| Many Thanks for Kind Mails Part-5 |
| Let me present a portion of mails received. |
| My response here may not be identical to what I actually wrote back originally. Senders' names are abbreviated. |
| E.W. gave me a list of questions, very interesting ones. The questions are in reference to a previous Q&A in Mails-4; Allan from Canada, the 5th mail introduced. Unlike other Q-A sessions, this Q&A are put together.
Dear E.W., Thank you for your mail and interesting questions. I'd try to answer, well, to respond one way or the other, one by one. Q1: If correct, and I think it is essentially correct, why do Ainu look like Italians (for instance). A1: Do they??? To me, they do not look alike at all....Regret that I cannot (i.e., I do not know how to) pursue this point further, except that Ainu has not shown any Caucassian element in Gm blood type. Q2: Was there an extended "Caucasian" type (Proto- or remarkably similar) about the Pacific later submerged by dominant "Mongolian" traits? A2: Unfortunately, there seems no trace of "proto-Caucassian" in Pacific rim region. One thing that I know, which may be what you are looking for is this. Excerpt from Omoto's book in Japanese published in 1996 (reprinted in 1999) as translated by me is offered. At pages 157 and on, Omoto refers to three fossil bodies of Shang Deng (spelling?) people, ca. 18,000 years ago. Franz Veidenreich (spelling?) who first studied these bodies said the three were so different each other and each of them almost belongs to different race. Called #101, one body looks rather Cromagnon than Mongoloid. The second body looks like a Melanesian and the third resembles to Eskimo. And, Omoto states, individual differences can be great and it's hard to make the small number of samples represent the group of people. Franz's view as Omoto presented is nothing beyond a subjective impression. It's like my brother looks like a White Russian despite that my father has Mayan dark face. Q3: If so, did the "Mongolian" traits evolve (in the Arctic, perhaps) or result from mixture with a separate group of people? A3: From Matsumoto's studies in Gm blood type, one day, I wish I'd pursue something like this. Africans have Gm blood types of ab1c, ab1b3 and/or ab3s. White people's Gm blood typically is fb1b3. Associating this fact with the African Eva theory and other knowledge, I'm curious that the Africans' "ab1b3" might get a mutation that resulted in "fb1b3" (that is, a change of "a" to "f"). Similarly, afb1b3 that is typical to South Asian people, is only one digit difference from either Africans or Whites. Compare afb1b3 with ab1b3 or fb1b3. Thus, in my mind, Africans seem to be the root for Whites and South Asians. Gm blood types widely seen in northern Mongoloid is ag and axg. To arrive at "ag" from Africans' ab1b3 takes a two-digit reduction and one digit additoin. Or, only "a" part is common. Thus, the distance between Mongoloid and Africans may be greater than the distance between Africans and Whites. One may dare to consider Mongolids evolved on their own, but African Eva story on mitocondoria DNA tells Mongoloid is also a decendent of Africans. At any rate, ag and axg are only one digit different between each other, suggesting that one is a mutation of the other. Nextly, peculiar to Mongoloid, there is Gm blood type ab3st. Judging from only one fact that Aboriginee has only ag and/or axg and not ab3st, the ab3st would be born later than ag/axg. Owners of only ag/axg would be Paleo-Mongoloid and carriers of ab3st would be a decendent of Neo-Mongoliod. The premise to consider old and new Mongoloid is supported by Omoto and other researchers. Q4: Is there evidence that the Australian branch mixed with New Guineans? A4: Omoto presents in the above book a chart that shows Aboriginee and Papuans branching out directly from one point. The chart was prepared by Omoto himself and his study was based on 23 gene sites (positions or sets?). Q5: Ancient Japanese-South American link recently has been proposed on the basis of an archaeological discovery. A5: It is fascinating to find familiar matters in distant places. Yet, I do not know if they really look like, if it should not be considered a coincidence. I assume you are talking about a clay pot found in Ecuador, which looks like Japan's Jomon pottery. During 10,000 years of Jomon history, there may be some travelled to South America, on purpose or accidentally. Indeed, there is a Chinese document written in the 5th century AD that talks about later-Khan dynasty of the 1st century AD. In there, a mention was made about Japan. One sentence reads as "from the Queen's country of Wa (Japan), 4,000 RI (Chinese mileage; absolute distance controversial) away is country of dwarves 3 to 4 Chinese feet; one year southeastward by ship is country of black teeth. Whehter this is only imaginary or to any extent factual is yet to be determined. Is that based on then-Japanese knowledge or recognition of the Americas? Q6: Chickasaw Native Americans have a crow associated with a deluge myth. Refer to their web site. Coincidence, I think. A6: What is the URL? Q7: Cavali-Sforza cites Alexseev (1979): there are isolated Mongoloid groups other than the Ainu who show hairiness. A7: Hairiness is considered a feature of paleo-Mongoloid by anthropologists here. They talk about "aptitude to cold climate." If one has too much hair, humidity gets frozen on his/her face. Therefore, neo-Mongoloid evolved with lesser hair. Similarly, lower nose or flat face was evolved to better meet the low temperature. From this, if there is other hairy people than Ainu in northern Asia, they may well belong to old-Mongoloid. Q8: He cites Omoto: the Ainu are Mongoloid on the basis of fingerprints and dental morphology. A8: Omoto's forte is in gene studies. He very often introduces other studies by other researchers. In the book above mentioned, he refers to Christie Turner's study on dental structure, Sino-dont and Sunda-dont. Q9: He states "It seems reasonable to discard the myth of a Caucasoid origin of the Ainu". A9: In his book in Japanese as above referenced, Omoto is more confident recently of the statement you quoted. Q10: Genetic interpretation is that Ainu are slightly but not significantly more distant from Australians than (other) Japanese. A10: When we say Japanese, they are not uniform. Just as, when we say Spanish, they may not be uniform. At least there appears two basic streams in Japanese, one from old-Mongoloid and the other from new-Mongoloid. Ainu tend to show old-Mongoloid features. New-Mongoloid features appear better share with Koreans or NE Asians. Old-Mongoloid appears to have dispersed quite widely, Australian Aboriginee, predecessors in Americas north and south and Asia mostly middle to north. Q11: Gm was only one of many categories of blood types considered. A11: What is important, so looks to me, about Gm blood type is that certain of its types belong only to Africans, that Caucassians have a type which Asians do not have at all or that New-Mongoloid's type is not found in Europe or Africa or Australia or South America at all. Of the many categories, this appears to be an important tool to define races. Q12: Nevertheless, Caucasians will not easily be disuaded from claiming Ainu as relatives. A12: Oh, is that so? Schade! At least, Horai's mitocondoria DNA study, Omoto's 23 gene set study and Gm blood type study have determined Ainu belongs to Mongoloid, not Caucassian. E.W.: Thanks for sharing your work. I thank you for giving me this opportunity to precise my thinking. Some related articles are linked as follows:
Return to English Index |