Collection of skulls.

[h=1]Skull and limb morphology differentially track population history and environmental factors in the transition to agriculture in Europe.[/h]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23902904
Is there a way to access the whole paper?
 
Supposedly this is Loschbour skull. 6,000 BCE

Lochsbourskull.png

The Loschbour skull.
The prominent browridge
is very unusual for
Paleolithic Europeans.

Here is a view from top found at Dienekes. Meanwhile I don't find this skull so unusual anymore. Feel free to place this pic to an appropriate place and remove my post if necessary.

loschbour.jpg
 
I saw in other blogs that concerning craniology and bones, the Neolithic period corresponded to an almost disparition of ancient types (archaic: cromagnoid and brünn-capelloid) in western and central Europe: concerning western and north-western Europe I can say it is erroneous; some quoted "neolithical mediterranean" population showed a mix between ancient and new populations (in Spain by example), with some general gracilization, but this gracilization could not conceal the differences of origins; and MODERN specialists found that west-central Portugueses of the mesoloithical period were already unlevel before Neolithic people introgression (I'm glad, it confirm my previous knowledge) -
in the Seine-Oise-marne SOM culture in France (about -2300 and later) you have the possibility to see the 33%-40% remnants of a brutal type inherited from a specific local 'cromagnoid-capelloid' crossing + other types were an 'alpine-like' type and a specific new 'mediterranean' type are obvious and new enough ( chassean << post-cardial) - in Michelberg culture too (a bit earlier but not far cousins of SOM) you could see the same resistance of ancient types- by the way, this SOM Province took over until Wallonia (Ardennes) and Luxemburg-Eiffel West-Rhine region as a whole -
don't forget old anthropology: features are autosomals in a big part! so the mesolithic people resurgence is not so a miracle mediated by females or not...
 
really interesting, thank you! but I will not dare to dig on my property ;))
 
One more to add, although it's not a close-up, so I don't know how much you can tell from it. This is a Scythian skull:
Burialheader.jpg


I don't know how this corresponds with these self-representations by the Scythians. It's sometimes difficult to know if the artists are always using their own people as models, or are copying the style as well as the technique of another culture. The answer differs depending on the time period.

pic%5CS%5CC%5CScythian%20art_Chortomlyk%20kurhan%20Dionysos%20head.jpg


scythians1.jpg
 
scythian: mesocephalic or rather sub-brachycephalic (uneasy to say with this angle) - doesn't seem 'mongoloid' at first sight - it is a pity we have not several angles for every skull...
all the way I thank the people who provide this pictures of crania
 
I don't know how much you can tell from this photo, but these are the remains from a mesolithic burial in Brittany. The majority opinion seems to be that the two young women were murdered by blows to the head.

02-murdered-women-mesolithic-cemetery-670.jpg
 
How profound.
 
playing again:
looking again at the Shkul skulls (Palestine, 100000 BC), I find they show in the same time a) archaïc features b) evident subsaharian features: were these features lost after by our ancestors by the mutations-selection system or were they another phylum without to close relations with us? they seem to me more "negroid" than a lot of East African people of today -
 
playing again:
looking again at the Shkul skulls (Palestine, 100000 BC), I find they show in the same time a) archaïc features b) evident subsaharian features: were these features lost after by our ancestors by the mutations-selection system or were they another phylum without to close relations with us? they seem to me more "negroid" than a lot of East African people of today -

The answer might be affected by which side one takes as to the dating for the out of Africa migrations leading to West Eurasians? In other words, are we West Eurasians descended from people who migrated from Africa over 100,000 years ago, only 60,000 years ago, or both?
 
The answer might be affected by which side one takes as to the dating for the out of Africa migrations leading to West Eurasians? In other words, are we West Eurasians descended from people who migrated from Africa over 100,000 years ago, only 60,000 years ago, or both?

in fact I insisted too much on the supposed (by myself) subsaharian traits - as a whole it seem now to me it is by far the "archaïc" asec (something 'neanderthaloid') which predominates in teseShkul skulls (a storm in a glass of water?)
 
when I look at Motala skull, Loschbour skull and others skulls of mesolithical cultural communities during neolithic time in Sweden, I see everytime a strong 'brünn-capelloid' trend in them all - could be interesting if we can prove they were as a whole Y-I2 people ???... so the more occidental more cromagnoid ones could have been bearing another Y- HaploG??? which one? Y-C??????????? Y-E1??????? confusing!
 
Two skeletons entwined (male and female) from Neolithic Italy (5000 years ago), Mantua area. People in the neolithic era were endowed with romanticism
tumblr_mi6kclRO1J1rui49ao1_500.jpg
amantes-de-valdaro-1-300x245.jpg
 
Neolithic "Romeo and Juliet" :) look strongly dolychocephalic to me, it's consistent with the mediterranean origins of neolithic people, IMHO.
 
36-39 thousand year old hunter gatherer from Kostenki Russia. Also known as K14. Y DNA C, mtDNA U2. Supposedly very Cro-Magnoid.

e3ODI7A.jpg

untitled-2_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
36-39 thousand year old hunter gatherer from Kostenki Russia. Also known as K14. Y DNA C, mtDNA U2. Supposedly very Cro-Magnoid.

e3ODI7A.jpg

Very archaic looking to me...look at those brow ridges and those incisors. Still, is the reconstruction originally done on the skull accurate?

See: Kostenki Man

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_BfC6j03vee0/T...l5g/57754564-bbc-news_thumb[8].jpg?imgmax=800

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7t4meQzsnBY/TrMu5mGheDI/AAAAAAAAH7I/RXb3Mrd69yY/s1600/Kostenki.jpg

If it is, then his people were pretty "Australoid" looking, and perhaps Mal'ta was too.
 
Very archaic looking to me...look at those brow ridges and those incisors. Still, is the reconstruction originally done on the skull accurate?

See: Kostenki Man

If it is, then his people were pretty "Australoid" looking, and perhaps Mal'ta was too.
Yes, it does look archaic, in old European Cro-Magnoid terms, so are Australoid skulls. Perhaps this is where the artist got his inspiration to finish the flesh. Can we find skulls of farmers from Near East from 10kya to see if modern European skull comes from there? Where this full forehead with no eyebridges developed first. Is it the first farmer thing?
 

This thread has been viewed 77889 times.

Back
Top