2
RETURN OF THE HOBBIT
Our Ancestors the Little People
“Our ancestor was much smaller than contemporary humans,” noted Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin in Origins. Who was that little ancestor? This chapter is about the real missing link in the fossil record: Homo sapiens pygmaeus, Ihin man, the little people, known in some places as the Old Ones, elsewhere as the Immortals.
HOBBIT HULLABALOO
Thanks to good old media hype, 2004 was dubbed “The Year of the Hobbit”: When a fossil woman in her tiniest dimensions was discovered on the Indonesian island of Flores, anthropologists struck a pose of humility, averring “how much we still have to learn about human evolution.”1 But Flores woman (dubbed Flo or Lady Flo) goes more to helping us unlearn human evolution. As one website pegged the problems surrounding this diminutive race: “Little people raise big questions.”2 Hmm, they said about the same thing when Africa’s extremely short Lucy (Au. afarensis) was found in 1973: “This little midget . . . will mess up everything”3 on the family tree. Others said “these little remains could rewrite the story of modern human evolution.”4 Rewrite? Actually, it could kill it.
Figure 2.1. Australian little people as seen in two Wanjina figures fully clothed with the distinct anatomical features of foreign-looking beings, with pallid, triangular faces, big eyes, long narrow noses, and short arms. Courtesy of Vesna Tenodi.
Figure 2.2. Ihin man. Drawing by Ruth (Skorjenko) Wobschall.
The problem was that Flo, at three feet seven inches, seemed too little to be Homo/human. As for Africa’s Lucy, her primitive jaw was at least 500 kyr younger than a previously collected older, but more modern-shaped jaw: something more modern came before her, upsetting of course the evolutionary scheme of things.*17 But that’s where the little people come in, Homo sapiens pygmaeus, whose ancestry is Ihin, a race almost as old as Ardi/Asu and actually older than Lucy and her Au (australopith) family. At Hadar in East Africa, where Lucy was found, there was another larger hominid (Homo, thought Donald Johanson, if only because the molars are reduced and the front teeth rather modern). But again, these mod features were turning up too early in the record. Someone along the lines of modern man (AMH) must have existed in earliest times. But who?
Figure 2.3. Donald Johanson (left) and Tim White (right) in the halcyon days (1978), announcing Lucy, their wonderful discovery, to the world; fossils on the table are mostly Hadar specimens. Courtesy of Donald Johanson.
The origin of Homo sapiens must be sought for in a much more remote past than we could ever have supposed.
MARCELLIN BOULE, FOSSIL MEN
When England’s prestigious Nature magazine broke the hobbit story late in ’04, the media loved this prehistoric shrimp, following up with headlines like “Tiny-human find becomes huge news.” But then, as everything about the Flores hobbit stood to upset the evolutionary apple cart, news stories began to reflect the controversy: “The Hobbit Wars Heat Up,” “Hobbit Hullabaloo,” “Hobbit Bone Wars.”5
The first challenge was how to pigeonhole this pre-Neolithic creature who weighed little more than sixty pounds and was an astonishing composite of archaic and modern features. Overlooking the obvious race mixing, the binomial scientific name given her—Homo floresiensis—placed her in the human genus (Homo) but kept her at arm’s length from sapiens, the true human group, by assigning her to a separate species (floresiensis).
Also called LB1 after the caves (Liang Bua) in which these bones were found, this hobbit did not belong to any separate species, others argued, but was merely a pathologic version of our own species, the creature beset not only with “dwarfism,” but also, supposedly, with some brand of microcephalic disorder or cretinism, the brain being only one-third the size of us moderns. But let’s remember that pathology had also been pinned on the first-discovered Neanderthals, the first Homo erectus, and so on. All hominids,*18 as I understand the human family, are in the same species, the only differences being racial (subspecies).
Well, the pathologic argument was shot down soon enough: hobbit brains look nothing like those of microcephalics. Besides, the argument could hardly hold when thirteen additional specimens were found, all with the same chimpsize brain as LB1: 400 cc. Flores’s hobbit was certainly different from any other AMH (anatomically modern human); these people, in fact, rather resembled H. erectus: similar shape of crania, long arms, thick bones, hunched shoulders, short legs, large flat feet (see figure 2.4) not especially suited for running, bulging eyes, prominent brow, sloping forehead, and, the proverbial clincher, no real chin. As a matter of fact, H. erectus did coexist with H. sapiens in this region 60 kya.6 Indeed, the first-known abode of H. erectus was Java (Flores, east of Java, is situated between Bali and Timor). Now isn’t it pretty obvious Flo carried some of that Java Man’s (H. erectus) genes?
But even more primitive than Homo erectus in some ways, Flores’s hobbit has been compared to one of our earliest ancestors, Au: “Maybe hobbits had descended from Au. afarensis—Lucy’s kin,” even though hobbit’s “face and teeth are all wrong for australopiths,” grappled William Jungers, who nonetheless noted that Flo’s “suite of primitive skeletal characteristics, such as her apelike wrist bones and her flaring pelvis, bears an uncanny resemblance to . . . Lucy.”7
Figure 2.4. Artist’s rendition of hobbit. Drawing by Karen Barry.
Others agreed that perhaps Flores’s hobbit descended from Au (both were so short). Or perhaps she was a dwarf form of H. erectus. Skeptics, though, pointed out that hobbit’s pea brain was way too small to be a dwarfed version of any Homo erectus (whose brains are twice the size). As Carleton Coon once said, “the racial dwarfs are a subrace . . . without known erectus ancestors.”8 And the reason is because the little people actually came before the Druks (H. erectus). They were, as we will soon see, essentially ancestors, not descendants, of the H. erectus race (and of the Au race as well).
Absolute size, it turns out, has little to do with mental powers. For example, despite Neanderthal’s impressive cc, his gray matter shows a want of convolutions, and he is back-brained and has skimpy frontal lobes. Although hobbit’s brain-body ratio was more like a chimp, her tiny brain was intricately folded and unusually complex; the temporal lobes were really wide, and convolutions were just in the regions associated with executive functions.
In the hobbit were combined Lucy-like (Au) genes with pithecanthropine (H. erectus) genes—and modern ones as well. Flo, a happy hybrid, was definitely “modern” in teeth, temporal lobes, and aspects of the skeleton. These little people were skilled hunters of the dwarf elephants (called stegodons). They made blades, perforators, points, and other sophisticated tools for the hunt, and they made fire for cooking. Though the brain was small, the organization of their frontal lobes and cerebellum—the way the neurons were connected—was humanlike, not apelike. Their brain, say experts, was actually highly evolved.
What is the point of arguing whether hobbit’s ancestor was H. erectus or Au or H. sapiens when we find contributions from all these phenotypes combined in little Flo? The simple fact is that she is a marvelous hybrid, not a “freak born with a tiny brain.”9 These freaks, according to Australian paleoanthropologist Peter Brown, of the University of New England, who analyzed the hobbit remains, were “surprisingly human.” In fact, they were a lot more human than the preposterous chimp-faced reconstruction supplied by National Geographic.10 Who told the artist to draw in a gorilla face? Evolutionists, of course. Even Java Man, older than Flo, though rugged, did not look like an ape.
| TABLE 2.1. ROUNDUP OF BRAIN CC’S (CUBIC CENTIMETERS) | |
| Hominid/Primate | Brain Size*19 |
| Ar. ramidus (Asu) | 350 |
| Au | 400–600 |
| Au. robustus | 500–550 |
| chimpanzee | 300–400 |
| gorilla | 460–550†20 |
| H. erectus | 700–1,200 |
| H. ergaster | 800–900 |
| H. erectus pekinensis (Sinanthropus) | 915–1,075 |
| H. floresiensis (hobbit) | 400 |
| H. habilis | 510–750 |
| H. heidelbergensis | 1,200–1,300 |
| H. neanderthalensis (Amud) | 1,200–1,740 |
| H. neanderthalensis (Ehringsdorf) | 1,480 |
| H. neanderthalensis (La Chapelle) | 1,620 |
| H. neanderthalensis (Shanidar) | 1,200–1,600 |
| H. rudolfensis (Skull 1470) | 800 |
| H. sapiens (Cro-Magnon) | 1,350–1660 |
| H. sapiens (earliest) | 1,250 |
| H. sapiens (modern human; smallest, nonpathological) | 790‡21 |
| H. sapiens (modern human; world average) | 1,350–1,450§22 |
| H. sapiens (modern Tiwi and Andaman Islanders) | 1,000 |
| H. sapiens (average Australian Aboriginal) | 1,287 |
Figure 2.5. Peter Brown photographing hobbit skull. Courtesy of Peter Brown.
Flores natives have not forgotten their own Ebu Gogo, true wild men or cryptids, covered with body hair and only four and a half feet tall, who “ate anything” (Ebu Gogo roughly translates into “grandmother who eats anything”), raided their crops, and may also have made off with their children. This is not Flores mythology (as a Google search will tell you). It is Flores history: In the eighteenth century, the Nage villagers of Flores disposed of the devious little Ebu Gogo by tricking them into a cave and firing at them. The same tactic, as we will see, was used in Sri Lanka to exterminate the equally wild Nittevos.
Long armed and pot bellied, Ebu Gogo were probably the last of the hobbits’ mixed descendants, carrying the genes not only of Homo floresiensis, but also those of the ancestors of the light-skinned, very short, Rampasas folk, still living on Flores. Some researchers noted that Flo had the same rotated teeth and receding chin as the Rampasas pygmies living there today, quite near the LB cave.
HOMO SAPIENS PYGMAEUS
Yes, quite a bit of H. erectus blood flowed in the veins of our hobbits, even though they lived as recently as 12,000 years ago. Flo’s race is said to date back 95,000 years (others say only 38 kyr) and to have survived up to 12,000 years ago. But these dates can be problematic: Even H. erectus’s successor, Neanderthal man, was supposed to be gone from Earth by 28,000 BP. It seems, though, that both H. erectus and Neanderthal garnered a bit of immortality by planting their genes with more advanced humans who “succeeded” them.
Ah, but until scientists twig to the persistent crossbreeding among all these ancient stocks (not different species, just stocks), they will keep discovering “previously unknown species” like Flo, and keep asking misfired questions like: How did hobbit get so small? The favorite (and flawed) answer is that they are a scaled-down version of H. erectus, according to the principle of island dwarfing; or they got small due to “global warming caused by massive volcanic activity . . . [which] led to dwarfing.” Or Flo is a “stunning” example of isolation at work “miniaturizing” a sequestered race.11
Their littleness is not an anomaly at all and does not need to be explained away, though every analysis I have come across has the little people shrinking to their current size, acquiring reduced stature. Unbiased research points to an original gene pool for littleness, belonging to the race of Homo sapiens pygmaeus, which began with the Ihins, the first AMHs whom we will come to see as a people of learning and peaceful ways, and who, though now extinct, once dominated the world population. “Now, for the most part, all the people had become Ihins.”12 (at around 45 kya).
The shrinkage theory completely ignores the primeval existence of Homo sapiens pygmaeus (the name coined by zoologist Ivan T. Sanderson), the original little people. Instead, the experts account for the short stature of these living and extinct races as downsizing or simply an irrelevant oddity that needs to be explained away as:
- anomalous mummies, or perhaps the skeleton of a small bear
- hoax specimens, or simply those of children
- tendency toward pedomorphism (retention of juvenile traits in adults)
- congenital abnormality, growth deficiency
- an adaptation to jungle life: easier to move around dense forest, climb trees for fruit, etc.
- squatting in canoes
- inbreeding (due to isolation)
- lack of sunlight (in forest)
- crowding (on islands)
- shifting the reproductive age forward: having babies younger, hence stunting growth, under “evolutionary pressure” to reach adulthood faster
- island-dwarfing due to limited food supply; nutritional stress leads to smaller bodies
The stature of early man is often near the upper limits of pygmy stature.
HARRY SHAPIRO, PICK FROM THE PAST
No, the little people were not “derived” or shrunken from anything; they were always around, even before H. erectus, even before Au. This is why Earnest Hooton proposed “evolution of the Negro from the pygmy,”13 rather than the other way around (which posits pygmies as “shrunken Negroes”). We perceive Ihin genes in Africa’s Negrillos (pygmies) in their browridges—smoother than the forest Negroes. The pygmies are racially different from the Bantu and Sudanic people. Colin Turnbull, in his charming ethnography, The Forest People, lists a good number of pygmy traits “uncharacteristic of the Negro tribes.” Most notably, the pygmies are more brachycephalic (round headed) than the dolichocephalic (long headed) Africans, and they are lighter skinned, not so woolly haired, straighter nosed, and not prognathous.*23 As Roland Dixon put it, “the admixture of this element [brachycephaly], which throughout the centre of the continent seems to be derived from the Pigmy peoples, leads to a diminution in stature.”14 The combination of very short stature and brachycephaly is again seen in New Guinea’s little people as well as other Negrito groups. The Ihins were short, brachycephalic, gracile, and big brained.
Though the genes of H. sapiens pygmaeus are represented everywhere in the record, they remain unrecognized by the bone people. Only their gracile (delicate) build is worth a mention; but gracility did not develop from some previous condition, as evolutionists suppose. It was not some random gene change “selected” (by the environment). Gracility was part of the H. sapiens pygmaeus package from the start, and H. sapiens pygmaeus was on the scene from the beginning. And this is the reason why little fossil men (like Au) are older than their robust counterparts. In South Africa, for example, “the smaller form [Au. africanus] seemed to be from deposits that are earlier [e.a.] than those containing the larger form,”15 (the smaller ones from Taung, Sterkfontein, and Makapansgat, and the larger robust ones from Kromdraai and Swartkrans). Au. africanus also had better shaped frontal and temporal lobes than Au. robustus.
The brain of East Africa’s Skull 1470 was, surprisingly, much bigger than H. habilis’s, even though 1470 was quite a bit older. It was another out-of-sequence disjunction, whereby Richard Leakey had to conclude “that there were several different kinds of early man, some of whom developed larger brains earlier than had been supposed.”16 But both Hooton and Weidenreich wisely understood gracility and advanced brain as part of the same original package. No “development” here: the little people, H. sapiens pygmaeus, were anatomically modern in every respect from the start, save height.
Kenya’s (Lake Rudolf) enigmatically modern 1470 man (H. rudolfensis) then is a disturbing case of AMHs older than they should be (Ihin older than the upgraded Asu who received their genes). Richard Leakey announced his 1470 find as a “surprisingly advanced” specimen, springing up 2.9 mya among ultraprimitive hominids.17 Opponents howled that 1470 was actually younger; the volcanic tuff in the region, retested, made him more recent, 1.9 mya, therefore a H. habilis type, thus avoiding an embarrassing reversal to the scheme of ever-improving evolution. Paleoanthropologist Ronald J. Clarke, for example, matched one Olduvai H. habilis palate (OH 64) to the jaw of 1470 and voilá, “Homo rudolfensis [conveniently] disappears.”18
But 1470 had good chopping tools, which no other contemporary creature had. The expected heavy bones or visor brow (of the primitive type) just were not there; 1470’s skull was also too modern for H. erectus (let alone H. habilis), and his cranial capacity was well beyond H. habilis’s. How could his moderate brow and flat face be ancestral to H. erectus, with his massive barlike browridge and prognathous face? Not terribly likely that 1470 evolved into a more archaic form! Reversal? Devolution?
Compared to H. erectus or H. ergaster’s (3733) heavy visor, “it is a very strained theory that posits that we moved from 1470 to 3733 and then back again to lighter brows, fuller foreheads, higher domes.”19 Broca’s area, a region of the brain linked to speech found in modern humans, was also present in 1470. Its leg bones, moreover, were almost indistinguishable from H. sapiens. Yet this man was a contemporary of Au; he lived before H. habilis, H. erectus, Neanderthal, and Cro-Magnon. But he was too large to be a H. habilis and had a bigger brain.*24 The features of 1470 were, in short, a remarkable mixture of both primitive and advanced. The solution to the problem (if there is a problem) is extremely simple: crossbreeding. Only mixing gets us past this tangled web (see chapter 5, where we again see Ihin retrobred with Au, producing such types as 1470). Richard Leakey himself declared: “Either we toss out this skull [1470] or we toss out our theories of early man. . . . [for] it leaves in ruins the notion that all early fossils can be arranged in an orderly sequence of evolutionary change.”
Figure 2.6. The devolution of evolution. Cartoon by Marvin E. Herring.
The stirring question of lost races and lost civilizations has engendered a new breed of researchers: protohistorians, most of whom are considered fringe voices. In this area of knowledge, the flow of information has been embargoed, blocked, ridiculed, and dismissed with contempt, largely because it is a threat to the ruling paradigm of onward-and-upward evolution. H. sapiens pygmaeus are the bodies buried in the foundation of the house of evolution. Only indirectly have we been able to find these ancestral little people. The problem took me on a book-length search (The Lost History of the Little People). They were, as this winding journey revealed, the first truly upright even civilized race of man, the first honest-to-goodness humans. They did not evolve. (Chapter 7 goes into their remarkable genesis.)
Man came on earth fully and perfectly developed . . . [He] was a special creation and not of nature’s making . . . but required education and mental development.
JAMES CHURCHWARD, THE LOST CONTINENT OF MU
We find the little people in folklore, we find them in language, we find them in scripture, we find them in elfology, and we find them in the fossil record. A tiny yet well-shaped (not dwarfish) and genteel people, the Ihins were civilized almost from the start. Darwin’s sometime friend the Duke of Argyll, along with Archbishop Whately, thought “man came into the world as a civilized being.” A similar belief was later held by Arthur Keith and his famous student Louis Leakey, both of whom believed (despite the Darwinian paradigm) that AMHs (anatomically modern humans) somehow appeared very early in the record. Steinheim Man (Germany), discovered in 1933, seemed to corroborate this idea, as well as Galley Hill Man (United Kingdom), Olmo Man (Italy), Atapuerca Man (Spain), and other AMHish specimens earlier than Neanderthal. Yet another example of an early AMH is Hungary’s Vertesszollos Man, dated by some as old as 700 kya, though possessing a very large brain (1,500 cc) and rounded occiput (like H. sapiens). He lived at the same time as H. erectus. The claim was that he was H. erectus, even though his skull was entirely out of H. erectus range.
Also consider this: With the appearance of AMHs, many scholars thought physical evolution may be considered as finished. Therefore, since AMH is so very early in the record, how can evolution be seriously applied to man at all?
When the Ihins first appeared, the only other creatures on Earth were Asuans (Ardi). Au (australopith) was not yet on the scene. The Ihins came into being as sapient men; they were the first on Earth to know religion and consciousness, the first to speak words and to congregate in cities, and the first to wear clothes and to labor, practicing the arts of agriculture long before the Neolithic Revolution. They were AMH from the start, with upright posture, opposable thumbs, large brains, and small teeth; they never did swing from trees.
But they are a lost and forgotten race and their great antiquity has been trifled with. Today, when AMHs are discovered in unexpectedly early strata, the verdict is likely to be “intrusive” burial: meaning, we must take them as much more recent, accidentally reburied in older deposits. This is a misstep, which was exposed in the 1980s when it became clear that some Homo finds “indeed predate many australopithecine fossils.” One example comes from Ethiopia, paradoxically revealing that “afarensis [Au] becomes more modern the older it gets.”20 Here, the 3.6-myr fossil (KSD-VP-1.1), although 400 kyr older than tiny Lucy, is more Homo-like, especially in humerus, ulna, and scapula. All the same, they lumped it together with Lucy’s bunch.
Earlier, then, does not necessarily mean more primitive at all. A great array of fossil men who are AMH in some respects, but considered too remote in time to be so advanced, have been pushed back into the shadows—saving Darwinism from the wrecking ball.
Close to a century ago, Prof. Dixon made it plain that “as far back of the Neanderthaloids as these are back of us, there existed men . . . comparable in most respects to the peoples of European type today.”21 For a hundred years that fact has been swept under the rug. We keep finding a more advanced type (AMH) on the lower branches of the family tree. Why? Because, back in the beginning, the little Ihins, our ancestors, were fully human. Indeed, another question lurks: Why do the first AMH specimens resemble the European type?22 Because the little people were Caucasian in their features.
The AMH remains of little people, H. sapiens pygmaeus, have been recovered all around the world: in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, New Mexico, and Vancouver, British Columbia, as well as in Germany (Bonn), France (Montespan), Scotland (Hebrides), Switzerland (Dachsenbiel), Belgium (Spy), Egypt (Baderian), Africa, the Philippines, Japan, and Sundaland. All and any AMH traits recovered from “surprisingly” archaic horizons can be traced to Ihin genes, which are equally the source of all the gracile (and large-brained) types from Au on forward.
The little people were finely made and shapely of limb, their signature being distinctively dainty hands and feet, which show up in many parts of the world (see table 2.2).
Sterkfontein fossil feet in South Africa, like today’s Bushmen’s, proved to be quite tiny (under four inches long); the anklebone of these specimens (named Little Foot) was “extremely humanlike,” even though they are the earliest known hominid in South Africa: Little Foot was 1 myr older than most of the other Sterkfontein Au (Au. africanus).23 The anachronistic difficulty of this specimen’s too-early modernity goes away if we allow it to represent one of the earliest Ihin mixes with Au.
Figure 2.7. Laurence van der Post with the Bushmen.
Donald Johanson wondered how his famous Lucy (Au. afarensis) got such modern feet. In some H. habilis, too, as well as in the acclaimed 3.7-myr Laetoli Au footprints of Tanzania, a small and “improved” foot is seen on these little people (only four feet seven inches), featuring a rounded heel, uplifted arch, and forward-pointing big toe, all typical of the perfectly modern foot. All it takes are a few of the right H. sapiens pygmaeus genes!
| TABLE 2.2. WORLDWIDE INSTANCES OF SMALL HANDS AND FEET | ||
| Where | Who | Description |
| Brazil | Tapuyas | Delicate, small hands and feet |
| Chile | Yaghans | Tiny hands and feet |
| Far East | Mongolians | Small hands and feet |
| Italy, Switzerland, UK | Neolithic skeletons | Remarkably small feet |
| Kalahari Desert, southern Africa | Bushmen | Tiny hands and feet |
| Mexico | Maya | Small hands and feet |
| New Guinea | Pygmies | Small, dainty, graceful feet |
| United States, Arizona | Hopi women | Exquisitely molded little feet |
| Worldwide | Protopygmies | Small feet, barely five inches long*25 |
| Yemen | Zeranik people | Small hands and feet |
In America, when the Ongwee hybrids appeared, possessing 50 percent Ihin blood, they too inherited the modern foot: “His instep is high; he can spring like a deer. . . . He flees to the plain and the forest on his swift feet.”24 Even primitive Dmanisi Man (whom we will take a better look at in chapter 11) is a real mongrel, blending Au, H. habilis, H. erectus, and Ihin traits, the latter including modern feet—in contrast to the typically large and clumsy feet of H. erectus. Resulting from gene mixing among the races, possessors of a primitive foot may evince little people genes in their short stature, but also may retain H. erectus genes for large feet. These include:
- Most Au: flat arch
- Flores hobbit: large, flat feet
- Andamanese, Andaman Island: very large feet on very shortpeople
- Bogenahs, Panama: pint-size folk with large feet
- Veddas, Sri Lanka: unusually flat feet
The Veddas of Sri Lanka show a baseline of Caucasian blood (Ihin genes), and so they are classed. Prof. Coon identified a major substratum in Southeast Asia and Sundaland as “Veddoid,” representing an ancient mixture of Caucasoid and Australoid people. Very short and pale, the Veddas are handsome and well built, their hair wavy to straight; some of the men sport elaborate beards. Who, then, were their Caucasoid ancestors?
Moslems throughout the world regard Sri Lanka as the Garden of Eden, the birthplace of human civilization. Ancient works on the teardrop island may be a clue to the Vedda’s civilized forebears: the water tanks in Sri Lanka are of great antiquity, a vast well-made system for irrigation. “The race which constructed these tanks has passed away, and the country where . . . there once existed a highly civilized and skillful engineering people, is now the abode of wild Veddahs.”25
Today, DNA analysts would have us believe that the origin of the Caucasians is recent, dated after the demise of the Neanderthals (a subject I return to in chapters 10 and 11). But Marcellin Boule, Arthur Keith, Henri Vallois, and other leading European paleontologists of the previous century recognized a Caucasian antiquity much deeper than Neanderthal. More recent scholars, though, think they have overturned these venerable theorists, some of whom believed in the primacy of AMH—which today’s experts smugly call “a moribund approach to human ancestry.”26
Figure 2.8. The Veddas are a striking mix of racial traits.
Nevertheless, the well-sculpted, gracile form of the original (nowextinct) little people offers confirmation to every paleoanthropologist who has ever thought that somehow, despite the evolutionary paradigm, earliest man was of the oxymoronically “modern” type (AMH). And he was. After all, the earliest fossil skulls of Au were gracile. And with AMHs standing at the earliest point in human history, the need for evolution simply evaporates, not only because a modern form in fact predates so many primitive ones, but also because evolution is thought to stop happening once man has culture to ensure his survival (we’ll return to this idea that physical evolution is over). And the Ihins had culture.
Unlike his primitive fireplug contemporaries, the arms of early AMH were not long, his legs not short, his figure not burly. His symmetry was with him from the beginning. As an Au, Lucy had some Ihin genes; her hip structure was so refined as to make it hard for her to climb trees, and her family, the gracile Au, had bigger brains than the robust Au—who, indeed, are not as old. For gracile is older than robust in both South and East Africa. The puzzle of Au appearing as two distinct kinds (gracile versus robust) now dissolves. No, selection pressure did not change gracile to robust; it is a fruitless argument. East African robusts like Zinj (Au. boisei) were less humanlike, though younger, than Au. africanus. All these impossible evolutionary reversals are proof enough that Darwinian phylogenesis doesn’t pan out. Such anachronisms (appendix E) as we constantly find are only the result of Au retrobreeding with even more archaic mates.
Figure 2.9. Jehai Negritos, showing the symmetry of the Ihin.
Not only in Africa but also America do we encounter Asu and Ihin genes thoroughly mixed (as we will see in chapter 11). We might expect such mixing wherever “giants and dwarfs” are found together in proximity. Early men of Argentina, for instance, were divided into a dwarf race with a strong chin and a short, broad, and smooth skull, living side by side with a larger people. According to James Shreeve, these are “two very distinct races of man.”27
A LOST RACE
To recap: The little people—H. sapiens pygmaeus (the second race)—came before Au. The only race older than H. sapiens pygmaeus is the unripened, insapient Asu man (Ar. ramidus or Ardi, the very first race). I believe Kenya’s Kanapoi specimen, Au. anamensis, demonstrates the earliest blend of the two: morphologically somewhere between Asu (Ardi) and Lucy (Au), Kanapoi shows quite a modern knee joint and humerus/elbow, even though he is one of the very oldest known hominids (4.3 myr). How could he have had more modern features than his successors? It is true, he was chinless, with curved fingers, short legs, and a primitive mandible. But the tibia was almost indistinguishable from H. sapiens. An anomaly. But they simply lumped it with Au.
Done deal, but a pseudosolution: Falsifying or refuting evolution, commented Marvin L. Lubenow in connection with these Kanapoi discrepancies, “is like trying to nail jelly to the wall.”28 For evolutionists, it was simply unacceptable that such an old specimen could be associated in any way with H. sapiens, even though Kanapoi archaeology revealed such sapient items as potsherds and hut circles. Viewed as a hybrid, Kanapoi would simply be an Asu upgraded by Ihin genes.
But let’s move on, away from jellylike anthropogenesis. In reconstructing the past, Indonesia and beyond is rightfully seen as a key area. Indeed, here are most of the world’s extant little people. Their great antiquity can be read by the number of indigenous languages still spoken in Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Papua-New Guinea, and Australia: estimated at over 1,400, this is more than a quarter of all the world’s languages.29 Such linguistic diversity betrays a formerly far-flung, extremely old and indigenous population, meaning the little people of insular Southeast Asia and Sahul were most probably here in situ from the beginning. They did not come from somewhere else.
And they were always little, despite the fatuous shrinkage theory that pegs small stature as an adaptation to life in the tropics or closed habitats or amid crowding. The “shrunken Negrillo” (the pygmy of the Congo) actually has few traits genetically linking him to black Africans. No, they are not shrunken Africans. The argument that they are shriveled versions of a taller race actually stands fact on its head, for the little people everywhere arose before the larger races, the “giants”; just as the gracile Au are older than the robusts. Chronologically, the giants were an offshoot of the third (Druk) and fourth (Ihuan) races, much more recent than the second race (the little people). Welsh tradition holds that the Manx (a fairy race of little people) were the original inhabitants of the land and lived there long before the giants. In the Bible, too, the giants are introduced thousands of years after Adam, the first man.
We find the same sort of reckoning in America, where, after the (Algonquian) hero Glooscap created the world, he formed “the smaller human beings.” The Wyandot Indians, for their part, said the little people were old enough to remember the flood; while the Choctaw, so rich in little people lore, held that a race of diminutive folk, teachers, lived on Earth before them. And who were those little people? They were the mysterious American mound builders, who left their own tiny bones and diminutive sarcophagi in Ohio, Tennessee, and Kentucky. Such skeletons, deposited in coffins not more than four feet long, were found near Cochocton, Ohio, in an ancient cemetery situated on elevated ground (i.e., artificial mounds). “They are very numerous,” said the earliest report,30 “and must have been tenants of a considerable city. . . . All are of this pigmy race.” The city of Lexington, Kentucky, thought historian George W. Ranck, was built on the metropolis of a lost race that flourished centuries before the Indians who are themselves “a tall people; the [early mound builders] were short . . . rarely over five feet high.”
In the South, the Creek Indians reported that the oldest mounds were built many ages prior to their arrival. Most Indians said the mound builders were a different race. In The Secret: America in World History before Columbus, J. B. Mahan observes that the priest caste inhabiting the Georgia mounds were of European mold: “the people of the mound cultures are clearly Caucasian in type.” In some AmerInd traditions, the little people on the mounds are remembered as the teachers of their tribal elders. They had been mentors to the Crow Indians: “Our forefathers claim the little people lived there once, it was a sacred place many years ago.”31
Figure 2.10. Chiseled Crow features suggest a measure of Ihin genes, for the Native Americans had an Ihin foremother.
Diminishing the chances of finding their remains was the Ihin-related practice of cremation, which brachycephalic people introduced into Europe in the early Neolithic; brachycephals and mixed-head forms fringe the areas in which cremation was most prevalent. By the time of the Bronze Age, it became the principal method of disposing of the dead. In the New World, cremation is evident in regions dominated by the Ihins, such as Tennessee, Ohio, and Wisconsin (with cremation pits near the ancient copper works of the mound builders). We also find cremation at Lake Mungo in Australia, with its early gracile people.
In South American traditions, it is said that men of fair coloring came to the Andes long before the Inca: “In the very ancient times the Sun God, ancestor of the Incas, sent them one of his sons and one of his daughters to give them knowledge. The Incas recognized them as divine by their words and their light complexion.”32
Priests and wisdomkeepers, the Ihins in North America introduced the worship of Gitchee Manito to the Ihuans. Some western tribes declared these priests and mound builders were people who “came from another world [chapter 7] and dwelt on earth for a long season, to teach them of the Great Spirit and of the Summer Land in the sky.”33 Genetically different, being born with the veil,*26 the Ihins were constitutionally open to spirit. “The race which provides the meaning of world history . . . spread over the whole earth . . . a blue-eyed, fair-haired race which . . . formed the spiritual features of the world.”34 They are one and the same as the round heads of antiquity, the “broad-headed [brachycephalic] people apparently with a higher civilization.”35
Figure 2.11. Tablet of the mound builders, from Oahspe. As noted in Peter Kolosimo’s Not of This World, bone fragments, on analysis, show the mound builders “did not belong to the red-skinned races but to . . . a race similar to the [Europeans].”
Called the Alpine race by Prof. Dixon, the clearest remnant today of these brachycephalic people is in the high Alps. “The brachycephalization of Europe . . . may be summed up as a contest between the older longheads and the later roundheads.”36 Thus, even in Africa, the Ihin-blooded little people, the pygmies, are morphologically of the Paleo-Alpine type, as are the remnant people of Hiva (lost Pan).
In America, stretching from Panama to the southernmost tip of the continent, are ensconced remnants of this lost race along with their mixed descendants, from the San Blas White Indians of Panama to the small-footed Yaghan at Tierra del Fuego. Many of the latter (in the western part of Cape Horn) are only four feet seven inches tall. Likewise are Chile’s Alakaluf people short statured and thought to be among the earliest South Americans, pushed ever southward by later people. Writer Bill Mack followed this indigenous little race from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego: “The tropical rain forests of Central and South America are inhabited by a race of dwarflike people”; known as Alux in the Yucatan, “in other parts of Central and South America they were called Sisemite or Toyo . . . . The villages gave them special local names.”37
Figure 2.12. The Yaghan of Tierra del Fuego are mentioned from time to time in the writings of Charles Darwin, who, on board the HMS Beagle, encountered these Stone Age people.
A similar pattern exists in Oceania, where the small people of Melanesia represent an older population than their tall neighbors.38 On Malekula (New Hebrides), the pygmies in the mountainous interior are “the last remnants of an earlier racial stock, similar to that found in the interior of the larger land-masses in the western Pacific. . . . Practically nothing is known about them.”39
This distribution, this geographical pattern, is typical of the world’s little people. In New Guinea, stature goes down with altitude: “[S]ome of the highland tribesmen are small enough to be called Pygmies.”40 Here in New Guinea (as well as Southeast Asia), the people tend to get shorter and lighter as you penetrate the uplands. As one leaves the coastal plain of Sri Lanka, for example, and climbs the central mountains, the people grow “shorter, stockier and somewhat lighter in skin color.”41 Hawaii’s legendary Menehune, also secluded in the uplands, were a singularly short race, who brought culture and lasting engineering works to those islands.
What does all this tell us about our ancestors? Armand de Quatrefage, the nineteenth century’s eminent professor of anthropology at the Musee d’Histoire Naturelle of Paris, concluded that the Negrito race (little brown people) once inhabited a vast domain of Indo-Oceanic Asia, extending from New Guinea all the way west to the Persian Gulf, and from the Malay archipelago north to Japan. Significantly, the Onge Negritos of the Andamans (in the Bay of Bengal) are considered genetically ancestral to Asians. Along the same lines, Jared Diamond, in Guns, Germs, and Steel, suggests that the Negritos of New Guinea may be the ancestors of the Papuans, that is, the little ones came before the tall. Likewise were Australia’s Negritos anterior to the tall Aborigines, providing the initial population for the whole of Greater Australia.
Great minds think alike: Professor J. Kollman of Basle considered the Negrito and Negrillo populations the oldest form of humanity: “from them the taller races have been evolved,” rather than the other way around (the dwarfing or shrinkage theory). The dean of American anthropology in the mid-twentieth century, William Howells, identified the Negritos of the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and India as the underlying population strata, the submerged remnant of South Asia’s first people. Just as India’s Negritos have long been regarded as the oldest people on the sub-continent, the little Semang, Malaysia’s last remaining Paleolithic people (living in remote forest areas), are known to be the earliest inhabitants of the Peninsula. Their name, Orang Asli, means “original people.”
We were born just after the earth was made.
WELSH ELF PROVERB
| TABLE 2.3. WORLDWIDE LEGENDS OF LITTLE PEOPLE AS THE OLDEST RACE | ||
| Where/Who | Little People | Description |
| Africa/Wolof | Yumboes | White pygmies/fairies |
| Europe, eastern/Serbs, Poles | Ludki | Little people, lived before humans |
| Europe, western/French | Fees | The Old Ones, oldest beings on the planet |
| Ghana/Ghanaians | Small man | First hero of the race, made by Anansi |
| Mexico, Central America/Maya | Saiyam Uinicob | Race of dwarfs inhabiting the First World |
| Mozambique/Yao | Little man and woman | First people ever seen, a tale of the beginning |
| Northeast America, rocky heights/Seneca Indians | “Great little people” | Predecessors of the Seneca Indians |
| United States, Hawaii/Native Hawaiians | Menehune | Little people, first race in the region |
| United States, Nantahalas, North Carolina/Cherokee | Nunnehi | Little, white, and bearded people |
| United States, Southeast/Choctaw | Kowi Anukasha | Forest dwellers or little people, lived on Earth before Natives |
It is among such dwindling and isolated groups that we might catch a last glimpse of the earlier editions of H. sapiens, in some ways more like the short and pale Ihin ancestor. One stunning example is the Filipino Abenlens, with lighter skin than the Aetas, a different language, and the signature graceful limbs of early H. sapiens pygmaeus. (The Aeta, themselves tiny folk, are considered the earliest inhabitants of the Philippines.) The remote Abenlens, living deep in the isolated Zambales Mountains of Luzon, are exceptional; unlike the regional Negritos (Aetas), they are shorter still and light, almost blond in complexion. Some are oliveskinned with light brown eyes; most possess delicate features and soft wavy hair. One reason the Abenlens’ fair coloring and short stature are taken as a sign of Ihin ancestry is that they are highly reclusive and never mixed their genes with neighbors or conquerors.
In remote corners of the world, far removed from the great currents of migration, moderately pure remnants of older, more original races still survive.
ROLAND DIXON, THE RACIAL HISTORY OF MAN
| TABLE 2.4. LITTLE PEOPLE IN REMOTE AREAS | ||
| Little People | Where | Comment |
| Ainu | Hokkaido, Japan | Earliest widespread moderns in Far East |
| Bushmen | Southern Africa | Driven to the Kalahari wastelands |
| Lacandon | Mayan jungles | Short and pale |
| Tapiros | Mt. Tapiro, New Guinea | Remnants of a once widely distributed race*27 |
| Tarifuroro | New Guinea, interior | Driven back by Papuans, at one time inhabited entire tableland |
| Maithoachiana gnomes | Kenya | Driven out by pre-Bantu people |
| Negritos | India and Polynesia, inaccessible mountains | Remnants of the earliest stratum†28 |
| Pygmies | Central African forest | Original people, overrun‡29 |
| “Race of dwarflike people”§30 | Central and South America | Driven back to interior forests |
Once widespread but largely lost to history, driven back to refuge regions, persecuted and extirpated, “the pygmies fled to the ends of the earth.”42 Just look at the tips of the continents: people there are small and undersized, such as the near-Arctic Yaghans of Tierra del Fuego, where some of the women are only four foot three inches. Even in places like Italy, the shortest people are found in the most removed mountain enclaves.
NEGRITO PEOPLES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
The localities in which the Negrito people are found in their greatest purity in inaccessible islands . . . or in the mountainous ranges of the interior . . . point to the fact that they were the earliest inhabitants.
WILLIAM H. FLOWER, “THE PYGMY RACES OF MEN,” ESSAYS ON MUSEUMS
The worldwide distribution of Negritos tells us that, not only were little people a universal race, but so were black and brown people. According to George Frederick Wright, “[t]he original inhabitants of Europe were a long headed [dolichocephalic], dark-skinned race.”43 England’s controversial Galley Hill fossil man, for instance, was very dolichocephalic, his build modern, his face “Negroid.” Similar to Galley Hill is France’s Combe Capelle specimen, Negroid in dentition, palate, skull, and length of tibia. Belgium, too, had its “Ethiopian” type in the Engis skull; some have found bones of the Negro type in Austria and Liege.
Dixon, who thought the most ancient types of mankind had been discovered in Europe, identified brown-skinned proto-Australoids as the substratum of Neolithic France and western Russia, his determination based on cranial and nasal measurements. Dixon also found proto-Negroid people in Silesia, Bohemia, Denmark, Italy, Greece, Norway, and Yugoslavia—the latter including the Krapina folk with dentition (crowns) of the Negroid type.
There are brown and black races in almost every part of the world: the Makrani blacks in Pakistan, and in India the Dravidian Negritos, dark with frizzy hair, dolichocephalic skulls, and thick lips, as well as jungle tribes like the Kadar and Paniyan Negroids. There were Neolithic platyrrhine proto-Negroids in the Ganges Valley, extending up to the Persian Gulf. In Iran, near Susa (the capital of Susiana aka Elam), a black Ethiopic people once lived and there are black people in southern Arabia as well.
In the Americas, too, Dixon found “Negroidal” skulls in New Mexico, northern Arizona, Tennessee, New England, and along the Great Lakes (in Ohio).44 Other sources allude to prehistoric blacks in the Andes and Peru (sculpted at Marcahuasi), Ecuador, Patagonia, and the Brazilian highlands,45 the latter region being home of the living Botocudo people at Minas Geras; their ancestors (best known from the 11,500-year-old Africoid woman of Luzia) were the underlying stratum populating this whole region (before being driven back by the Tupi). The Botocudos are dolichocephalic and prognathous and are probably descended from the people of the Lagoa Santa caves. Spanish and Portuguese expeditions of the late Middle Ages encountered tribes of black people (non-Indians) in both Central and South America. The Africoid Olmec heads of Mexico are a famous example. Blacks are also depicted in surviving Codices, as well as in images at Teotihuacan, Vera Cruz, Tula, and in temple paintings at Chichen Itza, in the terracotta heads at Jalapa, and carvings at Villahermosa.
In the Orient, Dixon found “Negroid survivals” in the extreme southwest of China, among the hill folk of Burma and the Mon-Khmer tribes of Cambodia. There are also blacks in Nepal and a Negroid factor dominant in the interior of the Celebes. True blacks live in the uplands of the Sandwich Islands, just as Easter Island, Melanesia, and Fiji all have their indigenous browns and blacks with woolly hair and broad noses. Negritos, we have come to see, were once dispersed throughout Southeast Asia. Much of the Java, Thai, and Sumatra fossil remains are those of pint-sized persons.
Figure 2.13. Black people are found in every division of Earth. (A) New Guinea Melanesian (B) Philippine Igorot and Batak (C) Guaycuru/Caduveo South American (D) Palliyan Indian
Figure 2.14. Australian Negritos.
Figure 2.15. Sumatra: Malaysian blends. These Negritos have always been here.
The wide dispersal of the surviving Negritos indicates that they once peopled the entire forest of the Sunda Shelf.
JOSEPH THORNDIKE JR., MYSTERIES OF THE PAST
Negritos were in all parts of the world; black and brown people were indigenous to every land, and were all of mixed blood, for the Ihin had merged with the dark ground people. Dixon’s Paleo-Alpine type, for example, is an Ihin–Homo erectus mix: short, brown-skinned, with straight black hair. Among the Filipino Negritos (almost purely brachycephalic), are “an overwhelming majority of the Paleo-Alpine type.” The Ihins’ Caucasian genes, in some cases, remain pronounced among the world’s Negritos; in Malaysia, the Negrito iris, for example, is unusually light in color. Much of Sundaland is a living museum of these ancient blends.
| TABLE 2.5. LOCATIONS OF NEGRITOS | ||
| Where | People | Comment |
| Argentina pampas | Homo sinemento | Fossil man with “likeness to the negrito type of Asia and Africa.”*31 |
| Australia, rain forest | Aborigines | Standing at four feet six inches |
| Bay of Bengal | Andamanese | Flat noses, black skin; represent the original “primitive inhabitants of a large portion of the earth’s surface”†32 |
| Borneo, northern | Cave skeletons | Bulbous foreheads (like Negrillos) |
| China/Tibet | Kunlun people | Many were enslaved |
| Flanders | Negrito Fenlanders | Predate the Celts |
| India, Gujerat | Bhils | “Aboriginal stratum”‡33 |
| India, Cochin region | Pulaiyan and Kadar | Standing at four feet six inches |
| India, Farabad Hills | Chenchus | Forest people |
| India, Malwar | Kurumba | Dravidian people |
| Indochina | Minh-Cam | Diminutive cave skeletons |
| Mexico, Monte Alban | Danzantes | Dancers carved on monuments |
| Myanmar and Vietnam | Moken | Oldest known human population in Southeast Asia |
| Thailand | Krabi | Plus pint-sized fossil men in region |
| Philippines | Aeta | Once commanded all of Luzon |
| Sundaland | Negrito groups | Considered some of the oldest tribes on Earth |
Figure 2.16. Danzantes, thought to be chieftains of hostile tribes; sculptures represent the conquest and humiliation of slain captives.
Figure 2.17. Figure from American mounds. Illustration by Jose Bouvier.
THE SECOND RACE OF MAN
Asu was the first race, Ihin the second. No other races are older than these. One Batek (Negrito) tradition recounts that after the first Batek was created from brown soil (Asu), there next came a pair of beings from white soil (Ihin), who were tua—a European-type.*34 The Batek like to stress that they were created first and were thus “the original humans.”
Although the western mind holds Adam as an iconic Caucasian forbear, the name Adam in the oldest traditions denotes the first race, Asu, a being made of soil or clay, brown like the earth. It was not until the second race (the little people) appeared, that white and yellow skin entered the gene pool. There was little pigment in Ihin skin—at best, a paucity of melanin. This second race of man arose everywhere, covering the Earth over46—pale, tiny, and brachycephalic.
Indeed, Hooton found the earliest men of the modern type to be brachycephalic Caucasians. No, brachycephalic is not, as supposed, the result of mutations, or derived from anything. It was the original head shape of the little people.
The Ihins came into the world with white or yellow hair: one last vestige of the early Ihins survives in the platinum blonds of the east Baltic region. Nevertheless, modern anthropology (the out-of-Africa theory in particular) asks us to believe that white people are a fairly recent strain, having come from dark Africans through some mysterious process of “de-pigmentation” or “mutations toward blondness . . . in cool regions.”47 Theory runs something like this: the Neanderthals were originally brown, having adapted to tropical lands; but with the use of clothing (in their supposed move to northern places during the early Wurm glaciation), the epidermal pigment melanin was no longer “needed” to filter ultraviolet light. Just so, mutations arose that were selected for depigmentation.
Adam the Mud Man
In Arabic tradition, it was a host of angels, at a place near Tayef, who found suitable earth and kneaded it into the human form. In Hebrew, Adam means “red earth” or “the one formed from ground,” similar to edama in proto-Phoenician. We find this primitive Adam embedded in Meshe’adam, the name of the Azerbaijani Yeti/Bigfoot, signaling the most brutish form of man. Adami in Akkadian also meant “red clay,” the material from which first man was legendarily fashioned. Thus in the Mesopotamian account of creation was the first race created from dust of the earth—and called Admi or Adami or Adamu.
This reckoning is almost universal. If the Inca said man was made from dirt, the Mexican Popul Vuh has first man made of mud. In North America too, the Creek and California Indians said first man was fashioned from clay. First man (Tiki), agree the Maori of New Zealand, was formed of red clay. Tahitians also hold that humankind was first created out of red earth, araea—as do the Siberians as well as Malaysia’s Kenta Negritos who relate that Creator drew the first ancestors from the earth. This in turn matches the Batek account, wherein the soil was molded into little manikins.
In a Slavonic version, human beings made of clay are said to have inhabited Europe long before their own ancestors. We find this earth/ clay anthropogenesis in Australia, New Guinea, New Britain, Palau, Tahiti, Vanuatu, Egypt, Africa, Russia, Borneo, Burma, and India.
There are, however, pale people indigenous to tropical regions (for example, tribes along the Amazon, the Southeast Asians, and the Abenlens), which no amount of “natural selection” can explain. Furthermore, we now have DNA-tested 43 kyr Neanderthals, at El Sidron Cave in Spain, who happened to be pale and red haired—some even freckled. While this could reasonably be attributed to crossbreeding with Cro-Magnons, the preferred explanation has their pale skin resulting from pressures in northern latitudes to evolve fair skin. Other explanations for blondism in the “wrong” places include bleaching in saltwater, or for some accidental reason, or “new alleles” for hair and eye color that supposedly arose through mutation under some kind of selection pressure favoring light color.
| TABLE 2.6. LOCATIONS OF WHITES ON EVERY CONTINENT*35 | ||
| Where | White People | Comment |
| Africa | Kalahari Bushmen | Tiny and yellow |
| Australia | Tribes in central desert and west central | “Blondism” common among Aborigines |
| Brazil | Tahuamanu and Assurini | “Milk-white” Indians with red hair and blue eyes |
| Brazil | Tapuyos | White, bearded refugees from an older civilization |
| Chile | Mapuche Indians | Pale and bearded |
| China | Miao-Tse | Pale mountain people |
| Ecuador | “Laron” dwarfs | Little, white people |
| Egypt | Ancient Badarians | Small and fair |
| Himalayas and Mongolia | tribal groups | White-rosy skin, grayblue eyes |
| Honduras and Guatemala | White Indians | In the interior |
| Indonesia | Rampasas | Near Liang Bua caves |
| Malaysia | Senoi, Semang | Sakai fair-skinned natives |
| Nepal | Newars | Fair, Caucasian features |
| New Guinea | Tarifuroro | Yellow-skinned, light-haired pygmies |
| Panama and Surinam | San Blas Indians and the Akurias | Small and very pale |
| Papau New Guinea, East New Britain | Tolai people | Blond, blue-eyed children sometimes born |
| Peru | Chachapoyas | White race |
| Peru | Royal Incas | Fair people with wheatcolored hair |
| Peru | Upland Quichuas | Light-skinned, small people |
| Sri Lanka | Veddas | Short, some very pale, heavily bearded |
| U.S., Alaska | Native Americans | White Eskimos and blond Inuit |
| U.S., Arkansas and Florida | Native Americans | Fair skin†36 |
| U.S., California, North Dakota | Yurok | White, bearded people (forebears) |
| U.S., North Dakota | Mandan | White, bearded people (forebears) |
Yet the San Blas and other white Indians are not pale due to any mutation or de-pigmentation or environmental pressure. Light skin is neither a mutation, an accident, or any other “change”; rather, it is an original and very early element of the human gene pool. Nor did it first appear in greater Europe, ca 40 kya, as so often stated, for aboriginal whites have been found on every continent. Indeed, the blondest people of the North African Rif, the Nordic-type Berbers, are said to be the country’s most ancient inhabitants. Blondism in Barbary, Morocco, Canary Islands, and at Mt. Aureps (Algiers) all derive from Ihin-Hamitic genes, owing to the westward migrations of Noachian peoples.
All the sons of Noah, refugees from Mu, were of the Europoid type, and they dispersed to every part of the world, carrying the name Mu into California, in the tribal names of Pi-mu and Li-muw. These people, as sixteenth-century explorers documented, were fair and of fine form and demeanor (at Santa Catalina, Santa Cruz, and Channel Islands). Interestingly there are many other examples of Mu-named peoples and places including:
- Mu people of Kauai, Hawaii (pale skinned)
- Muza (Arabia), Mu (Crete), Mukawa (Japan): all port cities and landing places
- Murutic, spoken by lighter-skinned tribal groups in Northeast Borneo
- Murrian people of Australia (lighter skinned)
- Muysca culture of Colombia, with their legends of a great flood and white “gods”
- Mu’allakah, the Syrian village famed for its Noah’s ark
- Murias, a city from which the founding Irish migrated
- Nah-mu, the ancient Egyptian word for the yellow race
- Mulatto, meaning an admixture of white and black
In the ancient world, the name Tua (as in Batek and Maori usage) designated people of the European type who, though they lived long ago, were quite civilized. The Sumerian tablets, for example, tell of man coming directly from the gods, being at once intelligent and civilized. This man, it seems, was “sophisticated from the start.”48
Was there ever a time when . . . man did not know how to think, to produce, to create? . . . Man always spoke, fashioned, invented, from the very beginning.
ROBERT CHARROUX, THE GODS UNKNOWN
In Ireland and Scotland, the Daoine Sidhe (translated as the people of the mounds) were Ihins, hailed as the oldest families—“perfected men” or the “gentry.” During the Neolithic, a remnant of this ancient community of wee bodies lived in the Orkneys. A genteel and knowing race, they were remembered as inhabitants of the “Islands of Wisdom,” for they were a living sermon before the wandering tribes. To the Maya as well, their race founders were men who “could discern everything in the world . . . Their wisdom was great. . . . Verily, they were wondrous men.”49
Figure 2.18. Spain’s Lady of Elche, sometimes called the Spanish Mona Lisa, has a classic Ihin face; the female sculpted on this twenty-one-inch limestone bust has also been compared to the Aztec goddess of rain. Photo by Luis García.
Anatomically modern humans go so far back in time that it becomes impossible to explain their presence on this planet by current Darwinian theories of evolution.
MICHAEL CREMO, HUMAN DEVOLUTION
Convinced that “modern” forms existed extremely early in the record, Louis Leakey followed in the footsteps of paleontologist Johannes Ranke who, in 1899, argued that the human races were unchanged throughout prehistory, and that there have always been AMHs. Why, for example, did the Negrito-like Grimaldis (on the Riviera) have large brains for such small people, like the Inuit at 1645 cc? In this connection I’d like to quote Hooton’s keen observation that “small people usually have relatively larger brains than tall people.”50
A day will come when there will be discovered a human being of small stature . . . having a brain-box relatively large in comparison to the total body-bulk. . . . This will be the true Eoanthropus [Dawn Man]. Perhaps this day is near at hand.
MARCELLIN BOULE, FOSSIL MEN
Near at hand—but it is hard to get a grasp of these long-ago mods, as they (queering the evolutionary mold) have been essentially removed from the Darwinian canon. All these anachronisms in the record (appendix E) must somehow be kept under the radar or otherwise held in abeyance (with vague terms like anomalous, a mystery, intrusive). Early mods don’t stand a chance of attaining full citizenship in fossil land. Galley Hill Man, as an example, is an old mod on English turf, and, as such, judged to be an “intrusive” burial, new chemical tests allegedly proving that he was not very old after all—his date changed from 1 myr to 200 kyr to 100 kyr and finally to the Holocene.
Such unwelcome specimens are sometimes labeled aberrant or pathological—any term of dismissal will do. A modern chin on a too-old specimen must be a “pathological bone growth”! Any fossils “with a well-marked chin cannot possibly be very ancient.”51—but see the very nice chin on Miramar (see figure 11.12).
Also appearing earlier than expected, France’s Fontéchevade Man was mod in crown and brow; to invalidate him, evolutionists said it was an “immature individual,” because, if not, mods were in Europe before Neanderthals (a no-no). Italy’s Castenedolo Man, another problem, was changed, incredibly, from a Pliocene to a Holocene date after it was decided that it was an intrusive burial (in a fifty-foot deposit). But there are too many specimens of this early AMH (stubbornly predating “archaic sapiens”) to be intrusive. Too, there was in America the mod-looking Calaveras skull of California, as well as the Del Mar and Black Box specimens (50 kyr).
Figure 2.19. Galley Hill Man. Note the well-formed forehead.
Figure 2.20. Calaveras skull. Hotly contested and rejected as an early AMH, this California specimen found in 1866 at a decent depth of thirty feet (in the middle of a mountain) rested in Pliocene gravels; the skull had the appearance of the modern type. In keeping with this find, West Coast Indians like the Yurok said that white-skinned folks occupied the land before them; today some of their remains are still kept in California museum collections.
By evolutionary standards any mod feature on deep-buried specimens immediately casts doubts on their antiquity—this disrupts their linear view of the succession of human “species.” But, as we will find in the following chapter, this kind of self-affirming logic won’t hold up to scrutiny. The progression of human races is more entwined, meandering, than it is linear; a coexistence rather than a succession.