Topic: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan (Read 1,778 times)
mike2 Guest
Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Thread Started on Jun 16, 2005, 8:11pm »
I remember Igu posting his version of the successive waves of the populating of North Africa.
I was wondering if we could do the same thing with Japan and then discuss the racial implications of the migrations of the Jomon, Yayoi, etc.
This is human2 territory.
How did the racial types of Japan come to be? What are the Ainu? Were they Australiforms who hybridized with native Arctic Mongoloids or Tungids? Or were they more like Polynesians, already mixed when they came to Japan from the south? Or were they from southeast Asia? Did the Nordsinid look of many Japanese come from the Korean peninsula via the Yayoi? What is the genetic record of the Japanese and the Ainu? All interesting questions about a fascinating people.
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #1 on Jun 16, 2005, 9:13pm »
Quote:
I remember Igu posting his version of the successive waves of the populating of North Africa.
I was wondering if we could do the same thing with Japan and then discuss the racial implications of the migrations of the Jomon, Yayoi, etc.
This is human2 territory.
I stumbled over this myself while studying the tiny 'genetic landscapes' (Haplogroup O in Egypt) and was pleased to see that human2 already wrote about something similar.
[19:58] (Janine): i dont have any adware on my computer. i have a mac. adware only affects windows. [19:58] me: O RLY [19:59] (Janine): stop doing that
mike2 Guest
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #3 on Jun 17, 2005, 4:18am »
Quote:
Does Mongoloid + Australoid give a pseudo-Caucasoid look.
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #4 on Jun 17, 2005, 12:10pm »
Typologically speaking the protomorphic Ainuids were the first, Palaemongolids followed, and Sinids and Tungids came latest after the German anthropologists. The basic types are still visible in the Japanese and form specific regional and social types. To connect that with the genetic background is another interesting question...
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #5 on Jun 17, 2005, 2:08pm »
Well, the "description" is neither precise nor important for that matter and did you even read what I have written? I didnt said that Ainuids were the same as European Cro-Magnon people or modern Europid Cromagnids.
I said once that Cromagnoids were relatively widespread in Eurasia, as were the Aurignacids/Bruennoids (not necessarily stricts races but morphological types). In the West, shortly before, during and after the ice age, Europids came up and in the East Mongolids. But some types stood behind and never developed a fully Europid nor Mongolid specialisation. Those types are rather protomorphic and include Ainuids and Weddids f.e.
So Cromagnoid is a wide term, best used for certain Europid types if its about moderns, but certain feature combinations can be called Cromagnoid too (broad face, orthognathous, strong zygomata, jaws and chin, rather prominent nose etc. They mixed with rather leptomorphic, narrow faced groups, both in Asia and Europe, and this population mix changed because of the different selective regime during the ice age in Europe and East Asia.
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #6 on Jun 17, 2005, 3:48pm »
Try to stay more constructive please and dont lay words in my mouth, generally you have some knowledge I respect, but stay a little bit more open minded if its about my person, or you just make a fool out of yourself. No offence meant, just read something rather negative out of your words...
To the topic:
Quote:
This is true in the West but not in the East, where there is no record of "Mongoloids" coming up from the south, which is all Australo-Melanesian in morphology. In fact, the earliest "proto-forms" and "Mongoloids" are all found in the north. Also, Native Americans are osteologically established as "Mongoloids" and not whatever sentiments suits you. These are just facts that anyone can access.
Where did I say something else? I said they specialised in during the ice age and my cold type adaptation theory fits much better in the North either... Most people of the North and the Indianids are rather Cromagnoid if its about their morphology, whereas from the South, as you said, rather Aurignacid types came up and were probably involved in the forming process of Sinids - leptomorphic Aurignacid elements with progressive Cromagnid well combined.
Quote:
Also, "Europoid" wouldn't be 'Europoid" if it came up later, right? Why don't we be careful with these names because it's more helpful to be accurate.
Well, thats a really difficult question. We can discuss the same thing with "Australoids" or "Australiform" or even just "Australomorphic" people in Eurasia. The point is just the European Cromagnids of the early times wouldnt be out of place in some European regions of today. They would be extraordinary, but I saw the skull (mould) myself, and no, the difference to modern Europids is rather small if speaking of f.e. "the old". But you are right, those terms should be used carefully. What we are seeing here are different strata, states. Some stood behind (Australid), evolved on on the same path (Europid) or specialised in a new way (Mongolid). So its just natural that some older "Protomongolid" skulls show similarities to Australoids or Europoids. But thats morphological similarity, not necessarily genetic one and most of the time rather superficial one anyway.
Quote:
Ok, what do you mean by "Aurignacids/Bruennoids"?
The other basic element of early mankind which is still influencing the form of modern populations. More leptomorphic build with different grades of robustness but always rather narrow faces and heads and no tendency to brachycephalecy (unlike the Cromagnoids). One of the oldest examples for this morphological tendency is Combe Capelle.
Quote:
How can you use that word to describe the people afterwards as "Cro-Magnoids"/"Europoids"?
Because they are anatomically so similar and coming up from this background. F.e. modern Dalofaelids of Northern Europe are just like a slight adaptation of the original form. These are relatively unaltered forms, whereas others specialised on in a more brachymorphic direction (Alpinids) or to extreme cold adaption (Mongolid). But usually I dont use it for Mongolids because the differences were there almost from the first record, but in Europe the type "survived" more or less unaltered in certain regions and types.
Quote:
You sneakily sneak into there the word "modern". You know full well that these people were fully modern and looked nothing like "Caucasians", to say the least.
Not like typical Nordids or Mediterranids, but look at the skulls of Palaeatlantids and Dalofaelids. Ok, they are altered, but just somewhat, the basic form is the same.
You dont understand that typical Mongolid is for me and should be seen as a specialisation - f.e. if one of two related clans lived in the area during the ice age in which Mongolids as a cold type evolved, and the other went further East (f.e. on Japan), in which another selective regime was important - and never evolved the typical features, is this variant then Mongolid? On the other hand, if a group came from the South, was integrated in the population during the formation process, but wasnt genetically closely related - now they show the typical Mongolid traits - what are they?
They point is races are not static but evolve as you know and if I'm speaking about types, I speak about specialisation, and thats the main point of whats race about. Mongolids evolved in the North, I never said something else, I just said elements came from the South too, most likely... Never say again that I said Mongolids evolved in the South because I never said that and even more important, I dont believe it.
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #8 on Jun 17, 2005, 6:13pm »
Quote:
"In the West, shortly before, during and after the ice age, Europids came up and in the East Mongolids."
Ok, thats a misunderstanding. with "came up", I meant they evolved, not that they have to come from much further South.
Indianids are mostly Mongolid, but are not fully developed ones, at least not all types. Their facial profile, subcutaneous fat, body proportions etc. are not fully typical. So you could call them Mongoloid, but the difference between an Andid and a Tungid or Sinid should clear isnt it?
Quote:
The point is that north China was inhabited by people resembling Australo-Melanesians possibly as late as 10,000 it seems, and southern/central China as late 7,000 years ago. There is also plenty of genetics to back it up as well as cutural relics.
Exactly.
Quote:
don't doubt that Chinese are a result of "admixture" if you can call it that, or intermediation, but the fact is people in Siberia were always there (as in first) and they developed into "Mongoloids". I'm not going to say that there is no doubt but it's what the implications suggest, without sentiments. There may have been regional differences, such as between "Tungid" and NE Siberian.
Yes, imho the basic Mongolid is Tungid, everything else is deviation out of mixture, half way development or different selective regime. Mongolids are what I call a "core race", the features are extreme enough and useful for a just certain areas, so you can assume development in an isolated area and expansion afterwards. Sinids f.e. might be the result of mixture and re-selection and South East Asians are obviously nothing else.
Quote:
Which skull are you talking about? And what are the differences? You always speak in vagueness. See, in terms of skulls, that could be said for every region, since there is variation everywhere and moderns are not all that different, so your contention is meaningless.
The facial profile of the old from Cro Magnon is typically European and wouldnt look different from many recent humans, dont you think so too?
See, that variation of early modern was there, right. There was great variation in the Cromagnids and there were other variants, like what I call Aurignacid, oftentimes even in the same clan. Out of that variation, under specific ecological and sociocultural conditions, the modern types came up in Eurasia.
Quote:
but it may indicate that the Cro-Magnons were either racially undifferentiated, or that they represented a race or races with their own combination of features unlike any found today."
Nice quote, exactly what I wanted to say. Undifferentiated = protomorphic.
Quote:
Anybody can go read for themselves what you say from post to post upon being challenged, ever changing.
No, just misunderstandings and misconceptions from your side, you might read similar things from me on Skadi, Stirpes etc. where I've written the same some months ago...
Quote:
"the preserved facial parts indicate a flat face with forward placed cheek bones, contrasting strongly with the Neanderthals", is more European than Asian?
I meant the basic growth tendency if naming it Cromagnid, not details, BUT if you are quoting this, remember, compared to neanderthalensis a Dinarid has a rather "flat face" and forward placed cheek bones, you know that the Neandertal face was projecting and had no clear cheekbones if looking frontal at the skull.
Quote:
What time period? What specific skulls and studies?
Ok, just to clear things up, how would you place the old from Cro Magnon and for comparison the skull form Oberkassel.
This skull is flat faced to you? More than average Europeans yes, but especially the modern Europid Cromagnoids (mainly Palaeatlantid, Dalofaelid and Borreby) coming quite close.
What are you talking about? For example, Cambodians are not fully "Mongoloid". That should be obvious if yu know what "Mongoloid" morphology is. I can even cite you studies. It's like saying some half-"Negroid" Berbers are "Caucasoid".
They were even considered being mostly East Weddid by Eickstedt and scholars, so again, you just stating the obvious which I never denied.
Quote:
What does that really mean by saying this guy is Cro-Magnon, like you did with "examples". Nothing.
Not too much, thats right, since he evolved on in a typical Mongolid direction. But certain aspects come rather from Cromagnoid variants than from Aurignacids, do you agree? And those two were the basic elements of early sapiens, most moderns are going somewhat in this or that direction and are more influenced by Cromagnoids or Aurignacids.
The original Eurasian, at least in the colder, northern parts. population was mostly Cromagnoid in form, at least thats whats quite probable. Later more forms from the South came in (Aurignacids) and after that, out of this mixture, new variants came up. F.e., in Northern Europe even shortly before the Neolithikum and afterwards Cromagnoid types dominated (Palaeeuropid, just higher skulled on average). That types are usually called "Upper Palaelithic" by many English speakers. What I wanted to point out is the dual (anatomical) origin and structure of BOTH Europids and Mongolids, because certain Cromagnoid/Aurignacid features are older THAN BOTH, but still influence variants in both races. F.e. its typical that Cromagnoids tend to brachycephalisation more than Aurignacids. Even the dinariomorphic forms are rather Cromagnoid influenced...
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #9 on Jun 17, 2005, 8:00pm »
Quote:
Notice that your tone has changed within this thread. Before, it was "Europoids" are the closest to "Cro-Magnoids".
I will answer the rest later probably, if I have more time and motivation and can back up what said with some quotes. As for the BBC docus, they aren't always perfect you know, if I quote everything from BBC I could make many funny stories... They even said in one docu that Mongolids are direct descendents from Homo erectus, according to some forum members on Skadi which asked if this can be taken serious. Dont forget the overall head shape and body proportions which are different either.
If looking at the skull from "the old" of Cro Magnon, he is definitely closer to Europids than to Mongolids, you deny that? He has robust cheekbones, thats an archaic trait, but otherwise his profile is rather Europid. Sure there are broad faced individuals with flat profiles and noses, but a) there were various variants, usually I dont refer with Cromagnid to them (for modern I only use this term for broad faced, robust Europids like they can be seen in Palaeatlantids, Dalofaelids and Berberids, and thats the way most anthropologists saw it, even in the 90's btw) and b) mixes with Aurignacids which had more prognathy, weaker chin and flatter facial profile (compare Combe Capelle).
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #11 on Jun 18, 2005, 12:54am »
We are concerned with modern races and human biodiversity. The further back the hominid timeline goes from the present to the dim past, the less like modern human races those antique hominids are going to look and even the less human these hominids will appear. It is a fact that human like remains from 10,000 years ago, not very long ago in the life of this planet, the remains are about 10% more rugged than today's humans. Similarly 30,000 years ago, say Cro-Magnon's time, those hominids were 30% more rugged than today's humans. The point is that those creatures can be separated from today's humans on that anatomical basis. The assumption is that those creatures were human ancestors and that humans are derived from them. That is a reasonable assumption but one that cannot be proven until it become's possible to completely rebuilt the creature's nuclear DNA and create one in a laboratory. At the present we are comparing a Ferrari with the clapped out chassis of a bus and a Mack truck and saying they are vehicles and belong to the same family. The general assumption is that hominids of 30,000 years ago looked like the people from the area where they were found. So the Cro-Magnons of France are caucasoid. Whatever their actual racial appearance we can only guess and make subjective assessments. According to paleontology and archeology, Japan has been occupied by people for many thousands of years. The Jomon period, a long period, the people were from the South of Asia and considered mongoloid. The Yayoi period saw the appearance of people from NE Asia who came over in waves from the mainland. It is these two types that make up the Japanese with the NE Asian variety predominating. As far as the Ainu is concerned, the Ainu were from NE Asia, the Kuriles and Hokkaido, some of them were in Northern Honshu whent the Yayoi peoples made contact with them. I am basing my understanding on the peopling of Japan from what can be assumed from archeology. As for the Ainu's contribution to the Japanese genepool, it is likely to be minor whereas the contribution of the Japanese to the Ainu genepool is major.
Joined: Jan 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 3,288 Location: Asgard
Re: Origin of the Racial Types of Japan « Reply #12 on Jun 19, 2005, 12:51pm »
Quote:
So, now "Mongoloids" are Erectus? Before they were "Australoforms" from the south. Anything to keep that world of yours "happy".
Ok, guy, you are just a troll and want to provoke me with nonsense. I never said that myself, BUT YOU quoted BBC and in a BBC docu it was said. The Australiform connection was made by you as well and it is just an influence. Furthermore its not abut "the Mongoloids" but possible ancestoral forms, if you now the difference boy.
Everybody can read it and see what shit you are talking, because thats what I said:
Quote:
As for the BBC docus, they aren't always perfect you know, if I quote everything from BBC I could make many funny stories... They even said in one docu that Mongolids are direct descendents from Homo erectus, according to some forum members on Skadi which asked if this can be taken serious.
On Skadi everybody can read that this is not my opinion but someone asked it in the German section.
Quote:
Predmosti have certain traits close to Australians (and thus clustering with them) in the robust jaws and thick brows and cranial vault, while having a flattened, broad face with forward cheek bones. Cro-Magnon also has the same face but without heavy brow ridges or jutting occipults but have a gracile, modern African-like cranial vault of moderns. Paired with his flat face he is rather Eskimo-like, who have sometimes the same two combination of traits.
Yes, I'm superficial but a narrow dolichocephalic skull is just "African-like" *lol* Even if a professional is saying that it sounds like joke. Chancelade is much closer to Eskimids anyway and you can compare the two skulls. What you are trying to insinusate my person, you and the sources you are quoting are doing, they see features and link them to modern populations like they want. In fact they are just undifferentiated but the features which are more clear going in a rather Europoid direction. Robust and rather prominent cheekbones yes, but to call the Cro-Magnon face "flat" compared to other findings from that time is a joke, even if compared with "Africans" and "Eskimos".
Quote:
The within-population variation of Mladec, for example, can be interpreted as admixture with Neanderthals or Moderns coming from the Middle East.
Oh really? Modern from the ME or Neanderthals, one of both right? As it would be same
Quote:
Just what do you mean by this I don't know. It's ambiguous. Does he look like the Moderns of the Levant 95,000, who are older than him? Do they have "robust cheekbones"? I don't know what you mean.
Robust zygomata are generally an archaic feature, at least more archaic than compressed, gracile ones in sapiens.
Quote:
We are not talking about big-faces/robust cheek bones but forward and upward orientation of malars. The Jomon had robust cheek bones and big faces but not forward and upward orientation of malars, an osteologically "Mongoloid" trait that is one among many to identify "Mongoloids", including Native Americans. Thus, even while Japanese have been getting more "Mongoloid" in cheek bones, they have seen drastic reductions in facial size from the Jomon days.
Thats an argument but what is meant not just by me, but by many anthropologists if refering to "Cromagnid" is robust features, pyknomorphic forms, strong jaws, gonial angles. F.e. the North African skulls from Afalou and Mechta fall into this category more or less.
Do the pure Ainu I've posted in various threads look like they have flat flaces, or at least look "Mongoloid"?
Australians have robust cheek bones. Are they flat?
This is exactly what Cro-Magnons are. To be more accurate, the very first Moderns of Europe that we find that are associated with the name. If you don't refer to them, then what do you mean by Cro-Magnons? Iranians? The term Cro-Magnon changes depending on context and time period. These people you mentioned, moderns, have already been thoroughly admixing with people from the Middle East.
Good you finally understood it, hopefully! Cro-Magnon people is used by many popular publications to name ALL first moderns in Europe with all there variants, but in the past, and by many specialists even now, it refers to those broad faced, robust morphology - basically after the individual "the old of Cro-Magnon".
Quote:
First of all, the Cro-Magnons (the ones of France, for example) are Aurignacians in culture, and the "Aurignacids" you mention actually are what anthropologists considered admixtures with a local strain after the people arrived from Siberia.
Yes, thats right, but in fact those "Aurignacids" are the older strain in Europe, the "Cromagnids" the newer from Sibiria, probably the name is not the best, but its one used by some anthropologists, another is "Capellide" for Aurignacide.
Quote:
"Aurignacids" now have flatter profiles, weak chin? His big jaw and chin plus the bulging occipult are the reasons they sometimes cluster with Australians.
Yes, but they dont have the typical Europoid relief, Cro-Magnon is more European in this feature. And they have oftentimes strong jaws-chin, but more often rather negative chin and prognathy. The nasal profile is rather flat in Combe Capelle and the nose is broad and primitive formed.
Quote:
The very people of the south who you said in this very post as people with narrow faces, dolichocephalic, who you've associated with various "Veddoid"/"Australaform" peoples?
The very people that the "Caucasoid" stock mainly developed from have flatter profiles now? Iranians have flat faces.
Thats true for individual variants and the most archaic populations, they soon mixed with Cromagnids and evolved on but kept the typical narrow face-head feature combination. Only the most primitive examples show that flat facial profile.
Quote:
Whatever suits your agendas. As I said, you keep changing things up, within the same thread. You have no honor. You do seem knowledgable in some areas but it seems to be gotten mainly from aged German race books. I'd say atleast... atleast... half of the stuff in those things are now revoked, with new findings that may even be the exact opposite of those German race books of yore.
Partly you are trolling around and partly you misunderstood things, thats probably my fault because I dont want to do endless posts with work-intensive inquest for someone who tries to lay words in my mouth I never said, all the time...just look to the "came up" thing or the "erectus" question. You didnt understood or just tried to troll, one of both. You should know it better since I never said the basic Mongolids evolved in the South nor that I believe in a erectus influence...but whatever you can get to attack me...blabla...
Quote:
His "Aurignacid"/"Bruennid" (incorrect use of the word) morphology in this very thread now has "flat facial profile". These Australian aborigines have certain "Aurignacid" (incorrecy terminology) that Agrippa has referred to.
They have broad undifferentiated noses, prognathy and negative chin, robust cheekbones which are typically formed and their jaws are robust but narrow, compressed gonial angles etc. Compare their jaws with that of Cromagnids to see the difference. They are no pure form of Cappelids/Aurignacids, but show certain traits and are in the same sense undifferentiated - therefore australiform is justified for Aurignacids after the definition of -iform you might find if reading through the forum...
Quote:
The funny thing is that these people, and Tasmianians and Papuans and other "Australaform primitives" have more in common with "Caucasoid" morphology than the people you constantly claim in Siberia, East Asia, and the Americas. We can't classify based on emotive sentiments about "progressiveness", tall noses, nice jaws and chins and body, skin color and other superficial facial traits.
Read back, thats what you and some of your sources did, not my person.
Quote:
In your mind, light feratures+"progressive" (aquiline) features equals "Europoid" admixture. Real anthropologists classify based on cranial morphology beyond that first impression, such as in eye socket position and shape, cranial vault morphology, and various other genetically affect non-metric and metric traits in the skull and bones. In that sense, any of these groups classified as "Mongoloid" (including Native Americans who you view as your Cro-Magnon, proto-Nordic ancestor), are in a different world from you.
Europids have just the highest frequency of progressive features on average, but that doesnt mean other races can't show progressive traits or the same adaptations. I wrote about that in the thread about high bridged noses... So no, I dont assume that every progressive feature must be Europid, since in the temperate climate and under positive selection similar traits can come up from many backgrounds.
Indianids evolved from Asian Cromagnoids, mostly from the same source as modern East Asian Mongolids, BUT they went just the half way to be fully developed Mongolids and in America they had even a selective regime, especially in certain areas, more European than everything else which lead to a similar selective regime. Sure they are Mongoloid, but they are not Mongolid in the same sense as Tungids or Sinids, since they went away from East Asia too soon and didnt get all the typical features.
![[Home]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif "[Send Topic To Friend]")
![[Print]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/1803/asdf8sr.jpg "[avatar]")
![[aim]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/aim.gif "[aim]")
![[avatar]](http://avatarpage.rapidforum.com/fama6/6.jpg "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/photos/cro-magnon.jpg "[image]")
