Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Discovered an Oldie But Goodie!

It was 1990 ... fall ... and I was packing books from a dead man's apartment into a cardboard box off Central Park. The doorman had sold me a nice lot of paperbacks (Danielle Steel, Tim Robbins, Tom Clancy, the usual dreck) for a couple of ten dollar bills. I was stacking them inside the box and I noticed another rattier box sitting by the man's door with what looked like rotting fragments of books in it. I asked my doorman friend "What about those over by the door?" and he said "Those you can have for free, but you have to take them with you. It is just a lot of junk I was going to throw out, most of the books in there are about a 100 years old and some of them were stored beneath a sink."

So I took the box with me when I left and picked through it back at the warehouse that night. Found a few that looked intact.

The next morning, I sat on a plastic milk crate in front of Grand Union station after setting all my books for sale out on a table there.

The first book I had salvaged from the junk box was this one. Man was it good. I had turned over the last page by closing hour at around 2:30 that afternoon. I felt like my mind had blown out of my skull after reading it.

It was a good day for sales, too. I pocketed around $400.00 by the time I packed it up and headed back to the warehouse. Later when I sat in the diner next door for my traditional meal, I could not help but look through the book all over again, rereading some of the more mindboggling sections.

I knew that the book was really important at the time even if all of it was unfamiliar to me. It took me about 20 years to put it all together with everything else I had read.

I saw a photo of the dead man I had inherited the books from. He was a wealthy creepy Addams family-looking dude with a very large, almost freakish skull and red hair. The connection did not occur to me for a long, long time. Kind of sad nobody came to pick up his books or most of his possessions. I can't help but wonder what else I might have found if I had picked through his belongings.


Ave said...

Page 42 of the PDF :
An earlier work, however, by this
author [Professor Albert Mayr] , " Die Vorgeschichtlichen Denkmaler von
Malta," which has been translated into English
by H.R.H. Princess Louis of Battenberg, and issued for private circulation only, is fuller and
more detailed, and remains at present the classic
work on the subject, so far as it goes ; (...)

Louise of Battenberg (Quenn of Sweden) has red hair and looks like a Pharaoh :

I wonder why she would give herself the trouble of translating a book if it's supposed to be only for private circulation ; I imagine the original, in German, was readily available, and that German was a language well known in aristocratic circles at the time.

Anyway, so far (10% read) a well-written and interesting , but not riveting, book.

Ave said...

In my rush I missed the phrase's meaning : the work itself was issued for private circulation only...

Sorry about that.

In order to make it right, here is a link to that books in english, for those interested :

Grognard said...

And of course Napolean is the ultimate melonhead and is linked to Malta as well.

Was this guy extremely old, btw?

As for red hair, that also describes a shocking number of the royalty of europe as well as anyone of note from roman times. Etruscans have the greatest amount of neanderthal DNA and that, along with troy, is where julius caesar and augustus trace back to.

Edward said...

Looks like future generations of Melonheads are just 'born that way'

samhuih said...

Thanks for the link. Reading now.

In the book he mentions the book, "The Mediterranean race : a study of the origin of European peoples / with 93 illustrations (1901)" by Giuseppe Sergi. I found it here.

His comments are interesting. He says a different race is the race of the early Greeks and Romans. Not the Nordics but a Mediterranean race. I believe also White or Caucasoid looking somewhat.

Carlton Coons also talked about a Mediterranean race of Whites but didn't seem to make much of them that I noticed.

I've always wondered if the Nordics, fair notice I'm one(abet mongrolized), were so great how did some in early Greece, Rome, Egypt, etc. become so prominent while the others painted themselves blue and ran about like berserkers wearing hides. This has always bothered me. It would be rational that the race of the Greeks was something different. He shows some head shots of skulls from the top to categorize them. First time I've seen this. The difference is readily apparent.
Why is anthropology so stupid. Such a easy to see difference should at least be noted. All we see are side and front views of skulls. Not the top. The whole "science" seems to be riddled with incompetence. We have skulls of melon heads in Mexico which anyone can see are very large and weird shaped and they're virtually ignored. Especially the coneheads in, I think, Peru with skin still on them. Geesh. Afraid to find something new.

samhuih said...

Just ran across an odd web page and as this is kinda, slightly, a little about head shape; if you stretch meaning a mile or so. Thought I'd add this Neanderthal picture.

Looks like...Jooos

Maybe Jews are not melon heads but Neanderthal hybrids. Maybe Neanderthals are not the kindly loveable folk of the wood that Texas Arcane loves but are really an aggressive, sociopathic, racist killer.

I read somewhere that long ago. Can't remember the date people started building forts. 4000 B.C. ????(not sure) Where as there were none before. A group from the Caucasus was believed to have caused all the turmoil. Destroying as they went. Caucasus/ Neanderthal hybrid???
Maybe they destroyed the Melon heads and bred with their women creating the Jews.

samhuih said...

Sorry. One more. You've been saying that the Sapien males raped Neanderthal females but that's not true.

If the above is true the picture is muddled and we need a new framework.

Héctor said... you know of any online place or physical place where one could buy/download the book from Albert Mayer. I have tried to find it but unfortunately nothing but an old library in Germany (Leipzig I think) seems to have it and not for sale.

Texas Arcane said...

Samhuih -

The page you linked to is arguing a case first put forward fifty years ago, long since debunked. The author admits that we appear to have a mitochrondrial neanderthal Eve and then goes on to argue the only way we could have gotten it is from a Neanderthal father. That idea was the best thing they had in the 70s but it was eclipsed by DNA sequencing.

There is another way you could produce the same genetic effect and it is through at least 5000+ years of gang rape in which Neanderthal women became camp whores, having many children by different Cro-Magnon males. This apparently coincides exactly with the time that the bones of Neanderthal males appear in Cro-Magnon camp fires all across Europe. The conclusion is pretty obvious. The Cro-Magnons used the Neanderthal women as they pleased for thousands of years such that the female mitochrondria was then carried on the genes of their own children by many different males.

Texas Arcane said...

As for your other theories we have exhausted these here many times before.

We postulate a hybrid based on melonheads breeding with their Nephilim guards/minions, who consisted entirely of Neanderthal rejects mostly drawn from Mousterian peoples over a hundred thousand years, with almost no Amuds in the mix. Once driven from rule in Sumeria and many other places, we put forth the idea that once on the road, the Nephilim male began to seem a more attractive mate to the melonhead females who could not choose their cousins/nephews as husbands having already been incestuously mixing too much. The Nephilim bodyguards acted as studs to the melonhead female to produce the Khazars.

Notice how we take a lot of information, process it deep and then produce very simple assumptions. These ideas are the fruit of very long periods of study summarized in just a few sentences.

Ave said...

To Hector : no, sorry, I just googled the name and provided the next best link for the book. doesn't have it AFAIK.

Grognard said...

If you have a closed population with 10% of one mtDNA and 90% of another the minority disappears VERY quickly, more quickly the smaller the population is. That's simple math. Simple for anyone who didn't fail their 400 level statistics anyway, oh wait that's way beyond what an anthropologist takes no wonder they can't figure that out.

Grognard said...

Now the "cro magnon" thing is another story so I will make another comment for it, and one more for the "nordics". I apologize.

First off in regards to cro magnon, is that cro magnon is not something that factually exists. That is, the actual cro magnon site itself has long since proven to be a combination of fraud and bad archaeology.

99% of what you hear about cro magnon is just completely wrong, often an outright lie.

There were no modern looking humans in europe at all until very recently. The aurginacean was 100% neanderthal and was transmitted to so called modern humans from neanderthal, not the other way around. There was a big controversy about dates and the way they were measuring older dates, but long story short nearly all the older dates turn out to be dead wrong.

So now wer only get modern looking humans much later on in europe, possibly AFTER the gravetian. Now the gravetian is what we'd call simply human. It would take a full human to make stuff like that. And the age of gravetian stuff keeps pushing back and modern looking humans pushing forward until it's pretty clear this came from neanderthals. It's not until modern looking humans got here and mixed with neanderthals that they became real humans who did all the stuff we associate with modern humans. It seems pretty clear this is where they got their brains and their behavior. That we now have a lot of hybrid fossils that are more recent that supposed "cro magnon" means we are now pretty much certain where all the origin of culture came from.

Also, ALL the oldest artwork comes from iberia in neanderthal times, preceding "modern" humans by 30k years or so.

When you look at the large brained (much larger than most humans today) neanderthal skulls from the middle east from 100k-200k years ago they have a shape that is rather "modern" looking. After sequencing subsaharan skulls in nigeria we find these seem to be related to each other, meaning that all of north africa, too, was dominated by neanderthals.

So the question is where the heck did "modern" humans come from, and the answer isn't africa at all but the far east. You don't look for the most ancient civilization by looking for primitives, you do it by looking for spaceships.

You also didn't suddenly get replacement of neanderthals, never happened. Heidelbergensis spread across all of africa and eurasia, and evolution happened all over that area. The apparent change in looks happens today all the time, with waves of immigration, especially out of east asia, that have been going on all through recorded history.

If you have seen pictures of the lost peking man you realize how much more sense this makes as a culprit to mix with neanderthals to get modern looking humans.

I think Tex thinks the "melonheads" migrated from south africa, but I am pretty sure nothing ever came OUT of africa, all the migration has been the other way. The reason this theory is so popular is because it's very touchy feely "we all come from africa" nonsense. But the thing is the people who were in sub saharan africa were people who looked like bushmen. The people of the congo area were the only black ones until very recently when they came out and basically wiped out everyone else.

Grognard said...

There is "nordic" Y DNA all over gedrosia. Gedrosia and persia are probably where ALL europeans get the bulk of their DNA.

Finns also share a great many cultural things with persians, odd as that may seem. My guess is the finns and basques were from a previous east west migration and the classic indo european language speakers came later.

Arab expansion has completely changed the face of the previously christian and european looking middle east. Every ancient depiction of them, and indeed any real ethnic persian looks nothing like an arab but much more european.

Of course there's also nordic Y DNA in some south american tribes, who knows how that got there.

Lugh said...

What about Homo Erectus? Do you think some of the dumber breeds of Homo Sapiens bred down with them? Or are these just completely without Neanderthal genes?

Grognard said...

Homo erectus invariably has smaller brain than heidelbergensis or even chimpanzees.

They are simply not human ancestors. They've also since what is more or less proof they were not, as well. I forget what it's called now but it is earlier but had not only a bigger brain but brain fold impressions on the cranium, unlike erectus. OOPS, dead end.

It was not a bad guess except that we know erectus matured in 8 years by looking at the bones. So do chimpanzees, what a coinkidink. Neaderthals on the other hand mature as slow or slower than modern humans and had larger brains to boot.

To be fair a lot of these suppositions came due to finding a lot of stuff in africa all of a sudden. But since then you have these big gaps and things that don't make sense, many of them very recent.

The human-chimp missing link candidate only has serious candidates in europe and asia for example. Plus now for erectus we have a COMPLETE skeleton of an older but more advanced hominim in africa (and not just outside like before) so it's pretty much out though this is not widely accepted yet.

Multiregionalism is right, that's all there is to it.

Edward said...

Look at this backup of your Esau vs. Jacob theory!