PDA

View Full Version : WW2 era German SS-man = Kostenki14 look alike?



Tomenable
12-10-16, 02:08
SS-Oberscharführer Otto Kulessa:


Otto Kulessa was a German citizen, born in Rastenburg, East Prussia, in 1892. He was conscripted into the German Army in May 1944, at the age of 51, and in September of that year was transferred to the SS, which was a very common occurrence at that late stage in the war (...)

http://www.bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/Database/DatabaseStaff.asp

More photos: http://www.bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/Staff/Staff.asp?CampStaffID=62&Submit=View

https://s10.postimg.org/uqutyal0n/Kulessa.jpg

^^^ IMO, he looks quite similar to Paleolithic Kostenki14:

http://donsmaps.com/images31/img_3545kostenkivlad.jpg

bicicleur
12-10-16, 08:27
some similarities, but not the brow ridges and a higher nose

Alan
12-10-16, 14:46
similarities are definitely there, but Kostenki looks more archaic.

Tomenable
12-10-16, 18:13
About Kostenki14 skull:


The skull often described by past craniologists as “unique,” “transitional,” “emergent,” “Grimaldian” and “marginal” due to its pseudo-Australoid, pseudo-Andamanese or pseudo-Negroid traits (robusticity, alveolar prognathism combined with protruding nasal bones, wide nose, small braincase, low and narrow face, deep infraglabellar notch and supraorbital tori) is clearly different from Neanderthals and falls fully within UP cranial variation (Gerasimova, M. M. “Esche raz o paleoantropologicheskikh nakhodkakh v Kostenkakh.” Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 2 (2010): 26-40). I’m not aware of a study that directly compares K14 with the roughly contemporaneous Hofmeyr skull from South Africa dated at 36,000 YBP and described (Grine et al. 2007) as forming a cluster with UP Europeans to the exclusion of modern Africans (K14 was not included in Grine et al.’s UP sample). But it would be appropriate to compare the two considering that K14 shows a pronounced Sub-Saharan African-related ancestry component (see below).

It’s noteworthy that both skulls are characterized by alveolar prognathism, large nasal breadth (pyriform aperture), deep infraglabellar notch and continuous supraorbital tori – the strongest form of expression of the supraorbital ridge (see below; the Hofmeyr skull is from Grine et al. 2007). K14 is a smaller skull than Hofmeyr, though. This trait makes it look more like modern Africans, while most UP skulls are as large as Hofmeyr. Hofmeyr’s dentition is poorly preserved but it has some Sinodont traits such as large second molars (M2) (Grine et al. 2007, 227-8). K14’s teeth lack incisor shoveling (this likely means that K14 had the ancestral state of EDAR gene) and the upper second molars are large buccolingually but small mesiodistally

Angela
12-10-16, 18:26
I don't see that many similarities, but then I wouldn't expect there to be after all these thousands of years.

As has been said, the brows are different, and the nose is very different other than the tip being fleshy. I also think the mouth and upper lip are very different. He looks very tropics adapted to me. Perhaps the differences are more visible in the profile:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/fi1/prehistoric/possibly_Kostenki.jpg

Clearly, mtDna has nothing to do with appearance going by this: I'm also U2, and I assure you I look absolutely nothing like him. :)

Tomenable
12-10-16, 18:27
(...) pseudo-Australoid, pseudo-Andamanese or pseudo-Negroid traits (...)

Indeed Kostenki14 carried some alleles which today peak in frequency among Papuans, South Indians and Africans:

See this DNA Land "Ancestry Report" for Kostenki14:

https://s4.postimg.org/ic8841xjh/Kostenki14.png

Kostenki14's IBD sharing with modern populations:

https://verenich.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/k14ibdext1.png

Loschbour's IBD sharing with modern populations:

http://s018.radikal.ru/i524/1511/8c/36e36c8180a7.png

Kostenki14 was "broadly West Eurasian and South Indian", while Loschbour was already "European".

Tomenable
12-10-16, 18:58
Clearly, mtDna has nothing to do with appearance going by this: I'm also U2, and I assure you I look absolutely nothing like him. :)

What about Y-DNA? In period 41640-29310 years ago, Europe was dominated by men with C1 haplogroup.

Among 10 samples from that period we have 1 x F, 6 x C1, 2 x I and 1 x IJ*. Most of UP European C1 was C1a2.

But Kostenki14 had C1b haplogroup, which is today most common among Australian Aborigines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C-M130#Distribution

Angela
12-10-16, 19:11
What about Y-DNA? In period 41640-29310 years ago, Europe was dominated by men with C1 haplogroup.

Among 10 samples from that period we have 1 x F, 6 x C1, 2 x I and 1 x IJ*. Most of UP European C1 was C1a2.

But Kostenki14 had C1b haplogroup, which is today most common among Australian Aborigines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C-M130#Distribution

I've always thought he looked Papuan. A good number have those heavy brows and that deeply notched nose at the bridge which then curves. Also, some of them have that projecting mouth.

http://www.travelthewholeworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/West-Papua-Sugapa-Tribal-Man2.jpg

Let's not forget, though, that with these reconstructions it's often a question of which came first, the chicken or the egg. If the morphology indicated tropics adapted people, want to bet the scientists had a look at Papuans, aboriginals etc.?

bicicleur
12-10-16, 19:32
Papuans are C1b2 & C1b3.
Kostenki 14 was C1b1.
The split was made some 48 ka.
C1b1 is more south-Asian.
It is only in the far east that Papuans got their 2 % Denisovan and 2 % of another extinct modern human branch DNA, not in SW or South Asia.
I guess mtDNA is different too.
No, they are not the same.

Northener
12-10-16, 21:46
Ok a war criminal :( and very odd story! I don't know the background of this site (simple google it), but I suppose with lots of people with a stretched right arm deviation, totally not my cup of tea, but at least they seem to reveal his background???

" by michael mills (http://forum.axishistory.com/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=69&sid=fc53fe3fc8a48a063e278f1666075c1f) » 20 Mar 2005, 04:45
The individual concerned was Otto Kulessa.

There is a photo of him in the book "Trial of Josef Kramer and Forty-Four Others, The Belsen Trial", edited by R. Phillips (London : W. Hodge, 1949), in which his partial non-European descent is quite apparent. If you look at the photo you will see what I mean.

It would perhaps have been more correct to describe him as a person who, if living in Australia today, might be considered an Australian Aboriginal, in the sense in which that term is generally used, ie including persons of mixed Aboriginal and European descent who identify as Aboriginal.

It was not my intention to imply that Kulessa identified as an Australian Aboriginal. He seems to have considered himself purely German.

As I recall, my post originally appeared in a thread about the recruitment of non-Germans into the German armed forces, in which a number of posters claimed that such recruits were subjected to a "racial" examination, in which they were accepted or rejected on the basis of their "Aryan" appearance. It appears that it has been split from that original thread, so the context no longer appears.

My intention was to give an example showing that in fact individuals with a "non-Aryan" appearance, ie whose facial features showed a mixed descent, were accepted even into the SS, a body of men supposedly of pure "Aryan" blood, provided they were believed to be German.

It might perhaps have been better to say that Kulessa was of partly Aboriginal descent, rather than that he was "an Australian Aboriginal", since what I have read about him indicates that he identified as a German, and his status as a German was never questioned.

In the cultural sense, which is how Aboriginal identity is today defined, he was certainly not an Australian Aboriginal. But in the "racial" sense, which was the way people were classified in National Socialist Germany, he would not normally have been considered a "pure" German; we have to assume that his background remained unknown to the authorities.

What is significant is that Kulessa, despite his external physical appearance, which must have been unusual in the German context, was accepted into the SS without his "racial" background being questioned. That shows that persons who according to the official records were purely German were accepted as such, regardless of their facial features.

To correct any misunderstanding, this was certainly not a case of a person known to be an Australian Aboriginal being recruited into the SS, and serving as an identified Aboriginal, in the same way as a number of self-identified Arabs and Indians were recruited into the German armed forces.

When I re-read my post of two years ago, it might on first blush give that impression, and my wording could have been more precise. But my purpose was not to say that a person who identified as an Australian Aboriginal, and knew himself to be such, served in the SS. Rather it was to show that the SS accepted as a recruit (I do not know whether he was a volunteer or a conscript) a person whose physical appearance indicated mixed descent, and did not call his descent into question or subject him to a "racial" test."

Angela
12-10-16, 22:05
Gentlemen, I read the available sources on the internet. There's absolutely no proof that he was part aborigine. All of this rests on someone, who knows who, who says he "heard it".

That is not the kind of proof to take seriously.

@Tomenable,
We've had enough anthrofora and internet myths on here lately. Enough.

binx
13-10-16, 13:29
Is Kulessa a German or Polish surname?

Tomenable
13-10-16, 15:38
There's absolutely no proof that he was part aborigine.

He was surely at least part European Aborigine... :smile:


Is Kulessa a German or Polish surname?

Polish, it's a Germanized spelling variant of Kulesza.

His given name, Otto, is clearly German though. :smile: