When did Middle Easterner become Caucasian?

johen

Elite member
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
126
Points
63
Modern European = WHG (major role anthropologically) + EEF + minor ANE

Middle Easterner = EEF + ?

When did they get WHG to become a Caucasian?
 
WHG (major role anthropologically)

Probably yes, but EHG most likely played a more major role.

They were to some extent similar, but not the same group.
 
I think EEF might be very swarthy, even if they had 2 light skin genes, b/c their sunburnt environment required especially farmer to have a black skin. In the Middle East, there was no reason the skin of EEF had been changed from black to light.
Thus EEF entered Europe, interbreeding with HG. What happened in there, I don’t know. And returned or attacked Middle East thru Caucasus area, turning into being brown like right now, I guess.

farmandlan.JPG


European_hunter-gatherer_admixture.png
 
Caucasian or Caucasoid or etc. aren't easily defined. I think back in the 1800s researchers noticed Middle Easterners, South Asians, and Europeans have similar skulls, and coined the term "The Caucasian Race". We now know via DNA there is lots of shared ancestry among those people, but there isn't an exact definition what Caucasian is. "Basal Eurasian" and "proto-ANE/WHG" were very differnt from each other. This means Caucasin isn't a single race but a fusion of multiple distinct people/races. EEF, CHG, WHG, EHG all descended mostly from the same very distant ancestors who lived like 40,000 years ago. Whoever the root is, the people they all have lots of ancestry from, if anything should be the definition of Caucasian.

Middle Eastern genetics are a lot more complex than EEF. EEF and Middle Easterners have distant shared ancestry, but I'm very confident Middle Easterners descend from people who were very differnt from EEF. Like distant cousins of EEF. Plus, not everyone in the Middle East is the same.
 
I think EEF is not important factor, b/C HG had a great role to shape modern European.

C. Loring Brace (2005) said:

1.“It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa.”

2. “The interbreeding of the incoming Neolithic people with the in situ foragers diluted the Sub-Saharan traces that may have come with the Neolithic spread so that no discoverable element of that remained.”

it means HG dominated

But,

3. “it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other.”

-> it means they got HG, right?
 
Caucasian or Caucasoid or etc. aren't easily defined. I think back in the 1800s researchers noticed Middle Easterners, South Asians, and Europeans have similar skulls, and coined the term "The Caucasian Race". We now know via DNA there is lots of shared ancestry among those people, but there isn't an exact definition what Caucasian is.

Caucasian is Western Eurasian, or descendants of Kostenki-related populations.

By contrast, East Asians are descended from Ust-Ishim-related populations.

=====================================

These 2 maps show this nicely (they show, that Caucasoid - East Asian split took place in Paleolithic times):

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

k14ibdext1.png


2) Ust-Ishim: http://s020.radikal.ru/i700/1411/99/39e84d81c245.png

39e84d81c245.png


So the split of Eurasians for Western group and Eastern group (ancestors of East Asians) was Paleolithic.

But other micro-splits within Caucasoids (West Eurasians) took place probably only later, during LGM.

In Paleolithic times, post-LGM autosomal components known from Mesolithic and Early Neolithic did not yet exist.

Paleolithic genomes from West Eurasia look like "mixed salads", as if they were ancestors of everyone:

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368/F1.large.jpg

Paleolithic_Salad.png


So in my opinion clear-cut components known from Mesolithic and Early Neolithic samples, evolved during LGM.
 
@Tomenable,

Yes, Kostienki is like a founding father of Caucasians/West Eurasians. Although we know that all West Eurasians also have decent from "Basal Eurasians" who were completely differnt from Kostenki. And we don't yet know how exactly WHG, CHG, EEF, and EHG were related to each other. There isn't an exact definition of Caucasian, it's a mixture of at least two distinct Paleolithic Eurasians. People in West Eurasia have common ancestry everyone else in the world lacks, exactly what that common ancestry is or how much is shared is unknown, so therefore there is no exact definition of Caucasian/West Eurasian.
 
Modern European = WHG (major role anthropologically) + EEF + minor ANE

Middle Easterner = EEF + ?

When did they get WHG to become a Caucasian?
So you think Whg is the component that makes someone Caucasian?

Europeans pred. = EF+EHG+CHG+WHG
West Asia pred. = CHG+EF with some admixture of SF(Southwestern Farmers of Sinai Peninsula/Northeast Africa)
Levant = EF+SF+CHG
Southern Middle East/Arabia= pred. SF with strong CHG and EF admixture

Of course there are some other minor components.
 
johen said:
When did they get WHG to become a Caucasian?
...their sunburnt environment required especially farmer to have a black skin.
...I think EEF is not important factor, b/C HG had a great role to shape modern European.

C. Loring Brace (2005) said:

1.“It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa.”

2. “The interbreeding of the incoming Neolithic people with the in situ foragers diluted the Sub-Saharan traces that may have come with the Neolithic spread so that no discoverable element of that remained.”

I think I know where your theories are coming from and where you want to get to.
 
So you think Whg is the component that makes someone Caucasian?

Europeans pred. = EF+EHG+CHG+WHG
West Asia pred. = CHG+EF with some admixture of SF(Southwestern Farmers of Sinai Peninsula/Northeast Africa)
Levant = EF+SF+CHG
Southern Middle East/Arabia= pred. SF with strong CHG and EF admixture

Of course there are some other minor components.

Absolutely 100%, see the map

F4.large.jpg


Neolithic_farmer_admixture.png


I think Caucasian shape came from WHG, not EEF(natufian), who enter Europe 45,000 years ago, and adjusted in the special environment of Europe.
 
I think I know where your theories are coming from and where you want to get to.

Huh,

Looks like you ask me loyalty, ok

1.my destination, here another brace great work

mp.jpg


I love this guy, I love his true scholarship

2. my theory here

Prejudice, which is caused by ignorance, produces discrimination
 
Last edited:

C. Loring Brace (2005):

“Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.
 
Absolutely 100%, see the map

F4.large.jpg


Neolithic_farmer_admixture.png




I think Caucasian shape came from WHG, not EEF(natufian), who enter Europe 45,000 years ago, and adjusted in the special environment of Europe.

Source of the first map? Source that Natufians were genetically African or Black? Source that the Neolithic farmers who have been proven to be 80% ancestral to Sardinians (who look anything but SSA) were Black?

The most Caucasian looking people by physical features are those with most EEF or CHG admixture. Modern Europeans have actually not much of "real" WHG ancestry left EEF, EHG and CHG are more relevant.
You claimed EEF were Black because they are descend of Natufians than you showed a dubios map as prove which in fact disproves your claim that farmers descend of Natufians. So what are you actually trying to say because it doesn't make sense.

Your Afro_centrism goes up to the roof.
 
Last edited:
Being against Afro Centric fantasies is considered "racist" in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Canada, isn't it?
We are quite sure you are the racist Joeyc, better get new IP soon, I can feel the ban is coming.
 
Modern European = WHG (major role anthropologically) + EEF + minor ANE

Middle Easterner = EEF + ?

When did they get WHG to become a Caucasian?

They didn't. It's the Europeans who are different. The "Caucasus" harbours ancestry which is more inline with Middle Eastern people. Sure there is some WHG and EHG among Middle Eastern people but is minimal and difficult to trace. Some of the WHG pre-dates PIE expansion, but EHG and some WHG (I would not use ANE as reference) definitely was brought with IE language.
 
Being against Afro Centric fantasies is considered "racist" in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Canada, isn't it?

These "Canadians" voted for a certain Prime-Minister who I shall not name, and my country is filled with politically correct "loons". On my part, I do lean more to Ukraine's side rather than Russia. They still haven't apologized or taken responsibility for the deaths of innocent Malaysian and Dutch citizens on a commercial aircraft.
 

This thread has been viewed 18344 times.

Back
Top