August 15, 2008 In the Sahara, Stone Age Graves From Greener Days By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD When Paul C. Sereno went hunting dinosaur bones in the Sahara, his career took a sharp turn from paleontology to archaeology. The expedition found what has proved to be the largest known graveyard of Stone Age people who lived there when the desert was green.
The first traces of pottery, stone tools and human skeletons were discovered eight years ago at a site in the southern Sahara, in Niger. After preliminary research, Dr. Sereno, a University of Chicago scientist who had previously uncovered remains of the dinosaur Nigersaurus there, organized an international team of archaeologists to investigate what had been a lakeside hunting and fishing settlement for the better part of 5,000 years, originating some 10,000 years ago.
In its first comprehensive report, published Thursday, the team described finding some 200 graves belonging to two successive populations. Some burials were accompanied by pottery and ivory ornaments. A girl was buried wearing a bracelet carved from a hippo tusk. A man was interred seated on the carapace of a turtle.
The most poignant scene was the triple burial of a petite woman lying on her side, facing two young children. The slender arms of the children reached out to the woman in an everlasting embrace. Pollen indicated that flowers had decorated the grave.
The sun-baked dunes at the site known as Gobero preserve the earliest and largest Stone Age cemetery in the Sahara, Dr. Sereno’s group reported in the current issue of the online journal PLoS One. The findings, the researchers wrote, open “a new window on the funerary practices, distinctive skeletal anatomy, health and diet of early hunter-fisher-gatherers, who expanded into the Sahara when climatic conditions were favorable.”
The research was also described at a news conference in Washington at the National Geographic Society, a supporter of the project.
The initial inhabitants at Gobero, the Kiffian culture, were tall hunters of wild game who also fished with harpoons carved from animal bone. Later, a more lightly built people, the Tenerians, lived there, hunting, fishing and herding cattle. An examination of their fossilized skeletons indicated that both cultures lived and ate relatively well.
Other scientists said the discovery appeared to be spectacular evidence that nothing, not even the arid expanse of the Sahara, is changeless. About 100 million years ago, this land was forested and occupied by dinosaurs and enormous crocodiles. By 50,000 years ago, people moved in and left stone tools and mounds of shells, fish bones and other refuse. The lakes dried up in the last Ice Age.
Then the rains and lakes of a fecund Sahara returned some 12,000 years ago, and remained, except for one 1,000-year interval, until about 4,500 years ago. Geologists have long known that the region’s basins retained mineral residue of former lakes, and other explorers have found scatterings of human artifacts from that time, as Dr. Sereno did at Gobero in 2000.
“Everywhere you turned, there were bones belonging to animals that don’t live in the desert,” he said. “I realized we were in the green Sahara.”
Human skeletons were eroding from the dunes, jawbones with nearly full sets of teeth and finger bones of a tiny hand pointing up from the sand. Dr. Sereno said that the skeptical reaction of archaeologists to his original reports prevented him from securing support for intensive explorations of the site until 2005 and 2006.
From an analysis of the skeletons and pottery in those two seasons, scientists identified the two successive cultures that occupied the settlement. The Kiffians, some of whom stood up to six feet tall, both men and women, lived there during the Sahara’s wettest period, between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago. They were primarily hunter-gatherers who speared huge lake perch with harpoons.
Elena A. A. Garcea, an archaeologist at the University of Cassino in Italy, identified ceramics with wavy lines and zigzag patterns as Kiffian, a culture associated with northern Africa. Pots bearing a pointillistic pattern were linked to the Tenerians, a people named for the Ténéré Desert, a stretch of the Sahara known to Tuareg nomads as a “desert within a desert.”
Christopher M. Stojanowski, an archaeologist at Arizona State University, said the two cultures were “biologically distinct groups.” The bones and teeth showed that in contrast to the robust Kiffians, the Tenerians were typically short and lean and apparently led less rigorous lives. Perhaps, Dr. Stojanowski said, they had developed more advanced hunting technologies for taking smaller fish and game.
The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara.
Dr. Sereno said in an interview that both cultures, the Tenerians in particular, appeared to have settled into semi-sedentary lives in a more or less year-round community. Families, he said, are not usually part of mobile hunting parties, and yet many of the burials at the site are of juveniles. The abundant refuse mounds also attested to long-term occupation.
Asked if he had adjusted to the transition from dinosaur paleontology to Stone Age archaeology, Dr. Sereno said, “It’s still weird for me to be digging up my own species.”
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: "The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara."
^^^^^As I read, I knew there was going to be some kind of outrageous interpretation of the skulls disconnecting them from Africa.
^^^Here we go again..... I searched Tenerian, and this is what pops up first.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: As I read, I knew there was going to be some kind of outrageous interpretation of the skulls disconnecting them from Africa.
Funny how the description of "Mediterranean" can somehow 'disconnect' them from Africa considering that the Mediterranean sea borders Northern Africa. Then again...
^^^Here we go again..... I searched Tenerian, and this is what pops up first.
Well I tend to ignore anything Dienekes posts as well, just shameless lies. Getting back to the issue, considering the tenacious and ridiculous history of the label "Mediterranean" in past Western physical anthropology applied to peoples from southern Europeans, to East Africans, to Indians, to Polynesians... I don't see how there can be any confusion unless one wishes to continue the psuedo-racial terms of 19th century Western anthropology.
As such, one just has to ask what the heck does this 'expert' mean by "Mediterranean"?? Exactly what features is he speaking of, and how 'unique' are they to Africans??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well I tend to ignore anything Dienekes posts as well, just shameless lies. Getting back to the issue, considering the tenacious and ridiculous history of the label "Mediterranean" in past Western physical anthropology applied to peoples from southern Europeans, to East Africans, to Indians, to Polynesians...
True, thats what I mean, but it's 2008, and anthropologists are still making bogus Mediterranean claims? I mean, when will this nonsense end...
quote:As such, one just has to ask what the heck does this 'expert' mean by "Mediterranean"?? Exactly what features is he speaking of, and how 'unique' are they to Africans??
Exactly, I can't wait to see the actual anthropology results.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder, if by "Southern Saharan" do they mean folks of the Sahel which is truely Southern Saharan, or do they mean folks south of the Sahara completely? I've heard that many people of the sahel region have skulls that would have been classified as "Caucasiod" under those archaic terms. I also wonder if they anthropologists can distinguish Sahelian peoples from Mediterranean people.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ By 'Southern Sahara' they mean the southern part of the modern day Sahara desert itself specifically around northern Niger.
By the way, this whole "Mediterranean" thing reminds me...
quote:Originally cited by Charlie Bass:
The Cambridge History of Africa (Hardcover) by J. D. Fage (Editor) Cambridge University Press (March 30, 1979) p.69
Skeletal remains from the Kenya Rift previously considered as 'Afro-Mediterranean' or 'Caucasoid' have now been shown to group with African Negro samples. They date within the first millennium BC and, on physical characteristics, it is suggested that they may be of proto-Nilotic stock. But it is necessary to also make comparisons with Cushitic speakers, since burials found recently in association with a Kenya Capsian-like industry from Lake Besaka in the Ethiopian Rift, dating probably to c. 5000 BC, also show negroid features, and linguistic evidence indicates long history for Cushitic in Ethiopia.
One can't help but think this is the same situation here.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know its a lie when scientists start throwing around terms like "puzzling" or "startling". That should be an IMMEDIATE alert to anyone that what follows is pure Bull Sh*t. Rather than say we haven't fully analyzed the relationships between such skulls and skulls from other populations in a similar area over the same time period, they are just pulling stuff out their behinds. And they know it, because they did not even NAME what group of so called "mediterranean" skulls they were similar to. Not to mention the fact that they don't even describe why skulls can be classified as "Mediterranean" in the first place, as I doubt that the populations AROUND the Mediterranean have similar skeletal morphologies. So what makes Mediterranean a more significant geographical marker than African, considering that these skulls are found QUITE A LONG WAY from the Mediterranean to begin with? And on top of that, why don't they even identify it with NIGER as opposed to simply "Saharan" as if the Sahara is more significant than the presence of NIGER as a country?
quote: The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara.
Only a fool would even pretend to believe that the people smack dab in the middle of Niger 10,000 years ago were anything other than black Africans.
And, bottom line, anyone who is still questioning why this is still going on just need to examine their heads. Whites scientists WILL ALWAYS pretend that WHITE SKIN is the MOST SIGNIFICANT development in human evolution ever. They HAVE to because that is what their WHOLE WORLD VIEW is based on.
I mean the very idea that someone would be SHOCKED by finding stone tools and arrows in Africa, where humans have been practicing a hunter and gathering lifestyle for HUNDREDS of thousands, if not millions of years is absolutely ridiculous.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: Text from above link
August 15, 2008 In the Sahara, Stone Age Graves From Greener Days By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
"The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara."
Evergreen Writes:
Below you will find a description of these Mediterraneans from the peer-reviewed paper itself.
Evergreen Posts:
PLoS ONE August 2008 3(8)
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
Paul C. Sereno et al
"Their crania are long, high and narrow, and their faces are taller with considerable alveolar prognathism."
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Of course, but again we have to remember that even prehistoric skulls found as far south as Kenya and Tanzania have been described as having those same features and also labeled as "Mediterranean". So hopefully, and I do mean placing my hope in today's anthropology that this error would be corrected, and these skulls will be identified as the indigenous Africans that they are.
Speaking of which, this reminds me of past threads where we've discussed the anthropological landscape of prehistoric North Africa, namely those of the 'Oranian' or 'Metchtoid' types.
Hopefully Takruri can dig up one or more of those past threads for us.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: "Their crania are long, high and narrow, and their faces are taller with considerable alveolar prognathism."
^ Speaks for itself.
Evergreen Writes:
Indeed. As we read between the lines we see that this clearly African type was common in the Mediterranean during this timeframe. This is consistent with the remains found in Natufian graves as well as the early neolithic of Greece and Anatolia. This is also consistent with the genetic and linguistic record.
Evergreen Posts:
Mitochondrial DNA variation in Jordanians and their genetic relationship to other Middle East populations.
Ann Hum Biol. 2008 Mar-Apr;35(2):212-31
Gonzalez et. al.
BACKGROUND: The Levant is a crucial region in understanding human migrations between Africa and Eurasia. Although some mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) studies have been carried out in this region, they have not included the Jordan area. This paper deals with the mtDNA composition of two Jordan populations. AIM: The main objectives of this article are: first, to report mtDNA sequences of an urban and an isolate sample from Jordan and, second, to compare them with each other and with other nearby populations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The analyses are based on HVSI and HVSII mtDNA sequences and diagnostic RFLPs to unequivocally classify into haplogroups 101 Amman and 44 Dead Sea unrelated individuals from Jordan. RESULTS: Statistical analysis revealed that, whereas the sample from Amman did not significantly differ from their Levantine neighbours, the Dead Sea sample clearly behaved as a genetic outlier in the region. Its outstanding Eurasian haplogroup U3 frequency (39%) and its south-Saharan Africa lineages (19%) are the highest in the Middle East. On the contrary, the lack ((preHV)1) or comparatively low frequency (J and T) of Neolithic lineages is also striking.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
"Their crania are long, high and narrow, and their faces are taller with considerable alveolar prognathism."
^ Speaks for itself.
And this would still hold true, even if there were no alveolar prognathism.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: "Their crania are long, high and narrow, and their faces are taller with considerable alveolar prognathism."
^ Speaks for itself.
Again such traits were found in prehistoric remains of people as far south as Tanzania and are still common among populations there today. There goes your "Mediterranean" for ya. LOLPosts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Speaking of which, this reminds me of past threads where we've discussed the anthropological landscape of prehistoric North Africa, namely those of the 'Oranian' or 'Metchtoid' types.
Hopefully Takruri can dig up one or more of those past threads for us.
Two out of many threads from Debunked/Evil E making an ass out of himself. Maybe he'll read how dumb he was then, and realize he's still the same idiot today.
posted
^ The majority of the polymorphisms found in our species are found uniquely in Africans.
Europeans, Asians and Native Americans carry only a small amount of the diversity that can be found in any African village. - Geneticist Spencer Wells.
Debunked wishes for and opposite reality in which the AFrican genepool would be mostly non-African.
Again geneticists debunk his backwards thinking.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Below you will find Carleton Coon's definition of the Mediterranean type.
Evergreen Posts:
Carleton Stevens Coon
Races of Europe
In Europe, the Neolithic is primarily the period of the Mediterranean race, in one form or another. It was, apparently, the Mediterraneans who accomplished the change to a food-producing economy elsewhere, and who expanded into the territory of the food-gatherers.
(1) Mediterranean Proper (hereafter meant when the word "Mediterranean" is used alone): Short stature, about 160 cm.; skull length 183-187 mm. male mean; vault height 132-137 mm. mean; cranial index means 73-75; brow ridges and bone development weak, face short, nose leptorrhine to mesorrhine. Type already met in Portugal and Palestine in Late Mesolithic. Represents the paedomorphic or sexually undifferentiated Mediterranean form, and often carries a slight Negroid tendency.
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Egyptians recognized people with very black skin, flat noses, and thick lips as being native Egyptians. We see depictions representing this phenetic variation in their art including depictions of the most sacred and the most noble. In other words they recognized the array of features and hues among their own coethnics.
This statement is true not only of Egyptians but also of other African societies.
The attempt to isolate and mystify the "negro type" is not science; its Eurocentrism parading as science.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: The attempt to isolate and mystify the "negro type" is not science; its Eurocentrism parading as science.
Evergreen Writes:
Actually this is where we get lost sometimes. There is no "Mystery God". Eurocentrism is a science. It is a science which works in concert across many disciplines to practice economic hegemony.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Correction, Eurocentrism is a pseudo-science NOT a science. Science uses sound and valid logic and reason, Eurocentrism does not but goes by a specific dogma.
To Apocalypse, it's not so much Egyptians as Nile Valley populations that vary in hue and in features. This variation or contrast can be seen as you go north to south up the Nile or east to West across the deserts. Such variation is found in other parts of Africa as well so such diversity is not unique to the Nile Valley or Northeast Africa for that matter.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Correction, Eurocentrism is a pseudo-science NOT a science. Science uses sound and valid logic and reason, Eurocentrism does not but goes by a specific dogma.
Evergreen Writes:
You're not correcting me, you just missed the point. Eurocentrism uses a very prescribed, scientific, logical and reasoned methodology to maintain European hegemony. Eurocentrism is a tool of European hegemony, not vice versa.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Evergreen I agree with your staement whole heartedly; but the scientific method, as quaint and old fashioned as it sounds, draws conclusions based upon observation, empirical evidence. With Eurocentrism the conclusion (White superiority and its complement black inferiority)came first followed by many painful and misguided attempts to find facts justifying the conclusion. The hegemonic nature of Eurocentrism draws upon and distorts, science, history, culture, media, you name it.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: With Eurocentrism the conclusion (White superiority and its complement black inferiority)came first followed by many painful and misguided attempts to find facts justifying the conclusion.
Evergreen Writes:
I would agree that as Europeans emerged as a distinct socio-political reality the notion of White Superiority evolved. However, many of the finds during WWII and since have demolished these basic tenants. Eurocentrism is no longer believed by most Eurocentrists. They now **knowingly ** mislead to maintain the status quo. They do so in a concerted effort which is based upon sound management science. This is what makes it so insidious.
The Devil is a liar!
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: With Eurocentrism the conclusion (White superiority and its complement black inferiority)came first followed by many painful and misguided attempts to find facts justifying the conclusion.
Evergreen Writes:
I would agree that as Europeans emerged as a distinct socio-political reality the notion of White Superiority evolved. However, many of the finds during WWII and since have demolished these basic tenants. Eurocentrism is no longer believed by most Eurocentrists. They now **knowingly ** mislead to maintain the status quo. They do so in a concerted effort which is based upon sound management science. This is what makes it so insidious.
The Devil is a liar!
Evergreen Writes:
Does anyone **really** believe that Serano et al. are unfamiliar with Carleton Coon's claim that the "Mediterranean type" was "Negroid-like"? Sereno is a professional paleontologist and Coon was standard reading for his generation. Hence, to play the game that he doesn't know where these "Mediterranean" people came from is bs!
PAUL SERENO: Well, what we did in analyzing the skull shape of this individual and that individual is, first, show how different they are. And then, second, we linked across the Sahara populations from North Africa, the coast of the Mediterranean, all the way over to the Atlantic coast, an ancient population with this kind of skull.
So we see a migration into the Sahara, when it turned green, from those parts. And then they were driven out by a dry period. And when it turned wet again, another kind of person moved in.
Where these people came from, ultimately, and where they became the Tenerians, that's for future research. We're really interested, because the Sahara is inhabited today by some very interesting nomads. And we're wondering, ultimately, are we looking at the roots of that population?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:To Apocalypse, it's not so much Egyptians as Nile Valley populations that vary in hue and in features.
Agreed, the nile valley and indeed all of Africa is a smorgasbord of phenetic variety. My point is that the Ancient Egyptians are north Africans par excellence and unlike modern day europeans were in a better position to decide who is native and who is not. A review of ancient Egyptian art confirms what is oft repeated on this forum: that North Africa and East Africa included all physical types.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:They do so in a concerted effort which is based upon sound management science. This is what makes it so insidious.
Very true. Additionally their control of academia compounds the situation; challenges to the orthodoxy still come with risks, e.g., Bernal.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ It's funny you mention that, but the reason why there was so much controversy with Bernal's books is simply for three reasons: First, it was a widely published seller made open for the general public. Second, it was very overt and straightforward in its claims making bold attacks on the traditional Eurocentrist dogma that is Western Academia. Lastly, some aspects to Bernal's claims was in fact inaccurate, for example some of his linguistic claims that Indo-European is derived from Semitic etc. All this did was give the Eurocentrics the sorry excuse to say therefore Bernal's entire thesis was inaccurate.
It is when you have publications from folks like Keita that the Eurocentrics really worry. Not only is Keita's whole thesis sound in practically every aspect, but he also takes the Eurocentric tactic of passive-aggression where he refutes all the old racist paradigm but in a much more 'polite' way that takes it apart piece by piece instead of overtly smashing it to bits. The only problem is that published works by Keita are only known in the much smaller academic circle. As such Eurocentric scholars take the cowardly route of neither accepting nor refuting his work (as if they can). Now if Keita and others like hime were to make their work more well known to the public. That's when the real fun begins. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^^^G3B8 is not alone in his stature and robustness. There other burials, both male and female, from this time frame are of similar height. These Early Holocene hunter-gathering fishermen also have characteristic skulls — long and low, with a unique occipital bun and broad nasals. These features aren’t restricted to only adults, in fact, juveniles as young as 4 years exhibit similar traits which are not shared by the later inhabitants of Gobero. These bodies were tightly bound when buried.
^^They’ve got tall, narrow skulls, with long faces. This guy, dubbed G1B11, is a mid-Holocene adult male dating to around 4,645 B.C.E. is a good example of the different morphology:
^^Kiffian (9,500 year old) Skull vs Tenereian (5,800 year old) Skull from Gobero, Niger
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Evergreen Writes: Eurocentrism is no longer believed by most Eurocentrists. They now **knowingly ** mislead to maintain the status quo.
Agreed the least ineffectual Eurocentric rhetoric is rooted in word games, shell games and sometimes clever lies.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Evergreen Writes: Eurocentrism is no longer believed by most Eurocentrists. They now **knowingly ** mislead to maintain the status quo.
Agreed the least ineffectual Eurocentric rhetoric is rooted in word games, shell games and sometimes clever lies.
Evergreen Writes:
Consider Segi's 1901 claim that the "Mediterranean Type" came out of Africa. Consider McCown's work in the 1920's on the "Negroid" Natufians. Consider Dorothy Garrod's work in 1932. Consider Coon in 1939. Consider Brace's work on the Natufians in 2007. These scientists have known for years that Black people are ancestral to what is now known as North Africa, hence to claim that these people are similiar to other "Mediterraneans" of the time should be no big surprise. The Mediterraneans of the time were the descendents of early Holocene migrations out of Africa and around the circum-Mediterranean basin.
They reframe the picture by making Africans non-African and making this technological migration out of Africa a "Middle Eastern" affair.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Evergreen Wrote: Consider Segi's 1901 claim that the "Mediterranean Type" came out of Africa. Consider McCown's work in the 1920's on the "Negroid" Natufians. Consider Dorothy Garrod's work in 1932. Consider Coon in 1939. Consider Brace's work on the Natufians in 2007. These scientists have known for years that Black people are ancestral to what is now known as North Africa, hence to claim that these people are similiar to other "Mediterraneans" of the time should be no big surprise. The Mediterraneans of the time were the descendents of early Holocene migrations out of Africa and around the circum-Mediterranean basin.
They reframe the picture by making Africans non-African and making this technological migration out of Africa a "Middle Eastern" affair.
In simple words, they are just repeating the same old nonsense that Dienekes and his braindead minions like Evil-Euro try to sell.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^^^G3B8 is not alone in his stature and robustness. There other burials, both male and female, from this time frame are of similar height. These Early Holocene hunter-gathering fishermen also have characteristic skulls — long and low, with a unique occipital bun and broad nasals. These features aren’t restricted to only adults, in fact, juveniles as young as 4 years exhibit similar traits which are not shared by the later inhabitants of Gobero. These bodies were tightly bound when buried.
^^They’ve got tall, narrow skulls, with long faces. This guy, dubbed G1B11, is a mid-Holocene adult male dating to around 4,645 B.C.E. is a good example of the different morphology:
^^Kiffian (9,500 year old) Skull vs Tenereian (5,800 year old) Skull from Gobero, Niger
So what is their connection to the Metchtoid or Capsian culture??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^^^G3B8 is not alone in his stature and robustness. There other burials, both male and female, from this time frame are of similar height. These Early Holocene hunter-gathering fishermen also have characteristic skulls — long and low, with a unique occipital bun and broad nasals. These features aren’t restricted to only adults, in fact, juveniles as young as 4 years exhibit similar traits which are not shared by the later inhabitants of Gobero. These bodies were tightly bound when buried.
^^They’ve got tall, narrow skulls, with long faces. This guy, dubbed G1B11, is a mid-Holocene adult male dating to around 4,645 B.C.E. is a good example of the different morphology:
^^Kiffian (9,500 year old) Skull vs Tenereian (5,800 year old) Skull from Gobero, Niger
So what is their connection to the Metchtoid or Capsian culture??
Good question. Not too sure what that connection is yet, but we can see here from Paul Sereno, further investigations have to be done.
JEFFREY BROWN: And just briefly, you said what is coming next, in terms of some of the research. You're going to be involved? What happens?
PAUL SERENO: Oh, we're interested in fine-tuning our understanding.
I mean, basically, we want to know how the recent populations -- everybody wants to know how the recent populations relate to these ancient populations. Are we looking at the roots of the people who are living there today, the Egyptians, the Berbers, the Tuaregs?
And where do they come from? And, ultimately, we're interested in human history. And we have a much better view of the humans today that lived in the center of the Sahara than we did before we ran into that site.
----
As we can see, they are falsely classified into Mediterranean.
quote:Lastly, some aspects to Bernal's claims was in fact inaccurate, for example some of his linguistic claims that Indo-European is derived from Semitic etc. All this did was give the Eurocentrics the sorry excuse to say therefore Bernal's entire thesis was inaccurate.
Bernal does see certain linguistic correspondence between Indo European and Afroasiatic. Ehret also sees such a correspondence. Bernal believes that the lithic culture originating in the nile valley (he specifically mentions Mushabian) and the Natufian culture of the Levant contributed to the development of Proto Indo European. Bernal does not put the case for this linkage forward in a dogmatic manner but tentatively.
The sanctity of the IE language is non negotiable to Eurocentrists. Challenges to this sacred cow is just as unacceptable as saying that their civilization derived from elsewhere; or that modern day Europeans are a hybrid of Africans, Asians, and paleolithic native hunter-gatherers. Bernal's work is dismissed, not because of any sloppiness in his thinking, but precisely because it is so well researched; and because it presents such nightmarish scenarios of the roots of european people.
Kieta's work is of course brilliant. That is beyond dispute.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
These guys were Negroes. This is my speical topic - the graves of our ancestors. The tall robust Negroes were the ancestors of the Mande Speakers and some Fulani. These graves are similar to others from Ethiopia and Sudan to Senegal.
The skeletons are usually oriented along a compass direction.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red,White, and Blue + Christian: These guys were Negroes. This is my speical topic - the graves of our ancestors. The tall robust Negroes were the ancestors of the Mande Speakers and some Fulani. These graves are similar to others from Ethiopia and Sudan to Senegal.
The skeletons are usually oriented along a compass direction.
Feel free to elaborate. Do you have the information on "The tall robust Negroes" being ancestors of Mande and Fulani? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: "The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara."
^^^^^As I read, I knew there was going to be some kind of outrageous interpretation of the skulls disconnecting them from Africa.
^^^Here we go again..... I searched Tenerian, and this is what pops up first.
HUH????? I just found the article for the first time and the skull photos they show are of black people, they even had a photo of the woodabe and I compared, probably they have this photo because they have similar height very tall slender people.
What is so PUZZLING about their skull types, what is this nonsense????????? Is this from official articles or stupid eurocentric persons like dienkes greek globalization-loving anthropology blog????
ALL OF THESE SKULLS ARE ETHNIC INDIGENOUS BLACK POPULATION. They have the same traits Eurocentrics will say are not found on caucasian skull, now in this case like they did in natufians they will say Oh they are "Mediterraneans with negroid affinities!!" A JOKE! Sometimes I think they publish this just to make blacks mad and try to exude some power over them because they want to prove something that they still control this area of study or something. More non whites need to aim to be in these areas of research!!
Posts: 105 | From: Japan | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: You know its a lie when scientists start throwing around terms like "puzzling" or "startling". That should be an IMMEDIATE alert to anyone that what follows is pure Bull Sh*t. Rather than say we haven't fully analyzed the relationships between such skulls and skulls from other populations in a similar area over the same time period, they are just pulling stuff out their behinds. And they know it, because they did not even NAME what group of so called "mediterranean" skulls they were similar to. Not to mention the fact that they don't even describe why skulls can be classified as "Mediterranean" in the first place, as I doubt that the populations AROUND the Mediterranean have similar skeletal morphologies. So what makes Mediterranean a more significant geographical marker than African, considering that these skulls are found QUITE A LONG WAY from the Mediterranean to begin with? And on top of that, why don't they even identify it with NIGER as opposed to simply "Saharan" as if the Sahara is more significant than the presence of NIGER as a country?
quote: The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara.
Only a fool would even pretend to believe that the people smack dab in the middle of Niger 10,000 years ago were anything other than black Africans.
And, bottom line, anyone who is still questioning why this is still going on just need to examine their heads. Whites scientists WILL ALWAYS pretend that WHITE SKIN is the MOST SIGNIFICANT development in human evolution ever. They HAVE to because that is what their WHOLE WORLD VIEW is based on.
I mean the very idea that someone would be SHOCKED by finding stone tools and arrows in Africa, where humans have been practicing a hunter and gathering lifestyle for HUNDREDS of thousands, if not millions of years is absolutely ridiculous.
Agree with you completely.
Posts: 105 | From: Japan | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: "The shapes of the Tenerian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other groups from the southern Sahara."
^^^^^As I read, I knew there was going to be some kind of outrageous interpretation of the skulls disconnecting them from Africa.
^^^Here we go again..... I searched Tenerian, and this is what pops up first.
HUH????? I just found the article for the first time and the skull photos they show are of black people, they even had a photo of the woodabe and I compared, probably they have this photo because they have similar height very tall slender people.
What is so PUZZLING about their skull types, what is this nonsense????????? Is this from official articles or stupid eurocentric persons like dienkes greek globalization-loving anthropology blog????
ALL OF THESE SKULLS ARE ETHNIC INDIGENOUS BLACK POPULATION. They have the same traits Eurocentrics will say are not found on caucasian skull, now in this case like they did in natufians they will say Oh they are "Mediterraneans with negroid affinities!!" A JOKE! Sometimes I think they publish this just to make blacks mad and try to exude some power over them because they want to prove something that they still control this area of study or something. More non whites need to aim to be in these areas of research!!
Yea they already erroneously tried, with the false classification as a Mediterranean.
"The shapes of the Ténérian skulls are puzzling, researchers said, because they resemble those of Mediterranean people, not other nearby groups."
^^^^Quote from article
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it so unlikely that these might be people from the North (ie Mediterraneans)? North Africa has "Mediterranean" looking people. It's almost as if everyone is opposed to the mere possibility that these folks could be of Mediterranean origin.
However, I understand why you guys question their terminology, as I've heard of other "black" African's having "caucasoid" skulls. I'm interested in seeing how these "Mediterranean" skulls supposedly differ (or relate) from nearby modern day populations (including the Fula and the Tuareg).
In my honest opinion, I would guess that the modern day populations have origins in both of these distinct groups. I wouldn't doubt that there was a Mediterranean influence considering the Tuareg, who are a berber group.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ This is Charlie Bass. Allix, you know that picture suits you .
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mediterranean is meaningless in terms of skeletal morphology as no humans live in the ocean and oceans are not the basis of biological adaption which leads to variation in skeletal traits. Mediterranean is a code word for mixed, specifically mixed with Eurasian whites from outside Africa. The idea is that the people in Africa near the mediterranean are different from other Africans because of thousands of years of Eurasian white migrations into Africa from around the Mediterranean. However, that still does not make Mediterranean an accurate description of the variation found in populations across North Africa. African populations in North Africa DO NOT have the exact same skeletal morphology as Europeans who live near the Mediterranean or populations in the Levant who live on the Mediterranean and so forth. In order for there to be a true Mediterranean morphology in skeletal traits there would have to be a common set of features found in all populations around the Mediterranean from Africa to the Levant and into Europe. But there aren't, which therefore makes the term Mediterranean meaningless in terms of a 6,000 year old population which was somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 miles from away from the Mediterranean sea.
So I guess this guy has Mediterranean features:
Or this boy:
But the funny thing is I have even confused African features for white. One day, not too long ago, I was walking up to a group of black young adults in a parking lot and I coulda sworn there was a white girl in the middle of them. When I got closer I realized she was completely black African Ethiopian with so-called "white" features. I had to laugh at myself.
quote: Is it so unlikely that these might be people from the North (ie Mediterraneans)? North Africa has "Mediterranean" looking people. It's almost as if everyone is opposed to the mere possibility that these folks could be of Mediterranean origin.
However, I understand why you guys question their terminology, as I've heard of other "black" African's having "caucasoid" skulls. I'm interested in seeing how these "Mediterranean" skulls supposedly differ (or relate) from nearby modern day populations (including the Fula and the Tuareg).
In my honest opinion, I would guess that the modern day populations have origins in both of these distinct groups. I wouldn't doubt that there was a Mediterranean influence considering the Tuareg, who are a berber group.
Also Notice the Occipital region
(A)-Top view of mid-Holocene adult male (G1B11; ~4645 B.C.E.) buried in a recumbent hyperflexed posture. (B)-Bottom view of burial in A showing a mud turtle carapace (Pelusios adansonii) in contact with the ventral aspect of the pelvic girdle. (C)-Skull from burial in A and B showing high calvarium, narrow zygomatic width and more prognathous face. --Paul C. Sereno
The occipital bone, a saucer-shaped membrane bone situated at the back and lower part of the cranium, is trapezoid in shape and curved on itself. It is pierced by a large oval aperture, the foramen magnum, through which the cranial cavity communicates with the vertebral canal.
The male cranium below is from Wadi al-Halfa on the Sudan-Egypt border. Dating from the Mesolithic-Holocene period, it is typical of crania in Sudan and surrounding regions from that time frame.
Queen Ahmes-Nefertary
The Elder Lady(First identified as Queen Tiye) possesses an occipital bun comparable to Mesolithic Nubians.
Thutmose II displays the globular cranium common among more recent Nubians.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what I think is going to happen? Eurocentric will be so desperate, so very desperate to claim black discoveries that when the find they have no juice to go on anymore they will either start to claim elongated african blacks as whites like the mediteranean whites, try to divide blacks more so sub sahara blacks will somehow be a completely different RACE from Northern blacks.
Suddenly whites who are one of the least diverse groups in the world will make up 1/3 of the world population and span all across northern europe into the middle east and into africa as all whites but the MOST diverse group, blacks, will be designated as only one small group of people known as the "true blacks" called the "sub saharans" only found in WEST africa!
I think the reason actually for them saying race doesn't exist though I see the practicality is it, is that they are having hard time hanging unto things like "white egypt" without blurring the lines a bit.
RIDICULOUS.
Posts: 105 | From: Japan | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Knowledgeiskey, what is the significance of your post? Are you simply showing me "black" Africans that have Mediterranean skulls?
Posts: 72 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
scenarios of the roots of european people.
Printer-friendly view of this topic