Upper Paleolithics vs Mediterraneans: the biggest division of modern Caucasoids

[Amorsite]

Upper Paleolithics vs Mediterraneans: the biggest division of modern Caucasoids

(by Amorsite)

Regardless of local peculiarities, all the peoples of this planet of Caucasoid race may be divided in two, universally contrasting, morphologically distinct varieties: the Upper Paleolithic and the Mediterranean types. The essay below attempts not to explain the eventual origin of this differentiation, but to describe it using both textual and photographic material. The idea is for the reader to acquire a clear morphological understanding of these two groups and their differences.

This study is divided in: 1) Presentation 2) Differences 3) Diagnostic methods 4) Final remarks

1) Presentation of each group

1.a) Mediterraneans

We may begin with Carleton Coon’s description of the Mediterranean race from his book Caravan: the Story of the Middle East:
“A Mediterranean is a white man of variable stature - as whites go, usually short to medium; his bones are light, but strongly marked for muscle attachments if these muscles have been well developed through use. His legs are relatively long compared to his trunk, and his hands and feet rather small. His chest is relatively flat, his neck of medium length, his head of medium size, long-oval in shape with parallel sides; his face is small and delicate, with only slight bony ridges over the eyes. The upper part of his face is large in proportion to the lower part, so that when he is old his nose looks large for his jaw. Of all human being the Mediterranean has the most human, the most highly evolved, masticatory apparatus. His teeth are small, and so are the muscles that operate his jaw. His face is narrow, and his nose consequently is often prominent when compared to the lower-bridged and flatter noses of wider or longer-jawed races in Europe and other parts of Africa and Asia. The Mediterranean man is a relatively hairy fellow. His head is covered with a heavy growth of straight, wavy, or ringleted hair, usually fine in texture; rarely does the true Mediterranean go bald. His eyebrows are full, often meeting over the nose. His beard develops throughout adult life. While it is not the heaviest beard of all mankind, it is often a close runner-up. His body hair also increases throughout life and individually varies greatly in quantity.”
A Mediterranean individual below.

(Atlanto-Mediterranean from Italy after Coon’s the Races of Europe)

1.b) Upper Paleolithics

A description of Upper Paleolithic crania is found in C. Coon’s The Races of Europe:
“Since, as Morant has shown, this total Upper Palaeolithic group is unified enough to be considered a single population, we may proceed to generalize about the traits which most of the members of this group possess in common. The first and most notable of these is the extremely large size of the brain case, larger in most cases than Galley Hill or most modern men, and comparable in size to Skhul. This is found in all but a few of the skulls, whatever the actual dimensions and forms. The cranial indices, however, are very variable, ranging from sixty-five to eighty-five, and this variability is too great to imply a single homogeneous type.
In these skulls the males are easily distinguished from the females, for there is a greater difference between the sexes than is usual among more recent groups of man. The same is true of long bones and stature. This implies, of course, a stronger development of secondary sexual characteristics. In the male skulls the bony markings are all pronounced the browridges are as a rule heavy, the faces arc excessively broad, with flaring zygomata. The upper face height is variable—medium to short in most individuals, but in others quite long.
One of the most distinctive characteristics of most (but not all) of these skulls is that the orbits are very broad and very low. The nasal skeleton is almost always prominent. The nasal root, although deeply overhung by glabella, is still high, and the osseous nasal profile is as a rule straight or convex. The nasal spine is sharp and the lower border well marked. The nose, on the whole, is leptorrhine to mesorrhine.
The lower jaw presents just as marked an individuality as does the cranium. This bone is deep, wide, and heavy, with flaring gonial angles and a prominent chin. The palate is rather wider than those of most living men, although the teeth are not of excessive size. If one judges the face form from the calvarium alone, the great breadth of the face, coupled with a variable length, yields in most cases a low upper facial index, placing these skulls in the euryene category. If, however, one calculates a total facial index, many of these skulls are leptoprospic, for the great height of the mandibular symphysis compensates for the shortness from nasion to alveolar point. This condition, in which the lower part of the face is exaggerated, is one of the chief diagnostic features of this type of man, and a suggestion of it may still be seen among some of the living peoples of northern Europe.
In the totality of facial features, with a few exceptions, the Upper Palaeolithic people may be said to have resembled modern white men. Some, however, probably looked like a certain type of American Indian, notably that of the North American Plains, and of the Onas and Tehuelche of southernmost South America. This comparison, we must remember, is wholly morphological, since we do not know Upper Palaeolithic man’s pigmentation, hair form, or hair distribution.”
An Upper Paleolithic individual below.

(Upper Paleolithic Survival in Ireland after Coon’s the Races of Europe.)

2)Differences

In his 1939 book The Races of Europe, Coon presented this diagram contrasting the two groups in 16 different aspects.

3)Diagnostic methods

This section deals with the observable morphological traits by which living individuals belonging to either group may be recognized. Though certain features may be more characteristic for a given population of UPs or Meds, individuals with comparable forms may occur in many areas. Mediterraneans, however, never present Upper Paleolithic features and vice versa.


3.a) Upper Paleolithic diagnostics
3.a.i) Everted upper lip

More typical of the Irish, this trait is spread in the Upper Paleolithics of the British Isles and their related types.

(1.Unknown, probably an Englishman, 2. Ian Brown, 3. Chris O’Donnell)

The upper lip appears not to close with the lower lip, with furrows between the two.


3.a.ii) Clifted, prominent chin

Varies slightly with subtype, but is as a rule present in most if not all UP types.

(1. James May, 2. Upper Paleolithic Survival in Ireland after Coon’s The Races of Europe, 3. Greek Alpine after Coon’s The Races of Europe)

There appears to be an “excess” of bony material in the chin, which is often projecting in form.


3.a.iii) Attached, low-rooted nose

Present in all UP types, most UP individuals in which other diagnostic criteria are not apparent still vary clearly in this from the Mediterranean group.

(1. Oliver Kahn, 2. Ian Brown, 3. Sirian Alpine after Coon’s The Races of Europe)

Viewed from the side, the nose appears “insignificant” if compared to the rest of the face, in which the lateral aspects and the robusticity of cheeks, chin, gonial angles and jaw are more important.


3.a.iv) Heavy skeletal structure

Particularly evident in the Upper Paleolithics of Germany and their related types.

(1. Till Schweiger, 2. Albanian Borreby-like type after Coon’s The Races of Europe, 3. Klaus Kinski)

Cheeks, jaw and chins present a heavy bony structure. Probably anyone who has met a significant number of Germans has come across this peculiarity.


3.a.v) Bigger masticatory parts

More evident in the bigger (and less reduced) subvarieties of UPs.

(1. Mick Jagger, 2. Stephen King, 3. Oliver Kahn)

The mouth appears big for the face, the nose often “insignificant”.


3.b) Mediterranean diagnostics
3.b.i) Differentiated nasal apparatus

Present in all Med types, in the Mediterraneans of the East and Nordics the nose is often convex.

(1. James Cromwell, 2. Caucasoid from Pakistan after Coon’s The Origin of Races, 3. Gianluca Zambrotta, 4. Gianluigi Buffon)

The nose is “important” compared to the rest of the face, which appears to gravitate to it, and is often projecting in form.


3.b.ii) Large upper face

In all Mediterranean types.

(1. Peter Cushing, 2. Max von Sydow, 3. Kevin Federline, 4. Atlanto-Mediterranean from Italy after Coon’s The Races of Europe)

Viewed frontally, the upper part of the face appears large if compared to its subnasal portion.

3.b.iii) Narrow jaw with projecting nose in profile

In all Mediterranean types.

(1. Alessandro Del Piero, 2. Nordic after Coon’s Races: A Study of the Problems of Race Formation in Man, 3.Afghan man, 4. Hallstatt Nordic Englishman after Coon’s The Races of Europe)

In profile, the lateral aspects of the face are not important, and the course of the nose, which is clearly differentiated from the rest of the face, becomes more evident. The jaw is consistently narrow.

4) Final remarks

The visual morphological evidence renders undeniable the existence of these two main groups: the Upper Paleolithic and the Mediterranean. The former is far more numerous at least on European ground, and presents a greater deal of variability in part due to reduction and possibly to local specialization. The differentiation is, however, not new, as both UP and Med skulls are found already in the Paleolithic period.
The studious of Morphology and Anthropology of Caucasoids who wishes to inquire in their uniqueness and variation should begin by recognizing this primary division as the angular stone for sound taxonomy.

[Ariets]

Name Upper Paleothic type doesn't make sense since Mediterreans existed in that time frame

And I would agree in basic two types some time ago, nowdays I'd say I was wrong, same as you are today. Basicly because Cromagnoid (better name) vs Mediterranoid (Aurignacid after Coon afair, in fact culture from upper paleothic period) are related, and the first are "father" of the second and isn't any other specially range of Europid spectrum. I'd say more, since leptosomisation of body constitution and facial/head proportions/shape is fact what comes from various places (factor what indeed helps) where they live (climate, adaptation) and later as Progression (also depends of factors). Thats why Nordid, or better Nordoid nothern Europeans cluster with their nothern Cromagnoid neighbor, and southern Mediterranoid forms cluster with southern Cromagnoid forms.

Acceleration of progression depends from many things (factors), not only timeline in what they exist.

And remember that Mediterreanoid forms dont come from nowhere. So year by year "Cromagnoids" will be in smaller number.

To rest I dont have time and humour to comment

[Ariets]

Just post scriptum, please dont base on literature from 1939 if come for modern morphology of human beings, most are outdated.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by AMORSITE

I think many European Alpines come from southern UPs, types like David Muñoz and Martin Scorsese. There are also Alpines in the middle east though, so it is likely that alpine is actually a bag term for reduced UP forms.

Alpinoids are Alpinised Europids as simple as that - so Europids with the specific traits combination for that type and coming from different sources.
An interesting aspect of differentiation of Cromagnoid and Aurignacoid, I tried to further emphasize, namely the angle and position of the jaw, best visible in profile usually:

Note that the 1st example of Nordid is clearer on that matter and seems to be more pronounced Aurignacoid if its about the jaw line than the example No 4 which is Nordid too.

I think there are some good ideas in your test Amorsite, but probably too much concentration on certain detail traits and of course, the size aspect already Coon emphasized is crap, since there are large sized Aurignacoids and those can be clearly distinguished from the short-broad faced Cromagnoid variation, with this distinction of Cromagnoid vs. Aurignacoid being the real important one.
Exemplified here:

Borreby variants are brachycephalised Cromagnoids, so half way Alpinised one could say, Dalofaelids in most systems of value were considered those Northern Europids which are Cromagnid - so dolichocephalic-broad faced-light.

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Ariets

And remember that Mediterreanoid forms dont come from nowhere. So year by year "Cromagnoids" will be in smaller number.

You are right but Mediterranoids do not come from cro-magnids as I think you suggest here
Cro-magnoids and Mediterranoids (Aurignacids) are both branches derivating from a same ancestor. Now who was this common ancestor? I do not think it has been stablished yet and I do not think it will be stablished for a long time.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Alpinoids are Alpinised Europids as simple as that

Or simpler (and clearer), they are reduced Cromagnoids. So it is using the term alpinised for reduced that produces confusion. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to use the term reduced consistently?

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Or simpler (and clearer), they are reduced Cromagnoids. So it is using the term alpinised for reduced that produces confusion. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to use the term reduced consistently?

Not really because there could be different ways of reduction. In a way a very gracile Mediterranid f.e. is a reduced Aurignacoid, but of course, this kind of reduction doesnt make them Alpinoid of any sort. The distinction is less clear if looking at Baltisation, but again there are aspects in Baltisation, which are different from that of Alpinisation (always light, Borealised-cold adapted, stronger tendency towards Mongoliform traits in strongly Baltised groups etc.)

Therefore Alpinisation means an end result which is still clearly Europid, has however a brachycephalic head, broad face, short-medium body height, tendency towards pyknomorphy, stocky build and rather infantilised characteristics and proportions etc., etc.
The typical Alpinoids from around the Europoid settlements have all, despite minor differences which came up through their different roots and regional mixtures (f.e. German with Nordid, French with Atlantid, Italian with Mediterranid, Iranian with Iranid etc.) a lot of - the crucial Alpinoid - traits in common which are more than just reduction per se, its a certain kind of change which includes a certain kind of reduction.

[Ricardo Reis]

And I thought it was Nordics vs Mediterraneans with the biggest division of modern Caucasoids.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Ricardo Reis

And I thought it was Nordics vs Mediterraneans with the biggest division of modern Caucasoids.

That is, in a way, true too, because there are more than one gradient.

Some of the most important being from North to South, West to East, Aurignacoid to Cromagnoid, robust to gracile, mature to infantile, progressive to primitive etc.
We are rather dealing with overlapping aspects of a greater structure in Europoid and worldwide variation.

Genetically there is a North-South divide which is the result of population movements and isolation which, however, doesnt predate the Aurignacoid vs. Cromagnoid dichotomy but vice versa and its main distinction is climatic, the form type advantages/disadvantages go beyond simple climatic considerations and include the way of life of a people which determined the selection in their habitat.

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

variation.

Genetically there is a North-South

How important is this divide? Is this one of the main genetic divisions among European Populations? could you pls provide maps, texts, sources? As far as I know and from what I've seen from European HaploGroups maps, the dividing lines tend to be rather more "vertical" than "Horizontal"

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Truth-Finder

How important is this divide? Is this one of the main genetic divisions among European Populations? could you pls provide maps, texts, sources? As far as I know and from what I've seen from European HaploGroups maps, the dividing lines tend to be rather more "vertical" than "Horizontal"

Depends on the genes you measure. Obviously if its about Neolithic influences, it rather goes from the North-West to the South-East. Again you have overlapping influences. But as a rule the North clusters closer together, the South West being intermediate and the South East the other end (Neolithic).

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Depends on the genes you measure. Obviously if its about Neolithic influences, it rather goes from the North-West to the South-East. Again you have overlapping influences. But as a rule the North clusters closer together, the South West being intermediate and the South East the other end (Neolithic).

In fact, I was thinking of Palaeolithic Haplogroups.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Again you have overlapping influences. But as a rule the North clusters closer together, the South West being intermediate and the South East the other end (Neolithic).

Neolithic? Don't Central and Northwestern Europe have more Neolithic input than Southwestern Europe?