When did blonde haired, blue eyed peoples...

Does anyone have any proof as to what colour hair did Homo-Erectus had?

And Orangutangs evolved between half and 2 and a half million years ago.

Edited by Paul - 17-Dec-2007 at 17:09

Originally posted by Paul And Orangutangs evolved�between half and 2 and a half million years ago.

Yes, Orangutans have red hair, but they belong to the genus Pongo< family Pongidae< super family Hominoidea< order Primates. Humans belong to the genus Homo< family Hominidae< super family Hominoidea< order Primates. It is believed that the split of the Hominid from the Hominoid line occured around 6 to 8 million years ago, meaning that the ancestors of humans and orangutans split 6~8 million years ago.
If we are going to bring up any species just because of the hair colour, regardless of the genetic/biological distance from humans, than any thing is possible. For example, Lions have blonde hair.
The thread is about humans however, or the hominid species (which is a primate group that includes humans and all fossil forms leading to man only) at the most.

Originally posted by Paul Can anyone prove the original humans weren't blond and black hair�a recent development?

From the fact that Australoid peoples such as the Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians have also developed blonde and light hair colours, obviously (from the lack of correlation between the hair, eyes and skin colours in them) due to another independant genetic mutation different from that of the Caucasoid peoples, and from the fact that Neanderthals also had variety of hair colours due to different genetic mutations from those of the modern humans, we can assume that blonde hair or light hair colours can appear due to numerous reasons and various independant mutations.
From all this, It is possible that some early humans (I assume that by ''early humans'' you mean modern humans before leaving Africa, of 200,000 years ago to 80~40,000 years ago) had blonde or light coloured hair. It is also quite possible that blonde or light coloured hair appeared and disappeared a few times in modern humans since they came in to being, each time with diffrent and independant mutations. However as I wrote before, since there is the strong and selective pressure from the UV radiation and no need for the skin to lighten in order to absorb vitamin D, in my opinion the possibility for the majority of humans before leaving Africa to have had lighter coloured hair than black is low.

Originally posted by Zagros I think in the same way that DNA has been used to track human migration it has been used to confirm that early humans were not blond/e and did not have coloured eyes beyond the brown range. � This is what I remember reading - so I am not 100% certain.I also remember reading that it first evolved in females - though i can't remember how that hypothesis was reached.

This is really interesting Zagros, Thanks for the information. I had never heard of it. I am quite curious as to how they could tell about hair and eye colours from Y-chromosome haplogroups and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, which I believe were used to track human migrations.
That it first evolved in females is quite possible and believable, since the blonde hair in Australoids occurs in a much highter frequency in females.
Perhaps it has something to do with sexual selection.

Edited by omshanti - 19-Dec-2007 at 00:08

There are some climatological causes for light and dark skins, mainly that dark skin protects better against UV radiation (which is why they burn less fast, of course), whereas light skin needs less direct sunlight on it for the body to produce sufficient Vitamin D. In an outdoors living people, dark skin in the north is no problem, as they will catch enough sunlight by being outside so much, and most dark-skinned people in the north are nomadic. But for people who stay inside a lot, it can be problematic: over here, immigrant women, mainly from Morocco, who do not tend to come out much, and heavily veiled when they do, are at risk from vitamin D deficiency, and are advised to go outside at least half an hour a day without a veil, and with uncovered hands, in the back yard for example.

I think that is about constitution. At more robust constitution, living in a cold area would lead to fair skin, hair and eyes.

In Romania we have the most fair haired in the North but also the most darked, especialy in the plain regions, including the great Southern Plain. In general, the mountainous people have blonde hair, except the Moldavians from Eastern parts which are blonde haired and they live in a low-hill region.


But the delicate constitution have dark haired in any condition, due to metabolism.

Edited by Menumorut - 24-Dec-2007 at 11:27

I don't know in Bulgaria, but in Romania there are some areas with characteristic typologies. Most distinct is Maramures (extreme North), which are mostly blonde. Also, in North and East Moldavia the people are blond and have a "Russian" look. In Transylvania there are areas were most people are blonde: Bistrita-Nasaud, Hunedoara, Alba. But the types of faces at these groups are different. I can recognize someone from Hunedoara, is a type seeming with the faces of Dacians on the Trajan's Column, a type of blonde dinaric (atheltic profile at males, faces with well profiled traits).

At the darker haired groups too can be made distinctions. The people from Romanian Plain (Southern Romania) are different, say, for the ones from Central Modavia. In the mountainous part of Wallachia there are several types and some too are identifiable in a measure.


All these are the result of centuries and millenia of population movement and mixages.

It is almost not any resemblance between a Romanian from North of country and one from South, or one from West and one from East etc. What is common is the language (an impressive unity, due perhaps to the low level of population in the migration period) and the feelings.

See if i can put in 2 maps over blondes and eye color here , and i think it is also milk tolerance in this game of quizz to , then we are landing in  "Fal Byggden" an ancient place whit stone megalits from 6000 years ago.

Edited by Tore The Dog - 17-Feb-2008 at 12:25

Sence they where up far north ? some Endogami perhaps , and sexual atracktion.

Edited by Tore The Dog - 17-Feb-2008 at 13:03

Indeed very interesting article, Serge L! I was always thinking that the dark eye color is dominant, when someone has both dark-eyed and light-eyed predecessors.

According to the latest information, blue eyes came from one common ancestor form out've the near East during the Neolithic.

The theory that blue eyes was miraculously created because to attract more mates is nonsense really. Not all brunette's are brown eyed and not all blonds are blue eyed besides, moreover two brown eyed parents can produce a blue eyed child.

Also the idea that Red hair came from Neanderthals is moronic. Just because they had it too, doest mean that somehow Scottish or Irish people are Neanderthal. Red hair is a mutation its a very small minority percentage  found in populations and always has been. Its really beyond stupidity but its rather typical of science news, lots of ridiculous claims and silliness its often hard to separate fact from fiction with alotve these articles. Too many in science prefer the mixed race extinction of Neanderthals, despite the fact that no current genetic nor anthropological evidence shows such, yet its still pushed forward.

Just looking at some Neanderthal reconstruction's too,  some like  portraying  them looking way too modern human..namely like Rupert Grint from  Harry Potter fame:



The reality is that they wouldve looked more like this:




The Germanic's themeselves vary, they arent a race of clones:

Ancient Germans weren't so fair

http://dienekes.50webs.com/blog/archives/000634.html

________________

*Blond hair can be found in non-Caucasoid populations:




Edited by Tyranos - 17-Feb-2008 at 17:49