Cro-Magnon closer to Bronze Greece ??

[Grab the Gauge]

http://www.dlt.ncssm.edu/tiger/360vi...900/index.html

[Grab the Gauge]

The first picture is a dolicocephalic skull, the picture below it is the Cro Magnon skull. Note that the Cro Magnon skull is broader and has a pentagonal silhouette, because of the bulging rear parietals.





This is also a common feature in Neanderthal skulls, but more extreme:

[Petalpusher]

Cro-Magnon 1 / Les Eyzies 1 is not UP, it is actually radiocarbon dated to only 700 years B.P, so it most likely belonged to some medieval Frenchman: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/...822(13)00215-7

So much about retarded "anthropologists" (a disgrace for whole science branch) reconstructing him as a wog, and for guys like Petalpusher claiming he's "not similar" to modern Europeans, while more recent UP/Meso guys "are similar", showing that they know nothing about anthropology, only what mainstream pseudo-genetics serve them.

It is 27 680 years old, you clown.

Did you even read the conclusion?

Surprisingly, the sample had a much younger age of about 700 years, suggesting a medieval origin. Consequently, this bone fragment has now been removed from the Cro-Magnon collection at the Musée de l’Homme in Paris. Attempts to directly date other remains from the Cro-Magnon type collection unfortunately failed. The good molecular preservation of our sample for both DNA and AMS dating, in contrast, suggests that this particular bone has a different origin from the other remains in the collection.

It's an mtdna estimate of a tibia fragment that happened to not belong to Cro-Magnon1. You don't seriously believe they would have sent a piece of one the most important skull of humanity to be cut and butchered for a mtdna test. There were several layers in the site, with many many bones, it just happens this random fragment they tested was more recent, therefore since then removed from the collection.

The real C14 datation was made on the shell adornements they had stuck on their skulls in the sepulture (wich was one of the distinctive custom of the Gravettian)

The Cro-Magnon skeletal remains, discovered in 1868 near les Eyzies-de-Tayac (Dordogne), are generally attributed to the Aurignacian culture and dated 30 000 BP by comparison with the C14 dated at the abri Pataud’s Aurignacian levels (Dordogne).
An AMS C14 date (27 680+ - 270 BP, Beta –157439) of a Littorina shell associated with the human remains demonstrates that these human fossils postdate 28000 BP. This result demonstrates that the Cro-Magnon burials should not be interpretated as an earliest Aurignacian interment. Cultural indications and the AMS date of the shell indicate an attribution to the Gravettian period.

https://paleo.revues.org/1424

http://www.hominides.com/html/lieux/abri-cro-magnon.php
http://www.hominides.com/html/refere...non-delluc.php
http://www.hominides.com/html/ancetr...cro-magnon.php

[DarknessWin]

Brachycephaly is a class of cephalic index. The cephalic index is the relationship between the breadth and the length of a cranial vault. It's a ratio. You cannot tell if a person is brachycephalic just by looking at their anterior cranium. A person can be both broad headed and dolicocephalic. Cro Magnon 1 is one such skull. It is dolicocephaic only because of its excessive maximum head length. There are no Mongols in the pictures I posted. The first one is a German, the second one is a Bulgarian Turk.

Germans and Turks have hunnic and mongol dna in them. The first one is mixed and not real German for sure, have roots to huns .

Of course i can tell if someone is Dolicochephalic just from a photo and these guys are brachycephalic 100% with mongol traits

[Grab the Gauge]

Germans and Turks have hunnic and mongol dna in them. The first one is mixed and not real German for sure, have roots to huns .

Of course i can tell if someone is Dolicochephalic just from a photo and these guys are brachycephalic 100% with mongol traits

I'm afraid you are wrong, and severely mentally ill. Please work your problems out with a psychiatrist or, more preferably, a noose.

[catgeorge]

I posted a photo of my village and some posters said they could see three CMs don't know if its true.

I can only dissect the material I read whether bullshit or not

Material and Methods.

In 1963, invited by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, the author has studied among other groups α group of about 300 adult Sarakatsani of the Balkan Mountains. Half of them were men and half women. In the years 1967-1968 almost another 300 were studied in Greece along the Pindos Mountains. In every individual about 60 metrical and morphological traits were examined, while in α series of α couple of decades of contemporary Sarakatsani skulls, from Boeotia, were examined more than 70 traits. For comparison were used the tables previously published by Poulianos (1968, 1969, 1971) and unpublished, of more than 15,000 people examined from Central Asia, through Caucasus, to Spain. In elaborating the collected material the usual statistical techniques were applied.

Analysis.

From the morphometrical analysis it is apparent that not only historically, ethnographically and linguistically the two groups share common origin, but anthropologically too. Some differences must be accounted to the fact that the group of the Balkan area has been separated from the main group of Western Greece about 150 years ago. Besides, its population is very small in numbers (it does not exceed 4000 people). On the other hand the population of Pindos area is counted to be α few decades of thousands. Thus the Balkan group must be considered still more isolated than that of the Greek mainland. Both groups are characteristic of their big diameters of the head. But the biggest of α11 in comparison to other europeoid series is the bizygomatic breadth overlapping that of the mongoloids. The Boeotian skulls give us the same picture. There is nothing, of course, of the mongoloid complexity among Sarakatsani. Their wide bizygomatic diameter in α very few cases exceeds the head breadth. This, according to C. S. Coon (Coon, 1939), is an archaic trait found only among Upper Palaeolithic Europeans. Wide zygomatic arches sometimes combine with flaring gonial angles, and often the forehead is wider than the mandible and the face takes on the characteristic form of an inverted triangle. The morphological face height is quite small, in relation to the width, α trait also very distinctive for the Epirotics, as α11 the above, from the Aegeans (Mediterraneans). The women groups also give α 1οw face height. The plump cheeks of the Sarakatsani stand at the opposite European extreme than the drawn ones amongst Aegeans. Browridges are of moderate size, or do not exist. In most cases the frontal slope is straight. The skin color is also lighter among Sarakatsani, and the chest hirsutness is rare. Hairiness in this part of the world seems to be α trait of great taxonomic value. The lack of any prognathism is stressed by the great percentage of the opisthocephalic part of the face. These are only some of the traits.

Discussion.

The description given above places the Sarakatsani population in the Continental, or Epirotic, type of the europaeoids, and not among the Mediterraneans (as supposed by Necrassova, Boev, 1962). It has been shown, that the Epirotic type is much older on European soil, than the Mediterranean one (Poulianos 1968). It is clearly related to the "Brunn-Przedmost-CroMagnon" type described by G.F. Debetz (1936). This same type is followed up by Ι. Ι. Gohman (1966) amongst the Mesolithic (Vassilievka ΙΙΙ) and Neolithic population of Ukraine. Due to this work by Gohman we now know that the "Cro-Magnon in the wide meaning of the word" anthropological type of Western Europe in the Upper Palaeolithic is the same in Eastern Europe and the steppes of the Russian Plain. Upper Palaeolithic skulls are not yet known in Greece, but there is α very interesting find of early Mesolithic (Jacobsen 1969). The physical type of the skull is classified by J. L. Angel (1969) as Basic White (Α3) and lies between Tιviec and Natufιans (less linear than the later). Our own study of the skull (Poulianos 1970) gave α 1οw face (68 mm) and quite wide (143 mm). The frontal width is rather small and the slope almost straight. Unfortunately it is yet only one skull and it would be difficult to come to general conclusions about the Mesolithic population of Greece. Still we can classify it among the Protoeuropaeoids, in a way linking anthropologically the territory of Central and Southern Europe in such an early period.

The Epirotic type described above is met, besides the Pindos massif, among the Epirotes of NW Greece, which we first studied in 1957, and after whom the name of the type was given. The same type is met in Montenegro, as it is described by K.W. Ehrich (1948), in NW Bulgaria, (Poulianos, 1966), in Romania (Milku, Dumitrescu, 1958-1961) and in Ukraine (Djatchenko 1965). It is not confined only to the Dinaric Alps, but extended to the west at least as far as Pyrinnes. It is a real epirotic (e.g. continental). The Palaeolithic Europeans could not vanish without a trace. Their descendants became the Epirotics, and the most representative group of them, the nucleus so to speak of the Epirotic type, is the Sarakatsani isolates.

Up to now in literature prevailed the opinion that the Basques, who do not speak an Indo-European language, were maybe the oldest people in Europe. Some refer to the Lapps as well too. Let us consider both cases: The Basques (Poulianos 1969b) as α whole are not very different in their physique from the rest of the population of Spain, which in its absolute majority is Mediterranoid. This is not meant to say that no Cro-magnon elements are met among the Basques, as we cannot say that no Mediterranoids are met among Sarakatsani. The relict language is only an indication of the antiquity of a population. The physical features are those which count more. On our case the Sarakatsani show themselves to be much older.

The Lapps of the North of Scandinavia are not any more an anthropological aenigma. The traditional point of view to seek among laponoids the ancient brachycephals of Europe has not any more any kind of foundation. Many anthropologists who have worked among them have shown, that the Lapps are the result of "inbreeding" with mongoloids, who came to Europe (Bounak 1956) at least much later after the Europeoids existed there. Thus the Lapps cannot be the oldest people of Europe either. The geographical differentiatίon of traits which we have described above for the Epirotics shows that they have persisted in their special geographical regions, and they are met in a more "compacted" form amongst the Sarakatsani of Pindos and Balkan mountains areas, despite other changes of a more clearly phyletic evolutionary nature. Thus the antiquity of the Sarakatsani type is, at the least extent indirectly established. The Sarakatsani are nothing more or less than a local Middle Palaeolithic survival, or, perhaps a reemergence. Being an ecological isolated group, they represent a local specialization, in which selection may have played a part, as well as possibly other factors associated with life in a mountainous area. Looking into the historical past of races in our continent, the Sarakatsani may be considered the most ancient population of Europe.

The data presented here once more verify the validity of the thesis taken by Oshinsky (1959) and Krogman (1964), that anthropometric and morphological traits must still be considered the nucleus of Physical Anthropology.

[Adolfinus]

SNPA contains data from Coon's work,basically the father European Typology and Racial Anthropology.

Anyone else's writings is just armchair work with no credibility.Coon actually travelled Europe and based his writings on observing and measuring thousands of people.

Sorry but no. There were many before Coon and after and much more noticeable (Ripley, Deniker, Haddon, Dixon, Hooton, Giufrida-Ruggieri, Biasutti, Czekanowski, Eickstedt, Bunak, Cheboksarov, Levin, Debetz, Montandon, Vallois, Lundman and many others). Coon work on typology was only one general (TROE) and two for specific people (Riffians and Ghegs). After 1939 he abandon his taxonomic views and in next work ([1950] he mention only few populational races in Europe (North-Westerm Med, East-European, Alpine).

No prominent anthropologist follow his scheme, oh wait except Sonia Cole, but she wasn't prominent And her work was only TROE rewriting.
Even Coon's menthor Hooton deeply criticized his TROE fantasies about Irish Brunns in work about Ireland [1955].

In Europe he only measured Albanians. The rest nation's descriptions were based on works of above anthropologist, among many others (but usually from '20 or sometimes from XIX century, check bibliography). Oh wait, he measured some small samples of European emigrants in USA (probably many were second generation). But we know that many times people who emigrate are of different type than mean of ancestral population...

[DarknessWin]

I'm afraid you are wrong, and severely mentally ill. Please work your problems out with a psychiatrist or, more preferably, a noose.

Turks came from the steppes along with mongols and you put here a turk and connect him to Cro-Magnon ??? You are ill and you need a doctor.
The DNA analysis cant be fake and you know nothing about Anthropology.

[Dick]

I cant find better example for modern cro-magnon than this greek man :


Attachment 61861

I'd say he's CHG rather than WHG

[Wrong]

I'd say he's CHG rather than WHG

He needs more angularity men... I'd say he's neither.