Post by zarahan on May 11, 2010 13:27:43 GMT -5
"Nordic" Mesopotamia debunked
Mesopotamia - a tropic or arid tropic civilization linked to tropically adapted peoples
Nordic Mesopotamia? Across the web Neo-Nazis and Human Biodiversity proponents (HB) wage an arcane war of “racial science” built around claimed superiority of cold-climate “Nordic” peoples. Tropical areas it is claimed produced little civilization until the coming of cold-climate Asiatics and Europeans? But is this “the truth” as claimed?
Debunking 1: Greater Mesopotamia (Palestine, Iraq, Syria, southwestern Iran) falls within the Subtropic/Tropic Arid Zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. The subtropics are the geographical and climatic zone of the Earth immediately north and south of the tropical zone, at latitudes 23.5°N and 23.5°S. The Greater Mesopotamian area is assigned to the subtropics or the arid tropics by modern climatologists. (See: Troll and Pfaffen, 1964. ‘Seasonal patterns of the earth and Thompson, A. (1997) Applied climatology: pg 179;
Debunking 2: Peoples of the Palestine area, and the Sumerians did NOT look like cold-clime “white Nordics” or Asiatics. Modern data shows a wide range with links to African sub-Saharan elements.
-------------------------------------------------
DETAILS: THE NATUFIANS
Natufians: HBDers point to research of Arthur Keith (1927, 1934) at Ur / al Ubaid cemetery, which found “EurAfrican” Negroid-Mediterranean types. HBD proponents also reference Carelton Coon heavily, a supporter of the southern segregationist cause during the 1960s (Caspari 2003). As to the Palestinian area, Coon (1939 ‘Races of Europe) held that skulls indicate a Mediterranean type with minor negro admixture, although contradictorily noting the prognathism of the specimens gives “a somewhat negroid cast to the face.”
Other research shows Natufian links with tropical Upper Egypt. [quote:]
“The first report on the Lachish skulls included a thorough examination of pathology, metrics, artificial deformation, and epigenetic affinity. Utilizing craniometrics, Risdon (1939) concluded that the group was very similar to dynastic Egyptian material.In fact, he stated that the entire population was of foreign origin, representing descendants of a group derived primarily from Upper Egypt. This conclusion was subsequently supported by a craniometric study by Musgrave and Evans (1981). Keita (1988, p. 377) likewise examined the skulls metrically, omitting those that were either “artificially deformed, female, warped, split, [or] juvenile,” using only those measurements that he believed were consistent population discriminators. He concluded that the group was fairly heterogeneous, having close relationships to North African, Egyptian, and Nubian groups, thus lending support to an “Egypto-Nubian presence” (Keita, 1988, p. 388).
–(-Ulinger et al. (2005) Bioarchaeological Analysis of Cultural Transition in the Southern Levant. AJPA 128:2:466-76)
Modern scholars dismiss Carleton Coon's “racial” analysis but confirm the sub-Saharan elements in the Natufians. [quote:]
“A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998).
"This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005)..”
--F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology. 80:5, pp. 535-564
Sidebar: The dubious categories of US anthropologist Carleton Coon
-------------------------------------------
DETAILS: THE SUMERIANS
English Sumerians and Aryan stocks: As to the Sumerians, Coon asserted that "Sumerians who lived over five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia are almost identical in skull and face form with living Englishmen."
L. A. Waddell (1930- Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin..) held that the Nile Valley civilization was due to the Sumerians and that t he first dynastic Pharaoh of Egypt, Menes, was identical to the son of Sargon the Great of Sumeria, and that a great empire extended from India in the east to Britain in the west and that it was ruled over by Sargon I and later by his son Manis Tusu, whom he equates with the Menes of the Egyptian kingdom. The actual Sumerians who controlled this world-girdling empire, Waddell maintained, were of blue-eyed Nordic Aryan stock. [quote:]
"The unity as regards type and source of the ancient civilizations of Sumerian Mesopotamia, India, Egypt is in keeping with the physique of the ruling people in all countries, which is shown by their portraits, sculptures and skeletal remains to have been of the long-headed, fair, grey or blue-eyed type recognized by moderns as marking the Aryan section of the caucasian race." (Waddell 1930)
US Anthropologist Carleton Coon (Races of Europe) was to affirm and extend these theories.
The Sumerians had a range of physical variation with clear resemblances on some counts to tropical Africans, not reputed blue-eyed "Nordics" or "Aryans."
Linkages to other tropically adapted peoples and Upper Egypt: Sir Arthur Keith (1934 - Al-'Ybaid: 216,240) also held that the Sumerians were related to Englishmen. [Quote:]
"The Neolithic people of English long barrows are also related to them- perhaps distantly"
Such resemblances between older tropically adapted Europeans and peoples outside Europe, such as in Africa, has been noted by Brace 2005 (The Questionable Contribution of the Neolithic) and by Hanihara (1996) as to the resemblance of other peoples in the greater Mesopotamian area to tropical Africans (Hanihara 1996- Comparison of craniofacial..') Keith speculates as to links between the Sumerians and Afghanistan and Baluchistan, but in actual comparison of data, Keith notes that Sumerian specimens he examined showed some resemblance to specimens from tropical Upper Egypt (described by researcher Dr. Fouquet in Vol II of Morgan's 'Sur les Origines de l'Egypt- 1896) but had no resemblance to other Egyptian specimens. [Quote:]
"They were akin to the predynastic people of Egypt described by Dr. Foquet, but differed from all other predynastic and dynastic Egyptians." (Keith 1934, in Al-'Ubaid, pp. 216,240)
More linkages to tropical Africans- Buxton and Rice and Penniman
Buxton and Rice (1931- 'Excavations at Kish') examined 26 Sumerian crania and calculated 17 as Eurafrians, five Mediterraneans/Australoid, and four Armenoid, showing that long-headed people were the dominant element in Sumeria. Penniman (1923-33) excavated 14 crania at Kish, describing 2 as brachycephalic and eight dolichocephalic or EuraAfrican type adn 4 miscellaneous. Dolichocephalic crania in older analyses are generally considered a marker of "negroid", mulatto or sub-Saharan variants. [quote:]
"Head shapes vary outside the "White Race" too. Most members of the "Black Race" are long or medium-headed and most members of the "Yellow-Brown Race' are short-headed." (Boyd, W. races and People. 1955). The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913- "Human Race") also notes dolichocephaly as a marker of "blacks", asserting as to "the Ethiopian race" that: "the skull is dolichocephalic, the forehead full, the cheek-bones prominent, the nostrils wide, the alveolar arch narrow and prominent, the jaws prognathous, and the lower jaw large and strong."
Penniman likened many of the Sumerian specmens to Egyptians.
"First there is the Eurafrican.. In ancient times, this type is found in Mesopotamia and Egypt and may be compared with the Ombe Capelle skull. It is possibly identical with men who lived in the high desert west of the Nile in paleolithic times.." (-Penniman, T.K. "A Note on the Inhabitants of Kish.." Excavations at Kish, 1923-33 Vol 4. pp 65-72)
Comparison of Sumerians to people of the western Desert - One recent (2008) study notes:
"..the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators.."
--Ricaut and Walekens (2008) 'Cranial Discrete traits..' Human Biology, 80:5, pp. 535-564
Quote on Qarunian (Faiyum) desert area remains (c. 7000 BC)
"The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
Sumerian summary:
While not being absolutely identical, several excavations and analyses link the Sumerians with tropical African types in terms of (a) resemblance to Upper Egypt predynastic specimens, (b) dolichocephalic features, and (c) resemblance to tropical peoples of the Western Desert.
The Penniman excavation of Sumerians found 8 out of 14, or 57% to be dolichocephalic, suggesting again the range of variation in the ancient Sumerians including tropical African features. Buxton and Rice found 17 out of 26 crania or 65% to be a similar tropical variant, plus another 5 'Austric'. The Australoid phenotype is similar to that of Africans craniofacially (See Hanihara 96 below). These similarities link again with the observations of Keith and the resemblance between Sumerian skulls and those of tropical Upper Egypt.
Modern reanalyses of the data find both the Rice-Buxton and the Peniman data falling within the range for Saharao-tropical variant Africans (Van Sertima and Rashidi, 1987, p.23), confirming the Upper Egyptian matches with the Upper Egypt data of Fouquet reported by Keith (1934), and Penniman's Egyptian linkage. Ricaut and Walekens show that data in the Western Desert points once again to linkages with an African tropical variant.
----------------------------------------
DETAILS:
GREATER MESOPOTAMIA - OTHER PLACES SUCH AS IRAN- still show links to tropical Africans.
In addition to the Palestinian data, data from Iran show that early West Asians looked like today’s sub-Saharan Africans.
quote:
"Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study."
(Hanihara T. Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.)
------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
The HBD claim is false. Tropical peoples did indeed develop advanced civilizations without needing cold-climate "role models". Mesopotamia is in the Arid tropic (subtropical) zone and developed advanced civilizations long before reputed European or Asiatic cold-climate “leaders”. The peoples who developed these ancient civilizations did NOT look like cold-climate “Nordics" or Eastern Asiatics. Instead, they show a range of variation, including clear resemblance on some counts to other tropically adapted peoples of Africa. Scholars who deny these findings are inconsistent - like Coon above. Documented resemblances between Sumerians and other tropical peoples covers (a) Upper Egyptians, (b) dolichocephalism and (c) high desert Egyptians, both within the range of tropical African variants.
Mesopotamia - a tropic or arid tropic civilization linked to tropically adapted peoples
Nordic Mesopotamia? Across the web Neo-Nazis and Human Biodiversity proponents (HB) wage an arcane war of “racial science” built around claimed superiority of cold-climate “Nordic” peoples. Tropical areas it is claimed produced little civilization until the coming of cold-climate Asiatics and Europeans? But is this “the truth” as claimed?
Debunking 1: Greater Mesopotamia (Palestine, Iraq, Syria, southwestern Iran) falls within the Subtropic/Tropic Arid Zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. The subtropics are the geographical and climatic zone of the Earth immediately north and south of the tropical zone, at latitudes 23.5°N and 23.5°S. The Greater Mesopotamian area is assigned to the subtropics or the arid tropics by modern climatologists. (See: Troll and Pfaffen, 1964. ‘Seasonal patterns of the earth and Thompson, A. (1997) Applied climatology: pg 179;
Debunking 2: Peoples of the Palestine area, and the Sumerians did NOT look like cold-clime “white Nordics” or Asiatics. Modern data shows a wide range with links to African sub-Saharan elements.
-------------------------------------------------
DETAILS: THE NATUFIANS
Natufians: HBDers point to research of Arthur Keith (1927, 1934) at Ur / al Ubaid cemetery, which found “EurAfrican” Negroid-Mediterranean types. HBD proponents also reference Carelton Coon heavily, a supporter of the southern segregationist cause during the 1960s (Caspari 2003). As to the Palestinian area, Coon (1939 ‘Races of Europe) held that skulls indicate a Mediterranean type with minor negro admixture, although contradictorily noting the prognathism of the specimens gives “a somewhat negroid cast to the face.”
Other research shows Natufian links with tropical Upper Egypt. [quote:]
“The first report on the Lachish skulls included a thorough examination of pathology, metrics, artificial deformation, and epigenetic affinity. Utilizing craniometrics, Risdon (1939) concluded that the group was very similar to dynastic Egyptian material.In fact, he stated that the entire population was of foreign origin, representing descendants of a group derived primarily from Upper Egypt. This conclusion was subsequently supported by a craniometric study by Musgrave and Evans (1981). Keita (1988, p. 377) likewise examined the skulls metrically, omitting those that were either “artificially deformed, female, warped, split, [or] juvenile,” using only those measurements that he believed were consistent population discriminators. He concluded that the group was fairly heterogeneous, having close relationships to North African, Egyptian, and Nubian groups, thus lending support to an “Egypto-Nubian presence” (Keita, 1988, p. 388).
–(-Ulinger et al. (2005) Bioarchaeological Analysis of Cultural Transition in the Southern Levant. AJPA 128:2:466-76)
Modern scholars dismiss Carleton Coon's “racial” analysis but confirm the sub-Saharan elements in the Natufians. [quote:]
“A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998).
"This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005)..”
--F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology. 80:5, pp. 535-564
Sidebar: The dubious categories of US anthropologist Carleton Coon
-------------------------------------------
DETAILS: THE SUMERIANS
English Sumerians and Aryan stocks: As to the Sumerians, Coon asserted that "Sumerians who lived over five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia are almost identical in skull and face form with living Englishmen."
L. A. Waddell (1930- Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin..) held that the Nile Valley civilization was due to the Sumerians and that t he first dynastic Pharaoh of Egypt, Menes, was identical to the son of Sargon the Great of Sumeria, and that a great empire extended from India in the east to Britain in the west and that it was ruled over by Sargon I and later by his son Manis Tusu, whom he equates with the Menes of the Egyptian kingdom. The actual Sumerians who controlled this world-girdling empire, Waddell maintained, were of blue-eyed Nordic Aryan stock. [quote:]
"The unity as regards type and source of the ancient civilizations of Sumerian Mesopotamia, India, Egypt is in keeping with the physique of the ruling people in all countries, which is shown by their portraits, sculptures and skeletal remains to have been of the long-headed, fair, grey or blue-eyed type recognized by moderns as marking the Aryan section of the caucasian race." (Waddell 1930)
US Anthropologist Carleton Coon (Races of Europe) was to affirm and extend these theories.
The Sumerians had a range of physical variation with clear resemblances on some counts to tropical Africans, not reputed blue-eyed "Nordics" or "Aryans."
Linkages to other tropically adapted peoples and Upper Egypt: Sir Arthur Keith (1934 - Al-'Ybaid: 216,240) also held that the Sumerians were related to Englishmen. [Quote:]
"The Neolithic people of English long barrows are also related to them- perhaps distantly"
Such resemblances between older tropically adapted Europeans and peoples outside Europe, such as in Africa, has been noted by Brace 2005 (The Questionable Contribution of the Neolithic) and by Hanihara (1996) as to the resemblance of other peoples in the greater Mesopotamian area to tropical Africans (Hanihara 1996- Comparison of craniofacial..') Keith speculates as to links between the Sumerians and Afghanistan and Baluchistan, but in actual comparison of data, Keith notes that Sumerian specimens he examined showed some resemblance to specimens from tropical Upper Egypt (described by researcher Dr. Fouquet in Vol II of Morgan's 'Sur les Origines de l'Egypt- 1896) but had no resemblance to other Egyptian specimens. [Quote:]
"They were akin to the predynastic people of Egypt described by Dr. Foquet, but differed from all other predynastic and dynastic Egyptians." (Keith 1934, in Al-'Ubaid, pp. 216,240)
More linkages to tropical Africans- Buxton and Rice and Penniman
Buxton and Rice (1931- 'Excavations at Kish') examined 26 Sumerian crania and calculated 17 as Eurafrians, five Mediterraneans/Australoid, and four Armenoid, showing that long-headed people were the dominant element in Sumeria. Penniman (1923-33) excavated 14 crania at Kish, describing 2 as brachycephalic and eight dolichocephalic or EuraAfrican type adn 4 miscellaneous. Dolichocephalic crania in older analyses are generally considered a marker of "negroid", mulatto or sub-Saharan variants. [quote:]
"Head shapes vary outside the "White Race" too. Most members of the "Black Race" are long or medium-headed and most members of the "Yellow-Brown Race' are short-headed." (Boyd, W. races and People. 1955). The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913- "Human Race") also notes dolichocephaly as a marker of "blacks", asserting as to "the Ethiopian race" that: "the skull is dolichocephalic, the forehead full, the cheek-bones prominent, the nostrils wide, the alveolar arch narrow and prominent, the jaws prognathous, and the lower jaw large and strong."
Penniman likened many of the Sumerian specmens to Egyptians.
"First there is the Eurafrican.. In ancient times, this type is found in Mesopotamia and Egypt and may be compared with the Ombe Capelle skull. It is possibly identical with men who lived in the high desert west of the Nile in paleolithic times.." (-Penniman, T.K. "A Note on the Inhabitants of Kish.." Excavations at Kish, 1923-33 Vol 4. pp 65-72)
Comparison of Sumerians to people of the western Desert - One recent (2008) study notes:
"..the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators.."
--Ricaut and Walekens (2008) 'Cranial Discrete traits..' Human Biology, 80:5, pp. 535-564
Quote on Qarunian (Faiyum) desert area remains (c. 7000 BC)
"The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
Sumerian summary:
While not being absolutely identical, several excavations and analyses link the Sumerians with tropical African types in terms of (a) resemblance to Upper Egypt predynastic specimens, (b) dolichocephalic features, and (c) resemblance to tropical peoples of the Western Desert.
The Penniman excavation of Sumerians found 8 out of 14, or 57% to be dolichocephalic, suggesting again the range of variation in the ancient Sumerians including tropical African features. Buxton and Rice found 17 out of 26 crania or 65% to be a similar tropical variant, plus another 5 'Austric'. The Australoid phenotype is similar to that of Africans craniofacially (See Hanihara 96 below). These similarities link again with the observations of Keith and the resemblance between Sumerian skulls and those of tropical Upper Egypt.
Modern reanalyses of the data find both the Rice-Buxton and the Peniman data falling within the range for Saharao-tropical variant Africans (Van Sertima and Rashidi, 1987, p.23), confirming the Upper Egyptian matches with the Upper Egypt data of Fouquet reported by Keith (1934), and Penniman's Egyptian linkage. Ricaut and Walekens show that data in the Western Desert points once again to linkages with an African tropical variant.
----------------------------------------
DETAILS:
GREATER MESOPOTAMIA - OTHER PLACES SUCH AS IRAN- still show links to tropical Africans.
In addition to the Palestinian data, data from Iran show that early West Asians looked like today’s sub-Saharan Africans.
quote:
"Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study."
(Hanihara T. Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.)
------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
The HBD claim is false. Tropical peoples did indeed develop advanced civilizations without needing cold-climate "role models". Mesopotamia is in the Arid tropic (subtropical) zone and developed advanced civilizations long before reputed European or Asiatic cold-climate “leaders”. The peoples who developed these ancient civilizations did NOT look like cold-climate “Nordics" or Eastern Asiatics. Instead, they show a range of variation, including clear resemblance on some counts to other tropically adapted peoples of Africa. Scholars who deny these findings are inconsistent - like Coon above. Documented resemblances between Sumerians and other tropical peoples covers (a) Upper Egyptians, (b) dolichocephalism and (c) high desert Egyptians, both within the range of tropical African variants.