Early Briton Had Dark Skin and Light Eyes

[Techno-Druid]

(Source)

In 1903, the remains of a 10,000-year-old man were discovered in the Cheddar Gorge of Somerset, England. Dubbed the “Cheddar Man,” it remains the oldest almost complete skeleton ever found in Britain. Over the years, research has shown that he stood around five-foot-five, he was well-fed and he likely died in his early 20s. Now, as Paul Rincon of the BBC reports, genome analysis has revealed that Cheddar Man had dark brown skin and blue eyes—a discovery that adds to a growing body of research indicating that the evolution of human skin color was far more complex than previously believed.

The genome analysis was conducted by researchers at London’s Natural History Museum, who extracted DNA from Cheddar man’s inner ear bone, located at the base of the skull. Experts at the University College of London then used the DNA information to create a facial reconstruction of Cheddar Man, rendering his dark complexion, deep brown hair, and light eyes in life-like detail. The research and remodeling process will be chronicled in an upcoming documentary, The First Brit: Secrets of the 10,000 year old man, which will air on the UK’s Channel 4.


As Hannah Devlin of the Guardian explains, Cheddar Man’s appearance has been the subject of considerable interest because he belonged to the first wave of migrants to establish a continuous human presence in Britain after around 11,700 years ago; before that, humans had temporarily settled in the region and cleared out during various ice ages. Around ten percent of people with white British ancestry are descended from this group of first settlers, and previous reconstructions of Cheddar Man have depicted him with pale skin and light hair.

But the new discovery suggests that light skin evolved in European populations much later than is commonly believed. “People define themselves by which country they’re from, and they assume that their ancestors were just like them,” Alfons Kennis, who worked on the reconstruction, tells New Scientist. “And then suddenly new research shows that we used to be a totally different people with a different genetic makeup.”

I already knew to a degree that the first anatomically modern humans in Western Eurasia (Europe/Middle East) had darker skin up until a few thousand years ago. I think it's interesting to look back and see how our ancestors physically differed from us while still being modern humans.

@Connal @Theodarzna

[Stelio Kontos]

(Source)



I already knew to a degree that the first anatomically modern humans in Western Eurasia (Europe/Middle East) had darker skin up until a few thousand years ago. I think it's interesting to look back and see how our ancestors physically differed from us while still being modern humans.

@Connal @Theodarzna

Incoming shitstorm from certain north European posters...

[Deleted]

I’d be curious about what caused the evolution towards lighter skin. I’m assuming darker skin provides some protection from the sun and so it’s more necessary in the south, but people still get burned up north all the time.

Yeah essentially because the dark skin blocks more of the suns rays, we needed lighter skin to get enough D-vitamin and such from the sun.

It is why a lot of dark skinned immigrants who live here needs to take D-vitamin supplements during the winter, simply because they don't absorb anywhere near enough sun.

[Deleted]

I find it more interesting how some get angry about their ancestors before they even were called homo sapiens.

[Torto]

Trying to create controversy where there isn't any, trying to bait people over things that doesn't matter. Although I'd love to know how they determined blue eyes with DNA taken from the inner ear.

[Deleted]

Trying to create controversy where there isn't any, trying to bait people over things that doesn't matter. Although I'd love to know how they determined blue eyes with DNA taken from the inner ear.

DNA is not specific to areas, it is the core blueprint, meaning the source of it doesn't matter, it will still be the same.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Yeah, take it with about a pound of salt. If it's true, then it's true, I can't say it really makes any difference to me. I mean I think if I did a DNA test and somehow it came back I was part Mermaid, I think I would go, "Eh, that's interesting" and then move on.

I might be concerned about eating Tuna, I mean would that be considered cannibalism then.

[Techno-Druid]

“But the new discovery suggests that light skin evolved in European populations much later than is commonly believed”.

I mean, you bolded it. I don't think many thought dark skin humans didn’t inhabit Europe at one time, this is just proving that they (light skin humans) came later than what was originally thought.

I think it's more of a perception that modern humans have always mostly looked how we look now.

[Deleted]

"he stood around five-foot-five, he was well-fed and he likely died in his early 20s. Now, as Paul Rincon of the BBC reports, genome analysis has revealed..."

Read that as gnome analysis. I'll show myself out.

[Tijuana]

(Source)



I already knew to a degree that the first anatomically modern humans in Western Eurasia (Europe/Middle East) had darker skin up until a few thousand years ago. I think it's interesting to look back and see how our ancestors physically differed from us while still being modern humans.

@Connal @Theodarzna

I read this same article, or one similar. It was fascinating to me.

I think though, the reality is, white skin is the anomaly in the human race. At east, as I understand it, it's a regressive gene. I don't think that really means much, but it's interesting I guess.

[Mormolyce]

I mean, you bolded it. I don't think many thought dark skin humans didn’t inhabit Europe at one time

I bet a lot don't know that actually.

I’d be curious about what caused the evolution towards lighter skin. I’m assuming darker skin provides some protection from the sun and so it’s more necessary in the south, but people still get burned up north all the time.

I've read a lot of theories, the real answer is "we don't know", but here's one example:

The paper doesn’t specify why these genes might have been under such strong selection. But the likely explanation for the pigmentation genes is to maximize vitamin D synthesis, said paleoanthropologist Nina Jablonski of Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), University Park, as she looked at the poster’s results at the meeting. People living in northern latitudes often don’t get enough UV to synthesize vitamin D in their skin so natural selection has favored two genetic solutions to that problem—evolving pale skin that absorbs UV more efficiently or favoring lactose tolerance to be able to digest the sugars and vitamin D naturally found in milk. “What we thought was a fairly simple picture of the emergence of depigmented skin in Europe is an exciting patchwork of selection as populations disperse into northern latitudes,” Jablonski says. “This data is fun because it shows how much recent evolution has taken place.”

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/...ved-white-skin

- - - Updated - - -

Trying to create controversy where there isn't any, trying to bait people over things that doesn't matter. Although I'd love to know how they determined blue eyes with DNA taken from the inner ear.

It doesn't matter where you get DNA from, the entire 23 chromosome set is in every cell.

I read this same article, or one similar. It was fascinating to me.

I think though, the reality is, white skin is the anomaly in the human race. At east, as I understand it, it's a regressive gene. I don't think that really means much, but it's interesting I guess.

You mean recessive. But it's not that simple, skin colour is encoded by more than one gene.

[Najnaj]

As a Brit myself, I genuinely thought most ancient humans were dark skinned

Our ancestors were light skinned even in Africa as they were covered in hair and no sun block was needed. A few millennia of Northern Norway and Ireland turned them back to looking as if they were raised on white bread in a dark basement. Heavy pigmentation seems to have developed as we lost out coat of hair but was not originally our natural state. Northern Europeans did not develop their coloring, they reverted to it.

[Dald]

So... Bretons, roger.

[Deleted]

Incoming shitstorm from certain north European posters...

The swedes who claim they evolved their blue eyes? Or is it just anyone that says this is fake news.

[KrakHed]

This kind of shit is pretty known. Even a sensible racist wouldn't be offended to learn his ancestors had dark skin, because a sensible racist cares about more than skin color.

Most racists aren't very sensible, so I suppose too many people act like this is a big deal.

[Stelio Kontos]

sensible racist

>sensible
>racist

Choose one

[Techno-Druid]

The swedes who claim they evolved their blue eyes? Or is it just anyone that says this is fake news.

This certainly isn't fake news, this was published by Smithsonian.

[Svifnymr]

I’d be curious about what caused the evolution towards lighter skin. I’m assuming darker skin provides some protection from the sun and so it’s more necessary in the south, but people still get burned up north all the time.

I mean, really part of the problem is the idea that you're either white or black. It's like the "who built the pyramids" thing. I always assumed the skin tone of folks in the middle east was default, with the really dark skin and the lighter skins being more recent, but maybe the super dark skin was original and all other skin tones are due to clothing/ sunlight exposure. Either way, whatever change occurred happened before any of the societies that we know of.

I figure some of the skin changes might be due to Neanderthal or Denisovan or whatever, changes that may have occurred much further back along the evolutionary scale and then recombined with the home sapiens much later, leading to more diverse sapiens, but... eh, whatever.

[Kraenen]

I’d be curious about what caused the evolution towards lighter skin. I’m assuming darker skin provides some protection from the sun and so it’s more necessary in the south, but people still get burned up north all the time.

This is generally it. Also notice women are lighter skinned than men - it provides an evolutionary advantage to childbirth to have less melanin which results in greater levels of Vitamin D, for example.

[Mihalik]

I read this same article, or one similar. It was fascinating to me.

I think though, the reality is, white skin is the anomaly in the human race. At east, as I understand it, it's a regressive gene. I don't think that really means much, but it's interesting I guess.

It's not an anomaly. It's an adaptation to low light environments. As an example of convergent evolution the genes responsible for light skin among Asians is different than the one among Europeans.