image) in pdf format. The OCR software that I used to convert it to text barely worked. If anyone wants to see the full article let me know and I can undertake the conversion of the remainder of the article to text.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I heard of Dr. Roland Dixion. He is considered,along with Boaz, one of the founders of America physical anthropology. Unlike Boaz he made quiet alot of racist remarks. He even tried to say that Genghis Khan was racially a Alpine. You might still be able to find Dixon's books such as ''The Racial History of Man''. Despite his racist attitude, he does have some good data on the Mectha-Afalou and Capsian culture.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ausar wrote: Yes, I heard of Dr. Roland Dixion. He is considered,along with Boaz, one of the founders of America physical anthropology. Unlike Boaz he made quiet alot of racist remarks. He even tried to say that Genghis Khan was racially a Alpine. You might still be able to find Dixon's books such as ''The Racial History of Man''. Despite his racist attitude, he does have some good data on the Mectha-Afalou and Capsian culture.
Dr. Dixon does seem to draw some wild conclusions about the presence of Nordic types among Native American crania. He does seem however to be most insistent about the claim that there are "negroid" affinites to the earliest American crania - even for those found in North America.
quote:one type of Indian skull found in different parts of the geographical pattern, the speaker continued: “In both continents thus this type is clearly an ancient one, as shown both by archaeological evidence and geographical distribution. The affiliation which is suggested for this type will, I know, meet with incredulity and strong opposition, for on the basis of the method followed its nearest relatives are to be found in the negroid and australoid populations of Melanesia, Australia and portions of Southern Asia.
I'd really curious to know if his claims have been debunked altogether or if he really did have possesion of so-called "negroid" crania from both continents.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^The fact that he compares the finds to those of Melanesians begs the question of whether these early "negroid" peoples really entered the Americas by way of the Bering land bridge, or did they take a more southerly route??
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Djehuti wrote: The fact that he compares the finds to those of Melanesians begs the question of whether these early "negroid" peoples really entered the Americas by way of the Bering land bridge, or did they take a more southerly route??
What he is really saying is that this type, most closely resembling Melanesians and Australians, was widespread throughout Asia during prehistory – thus making a Bering crossing feasible. My question is a bit different though and I’m not sure if the answer is easy to find: Were the methods by which he determined these crania to have “negroid” affinities valid? If not then his conjecture regarding how they arrived (Bering Straits versus Southern route) is moot. However, if his methods were valid and he really was in possession of “negroid” crania from pre-Columbian times then why did it take several decades to re-discover Luzia? The gist of my question is this: was this another example of science being subverted to a social agenda - which leads back to the question posed in the title of your thread.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as Dixon's claim about affinities with Australo-Melanesians [and tropical African groups], this has been confirmed more recently by the likes of Neves et al. As such, that particular claim holds some validity. As far as the specifics of what he deems as "Negroid" characteristics, is something that would have to go through detail analysis. The point being here that, it is now widely recognized that tropical folks host a much broader range of local physical characteristics, than early 19th characterization of what "Negro" is, and what "Negroid" is...the latter implying "like a Negro, but not fully". The latter, during the 19th century onto the 20th century, was usually applied to tropical folks outside what was deemed "sub-Saharan", and "occasionally", to some folks outside of the African continent.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Utterly useless and silly terms to use, for any Africanist scholar hoping to dismember Eurocentric propaganda.
Actually, accepting their psuedo-scientific terminology is like giving them arms[b], your arms, when their arms have been broken.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dixon's terminology was by measurement not phenotype. He clearly wrote that his negroids outside Africa need not have been of recent African descent. So his Nordics aren't Vikings or Germans and like his Alpines is shorthand for a set of head measurements using a methodology no scientist stakes stock in anymore.
The thing about Luzia is her age, not that her skull is a unique find, and rediscovery after being neglected for so long.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic