PDA

View Full Version : Facial recostruction of ancient 5900 years old Sicilian face



Hauteville
05-05-15, 13:16
http://palermo.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/04/04/foto/ecco_il_volto_di_sofia_miss_preistoria_e_nata_seim ila_anni_fa_ad_agrigento-111181791/1/?ref=search#1

http://s9.postimg.org/kwkwmyldb/113921172_7ce69314_aeb8_4115_98f6_3aa82ae8a6ed.jpg (http://postimage.org/)


http://s9.postimg.org/8jcntsl2n/113921253_da2c6d0d_e975_4f3a_a952_42bbd46baea2.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

John Doe
05-05-15, 14:33
Interesting. We're probably talking about a person who's mainly Neolithic mixed with minor Mesolithic?

arvistro
05-05-15, 15:32
I would not guess her as (modern) Sicilian. But I will wait for Moesan comment :) he knows subject better.

Hauteville
05-05-15, 15:35
Maybe but there aren't dna studies so far.

Hauteville
05-05-15, 17:01
I would not guess her as (modern) Sicilian. But I will wait for Moesan comment :) he knows subject better.
Why?is there something of atypical in her to you?i was personally surprised to the fact the she had delicate features, i would always imagine the people of that era as more Cromagnid-Berid like.
But it's only a reconstruction.

arvistro
05-05-15, 18:08
Dont take me too seriously. My brain works intuitively in this field and it lacks background to make intuition efficient.

My intuition pointed to Saami right away. But google fixed it for me, standard Saami has more Asian in their looks.

Angela
05-05-15, 23:23
I find her quite "modern" and unexceptional looking for an Italian. Nothing "archaic" as in some of these reconstructions, although she's from around 4,000 BC?

Of course, who knows how accurate it is...I'd like to hear Moesan's take on it too as regards traditional physical anthropology.

Hauteville, I don't know why you'd expect tons of "Cro-Magnon" in her, by which I suppose you mean WHG? Sicily had been Neolithic for quite a while by this point. Gracile looks are rather a hallmark of the Neolithic, yes?

I wonder if these researchers have attempted to sequence her dna, and if they can't do it, I wonder if they've considered sending the remains to Reich and co.? I would think she would be high in EEF (and the included WHG, however much the precise amount), but it would be interesting to see if any ANE had trickled in...


In terms of modern look a likes, any ideas, anybody?

7214

7215

7216
Just click on the images above to enlarge...

Antonella Mansi came to mind, but her forehead is higher and her eyes aren't round. So, maybe not. Anyway, just for the fun, here are some pictures. Moesan, be kind! :)

http://www.formiche.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/antonell4.jpg

http://multimedia.ilrestodelcarlino.it/data/images/gallery/2013/75418/antonell.JPG



http://i.res.24o.it/images2010/SoleOnLine5/_Immagini/Notizie/Italia/2012/confindustria/mansi-antonella-IMAGO-258x258.jpg?uuid=d184ae86-8a20-11e1-b139-dd214ef6660f

http://www.fondazionemps.it/ita/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/foto-3-e1401988656804.jpg

Or her for someone with lighter pigmentation?
http://www.blogsicilia.it/wp-content/uploads/foto/unsorted/Ylenia-Citino-a-Uomini-e-Donne.jpg

Maleth
05-05-15, 23:51
There maybe could be some similarities to the temple people from Malta. We already know the first inhabitants in Malta arrived from Sicily (before the temple builders) from the similar pottery shreds found.

http://292fc373eb1b8428f75b-7f75e5eb51943043279413a54aaa858a.r38.cf3.rackcdn.c om/7a753cbd2417521537a3469abe8ccea92667737087-1367955467-5189580b-620x348.jpg

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130507/local/revealed-the-face-of-a-maltese-woman-5-600-years-ago.468752

Hauteville
06-05-15, 00:29
Hauteville, I don't know why you'd expect tons of "Cro-Magnon" in her, by which I suppose you mean WHG?
Yes this, i would expect her more archaic look.
Anyway i really hope in some genetic studies on her.

Fire Haired14
06-05-15, 05:26
Sicily is far away from all the Haak genomes. It'd be interesting to see her DNA results. She looks basic Caucasian, and I doubt there were some totally distinct Eurasians living in Sicily back then anyways. If the same EEF Neolithic farmers settled Sicily, I would expect her to be EEF-like. Before Neolithic settlers we can only guess who was living in Sicily and Italy.

Looking at Italian DNA today we can clearly see EEF and Yamna ancestry. We don't need ancient DNA to prove such people lived in Italy at the same time periods as in mainland Europe. Whether or not the EEF ancestors of Italians were like Otzei or Gok2 and whether the people who brought Yamna-ancestry were like BR1+2(from Bronze age Hungary) or Bell Beaker or Corded ware-like is unknown. That part we need ancient DNA for.

The deviation towards the Near east(not North Africa) is the only element that can't be explained by mainland aDNA. There also could be unknown elements and totally differnt people that lived in Italy during some time periods than in the mainland. The Near east-deviation must have arrived via the Mediterranean sea or maybe the Alps. When and who brought it is a mystery. North Africa, the Caucasus, and east of Iran can probably be ignored as source areas. The "Near East" in literally meaning looks like the source area.

arvistro
06-05-15, 08:31
I don't see much similarity between Malta girl and Sicilian girl reconstructions. To me eyes, eyebrows, nose, mouth look different.
The top Italian girl presented by Angela does look similar. Bottom girl has rounder head and bit different face.

MOESAN
07-05-15, 15:29
to Redhaired: we DO have Meoslotihic skulls - the problem is that I 've only means of measures, and no individual measure nor feature, no geographic localization (I 'll go to search the rare data I've at hand for italian Mesolithic
concerning this reconstruction, always the same remark: the flesh parts are supposed more than checked, by force
here I don't undestand too well if they have a lower jaw or if they imagined one, and we lack a facial view and a top view of skull:
the skull seems, from side, a kind of "old mediterranean" of the French CHARLES, it's to say lower skull compared to Near-Eastern 'mediterranean', and some more proximity to Cro-Magnoids - but I can say stupid things without more views and the local South Caucasus North Mesopotamia so called 'cappadocian-mediterraneans' already had lower braincase than 'danubians' (from Central Anatolia? Y-G2?) and than Arabia 'mediterreanns' (maybe some causes as the western 'mediterraneans': more on the 'cromagnoid' side than on the 'capelloid' and 'chancelade' side?
I hope I'll be provided more crania pictures - the Mediterranea surroundings lands have a more complicated story than we are tempted to think and things became almost a puzzle about the 6000/5000 BC concerning subtypes, what don't mean the global autosomes sketch was so contrasted between diverse 'mediterranean' groups, except the ones more crossed with Mesolithic people
I cannot say more

Angela
07-05-15, 17:27
Moesan, if you click on the link, slides 3, 9, and 14 show other views of the skull. It looks as if they had the jaw from half of the face, yes? I don't know if that will help. This is another article; it shows a plaster cast and a reconstruction sketch.
http://palermo.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/04/04/foto/ecco_il_volto_di_sofia_miss_preistoria_e_nata_seim ila_anni_fa_ad_agrigento-111181791/1/?ref=search#1

(http://palermo.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/04/04/foto/ecco_il_volto_di_sofia_miss_preistoria_e_nata_seim ila_anni_fa_ad_agrigento-111181791/1/?ref=search#1)
This is another article; it shows a skull cast of some sort and a reconstruction sketch of Sofia.
http://notizie.tiscali.it/regioni/sicilia/photogallery/Je-suis-Sofia-il-volto-di-una-siciliana-di-6mila-anni-fa-in-3d/55627/806283/

Maleth
07-05-15, 19:13
If I got it right the skull is from Agrigento the south of Sicily, which is the part that was inhabited by the Sicani. The Sicani are believed to be the oldest tribe (or earliest mentioned in history at least) in Sicily, although not sure when the Sicani settled in Sicily. They are believed to have arrived from the West (Iberia). I dont think there are clear dates of when Sicily was first populated. Like hautville said wouldn't it be great to have the joy to get a dna reading? It might happen some time.

Maleth
07-05-15, 19:17
I don't see much similarity between Malta girl and Sicilian girl reconstructions. To me eyes, eyebrows, nose, mouth look different.
The top Italian girl presented by Angela does look similar. Bottom girl has rounder head and bit different face.

At a closer look it does seem to have different skull bone structure especially the eyes

Hauteville
07-05-15, 20:30
Yes Tucidide indicated an Iberian origins but modern historians, especially Rosa Albanese Procelli and Luigi Bernaḅ Brea indicate that Elymians and Sicanians were the same people divided in two tribes and with Bell beakers ancestries via Liguria.
Linguistics and archeological findings confirm this link.

Angela
07-05-15, 21:42
Yes Tucidide indicated an Iberian origins but modern historians, especially Rosa Albanese Procelli and Luigi Bernab� Brea indicate that Elymians and Sicanians were the same people divided in two tribes and with Bell beakers ancestries via Liguria.
Linguistics and archeological findings confirm this link.

I think that's right, but this woman dates to 4,000 BC. I tend to doubt any of these other people had yet arrived on the scene.

Hauteville
07-05-15, 22:07
I think that's right, but this woman dates to 4,000 BC. I tend to doubt any of these other people had yet arrived on the scene.
The historians date the arrive of Ligures (proto-Sicanians and proto-Elymians) during the iron age.
So this woman lived long before their arrival.

MOESAN
08-05-15, 01:00
just a word before coming back after some more readings
I beg the pardon of Fire Haired 14 I named Redhaired: offense of great age to memory : and yet, I had not drunk my daily wine dosis!
Sorry

Maleth
09-05-15, 17:02
just a word before coming back after some more readings
I beg the pardon of Fire Haired 14 I named Redhaired: offense of great age to memory : and yet, I had not drunk my daily wine dosis!
Sorry

He is red haired he showed us his pic once :)

Maleth
09-05-15, 17:15
The historians date the arrive of Ligures (proto-Sicanians and proto-Elymians) during the iron age.
So this woman lived long before their arrival.

So from which group you think the facial reconstruction is in your opinion? Bel Beaker culture according to the below map was present in North Sicily and arrived some 1000 years later if not more then to the time when this woman lived in the area. Again if not mistaken Bel Beaker seems to have been more of a culture influence then a genetic one. Whats your take on that?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Beaker_culture_diffusion.svg/383px-Beaker_culture_diffusion.svg.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture

MOESAN
09-05-15, 18:38
the facial reconstruction (particularily the eyes) seems to me a mess. same for the nose. for the most the face seems very too large for a "mediterranean' affiliated girl, compared to skull. No confidence! the pictures I saw (several but lack of vertical upper view) shew what seemed an aggregation of hardened sediment and bone, concerning the jaw. the crania seems a bit put out of shape (compressed?) and assymetrical - still uneasy to make an opinion without a lateral and frontal view of BONES what the photos did not show...
and frontal pcitures can very well mistake us about height of crania and shape of inferior mandibule, according to the way the skull is put: if the skull is inclined towards the rear, the visible effect is more "square" jaw, and if the forehead is not bulbous, lower skull - the contrary otehrwise. SO very oftne, myself first, we speak upon to meager visible angles

concerning old tribes in Sicily: we could perhaps see some difference in means between population of different parts of the island (by instance, cephalic index and Y-haplos) but I would not put a penny on a strict correlation between today individuals and one of the diverses layers of population settled in it as time passed - and the girl here is older than any Ligurian or Elymian imput for I know so it's out of question-
first well identified BB men were on the brachy or sub-brachycephalic side, flattened occiput etc... no discussion - it's only after that differenciation (mixtures, acculturation) occurred according to regions-

MOESAN
09-05-15, 19:00
after a look t the other woman, of 5600 BC Malta, my first opinion is she look roughly said 'atlanto-mediterranean' - so high faced: my remark about the Sicilian one is maybe too hasty?
If I don't mistake a 14000 BC woman of Sicily was discovered, showing ruggish features of large high face with strong cheekbones evocating clearly some 'aurafrican' or 'c-capelloid-brĂ¼nnoid' type, present too in North Africa at the Neolithic daybreak or even sooner - the 'atlanto's had surely inherited some traits from this old type, attenuated by crossings or simply gracilization (still to explain)-
it's a pity we are not more often given complete viewing of these old skulls (for the maybe attractive naked living bodies of these girls it's too late, I 'm afraid. Sorry, Angela!

Hauteville
09-05-15, 22:21
What do you think for Capelloid?the proto-Mediterranid?

Hauteville
09-05-15, 22:26
So from which group you think the facial reconstruction is in your opinion? Bel Beaker culture according to the below map was present in North Sicily and arrived some 1000 years later if not more then to the time when this woman lived in the area. Again if not mistaken Bel Beaker seems to have been more of a culture influence then a genetic one. Whats your take on that?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Beaker_culture_diffusion.svg/383px-Beaker_culture_diffusion.svg.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture
I think she was a neolitic woman, she would be interesting their genetic results.
About Bell Beakers i don't know but probably there are some genetic influences in the western part.

MOESAN
15-05-15, 00:37
What do you think for Capelloid?the proto-Mediterranid?

I say 'capelloid' to mark some shapes ressemblance with the typical of Combe-Capelle, itself very close to the typical BrĂ¼nn type, seejmingly people forming a second layer in Europe, coming surley after the Cro-Magnon peole. Both show archaic features compared to the most our modern 'europoid' types, but show too some innovations compared to say, Neanderthal, BUT NOT THE SAME INNOVATIONS. it 's sure the C-Capelle-BrĂ¼nn "family" the C-Capelle/BrĂ¼nn family arrived lately enough (9000/7000BC?) in Western £Europe, maybe earlier in Eastern Europe; what appears at first reading is they came both from East, Cro-magnon through South, C-C/BrĂ¼nn through East (Steppes? East caspian?).
my thoughts are that both mixed during Mesolithic, but at very different levels according to places, and created diverse derived forms by isolation, what doesn't exclude some new populations shew still a dominance of Cro-Magnon ('cromagnoid') or BrĂ¼nn/C-Capelle ('brĂ¼nnoid' or 'capelloid'), undergoing a diminishing in stature and in certain places a brachycephalization. In France and Iberia appeared too the so called 'Laugerie-Chancelade' type, closer to 'brĂ¼nnoid'/'capelloid' but with broader and less brutal forehead; globally "smoothed" in some way.
I cannot be sure it is or not a local evolution of 'C-C/BrĂ¼nn or the same but evolved in Near-East and passed across North-Africa. some N-African skulls of Mesolithic period are close enough or between both.
what is sure is that the more steep frontal; smaller faced (all measures) 'mediterranean' arrived rather at true Neolithic times, under more than a subtype and I think also, through the two sides of the great Sea.
but everywhere in Mediterranea survives, under the crossings, odl forms where, left aside pigmentation, some skeletal and facial-cranial features do not evocate at any rate the later more evolved 'mediterranean' subtypes; "Mediterranean" geographically doesn't mean anthropogically 'mediterranean' . I observed during long years the European types of all sorts and I'm sure of the fact, as many people can verify with their eyes.
the links I found between 'mediterraneans' of all sort and the archaic types of C-C/BrĂ¼nn shape is a proportionally longer vs narrower faces, (but wheekbones are rather less compressed than jaws) when the 'cxromagnoid' people show larger vs shorter faces, shallower chink but more protuding forwards -
in Europe a lot individuals show by atavisme one of the two tendancies, the more archaic formes being more ruggish, more bony, and very often a region showing more than the average of an archaic mostly unmodified "model" shows also the other archaic mostly unmodified "model" (some parts of Scandinavia, Norway the most, some places in Ireland, i the Netherlands or Germany, or Lithuania, even in some central remote parts of Sardinia or Iberia, in the Central West part of France too, finally in a lot of remote places of Europe...
so the new 'mediterranean' people are not a completely different sort of human but only more gracilized forms due possibly to adaption not only to new climate but to new ways of living and even in their most evolved results kept some facial tendancies more linked to a 'Capelloid' or better a Chancelade or C-Capelle phylum than to a Cro-magnon one, for I think. Some mutations I'm unaware of and gracilization created new types but not always evolved at the same level.
'atlanto-mediterranean' type is mean/average metrics creation, but, as 'indo-iranian' type it shows conservation of more ancient features.
all that does not exclude some Cro-Magnon heritage in Medierranea regions but they are less representative of the modern 'mediterranean' subtypes

&: this already ancient lack of metrics steep frontiers between descendants of the two big phyla (already crossed at the mergins and put in the same bag) and later with the descendants of their proper descentants (grand'children) stayed a long stage in East is reflected by the mixture we find in aDNA, since the Early Neolithic, mong peasants and HGs. there were crossings so admixture between both bit it's not sure the apparent admixture did not existed already before. Maybe m'I wrong? Wait for more ancient DNA!

*I write '-oid' but I think in good english it's '-id' -

Hauteville
15-05-15, 22:53
What about the similarity between the reconstruction and Costanza Calabrese?

MOESAN
25-05-15, 20:08
What about the similarity between the reconstruction and Costanza Calabrese?

I missed something. Please, which Costanza Calabrese?

MOESAN
25-05-15, 20:52
to FireHaired, a bit late:
Italian Mesolithic: I have not the sample size (surely small) nor the pictures nor the features in details, only some indexes:
crania
dolichocephalic: CI 72,9 (low enough at Mesolithic when some other population had grown a bit more mesolcehpalic than during old Paleolithic)
vertical index (height / length: VI: 72,7
transversal index (height / breadth: 100,2 mean of both (more informative concerning skull height): 86,5: it places these "Italians" rather among the high skulledpeople, what is not typical of Cro-Magnon and most descendants; but it is a bit less high than South France Meoslithic men -
upper face index (height from glabella to upper teeth): FI: 49,3: one of the most shallow/short faces of everytime in Europe: I've no picture so I cannot say if it is a global face (orbits and Co) breadth trait, or if it is due only to cheekbones arcs (a C-C/BrĂ¼nn tendancy in Europe)?
orbital ondex: OI: 72,4: among the lowest too: the C-C/BrĂ¼nn descendants seemed a bit heterogenous at the stage of Mesolithic: here it is low, as in very old times -
lack: lower jaw indexes and form, orbits shapes (OI is only an aspect), frontal profile and so on...
all the way, I would put a shilling to bet on a pire ligneage from Cr-M or C-C/Br: I think reasonable to suppose mixings/crossings were old enough in Europe between the two big ligneages (begun in Central Europe after LGM) to explain the variety of types (individuals and mean groups) caused by mixtures followed by temporary isolation, so hazard caused drift too for some traits in small "families". all the way, the big differences in means and aspects with subsequent Neolithic people, ecludes for me that the evolution could have taken place in Italy.
I wonder if the most of the modifications leading to the typical "mediterranean" it's to say to a set of features becoming the general trend even if not 100% integrated, did not come from East Africa, perhaps in today Erythrea or South Egypte??? only a question here... these traits softened the diverse heritages of alreayd partially gracilized descendants of the two old ligneages in Europe: Cr-M and C-C/Br ??? it's true that some today Erythreans have features which do not recall "black and white" modern crossings (I don't speak about whisky here) and some of the first agricultors in Palestine showed "negroid" tendancies in alveolar prognathy, what is NOT saying THEY WERE SUBSAHRIANS TYPES... a bit more northern the Upper Egyptians Badarians (4000 BC) had brunet white skins, a bit of alveolar (teeth) prognathy, very high skulls with vertical forehead, very small narrow inferior maxillar BUT wavy black or blackish brown hairs without any subsaharian tendancy to frizzy/fuzzy hairs.