The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.

The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Who would be rash enough to prophesy aught
of a race whose entire past is a riddle, whose
literature is a question-mark?
Ð Gustav Karpeles

whites & semites;
indigenous europeans

& the hope of
renaissance

Nicodemus saith unto him,
How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter
the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
John 3:4 KJV
Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

How golden was the age of the renaissance
in Jewish historiography?
Robert BONFIL
In any case, the two parallel "Renaissance" productions would be studied comparatively in the same terms. On the
other hand, one might argue that while a premodern Christian historiography existed, it did not have its counterpart
among the Jews. In this case, while the Christian "Renaissance" production should be interpreted in terms of change,
the Jewish production should be thought of in terms of emergence.
Did Humans and Neandertals Battle for Control of the Middle East?
Ben Harder, National Geographic News, March 8, 2002
The Neandertals, stocky and intelligent humanoids, lived in Europe and Western Asia for thousands of years before
the first humans settled in the area. Then true humans moved into the region from Africa.
The new arrivals settled the land, and the resident Neandertals eventually died out or moved on as the humans
continued to spread outward. By 30,000 years ago, humans had occupied most of the Old World, and Neandertals
had disappeared from the globe.
Exactly how ownership of the Middle East was resolved between Neandertals and modern humans - and whether it
was bloody in nature - remains a mystery. One thing that's beyond doubt, however, is that the Neandertals gave their
successors a run for the land of milk and honey, according to Ofer Bar-Yosef, an archaeologist at Harvard
University.

wikipedia
The 1990 US Census Public Use Microdata Sample lists "Caucasian" or "Aryan" ancestry responses as subgroups
of "White"[6] but the 2005 PUMS codes do not.[7] In U.S. census documents, the designation white or Caucasian may
overlap with the term Hispanic, which was introduced in the 1980 census as a category of ethnicity, separate and
independent of race.[8] In cases where individuals do not self-identify, theU.S. census parameters for race give each
national origin a racial value.
The U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation also categorizes "white people" as "people having
origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa, through racial categories used in
the UCR Program adopted from the Statistical Policy Handbook (1978) and published by the Office of Federal
Statistical Policy and Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce. [9]

Why White People Are Called 'Caucasian?'
Nell Irvin Painter
On first thought, the theme of collective degradation would seem to exclude white people, not only because white
people are not now considered particularly degraded - at least, not as a race - and the themes of "slavery, resistance,
and abolition" apply more intuitively to people of African rather than European descent. Even one of the classic
texts in the history of whiteness, The Invention of the White Race, by Theodore W. Allen, associates slavery and
race with black people. But as Allen realizes, the function of the general concept of race is to establish and maintain
hierarchical boundaries in human taxonomy, even when the categories are not "black" and "white"; Allen, therefore,
begins the first volume of his study with the case of the Irish.
Sound as it is, Allen's Irish opening is relatively rare in race studies, which usually finger blackness compulsively.
Blackness, however, is not my subject here; whiteness is. I address the issue of white people as "Caucasian" as a
heuristic: usually the question is not asked, because whiteness has not been problematized as thoroughly as
blackness. My question of why white people are called "Caucasian" and its answer belong to the relatively new field

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

of whiteness studies, a field nowhere as developed as African-American studies, with its sophisticated literature on
race, enriched by the scholars featured in this conference.
Including the invention of "Caucasian" as the name of white people makes good sense in a conference dedicated to
collective degradation, for the still current term "Caucasian" connects directly to collective degradation, in the form
of the gendered, eastern slave trade, via the network of learned societies that so deeply influenced the history of
science in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Before this essay turns to Göttingen in 1795 and Johann
Friedrich Blumenbach (1762-1840), who is known for having invented the association, let me locate the Caucasus
and its peoples.
Obviously the name "Caucasian" connects to the Caucasus, the 440,000 square kilometers of land separating the
Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. The two ranges of the Caucasus Mountains cross the region running roughly east to
west. The northern, Caucasus range forms the natural border with Russia; the southern, lesser Caucasus forms the
natural border with Turkey and Iran. Anthropologists classify the fifty Caucasian ethnic groups into three main
categories: Caucasian, Indo-European, and Altaic. Among the Altaic peoples are the Kalmuck, whom Blumenbach
and his colleagues considered an embodiment of ugliness. Circassian peoples and Georgians, famed for their beauty,
also fall into the category of Caucasian people. Known to Westerners since prehistoric times, this geographically
and ethnically complex area has been subject to numerous overlords and considerable confusion. They have sent
slaves into Western Europe and Asia Minor since before the time of Herodotus.

The Caucasus Today "Caucasian" functions as a synonym for "white," as in this quote from a recent
psychological paper: Moderation analysis indicated that although there was no difference in the stress-copingdepression relationship between Latinos and Caucasians, the relationship among perceived stress, anger coping, and
depression was stronger for female than for male adolescents.
In this representative quote, social science expresses the consequence rather than the cause of the association of
Caucasian with white people. But what, exactly, is the relationship between the Caucasus and "Caucasians"? The
political news of our day offers more guidance.
The Caucasus appears today as Chechnya. In the Republic of Chechnya supporters of independence from Russia are
draining the force out of the Russian Army in the Caucasus and bombing theatres and apartment buildings in
Moscow. Akhmed Zakayev, chief negotiator for Chechnya's rebel government is the Chechen most recently in the
news.

Why White People Are Called 'Caucasian?'
Nell Irvin Painter
To judge from his photo, Zakayev does look like a "white person" in the current meaning of the term. Like many
Chechens, he may be Muslim. If so, his religion (like that of the Turks) would complicate his white identity. But
religion is a tangential question, important only because Georgians, who live south of Chechnya and are sometimes
also considered Caucasians, are largely (but by no means entirely) Christian. As symbolic Christians, Georgians
have been more readily accepted as honorary Europeans than have Muslim Chechens.
The history of the term "Caucasian" pulls us out of our own early twenty-first-century episteme, out of thinking
about race in terms of people of African descent. This two-centuries' old history demands two reorientations of
American thought: One reorientation must be geographical, the second, historical. We turn away from the United
States, with its racial history rooted in the Atlantic slave trade and African slavery, and turn toward central Europe,
with its preoccupation with Russia and slavery in and from Russia and its empire. In the association of whiteness
with "Caucasian," Russia and the Russian borderlands take the place of the tropical regions of Africa, the Caribbean
islands, and the United States South. Just as one sort of Orientalism attaches to Africa and the American plantation
lands, so another, Russian, Orientalism attaches to the lands from whence came white slaves.
To understand "Caucasian," we must also go back to the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, before the World
Wars that impoverished Europe through bloodshed and military spending and discredited anti-Semitism through

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

atrocity. We must go back before the elaboration of scientific racism to the Enlightenment's rage for classification
and early Romanticism's preoccupation with morphological aesthetics. The eighteenth century'snetwork of learned
societies linking far-flung savants must come back into view, as must voyages of discovery that revealed the
existence of peoples Europeans had not known before. As "Caucasian" became the word for white people, scientific
elaboration depended upon many of the same contingencies that influence the transmission of knowledge today:
institutional prestige, connections among savants and, in turn, rich and well-educated people.
Historical events shaped the elaboration of knowledge about human taxonomy and its attendant hierarchies. The
universal, egalitarian ideals of the French and American Revolutions moved scholars to situate themselves for or
against revolutionary political ideals. In Germany scholars pondered the meaning of race in a world in which the
controversy over the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade raged. The Atlantic slave trade and African slavery
remained theoretical in Germany, relegating them to the background of this particular history. Nonetheless, the
phenomenon of slavery and the vulnerability to which it exposed women weighed heavily in this white racial
naming, just as slavery still counts in stereotypes of blackness.
A slave trade lies at the center of the history of white people as Caucasians: the age-old, eastern, white slave trade
from the Russian borderlands to the eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Because the iconography of the
eastern slave trade features women, women occupy a more central place in the history of "Caucasian" than in the
iconography of the western, Atlantic slave trade.
The connection between "Caucasian" and white people lies in this very history. The name "Caucasian" for white
people includes an open genealogy, one originating in the work of a pioneering social scientist, Johann Friedrich
Blumenbach. Beneath this history of classification and measurement, however, lies another, hidden history of beauty
and hierarchy. Blumenbach's embrace of beauty links his classification, which serves large geographical races and
American racial binaries, with the nineteenth-century division of white people into better and lesser breeds.
Blumenbach borrowed the name "Caucasian" from a reactionary colleague who was interested in setting Germans
and Aryans at the top of the white heap.
Why White People Are Called 'Caucasian?'
Nell Irvin Painter
White people are called "Caucasian" because Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752-1840), an influential German
scholar in an up-and-coming German university, chose the name on 11 April 1795 in Göttingen, Lower Saxony, in
what would become Germany. Blumenbach's and Göttingen's scholarly prestige made ―Caucasian‖ a scientific
classification.11 The term ―Caucasian‖ quickly entered scientific discourse, appearing first in English in an 1807
translation of Blumenbach's Handbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie (A Short System of Comparative Anatomy) by
the influential English surgeon William Lawrence (1783-1867).
In the 1795 third edition of On the Natural Variety of Mankind, Blumenbach perfected the descriptions of his five
varieties of humankind and described one of his races as ―Caucasian,‖ the designation for which he is remembered.
Now as much a Romantic as an Enlightenment taxonomist, he stressed a racial hierarchy of physical beauty.
Nonetheless, he reiterated his conviction that all people belonged to the same species, ―Bimanus,‖ with only one
variety, Homo. Laying out the basis for his conclusions, he presented five ―perfect examples‖ of these varieties.24
Blumenbach realized that the issue of the exact number of human races (or varieties, as he called them) remained
open, and he invited his reader to consider twelve competing schemes of human taxonomy and ―choose which of
them he likes best.‖
Blumenbach never explained why he did not call white people ―Georgian.‖ Certainly the long-standing European
fascination with the vaguely known place called as the Caucasus was older than Blumenbach.38 Its very vagueness
probably made it more attractive than the more precisely located ―Georgia,‖ whose name lacked this Caucasus‘
mythological and symbolic charm.
Once Blumenbach had established the superiority of Caucasians, the term floated away from its geographical origin.
Actual Caucasians--the people of the Caucasus, living cheek to jowl with the Turks and the Semites of the eastern
Mediterranean and the supposedly hideous Kalmucks--lost their semiotic standing as ur-Europeans. Although real
Caucasians fell off the apex of the racial pyramid, the idea of the ―Caucasians‖ lived on, as did its claims of racial
superiority and beauty.
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Why White People Are Called 'Caucasian?'
Nell Irvin Painter

Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

Wikipedia Jewish Diaspora.
According to Costa et al., the four major Ashkenazi maternal lineages and most of the minor maternal lineages had a
prehistoric European source, rather than a Near Eastern or Caucasian one. According to the study these findings
'point to a significant role for the conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities' [30]
A study by Haber et al. (2013) noted that while previous studies of the Levant, which had focused mainly on
diaspora Jewish populations, showed that the "Jews form a distinctive cluster in the Middle East", these studies did
not make clear "whether the factors driving this structure would also involve other groups in the Levant". The
authors found strong evidence that modern Levant populations descend from two major apparent ancestral
populations. One set of genetic characteristics which is shared with modern-day Europeans and Central Asians is
most prominent in the Levant amongst "Lebanese, Armenians, Cypriots, Druze and Jews, as well as Turks, Iranians
and Caucasian populations". The second set of inherited genetic characteristics is shared with populations in other
parts of the Middle East as well as some African populations. Levant populations in this category today include
"Palestinians, Jordanians, Syrians, as well as North Africans, Ethiopians, Saudis, and Bedouins". Concerning this
second component of ancestry, the authors remark that while it correlates with "the pattern of the Islamic
expansion", and that "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle
Easterners," they also say that "its presence in Lebanese Christians, Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews, Cypriots and
Armenians might suggest that its spread to the Levant could also represent an earlier event". The authors also found
a strong correlation between religion and apparent ancestry in the Levant:
"all Jews (Sephardi and Ashkenazi) cluster in one branch; Druze from Mount Lebanon and Druze from Mount
Carmel are depicted on a private branch; and Lebanese Christians form a private branch with the Christian
populations of Armenia and Cyprus placing the Lebanese Muslims as an outer group. The predominantly Muslim
populations of Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians cluster on branches with other Muslim populations as distant as
Morocco and Yemen."[31]
Another 2013 study, made by Doron M. Behar of the Rambam Health Care Campus in Israel and others, suggests
that: "Cumulatively, our analyses point strongly to ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews primarily from European and Middle
Eastern populations and not from populations in or near the Caucasus region. The combined set of approaches
suggests that the observations of Ashkenazi proximity to European and Middle Eastern populations in population
structure analyses reflect actual genetic proximity of Ashkenazi Jews to populations with predominantly European

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

and Middle Eastern ancestry components, and lack of visible introgression from the region of the Khazar Khaganate
- particularly among the northern Volga and North Caucasus populations - into the Ashkenazi community." [41].

The young Ferdinand de Saussure made no mistake in writing, in 1878: "there is certainly, at the root of research on
the Aryans, in descriptions of this people of the golden age, revised and embellished by the imagination, the almost
conscious dream of an ideal humanity." More than a century after the writing of this sentence, such "research"
follows its uninterrupted course. Certain Aryanophiles of today add to it the denial of the existence of the gas
chambers and the kind of death suffered in the Nazi extermination camps.
Europe, or How to Escape Babel
Maurice Olender

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves

One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

Ashkenazi Jews are
Middle Eastern & European hybrids
Razib Khan
This paper clarifies and puts into sharper focus what we knew, and leaves open more details for future research.
These data would imply that in fact there was a relatively strong separation between these groups and the Jews, at
least when it came to gene flow into the Jewish group (other data from Poland does show the effect of Jewish
assimilation into the gentile majority). Therefore, the admixture may have occurred within the bounds of the former
Roman Empire, during the Imperial or early post-Imperial period.
The close relationship of Jews to Palestinians is not surprising. Jews are reputedly a Levantine population by origin,
and the historical and genetic evidence points to Arabicization in the Levant and Mesopotamia as having occurred
through acculturation, and not population replacement. Many of the Palestinians are likely of original Jewish or
Samaritan origin, though I would guess that they were likely at least nominally Christianized during the Byzantine
persecutions of the 6th century.

Wikipedia, Definitions of whiteness in the United States
Arab Immigrant and Ethnic Encounters with Race Classification
When compared with other non-European groups, the effect of racial classification on the lives of Arab Americans
has been relatively minor, with the exception of two distinct periods in their immigrant history. In both periods,

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

issues of race became important because of larger social policies that were shaping views on minority groups; also
in each period, the interjection of race issues circled around the proposition that Arabs are not quite white.
The Arabs‘ first and most dramatic encounter with classification in America centered around the question of
citizenship in the period before World War I. According to nineteenth century immigration categories, the first wave
of immigrants from the Ottoman provinces of Syria, Mount Lebanon and Palestine were classified along with other
Ottoman subjects as originating from ―Turkey in Asia.‖
By the turn of the century, reforms of immigration regulations that began in 1893 resulted in new classification for
the Arabic-speaking immigrants as ―Syrians‖ after 1899, an adjustment that Naff speculates might have been
introduced to deal with the need to differentiate the increasingly diverse national groups still arriving with Turkish
passports. Nevertheless, this new immigration category did not spare the Syrians their scuffle with naturalization
procedures that reverted precisely to their Asiatic birthplace.
While the early Syrians were by no means singled out by the focus of turn of the century nativism and xenophobia –
larger groups (Asians, southern and eastern Europeans) were far more concentrated and conspicuous - by 1909 they
did confront a particular challenge to their right to citizenship. Following directives by the Bureau of Immigration
and Naturalization to crack down on the eligibility to certain immigrants for naturalization (which had previously
been virtually automatic), the courts began to question whether the Syrians‘ birthplace and racial appearance
qualified them as white or, rather, as Asian, and therefore ineligible for citizenship. In several states, petitions of
Syrian-born immigrants were challenged on the grounds that having been born in the dominions of Turkey (Asia
Minor) and therefore of questionable racial stock, the Syrian was not a white person or person of African descent or
birth, as the 1870 statute required.
After the first case appeared in Georgia in 1909, leaders of the Syrian community protested to the ruling by
organizing the ―Association for Syrian Unity‖ and sending a delegation to Washington, D.C. to appeal. The
immigrant leadership, which included historian Philip Hitti presented historical and genealogical evidence of the
Syrian Caucasian origins. Similar cases brought before the circuit courts in Cincinnati and St. Louis attracted
enough attention for The New York Times editorial page of September 30, 1909 to comment ―Is the Turk a White
Man?‖ In a reply, Lebanese-born journalist Salloum Mokarzel pointed to the central dilemma of his countrymen:
…the main point at issue in this question… is not the practicability of considering the Turk a white man, but the
possibility of considering every Turkish subject a Turk, eliminating in this general classification all distinction of
race, language and religion.
Mokarzel‘s comments underscore another prevalent notion of the era that treated the concept of race in its
anthropological dimension (Mongoloid, Caucasoid and Negroid) but also in the common usage to connote national
origin. In both cases, he argues, Syrians are not Asiatic:
Is it not a fact that the peoples conquered by the Turks of old retain an indisputable claim to their racial descent? In
other words, how could the Caucasian blood of the Greek, the Slav, the Armenian, the Arab and the Syrian be
contested, since they were the aborigines of the lands where they now live?
The 1909 case was overturned on appeal. But the Syrians found themselves caught in the midst of policies that were
being redefined and laws being reinterpreted to deal with the naturalization of groups who were considered racially
borderline. Although the immigration categories as of 1899 classified Syrians and Palestinians as white by race, the
courts still were interpreting the 1870 law‘s applicability to Arabs, Armenians and other western Asian immigrants.

The cultural boundaries separating White Americans from other racial or ethnic categories are contested and always
changing. David R. Roediger argues that the construction of the white race in the United States was an effort to
mentally distance slaveowners from slaves.[1] By the 18th century, white had become well established as a racial
term.
The process of officially being defined as white by law often came about in court disputes over pursuit
of citizenship. The Naturalization Act of 1790 offered naturalization only to "any alien, being a free white person".
In at least 52 cases, people denied the status of white by immigration officials sued in court for status as white
people. By 1923, courts had vindicated a "common-knowledge" standard, concluding that "scientific evidence" was
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

incoherent. Legal scholar John Tehranian argues that in reality this was a "performance-based" standard, relating to
religious practices, culture, education, intermarriage and a community's role in the United States. [2] The 2000 U.S.
census states that racial categories "generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country. They do
not conform to any biological, anthropological or genetic criteria." [4] It defines "white people" as "people having
origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.[5]
The 1990 US Census Public Use Microdata Sample lists "Caucasian" or "Aryan" ancestry responses as subgroups of
"White"[6] but the 2005 PUMS codes do not.[7] In U.S. census documents, the designation white or Caucasian may
overlap with the term Hispanic, which was introduced in the 1980 census as a category of ethnicity, separate and
independent of race.[8] In cases where individuals do not self-identify, theU.S. census parameters for race give each
national origin a racial value.
The U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation also categorizes "white people" as "people having
origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa, through racial categories used in
the UCR Program adopted from the Statistical Policy Handbook (1978) and published by the Office of Federal
Statistical Policy and Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce. [9]
Various ethnic groups native to Europe were not considered white at some point in U.S. history. Among those not
considered white were the Slavs, Greeks, Italians and otherMediterranean peoples.[10] This reference defines White
as a part of the majority or equal under the law, and uses the word in quotations indicating that it is not intended as
an official term.

Not Quite White:
Race Classification and the Arab American Experience
Modern DNA studies have provided evidence that most of the world's Jews, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese,
have a common ancestral lineage in the Levant, which can be traced to a common ancestral population that inhabited
the Middle East some four thousand years ago. Maternally, both Jews and Samaritans have had very low rates of
intermarriage with local or host populations.[36][37] Both populations' DNA results indicate the groups having had a
high percentage of marriage within their respective communities; in contrast to a low percentage of interfaith
marriages (as low as 0.5% per generation). One study on Ashkenazi Jews stated "Taken as a whole, our results,
along with those from previous studies, support the model of a Middle Eastern origin of the AJ population followed
by subsequent admixture with host Europeans or populations more similar to Europeans. Our data further imply that
modern Ashkenazi Jews are perhaps even more similar with Europeans than Middle Easterners." [38] In 2006, a study
by Doron Behar and Karl Skorecki of the Technion and Ramban Medical Center in Haifa, Israel demonstrated that
40% of Ashkenazi Jews, both men and women, belong to just 4 maternal lineages, which according to Doron, have a
Middle Eastern source.[39]
According to Hammer, his study suggests that the Ashkenazi population expanded through a series of bottlenecks—
events that squeeze a population down to small numbers—perhaps as it migrated from the Middle East after the
destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD to Italy, reaching the Rhine Valley in the 10th century. Dr. David
Goldstein, a Duke University geneticist and director of the Duke Center for Human Genome Variation, has noted
that the Technion and Ramban team confirmed that genetic drift played a major role in shaping Ashkenazi
mitochondrial DNA, therefore mtDNA studies fail to draw a statistically significant linkage between modern Jews
and Middle Eastern populations, however, this differs from the patrilineal case, where Dr. Goldstein said there is no
question of a Middle Eastern origin.[27] Autosomal trans-genome DNA studies carried out by Behar and al confirmed
the shared Middle Eastern origin of all major Jewish groups. According to Behar, these findings are "consistent with
the historical formulation of the Jewish people as descending from the ancient Hebrew and Israelite residents of the
Levant" and "the dispersion of the people of ancient Israel throughout the Old World"[40]
A 2013 study of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA reached different conclusions. According to Costa et al., the four
major Ashkenazi maternal lineages and most of the minor maternal lineages had a prehistoric European source,
rather than a Near Eastern or Caucasian one. According to the study these findings 'point to a significant role for the
conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities'[30]
A study by Haber et al. (2013) noted that while previous studies of the Levant, which had focused mainly on
diaspora Jewish populations, showed that the "Jews form a distinctive cluster in the Middle East", these studies did

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

not make clear "whether the factors driving this structure would also involve other groups in the Levant". The
authors found strong evidence that modern Levant populations descend from two major apparent ancestral
populations. One set of genetic characteristics which is shared with modern-day Europeans and Central Asians is
most prominent in the Levant amongst "Lebanese, Armenians, Cypriots, Druze and Jews, as well as Turks, Iranians
and Caucasian populations". The second set of inherited genetic characteristics is shared with populations in other
parts of the Middle East as well as some African populations. Levant populations in this category today include
"Palestinians, Jordanians, Syrians, as well as North Africans, Ethiopians, Saudis, and Bedouins". Concerning this
second component of ancestry, the authors remark that while it correlates with "the pattern of the Islamic
expansion", and that "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle
Easterners," they also say that "its presence in Lebanese Christians, Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews, Cypriots and
Armenians might suggest that its spread to the Levant could also represent an earlier event". The authors also found
a strong correlation between religion and apparent ancestry in the Levant: "all Jews (Sephardi and Ashkenazi)
cluster in one branch; Druze from Mount Lebanon and Druze from Mount Carmel are depicted on a private branch;
and Lebanese Christians form a private branch with the Christian populations of Armenia and Cyprus placing the
Lebanese Muslims as an outer group. The predominantly Muslim populations of Syrians, Palestinians and
Jordanians cluster on branches with other Muslim populations as distant as Morocco and Yemen." [31]
Another 2013 study, made by Doron M. Behar of the Rambam Health Care Campus in Israel and others, suggests
that: "Cumulatively, our analyses point strongly to ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews primarily from European and Middle
Eastern populations and not from populations in or near the Caucasus region. The combined set of approaches
suggests that the observations of Ashkenazi proximity to European and Middle Eastern populations in population
structure analyses reflect actual genetic proximity of Ashkenazi Jews to populations with predominantly European
and Middle Eastern ancestry components, and lack of visible introgression from the region of the Khazar Khaganate
- particularly among the northern Volga and North Caucasus populations - into the Ashkenazi community." [41]

… Neanderthal is not homo sapiens. The most recent tests from Italy, Britain and Berkeley, CA., USA, confirm
this. Mitochondrial DNA tests as well as, Nuclear DNA tests all show the same results. DNA is confirming Gooch's
hybrid-origin theory, which hypothesizes that modern humans originated approximately 40,000 years B.P. as a
result of interbreeding between at least two types of archaic human species, for example CroMagnon and Neanderthal.

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves

One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

Ashkenazi Jews are
Middle Eastern & European hybrids
Razib Khan
These data would imply that in fact there was a relatively strong separation between these groups and the Jews, at
least when it came to gene flow into the Jewish group (other data from Poland does show the effect of Jewish
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

assimilation into the gentile majority). Therefore, the admixture may have occurred within the bounds of the former
Roman Empire, during the Imperial or early post-Imperial period.
4) The close relationship of Jews to Palestinians is not surprising. Jews are reputedly a Levantine population by
origin, and the historical and genetic evidence points to Arabicization in the Levant and Mesopotamia as having
occurred through acculturation, and not population replacement. Many of the Palestinians are likely of original
Jewish or Samaritan origin, though I would guess that they were likely at least nominally Christianized during the
Byzantine persecutions of the 6th century.
The Jews in the World of the Renaissance
Moses A. Shulvass; Elvin I. Kose
Review by: John W. O'Malley
The elements of darkness and irrationality, as they are interpreted as needing to affect our views of Renaissance
culture, seem to be of two sorts: first a prolongation of the aberrational and (from a modern perspective)
pathological behavior and thinking of the high Middle Ages. The Renais sance crisis sets in there as early as the
twelfth century according to several of the essays. The second, which might be regarded as both antimedieval and
anti-Renaissance, are the Reformational theological outlooks stressed by other contributors. The Italian Quattrocento
tends to be sidetracked and avoided as of limited duration and influence, though Martines' essay seems to undercut
its generally assumed rationality and optimism. Except for Lynn White, the contributors profess to admire the
qualities traditionally seen in the Renaissance but find them severely limited. Again, except for White, both
historical generalizations of a revisionist nature are not offered, possibly because they are aware of the limited
character of their evidence. Although wrong in some places and by no means definitive, this is an exciting book
which does indeed pull together a number of the neglected "irrational" as pects of this epoch which more and more
generally have come to concern scholars. Readers, however, should regard it with the same modesty and hesitancy
that the authors for the most part project. Certainly the old view of the Renaissance as a "Pre-Enlightenment" is
dying. Certainly a new view integrating many aspects of the late Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and the
Reformation is emerging.
What Shulvass has attempted is a comprehensive treatment of Jewish interests and activities, especially as these
relate to the larger scene of Italian Renaissance civilization. The nine "sections" into which the book is divided give
a good indication of the specific aspects of Jewish life which engaged the author's attention: (1) the Jewish
population, (2) the community, (3) economic life, (4) family and social life, (5) religious life and morality, (6)
literature, (7) the fine arts, (8) the world of science, (9) the Renaissance in daily life. The picture which emerges is
one of a Jewish community intent upon keep ing its identity but also fairly well integrated into gentile concerns. One
of the author's theses is that in Renaissance Italy the Jews enjoyed a toleration and a sense of acceptance that they
would not soon enjoy again. The Counter Reformation, especially under the anti-Jewish inspiration of Pope Paul IV,
would initiate a significantly different atmosphere. Until that time, however, the Jews in Italy participated in the
culture and commerce of the day with almost the same zest as did their gentile counterparts. This was frue despite
opposition which at times was voiced by both Synagogue and Church. The book reveals the author's erudition and
his control of the primary and secondary literature which deals with the Jews in Renaissance Italy. Needless to say,
it would be desirable to integrate studies published since 1955 into this translation. Perhaps a more serious criticism
is that Shulvass' interpretation of the Renaissance itself seems to derive almost exclusively from Jacob Burckhardt.
As best I can tell, the great Swiss historian is the only source to which Shulvass refers when he tries to set the Jews
into the context of Ren aissance culture. The book thus opens with the worn judgment that the Renaissance began
when "people tired of the burdensome limitations imposed upon them during the Middle Ages" (p. ix). Shulvass
accepts, for instance, Burckhardt's harsh judgment on Renaissance immorality. He hastens to add, however, that the
Italian Jews were consistently less degenerate than the gentiles (pp. 163, 201, 324). In other words, there is a certain
outdated and unsophisticated quality which marks some of the generalizations about the period. Nonetheless, the
book throws considerable light on the life and ac tivities of an important minority, and it is a valuable and
informative work of Jewish scholarship.
John W. O'Malley

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

MOSES A. SHULVASS.
The Jews in the World of the Renaissance.
This work was first published in Hebrew in 1955. The present English title is a misnomer, since the book deals only
with the Jews of Italy in the period 1300-1600, and not with the Jews of the general European Renaissance. Moses
A. Shulvass' solid study shows how the Italian Jewish community developed from a rela- tively indigenous one
centered in Rome to a mixed one, as refugees flowed in from France, Germany, Spain, and the Levant. Gradually
three major communities developed: Italian, Ashkenazic, Sephardic. Local situations plus the variations in the
traditions and practices of the groups led to different kinds of communities, with different eco- nomic activities,
Jewish organizations, linguistic practices, etc. Shulvass gives a detailed and often fascinating picture of what Jewish
life was like at this time, what its cultural achievements were, and how Jews interacted with Italian society.
Generally, this study focuses on the Jewish com- munities themselves (Shulvass estimates the Jew- ish population
around 16oo at 35,000) with very little emphasis on the effect ofJudaism on the non-Jewish world around it and on
the emerging free Jewish world in the Netherlands. Shulvass notes the impact of the Renaissance on the traditional
religious communities and shows how these com- munities managed to retain their orthodoxy des- pite the
influences of the Renaissance. What has become more interesting for intellectual historians of the period-the
influence of Jewish, and the formerly Jewish writers and thinkers on the gen- eral Renaissance and Reformation
currents-is hardly treated. He does not mention Jewish Averroism. Nor does he examine the roles of the Jewish
humanists around Pico and Ficino or of Abraham de Balmes in retranslating Arabic thought. Off-beat Jewish
movements, such as that led by David Reubeni are likewise excluded, as are the roles of various Jewish writers like
Leone Ebreo and his father, Don Isaac Abarbanel, plus some of the converts, on Messianic and Millena- rian
movements of the time. Finally, the polemical writings of some of the Marranos, like Elijah Montalto, that were to
be so important for Amsterdam Jewry (whose chief rabbi, Saul Levi Morteira, came from Italy) are not discussed.
The author's study deals primarily, and almost exclusively, with normative Judaism and how it preserved itself in the
Italian context. As such, the work is rich in detail. Those interested in how Judaism and heterodox Jewish thinkers
affected the wider world and contributed to aspects of the Italian Renaissance, however, will have to look elsewhere.
RICHIARD H. POPKIN Washington University

The Jews in the World of the Renaissance by Moses A. Shulvass; Elvin I. Kose
Richard H. Popkin, The American Historical Review
Moses A. Shulvass' solid study shows how the Italian Jewish community developed from a rela- tively indigenous
one centered in Rome to a mixed one, as refugees flowed in from France, Germany, Spain, and the Levant.
Gradually three major communities developed: Italian, Ashkenazic, Sephardic. Local situations plus the variations
in the traditions and practices of the groups led to different kinds of communities, with different eco- nomic
activities, Jewish organizations, linguistic practices, etc. Shulvass gives a detailed and often fascinating picture of
what Jewish life was like at this time, what its cultural achievements were, and how Jews interacted with Italian
society. Generally, this study focuses on the Jewish com- munities themselves (Shulvass estimates the Jew- ish
population around 16oo at 35,000) with very little emphasis on the effect ofJudaism on the non-Jewish world around
it and on the emerging free Jewish world in the Netherlands. Shulvass notes the impact of the Renaissance on the
traditional religious communities and shows how these com- munities managed to retain their orthodoxy des- pite
the influences of the Renaissance. What has become more interesting for intellectual historians of the period-the
influence of Jewish, and the formerly Jewish writers and thinkers on the gen- eral Renaissance and Reformation
currents-is hardly treated.

The knowledge of antiquity
among the italian Jews of the Renaissance
MOSES A. SHULVASS.
Jacob Burckhardt, the greatest historian of the Italian Renaissance maintains that the rediscovery of the world and
man together with the reproduction of the classical world, form the principal contents of the culture of the
Renaissance. I had occasion elsewhere' to speak of the Jews' inclination towards the culture of the Renaissance in
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

general. This in-clination becomes obvious as soon as one examines the attitude of the Jews to the various spheres of
this culture. One can also find in the sources proof of the interest of the Jews in the ancient Greek-Roman world.
This interest ma-nifested itself in two ways: It found its expression in a pos-itive attitude to the cultural tradition of
the ancient world, and in an effort to acquire the perception of this world. Though the Italian Jews maintained quite
a definitely critical attitude towards the religious tradition of Christianity, they displayed a pronounced interest in the
mythological tradition of the pre-Christian world. This can be noticed in their endeavor to acquire the knowledge of
both classical languages, Latin and Greek, and to master properly the Greek and Latin lit-erature, the History of
Antiquity, its religion, mythology and social mode of life. The evident interest in the ancient world and its culture is
verified by many proofs from the Hebrew Literature of the period of the Renaissance. The famous work of Abraham
Portaleone it furnishes us with such detailed descriptions of the ancient world, that they yield a rather clear pic-ture
of it and its way of life. Besides, one must not forget that this work -as the author assures us2 - is an act of penance,
and it aims to interrupt the scientific activity of the writer in the secular field.
The above mentioned facts confirm the impression we get whenever we plunge into the sources of this epoch: The
inclina-tion towards the Renaissance and the various branches of its culture is more than incidental. It was founded
on a genuine interest and on real efforts actually to acquire this culture. But the Jews did not get totally absorbed in
the pursuits of the Renaissance, as did certain parts of the Christian population. The Jews remained firmly on the
ground of Judaism, and they only adopted the culture of the Renaissance in a "moderate" form.36 Abraham
Portaleone tried to further the knowledge of the ancient civilization among the scholars through his writings, while
Gedaliah did the same for the simple man in his Shalshelet. The scholar and the simple man answered this challenge
in a positive way, and out of their knowledge of Antiquity they contributed to the domination which the Renaissance
held over the life of the Italian Jews.

The Jewish population in renaissance Italy
Moses A. SHULVASS. Renaissance Italy (1300-1600).
Statistics on the Jewish population in any period usually present a difficult problem for historians. The data available
for calculating the size of a population in a distant period are particularly complicated when they refer to a
persecuted minority, which is not the master of its own fate. … As far as the investigation of statistics on the Jews of
Italy is concerned, there are in fact further difficulties to be overcome. Until the last quarter of the nineteenth century
Italy comprised a multiplicity of states, large and small, The treatment of the Jews varied widely; while those in one
area enjoyed a measure of freedom their contemporaries in another suffered oppression. It is, therefore, necessary to
examine the data bearing on the individual republics, duchies and towns.
It was during these centuries that separate groupings developed within the Jewish population. On the threshold of
this age began the mass immigra-tioIn from Germany, and two hundred years later came the refugees from Spain
anid Portugal. Groups from the same countries continued to arrive during the sixteenth century, the end of which
saw the immigration of the Levantine Jews, particularly to the important center at Leghorn.
A similar curve may be perceived in the case of the Spanish Jews who in 1492 went to Portugal, which presently
decreed their forcible conversion. Through-out the entire sixteenth century there was a steady stream of marrano
families, arriving singly or in groups from the Iberian peninsula, who threw off the cloak of Christianityi n Italy. In
1513 there came from Sicily alone 400 marranos, part of the populationw hich had not fled in 1492. Similarly, Jews
from France continued to migrate to Italy for years after the main group of immigrants appeared. The partial
expulsion from Provence in 1491 brought immigrants as far south as Palermo (Sicily).24 A case of a Provencal Jew,
settled in Mantua, occurs as late as 1566.
In the sources for our period, individuals hailing from all parts of the Mediterranean world (Corfu, Tunis, Ragusa,
Tripoli, Balearic Isles) are mentioned, indicating a small but steady immigration in addition to the important waves
discussed above. In the middle of the sixteenth century, the Levantine sector of the Jewish population, consisting of
immigrants from Palestine and other parts of the Near East, began to achieve prominence, and in the following
century this new element assumed considerable importance. In Venice, the Levantines attained their prominence as
early as the first half of the sixteenth century. In later years their progress kept pace with the strena theninbof the
connection between Italy and Palestine,' culminating 0b 0in the leading role of the Levantines in the development of
Legohorn, the youngest of the leading Jewish centers.' Some increase in population also resulted from the ransoming
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

of Jewish captives brought to Italy. This activity forms one of the brightest chapters in the social life of Italian
Jewry, and it would require an extensive collection of material to showv its full scope. Here we can only take into
account the fact that over the centuries the liberated captives totalled more than a negligible addition to the
population. A few examples may be cited. In 1509 all of the Jews captured by the Spaniards in Tripoli were
transported to Naples. No doubt many of them succumbed to harsh treatment, but the survivors remained in Italy.
When Charles V attacked Tunis in 1535, Jewish captives were brought to Genoa and Naples, where 150 were
ransomed.0 When Andrea Doria took the Greek towns of Modon, Coron and Patras in 1533, part of his many
captives were also ransomed in Italy."' The factors which favored the upward population trend were entirely
counterbalanced by various contrary factors. To begin with, the exodus from the Kingdom of Naples, which
continued for some decades, must have reduced the number of Jews, even though some of the refugees gradually
found a haven elsewhere in Italy. Apart from such cases, Jews often emigrated from specific localities, when the
situation made it neces-sary. Thus, in 1509, when the war of the League of Cambrai struck the large Ashkenazic
center, many of the Jews indeed went to Mantua and Ferrara, "but many went to Germany to look for a peaceful
place."34 Again, under the impact of the hostile policv of Pope Pius IV, another reduction occurred and "the poor
folk sailed away in ships for Turkey."35 Added to this was the migration to Palestine, which rose to a high level
under the stress of the persecution in the Papal States.36 In considering the effect of conversions to Christianity, we
must naturally distinguish individual cases and large groups. The low rate of individuals forsaking Judaism is
attested by the large community of Ferrara, where conversion claimed no more than 94 persons in a seventy year
period (1531-1600) .
III The influx of Jews from other countries changed the composition of the population, which had been culturally
homogeneous in the preceding period. Small as the population was, various groups now lived side by side, Italian,
German, Spanish, French and Levantine, together with a sprinkling from the Greek islands and north Africa. The
three groups which set the tone of communal life were the Italian, the German and Spanish Jews. The Levantines
began to play a prominent role only at the close of the Renais-sance, while the French group lost its identity and left
only some families with a vague memory of their origin…. The influx from Germany brought immigrants to Friuli
and later to Istria; expanding eastward, this group re-established a Jewish population in Dalmatia, then a Venetian
colony. Concurrently there arose communities on Venetian territory, closer to the capital, and as far west as Brescia
and Cremona. The German Jews came into contact with the established Jewish groups to the southwest of Venice, in
the Po Valley. It was not long before the newcomers increased to the point of putting an Ashkenazic stamp on the
Jewish scene at Padua, a change facilitated by the temporary suspension of the loan-banks and the departure of the
Italian-Jewish residents.
The Jewish population in renaissance Italy
MOSES A. SHULVASS. Renaissance Italy (1300-1600)
The influx of non-Ashkenazic Jews into Venice, attracted by the city's economic opportunities and the liberal
regime, coincides with the flight of such Jews from nearby Padua, which was mentioned above. The majority status
of the German Jews declined until the Spanish and Levantine Jews together gained a majoritv in the coinmunal
executive committee, a trend which continued in the same direction thereafter.6' The development of the Spanish
Jews' preponderance in Ferrara is especially noteworthy. Around 1500 this was one of the most important cities in
Italy, with a total population of close to 100,000 (as compared with 30,000 at present), and the capital of a duchy,
which played a prominent role in the politics of that day. So great was the influx of Jews from Spain that the city's
limits had to be enlarged in order to accommodate them. The number grew following the flight of marranos from
Portugal, where the Inquisition was established in 1531. Joseph Hakohen relates that "most of them returned to the
Lord, God of our fathers, who had mercy on them, and they worshipped the Lord, God of Israel, and Ercole, Duke of
Ferrara, permitted them to dwell in his land . ".... `
There were other places as well in which the Jewish population included "'cultural islands" in addition to the
predominant group. But the tripartite concentration of the major categories, wvhich was indicated above, remained
until the last decades of Renaissance period, when the Spanish Jews lost their stronghold in the south. Thereafter this
group formed compact units elsewhere in Italy; in time, as the Leghorn community became a flourishing center, the
Jewry of Tuscany as a whole took on a Sephardic complexion.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

EUROPE, OR HOW TO ESCAPE BABEL
Maurice OLENDER
Since William Jones announced the kinship of Sanskrit and the European languages, a massive body of scholarship
has illuminated the development of the so-called "Indo- European" language group. This new historical philology
has enormous technical achievements to its credit. But almost from the start, it became entangled with prejudices
and myths - with efforts to recreate not only the lost language, but also the lost - and superior - civilization of the
Indo-European ancestors. This drive to determine the identity and nature of the first language of humanity was
deeply rooted in both near eastern and western traditions. The Bible described the perfect, transparent language of
Adam and followed its degeneration, caused by human sin, into the multiple, opaque languages of later nations. The
three sons of Noah became, for Jewish and early Christian writers, the founders of three distinct human groups. By
the sixth and seventh centuries, historians began to magnify the deeds of certain later peoples, such as the Scythians
and Goths, and to connect them with the biblical genealogy of languages and races. And in the Renaissance,
speculative historical etymology took root and flourished, as national pride led European intellectuals to assert that
their own modern languages - for example, Flemish - either could be identified with the original one or offered the
closest surviving approximation to it. Japheth, Noah's favorite son and the forefather of the Europeans, emerged as
the hero who had preserved the original language in its purity. A new history of the European languages developed,
one which traced them back to the language of the barbarian Scythians and emphasized the connections between
Persian and European languages. It came to seem implausible that the European languages derived from He-brew.
By the eighteenth century, in short, all the preconditions were present for a discovery that the ancestors of the
Europeans, like the common ancestor of their languages, had been independent of Semitic influence. A modern
scholarly thesis whose political and intellectual consequences are still working themselves out reveals the continuing
impact of a millennial tradition of speculation about language and history.

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

JAPHETHIC EUROPE
Japheth is one of the sons of Noah in the Abrahamic tradition. In Arabic citations, his name is normally given
as Yafeth bin Nuh ("Japheth, son of Noah"). In Biblical as well as Quranic tradition, Japheth is considered to be the
progenitor of Eurasian Peoples. [2][3][4] The tribes Gog and Magog are also regarded as descendants of Japheth.[5][6]

From the Flood to Babel, another humanity is put in place; Noah is its new ancestor, with his three sons by whom
"the whole earth was peopled" (Gen.9. 1). In Genesis, the multiplication of languages corresponds to the geographic
distribution of nations "after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, and after their nations" (Gen. 10.31).
This great human diaspora is organized ac-cording to a geography of malediction and benediction closely associated
with Noah's shameless drunkenness. His son Ham does not hesitate, according to the Christian exegetes inspired by
Philo of Alexandria, to expose publicly his Father's obscenity by laughing and making fun of his nudity. Ham
therefore sees his cursed descendants become "servant of servants . . . unto his brethren" (Gen.9.25); the Church
Fathers, who had read Josephus, attribute the peopling of Africa to him. To his two brothers who "went backward,
and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness"
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

(Gen.9.23), tradition grants two other continents. Shem, marked in Genesis by his privileged link to the eternal
Elohim, receives Asia. Japheth, whose Hebraic name evokes "beauty" as well as "openness,"9 the "wide space" of a
legacy capable of "dilation" and "expansion," will be the father of Europe. For the readers of the Septuagint, the
Greek translation of the Old Testament, the etymological fiction of a "Euru-opa," meaning "wide vision," could
serve to confirm the providential ambition of this continent which "sees far" (eurus, ops). Since Hecataeus of
Miletus in the sixth century B.C. the Greeks had divided the world into three parts: Africa, Asia, and Europe. From
this point on, this ancient geography was Christianized thanks to the new biblical ancestors of humanity.
Combining these strategies of appropriation of old biblical promises with the desire to integrate pagan knowledge
and myths in order to better assimilate them, the early Church recognized the three sons of Noah - Shem, Ham, and
Japheth-under the names Cronos, Titan, and Japheth. Japheth, the most bellicose of the sons of Uranus (sky) and
Gaia (earth), progenitor of a line of rebels, thereafter pursued his career as an energetic pioneer. Thus we encounter
him again in the Christian Europe of the last century at the head of a civilization combining two strains of memory,
"Semitic" and "Aryan" or "Jap(h)ethic," the inequality of whose valences is exacerbated when Renan associates the
titanic figure of Japheth with the victory of Progress. In Josephus, the descendants of Shem go forth and populate
"Asia to the Indian Ocean"; the sons of Japheth advance "in Asia to the river Tanais (the Don) and in Europe to
Gadeira (Cadiz)."
A few decades later Isidore described the Goths as a primordial "nation" because he considered their tribe to be born
of the first division of peoples after the Flood. He then assures us that the Scythians and Goths "derive their origin"
from Magog, the second son of Japheth. Isidore stresses again that the descendants of Japheth "possess the middle
part of Asia and all of Europe to the Britannic Ocean." This national knowledge of peoples and their languages, this
way of magnifying Gothic ancestors, transforming them into parents of a new biblical humanity, no doubt inspired
more than one linguistic construction in medieval and modern Europe.
Thus, when the descendants of Japheth encountered their cousins returning from Babel and were no longer able to
understand them, they designated their pidgin tongue by the verb "babelen,"' which in Flemish means "gibberish."
By means of etymological proofs and geographical, historical, and linguistic arguments, scholars emphasized the
non-oriental dimension of the origins of Europe.4"
Japheth was both the mythical patron and the conceptual tool, since it was he who, thanks to the confusion of Babel,
permitted the conceptualizing of the history of a mother tongue which transformed itself over time into innumerable
dialects. For those who attempted henceforth to compare and analyze them, to highlight their common structure,
these idioms bear a family resemblance: they all bear the "Japhethic" stamp which, in its scarcely historicized
version, received the name "Scythian" - a language close to old Iranian, but about which almost nothing else was
then known. As for the Scythians, a barbarous people existing on the margins of civilized humanity, Herodotus only
knew of them "by hearsay." The Scythians, Asiatic nomads who ignore the frontiers between Europe and Asia- two
continents once entrusted to the "western" son of Noah -were also associated with the Caucasian provinces close to
Mount Ararat, where the biblical Ark is sup-posed to have run aground.
Even as Joseph Justus Scaliger, in his Diatriba de Europaerorum linguis, vigorously opposed the Scythian
hypothesis and therefore also opposed the idea of a single origin for all European languages, everywhere in France,
England, Spain, the Low Countries, Scandanavia, the regions which would later make up Italy and Germany, and
elsewhere as well, the debates continued. Scholars tried both to evaluate the resemblances and differences among
the European languages, and to determine the surviving elements of the original Hebrew in the post-Babel dialects.
Thus, underlining the concordances between the idioms born of Scythian, Father Thomassin justified them by
"reducing" all languages to Hebrew. In his Meithode, published in 1690, he wanted to demonstrate that the
proximity between Hebrew and French is such that "one can truthfully say that they are fundamentally the same
language."
When Leibniz, heir to a tradition more than one hundred years old, asserted the existence of a Jap(h)ethic entity on
the basis of a linguistically united Europe, he underlined the demonstrative value of an explanatory model of the
linguistic affinities discernible in so many idioms separated by time and space. Speaking of the ancient "Scythians,"
he did not hesitate to recall that it is a question of a "generic term" designating "these distant barbarians." Little
matter: passion for the mother tongue, so often intertwined with that for the nation, incited even Leibniz- who was
otherwise quite cosmopolitan in out-look - to equate in 1697 "the origin of the peoples and the languages of Europe"
with "the archaic German language." Beginning with the sixteenth century, more and more systematic comparisons
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

between Germanic and Persian terms, and the rapprochements of the languages of India, Greek, and Latin,
developed in the wake of the spice trade and the proselytizing efforts of the Jesuits. One of them, produced by
Father Gaston Coeurdoux in investigating the structural correspondences between Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit,
proposed a Japhethic solution which henceforth brought together Europe and a new East.
In a memoir written in 1767, known to the members of the Acadimie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres but
not published until 1808, Coeurdoux wrote: Japheth, eldest son of Noah, left the plain of Shinar, bringing with him a
third of humanity, and headed toward the West, which was his share. His seven children no doubt became the heads
of as many great families, each one of which must have spoken one of the new original languages, such as Latin,
Greek, Slavonic, etc. May I be permitted to add to these Sanskrit (samskroutam); it is as deserving as any other
language, given its extensive reach, to be numbered among the primitive languages. The supposition that I am
making will perhaps later become a reality."

FROM "THE (INDO-)EUROPEAN RACE"
TO THE "ARYAN" MYTH
"Indo-European," often considered very close to, or even identified, with the sacred language of India (Sanskrit),
took over the role played by the Scythian hypothesis for erudits of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as the
means of explaining the origins and transformations of European languages. As the Iranist James Darmesteter wrote
in 1890, speaking for "the scientific orthodoxy of Europe," the Vedas was the text thanks to which we can reach "the
first revelation of religious thought to the Indo-European race. The Vedas thereby performed the function of a sacred
book which describes the religious origins of the race, the Aryan Bible." From Jones to Dumezil, by way of Bopp
and Saussure, there was no shortage of "founding fathers" to insist on the "algebraic" character of the word "IndoEuropean," which they used as a heuristic term rather than to refer to the chosen language of some ancestor of
Europe.
On this point, Dumezil, in his LeCon inaugurate given at the College de France on December 1, 1949, reminded his
audience that linguists and other specialists in Indo-European issues "know - but perhaps it would have been more
judicious to say "should know" -"that the living, dramatic reconstruction of what the language or civilization of the
common ancestors had been like is impossible, since nothing can replace docu-mentary evidence, and there are no
documents." However, though they have been reiterated for more than two centuries -if one takes into consideration
the nuanced formulation of Jones's phrase -these calls to elementary historical rigor have not prevented
archaeologists and linguists devoted to the Indo-European cause from searching, sometimes frantically, for the
"Aryan" origins of Europe. Despite these longings to discover religious, linguistic, racial, and political prin-ciples
for a Western civilization finally liberated from all Hebraic heritage (as when Renan states that "There is nothing
Jewish about Jesus"), this nostalgic search for [Aryan] origins was nonetheless inspired by a biblical paradigm and
the fascination long exercised by Hebrew, Adam's language. This point was not missed by the eminent Indologist
Sylvain Levi who, at the beginning of this century, observed how much the "old biblical prejudices," still intact,
con-tinued to exert influence on theories relating to "the childhood of Aryan lan-guages," or "the primitive Aryan."
"The Aryan myth," in its strictly academic phase, was therefore able in the Christian West of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries to result in a twin development, paradoxical but not necessarily contradictory. The modern
scholars whose opinions we have surveyed represented the culmination of a historio-graphical effort aiming to
discover for itself splendid ancestors in an East purged of all semitism; they favored the idea of a West superior to
all other civilizations, but were nonetheless able to identify themselves with the actors of a providential history
whose rules were decreed, once and for all, by biblical revelation. But the history of the twentieth century is marked
by the searing memory of another use of the "Aryan myth," when the words "Aryan" and "Semite" could, during the
Nazi occupation of Europe, be made to correspond to "jurid-ical" categories ordaining the death or the right to life of
millions of Europeans according to whether one classified them under one or the other "rubric." The programmed
death of Jews and Gypsies -who speak, after all, a language very closely resembling Sanskrit! - could thus be
"legitimized" by discourses inspired by old racist theories taken from the writings of specialists in Indo-European
studies. But despite this terrible use of the concept "Aryan" and the notion of an Indo-European origin to European
language and thought, even today, at this fin-de-sie'cle in Europe as in the United States, certain writers i- linguists,
mythologists, prehistorians, archaeologists and anthropologists, university professors or journalists, pursue this type
of speculation.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

From the old "Aryan myth," devoted to the romantic quest for a paradise lost, a programmatic vision of the future of
the West can be derived. Exalting reason, the scientific spirit, and the technical know-how that resulted from them,
Michel Poniatowski attributes the intellectual talents and the ontological and genetic characteristics which trigger
the great excurses of the human mind solely to the Indo-Euro-peans. In a work entitled L'Avenir nest ecrit nulle part,
he wrote in 1978 concerning the Indo-Europeans: Yet it is there that we find our true sources, common to all of
Europe.
There our primitive culture lies. These men, who directly preceded us, are, through us, at the origin of the most
advancedc ivilizationsa nd sciences,o f the most refineda rt and culture.T he spirit of invention, of creation, led them,
over the course of 4,500 years, by a long, progressive march, from the shores of the Baltic to the moon.

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves

One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

Ashkenazi Jews are
Middle Eastern & European hybrids
Razib Khan
This paper clarifies and puts into sharper focus what we knew, and leaves open more details for future research.
These data would imply that in fact there was a relatively strong separation between these groups and the Jews, at
least when it came to gene flow into the Jewish group (other data from Poland does show the effect of Jewish
assimilation into the gentile majority). Therefore, the admixture may have occurred within the bounds of the former
Roman Empire, during the Imperial or early post-Imperial period.
4) The close relationship of Jews to Palestinians is not surprising. Jews are reputedly a Levantine population by
origin, and the historical and genetic evidence points to Arabicization in the Levant and Mesopotamia as having
occurred through acculturation, and not population replacement. Many of the Palestinians are likely of original
Jewish or Samaritan origin, though I would guess that they were likely at least nominally Christianized during the
Byzantine persecutions of the 6th century.
The Italian Renaissance
in the Mediterranean, or, Between East and West.
Monique O'Connell
Renaissance innovations in philosophy were matched by the formation of a distinctive literary culture, and three
recently published collections of essays ask how cross-cultural exchange shaped the Italian contribution to a
―Mediterranean‖ literature. Re-Orienting the Renaissance, edited by Gerald MacLean, ―insists that we think again
whenever we hear the term ―Renaissance‖ being used casually to describe an exclusively European movement
involving the recovery of exclusively European ideas, values, and attitudes from Antiquity.‖ A Faithful Sea, edited

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

by Adnan Husain and K.E. Fleming, looks at the religious cultures of the region and is particularly concerned to
incorporate often-neglected Islamic perspectives. Mediterraneanois, edited by Roberta Morosini and Cristina
Perissinotto, aims to showcase the polyphony of literary and artistic voices that circulated in the region and, of the
three collections, engages most directly with Italian culture. There are three themes that connect the diverse
contributions to these volumes: the representation of Muslim ―others‖ in art and in literature, the circulation of
narrative forms between Mediterranean societies, and the literary representation of the region‘s particular social
environment, full of pilgrims, exiles, travelers, and renegades.
One group of essays examine the various ways negative stereotypes of Muslims and/or Ottomans were created,
represented, or challenged in literary works. Michael Papio‘s contribution to Mediterraneanois presents the
Novellino of Masuccio Salernitano as an articulation of popular anti-Muslim fears, focusing in particular on the fear
of sexual contamination from male slaves, who in Southern Italy were largely Muslim and of African origin.
Morosini‘s contribution to the same volume analyses the figure of Mohammed in Alexandre du Pont‘s 1278 Roman
de Mahomet, the first biography in Romance language of Islam‘s prophet.

-

History of the Jews of the Netherlands Antilles,
by Isaac & Suzanne A. Emmanuel
Review by Seymour B. Liebman
For many decades, Jews have bemoaned the fact that they are the objects and not the subjects of history.
Contributing to this partially justified belief or fact has been the paucity of Jewish historians. The stress laid by the
majority of Jewish historians and historians of Jewry upon persecutions and martyrdom has magnified the
legitimacy of this belief, though some have extolled the contributions made by individual Jews to the sciences and
intellectual life of Westem civilization. The former chief rabbi of the Ashkenazi English Jews (the Sephardim have
their own haham or chief rabbi) was moved to write in his Pentateuch (Hertz, 1936: 936) that the primary aim of the
Jewish historian should be neither to lament the past ... nor to idealize it, but to understand it. He is, therefore, no
longer to confine himself to the martyrdoms of the Jewish People ... or even exclusively to the strivings of the
Jewish spirit in the world of thought.... Both the story of the martyrdoms and the spiritual strivings, are, of course,
basic. But, in addition, the historian today must seek to explain the position of the Jews in the national histories of
the countries in which they dwelt This calls... for a detailed study of Jewish communities … and a knowledge of the
Jew's social, economic and political relations to the general population.
The rabbi referred to the "cross-fertilization" of Jewish and non-Jewish ideas and influences. After this, he
concludes, the student of Judaism will perceive that Judaism is a civilization that has made distinct contributions in
every sphere of life. With rare exception, few historians have been mindful of these excellent statements. The failure
of historians of Jews to observe the caveats of Rabbi Hertz and other basic tenets of historiography has resulted in
the development of stereotypes of Jews. At best, these are applicable to only a small proportion of Jewry. Yet these
pejorative stereotypes have been applied to all Jewish groups. For almost 1800 years, Jews have been divided into
two major segments, Ashkenazim and Sephardim, and each of these is divided into subgroups. The former inhabited
northern Europe until the fifteenth century, after which their major centers of habitation were Central and Eastern
Europe. The Sephardim constituted the Jewry of the Iberian Peninsula until their expulsion from Spain and Portugal
in 1492 and 1497, respectively. Those who left these nations joined the existing communities of Levantine and
Oriental Sephardim in North Africa, stretching from the Middle East to the Atlantic, or those in the Ottoman
Empire, Italy, or southern France. Jewish historians ascribe the "Golden Age of Spain" (circa 1000-1400) to the
Iberian Sephardim. Following that period, except for the expulsions, all groups of Sephardim have been assigned to
limbo in histories while the Ashkenazim, always as objects, monopolize the stage. The history of the Sephardim in
the New World included roles in every facet of life in that area. This was true even during the reign of the several
tribunals of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the Spanish colonial era. Jewish journals and a few not too well
known books touch upon some aspects of this history, but it is generally a neglected field. The Sephardim wrote
books, poetry, created new prayers, developed international trade and commerce and, if we accept the premises of
Werner Sombart (1962), they brought modern banking and capitalism into Europe and the New World. If any credit

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

accrues to Jews for making many of these contributions, such credit is largely due to the Sephardim. The Iberian
Sephardim were among the Spanish conquistadors. They came with Cortes, Balboa, and Pizarro. They could ride
horses fully armed, swing a sword, wench, march, and equal the activities of any Christian knight. They differed
from their non-Jewish colleagues in that their purpose in coming to the New World was to establish themselves, to
build homes, to be enterprising inhabitants-and not for "God, gold and greed," the purposes ascribed to others.
Many, undoubtedly, came to seek sanctuary from the Spanish Inquisition and its branches in Portugal between 1580
and 1640, but sanctuary was a secondary motive. Where Spanish hegemony reigned, they were compelled to
observe their true faith clandestinely.

“…(The eviction of jews from Spain) deprived Portugal of
its middle class and its most scientific traders and financiers.”
[Encyclopedia Britannica, page 279, vol. 18 - 1947.]

―The great mass of the Jewish people were thus to be found once more in the East, in the Polish and Turkish
empires … The few communities suffered to remain in western Europe were meanwhile subjected at last to all the
restrictions which earlier ages had usually allowed to remain as an ideal; so that in a sense, the Jewish dark ages
may be said to begin with the Renaissance.‖ Encyclopedia Britannica: [page 57-58, vol. 13 - 1947.]

Behind Communism
Frank L. Britton
The period marked by the evictions - 1300 to 1650 - also marks the period of the Renaissance which broke over
Europe as the Jews departed. Starting at first in the trading cities of northern Italy in about 1300, there began a
great rebirth of culture and learning which at first was based almost entirely on the writings of the ancient Greeks
and Romans. Very quickly this renascent culture spread over Europe and when the age had ended, in about 1650,
Europe was by comparison with her former status, enlightened and civilized. Quite obviously all this could not
have taken place had it not been for a great upsurge of commercial activity which occurred simultaneously with,
and as an adjunct of, the Renaissance. Not until the nations of Europe had wrested commercial control from the
ghetto did this rebirth of western civilization occur.

The Missing Keyword:
Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin
The very casting of this dialectic between Aryans and Jews as
the main mystery of "our" origins and the key to Providence betrays, not just a general
Eurocentrism (Renan "knew" that the Aryans had come from outside Europe as well), but
a Greco-Christian understanding of European identity and values. After all, it is the
wisdom of the Semites which the Aryans acquire; the Semites, for their part, are incapable,
of such development. … The Aryan myth is not a myth of autochthony,
but of colonization.

The Collected Works of C.G. Jung
"There is no consciousness without discrimination of opposites. This is the paternal principle, the Logos, which
eternally struggles to extricate itself from the primal warmth and primal darkness of the maternal womb, in a word,
from unconsciousness. Divine curiosity yearns to be born and does not shrink from conflict, suffering, or sin.
Unconsciousness is the primal sin, evil itself, for the Logos. Therefore the first creative act of liberation is matricide,
and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment, enchainment on
the rocks of the Caucasus. Nothing can exist without its opposite; the two were one in the beginning and will be one

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

again in the end".
The archetypes and the collective unconscious.
Four archetypes: mother, rebirth, spirit, trickster. Carl Gustav Jung.

… the governing of behavior." Self-fashioning is in effect the Renaissance version of these control mechanisms, the
cultural system of meanings that creates specific individuals by governing the passage from abstract potential to
concrete historical embodiment ... But, in general, the sincere ideal could not appeal to a common notion of the
internal self. Once the idea of similarity or likeness between God and the human person had been ruptured, it
became increasingly difficult to express a common Christian ideal.
The Other Side of Nowhere: Jazz, Improvisation, and Communities in Dialogue
Daniel Fischlin, Ajay Heble

Yet, as Gamble (199I:416) says, "The curtain has no near or far side, only a highly patterned warp and woof
stemming from the rich potential of culture, however simple or complex, volatile or repetitive." In my view
Neander- thals and early "modern" humans were both, in their own ways, woven into the fabric of humanity. I will
admit that the model I propose is speculative, conten- tious, and wide open to "falsification"; I see this not as a vice
but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in
ever-decreasing circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion. .
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves

Neolithization Processes in the Levant; The Outer Envelope
A. Nigel Goring-Morris and Anna Belfer-Cohen
The Near East is one of those unique places where the transition(s) from hunter-gatherers to farmers occurred
locally, so it is possible to observe the whole sequence of these processes within the region as a whole. We discuss
the archaeological evidence pertaining to those transformations within the Levant, presenting the particularistic local
changes in settlement patterns and the character of the different communities juxtaposed with the landscapes and
environmental background. The asynchronous developments clearly reflect the mosaic nature of the Levant in terms
of specific local environmental conditions that influenced the scope and pace of Neolithization processes.
The Levant is a distinct and limited area of the Near East characterized by its unique geographic location and the
presence of a mosaic of different phytogeographic zones. There are few if any regions in the world where
precipitation and vegetation zones vary so markedly over such small distances (Goring-Morris, Hovers, and BelferCohen 2009 and references therein). It was against this unusual backdrop that the momentous changes from small
groups of mobile foragers to large settled agricultural communities first occurred. These conditions need to be taken
into account when considering Neolithization processes as a whole. Thus, in order to present as coherent a picture as
possible, we here discuss and expand on the external issues pertinent to such developments. Belfer-Cohen and
Goring-Morris (2011) explore the internal facets of these phenomena.

The Levant. Wikipedia. The Levant (/ləˈvænt/), also known as the Eastern Mediterranean, is a geographic and
cultural region consisting of the "eastern Mediterranean littoral between Anatolia and Egypt".[2] The Levant today
consists of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine,Syria, and part of southern Turkey (the former Aleppo
Vilayet).
Precise definitions have varied over time, and the term originally had a broader and less well-defined usage.[3] The
Levant has been described as the "crossroads of western Asia, the eastern Mediterranean and northeast
Africa",[4] and the "northwest of the Arabian plate".[5]

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Other names for the Levant include [the region of] Syria, Sham, and the Eastern Mediterranean. Historically, the
region was known by a variety of names, of which the first recorded to apply to the whole region was Canaan.
The term Levant, which appeared in English in 1497, originally meant the East in general or "Mediterranean lands
east of Italy".[6] It is borrowed from the French levant 'rising', referring to the rising of the sun in the east,[6] or the
point where the sun rises.[7] The phrase is ultimately from the Latin word levare, meaning 'lift, raise'. Similar
etymologies are found inGreek Ἀνατολή (Anatolē, cf. Anatolia), in Germanic Morgenland (literally, "morning
land"), inItalian (as in "Riviera di Levante", the portion of the Liguria coast east of Genoa), inHungarian Kelet, in
Spanish "Levante", (the place of rising), and in Hebrew (mizrah). Most notably, "Orient" and
its Latin source oriens meaning "east", is literally "rising", deriving fromLatin orior "rise".
The notion of the Levant has undergone a dynamic process of historical evolution in usage, meaning, and
understanding. While the term "Levantine" originally referred to the European residents of the eastern
Mediterranean region, it later came to refer to regional "native" and "minority" groups.[8]
The term became current in English in the 16th century, along with the first English merchant adventurers in the
region; English ships appeared in the Mediterranean in the 1570s, and the English merchant company signed its
agreement ("capitulations") with the Grand Turk in 1579 (Braudel). The English Levant Company was founded in
1581 to trade with the Ottoman Empire, and in 1670 the French Compagnie du Levant was founded for the same
purpose. At this time, the Far East was known as the "Upper Levant".[3]
In 19th-century travel writing, the term incorporated eastern regions under then current or recent governance of
the Ottoman empire, such as Greece. In 19th-century archaeology, it referred to overlapping cultures in this region
during and after prehistoric times, intending to reference the place instead of any one culture. The French mandates
of Syria and Lebanon (1920–1946) were called the Levant states.[citation needed]

The Levant. The Geographic Setting It is vital to define the geographic boundaries in which these processes
occurred. The ―Near (or Middle) East‖ is an ambiguous term that covers Southwest Asia between the Mediterranean
and Iran. The region (Western Asia) encompasses Anatolia, the Levant, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, and Transcaucasia.
Here our primary focus of study is the Levant, its most distinctive feature being its ecological diversity. In addition,
where pertinent, we relate briefly to adjacent regions (e.g., Cyprus and central Anatolia). The Levant is a small
region enclosed between the Taurus and Zagros mountains to the north, the Mediterranean coastline to the west, the
Sinai Peninsula to the south, and the Syro-Arabian desert to the east, ca. 1,000 km north to south by up to 400 km
east to west (fig. 1). The topography of the Levant is characterized by a north-south longitudinal series of alternating
elevated and low-lying regions: the coastal plain and western piedmont; the central hill range reaching up to 2,000 m
a.s.l.; the Dead Sea Rift lying below sea level; and the Trans-Jordanian/Syrian plateau (the central-south Levant),
which rises steeply to elevations between 800 and 2,000 m a.s.l., followed by a gradual descent eastward into Saudi
Arabia. Today there are relatively
Phytogeographic regions of the Near East. The line between Beirut and Damascus differentiates between southern
and northern Levant. Note that some relate the Upper Tigris as part of Mesopotamia while others include the Middle
Euphrates as southeast Anatolia. few perennial rivers or streams in the region, the most notable being the Tigris and
the Euphrates in the north and the Oron-tes and the Jordan farther south along the rift valley. Almost all other
drainages are seasonal and ephemeral. Changes in evapotranspiration rates were major factors in the presence and
extent of Late Quaternary inland water bodies. Springs are common in the Mediterranean zone but are widely
dispersed in more arid areas. Obviously, the specifics would have changed at various times, depending on the
particular climatic conditions. It is important to stress that within the Levant, as indeed elsewhere, global climatic
changes would have differentially affected environments at the micro- and macro-regional levels. This is especially
valid in comparisons between the southern and northern Levant. For example, Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene
geomorphological changes appear to have acted differently in the north and the south, with more extensive
aggradation in the north that may have caused the burial of sites there (e.g., O¨ zdog˘an 1997).

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Nicodemus saith unto him,
How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter
the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
John 3:4 KJV
Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?

On the Physical Characteristics of the Jews.
John Beddoe.
I have two objects in inviting the attention of the Society to the subject of the Physical Characteristics of the Jews. In
the first place, I should be glad to elicit from those who have already considered it, their views as to what
peculiarities of form and feature do really constitute that type, which most of us believe to distinguish the Hebrews
from every other people. In the second, I wish to lay before the Society such information as I have been able to
procure, respecting the varieties of complexion among the Jews, and to make a few remarks on their probable origin.
It would be difficult, perhaps, to define what it is that makes a Jew's eye proverbially recognisable. It is generally
full and prominent, though the brow is well marked. Some think its principal peculiarity is the long almond shape;
but this is common to several Oriental people s; and the expression of meditative mildness, with a degree of
cunning, or sometimes of timidity, which appears almost always to accompany it in the Israelite, and which seems to
speak of centuries of oppression patiently endured by a people of great intellectual powers, is not, I believe, usually
observed in other people with eyes of that form. That it is not the colour may be easily shown. Nor does it consist in
obliquity of the opening, for persons of thoroughly Jewish aspect may be seen to present, someone, and some the
other kind of obliquity, while in most of them the opening is, I think, as strictly horizontal as in other so- called
Caucasian people.
Again, can any distinctive character be traced in the lower jaw, or in the nose? The former is usually somewhat
heavy though rounded, with a receding chin and full lips; while the upper maxilla is large, and the nasal bones low at
the root, and salient. But individuals deficient in some of these marks are to be met with every day. In some Jews,
who are at once recognized as such from the tout ensemble of their features, the profile of the nose is concave. In
such persons, however, there is often a slight downward curve towards the point, as though the bridge had slid down
a little below its proper place. The common type of nose is not sufficiently described when it is called aquiline,
though that term is etymologically very appropriate. There are usually, I think, more hollowness at the root, more
depression at the point, and more tucking-up of the wings, than in high-nosed persons of Aryan race.
There is a populous settlement, of ancient date, at Tiberias, on the low hot snore of the Lake of Gennesareth ; but the
Jews there present no striking peculiarities, certainly not black skins or crisp hair. Some of them are quite fair. Is it
not possible that the foundation of this statement may, after all, be found in the writings of Silk Buckingham, who
noticed some flat-faced, crisp-haired people among a tribe on the Lower Hami or Hieromax? The tribe, however,
was Arab, not Jewish; the complexions were not so dark as those of some other Arabs; and lastly, the presence of a
black slave girl suggested the probability of negro concubinage.
On the Physical Characteristics of the Jews.
John Beddoe.
M. Paul Broca, for example, in a recent article in Brown-Se'quard's Journal de la Physiologie, makes use of the
supposed fact, that some parts of Hungary, and still more of Poland, had to some extent embraced Judaism between
the eighth and the eleventh century. And Gliddon, after enlarging on the vicissitudes of their history, their forced
conversions and relapses, and so forth, observes that Poland seems to be the focus of this fusion of the Jews with the
German and Sarmatian races. All this may be very true, but is scarcely relevant. What could have been the effect of
intermixture with the swarthy Modyors, among whose descendants I have indeed occasionally seen flaxen, but
hardly ever, so far as I can recollect, red hair? Nor have even the Poles or Slovaks enough of rufous blood to have
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

leavened an alien dark race to any great extent. Besides, the real difficulty is in Barbary and the Levant, the Jews of
which regions have never mingled much with those of Poland and the north, but are known to be sprung from communities fixed there for very many centuries, overlaid, and in some places probably much outnumbered, since the
latter part of the fifteenth century, by the descendants of the great Spanish and Portuguese emigration. Spanish is to
this day, in most places, their domestic language, instead of the Greek, Turkish, or Arabic of general intercourse.
Mr. Blakesley derives the Jews of Tunis and Constantine in part from the Vandals of Genseric and Gelimer, of
whom he believes a considerable portion to have become incorporated with the independent tribes of the interior,
and to have assisted in raising the power of the latter to the pitch it attained not long afterwards. And Berbrugger
says, " Si l'on en croit des historiens Arabes, la plupart des Arabes et des Berberes d'Af- rique professaient le
judaisme des les septieme et huitieme siecles, et la prexlication musulmane ne fit point de proselytes chez eux." It is
the fact that fair-haired people are numerous among the Berbers, at least in particular tribes, and some of these may
have been incorporated among the Jews. But at the best these views affect only the people of Tunis and Al? geria,
and leave those of all the East, if not of Morocco, un- accounted for.
That the Jews in Spain, while under Visigothic rule, mixed freely with their Christian countrymen, does not admit of
doubt.Their settlement was of ancient date : tradition named David and Solomon as its founders: they were largely
engaged in the cultivation of the soil, as well as in trade: they were slave-holders, and appear to have been disposed
to proselytise their slaves ; and their belief in the unity of the godhead seems to have been a source of sympathy
between them and the Arian Goths. It is noteworthy that Jews assisted vigorously in the defence of Arles against the
Franks, and of Neapolis against Belisarius. The conversion of King Recared to Catholicism changed these friendly
relations; and thenceforward, till the Moorish conquest, the Jews underwent most bitter persecu- tions; but in
Narbonnese or Gothic Gaul they continued to flourish, and Basnage states facts sufficient to prove that even in the
ninth century the conversion of Christians to Judaism was not infrequent. Still later, in the thirteenth century, Rabbi
Moses de Cozzi attributed some persecutions to God's anger against his people for marrying strange women. That
numerous body, therefore, who, by the cruel edicts of Ferdinand and Isabella, and of Emanuel of Portugal, were
finally expelled from the Peninsula, and committed as it were to the Mediterranean, to be flung here and there upon
its southern and eastern shores, may nay, must have been of very mixed descent. But we have surely no reason to
suppose that they can have carried away with them more Gothic blood than they left behind. And though red hair
seems to have been not uncommon among the Gothic aristocracy of Spain, in the middle ages?
If it arose in the second way, (and I believe it is consistent with Arab usage to name a tribe from any peculiarity of
complexion or feature), then another possible source of the xanthous ele- ment is pointed out. It is hardly possible to
take leave of the subject, without remarking on a quality of the Jewish race, which may perhaps be in some degree
connected with its double physical type, and which has been repeatedly enlarged upon by those who have written on
its peculiar nosology. I mean, that as the Jews in their own body represent the two extreme types of the Cauca- sian
family, the pure xanthous or rufous and the melanous, so they are able, it seems, to live, thrive and multiply in all
countries where any branch of that family can subsist. In Sweden they increase in numbers, and the proportion of
children to married persons appears, from the census tables, to be greater than among the Christian population. In
the towns of Algeria they are, according to Boudin,f the only race that is able to maintain its numbers, while
Frenchmen, Spaniards, Moors and Negroes tend to die off more or less rapidly. And in Cochin and Aden, the latter
one of the hottest places in the world, they succeed in rearing children, and in forming permanent communities.

Early Human Genetics as the Unanthropology
Of course the relative number of the twelve species [of people] fluctuates every year, and that too according to the
law developed by Darwin, that in the struggle for life the more highly developed, the more favoured and larger
group of forms, possess the positive inclination and the certain tendency to spread more and more at the expense of
the lower, more backward, and smaller groups. Thus the Mediterranean species, and within it the Indo-Germanic,
have by means of the higher development of their brain surpassed all the other races and species in the struggle for
life, and have already spread the net of their dominion over the whole globe.

-

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Did Humans and Neandertals Battle for Control of the Middle East?
Ben Harder, National Geographic News, March 8, 2002
The Neandertals, stocky and intelligent humanoids, lived in Europe and Western Asia for thousands of years before
the first humans settled in the area. Then true humans moved into the region from Africa.
The new arrivals settled the land, and the resident Neandertals eventually died out or moved on as the humans
continued to spread outward. By 30,000 years ago, humans had occupied most of the Old World, and Neandertals
had disappeared from the globe.
Exactly how ownership of the Middle East was resolved between Neandertals and modern humans - and whether it
was bloody in nature - remains a mystery. One thing that's beyond doubt, however, is that the Neandertals gave their
successors a run for the land of milk and honey, according to Ofer Bar-Yosef, an archaeologist at Harvard
University.

The Neanderthal hypothesis
If it's true, then war is inevitable, and it’s long past time to fight
23rd August 2010
But another Jew, one my age and our generation, Michael Bradley, may just exceed these humane Jewish-human
patriots with the scope and profundity his stunning hypothesis.
Jews are the remnants of the Neanderthals, he says, nearly rubbed out by the CroMagnons 7500 years ago, and
nursing a deathless hatred of their enemies, who today are all the non Jews of the world.
Bradley, a Jewish writer, warns us:
―It is time for the non-Semitic peoples of the world to come together in a multi-racial alliance under one banner in
order to severely limit Semitic activities before they put an end to us and everything else on the planet. . . . However,
I will warn everyone that it may well be too late.‖
Bradley figures monotheism is a Neanderthal plot to more efficiently control the people who are targeted as the
hosts of their parasitic perversities, with the implication that all of human civilization has been influenced by the
predispositions of Neanderthal DNA.
DNA samples prove that Semitic populations are possessed of up to 70 percent of Neanderthal DNA, which
accounts for why what is now the nation of Israel has been the epicenter of world violence since most ancient times,
Bradley concludes.
According to Bradley, the Neanderthal heritage of modern- day Jewish people explains much about their ongoing
problems with not only the native people of Palestine but with other people on the planet. He writes:
―Insensitive even to objective concerns about inordinate Jewish influence in societies, and reacting with hysterical
aggression to any such supposed ―attack‖ on their behavior and pleas from non-Jews to limit it, Jews have always
provoked violence against themselves. And then they, with much emotional satisfaction, feel victimized and
attribute the situation to innate ―anti-Semitism‖ among their neighbors.‖

Neolithization Processes in the Levant; The Outer Envelope
A. Nigel Goring-Morris and Anna Belfer-Cohen
The Near East is one of those unique places where the transition(s) from hunter-gatherers to farmers occurred
locally, so it is possible to observe the whole sequence of these processes within the region as a whole. … The
Levant is a distinct and limited area of the Near East characterized by its unique geographic location and the
presence of a mosaic of different phytogeographic zones.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin
The discourse of Semitism, insofar as it ever posited fundamental continuities between ancient genetic or
philological stocks and modern cultural formations and inasmuch as its debates revolved around the problematic
contribution of "Semites" to the constitution of the Christian West, offers rich material for discussing both of these
sets of relations. As Maurice Olender details in his book The Languages of Paradise, the European scholarly world
in the nineteenth century maintained a central narrative of a world-historical dialectic between Aryans and Semites.
… the "Aryanist" ideology is now associated primarily or exclusively with the Nazi movement, while the notion of
"Semites" is almost inseparable from the anti-Jewish ideology of anti-Semitism. What then is Semitism?
What are the implications, for ideologies of gender and race, of the way the pairing of Aryans and Semites echoes
and at times overtly borrows images from the unequal coupling of the masculine and the feminine? How was antiSemitism, this "scientific" racism within Europe at the height of its imperial power related to colonialist racism
beyond Europe's boundaries?
The very casting of this dialectic between Aryans and Jews as the main mystery of "our" origins and the key to
Providence betrays, not just a general Eurocentrism (Renan "knew" that the Aryans had come from outside Europe
as well), but a Greco-Christian understanding of European identity and values. After all, it is the wisdom of the
Semites which the Aryans acquire; the Semites, for their part, are incapable of such development.
… And yet this is not yet quite the full-blown argument for the proper coincidence of race and geography that
appears, for instance, a few decades later in the work of the German "social geographer" Ratzel. The Aryan myth is
not a myth of autochthony, but of colonization.

Renaissance Italy and the Muslim
Mediterranean in Recent Historical Work
Francesca Trivellato
In 1951, Robert Sabatino Lopez published a provocative piece in the American Historical Review entitled ―Still
Another Renaissance?‖ The question mark in the title was little more than a rhetorical concession. Lopez had no
doubt: ―If renaissance be understood in its original meaning of revival, new birth, or, indeed, new conception, no
period in European history seems entitled to be called renaissance more than the tenth century.‖ An economic
historian who did not shy away from the study of ―civilizations,‖ Lopez was less concerned with the emergence of
new intellectual trends than he was with the demographic, economic, social, and political opportunities that opened
up for larger strata of the population in much of western Europe, and particularly in the Italian peninsula, at the end
of the first millennium of the Christian era. His proposal for a new chronology of the Renaissance had broad
implications. In Lopez‘s words, ―The humble beginnings of the tenth century ushered in the long age of European
preponderance in the world.‖
For his part, Giovanni Ricci ironically and tellingly speaks of Ferrara‘s ―so-called Renaissance‖. More important
perhaps, as the following pages will reveal, the new centrality of the Mediterranean revives more than it displaces
old historiographical questions: How can we understand the relation between artistic endeavors and economic
developments? Was the Renaissance a rebirth or a continuation of trends begun long before? And should we
consider the Renaissance solely as a high-culture phenomenon or as a more profound societal transformation?
Renaissance Italy and the Muslim Mediterranean in Recent Historical Work
Francesca Trivellato

-

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves

One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin
The Date of Interbreeding between Neandertals and Modern Humans
Joshua M. Akey
One of the key discoveries from the analysis of the Neandertal genome is that Neandertals share more genetic
variants with non-Africans than with Africans. This observation is consistent with two hypotheses: interbreeding
between Neandertals and modern humans after modern humans emerged out of Africa or population structure in the
ancestors of Neandertals and modern humans. These hypotheses make different predictions about the date of last
gene exchange between the ancestors of Neandertals and modern non-Africans. We estimate this date by measuring
the extent of linkage disequilibrium (LD) in the genomes of present-day Europeans and find that the last gene flow
from Neandertals into Europeans likely occurred 37,000–86,000 years before the present (BP), and most likely
47,000–65,000 years ago. This supports the recent interbreeding hypothesis and suggests that interbreeding occurred
when modern humans carrying Upper Paleolithic technologies encountered Neandertals as they expanded out of
Africa.

Ian Gilligan. The role of climate change and clothing
Neanderthal extinction and modern human behaviour
Neanderthal extinction. Despite intense research and debate, the question of why Neanderthals disappeared
remains essentially unresolved (Straus 2005). Moreover, the debate has raised concerns that dubious preconceptions
have biased our interpretations of their capacities compared to those of fully modern humans. Neither do existing
data provide much support for the long- cherished idea that Neanderthals were pushed to extinction by competition
from fully modern humans.

At a basic but important level, the studies reviewed here demonstrate beyond any doubt that old narratives of the
displacement of the Mediterranean by the Atlantic are inadequate for an understanding of the fifteenth and early
sixteenth centuries. One is reminded that Columbus, in the account of his fourth transatlantic voyage, written in July
1503, urged the Spanish monarchs to use the wealth of the New World not only to evangelize China but also to
reconquer Jerusalem.

Inventing Sincerity, Refashioning Prudence:
The Discovery of the Individual in Renaissance Europe
JOHN MARTIN
In the Middle Ages both sides of human consciousness-that which was turned within as that which was turned
without-lay dreaming or half-awake beneath a common veil. The veil was woven of faith, illusion and childish
prepossession, through which the world and history were seen clad in strange hues. Man was conscious of himself
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

only as member of a race, people, party, family, or corporation-only through some general category. In Italy this veil
first melted into air; an objective treatment and consideration of the state and of all things of this world became
possible. The subjective side at the same time asserted itself with corresponding emphasis; man became a spiritual
individual, and recognized himself as such. In the same way the Greek had once distinguished himself from the
barbarian, and the Arab had felt himself an individual at a time when other Asiatics knew themselves only as
members of a race. It will not be difficult to show that this result was due above all to the political circumstances of
Italy.

Jacob Burckhardt
The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy.
More than one hundred and thirty years after its publication, Burckhardt's masterpiece The Civilization of the
Renaissance in Italy continues to stimulate much of the most creative scholarship in late medieval and early modern
European history. This book, to be sure, has never generated a scholarly consensus on the nature of the Renaissance.
It has, however, accomplished something far more valuable. Ever since its publication, The Civilization of the
Renaissance in Italy has consistently invited corrections, modifications, and refutations; it has become a classic,
compelling each new generation of readers to come to terms with its arguments.
This essay, by contrast, is an effort to underscore the importance of what I believe should still be called "the
discovery of the individual" for our understanding not only of high culture-art, music, literature, and intellectual
history-but also for our grasp of social and political history as well. …
We are, in other words, no longer in the comfortable - for the governing of behavior." Self-fashioning is in effect
the Renaissance version of these control mechanisms, the cultural system of meanings that creates specific
individuals by governing the passage from abstract potential to concrete historical embodiment..
But, in general, the sincere ideal could not appeal to a common notion of the internal self. Once the idea of similarity
or likeness between God and the human person had been ruptured, it became increasingly difficult to express a
common Christian ideal.
A much-debated question in human evolution is the relationship between modern humans and Neandertals. Modern
humans appear in the African fossil record about 200,000 years ago. Neandertals appear in the European fossil
record about 230,000 years ago [1] and disappear about 30,000 year ago. They lived in Europe and western Asia
with a range that extended as far east as Siberia [2] and as far south as the middle East. The overlap of Neandertals
and modern humans in space and time suggests the possibility of interbreeding. Evidence, both for[3] and against
interbreeding [4], have been put forth based on the analysis of modern human DNA. Although mitochondrial DNA
from multiple Neandertals has shown that Neandertals fall outside the range of modern human variation , low-levels
of gene flow cannot be excluded.
http://www.sciencemag.org/special/neandertal/
Not surprisingly, Der Spiegel magazine in Germany has done a major article on the discovery that modern
Europeans 4% neanderthal. (After all, it is the Max Planck Institute in Germany that did the research, and the
Neander Valley is also in Germany where these bones were first unearthed and studied in the 1850s, east of
Duesseldorf, now in the Ruhr industrial area).
Comparisons of DNA sequences between Neandertals and present-day humans have shown that Neandertals share
more genetic variants with non-Africans than with Africans. This could be due to interbreeding between Neandertals
and modern humans when the two groups met subsequent to the emergence of modern humans outside Africa.
However, it could also be due to population structure that antedates the origin of Neandertal ancestors in Africa. We
measure the extent of linkage disequilibrium (LD) in the genomes of present-day Europeans and find that the last
gene flow from Neandertals (or their relatives) into Europeans likely occurred 37,000–86,000 years before the
present (BP), and most likely 47,000–65,000 years ago. This supports the recent interbreeding hypothesis and

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

suggests that interbreeding may have occurred when modern humans carrying Upper Paleolithic technologies
encountered Neandertals as they expanded out of Africa.
Neolithization Processes in the Levant. The Outer Envelope
A. Nigel Goring-Morris and Anna Belfer-Cohen
The Near East is one of those unique places where the transition(s) from hunter-gatherers to farmers occurred
locally, so it is possible to observe the whole sequence of these processes within the region as a whole. We discuss
the archaeological evidence pertaining to those transformations within the Levant, presenting the particularistic local
changes in settlement patterns and the character of the different communities juxtaposed with the landscapes and
environmental background. The asynchronous developments clearly reflect the mosaic nature of the Levant in terms
of specific local environmental conditions that influenced the scope and pace of Neolithization processes.
The Levant is a distinct and limited area of the Near East characterized by its unique geographic location and the
presence of a mosaic of different phytogeographic zones. There are few if any regions in the world where
precipitation and vegetation zones vary so markedly over such small distances (Goring-Morris, Hovers, and BelferCohen 2009 and references therein). It was against this unusual backdrop that the momentous changes from small
groups of mobile foragers to large settled agricultural communities first occurred. These conditions need to be taken
into account when considering Neolithization processes as a whole. Thus, in order to present as coherent a picture as
possible, we here discuss and expand on the external issues pertinent to such developments. Belfer- Cohen and
Goring-Morris (2011) explore the internal facets of these phenomena.
The region is also one in which relatively intensive field and laboratory research has been conducted, albeit still with
significant ―blank areas.‖ It is fascinating to observe the changes in the scientific approaches to Neolithization.
These comprise early simplistic paradigms tracing the inevitable unidirectional ―progress‖ (in a Marxist sense) from
hunting-gathering to agricultural practices by means of a specific trigger such as climate change (e.g., Childe 1934).
At the other end of the spectrum are complex multifactor approaches embracing demographic and social dynamics
as well as quantitative and simulation studies …

Who would be rash enough to prophesy aught
of a race whose entire past is a riddle, whose
literature is a question-mark?
Ð Gustav Karpeles

The Levant is a small region enclosed between the Taurus and Zagros mountains to the north, the Mediterranean
coastline to the west, the Sinai Peninsula to the south, and the Syro-Arabian desert to the east, ca. 1,000 km north to
south by up to 400 km east to west (fig. 1). The topography of the Levant is characterized by a north-south
longitudinal series of alternating elevated and low-lying regions: the coastal plain and western piedmont; the central
hill range reaching up to 2,000 m a.s.l.; the Dead Sea Rift lying below sea level; and the Trans-Jordanian/Syrian
plateau (the central-south Levant), which rises steeply to elevations between 800 and 2,000 m a.s.l., followed by a
gradual descent eastward into Saudi Arabia. Today there are relatively few perennial rivers or streams in the region,
the most notable being the Tigris and the Euphrates in the north and the Orontes and the Jordan farther south along
the rift valley. Almost all other drainages are seasonal and ephemeral. Changes in evapotranspiration rates were
major factors in the presence and extent of Late Quaternary inland water bodies. Springs are common in the
Mediterranean zone but are widely dispersed in more arid areas. Obviously, the specifics would have changed at
various times, depending on the particular climatic conditions. It is important to stress that within the Levant, as
indeed elsewhere, global climatic changes would have differentially affected environments at the micro- and
macroregional levels. This is especially valid in comparisons between the southern and northern Levant. For
example, Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene geomorphological changes appear to have acted differently in the
north and the south, with more extensive aggradation in the north that may have caused the burial of sites there (e.g.,
O¨ zdog˘an 1997).
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

In this article, we use the term ―southern Levant‖ to differentiate between the area south of an east-west line from
the coast across to the Damascus Basin, as opposed to the ―northern Levant,‖ stretching from that line north to the
Taurus and the western end of the Zagros Mountains, including the Middle Euphrates and the Upper Tigris region
(sometimes called the ―Golden Triangle‖). Physical and cultural interactions are documented between the south and
the north during the relevant periods; developments were not always synchronous, and centers of innovation appear
to have shifted from the south to the north (but see Watkins 2008, concerning the so-called primacy of the southern
Levant).
Whereas in the past this geographic shift of the hub of Neolithization appeared to reflect more the history of
research, it is less so the case today, notwithstanding ongoing lacunae in field investigations in certain areas.
In order to begin to comprehend developments in human adaptations, it is vital to know the physical circumstances
of the landscapes that populations occupied. This is especially applicable for areas such as the Levant, which
comprises a particularistic mosaic in terms of environment and ecology.

-

New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate'
Paul Graves
The implicit association between Neanderthal extinction and questions of race and racism underlies the acrimony
which has often attended the Neanderthal debate. I argue that this situation has been compounded by the persistent
tendency to relate inter- action between Neanderthals and anatomically "modern" hu- mans to a simplistic metaphor
of European colonialism. The changing nature of available evidence leads me to a critical anal- ysis of the analogies
drawn from the colonial metaphor and a search for new models and metaphors through which the debate can be
reformulated. Towards this end, I examine the nature of the species concept and suggest that hominid conspecific
recognition is a complex process involving close articulation between biological and sociocultural components. The
extent of "assimilation" between European Neanderthals and anatomically "mod- ern" humans should be assessed in
terms of biological potential for hybridisation and sociocultural/psychological potentials for mutual recognition.
the nature of race and racism. The imminent 500th anniversary of Columbus's "discovery" of America represents an
archetypal confronta- tion between cultural and "racial" identities. It was not until some years after 1492 that a papal
edict recognised the indigenous inhabitants of the Americas as human, thereby relieving those conquistadors in
jeopardy of the crime of bestiality (Lorenzo 1978). That such questions possessed the minds of Renaissance
Europeans might simply be dismissed as an early example of the imperial- ist thinking which has haunted discussion
of race and ethnicity. If, however, we project ourselves back 50,000 years and consider our possible reactions to an
encoun- ter with a "classic" European Neanderthal, the question of recognition-of identity-comes into sharper relief.
By what criteria do we adjudge ourselves and others to be human? What degree of identity between us is suffi- cient
to constitute our mutual recognition of this state? As a metaphor for the issues of race and racism, the Neanderthal
controversy returns us again and again to the related concepts of identity and equality. Were Ne- anderthals the
intellectual equals of their Cro-Magnon counterparts? What does the Neanderthal debate tell us about our own
identity as humans? There is a crucial semantic distinction to be made between "identity" as group or personal selfdefinition and "identity" in the logical sense that two objects may be "identical."

New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
In common with many cold/temperate mammal spe- cies, Neanderthals seem to have developed a body form
consistent with the minimisation of body surface area and therefore heat loss. Apart from being generally more
robust than "modern" humans, Neanderthals seem to have had a shorter, stockier build and much shorter limbs
(Trinkaus 1983a, 1986). (Here we must bear in mind that post-cranial skeletons of early H. sapiens are rare and
therefore comparison can be made only with later Middle and Upper Palaeolithic populations.) Neanderthal crania

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

are distinctive for their large noses and nasal sinuses, which may be interpreted as an adaptation for warming inhaled
air and retaining moisture from ex- haled air (Trinkaus 1986). Further, one might imagine that these mechanisms
would have been supplemented by differences in thermoregulation systems associated with non-shivering
thermogenesis and the deposition of brown adipose tissue (brown fat). This, in turn, would imply differences in
mitochondrial function which could have had an impact upon reproductive function. Generally, it is clear that,
whatever the behavioural adaptations of Neanderthals, they were not sufficient to obviate some physiological
adaptation to local conditions (Trinkaus 1983a).
As Zubrow (1989) has suggested, a demographic model of Neanderthal extinction seems most probable. But such a
model must take account of hybridisation. Ana- tomical evidence suggests that at least some amalgam- ation did
occur. Various early "moderns" from eastern Europe, such as Dolni Vestonice 3, Piredmosti 3, and Brno 3, do show
signs of hybridisation (Stringer 1989). Thus "while an ancestry for the Early Upper Palaeolithic population from
outside Europe appears very likely ... these anomalies could indeed indicate that some gene flow from Neanderthals
did occur in eastern Europe" (Stringer 1989:241). However, "even if there was some degree of hybridisation, one
must then consider whether those genes necessarily continued into modern Euro- pean populations.... Modern
Europeans certainly had ancestors, but that does not mean we must accept, without further proof, that the whole
Early Upper Palaeolithic sample represents those ancestors." When we consider the reproductive biology of Neanderthals and "modern" humans, it becomes clear why these genes would not have contributed to "modern"
populations. Females possessing Neanderthal character- istics would, on average, have reproduced at a slower rate
than neotenous "modern" females producing neo- tenous offspring. Given that this was a biological charac- teristic,
it would have applied irrespective of the socio- cultural conditions under which Neanderthal females were living.
The combined effect of social and biological factors serves to explain the evidence of Neanderthal extinc- tion. The
apparent absence of Neanderthal mitochon- drial DNA lineages in "modern" populations (Cann, Stoneking, and
Wilson 1987, Stoneking and Cann 1989), although itself by no means certain (Wolpoff 1989), can be seen as a result
of asymmetries in hybridisation.8 Moreover, the fundamental differences between Nean- derthal and "modern"
human social structure explain why the two populations coexisted for such a long period without amalgamation. In
my view, this pattern could have only have pre- vailed in a situation in which neither population was dominant but
fundamental differences in social and bio- logical structure maintained segregation. No argument for allopatry is
supported by the archaeological evidence; it simply does not seem plausible, especially given the evidence of
acculturation and hybridisation, that two adaptively distinct "species" were occupying the same geographical region
for upwards of 10,000 years.
In the spirit of critical analysis, I have here described what I see as the underlying metaphors which have in- formed
approaches to population interaction. Because I do not, however, consider critical analysis an end in it- self, I have
sought to present an analysis of the Neander- thal debate which brings what I hope is a new perspec- tive to the
problem.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
Yet, fundamentally, most participants in the Ne- anderthal debate cannot resist a simplistic metaphor of European
colonialism and the analogies which are drawn from it. Indeed, the whole concept of displacement without
admixture and the evolution of "an entirely new species" carries with it the implication of progressive trends which
we owe to 18th-century ideologies. Were not the Neanderthals equally an entirely new "species"? Except in the
discredited logic of Social Darwinism, there is no sense in which one species can be said to be higher or superior to
another; species are simply different. The question of extinction, in my view, returns us to equality and identity. I
have described the complex biological, behavioural, and social components which condition conspecific recognition
and have reviewed and analysed what we know of these components in Nean- derthals and "modern" humans.
Strong evidence of acculturation suggests a sociocultural level of recognition and that the two populations had
similar cognitive capacities.
Ironically, statements of human unity often seem to rest upon the denial of human differences. Yet from a biological
and social point of view the unity of humanity depends upon the capacity to recognise our moral equality in spite of
differences of colour, gender, and culture. The unity of the hu- man species is inclusive, not exclusive, and it is this,
I think, that the extinction of the Neanderthals has to tell us.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
The Neanderthal problem can be stated quite succinctly: Did the Neanderthals contribute to the gene pool of modern
Europeans, and if so, what evolutionary and behavioural mechanisms were involved? Consider- ation of modern
human analogues certainly may provide some useful insights but in this polemical fashion is unlikely to provide any
new answers. As with most evolutionary problems, it is not lack of alternative per- spectives or questions that is at
issue but lack of testable answers, and regrettably Graves's paper does little to place the problem on a more secure
empirical footing. Laudable as much of his discussion is, he is trapped in his own argument. As he points out, the
question is whether Neanderthals and modern humans are separate species, but the only way to answer that question
is with evidence for the continuity of Neanderthal genes in later human populations. Similarity of subsistence,
technol- ogy, or anything else does not provide such evidence. Rather, similarity of adaptations without
interbreeding is a problem that calls for explanation. Graves's ap- proach, which is to integrate essentially
phylogenetic issues with behavioural and cultural ones, can only serve to confuse the issue. In effect he is using the
ar- chaeological and ecological information to rule out sepa- rate species on principle and then using the same evidence to outline the nature of the probable interactions between them as separate subspecies. In the end this must be
tautological. Aside from its polemic and this methodological draw- back, this is a useful contribution for its attempt
to out- line the mechanisms by which two populations may in- teract and affect their subsequent evolutionary
history. …that the fate of the Neanderthals was determined by the ways in which each population had adapted prior
to contact, for these would have determined its response to the other's presence.
Francis B. HARROLD

New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
As Graves indicates, the possibility remains that hybridisation occurred, but this was not necessarily significant for
later generations. Re- cent cases cited of contact and "significant" hybridisa- tion might look very different when
viewed from the perspective of several millennia in the future. Finally, with regard to whether multiregional or "out
of Africa" models are more or less "racist," I agree with Graves's critical analysis. However, it has to be said that the
multiregional model implies a much greater poten- tial for significant biological and behavioural differences to have
evolved between different modern regional pop- ulations, however much its advocates try to distance themselves
from the views of Coon (1962). Anne ZELLER
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
A third possible extension of the metaphor is to see the transformation as a voyage down the river, briefly landing
first on one bank and then on the other-the banks representing populations with different mixtures of technology,
anatomy, and social organization but both providing resources for the slowly emerging ances- tral humans. The final
condition on landing from this voyage would then be influenced by technology, environment, biology, social
relations, and culture which melded ideas and innovations of value from both banks of the river into a successful
pattern for modern humans. This voyage approach would fit more adequately with Graves's position that
Neanderthals and early moderns coexisted for at least 20,000 years without one group's replacing the other. The
final replacement came at a time of climatic change and technological development which had ramifications for
both. The idea of different but equal cultures exploiting the Wiirmian environment seems very reasonable.
The early modern humans who moved into the Levant between 80,000 and 80,000 years ago were undoubtedly few.
Many generations would have been required to es- tablish a population base which could expand to West- ern
Europe without depopulating already inhabited ar- eas. The numbers of individuals and groups who would have
been under enough resource pressure to spill over into already occupied Western Europe would have been small
indeed, and the level of contact with existing pop- ulations may have been low. Yet in Eastern Europe, there is some
skeletal evidence of Neanderthal features in more advanced forms which tends to contradict the DNA evidence. As
Graves sug- gests, an infusion of Neanderthal males into the popula- tion could account for this. Another possibility
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

is that although admixture occurred, these "hybrid" individu- als were not as successful at surviving and reproducing
and were eventually screened out of the population, leaving little genetic trace. This might particularly be true if
Cro-Magnon females bearing later-maturing half- Neanderthal infants showed increased levels of mor- tality.
Graves's argument that the relations between Nean- derthals and archaic moderns may be more accurately
understood as involving nonidentical equals reflects a current trend toward "equal rights" for visibly different
individuals, whether they be black, white, women, chil- dren, older people, physically or mentally handicapped, or
even members of different species (animal rights ac- tivism). This trend has been gaining momentum over the last
few decades as the political and economic power base has been spreading from its colonialist white male
antecedents to a broader spectrum of humanity. Graves's use of this modern paradigm has the potential for providing
new insight into human history.

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.

The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens
J. E. WECKLER University of Southern California
The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human
evolution as a whole. Dur-ing the past generation this problem has been discussed in numerous papers and sections
of monographs. None of the discussions known to me, however, has taken systematic account of certain major
geographic features of the Old World nor of what we know about Pleistocene climatic fluctuations, both of which
must have been important factors in the spread and differentiation of early hominids. Neither has the current state of
knowledge about Lower Paleolithic cultures been fully integrated into any of the competing theories of NeanderthalHomo sapiens relationships. It is the purpose of this paper to suggest that a consideration of all these factors
supports the hypothesis that Homo sapiens and Neanderthal, after a presumed common origin, evolved independently in almost complete geographic isolation from one another for a long time prior to the third interglacial,
and that the "progressive" Neander-thals of that time were hybrids between these two forms of man.
Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens
J. E. Weckler
In any case there are no known examples of Neanderthaloid forms in Africa prior to the third interglacial. Even the
Upper Pleistocene African finds that have sometimes been called Neanderthaloid have often been thought not to
have such affiliations. (The few finds that might seem to chal-lenge this statement will be discussed later.) These
facts suggest that Africa may have been the birthplace of the hominids, but more important to this paper, that it was
the homeland throughout Lower and Middle Pleistocene times specifically (although not necessarily exclusively) of
developing Homo sapiens, but not of Neanderthal man. Asia east and north of India, on the other hand, has produced
no hominid fossils of sapiens type prior to the fourth glaciation.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

These facts suggest the possibility that Neanderthal may have evolved his distinctive physical characteristics somewhere in Asia east and/or north of India. Another fact that seems to support this view is that the third interglacial
"progressive" Neanderthals have been found only in eastern Europe, Palestine, and central Asia (Howell 1951). The
simplest way to account for this fact, it seems to me, is to regard them as hy-brids bred in the zone of contact
between an easterly centered Neanderthal population and a Homo sapiens population oriented to the west and south
of the zone of contact. The separation of the two forms of man for hundreds of millennia during Lower and Middle
Pleistocene times can be accounted for on geographical and
These same factors may also afford some explanation of the divergent paths of evolution taken by the two forms and
for important differences between their cultural accomplishments as well. The geographic factor to which I allude is
the impressive natural barrier separating Africa from the heart of Asia (see Map I). It is almost continuous from the
Bosporus to central China between the 30th and 40th parallels north and consists of either large bodies of water or
high mountains: the Black Sea, Caucasus Moun-tains, Caspian Sea, the highlands of Turkey, Iran, and Afghanistan
and the great mountain and plateau area of Tibet, Mongolia, and western China. Although man with a primitive
culture would have found the highlands too chilly at night to encourage penetration and the seas too big to navigate,
this barrier was not absolutely impenetrable to primitive man. In fact there must have been some movements in
Lower Paleolithic times around its eastern end and perhaps through the passes in the northwest India-Afghanistan
area. There may have been sporadic penetrations at other comparatively low points, along the shores of the various
seas and so on. But the barrier was sufficiently impervious to penetration by men with simple cultures that it
maintained developing Neanderthal north and east of it in essential breeding isolation from developing Homo
sapiens to the south and west. The sheer distance from Europe to eastern Asia along the north face of this barrier
was adequate to maintain the isolation of the two forms on that front until late Pleistocene times, especially since
there were never such compelling reasons for east-west movements as there were for north-south movements
between Europe and Africa. (Movius states [1953:181] that northcentral Asia apparently was not occupied by man
until Upper Pleistocene times.) Europe, the Middle East, and India were part of the greater Africa range throughout
the Pleistocene.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens
J. E. Weckler
These considerations lead to the conclusion that the early hominids were predisposed to limit their ranges to warm,
well-watered areas similar to the habitat in which they had originated, where game and plant foods were plenti-ful
and where protection from the elements offered no serious problems. It is in this connection that the climatic
fluctuations of the Pleistocene were par-ticularly important as causal factors in the evolution of man. These fluctuations led to vast shifts in the territory acceptable to primitive man (when he had a choice) at various times during the
Paleolithic in the Old World.
At these times parts of south Africa may have been too dry and Europe was too cold to be hospitable to primitive
hominids. With the waning of a glacial period, however, north Africa and the Middle East slowly became
desiccated, because the rain-bearing westerlies shifted northward over Europe (Brooks 1949:277; Zeuner 1952:247).
Occasionally a population in such a cul de sac may have invented cultural devices that enabled them to survive. The
archeological record shows that some migrants found ways to traverse the Mediterranean without basic cultural
changes, either by crossing land bridges (Leakey 1936:24, 184) or by navigating the narrow water passages at either
end of the Sea. This feat was clearly accomplished at least once in Lower Paleolithic times, for there can be no doubt
of the kinship of cultures featuring biface cores and Levallois flakes throughout the Europe-Africa-India range
(Movius 1944:103-4). Leakey has discussed the close similarity of African and European Lower Paleolithic cultures
and culture sequences but at first (1931:234) concluded that an initial spread over both continents of a common
stage of crude Chellean or even pre-Chellean pebble culture was probably followed by parallel independent
development into the Acheulean in each area. Later, however, he came around to the view adopted here, saying
(1936:183):
Zeuner (1952:292) observes that: "The hand-axe culture is, on the whole, con-fined to the mild phases of the
Pleistocene." He agrees (p. 284) that Europe was abandoned by man during the second glaciation because of cultural
in-adequacy to cope with the frigid conditions, but he believes the continent was occupied during the first and third
glaciations as well as during the fourth. It seems a fair assumption, however, that massive movements out of Europe
into Africa occurred at the onset of each glaciation, even if some people did remain behind. Movius has pointed out
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

(1953:163 ff.) that, the more we learn about the Lower Paleolithic tool assemblages of the Europe-Africa-India
range, the more difficult it becomes to interpret them as orderly sequences or culture areas. My theory of repeated
large-scale drifts of early man in response to climatic fluctuations may explain why this is so.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens
J. E. Weckler
With Homo sapiens evolved to a stage not far removed from his modern form and differentiated into mixed races by
the end of Middle Pleistocene times (as Coon suggested [1939:50]) in the range south and west of the barrier, we
may now turn our attention to Neanderthal's career. It probably started when his ancestors left India. One part or
another of India was probably always climatically hospitable to primitive man, and the subcontinent was undoubtedly occupied at an early date. Hominids may even have originated there.
This fact may cast doubt on the interpretation of Neanderthal physi-cal characteristics as adaptations to a frigid
climate. If a population was trapped in inner Asia it found itself in an area which, according to Brooks (1949:264),
was very cold during glaciations and where piedmont glaciation occurred. I suggest it may have been the necessity
to cope with such conditions that first drove man to take shelter in caves, learn to control fire, perhaps to adopt
clothing and develop specialized hunting tech-niques and tools. Some such course of events as this, plus subsequent
diffusion of this knowledge within the "Neanderthaloid culture area," would explain why so lowly a hominid as
Sinanthropus was living in caves and using fire at least a hundred thousand years or more before there is evidence
for such cul-tural accomplishments in Europe.
The Homo sapiens groups that retreated south from Europe and perhaps from central Asia had been touched by
Neanderthal magic. They may have acquired some Neanderthal physical traits, but, more important, they had
achieved a new cultural outlook. They had perhaps learned the use of fire, clothing, and specialized hunting
techniques, and possibly of cave dwelling-accomplishments that freed man from dependence on a mild climate and
from a grubbing existence. It is even conceivable that the sentence beginning this paragraph is literally true. So far
as I know, the earliest recorded human burials were those made by Neanderthal during the European Mousterian.
The Mt. Carmel Neanderthals probably practiced burial, too (Keith and Mc- Cown 1937:42). On this slender thread
one might hang the conjecture that it was Neanderthal who first conceived the idea of life after death and of supernatural powers to be dealt with by magic and religion. Then the magically oriented art complex of the Upper
Paleolithic, the origin of which is otherwise unexplained, could be the result of enrichment by Homo sapiens of
these basic ritual ideas obtained from Neanderthal. Leakey's discussion of the beginnings of art in southern Rhodesia
(1936:161) is consistent with this suggestion, for simultaneous with that beginning is a sudden improvement in
stone-chipping techniques, and the date is probably about the time Homo sapiens would have returned to Africa
after stimulation by Neanderthal. But this notion may seem far-fetched, and it is not important to the thesis here
advanced. The essential idea I am suggesting is that the contact of Homo sapiens groups with "Neanderthal culture"
in Asia and in Europe during the third interglacial resulted in an efflorescence of "Homo sapiens cultures" that gave
rise to the Upper Paleolithic.
Neander-thals in Africa by late third interglacial times would not be inconsistent with the hypothesis, either. Some
of them may have pushed into Africa at that time via the Middle East or even from Europe. The Heidelberg jaw
could be very embarrassing to the present thesis if its Neanderthal affinities were to be confirmed. Keith's original
emphasis on tau-rodontism as a Neanderthal peculiarity led a generation of physical anthro-pologists to accept such
affinities without much question. … Thus the way seems open to regard Heidelberg as an affiliate of the Homo
sapiens line rather than of that of Ne-anderthal. The remains are doubtless too incomplete and too isolated in time
and space to permit deciding at this time whether he is in the direct line of sapiens evolution or represents an
offshoot that became extinct.
The Steinheim "progressive" Neanderthal remains would not upset my theory even if their alleged, and disputed,
third glacial date should prove to be correct. The form would then represent an advance guard of the third interglacial hybrid movement into Europe. It would also lend support to the possi-bility, discussed above, that Homo
sapiens and Neanderthal were hybridizing in northwest India or central Asia prior to the third interglacial. Of the
African finds that might seem to cast doubt on the present thesis, Rhodesian man is certainly the most celebrated,
although perhaps not the most significant. He has been as widely and casually referred to the Neander-thaloid group
as was Heidelberg. But both early and recent opinion often veers away from this viewpoint. Le Gros Clark (1945:4),
discussing the loose use to which the terms "Neanderthalian" and "Neanderthaloid" have been put in describing
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Rhodesian man and other fossil forms, says: " . . . it is important to recognize that the collection includes a number
of variants some of which may well bear an ancestral relationship to modern man, while others repre-sent local
specializations." Wells (1951:198), citing Keith (1925), Pycraft (1928), and Elliot Smith (1928), points out that they:
" . . . all agreed in con-sidering the Broken Hill skull to be at once more primitive than the Neander-thal type and
nearer to a generalized type of modern man such as the aborigi-nal Australians . . . He might therefore be considered
as nearly related to modern types of man as to Neanderthal man."
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens
J. E. Weckler
… For with Neanderthals undoubtedly present in mixed form in Palestine in third interglacial times, and with the
return to Africa from Europe in early Wiirm times of Homo sapiens groups admixed with Neanderthal, it is entirely
possible that Rhodesia or other localities in Africa might yield Upper Pleistocene fossils with discernible
Neanderthaloid qualities. Africanthropus njarasensis from Tanganyika Territory is another alleged
"Neantherthaloid" African find that Weinert would ascribe to the Pithecan-thropus-Sinanthropus group. Its age is
apparently Upper Pleistocene. The one skull that has been "restored" consisted, according to Hooton (1946:347), of
nearly two hundred small water-worn fragments, many of which are split, and most of which do not make contact
with each other.
In summary then, there appear to be no skeletal finds in Europe or Africa that contradict the hypothesis advanced
here that Homo sapiens had a long evolutionary career in that range before Neanderthal arrived there. Man was there
early, and the evidence grows that all the early forms had affinities specifically with Homo sapiens and not with
Neanderthal. Therefore, Neander-thal must have evolved elsewhere. Eastern Asia is the paramount choice for that
locus since all the early finds there are of that general type.

Behavioral differences between middle and upper paleolithic
homo sapiens in the east Mediterranean Levant.

The Roles of Intraspecific Competition and Dispersal from Africa
John J. Shea Anthropology Department, Stony Brook University
There is nothing "bad" or "wrong" with comparing the behavior of European MP Neandertals to UP humans;
however, we have to be clear about the questions to which that evidence is relevant. Comparisons of the Neandertal
and Homo sapiens archaeological record in Europe inform us about an important dispersal event in human
evolution. Archaeologists and physical anthropologists still hotly debate evidence for possible cultural contacts and
interbreeding between Neandertals and expanding Homo sapiens populations (Brauer 2006; Conard 2006a; Mellars
2005; see papers in Conard 2006b; Trinkaus 2007; Zilhao 2006), but there is no longer thought to have been a
universal "Neandertal Phase of Man." To learn about evolutionarily significant behavioral change in our species, we
have to compare the MP and UP records of Homo sapiens. Inasmuch as there is no MP record for Homo sapiens in
Europe, such investigations have to focus on Southwest Asia and Africa, where there is such an archaeological
record. The continuing prominence of Neandertal paleontology and European Paleolithic archaeology in human
origins research is an epistemological "founder effect." It reflects the origins of paleoanthropology in European
universities and museums.
The East Mediterranean Levant comprises the states of Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian Authority, as
well as the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt and parts of southern Turkey. Pleistocene human settlement in the Levant
focused on a narrow strip of oak-terebinth-pine woodland on the Mediterranean Coast and the flanks of the Jordan
Rift Valley (Bar-Yosef 1994, 2000). This part of the Levant has the most stable sources of water and the most
persistent coverage by woodland vegetation (Zohary 1973). From the standpoint of preagricultural subsistence
potential, the Mediterranean woodlands of the Levant are among the richest habitats in western Eurasia (Blondel and
Aronson 1999; Hovers 2001). These woodlands are superposed on cave-rich karstic landforms, a circumstance that
results in a rich Paleolithic archaeological record. The two most relevant archaeological periods for investigating

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

changes in Homo sapiens behavior in the Levant are the Middle Middle Paleolithic (MMP) and the Early Upper
Paleolithic (EUP).
The problem with continuity arguments is that they are, in principle, impossible to falsify. Disjunctions in the fossil
or archaeological record can be dismissed by asserting that gene flow among the hominin populations in question
did not leave a clear morphological or archaeological correlate. For paleoanthropology to remain a positivist
scientific enterprise, we have to formulate falsifiable alternatives to continuity arguments. If such a "discontinuity
hypothesis" adequately explains the evidence from the Levant, where Neandertal and Homo sapiens geographic
ranges either overlapped or abutted one another for tens of thousands of years, this finding challenges inferences of
continuity in Europe, where periods of inferred Neandertal-Homo sapiens sympatry are considerably briefer
(Mellars 2006c; Zilhao 2006). The gap in the Homo sapiens fossil record during the LMP, ca. 75-45 kya, is a serious
problem for continuity scenarios for the MP-UP transition in the Levant. LMP contexts preserve a rich series of
hominin fossils, all of which are
If Homo sapiens populations were living in the Levant during the LMP there ought to be some fossil evidence for
their presence. More to the point, proponents of evolutionary scenarios that assume Homo sapiens populations were
present in the LMP Levant need to produce a credible explanation for why these humans became archaeologically
and paleontologically "invisible" between 75 and 45 kya. Hovers (2006) contends that small populations of Homo
sapiens persisted during the LMP in sufficient numbers for there to have been continuity between them, Levantine
Neandertals, and, ultimately, EUP humans.
The amelioration of climatic conditions after the H5 event would have presented African Homo sapiens living in
Mediterranean North Africa, the Lower Nile Valley, and the Red Sea coast with a "window of opportunity" to
disperse into the Levant. If Neandertals remained in the Levant after the H5 event, they would have faced precisely
the same opportunity and incentives to reoccupy the south and interior regions. This period might have witnessed an
evolutionary race (a "scramble competition") between these two hominin species to disperse more rapidly and
effectively into arid zones. European Neandertals' track record for dispersal into dry, cold regions is not a strong
one. Dry, cold conditions are frequently correlated with abandonment of human occupation during the European MP
(Van Andel et al. 2003).

Behavioral differences in Levantine Hominins
Neandertals and Homo sapiens were evolutionarily distinct entities. The preponderance of morphological and
genetic evidence seems to support this hypothesis. The term "hominins" refers collectively to humans, Neandertals,
and other non-sapiens populations. I do not use the terms "modem humans," "behaviorally modem," or "behavioral
modernity" because I believe they are so imprecisely defined and loaded with implicit assumptions about
evolutionary continuity that they no longer retain descriptive or analytical value.

Why not the Neandertals?
Wolpoff et al.
Some workers have suggested that a hypothetical genetic mutation in an African population less than 100,000 years
ago led to a cascade of neurological changes in the human brain that culminated in the appearance of modern
language. Language then triggered the socioeconomic and cognitive changes we associate with behavioral
modernity and Africans, armed with behavioral modernity, then spread out from that continent, out-competing,
displacing, extirpating, outbreeding or, most generally, replacing the Neandertals and other archaic humans
throughout the middle latitudes of the Old World. The Neandertals of Europe are the best-known, best-represented
and longest studied test case for this theory. In this paper we present evidence from skeletal anatomy, mitochondrial
DNA, morphology and genetics of speech and the archaeology of the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition in Europe
that directly contradicts all of the elements in this replacement scenario. The processes leading to modernity
involved the entire human species, and were based on the ethnogenic principle of communication and reticulation
among populations. Keywords Modern human origins; Neandertals; language; cognitive evolution. Introduction His
large head, with the thick frontal bones, must have been very good for butting a brother Neandertal, but it was no
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

use against the stone wall of advancing civilization, and like the Tasmanian and Bushman, the Red Indian and
Australian of nowadays, he fades out of the picture and his place is taken by a cleverer people. (Quennell and
Quennell 1945: 66-7)
… Richard Klein (2003) recently published such a commentary, called 'Whither the Neanderthals?' It is a wellorganized, up to date, logical presentation of the replacement position, and we believe it can act as an effective
baseline for our own discussion of this position, and more generally of the place of Neandertals in human evolution.
Reading it, we feel compelled to ask the question in his title slightly differently with: 'Why not the Neandertals?'
Klein believes that 'the longest continuous debate in paleoanthropology is nearing resolution', and we agree.
However his assertion that 'modern humans replaced the Neandertals with little or no gene exchange' is the easy
solution to a complex issue and is counter to the emerging evidence. As we outline here, there are ample, compelling
reasons to propose a different resolution.
Do modern Europeans have a single unique African ancestry, or are European Neandertals among their ancestors?
We show here that the hypothesis that Neandertals are a significant part of the ancestry of Europeans is well
supported, and we explain why we believe it has not been disproved. To be clear, 'significant' in this context means
that Neandertal are among the ancestors of later Europeans, not that Neandertals are the unique or only ancestors of
later Europeans. 'Among' and 'significant' do not mean a single Neandertal ancestor mixed with many others, or, as
one author put it (Pearson 2000: 589), 'enough gene flow to be considered a flood' but rather that Neandertals
provided enough of a genetic contribution for their traits to be readily identifiable in later Europeans, and some even
found in Europeans today. Of course Neandertals are biologically and culturally extinct, just as all human
populations removed from us by 1500 or more generations are extinct today, but extinct in an ethnogenic sense
(Moore 1994) and not extinct without issue (Brace 1962). If any hypothesis has been disproved, it is the argument
that Neandertals had little or nothing to do with subsequent European evolution. We review below the evidence for
Neandertal replacement as it is reflected in recent publications.
Why not the Neandertals?
Why Neandertals are not European ancestors Skeletal anatomy The debate about a Neandertal ancestry for later
Europeans has recently been informed by issues raised in a description of an earlier African, from the Ethiopian site
of Herto (see Plate 1). White et al. assert that 'many morphological features shared by the Herto crania with AMHS
[anatomically modern Homo sapiens], to the exclusion of the penecontem-poraneous Neandertals, provide
additional fossil data excluding Neandertals from a significant contribution to the ancestry of modern humans'
(2003: 745). But this argument, amounting to the oft-repeated claim that the modern type coexisted with
Neandertals, can make sense only from a typological perspective. An evolutionary perspective recognizes that
polytypic species may evolve over time, so that the test of a Neandertal ancestry for later Europeans is the pattern of
ancestor-descendant relations within Europe. African populations 100,000 years removed from the latest
Neandertals could be ancestral to Neandertals, Upper Paleolithic Europeans, both or neither, but they cannot inform
the issue of whether the Neandertals are among the ancestors of the Later Europeans. If morphology is the marker
for determining ancestry of 'anatomically modern' European Homo sapiens, these and other researchers continue to
look at the wrong end of the time perspective and in the wrong geographic region. Stringer et al. recognized this in
assembling a long list of traits in their 'identification of derived characters that are actually unique only to the
Neandertals (autapomorphies)... provide[ing] important evidence for excluding them from the ancestry of modern
humans' (1984: 54). They list nineteen characters (1984: 55) for the cranial and postcranial skeleton and similar lists
of such evidence are reiterated in Stringer and Gamble (1993: 76-7), Conroy (1997: 421), Klein (1999: 272-82) and
numerous other scientific and popular sources essentially repeating these. … Many are not even what Stringer et al.
call 'common' in Neandertals, if common means reaching frequencies above 50 per cent of the known specimens.
This observation is fully compatible with the evidence that the Neandertal habitation of Europe was not a period of
reduced gene flow and that Neandertal features did not become more common, or accrete over time there because of
genetic isolation' (Hawks and Wolpoff 2001a). Neandertal features are not uniformly spread across the Neandertal
range, with sharp boundaries with other contemporary populations. Instead, they vary clinally, reducing in frequency
to the south east and east. In the Levant, it has been seriously questioned whether the specimens should be called
'Neandertal' at all because they share few diagnostic features with the Europeans (Arensburg and Belfer-Cohen
1998; Wolpoff 1999).
We are aware of the Briuer and Broeg (1998) paper, cited by Klein (2003) in support of his argument, which
contests some of these observations. These authors dispute the evidence for regional continuity between Neandertals
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

and subsequent Upper Paleolithic populations in Central Europe. However, the definition of regional continuity they
employed is incorrect. They equate regional continuity with gradualism, and wrote 'during the long period of
coexistence, mixing and gene flow between Neandertals and the dispersing modern populations might have occurred
to varying degrees in different regions.. .such gene flow could have mimicked some degree of continuity' (1998:
106). This does not support Klein's argument because the process they describe is actually multi-regional evolution,
which is not 'mimicked' by gene flow but is based on it (Wolfpoff and Caspari 1997; Wolpoff et al. 2000). In other
words, this kind of reticulating process would demonstrate a Neandertal ancestry for later Europeans, and therefore
could not disprove it as Briuer and Broeg believed. It seems as though the only evidence they would accept as
showing continuity would be a demonstration that the post-Neandertal populations of the region were actually
Neandertal populations But of course they were not, although the earliest post-Neandertal Europeans retain the
highest frequencies of Neandertal features (Duarte et al. 1999; Frayer et al. 2005; Wolpoff et al. 2005) We recognize
it is not reasonable to calculate frequencies for the very small samples of the earliest known post-Neandertal
Europeans, but we find it significant that numerous features common or ubiquitous in Neandertals are even
preserved in this small sample. For instance, Largo Velho shows enough mixture of features for some to describe it
as a hybrid (
Where are these Neandertal features today?
The answer is that some have disappeared while others remain in Europe, and some of these are commonly used in
forensic applications for determining ancestral affinities (Frayer 1992, 1997; Gill and Rhine 1990; Lampl et al.
1991; Szilvaissy et al. 1987). Most never consider these later traits as evidence of a Neandertal heritage, but they
appear in European Neandertals at higher frequencies than other groups contemporary with them and parsimony
explains them as Neandertal features.
While we would never consider them to be 'autapomorphic' for Europeans, they are indisputably more common in
fossil and contemporary Europeans than other groups, thereby linking these populations through time and making it
very unlikely that the source populations of recent and modern Europeans are uniquely from Africa. Klein (2003)
does accept the evidence for the mixture of Middle and Upper Paleolithic artifact types, and observes that 'if Upper
Paleolithic technology allowed more effective use of natural resources and larger human populations, it is puzzling
that Neanderthals failed to adopt it more widely. If they had done so, then their unique skeletal traits and genes
would be more obvious in succeeding populations.'
These authors also point to the possibility that Neandertal sequences have been degraded, most notable in the
comparison between the most ancient Neandertal sequence, which is most divergent from humans, and the most
recent (Mezmaiskaya), which is closest to humans (Caldararo and Gabow 2000, Gutierrez et al., 2002). This
contradicts a separate lineage interpretation which requires that the divergence increases with time and is strongest
in the most recent specimens. This discrepancy might also be explained by the possibility that Mezmaiskaya is not a
Neandertal (Hawks and Wolpoff 2001b), which would provide strong evidence of the survival of their mtDNA into
later humans. But these considerations may well be irrelevant, because all fail to consider that a very likely
explanation for the level of diversity of this single genetic locus (Spuhler 1988) is selection (Elson et al. 2004;
Gillespie 2001).
Why not the Neandertals? If modern humans replaced the Neandertals in Europe without mixture, what advantage
might have allowed this? Over and over again the answer to this has been human language.
… As is true of people today, among Neandertals, culture is not related to biology. Conclusions After more than 150
years of Europeans' 'second' encounter with Neandertals, is there any reason to exclude them from the ancestry of
Europeans? We believe the answer is only if we exclude a lot of other ancestors too. Rather than the continual
drumbeat of Neandertals as the 'other' and the constant exclusion of evidence and rejection of interpretations that
suggest otherwise, it is time to recognize them as ancestors and begin the analyses that will help us to account for
the evolutionary changes that include them within the European family, not the oddball, celibate outsider. For us
Europeans, the Neandertal debate is nearing resolution and the conclusion is that they are one of us. Recognizing
this is a key step in the process of understanding how and why we became different.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

The "neanderthal man" and the ancestors of "homo sapiens"
Franz WEIDENREICH
Two years ago I published an article in this Journal dealing with the ob-vious incongruities of the morphological and
chronological sequences of the various evolutionary stages of Man as they appear on the basis of steadily increasing
discoveries of recent years.' At the very appearance of true hominids there must have already existed several
different branches, morphologically well distinguishable from one another, which all proceeded in the same general
direction with mankind of today as their goal. The variant geographical ap-pearance of the latter is obviously the
consequence of each special group hav-ing already passed through different characteristic intermediate fossil stages.
If we regard the existing geographical variations of modern mankind as sub-species or races of one main species, the
ancestral stages must have had the same taxonomic value, or in other words, evolutionary stages of Man must exhibit certain main features determining their general position within the phy-logenetic line and, in addition, certain
less substantial peculiarities defining the sub-group to which a given species belongs. I arrived at these conclusions
on the basis of a personal investigation of all fossil human material discovered so far, stretching over a considerable
num-ber of years and including not only casts but also the originals. Numerous im-portant finds, in particular those
that would prove of special interest to the question under discussion, still await description and publication, and thus
the data on which my statements were based are not as yet generally available. In writing the article quoted above, I
realized the weakness of my position by offering a summary instead of presenting facts which could be checked by
any worker interested in the subject. But at that time I expected the comparative study on the Sinanthropus skull, on
which I am working and which will con-tain all the data in question, to be ready for publication within a relatively
short time. The political events, however, have frustated these hopes; it is, therefore, my own fault that I left the
theories earlier advanced without the necessary details to substantiate them.
Or in other words, Neanderthal Man or a form equivalent to him is not an immediate ancestor of modern Man
(Homo sapiens) but a hominid type whose anatomical properties are-it is true-similar to those of Man but in
principle of such different kind that their bearer must have become extinguished in the course of time without
leaving any descendants behind to merge into Homo sapiens. If, however, the word "species" in Howells' sentence
stands merely for "type" and means no more than that this type differs from modern Man by certain features, there
can be no objection against such a definition. Yet, it follows from Howells' argumentation that he uses the word
expressly in the first mentioned sense.
The riddle what has happened to the Neanderthal Man in Europe is, there-fore, not the only one that demands
solution. In no case, however, can the capability of his advancing into Homo sapiems be denied. The line: Pithecanthropus-Homo soloensis-Cohuna Man-Australian shows the way taken at least by one of the various racial branches
of the human stem.

MAˁAGAN – WHERE IT ALL BEGAN
Noam Agmon
Our conference takes place 208 m below sea level, at the southern tip of the Lake of Galilee, Kinneret in Hebrew.
Folk etymology derives the name from Hebrew kinnor `lyre', although ancient lyres probably had a different shape.
It is more reasonable to assume that the lake has received its name from the Canaanite town Kinneret (or Kinrot) on
its NW coast, a regional center during the Early Iron period (see Kinneret map & satellite image, and archeological
table below).
The lake is part of the Jordan Valley, which in turn is part of the Syrian-African rift, extending from the Beqaˁa
Valley in Lebanon to the Great Lakes of East Africa. This rift is the birthplace of Mankind. North of Lake Kinneret,
near Benot-Yaˁakov Bridge, evidence was found for hominine use of fire as early as 800,000 years ago [1].
However, the species that proudly calls itself Homo sapiens sapiens originated no more than 200,000 years ago. It is
claimed that a single tribe of about 1,000 individuals in E. Africa (at the southern perimeters of the Syrian-African
rift) some 56,000 years ago, fathered the human population of the entire world [2]. The Levant and the Jordan
Valley in particular, formed a major migration route for their colonization of all other continents. The ancestors of
most people participating in our conference very likely passed through Maˁagan at some point in prehistory.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

ScienceDaily (June 23, 2010)
Separation Between Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens
Might Have Occurred 500,000 Years Earlier,
DNA from Teeth Suggests
- The separation of Neanderthal and Homo sapiens might have occurred at least one million years ago, more than
500.000 years earlier than previously believed, according to new DNA-based analyses.
A doctoral thesis conducted at the National Center for Research on Human Evolution (Centro Nacional de
Investigación sobre la Evolución Humana), associated with the University of Granada, analyzed the teeth of almost
all species of hominids that have existed during the past 4 million years. Quantitative methods were employed, and
they managed to identify Neanderthal features in ancient European populations.
The main purpose of this research, whose author is Aida Gómez Robles, was to reconstruct the history of evolution
of the human species using the information provided by the teeth, which are the most numerous and best preserved
remains of the fossil record. To this purpose, a large sample of dental fossils from different sites in Africa, Asia and
Europe was analyzed. The morphological differences of each dental class were assessed and the ability of each tooth
to identify the species to which its owner belonged was analyzed.
The researcher concluded that it is possible to correctly determine the species to which an isolated tooth belonged
with a success rate ranging from 60% to 80%. Although these values are not very high, they increase as different
dental classes from the same individual are added. That means that if several teeth from the same individual are
analyzed, the probability of correctly identifying the species can reach 100%.
Aida Gómez Robles explains that, from all the species of hominids currently known, "none of them has a probability
higher than 5% to be the common ancestor of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Therefore, the common ancestor of
this lineage is likely to have not been discovered yet."

What is innovative about this study is that computer simulation was employed to observe the effects of
environmental changes on morphology of the teeth. Similar studies had been conducted on the evolution and
development of different groups of mammals, but never on human evolution.
Additionally, the research conducted at CENIEH and at the University of Granada is pioneering -- together with
recent studies based on the shape of the skull -- in using mathematical methods to make an estimation of the
morphology of the teeth of common ancestors in the evolutionary tree of the human species. "However, in this
study, only dental morphology was analyzed. The same methodology can be used to rebuild other parts of the
skeleton of that species, which would provide other models that would serve as a reference for future comparative
studies of new fossil finds."
To carry out this study, Gómez Robles employed fossils from a number of archaeological-paleontological sites, such
as that of the Gran Colina and the Sima de los Huesos, located in Atapuerca range (Burgos, Spain), and the site of
Dmanisi in the Republic of Georgia. She also studied different fossil collections by visiting international institutions
as the National Museum of Georgia, the Institute of Human Paleontology and the Museum of Mankind in Paris, the
European Research Centre Tautavel (France), the Senckenberg Institute Frankfurt, the Museum of Natural History
in Berlin, the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing and the Museum of Natural
History in New York and Cleveland.
The results of this research were disclosed in two articles published in Journal of Human Evolution (2007 and 2008),
and they will also be thoroughly presented within a few months.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

The anthropological review, October, 1869.
The Aryan and the semite. J. W. Jackson, Esq, F.A.S.L.
In a previous paper we have endeavoured to define the relation of the great Turanian family to the Aryan branch of
the Caucasian race. We now purpose attempting something of the same kind in reference to the Semites, whose
historic antecedents and racial specialities were till recently, but imperfectly understood either by scholars or
anthropologists. The truth is, the Semite has been underestimated by his Aryan rivals.
We now know not only that there were colossal empires before that of Rome, but also a civilisation anterior to that
of Hellas. Babylon and Nineveh, Thebes and Memphis, have become somewhat more than faint echoes and vague
traditions. We now know that there was a great cycle of what is perhaps not inaptly termed monumental civilisation,
whereof the written records have utterly perished, and which is, nevertheless, being slowly rehabilitated by the
investigation of its ruins and the interpretation of its inscriptions. The importance of such archseo- logical studies
cannot well be overestimated. We have thus revealed to us the history of a great family of man, whose annals
seemed to have irretrievably perished, or at best been preserved for us only in the fragmentary form of incidental
notices in the prejudiced chronicles of their enemies or successors. In truth, the greatest wars which history narrates
as having occurred within the Caucasian area, were those between the Semites and Aryans.
If the foregoing view be correct, then we shall find Aryan and Se? mite on the moral as well as the physical
battlefield, the one being the complement as well as the antagonist of the other. This may be succinctly summed up
by saying that philosophy is the vocation of the Aryan, and religion the mission of the Semite. Such a statement,
however, requires some detailed illustration for its confirmation. Let us, then, interrogate history, and listen to its
response. The three great religions of existing Caucasian man are Judaism, Christianity, and the faith of Islam, all of
Semitic origin ; while, on the other hand, our science, literature, and art are mostly of Aryan lineage. So strongly
pronounced, indeed, are these racial proclivities that the religion of the Aryan ever tends to assume the form of a
philosophic Pantheism, eventuating in a deification and worship of nature, as among the ancient Hindoos and
modern Europeans; while, conversely, the science of the Semite is ever prone to sink into a superstition, as in the
astrology of the Chaldeans and the alchemy of the Saracens. This is only saying in other words that, influenced by
his predominant moral principles, the Semite believes and worships, where the Aryan, guided by his preponderating
intellectual faculties, investigates facts and deduces conclusions. Hence to define them, we may say that the one is a
priest and the other a philosopher; that the former spiritualises and elevates humanity, while the latter en- lightens
and expands it. Both are necessary; the one to correct the excesses and extravagancies of the other; for left to their
own un? limited tendencies, the Semite degenerates into an exclusive bigot, and the Aryan sinks into a utilitarian
materialist. These general statements, however, are by no means sufficient, and have, indeed, been put forward
simply as a convenient summary of the question, into whose minuter details we now propose to enter. And, firstly,
let us ask, what is the Caucasian, whereof Aryan and Semite are but the two great subdivisions 1 And we reply, that
he is preeminently the man of civilisation.
And now, perhaps, the reader will begin to understand the truth and force of our assertion,?that the Caucasian is
emphatically the man of civilisation, as contradistinguished from the savage. What, then, is this Caucasian ? And we
reply, the highest type to which man has yet attained. He presents us with that form of humanity in which
cerebration and respiration are most powerful in proportion to alimentation and reproduction.
We have swept the world from the equator almost to the pole, and we have circumnavigated it, and yet we have
never discovered a race of savages of even approximately Caucasian type. In truth, the thing is impossible. A
Caucasian is a being with aptitudes and sus- ceptibilities adapted to the requirements, and needing the conveniencies of civilisation, and so, save in a few exceptional instances, ill at ease amidst the rudeness and privations of
savagism. This is only saying, in other words, that as the savage is suited to his environment, so the civilised man is
suited to his environment,?"the fitness of things" demanding the one as well as the other. But this high-caste
Caucasian, this man of civilisation, is organic- ally, lingually, and theologically, divisible into two well-marked
families, Aryans and Semites, or Indo-Europeans and Arabians; the former especially located in Europe, and the
latter in Asia, although the first are the predominant population of Persia and India, and the last extend throughout
all northern Africa. It may thus be said that the Caucasian occupies the temperate zone of the world from India to
Britain, with the Negroid races to the south, and the Turanian to the north, the Semites, resting on ancl through
Moors, Tuaricks, Nubians, and Abyssinians, gradually shading off into the former; while the Aryans rest on and
through Slavons, Muscovites, and Cossacks, gradually shade off into the latter. Thus, whether we regard their
geographical position, their mental constitution, or their organic specialities, we shall find that the Semites are allied,

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

as flower and root, to the Negroid type of the south, and the Aryans to the Turanian type of the north. These leading
facts, even thus succinctly stated, without their corroborative details ancl accessorics, are, to say the least of it,
eminently suggestive. They suffice to show us how little we yet know, how far we are from a satisfactory solution of
the great race problems, and consequently, how much yet remains to be done, whether in the accumulation of facts,
or the deduction of conclusions. Foremost among the theories which have been propounded to account for the
present location and distribution of these races, is that which at? tributes an eastern origin to the Aryans, and
accounts for their presence in Europe, by the successive waves of an overwhelming and all- absorbing emigration
from their Asian seats, in ages which, though decidedly prehistoric, are still within the range of reliable tradition. It
need scarcely be said that this is only part of a larger whole, the somewhat mythical hypothesis which regards Asia
as the primal seat of man and the cradle of civilisation, and which consequently pre- dicates the unity, if it does not
imply the aboriginally high-caste organisation of humanity.
We find an Aryan-speaking population of predominantly Caucasian, though par- tially Turanian type, inhabiting the
whole of Europe, with the exception of the apparently aboriginal Finns and Lapps in the north, and the Biscayans in
the south, together with the comparatively recent and historically immigrant Huns and Turks in the east. Eu? rope is
then, undoubtedly, at present an important province of the great Aryan area; in truth, numerically, politically, and
intellectually the most important: and not only so, but we find that its several languages are radically and
grammatically, in terminology and structure, of Aryan type, their oldest extinct forms and their existing peasant
dialects being those in which their congruity with the Sanscrit and Zend are most apparent. With the exception of the
Bis- cayan geographical names in Spain, the south of France and Italy, there is nothing to indicate that the Aryans of
Europe are intrusive immigrants, as they undoubtedly are in India, but rather aborigines, as far as such a phrase is
applicable to any type not absolutely savage. But it is quite otherwise with the Hindoos and Persians. They are on
every side surrounded and closely pressed upon by alien populations of Semitic or Turanian lineage. Their true area
is very limited, for India is undoubtedly Turanian; while much of (political) Persia is now in possession of the
Tartars, as large portions of it were once in the possession of the Semitic Assyrians. In truth, when we reflect on the
wide diffusion of the Arabs (proper), and on the early rise and extended sway of the Semitic empires that arose on
the Tigris and Euphrates, we cannot but pause ere accepting the utterly improbable hypothesis of Aryan origination
in the neighbourhood of Balk, and the diffusion thence of this geographically and lingually isolated type over the
entire area of Europe.

Whenever, indeed, we come in direct contact with primitive Aryan life in the East, we find it to be one of deadly
conflict, not with lingually ancl racially allied peoples, but with re- ligiously hostile and barbarian strangers, whose
destruction was a duty due alike to God and man. But it was quite otherwise with the Semites. The Syrian and As?
syrian were sinrply the civilised extensions and outposts of the Arab, that magnificent aborigine of the southern
wilderness, never savage, though always simple, and who, in his innate grandeur and external barbarism may,
beyond all others, be regarded as the Caucasian patri- arch; so that if compelled to admit the unity of the type, we
should, without hesitation, say here is the root. Without a break, the Semite stretches away into the deserts of
Arabia, and, we may say, the wilds of Africa. If not absolutely at home on the Euj^hrates and the Tigris, he was, at
least, on the border-land; ancl his aboriginal rivals here, we suspect, were not Aryans, whether from the East or
West, but Turanians from the North. These, we know, are very heretical opinions, and we should not venture to
entertain them save on the apparent authority of facts, that seem to compel a dissent from esta? blished
anthropological, or rather, philological opinion on this subject. This comparatively isolated and alien position of the
eastern Aryans, not surrounded by nations gradually shacling off in language and structure towards other and ruder
types, but sharply divided by lingual and typal demarcations, amounting to decided contrast from all their
neighbours, is a fact that has never been duly pondered by the advocates of their Oriental origin. And not only is the
area which they occupy thus isolated, it is also limited in extent; thus affording additional evidence that the presence
of the Aryan in Asia is exceptional. While, in combination with this, is the very important and highly suggestive
fact, that the languages of the eastern Aryans are all essentially of one, and even nominally, but of two families;
namely, the Indic and Iranic, whose subdivision is almost a matter of history. Now, in contrast with this, we have the
wrestern Aryans occupying almost the entire expanse of Europe, as if it were their own proper territory, their true
ethnic area, a conclusion confirmed by their manifold lingual divisions and subdivisions, indicative of the fact that
they had here both time and opportunity, not only for geographical expansion, but also diversity of development.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Now, we suppose it is almost unnecessary to say that, physically, the Aryan of Europe is, and?to the remotest verge
of history?always has been, the perfection of his type, whether we regard strength, stature, beauty, or longevity.
While contemplated morally and in- tellectually, it is on this area that he has built up his greatest and most enduring
empires,it is here that he has attained to his highest and most diversified phases of civilisation; and it is here alone
that, after the lapse of so many centuries of supposed colonial residence, he manifests that unexhausted vigour both
of body and mind, which renders him, whether as conqueror and colonist, or as guide and expample, the hope of the
world. Now, what has the eastern Aryan to show in the way of parallel or rivalry to this. As the conqueror of India,
he is hopclessly effete; as a Persian, he is comparatively weak and demoralised, existing upon the suiferance of
Russia, and not yet quite free from the shadow of old Tartarean subjugation. In truth, it is only as a Kurd and an
Affghan where his mountain altitudes enable him to enjoy a European temperature, and breathean atmosphere
almost as invigorating as that of the peninsular West that he has preserved either the physical or mental vigour, the
courage or the enterprise, of his European ancestors and congeners, ancl even of these two divisions we have yet to
learn how far the former is free from Turanian, ancl the latter from Semitic, admixture. But perhaps it will be said
that this argument proves too much ; for if it be worth anything, it will equally tend to show that the Semites are also
aliens in Asia, and thus leave this vast continent as the appanage proj)er of the Turanians only. And if by Asia be
meant only that part of the Old World which lies east of the Uralian mountains, the Caspian sea, the great valley of
Mesopotamia, and the Persian Gulf, there is, perhaps, a certain measure of truth in this assertion. But if we include
western Asia and Arabia, the supposed parallel between the eastern Aryans and the Semites no longer holds good;
for some of the greatest empires of the latter, from the As? syrian to the Saracenic, were on this area, which,
moreover, as the source of the faith of Islam, is still the seat of a quctsi theological supremacy. It was also on this
area that Judaism flourished and Christianity originated; and here, also, that the world-renowned commerce of Tyre
and Sidon was developed.
Leaving now the great questions of Aryan origin and area, let us return to the Semites. This great family has been
subdivided into three branches, the Amharic, or southern; the Aramaic, or northern; and the Hebraic, or central. The
first embraces the Arabs proper, the Moors, Berbers, Tuaricks, Ancient Egyptians, Nubians, ancl Abyssinians. This
is apparently the purest and, perhaps we may add, the most nearly primitive type of the race. The principal admixture here is from Negroid sources south of the Sahara. The second embraces the Syrians, Assyrians, and
Chaldeans, and may be defined as the especially imperial type of the race. The principal interaction here has been
with the Iranic branch of the eastern Aryans; although, judging by the physical type of the two last, we should also
suspect the presence of a Turanian element, probably as the underlying basis of the population, derived from the
Tatar aborigines of this border-land of the true Semitic area.
It is doubtful if we have yet realised our full indebtedness to this vigorous section of the Se? mitic peoples. In a
sense, it may be said that Europe owes her trade to the Phoenicians, and her religion to the Jews; so that their influ?
ence is second, if second, only to that of the Greeks and Romans. From this bare enumeration of Semitic nations it
must be at once obvious that we have here to do with a great race, who have played a very important part in history,
and in various ways stamped their impress indelibly on humanity. Such a type must then be worthy of the
profoundest study, although the especial cycle of their greatness is passed, having waned, at least for the present,
before the increasing splendour of Aryan power ancl civilisation. Such a race cannot be despised or ignored.
Anthropology must endeavour to understand and define them. What is their relative age as compared with that of the
Aryans? When did their intcraction with the latter com- mence, and what are the indications of its continuance or
renewal?
What is a Semite? What place does he hold in the scale of being? What has he done for the religion, literature, art,
ancl science of the world? What was his essential character and vocation in the past, and what intellectual, political,
and commercial position will he probably hold; in other words, what services will he render to civilisation in the
future 1 These are rather searching questions, and yet Anthropology can scarcely be regarded as a science unless we
are prepared with something like a definitive reply to most of them. It must be at once ob? vious that in any such
investigation as that here proposed, we must advance cautiously, yet daringly, from the boundaries of recognised
knowledge into the region of speculation, where certainty will have to be exchanged for uncertainty, and where the
utmost we can yet hope to accomplish is but to throw out a few suggestions, not so much for the guidance as the
consicleration of others. As to the relative age of the Semite, if there be any truth in the idea that he is the flower of
the Negroid type, the ethnic culmination of the man of the south, the cultured representative of the oldest and most
nearly rudimentary phase of humanity, then we have from this circumstance alone some ground for regarding him as
the elder branch of the Caucasian family. The fact that he was the founder of the earliest historic empires, and that

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

his great cycle of now monumental civilisation on the Egypto-Assyrian area, preceded the historic Aryan cycle of
Iranic and classic development, is also partially cor- roborative of his ethnic seniority. Do his organic specialities
throw any light on this subject ?
When did the interaction between the Aryan ancl Semitic peoples, which constitutes the staple of all history,
commence ? Is there any thing in monumental remains or racial type calculated to throw any light on this subject ?
What, for example, was Egypt? Was the civilisation of this great country the pure product of Semitic vigour and
intelligence? Has not historic Egypt been constantly subjected to reaction from without? Persian, Greek, Roman,
Mameluke, and Turk present us with a rather extensive cycle of alien invasion, both frorn Aryan and Turanian
sources. Was there nothing akin to this in prehistoric times?

This was apparently a characteristic of primeval nations generally, among whom events moved slowly; but it was
especially so with the Egyptians, and hence their rigidly exclusive nationality of thought and feeling, ancl the
striking peculiarities of architecture in which the weird spirit of their inner life became at last tangibly embodied. It
is, perhaps, rather more difficult to estimate the reaction of Egypt upon other countries. Her wisdom was proverbial
among all the great nations of antiquity. But, whatever else she may have taught them, she did not give them her
architecture, and therefore we may presume, scarcely the ideas of which it was the symbol. Her nationality was too
intense, too strikingly characterised, for ready transference.

Does this help to explain the exalted moral position and vocation ofthe Jews, in virtue of which they are
theologically the representative men of their family, not only in pos? session of an exalted monotheism themselves,
but also the acknowledged source whence it was borrowed by Christians on the one hand, and Mo- hammedans on
the other ? And are they not in this respect somewhat analogous to the Celts of Western Europe, who in a similar
manner, and from circumstances also arising out of geographical position, have been largely protected from invasion
by non-Caucasian immigrants, and so have been enabled to retain a finer temperament and higher type than those
less fortunately situated ? Does not this specially Aryan admix- ture, which had probably a prehistoric as well as a
historic cycle, also help to explain the partially European character of the Jews and Phcenicians, who as being, in a
maritime sense at least, on the border land of the true Aryan area, inevitably partook more or less of its expansive
influences both morally ancl ethnically? To return, however, to the Aramaic Semites.

Are there not degrees of Caucasianisation both in the Semitic and Aryan types? Are the coarse-featured Moor and
flat-footed Slavon perfect forms, mentally or physically, of the Caucasian man ? Have they the requisite proportion
of nerve to bone and muscle, the contour of head, the chiselling of features, or that finish of the extremities, to say
nothing of delicacy of perception, elevation of thought, or grandeur of conception, which we regard as, in some of
their higher individu- alities at least, the natural endowments of a Caucasian people 1 Indeed, thus contemplated, is
there at present, or has there ever been, a perfectly Caucasianised nation? In the lower social strata of Aryan and
Semitic communities, when existing as actual nations, with all their several orders and classes in efficient activity,
do we not find the former tend to a semi-Turanian, and the latter to a semi-Negroid type?

The home of the semites,
John P. PETERS
According to the prevalent view the home of the Semites is Arabia, which has been like a seething caldron, boiling
over at intervals and emitting its surplus population in successive eruptions, poured out as the lid was forced up.
This theory, which has been worked out with beautiful symmetry, is represented in almost all the histories of Hither
Asia of the last quarter or even half century, and I have myself presented it as established fact in my writings. …
The evidence now available, linguistically, archaeologically, and from historical records, seems to show that the
home of the Semites was not to the south in Arabia, but to the north in Asia Minor and regions eastward of that.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

From the very earliest times we find the Semites pressing southward. Their earliest homeland as a civilized people
of record is just southward of the Taurus, from northern Babylonia westward into Syria. The indications are that at
that period they had already begun to move southward, and their original home was probably still farther to the north
and east. Armenia would appear to have been a part of that original homeland.
Dr. Igor P. Lipovsky
Where did the Ancient Semites come from?
The original homeland of all ancient Semitic peoples, including Hebrews, was not northern Arabia, as is currently
believed, but northwestern Mesopotamia. Around 6,000-4,000 years B.C., an ecological catastrophe in the Black Sea
area forced the Indo-European tribes to migrate outward in all directions. On their way to the south and the southeast, the Indo-Arians displaced and partially mingled with the Hurrians of Eastern Anatolia. In turn, arianized
Hurrians first displaced the Eastern Semites (Akkadians) from the upper courses of Tigris, and then, at the end of the
3rd millennium B.C., occupied the land of Western Semites (Amorites) in the upper courses of Euphrates. The
referencing by the Bible of Harran as the original birthplace of Abraham is the indirect evidence of these ethnic
changes. The last wave of Western Semites (Arameans) in 12-11 centuries B.C. was also caused by the movements
of Hurrians and Indo-Europeans in northwestern Mesopotamia.
The ancient Near East represented a world dominated by Semitic peoples. Akkad and Assyria, Babylonia and
Phoenicia, Israel and the Syrian kingdoms were all the offspring of the Semites‘ activities.
Although the evidence showing where the Semites came from is not yet clear, we can still use written and
archeological sources to definitively confirm that the Semites came to central Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine not
from the south (Arabia), but from the north (northwestern Mesopotamia) and from the upper courses of the two
large-scale rivers in Western Asia, the Tigris and the Euphrates.
The Bible concretely designates the fatherland of the Jewish patriarchs, specifying the region surrounding the city of
Haran which was situated approximately 30 km to the southwest of today‘s Turkish city Sanliurfa (ancient Edessa),
not far from the border with Syria. The biblical texts unambiguously show that the city of Ur in Sumer, from which
Abraham came into Canaan (Palestine), was never his place of birth.
Based on the information we have available about the history of the Indo-Europeans‘ movements, the Celts and the
Germans occupied the northwestern borders of the Black Sea, the Balts and Slavs took the northern borders, the
ancestors of the Cimmerians, Sarmatians and Scythians occupied the northeast, and in the southeast the Indo-Iranian
tribes lived. Most likely, the ancestors of the Italics and the Greeks lived in the northern portion of the Balkan
Peninsula to the southwest of the Celts and the Germans. The Hittites, Luwians, Palaics and all those whom we
classify with the Anatolian group of Indo-European languages, occupied the southernmost regions of the Black Sea
cavity and were forced out by the advancing sea towards the north of Asia Minor and towards Anatolia.
Subsequently, the Celts and after them, the Germans, gradually occupied the northwest of Europe, while the Slavs
and Balts spread into northern and eastern Europe, already occupied by the Finno-Ugric peoples. The Indo-Iranian
languages speakers invaded the territory of Iran, Central Asia and northern India.
This model of the Indo-Europeans‘ expansion to all directions from the Black Sea finds circumstantial evidence in
the ancient historians‘ sources, covering the life of the Germanic tribes of Ostrogoths in the Crimea during the first
centuries AD.14 These sources also deal with the eastern Slavic people, the Drevlians, as a neighbor of the ―lost‖
German tribe in the territory of today‘s Ukraine, as well as with the sojourn of the Baltic Lats in the Upper Volga
region.

Thus, the exodus of the Semites from their original homeland in the upper courses of the Tigris and Euphrates was
initiated by the movement of the Indo-Europeans and the Indo-Arians who, in turn, were gradually squeezed out by
the ecological catastrophe from their own native land in area of the Black Sea. The migrations eventually also
involved the Hurrians – the indigenous population of Trans-Caucasia and northeastern Anatolia.
By leaving the region of the Black Sea, the Indo-Arians displaced the Hurrians to the south (in the north of
Mesopotamia) where they clashed with the Semites living there.
The invasion of the Hurrians into the Tigris and Euphrates upper courses resulted in a mass exodus to the south; at
first the Eastern Semites (the Akkadians) left, later followed by the Western Semites (the Amorites).

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

The second mass migration of the Western Semites from their original homeland began in approximately the 12th
century BC and also happened as a result of the Indo-Europeans‘ migrations. This time, the Aramaeans backed out,
practically retracing the path of their predecessors, the Amorites. One of these peoples, the Chaldeans descended
down the river valleys of the Tigris and the Euphrates into southern Mesopotamia.
Others went to the southwest, into Syria, where they founded their own kingdoms. However, within the Semites‘
native land there remained a significant Aramaean population for a long time, even though they were crowded out
by the Luwians (a group related to the Hittites) and the Iranians, advancing from the east. Despite the successive
waves of Hellenization and then Christianization, the local population as a whole preserved their Semitic roots. The
ethnic situation substantially changed only after the arrival of the Turkic tribes at the end of 11th century. Over the
course of several centuries, the population became completely Turkish and Islamic. Today, the entire territory of this
vast region is primarily occupied by Turks and Kurds, thus no one recalls the fatherland of the ancient Semites any
longer.
Julia R.R. DRELL
Neanderthals: a history of interpretation
… the history of Neanderthal construction in different domains of social life and media. It establishes three broad
tendencies within Neanderthal reconstructions: following the expulsion of Neanderthals from ‗humanity‘ in the
nineteenth century and first half of the twentieth century, the 1950s are characterized by a shift in this perception.
From then, Neanderthals appear as essentially human creatures trapped in archaic bodies. Following this initial
ideological oscillation the recent decades represent a parallel existence of both paradigms as well as a
widening of conceptualizations. This paper argues that these ideological constructs remain operative, continuing to
inform and form our perceptions of what Neanderthals are/are not.

THE FIRST NEANDERTHAL SKELETON.
FUHLROTT’S CONTRIBUTION
Discovered in 1856 in the Feldhofer Cave of the Neander Valley, Germany, the typeskeleton of Homo (sapiens)
neanderthalensis,1 Neanderthal 1, consisting of 16 bone fragments fell into the hands of Johann Carl Fuhlrott
(1803–77), a local schoolteacher. He instantly ascertained that the bones were of a human who had lived during the
last Ice Age; the find, therefore, represented unique fossils from the human past. On the 9th of September 1856, the
local newspaper Barmer Bu¨rgerblatt reported the discoveries, assuming the remains stemmed from an individual
from a ‗horde‘, or from an ancient people.
Previous Neanderthal fossils (Engis, Belgium 1830; Forbes‘ Quarry, Gibraltar 1848) had not been recognized as
ancient humans even by the time that discussion about the discovery from the Neander Valley began. This was due
to the prominent biblical view of the Western world until the mid-eighteenth century; excluding the possibility of
transformation of species. However, following the publication of Charles Darwin‘s On The Origin Of Species By
Means Of Natural Selection in 1859, prevailing views were radically challenged. Darwin‘s and Wallace‘s
introduction of an evolutionary theory by means of natural selection created controversy. Over the next decade the
basic idea of transmutation (evolution) became widely accepted, although natural selection itself remained
controversial. Many scientists, and nonprofessionals, thought natural selection too harsh a mechanism to be
reconciled with their religious and philosophical beliefs. Darwin himself had been interested in the human
implications of evolutionism since the 1830s, although he omitted this from The Origins of Species in order to
minimize controversy (Desmond and Moore 1991). It was, however, implicit in the evolutionary paradigm itself.
The Neanderthal find was made only three years before Darwin published The Origins of Species and thus the
discovery of the Neander Valley was seen to verify his theories.

NEANDERTHALS, SAME OR OTHER?
After 140 years of controversy about Neanderthals we have acquired miscellaneous perceptions, the conflicting
theories of which are exemplified by Auel‘s novel and the Neanderthal Museum.

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

Pointing towards real and significant differences between Neanderthals and modern humans, one might consider
Neanderthals not so much as ‗our ancestors‘ (as the DNA sequence and the structure of the inner ear suggests) but as
European contemporaries of the modern humans who penetrated into Europe to encounter
the Neanderthals. Their life was perfectly adapted towards the conditions in Europe, while the intruders were shaped
by different forces possibly producing the increased symbolic articulation evident from the Upper Palaeolithic
onwards (e.g. Mellars 1996, 357–91). Mellars (1996) provides a review of Neanderthal technology, subsistence
strategies, patterns of mobility and spatial, social and demographic organization. From these it is evident that they
are the product of purposeful and intelligent behaviour on part of the Neanderthal groups, reflecting the mental and
cognitive capacities of the individuals concerned.
This view of Neanderthals is incongruent with the perception Auel popularizes; the associated savageness appears
primarily concerned with contemporary interests and identities.
Similarly, one might say that the sympathy and humanity invoked by the grieving woman in the museum renders
Neanderthals more human than they might actually have been. Invoking humanity and means of identification, the
mirror-image of Ayla‘s contemporaries, might eventually not serve the ‗interest‘ of Neanderthal studies. A simple
antithesis, ostracism still remains essential to the conceptualization within the category of Same not escaping the
dialogue between alternative human moral and social identities (e.g. the Neanderthal Museum).
Depicting Neanderthals as what they are, as quintessentially different, might solve the recurring dilemma of the
‗Neanderthal enigma‘; allowing an understanding of Neanderthals, less immediately of concern for ‗what it means
to be human‘.
Popular images and archaeological reconstructions can be understood as hypotheses, as Stoczkowski and Moser
have suggested. Being self-evident and more easily comprehensible they provide archaeologists with powerful
means of visualizing a past which, without the aid of visualizations, remains diffuse and dimly lit. However, this
being the case, we must appeal for an informed handling of this visual information; forming and informing
unconsciously, archaeologists have to be and make conscious of their creations, wherever they are reproduced (i.e.
in films, museums, popular, children‘s or scientific books).
Failing to take the influence and bias of such creations into account, images of Neanderthals cannot simply be
‗corrected‘ by rendering them more ‗human‘, as this means never escaping the already existing dichotomy of Us and
Them, Same and Other. By neglecting the necessity to inform about the impossibility of authenticity, this
dichotomy, into which the whole package of savage Others can be implanted, is reproduced. For Jahoda (1999,
243ff.) these (negative) images, inseparable from their opposites, are symptoms and support of racism. He points out
that the ‗usual cure-all, namely education‘ (ibid. 247) will not solve the problem. The non-rational character of the
images, presumably serving emotional and ego-protective needs, are often confined to a level of popular culture
which exists as a parallel and unbridled strand to scientific conceptualizations. Thus it emerges as increasingly
important that the scientific message, especially as transmitted in school and children‘s books, should be
unequivocal, as it is at this stage that children learn to classify and relate information, and are hence important in the
formation of the children‘s world view (see Burtt 1987 for a discussion). This paper is a contribution to the ‗history
of archaeological knowledge‘ in order to enable a conscious treatment of visual resources in archaeology and
anthropology.
THE PALIEOLITHIC BEGINNINGS
OF RELIGION-AN INTERPRETATION
GEORGE A. BARTON Professor Emeritus of Semitic Languages
The burials and the art of the Aurignacian period show that men then worshipped a mother goddess, and this
worship eani be traced back to Mousterian times, when Neanderthal man flourished. The same art shows that
women reverenced the erect plhallus. These are the only objects that they seem to have considered divine. There is
reason to believe that the part of a father in procreation was not yet known. The worship was nlot a fertility-cult in
the later sense. No privacy existed; men and women knew the details of each others' physical forms. Men saw
women miraculously produce children. Like the male animals, they had from instinct coitus with her. Orgasm give
them the divinest thrills they knew. It was to them like the later bacchic ecstasy of intoxicationi. Women became
their goddesses. Probably they did not generalize more than the dog, but each was devoted to his mistress. Women
obtained a similar mystic ecstasy from the experience. She did not deify man, but the erect phallus. The heart of
…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

The understanding of Neanderthal man's kinship to Homo sapiens is fundamental to the comprehension of human evolution as a whole.
The Relationships between Neanderthal Man and Homo sapiens . J. E. WECKLER .

religion is a mystic thrill, uplift or satisfaction. Creeds, rituals, and conduct are all subordinate to this. Palaolithic
religion was, then, sex- mysticism. The psychologic unity of the race made it universal as its survivals in the historic
period prove. This is the real origin of religion. It was not begotten by fear (Lucretius), nor by animism (Tylor), nor
by ancestor worship (Herbert Spencer), nor by the mysterium tremendum (Otto), but by the mysterium feminium -a
mysterium tremendumr indeed, but scarcely that which Otto contemplated. In adult life we forget the umbilical cord
anid the nursing; similarly religion has now almost everywhere left far behind its biological beginnings.
I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin
Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?

whites & semites;
indigenous europeans

& the hope of
renaissance
Who would be rash enough to prophesy aught
of a race whose entire past is a riddle, whose
literature is a question-mark?
Ð Gustav Karpeles
Of our legends.
Of our legends is it not even said? It is said.
For is it not known that Levant is the birthplace of Europa?
Even Uropa. Uropa, also Levant, and Tyre?

I see this not as a vice but as a virtue. Unless we are prepared to make some
bold proposals, the Neanderthal debate will simply go on in ever-decreasing
circles, leading to the inevitable conclusion.
New Models and Metaphors for the Neanderthal Debate
Paul Graves
One reason for the eventual "anti-Semitic" focus on Jews
was that modern, imperial Europe was at least as obsessed with
its own origins as with discourse on the colonized Other.
The Missing Keyword: Reading Olender's Renan
Jonathan Boyarin

…. and the spirit that dared all heights and depths must, as Synesius says, suffer the divine punishment,
enchainment on the rocks of the Caucasus.". The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Carl Gustav Jung.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful