What he said is this:Originally Posted by Ryukendo
What made me say this is, among other things, that there were different waves of H.s. entering South East Asia, making it to Australo-Melanesia and while spreading there mixing with local older H.s. groups and archaic forms (Denisovans) at a percentage the East Asians and many other "Eastern Eurasian" populations did not. They were on different evolutionary pathways and were, quite early on, genetically distinct. So the comment about what kind of range "Eastern Eurasian" phenotypes have (presence) seems to have been non-significant to me. Also, he didn't really tell a timing, which brings me to the next comment of yours:East Eurasians include morphologically disparate groups such as Mongols and Papuans.
He spoke about:all this stuff about the "ethnology" of people from >30,000 years ago (how is this even possible to talk about?)
So he introduced all the terms and ethnicities which, like I said myself numerous times before, didn't even exist 30.000 years ago. I didn't even wanted to debate the issue, but I have the constant urge to answer, even in such cases, if I feel I have to make my point clear and was treated unfairEast Eurasians include morphologically disparate groups such as Mongols and Papuans.
Even among East Asians we have Mongols and Ainu the latter of which are often mistaken as Caucasoid.
Its however possible to talk about which ancient population from 30.000 years ago is closer by phenotype, genetically, geographically and in some cases even culturally to some other ancient or modern people, that's certainly possible.
If one group stayed a colder environment mixed with even more cold adapted people in the East, whereas another group of people tried to evade the extreme climate and moved down to mix with yet another temperate climate adapted people, they are on different trajectories. That's what I meant.or even the "trajectory of the phenotypes" is simply besides the point
Sure, especially since we have not that much finds from the earlier period and the latter specimen which quite ANE shifted show little traces of it. Siberia as such was always a transitional zone.If you choose to focus on phenotypic race, then ybmpark's assertion of the Mongoloid character of HGs in Northern Asia is backed up by a whole tradition of Soviet physical anthropology classifying HGs from Eastern Europe to the Baraba steppe as members of a "Northern Eurasian Anthropological Formation" that terminated with Mongoloid-type peoples from East of the Baraba steppe, with Mal'ta being classified as among the latter "Mongoloids" by e.g. Alexeev in his 1988 publication--but again this is beside the point in genetic terms.
I didn't say so. Of course other people could have been big game hunters too. But ANE groups seem to have been particularly specialised on it, as a large group, and they appear to have been particularly well-nourished, which allowed them to grow to the size they reached. I only said that they were big game hunters for a long period of time, I didn't say others were not. What I implied however, is that the situation in the East was more complicated, in part because they were cut off from the larger steppe regions to the West, and their refuge was comparatively smaller. But surely they would have been big game hunters too, if getting the chance to. I didn't exclude others, I just wanted to stress that for ANE the big game hunting seems to have been their specialisation.Furthermore, I see quite a few overgeneralisations or even outright assertions in some of your other posts in this thread: where are you getting this idea that no populations other than Western Eurasians were big-game hunters on the Mammoth steppe?
That's because my assumption is, mostly based on the results of the Shum Laka paper and archaeological finds, that modern West Africans/Niger-Kordofanian came into existence different layers merging, with the latest being always more important than the one before, both percentage wise and culturally:And where are you getting this idea of "ANA pastoralists" spreading Niger-kordofanian?
Archaic Homo (Iwo Eleru) -> basic H.s. of the Southern sphere -> derived H.s. from North/East Africa or back migration from Eurasia. The latest showed signs for a more advanced productive technology and expanded on top of the older layers.
The genetical point of view is based on one possible Shum Laka interpretation, in detail discussed in thread in which this topic came up, from the archaeological point of view, I found this interesting, just a repeat of an older post with a link to it:
The paper about the sites in Senegal is quite interesting. Too bad they could not retrieve a DNA sample, because the transition to the Iron Age in West Africa was probably the single most important event in all of Subsaharan more recent prehistory and we know very little about the people involved.
Occupation at Walaldé began in the period 800-550 cal BC and continued until ca 200 cal BC. The sequence appears to document the transi-tion from stone- to iron-based technology, with the use of iron objects and stone initially, followed by evidence for iron smelting and forging from 500-200 cal BC. Copper with the distinctive chemical signature of the Akjoujt mines in Mauritania was also present after 500 cal BC, attesting to interaction over long distances.The 1999 Walaldé excavations cast considerable new light on our understanding of the initial coloniza tion of the MSV, pushing back the date by 700-1000 years, and linking the early colonists to both Neolithic and copper-using groups farther west and north.The Walaldé agropastoralists used and smelted iron, and wore jewelry crafted from imported copper.Most of the slag and 46 of the tuyere pieces came from Walaldé Unit W1, which clearly was the locus of significant metallurgical activity during the later phase of occupation -i.e., after 500 cal BC.Most of the identifiable remains are domestic stock. Over half were cattle, and approximately 10 % were ovi-caprinesAgropastoralists with millet and cattle, plus a few sheep and goat, first occupied Walaldé sometime between 800 and 550 cal BC.Comparative multivariate craniometric analysis by Isabelle RIBOT (2003) of the Feature 9 skull indicated that it was more similar to present-day West African groups such as Ashanti than to North Africans and modern Serer.
The vault appears to be long and broad, the face is high and prognathic with long zygomatics, the nose is moderately high and wide, and the mandible is relatively large.The affinities of this early assemblage are sug-gested by the pottery, which shares some similari-ties in vessel rim form and decoration with pottery to the west and north. Ceramics collected from the surface by R. Vernet (pers. comm.) in the Lac Rkiz area show close affinities, as do ceramics excavated by M.A. MBOW (1997) from the oyster shell middens at Poudioum and Bole de Mengueye near St. Louis on the Senegal River delta.https://www.academia.edu/5846186/Exc..._using_peoplesFirst, at Walaldé, as at other first millennium BC smelt-ing locales in the Sahel (Jenne-jeno, Do Dimmi, Bou Khzama (pending 14C dating)), early iron appears to arrive with pastoral or agropastoral peoples who tran-shume and have wide-reaching networks for movement and exchange.Copper artifacts from Akjoujt ores testify to the circulation of pastoralists/agropastoralists and objects in western Mauritania ca 2600-2200 bp.
It seems to me that we deal with a similar situation as in the North Pontic steppe, that indigenous foragers and semi-Neolithicised people adopted advanced technologies from newcomers and were, probably because of the favourable habitat and already large numbers, as well as ecological barriers (including endemic diseases like Malaria) for the newcomers, able to keep their independence. It seems to be the root of the Niger-Kordofan expansion, whether its exactly this people (likely), or a related group from the same wider region. A sufficient DNA sample could have helped a big deal to resolve this. Its unfortunate.
From this thread:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....ction-and-repl
Reply With Quote
