PDA

View Full Version : never published papers on this blog about physical traits related to old migrations



paoloferrari
05-01-2017, 12:48 PM
Dental Anthropology of the Mesolithic and Neolithic Populations
of the Eastern European Forest-Steppe Zone
*
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alisa_Zubova2/publication/309001888_Dental_Anthropology_of_the_Mesolithic_an d_Neolithic_Populations_of_the_Eastern_European_Fo rest-Steppe_Zone/links/58010afa08ae6c2449f2bfc3.pdf

"Northeastern European Mesolithic dentitions indicate both Mongoloid admixture and continuity with Upper Paleolithic
groups."

"Mesolithic series from Ukraine are more specialized in the Caucasoid direction, while also showing certain
Upper Paleolithic traits."

"This suggests, not that the
Mongoloid dental complex
per se
was included in the Pit-
Comb Ware population; but rather, that the presence of
the Eastern phenes may be explained by admixture with
the Mesolithic groups of mixed ancestry"

"There is solid evidence
pointing towards a migratory in
flux from the East at the
time of the Onega culture, or even earlier. "

" migration from
the East did not lead to complete the disappearance of
the “evolutionarily conservative” dental complex in the
population of the North of the Russian Plain"

paoloferrari
05-01-2017, 03:19 PM
I searched but strangely it seems that no one has ever posted this link on anthrogenica before
(i don't like very much "caucasoid migration" but i posted the paper anyway)

CRANIOMETRIC EVIDENCE OF THE EARLY CAUCASOID MIGRATIONS
TO SIBERIA AND EASTERN CENTRAL ASIA, WITH REFERENCE
TO THE INDO-EUROPEAN PROBLEM

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241118475_CRANIOMETRIC_EVIDENCE_OF_THE_EARLY_CAUCA SOID_MIGRATIONS_TO_SIBERIA_AND_EASTERN_CENTRAL_ASI A_WITH_REFERENCE_TO_THE_INDO-EUROPEAN_PROBLEM

"On the other hand, not all the Eastern European
steppe populations of the Bronze Age appear to have been
autochthonous. The analysis of a larger number of groups
using the reduced trait battery reveals numerous early
(4th millennium BC and earlier) Central and Western
European parallels for groups such as the Pit Grave from
the Ingulets and early Catacomb from the Molochnaya.
These ties are especially evident in four gracile early
Catacomb groups of the Ukraine, which show 14 close ties
with Central and Western European populations and eight
with those of Transcaucasia and Southwestern Central
Asia. This apparently attests to migration, since the late
Catacomb people are more robust "

"The general conclusion
is rather modest: Afanasyev roots apparently lie in Eastern
European steppes and forest-steppes, but relating them to
a specifi c culture is impossible. "

"In the case of
the Okunev of Tuva, the most prominent are the Eastern
European steppe parallels (Pit Grave, early Catacomb,
Timber Grave), and the analysis based on a reduced trait
set additionally reveals an early Central European parallel
with a group related to the Funnel Beaker culture of the
late 4th millennium BC. The migration therefore was from
Europe rather than from Southwestern Central Asia or the
Near East as formerly believed. This was hardly the same
migration that had brought Afanasyev ancestors to the
Altai and to the Yenisei, since the Okunev people of Tuva
were less similar to Afanasyev people than to the Eastern
and Central European populations"

"The results suggest that representatives of both the
Andronov varieties, the Alakul and the Fedorov, were
descendants of the Bronze Age people of the Southern
Russian steppes "

"The route
from Southeastern Europe to Southern Siberia was
even longer and moreover was hardly straight. The key
events in proto-Andronov population history apparently
took place in the intermediate territory of the southern
Urals "

"The parallel with a Middle
and Late Bronze Age group from Turkmenia is singular
and may attest to a southward migration of proto-Iranians
from the steppes toward Iran"

Celt_??
05-06-2017, 12:06 PM
I have no knowledge about anatomical anthropology although I am a pathologist and majored in anatomy undergrad. I have been following the threads on ancient DNA and there is much discussion about Steppe peoples / Yamnaya who were pastorialists, domesticated the horse, invented the wheel and possibly spread proto-IndoEuropean language in all directions. I asked this question over there:

"Is anyone aware of evidence of significant change in skull shape ergo brain shape in steppe people which might account for their inventiveness (horse domestication, wheel, cart, copper metallurgy) and linguistic abilities? It strikes me that some of their genetic mutations must have affected their brains in very positive ways." It was off topic in a discussion of upcoming aDNA papers on Corded ware and Bell Beaker cultures.

It appears that this might be the best thread in this forum to ask my question. Otherwise please inform me where this question belongs. Any thoughts based upon actual skull analyses of Steppe peoples? Thank you.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 12:13 PM
I asked this question over there:

"Is anyone aware of evidence of significant change in skull shape ergo brain shape in steppe people which might account for their inventiveness (horse domestication, wheel, cart, copper metallurgy) and linguistic abilities? It strikes me that some of their genetic mutations must have affected their brains in very positive ways."

I aswered your question over there. I will repeat my answer here.


Oh dear. There is no evidence at all of any genetic mutations restricted to IE speakers that enhance brain power in the slightest. Their linguistic abilities are no greater than anyone else's. Their language suited them, but was not superior to (for example) Chinese. I must admit to a certain pleasure in discovering that some of my ancestors could have invented the wheel, as so many other inventions came from the Near East or China. IE speakers did not invent metallurgy. They did not invent farming. They did not invent writing. I could go on. But you get the picture. IE speakers are not some sort of racially superior beings.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 12:20 PM
Any thoughts based upon actual skull analyses of Steppe peoples?

Back in the days when we had no ancient DNA, people did rely quite a lot on physical anthropology to conceptualise relationships. Skull shape in particular was much studied. I recall from years ago a number of studies of the peoples of the European steppe round about the time that linguists envisage the Proto-Indo-European language developing. I cannot recall much of their content, except that there was nothing whatever suggesting an enlargement of the brain, or any particular part of the brain.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 12:24 PM
Examples:

A. Yu. Khudaverdyan, Indo-European Migrations: Their Origin from the Point of View of Odontology, Anthropologist, 13(2): 75-81 (2011). [Available online in pdf. Just Google the title]
A.G. Kozintsev, Craniometric evidence of the early Caucasoid migrations to Siberia and Eastern Central Asia, with reference to the Indo-European problem, Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 37/4 (2009) 125–136. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1563011010000152


Abstract from the latter:


Measurements of 220 male Neolithic and Bronze Age cranial series from Eurasia were subjected to multivariate statistical analysis. The results support the idea that people associated with the Catacomb culture played a major role in the origin of the Afanasyev culture. Okunev people of the Minusinsk Basin, those associated with Karakol, Ust- Tartas, and Krotovo cultures, and those buried in the Andronov-type cemeteries at Cherno-ozerye and Yelovka were of predominantly local Siberian origin. The Samus series resembles that from Poltavka burials. The Okunev people of Tuva and probably Yelunino people were likely descendants of the Pit Grave (Yamnaya) and early Catacomb populations of the Ukraine. The same is true of the Alakul people of western Kazakhstan, who in addition, have numerous affinities amongst Neolithic and Early Bronze Age groups of Central and Western Europe. The probable ancestors of certain Fedorov populations were the Afanasyev tribes of the Altai, whereas other Fedorov groups apparently descended from late Pit Grave and Catacomb tribes of the Northern Caucasus and the northwestern Caspian. People of Gumugou are closest to Fedorov groups of northeastern Kazakhstan and Rudny Altai, suggesting that Caucasoids migrated to Xinjiang from the north rather than from the west. Describing the gracile Caucasoids of Siberia and Eastern Central Asia as “Mediterraneans” is misleading since they display virtually no craniometric ties with the Near Eastern, Southwestern Central Asian or Transcaucasian groups. The totality of evidence suggests that they were Nordics.

Silesian
05-06-2017, 01:13 PM
I have no knowledge about anatomical anthropology although I am a pathologist and majored in anatomy undergrad. I have been following the threads on ancient DNA and there is much discussion about Steppe peoples / Yamnaya who were pastorialists, domesticated the horse, invented the wheel and possibly spread proto-IndoEuropean language in all directions. I asked this question over there:

"Is anyone aware of evidence of significant change in skull shape ergo brain shape in steppe people which might account for their inventiveness (horse domestication, wheel, cart, copper metallurgy) and linguistic abilities? It strikes me that some of their genetic mutations must have affected their brains in very positive ways." It was off topic in a discussion of upcoming aDNA papers on Corded ware and Bell Beaker cultures.

It appears that this might be the best thread in this forum to ask my question. Otherwise please inform me where this question belongs. Any thoughts based upon actual skull analyses of Steppe peoples? Thank you.

A different angle or metric to look at your idea adaptive inventiveness-Empires using adaptive/evolving intellingence/logic/problem solving to conquer ones opponent[using inventions or per se you have not invented however borrowed ideas Mongols horses/gunpowder-legendary Viking swords] . We don't have full genetic resources for the following empires, only partial results[Egypt for example King Tut's line -tested the result were never officially released.]
British Empire.
Egyptian Empire.
Mongol Empire.
Ottoman Empire.
Macedonian Empire.
Achaemenid Empire.
Roman Empire.
Byzantine Empire.
Of these Mongol were the only ones to conquer China. I read somewhere that Achaemenid Empire on absolute numeric basis[total global population] has been the largest empire.

Some long lasting Empires-
Empire of Japan: minimum 1743 years to date (see above)
Byzantine Empire: 874 years (uninterrupted from 330 to 1204)
Holy Roman Empire: 844 years (962-1806)
Zhou Empire: 790 years (1046–256 BCE)
Ethiopian Empire: 666 years (1270-1936)
Khmer Empire: 629 years (802–1431)

Ancestral Yamnaya postion relative to the above Empires;
https://www.sciencenews.org/sites/default/files/sn-2015/ss_yamnaya_map.jpg
http://spike.mtvnimages.com/images/shows/deadliest-warrior/articles/top10empires_blogimage.jpg

Celt_??
05-06-2017, 01:17 PM
Thank you again, Jean M. Admittedly cranial measurements would be a very crude way of learning what was actually going on inside the human brain and its neural networks - subtle changes associated with creativity and language ability. I believe I quote you accurately from Blood of the Celt referring to Steppe peoples and their newly acquired technologies, writing "they could go wherever they wanted". And they did, finding their way to Ireland and England in a relatively short time. Quite remarkable.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 01:31 PM
I believe I quote you accurately from Blood of the Celt referring to Steppe peoples and their newly acquired technologies, writing "they could go wherever they wanted".

I can't immediately place that, but here's the relevant section from Ancestral Journeys:



Herders to Hellenes

Why were Indo-European speakers so successful? Some point to their warlike culture and mastery of the chariot. Others have been keen to stress the signs of peaceful integration with Neolithic people. Some see the key as the collapse of Neolithic cultures. Others envision a diaspora led by trade, driven partly by the need for metals, especially tin, the rare, vital component of true bronze. No doubt all such factors played a part at certain times and places. For example the chariot seems to have been a factor in the creation of the Kingdom of Mitanni, but it was too late a development to influence the spread of Indo-European languages in Europe.

The fundamental advantage of Indo-European speakers was their economy. If we return to the concept of the Secondary Products Revolution (see p. 109), we see that using animals for traction and transport meant higher yields from the same man-hours.1 That would generate a greater food surplus, not only permitting population growth, but supporting specialists, such as metal-workers and a warrior aristocracy. The Late Copper to Bronze Age cultures of Europe were more mobile, more socially stratified, more dispersed in the landscape, than the cultures they supplanted. There was a new stress on the individual, visible in single graves. Their elite members were buried with pomp.2 This new way of living fits the picture we get from the reconstructed PIE vocabulary. They had chiefs and warriors. They spread new technology across Europe: horse-riding, wheeled vehicles and metallurgy in gold, copper and bronze.3

Yet these wanderers were neither urban nor literate. So as they advanced there was a fascinating collision of cultures in key zones, out of which sprang the great civilizations of the Classical world. The Indo-European speakers absorbed a great deal from the cultures they eventually overtook. We first see this pattern in Anatolia, where incoming pastoralists arrived perhaps around 3000 BC, to coexist with an established and successful agricultural society. Their speech gradually evolved into Hittite and other Anatolian languages. It was over a thousand years later that Hittite warlords took over Hattic kingdoms, borrowing the vocabulary to go with them, such as words for 'king' and 'queen'. They also acquired the literacy that is so useful to state rulers, writing in the cuneiform script that had first emerged in Sumer.4 (Illustration 64) As we shall see in Chapter 9, the genetic evidence suggests that the Indo-Europeans generally filtered into such thriving urban societies, melding with their inhabitants over time, whereas areas where farming had not prospered to the same degree offered greater possibilities for expansion.

Celt_??
05-06-2017, 02:09 PM
I can't immediately place that, but here's the relevant section from Ancestral Journeys:

Thank you for taking the time to educate me, really I appreciate your extra effort!!

Ral
05-06-2017, 02:53 PM
Why were Indo-European speakers so successful? Some point to their warlike culture and mastery of the chariot. Others have been keen to stress the signs of peaceful integration with Neolithic people. Some see the key as the collapse of Neolithic cultures. Others envision a diaspora led by trade, driven partly by the need for metals, especially tin, the rare, vital component of true bronze. No doubt all such factors played a part at certain times and places. For example the chariot seems to have been a factor in the creation of the Kingdom of Mitanni, but it was too late a development to influence the spread of Indo-European languages in Europe.

The fundamental advantage of Indo-European speakers was their economy. If we return to the concept of the Secondary Products Revolution (see p. 109), we see that using animals for traction and transport meant higher yields from the same man-hours.1 That would generate a greater food surplus, not only permitting population growth, but supporting specialists, such as metal-workers and a warrior aristocracy. The Late Copper to Bronze Age cultures of Europe were more mobile, more socially stratified, more dispersed in the landscape, than the cultures they supplanted. There was a new stress on the individual, visible in single graves. Their elite members were buried with pomp.2 This new way of living fits the picture we get from the reconstructed PIE vocabulary. They had chiefs and warriors. They spread new technology across Europe: horse-riding, wheeled vehicles and metallurgy in gold, copper and bronze.3

Yet these wanderers were neither urban nor literate. So as they advanced there was a fascinating collision of cultures in key zones, out of which sprang the great civilizations of the Classical world. The Indo-European speakers absorbed a great deal from the cultures they eventually overtook. We first see this pattern in Anatolia, where incoming pastoralists arrived perhaps around 3000 BC, to coexist with an established and successful agricultural society. Their speech gradually evolved into Hittite and other Anatolian languages. It was over a thousand years later that Hittite warlords took over Hattic kingdoms, borrowing the vocabulary to go with them, such as words for 'king' and 'queen'. They also acquired the literacy that is so useful to state rulers, writing in the cuneiform script that had first emerged in Sumer.4 (Illustration 64) As we shall see in Chapter 9, the genetic evidence suggests that the Indo-Europeans generally filtered into such thriving urban societies, melding with their inhabitants over time, whereas areas where farming had not prospered to the same degree offered greater possibilities for expansion.



IMHO, cited author is not very good economist.


They had chiefs and warriors. They spread new technology across Europe: horse-riding, wheeled vehicles.


As i know, there is several thousand years distance between the invention of wheeled vehicles and riding . Horse riding in Europe start to extend only in the first millennium BC, but for example, horsemen were so unaccustomed to the Greeks that there is even a version that the image of the centaur is painted from them.
Not steppe cultures have long used wheeled vehicles, so I do not see any advantages of steppe people in this. As for the chariots, I have already cited sources: chariots was fixed in the steppe in a narrow gap of 200 years and so it did not take root, and even disappears from the steppe before horseback riding appeared. Non-steppe Greeks used it much longer. And there is no evidence of its military use in the steppe. And this is understandable: steppe is not highway and chariot will shake so that I do not even understand how to fight effectively using it . I think the military importance of chariots is greatly exaggerated.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 03:02 PM
As i know, there is several thousand years distance between the invention of wheeled vehicles and riding ...
We have bit-evidence of riding. I quote Ancestral Journeys again. (I am the author).


Bones of large horses, probably from the steppes, began to appear in the archaeological record of Danube valley, central and western Europe, the North Caucasus, Transcaucasia, and eastern Anatolia by about 3500 BC. At the same time the Botai culture appeared in the steppes of northern Kazakhstan. This culture had a close relationship with the horse - it provided them with meat, milk and transport. They were probably horse-hunters until taking up horse-herding. Horse domestication at Botai is indicated by traces of mare's milk, and phosphorus-enriched soils, suggestive of dung deposits, inside what could be the remains of horse corrals.1

Domestication of the horse need not involve riding at Botai. It could be simply kept as a meat animal or as beast of burden.2 Yet riding would make it possible to control much larger herds of animals, and to venture further with them. Traces of bit wear on horse jaw bones from Botai provide the convincing clue that some of their horses were ridden.3 The evidence from Botai clinches the argument that horse domestication went hand in hand with riding.

1 = Outram 2009. And see Kalieva and Logvin 2011.
2 = Drews 2004, 17-22.
3 = Outram 2009.

Ral
05-06-2017, 03:17 PM
We have bit-evidence of riding. I quote Ancestral Journeys again. (I am the author).



1 = Outram 2009. And see Kalieva and Logvin 2011.
2 = Drews 2004, 17-22.
3 = Outram 2009.
I know about Botaya culture. So far this is only a hypothesis. But we are talking about the spread of horse riding in Europe. It appeared as a mass phenomenon only in the first millennium BC (Apparently as a response to Scythian raids)

Silesian
05-06-2017, 04:07 PM
I searched but strangely it seems that no one has ever posted this link on anthrogenica before
(i don't like very much "caucasoid migration" but i posted the paper anyway)
"The parallel with a Middle and Late Bronze Age group from Turkmenia is singular
and may attest to a southward migration of proto-Iranians
from the steppes toward Iran"
Parallels also exist in Europe. Large swaths of ydna were pruned, wiped out of existence/, like ydna I2 in parts of Europe.
http://i58.tinypic.com/i5rm2b.jpg

Accomplished by an influx of hunter/Gatherer-semi-nomadic pastoralist tribes, showing signs of Yersinia pestis.
http://www.nature.com/news/bronze-age-skeletons-were-earliest-plague-victims-1.18633

https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/images/sioux-people-tepee-2.jpg

Jean M
05-06-2017, 04:15 PM
I know about Botaya culture. So far this is only a hypothesis. But we are talking about the spread of horse riding in Europe. It appeared as a mass phenomenon only in the first millennium BC (Apparently as a response to Scythian raids)

We need to distinguish between the specific use of horses in warfare (cavalry) and horse riding in general. Riding a horse permits the rider to travel further for less effort, for example in minding herds on the steppe. It is thus in keeping with the rest of the Secondary Products Revolution, in which animals were kept for uses other than meat. They were kept for traction, wool, milk etc. There is no need to suppose that the only possible reason for any of this was to gain military advantage. The Secondary Products Revolution permitted greater return from the land for less human effort. This meant a greater surplus, which could be used to support a specialist military, just as it could support full-time potters or smiths. But that is not the whole story.

I realise that military history fascinates a lot of people. It sells a lot of books for sure. :) But I am not a military historian.

Ral
05-06-2017, 04:47 PM
We need to distinguish between the specific use of horses in warfare (cavalry) and horse riding in general. Riding a horse permits the rider to travel further for less effort, for example in minding herds on the steppe. It is thus in keeping with the rest of the Secondary Products Revolution, in which animals were kept for uses other than meat. They were kept for traction, wool, milk etc. There is no need to suppose that the only possible reason for any of this was to gain military advantage. The Secondary Products Revolution permitted greater return from the land for less human effort. This meant a greater surplus, which could be used to support a specialist military, just as it could support full-time potters or smiths. But that is not the whole story.

I realise that military history fascinates a lot of people. It sells a lot of books for sure. :) But I am not a military historian.
Do you know any highly developed ancient steppe cultures such as Ancient Egyptian, Ancient Chinese,Ancient Rome, Ancient Greek, Harappa? Recent steppe cultures looked absolutely behind the times. And the Scythians (the heirs of the earlier steppe cultures) even in those old times looked like absolute savages. Where are these highly developed mobile steppe cultures with their highly developed economics?

Jean M
05-06-2017, 05:30 PM
Do you know any highly developed ancient steppe cultures such as Ancient Egyptian, Ancient Chinese,Ancient Rome, Ancient Greek, Harappa?

Steppe cultures? These are civilizations, some Indo-European speaking, some not.


Where are these highly developed mobile steppe cultures with their highly developed economics?

Highly developed? The Secondary Products Revolution was not just taken up by steppe people. It was an improvement on the earliest type of farming in the Neolithic. The SPR followed the earliest farming in the Near East, for example. Obviously urban civilizations represent the next level, built on a higher agricultural surplus funding markets and trade. What is the problem?

Awale
05-06-2017, 06:03 PM
Steppe cultures? These are civilizations, some Indo-European speaking, some not.

I believe he's trying to say "Do you know of any steppe cultures as developed as...?" Nonsensical question, really. How the hell would people living in a predominantly steppe region even have the adequate environment to some day, enough outside influences to help them along or not, become akin to the Ancient Egyptians or what have you? They were living a pretty decent lifestyle for their environment, frankly.


Recent steppe cultures looked absolutely retarded. And the Scythians (the heirs of the earlier steppe cultures) even in those old times looked like absolute savages. Where are these highly developed mobile steppe cultures with their highly developed economics?

Jesus, calm down, broski. I agree that they were arguably "barbaric" in comparison to more settled pre-modern civilizations like the ones you mentioned and I sometimes get annoyed at folks who constantly glorify them as though were these great-gods (though Jean is not of this sort and is a serious and respectable individual, in my eyes) but I honestly get annoyed at this constant degrading of nomadic or semi-nomadic peoples as well. "Savages! Dirty animals! Retarded!" It sounds like an over-reaction to the romanticist bunch and people like you are as bad as they are, in my humble opinion. You degrade where they would romanticize. A more sensible approach like what I often see from Jean is preferable, no doubt.

Ral
05-06-2017, 06:25 PM
Steppe cultures? These are civilizations, some Indo-European speaking, some not.



Highly developed? The Secondary Products Revolution was not just taken up by steppe people. It was an improvement on the earliest type of farming in the Neolithic. The SPR followed the earliest farming in the Near East, for example. Obviously urban civilizations represent the next level, built on a higher agricultural surplus funding markets and trade. What is the problem?
The problem is that in the steppe there was no highly developed civilization despite the alleged "technological development" of the steppe.
Wheeled vehicles are important to the economy, but not chariots. In addition, we found out that horseback riding has nothing to do with the spread of Indo-European languages, because as a mass phenomenon it appeared much later.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 06:37 PM
The problem is that in the steppe there was no highly developed civilization despite the alleged "technological development" of the steppe.

It is not a problem. I am simply saying that the SPR would give IE speakers an advantage in moving into areas that did not already have SPR (such as Late Neolithic Britain). I am not trying to explain every single episode in the prehistory and history of IE speakers from 3500 BC to the present. As I said, various other factors no doubt influenced the outcome in specific cases, such as chariots in the Mitanni.

As for IE-speaking civilizations - these occurred far later than the departure from the steppe in the Copper Age period. They tend to arise around great rivers or well-placed ports. It is a complex story.

Ral
05-06-2017, 06:42 PM
Jesus, calm down, broski. I agree that they were arguably "barbaric" in comparison to more settled pre-modern civilizations like the ones you mentioned and I sometimes get annoyed at folks who constantly glorify them as though were these great-gods (though Jean is not of this sort and is a serious and respectable individual, in my eyes) but I honestly get annoyed at this constant degrading of nomadic or semi-nomadic peoples as well. "Savages! Dirty animals! Retarded!" It sounds like an over-reaction to the romanticist bunch and people like you are as bad as they are, in my humble opinion. You degrade where they would romanticize. A more sensible approach like what I often see from Jean is preferable, no doubt.

This is not the first time that you are trying to give me an assessment. Relax, please.For your information, I'm anti-racist, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot and cosmopolitan. But we can not in this topic do not operate with such concepts as "cultural development", "сivilization","race" and the like at the http://www.anthrogenica.com site. Probably I choose not too soft expressions through language barrier, but I think that Jean M understands me.

Jean M
05-06-2017, 06:52 PM
I think that Jean M understands me.

I was a little confused by the sentence that Awale explained to me, but understand you now.

Awale
05-06-2017, 07:17 PM
This is not the first time that you are trying to give me an assessment. Relax, please.

Really? I don't remember addressing you before. I probably have, though. Just a shitty memory nowadays (uni work is up my buttox). But no worries, I'm quite relaxed.


For your information, I'm anti-racist, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot and cosmopolitan.

Mashallah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mashallah). I don't mean that sarcastically, for the record.


But we can not in this topic do not operate with such concepts as "cultural development", "сivilization","race" and the like at the http://www.anthrogenica.com site.

I agree about "race"/racialism, it's pseudoscience. But what exactly is the issue with concepts like "cultural development" and "civilization"? I guess it's sometimes subjective if a culture is "developed" or "underdeveloped" (some Anarcho-Communists would tell everyone in this thread that the Capitalist and Statist society we live in is "underdeveloped" or "primitive", for instance) but exactly what is wrong with discussing those two things otherwise? It's not like Jean is pushing crazy pseudoscience or something... Only person I've seen adopting such elements was "Celt" with a few prior posts. Is that what you were bothered by?


Probably I choose not too soft expressions through language barrier, but I think that Jean M understands me.

I see. Forgivable, then. Given than English is not your first language but do take it easy with the use of terms like savages, retarded, etc. You're just going to inject annoyance into the discussion, friend.

Ral
05-06-2017, 07:56 PM
terms like savages, retarded, etc. .
Oh. I thought that "retarded" means only "back,behind the times". Its very funny.I suggest I will fixed this error, аnd you delete posts with claims

Awale
05-06-2017, 08:06 PM
I suggest I will fixed this error

Do do that if you wish to, friend. :)


, аnd you delete posts with claims

You mean delete your posts? I'm not a Mod anymore so I can't do that. If you mean mine; don't see why. :|


Oh. I thought that "retarded" means only "back,behind the times".

Ah, a simple language misunderstanding, then. No problem in that case. You did use words like "savages" as a well, though, that was a bit excessive too but it's fine, I guess. I can see you apparently didn't mean that much harm, I hope so at least.

Ral
05-06-2017, 08:39 PM
I guess it's sometimes subjective if a culture is "developed" or "underdeveloped" (some Anarcho-Communists would tell everyone in this thread that the Capitalist and Statist society we live in is "underdeveloped" or "primitive", for instance) but exactly what is wrong with discussing those two things otherwise?

I will try to explain it.
I am convinced that there are objective parameters in assessing the development of cultures (we can argue about them). What does this mean? I have good reason to believe that the language transfers with a more developed culture. And what does that give? Probably, we can predict (with 80% certainty) which language became dominant after the union of people of groups "A" and "B". The dominant languages ​​in Europe are Indo-European. And dominant culture is "farmer". So the farmers spoke Indo-European. But! The hunter-gatherer and steppe people could quickly adopt the farming system and become more successful than the "old farmers." In this case hunter-gatherers or steppe people could speak Indo-European languages. But how likely is this scenario? I think it is less likely than the first. It is in this sense that I use the terms "high culture".

Ral
05-06-2017, 08:42 PM
I ask the moderators, please, remove posts that are not related to the topic, which have arisen from a misunderstanding.

paoloferrari
05-07-2017, 09:24 AM
THE MAIKOP CRANIA REVISITED

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1563011010000516

"Abstract

Measurements of crania of people associated with the Early Bronze Age Maikop culture of the Northern Caucasus are analyzed. Data on Maikop males, new and previously published, were compared with those concerning chronologically and geographically related people using the canonical variate analysis. The Maikop series turned out to be isolated and no close parallels to it were found among the Bronze Age groups, either from the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Eastern Europe or from the Caucasus and Southwestern Central Asia. While certain parallels seem to point to the Near East, they are too few to warrant definite conclusions."

paoloferrari
05-07-2017, 09:27 AM
SKELETAL REMAINS FROM BUSTON VI – A SAPALLI CULTURE CEMETERY IN UZBEKISTAN

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1563011010000498

"Abstract

Human skeletal remains from a Bronze Age cemetery at Buston VI, southern Uzbekistan, are described. The burials date back to the Molali and Buston stages of the Sapalli culture and are relevant for reconstructing the culture of the Northern Bactrian agriculturalists. Results of the demographic, craniometric, osteometric, and paleopathological analysis suggest that the Buston population was intermediate between the Bronze Age populations of the steppes and the southern agriculturalists. The southern tendency, linking Buston VI with the Neolithic groups of Southwestern Central Asia, is much more distinct. The steppe component was likely introduced by the Andronovo tribes. In terms of the totality of demographic patterns, skeletal constitution, and dental pathology, the group is close to that represented by the skeletal series from Sapallitepa, Uzbekistan."

paoloferrari
05-18-2017, 10:21 AM
waiting for india adna paper...


india

Indian Craniometric Variability and Affinities

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3886603/

"Similarly, looking at cranial index we find little if any difference between northern Indian males (70.7–72.3) and southern Indian males (71.3–73.0) or between Indo-Aryan males (70.7–72.2) and Dravidian males (71.3–73.0)."

"This indicates the existence of a population complex extending from Scandinavia south-south-east to Sri Lanka. Gene flow across this continuously populated region would have been relatively uninterrupted in comparison to the formidable barriers to gene flow presented by the Atlantic Ocean to the northwest, the Sahara Desert to the southwest, and the Himalayas and Eurasian Steppe to the northeast. Upper and middle facial protrusion are developed particularly strongly in southern India (Figure 6). This observation is not explicable in terms of a contribution to the southern Indian gene pool from Central Asia and/or the Mediterranean. On the other hand, the intermediate position of northern Indians between southern Indians, and Caucasoids northwest of India, could be explicable in terms of the incursion of Indo-European (Indo-Aryan) speakers into northern India from the northwest, or alternatively it could simply reflect clinal variation"

"We recognise that craniometric data are not as powerful as genetic data in unmasking populations' biological relatedness. Indeed, where our results could not duplicate the affinity between southern Indians and Andaman Islanders suggested by genetic data, we attributed the discrepancy to southern Indians' craniometric specialisation"

"Otherwise, Caucasoid series from Egypt and Europe are closest to Indians, especially northern Indians. The similarity between these Caucasoids and northern Indians would be expected from geographical considerations, but it may also reflect some degree of population incursion into northern India associated with the introduction of Indo-Aryan languages"

paoloferrari
05-18-2017, 11:22 AM
also craniometry not only adna said danube gorge or iron gates people still persisted in neolithic

i made a research by title, seem never published on this site and ,althought i 'm dubious since its importance i mention the article anyway considering the important adna results from the iron gates recently:

http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1698&context=humbiol

A Craniometric Perspective on the Transition to Agriculture in Europe



"Results indicated (1) little similarity between Mesolithic/
Epipaleolithic hunters and Early Neolithic farmers in any region but with
evidence of local continuity between Mesolithic and Neolithic populations in the
Danube Gorges and (2) morphometric similarities between Catal Hoyu ̈ k and
early Neolithic mainland Greek and southeastern European groups. However, the
craniometric affinities between circum-Mediterranean Early Neolithic series
(Cardial/Impresso) did not reveal any clear patterns, mainly because of the small
number of available relatively complete crania and unclear provenance for some
of the specimens employed. These results did not provide support for a local
transition to agriculture in southeastern or central Europe as no evidence for
hunterfarmer craniometric affinities existed. It, therefore, seemed plausible to
hypothesize on the basis of these results that the founding population of Early
Neolithic Europeans was Catal Hoyuk (or some Anatolian/Near Eastern early
farming population). However, an assessment was not possible on the basis of
these results as to whether the observed craniometric patterns best fit a demic
diffusion model, a stochastic microevolutionary model (such as isolation-by-
distance), or any other non-neutral (i.e., selective) model."

" Using an
explicitly model-based approach, our results found that “Forest Neolithic”
populations showed greater affinities with earlier Mesolithic populations from across
Europe and the Near East than they did with contemporaneous Neolithic populations
living in central Europe and Scandinavia"

paoloferrari
05-18-2017, 01:06 PM
Craniofacial morphometric variation and the biological history of the peopling of Sardinia

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X10001071

"Abstract

The aim of this work is to explore the pattern of craniofacial morphometric variation and the relationships among five prehistoric Sardinian groups dated from Late Neolithic to the Nuragic Period (Middle and Late Bronze Age), in order to formulate hypotheses on the peopling history of Sardinia. Biological relationships with coeval populations of central peninsular Italy were also analysed to detect influences from and towards extra-Sardinian sources. Furthermore, comparison with samples of contemporary populations from Sardinia and from continental Italy provided an indication of the trend leading to the final part of the peopling history. Finally, Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic samples were included in the analyses to compare the prehistoric Sardinians with some of their potential continental ancestors. The analysis is based on multivariate techniques including Mahalanobis D2 distance, non-parametric multidimensional scaling (MDS) and principal component analysis (PCA). The results showed the tendency to progressive differentiation between Sardinian groups and peninsular Italian groups, with the possible exception of a discontinuity showed by the Bonnànaro (Early Bronze Age) Sardinian sample. Several aspects of the morphological results were found to agree with the current genetic evidence available for the present-day Sardinian population and a Nuragic sample: (1) biological divergence between the Sardinian and peninsular Italian populations; (2) similarity/continuity among Neolithic, Bronze Age and recent Sardinians; (3) biological separation between the Nuragic and Etruscan populations; (4) contribution of a Palaeo-Mesolithic gene pool to the genetic structure of current Sardinians."

paoloferrari
05-18-2017, 01:11 PM
Late Pleistocene human evolution in Sicily: comparative morphometric analysis of Grotta di San Teodoro craniofacial remains

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24431241_Late_Pleistocene_human_evolution_in_Sicil y_comparative_morphometric_analysis_of_Grotta_di_S an_Teodoro_craniofacial_remains

"Abstract
The paleoanthropological remains from Grotta di San Teodoro near Acquedolci (province of Messina, Italy) represent the oldest and largest skeletal collection yet found documenting human settlement of Sicily. The sample, attributed to the Late Epigravettian (between 14,000 and 10,000 years B.P.), consists of seven variously complete adult individuals (San Teodoro 1-7). We compare the cranial sample to an array of both prehistoric and recent samples using multivariate techniques including D(2) distance analysis, canonical variate analysis, cluster analysis, and multidimensional scaling. Overall, the San Teodoro cranial sample displays a morphometric pattern close to Western European groups of similar antiquity, in particular those from Central and Southern Italy. The morphometric affinities indicate that these people probably came from peninsular Italy by sea during the Late Epigravettian epoch. An alternative hypothesis is that they descended from immigrants that arrived by land during a low sea level episode corresponding to the maximum Würmian regression, about 18,000 years B.P, with gene flow accounting for the morphological homogeneity with the populations of peninsular Italy. The San Teodoro skeletal sample provides the first reliable evidence for human settlement of Sicily. "

.

paoloferrari
05-18-2017, 01:23 PM
Craniometric analysis of European Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic samples supports discontinuity at the Late Glacial Maximum

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5010115/

"Abstract

The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) represents the most significant climatic event since the emergence of anatomically modern humans (AMH). In Europe, the LGM may have played a role in changing morphological features as a result of adaptive and stochastic processes. We use craniometric data to examine morphological diversity in pre- and post-LGM specimens. Craniometric variation is assessed across four periods—pre-LGM, late glacial, Early Holocene and Middle Holocene—using a large, well-dated, dataset. Our results show significant differences across the four periods, using a MANOVA on size-adjusted cranial measurements. A discriminant function analysis shows separation between pre-LGM and later groups. Analyses repeated on a subsample, controlled for time and location, yield similar results. The results are largely influenced by facial measurements and are most consistent with neutral demographic processes. These findings suggest that the LGM had a major impact on AMH populations in Europe prior to the Neolithic."

paoloferrari
05-29-2017, 03:49 PM
The Biological History of Homo sapiens in Island Southeast Asia

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119251583.ch4/summary

"Summary

This chapter addresses the biological history of population migration across Southeast Asia based on craniometric analysis using pertinent archaeological skeletal materials. The first migration, of anatomically and behaviorally modern Homo sapiens ancestral to the living Australo-Papuan populations, witnessed the Paleolithic settlement of many regions of Island Southeast Asia, together with New Guinea, the Bismarck and Solomon Islands, and Australia. Debates over the population history of Southeast Asia have generally revolved around the issue of whether the pre-Neolithic inhabitants were of a different biological lineage from the Neolithic and post-Neolithic populations, including present-day ones. The relevant skeletal material is discussed in more detail in the following invited contribution by Hirofumi Matsumura and his colleagues, who focus for their mid-Holocene data on pre-Neolithic cemetery populations from sites in southern China, northern Vietnam, and Peninsular Malaysia."

paoloferrari
06-03-2017, 04:10 PM
Interaction between Steppe and Agricultural Tribes during the Bronze Age: Mophological Aspects


https://www.academia.edu/26765031/Interaction_between_Steppe_and_Agricultural_Tribes _during_the_Bronze_Age_Mophological_Aspects



" Here we discuss the results of research conducted on the vari
-
ability of anthropological features of the populations of Turk
-
menistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, China, etc., from the Late Stone Age and Bronze Age. A detailed analysis was
carried out on 85 craniological series from burial grounds at
Gonur and Buston VI (see Table 1). We examined skulls from
the steppe, forest-steppe, desert, and semi-desert areas of Cen-
tral Asia, Ural, Siberia and the North Caucasus. Factor analysis was used to explore the data obtained. Four factors, describ
-
ing more than 70% of craniological variations, were extracted. The rst factor (describing 29.6% of variability) differentiated groups according to the lengthwise sizes of the head and face, mostly taking into consideration cranial breadth, bezygomatic diameter, and orbit width, as well as minimum frontal diam
-eters, upper face and nose heights. The second factor (17.4% of variability) differentiated groups mainly according to facial height, nose and orbit heights. The highest loadings of the third
factor, which determined 14.9% of variability, considered im
- portant characteristics such as cranial length and breadth, and the fourth factor (10,4% of variability) – nose breadth. As a
result, we identied two major anthropological groups: the rst comprising North Kazakhstan, South Siberia, Altai, and Ural-Volga, populations with larger latitudinal proportions of the head and face, as well as a smaller width of the forehead,
upper face height, and height of the nose; and the second com-
prising the southern territories, including the majority of the populations of Iran, Pakistan, the Indus valley, and the southern regions of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan as well, who had the opposite combination of features: long and nar
-
row heads, high, narrow faces and noses, and round orbits. The analysis conducted has enabled us to afrm that Southern Turk
-
menistan manifestations of minimal impurities with regard to anthropological components, which could be linked to pastoral surroundings, were not seen prior to the middle of the 2
nd
mil-lennium BC"


"This might be con
-nected primarily to the general brachicephalization processes manifested at that time. But
it is also likely that this was the result of a gradual penetration of groups from the Eurasian Steppe to the south"

" Another important point to bear in mind is that in the southern regions of Central
Asia there were no Bronze Age sites (or earlier ones), where the presence of the so-called ‘Protoeuropean’ anthropological type (a massive variant with a large sized head, low and wide face, rectangular orbits, and with a attening of the upper part of the face) was fixed.
This variant has only been described by researchers in the northern regions of Central Asia.
The groups with a small proportion of the ‘Paleoeuropeoid’ anthropological component in
their composition reached southern regions in the Bronze Age. The most prevalent among them still being the Mediterranean type. Such a situation, of course, leads to an increase in
mixed populations (i.e., in later groups including those of the Iron Age) with the character
-istics presented in both groups becoming increasingly mixed (e.g. Mediterranean traits). "

paoloferrari
06-18-2017, 02:18 PM
Evaluating the biological discontinuity hypothesis of Cis-Baikal Early versus Late Neolithic-Early Bronze Age populations using dental non-metric traits

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618215009532

"Abstract

The aim of this study is to assess dental non-metric trait frequencies of Middle Holocene hunter–gatherer populations from the western Lake Baikal region of Siberia, the Russian Federation, for evidence of population discontinuity. Mortuary practices, cranial morphology, and mitochondrial DNA data have led to the hypothesis of a discontinuity event between the Early Neolithic (EN; ∼7500–7025 cal BP) and Late Neolithic–Early Bronze Age (LN–EBA; ∼5500–3700 cal BP) populations. Dental non-metric traits are highly heritable and can be used to infer biological affinity between populations. Mean measure of divergence results find that dental non-metric trait frequencies vary between archaeological periods in statistical terms, but the extent of difference is minor. In the LN–EBA sample, several, but not all, trait frequencies shift towards the range characteristic of populations with Western European genetic admixture. Gene flow from a population to the south of the Baikal region is the most likely explanation for this shift, although the role of genetic drift and the impact of small sample sizes cannot be discounted. Two cemeteries along the Angara River on either side of the discontinuity event have the most similar dental non-metric trait patterns. The similarity of traits between the EN site of Lokomotiv and the LN component of the site of Ust'-Ida I could suggest population continuity or genetic admixture between groups in this area. Dental non-metric trait data are shown to be an informative avenue for assessing past population events, revealing trends not detected by other data types, and directing research into our reconstruction of the history of these groups away from the shores of Lake Baikal to along the Angara River."

http://www.academia.edu/18731095/Evaluating_the_biological_discontinuity_hypothesis _of_Cis-Baikal_Early_versus_Late_Neolithic-Early_Bronze_Age_populations_using_dental_non-metric_traits

paoloferrari
06-20-2017, 09:40 AM
Biological differences related to cultural variability during the Neolithic in a micro-geographical area of the Iberian Peninsula

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-017-0515-4


"Abstract

This paper presents dental morphological data of Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age populations from the Catalan Pre-Pyrenean area. The Neolithic group, in particular, differs from those of surrounding areas in its funerary culture: the building of cists, which is not present in the Sepulcres de Fossa Culture. A minimum number of 118 individuals from this area were studied for this work, and the data were compared with those of other Iberian and European groups. The results indicate that the two micro-regional groups from the Catalan area (Pre-Pyrenean and Pre-Coastal) were biologically different during the Neolithic and the Chalcolithic, but not in the Bronze Age, when they also appeared to be more homogeneous culturally. In addition, both areas differ biologically from coetaneous Italian groups, although those closer to the coast show slightly smaller differences. Finally, the Bronze Age groups also present fewer differences with regard to the Italian Bronze Age’s group. Therefore, the results suggest that the Catalan Neolithic population had two separate origins, related to cultural patterns, and that differences between the groups decreased within time, probably due to trade-related activities. Moreover, the fact that the difference with Italian populations decreased during the Bronze Age suggests major population movements through the Mediterranean that would affect the biological composition of the human groups."

paoloferrari
06-25-2017, 05:23 PM
Resolving Relationships Between Several Neolithic and Mesolithic Populations in Northern Eurasia Using Geometric Morphometrics

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/articles/28639281/

"

Objectives: Remains from several Eastern European and Siberian Mesolithic and Neolithic sites are analysed to clarify their biological relationships. We assume that groups' geographical distances correlate with genetic and, therefore, morphological distances between them.

Materials and methods: Material includes complete male crania from several Mesolithic and Neolithic burial sites across Northern Eurasia and from several modern populations. Geometric morphometrics and multivariate statistical techniques are applied to explore morphological trends, group distances, and correlations with their geographical position, climate, and the time of origin.

Results: Despite an overlap in the morphology among the modern and archeological groups, some of them show significant morphological distances. Geographical parameters account for only a small proportion of cranial variation in the sample, with larger variance explained by geography and age together. Expectations of isolation by distance are met in some but not in all cases. Climate accounts for a large proportion of autocorrelation with geography. Nearest-neighbor joining trees demonstrate group relationships predicted by the regression on geography and on climate.

Discussion: The obtained results are discussed in application to relationships between particular groups. Unlike the Ukrainian Mesolithic, the Yuzhny Oleni Ostrov Mesolithic displays a high morphological affinity with several groups from Northern Eurasia of both European and Asian origin. A possibility of a common substrate for the Yuzhny Oleni Ostrov Mesolithic and Siberian Neolithic groups is reviewed. The Siberian Neolithic is shown to have morphological connection with both modern Siberian groups and the Native North Americans."

paoloferrari
08-20-2017, 10:31 AM
Human teeth from Western Siberia Upper Paleolithic sites

https://isdm-iapo-2017.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/ISDM_IAPO_2017_prog_book_index_1.pdf

"The aim of the research is the detailed analyses of five dentitions were found in the Upper Paleolithic
sites of Southern Siberia and Altai Mountains. Mal'ta 1 and Mal'ta 2 were discovered during the excavation of Mal'ta site (trans Baikal region, 24 520‐24 090 cal. BP), a third dentition is from the Listvenka site (Krasnoyarsk area, 13100 410, 13470 285 BC), a f
ourth dentition is from the Afontova gora II site (Krasnoyarsk area, 16,940‐16,480 cal BP) and the fifth dentition was discovered in the Upper Paleolithic layer 31 of Strashnaya cave site (Altai Mountains, the layer was dated 1915080, but the stratigraphic context of these teeth is problematic). All samples were analyzed using the ASUDAS protocal and standard methods in Russian dental anthropology. We also assessed whether Neanderthal traits were present and used a protocol previously developed for describing plesiomorphic traits in modern human populations. The results of this analysis were compared with dental patterns of European Upper Paleolithic and Asian anatomically modern humans. The dentitions display common features including sixth and seve
nth cusps, derivatives of cingulum, anterior and posterior fovea on lower molars and the absence or very low frequency of the distal
trigonid crest and deflecting wrinkle. This set of dental features, attributed to the South Siberian Upper Paleolithic, is neutral with regards to the east to west differentiation vector and may be independent of the Eastern/Mongoloid and Western/Caucasoid dental complexes. "

Dentition of the Hun Warrior from Ptuj (Slovenia)
"In 2000, during the excavation of the Late Antique necropolis in Ptuj (eastern Slovenia) archaeologists
under the direction of M. Lubsina Tusek discovered an almost complete skeleton of a young male with
artificially deformed skull. The grave goods were represented by gilded bronze earring, parts of belt set, coin, arrowhead, and iron sword. They indicate that the deceased was a member of the Hun tribes from the middle of the 5th century AD. This grave is the first
material trace of the Huns on the territory of Slovenia. Anthropological analysis of the skeleton made by P. Leben Seljak revealed that he died in his early twenties. The method of Kvaal et al. (1995) based on dental radiographs arrived at age
estimate of 20.80 years. Mongoloid anthroposcopic features of the skull (unmarked masculine sexual traits, rounded orbits, broad zygomatic bones with inferior zygomatic projection, wide ramus of mandible, and elliptic palate with straight palatal suture) as
well as small body height (around 163 cm) and relatively gracile body composition indicate Asiatic ancestry of the deceased.
Artificial cranial deformation is of so‐called fronto‐occipital type caused by head‐binding during childhood. The dentition shows slight occlusal attrition and peculiar approximal grooves on maxillary incisors. Their formation could be explained by repeatedly dragging sinews between incisors during the process of making bowstrings. The dentition is without pathological lesions. The tooth crown morphology is complex (moderate UI shoveling, UM1 and UM2 C5, LM1 C6, LM2 C5, UM and LM enamel extensions);
however, the root morphology is simplified (27 single‐rooted teeth out of 32). The computer application rASUDAS was used for
dental ancestry assessment. The deceased was assigned to American Arctic & Northeast Asia with the highest posterior pro
bability (87.52%) followed by East Asia (12.47%). Western Eurasian ethnic origin was almost completely excluded (0.01%). "

Dental traits of Skolt Sami
"Skolt Sami (formerly Lapps) are an indigenous population of Northern Scandinavia. They inhabited
Western parts of Kola Peninsula for centuries until they volunteered to move to the Finnish side after
World War II. Due to the small population size (< 500), limited mate choice and geographic isolation,
inbreeding was common, index representing a value between half second cousin and full third cousin
(0.0045). The study of Kirveskari et al. (1974) showed that Skolts' combination of dental traits wasn't
typical either of the Mongoloid or Caucasoid form, but suggested more Caucasoid than Mongoloid
origin. Shoveling of the incisors varied significantly in subpopulations and showed significant sexual
dimorphism in upper lateral incisors in the whole population, women being the majority. Skolts
showed labial ridging (double shovel) more often than expected, based on the degree of expression
of the lingual shovel trait. Forty per cent of Skolts showed finger‐like projections on lingual surfaces of
the upper incisors and canines. Skolts and half‐Skolts (o spring of Skolts and mostly Finns) showed
significant difference in second molar hypocone reduction. Skolts showed predominantly negative
expression of the Carabelli trait, positive expressions were rare. Other accessory cusps were more
common in Skolts than in half‐Skolts. Dental caries prevalence was high and total loss of teeth was
common due to unsatisfactory oral hygiene and caries. Frequent loss of teeth increased the frequency
of tipped and rotated residual teeth. Enamel hypoplasias were frequent along with hypodontia, as
more than 5% of the Skolts had 1 to 4 missing premolars and molars. Long genetic isolation, drift and
natural selection probably explain why the morphological reduction of teeth commonly seen in
Caucasoid populations is marked only in the posterior teeth of the Skolts. "