domingo, 20 de septiembre de 2015

Racially progressive tendencies in Homo sapiens



Racially progressive tendencies in a race are typically modern sapiens features. In this context I mean neomorphic, new features, which are both balanced, versatile, under as much conditions as possible advantageous and efficient. The new feature must be generally advantageous or at least not disadvantageous, neutral, if considering as much factors as possible, to be called progressive. Usually this tendencies are on line with the general trends of Hominisation, f.e. decrease of prognathy, prominence of the upper jaw, changes in the position of the foramen magnum and the form and position of the parietal bone etc.
Knußmann said that different races have different progressive features. For the Negrids he mentioned the full lips in the Grzimek Enzyklopädie.
The dynamic of progressive types (Europids and Mongolids, with certain types being more progressive than the average of the race) replacing in prehistoric times more primitive variants was mentioned by v. Eickstedt (1963), Lundman (1952).
Rough translation:
 

"The other, even more progressive main race, the white race...", from Lundman, Umriß der Rassenkunde in historischer Zeit, 1952, S. 51.
"Very clear is the connection of races to the ontogenetic development: There are races, which retain the more childlike (paedomorphic) habitus (f.e. Palaemongolids, img 308 - look at the pictures posted in the phy. anthro. section from Knußmann), and such, which are more typical adult formed - or even overreaching (f.e. Nilotids, img 304)".
"The protuberance of the mucous membrane (lips) of Negrids is a phylogenetically progressive, whereas the strong prognathy is an archaic (primitive) feature."
Knußmann (see below) S. 407.
 

"Highly specialised organisms or organs are being designated as phylogenetically progressive. Phylogenetic primitivity is the retaining of original, undifferentiated features. (very rough the (theoretical of primitivity) advantage is the potential for further specialisation in more directions..."
- means: Primitives can develop (in more directions theoretically), Progressives already developed. If there new development is advantageous, there form is in comparison. Now my point is not everything new is progressive, insofar I use it like Eickstedt and Lundman, because only advantageous and versatile features are progressive, too one sided are overspecialised (took further potential away).
 

"Original ("ancestral") features are also called plesiomorphies, specialised "derived" as apomorphies.
Knußmann, Vergleichende Biologie des Menschen, 2nd edition 1996, S. 268-269.

Some images which show progressive-neomorphic evolutionary trends during hominisation.

First the general developments of the skull:


2nd the development of the lower jaw - positive chin:




Deviating tendencies, a metrical comparison, tropical primitives (Weddoid: Malid) compared with progressive Europids (Indid: Nordindid):




Extreme paedomorphy of the skull and body compared with a normal development of progressive mature leptomorphic Europids:




Compare with Lundmans scheme of body racial body types and the body types of Kretschmer/Contrad, constitutional forms. Here Lundman:




The progressive trias is mature-virile-juvenile, which are the dominant body forms of all progressive Europid forms, with a strong overlapbut the tendency of Dinaroid = mature, Nordoid = virile, Mediterranoid = juvenile.

Sinids, Nordsinids in particular go fluently in the juvenile type and I dont agree with Lundman that they are generally speaking of the feminine body form, which is comparably also more progressive than those which retain strong child-like or protomorphic traits in their body proportions.

The developments on skull affected various areas but quite important is what was chanced at the base of the skull, especially the sphenoid bone position and angle and the positon of the formen magnum. This trend was usually associated with a decreasing grade of prognathy and a "movement of the face" under the braincase - together with a reduction of the teeth numbers and whole chewing apparatus - though the last is relative and not necessarily a main cause in my opinion.





This changes made not only a different facial form and bigger braincase possible, they also changed the centre of gravity (which moved up to the hip for the whole body and backward on the head) for which especially the changing spine and moving foramen magnum was crucial:


The Neandertal was, if compared with sapiens rather primitive in many ways, whats particulary striking, is the fact that the principle form of the braincase didnt change - just the size increased - the opposite is true if comparing with the sapiens innovation:


Even the centre of gravity of the skull was less balanced you can see that the skull-spine angle is very different:


Its important to note that even in the most progressive Homo sapiens the head is not fully balanced, in fact, an improvement would be possible - though the counterweight or muscle power necessary to keep the head straight is constantly decreased from Australopithecines to Homo sapiens with Homo neanderthalensis being still rather on the erectus level - again position of the spine and foramen magnum should be kept in mind.
The decreasing prognathy is also important during Hominisation if looking at the palatine:




But whats really important is that the features are balanced, because imbalanced orthognathy-retrognathy leads to dental and jaw-problems. We could even argue that many progressive Eurasians suffer from that, the development is in fact not optimal and balanced in every case and needs still improvement.
However, lets look what balanced retrognathy of a very progressive and fully balanced individual means if compared with primitive racial prognathy:




The comparison of the positive chin of the progressive individual with the primitive negative chin of the archomorphic one reveals the same pattern:


 


The Pintubi skull (1800 AD.) is an Australoid skull with very archaic dimensions. 



Here it is compared with an Europid skull.
Affinities
Although we are describing differences that might seem to approach speciation, we must remember that these are differences in grade only.
Affinities suggested by these descriptions are all Homo sapiens, to be sure. Let no misinterpretation be made here.
There is, however, enough variance from the norm to suggest some carry-over morphology from earlier or archaic anscestry. A continuity or link to the past, as it were.
The link might be inferred to the influence of robust hominids of late Pleistocene Asia. The obvious candidate for this backward probe would be the aforementioned Homo erectus Soloensis of Ngandong, Java.
In a previous investigation, I was able to inspect casts of 2 calvarias - a 20,000 year old Australian aborigine (WLH-50) and an Indonesian (Ngandong, Java) Homo erectus Soloensis and was amazed at their nearly identical proportions.
A picture is worth a thousand... 
This same Javan Ngandong sample will be shown in the photo section for comparison to Pintubi-1.
The photographs are the meat of this essay. They are the evidence that allow the reader to make his/her comparisons and judgements.
http://canovanograms.tripod.com/pintubi1/

This skull is a perfect example for primitive traits and they made a comparison with a progressive skull on this site too, whats really nice to show the difference between primitive and progressive traits. 

Neomorphic and progressive traits can be also those, in my definition, which are new and at least not disadvantageous for a general, versatile and active adaptation. So traits being selected by sexual selection for the purpose of being sexually attractive for other individuals are per progressive for two reasons, namely for being new and advantageous in the intraspecific competition as along as they are not disadvantageous for another, more important and longer term aspect of biological adaptation. F.e. its no option for females to get larger and larger breasts, even if they would be preferred by males for exactly this reason. Larger female breasts would be a positive development as a sign of feminity, fertility, good nutrition, health etc. in that sense only to a certain limit, namely when the larger breasts become too much of a burden for a woman in too many other areas of her adaptiveness. So there might be a conflict of trends and competitiveness in this as well as in various other regards.
Attached Thumbnails Attached ThumbnailsClick image for larger version. 

Name: Evolution.jpg 
Views: 13491 
Size: 10.3 KB 
ID: 3297   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Unterkiefer-Symphyse.jpg 
Views: 13430 
Size: 50.3 KB 
ID: 3298   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Weddid-Indid.jpg 
Views: 11876 
Size: 53.4 KB 
ID: 3299   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Wuchs%20001.jpg 
Views: 17460 
Size: 115.0 KB 
ID: 3300   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Körperbautypenc.JPG 
Views: 27621 
Size: 78.8 KB 
ID: 3301 

Click image for larger version. 

Name: fig5-7.gif 
Views: 22851 
Size: 16.0 KB 
ID: 3302   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Evolution3.JPG 
Views: 10705 
Size: 23.8 KB 
ID: 3303   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Schwerpunkt.jpg 
Views: 10756 
Size: 26.0 KB 
ID: 3304   Click image for larger version. 

Name: HIRNSC~1.JPG 
Views: 15870 
Size: 37.5 KB 
ID: 3305   Click image for larger version. 

Name: abb161.jpg 
Views: 10936 
Size: 76.5 KB 
ID: 3306 

Click image for larger version. 

Name: 25%2520Retrognathie.jpeg 
Views: 11069 
Size: 20.8 KB 
ID: 3307   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Palaenegrid%2520Prognathie.JPG 
Views: 10681 
Size: 8.2 KB 
ID: 3308   Click image for larger version. 

Name: Palaenegrid%2520Kinn.JPG 
Views: 10681 
Size: 9.3 KB 
ID: 3309   Click image for larger version. 

Name: 25%2520Kinn.jpeg 
Views: 10695 
Size: 21.0 KB 
ID: 3310   Click image for larger version. 

Name: velret.jpg 
Views: 24311 
Size: 39.2 KB 
ID: 3311  


Here also a short least for a handy comparison of progressive (neomorphic), infantile (paedomorphic) and primitive (archemorphic) basic traits:




And a graphic in a triangular form in which the types being positioned between the three general trends of modern human evolution and form variation:




Especially in the "left progressive field" the distances are very short to non-existence, its just a graphic necessity to put them that way, since I can't write one over another.

Additionally I made this graph some time ago and would make some details somewhat different now and for many types a basic, typical variant was considered, there are other subtypes f.e. of Gracilmediterranids, Gracilindid, Aethiopids and other Palaemongolid variants than Palaungid in particular, which should be put in another, namely more progressive positions.

Basically this was the result of necessity in a graph, but it also reflects the relations of the Taurid/Dinaroid variants which are between the Aurignacoid and Cromagnoid spectrum in a way.

Compare with this graph about the genesis of the various racial forms represented in a "racial tree":




Some Dinaroid variants seem to be exclusively Aurignacoid derived (Nordoid = Norid, Mediterranoid = Adriatid), but others seem to have "processed" Cromagnoid elements (like the robust Adriatid forms in Montenegro f.e.) in a general process of Dinarisation in the more mountainous regions of Central and South Eastern Europe.

Dinaroids are in a way the big & lean, robust boned and maximal mature form of the European spectrum, yet they are often closely related as the herder-warriors of the mountains to the reduced tillers in the less favourable farming areas. So because of this close proximity and sometimes almost symbiotic relationship, they must have a transition shown in the graph to the Alpinid spectrum, even if this is, in certain respects, the diametrically opposite of the Dinarid type.

Less typical Dinaroid and Dinariomorphic variants can "pop up" phenotypical wise because of a similar recombination, but that shouldnt lead to the false conclusion of C.S. Coon that this is the process of Dinarisation itself, because the Dinarid type proper is the result of selection and expansion of this herder-warrior groups and way of life.

V. Eickstedt included Dinarids into the "Bergrassengürtel" ("mountain race belt") and he was right saying that because the Dinarids and original Taurid forms in general are, or at least were, much more than Alpinoids, a specialisation for higher areas, mountains, hills and valleys, mostly living from animal husbandry.
Its interesting to compare the distribution of the Gemse (chamois) with Dinaroids and groups with Taurid influences (from West Baskid, Norid, Adriatid, Carpathid, Kaukasid-Armenoid) which have a certain habitat as well.

I think most of the later Dinarid and generally Taurid expansion out of the mountainous areas was secondary, but their original habitat and the environment and lifeform for "which they were made" was mainly being highland herders. Under them they survived in the purest form usually like in the Tyrolese herders and farmers of higher regions and the herders of the Balkan area. For some ethnic groups it was proven that they moved in fact from over wide distances (f.e. in Eastern Asia, v. Eickstedt wrote about that) to a similar habitat. (f.e. from highland to highland, from a fertile river valley to the next etc.) Originally a similar kind of expansion might have taken place in Europe's past and lead to the Dinarisation of certain areas.
The distribution of Dinarids in higher areas can be confirmed for Austria more or less and Carpathian herders are mostly Dinaroid as well.

Yes it is related to the Cro-Magnon remains in the narrower sense.

That is important to note, because authors and even anthropologists speak of all early European Palaeolithic humans as of "Cro-Magnon" people so they mix up all kinds of types, which just lived at that time in Europe regardless of whether they being close by their features to "the Old of Cro-Magnon".

That's why this strange Grimaldi variants can be put in this category, but this has nothing to do with Cromagnid as I use it, because this refers strictly to the Europid type(s) which resemble the remains of Cro-Magnon, that one.

Skull:


Reconstruction:



Newer one:


There lived different types of humans, possibly even different races, in Europe at that time, but that's what is meant with Cromagnid, not "Cro-Magnon man" in the sense of everything Homo sapiens like running around in Palaeolithic Europe.

The skull of Bruenn f.e. is actually not truly Cromagnid, but rather (robust archaic) Aurignacoid, compare with this thread:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37601

It is quite clear that important waves to Europe, important also for the formation of the modern Europid races in Europe, came from the East. Most authors held up two options, Anatolia-Caucasus and Eastern Europe-Central Asia. From both areas came important waves of modern humans at different times, but the main problem for the case of Central Asia is, that Europid Central Asia, like it existed for thousands of years, doesn't exist any longer, because of the Turko-Mongol expansion and the huge wedge it formed.

For example between Nordo-Cromagnoid and Irano-Indoid is now a huge Mongoloid dominated wedge, but that wasn't the case in the crucial period, even on the contrary, Central Asia might have been a centre which influenced both!

Also for Blumenbach: He judged mostly by the skulls and living phenotypes, he didn't look at the genes and it is very important to note, once again, that ancient genetic relationship and modern racial-phenotypical relations can be quite different, especially if considering that the Armenoidisation happened rather late, at a time most of the immigrants from Southern West Asia (Near East) were already on the continent!

And those which brought the huge genetic impact were predominantely Mediterranoid, some had Alpinoid tendencies, but they were for the most part not even remotely Armenoid.

So genetic relationship is one thing, racial another, because many things changed in both places in meantime.

Another issue is that, like I said, a huge wave came from that Anatolian-Near Eastern area, but the question is, did a major wave (Indo-Europeans) came directly, or indirectly. In the later case, rather a package of traits and customs moved, rather than the full genetic impact.

And I think that is true for the area North of the Caucasus, were Indo-Europeans came up, mostly influenced from two sides late Mesolithic-Neolithic Mediterranoids and local robust Aurignacoids and even more Cromagnoids. The fusion produced Indo-Europeans, rather, than the original wave being Indo-European already - that's at least my opinion, also based on the fact that the "old Mediterranean" cultures had many important aspects, but lacked many others for the "Indo-European package", so additional ingredients, from race-genes to culture-memes, and local pressures, competition and selection, seems to have been needed.

The expansive group can only have been Proto-Mediterranoid/Aurignacoid, no doubt about it, because we see an explosion and massive expansion of that type together with the higher cultural package.

It started earlier in the warmer period already, even Mesolithics, mainly in the South Eastern Europe and the area North of the Caucasus, interestingly the two main candidates today for the formation of Indo-Europeans as well...

Well, in the case of Nordid we have Proto-Nordoid strains, different variants of Nordid in the old times and modern times.

The main problem with Nordid is, however, completely different than that with Armenoid, because in the Armenoid case, traits like pigmentation and hairiness f.e. were most likely present a long time before the proportions and morphology came up, since it is a "regional trait" going beyond subracial limitations, while for the Nordid case, we have skulls, but we don't know for sure their pigmentation, which is decisive, because there is no absolute difference between a Nordid and Mediterranid skull.

I mean there are clear differences between Nordid and classic-gracile Mediterranid, but not between robust-tall variants of Mediterranid and even where they are, we can only speak of frequency differences. At the same time, like I said, Nordid hat different variants in the past it seems.

So if you see skull and bones, which fit the "Proto-Nordoid" bill, how can you say they were blond or not for example? You can't!

You can just assume, that at a certain time, in a certain context, for example the Corded Ware population was at least ON THE WAY to lighter pigmentation, but as long as there are no historical descriptions, physical remains of the hair and skin, or genetic tests done on the bones, there remains a huge gap

Where the first Aurignacoids in Europe light or dark? The ones in the Mesolithic period? The Neolithic settlers even, what pigmentation did they have? We don't know for sure...

But morphologically-proportionally, beside more archaic variants, Nordoid forms existed since Mesolithic times in Europe, latest, which needed to be "just depigmented", so basically Proto-Nordoid Mediterranoids one could say.

Armenoid on the other hand is difficult to distinguish from Dinarid at times, but otherwise a clear case on its own, because being so different on the bones already.

We have first remains rather from the Metal Ages on of Taurid variants, so I'd assume they came into existence in the very late Neolithic, Chalcolithic, or even Bronze Age time.

To give an example, among the Chatti, Churri and Urartian we already find significant frequencies of Armenoid traits, before that single skulls here and there, for example on Cyprus surprisingly (metal prospectors?), but in depictions and higher rates, those people are for the Near East crucial.

Of course, not every valley and mountain in the Caucasus region being so completely researched, that you can be sure, but it doesn't really matter, because it is not so much about when you have the first variant, that's like with Nordids, otherwise Nordid would be much older I guess than the Neolithics, but when the traits as an inheritable combination spread and began to dominate at least significant subpopulations, becoming an important and recognisable element in the racial variation.


(Source: theapricity.com)
votar

No hay comentarios.:

Publicar un comentario