Mar 062012
 

An ongoing discussion I’ve been having at GNXP led me to recall one of Razib’s posts (prompted by these ADMIXTURE runs) from last year:

I don’t think that the “Classic Solutrean hypothesis” is viable, where Paleolithic Europeans manage to jump across the polar fringe to North America. Rather, my contention that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that a set of post-Gravettian societies spanned the northern fringe of Eurasia, and that one branch went east to populate North America. Of those that remained it may be that on the milder fringes of western Eurasia, what became Europe, they were almost totally marginalized or absorbed. Only across the great expanse of Siberia where agriculture was marginalized did this people persist down the modern day. To bring it back to the present and over romanticizing the the possibilities one might then suggest that the displacement of Amerindians in North America over the past few centuries recapitulated the marginalization of their distant cousins in Europe between 5 and 10 thousand years ago!


This sentence in The Tribes and the States stood out as weirdly self-assured when I first read it, even in a section that took for granted Atlantean outposts in Michigan and Africa, but maybe Sidis was more prescient than I gave him credit for!

In connection with the pre-history of the red peoples, an important fact is that there were red men at one time in Europe as well as in America.


(Yes, that Sidis wrote a book on American Indian history. And no, this intuition, if you’re sanguine enough to call it that, doesn’t really make Ch. 1 any less auspicious of a start. Give it a look and you’ll see what I mean.)

More seriously, Kyle Bristow and all the other U.S. White nationalists champing at the bit for a Holocaust to call their own may — in light of future aDNA revelations about European and American prehistory — well end up regretting what they’d wished for.

  5 Responses to “The “red race” in Europe”

  1. Gravettian does not lead to the the post-Ice Age cultures of Siberia and it’s not connected with the pre-Ice Age cultures either, save one spot in Western Siberia, Mal’ta, which has some Gravettian-like features, but not enough to attribute it to common descent rather than contact.
    On the genetic side there it is pretty clear now that Y-chromosome haplogroup R in Europe is a recent Neolithic phenomenon mainly if not fully brought by Indo-European expansion (If you haven’t been keeping up with recent papers, it may come as a shock.) R*(xR1,R2) samples, the rare ones that occur, are all in SW Asia. mtDNA-wise, there is no connection between Native American (East-Eurasian lineages A, B, C, D) and Paleolithic European samples (all U5 if I recall right) either. X is a special case but even there, the connection should be with SW Asia via Central Asia. The connection should be from the initial settlement of Eurasia, about 40,000 years ago; there is no archaeological evidence to make it later.
    Physical anthropology-wise, the Cro-magnon type skulls of Paleolithic Europe is nothing like Native American skulls (osteologically and craniometrically ‘Mongoloid’), and both types are very different from Modern European-Middle Eastern skulls.
    To put it simply, a claim of a Red Race in Paleolithic Europe is absurd, something better left to the topics at one of the various race-oriented forums.

    It is not a good idea to be quoting razib on this. He is not an expert on most of the subjects he speculates about, and most of his posts, though eloquently elaborated and filled with nice graphs, have no depth. His specialty is in the genes that effect phenotype, intelligence, health.., or so he claims.

  2. Overall, I agree with Ren that ancient DNA has so far failed to bolster the connection between Amerindians and Europeans. U2 at Kostenki is still squarely inside the European cluster. This, however, may simply reflect a) rapid population change at 30,000 that already minimized the connection that would be more visible with 40,000 YBP samples; b) insufficient coverage, which is only natural for ancient DNA; c) both.

    I agree that X is a special case and I agree that it must be old (as in 40,000 YBP old) in both America and Eurasia.

    What I don’t agree with is that ancient Amerindian skulls are Mongoloid. They are not, as a slew of recent works have shown. They are “pre-Mongoloid” and as such show proximity to both West Eurasian, paleo-Asiatic (Ainu) and Australo-Melanesian skulls. What is true is that archaeologically the Mongoloid type seems to appear earlier in North America than in East Asia.

    BTW, I’m migrating all the human origins stuff from kinshipstudies.org to a new site http://www.anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org. It’s still WIP but it’s already readable.

  3. And no, this intuition, if you’re sanguine enough to call it that, doesn’t really make Ch. 1 any less auspicious of a start.

    What do you mean by this?

  4. I think Ortu is just poking a jab at the Solutrean claim. But my impression is that the peer-review community is really not taking it seriously, so to me it’s just a more polished version of what is thrown out everyday on Stormfront, mysterious ancient White people everywhere.

    Paleo-American skulls are not as straightforward as you make it out to be; I can say more on that but I’d prefer to save it for a blog post.

  5. Darren:

    What I mean is that assertions like it is probable that Atlantis was colonized by red men from western Europe and Africa give me scant cause to trust anything else in the book.

    ren:

    I was hoping the ironic tone and “more seriously” would have been a giveaway, but this post was mostly tongue-in-cheek. While I still think the superficial correspondence in visions is funny (and find Diogenes’ ADMIXTURE findings worthy of further consideration), it’d clearly take something more than over-romanticization to characterize Paleolithic Europeans (let alone, as Sidis claims, the Basques) as racially identical with or meaningfully allied to living Amerindians.

    I’m well aware of the European aDNA work you mention — that’s precisely why “Solutrean white nationalists” like John de Nugent and co. might be dismayed to learn what their much-longed-for trans-Atlantic UP dispersal would actually have entailed.

    Gravettian does not lead to the the post-Ice Age cultures of Siberia and it’s not connected with the pre-Ice Age cultures either, save one spot in Western Siberia.

    It seemed like he meant “post-Gravettian” in the temporal sense, not one of genealogical succession.

 Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>