The Applied Epistemology Library :: View topic

Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London

THE HYPERBOREANS: HUMAN ORIGINS PART VII - Continued.... The simple Hyperborean model would have us classify the Australian Aborigines, like the marsupials that share their island, as the last remaining "southerly types" of their kind, and classify all other humans as "hybrid northerly types" who have both slowly and (more recently) rapidly invaded the southern hemisphere over the thousands of years since the beginning of this last glacial/cold period (ice age).

I say that this simple model is both true and inaccurate. It is true in the broad strokes but inaccurate for failing to account for the wide variety of traits evident among many peoples, particularly those native to our post-glacial southern hemisphere.

So OK-ish.

Given that Australia's Aborigines represent the typical "southerly" human, we can conclude that northerly humans exclusively developed and adopted machinery (indeed; our aim is to attribute to "northern exposure," the need to develop machinery). The use of the bow, which requires the design and manufacture of two independent components (bow plus arrow) and also twine (useful also for textile making), thus immediately marks a human as a northerly type. Thus, every human being that presently lives in the global south, excepting the Australian Aborigines, is a northerly type.

It can be no coincidence then that the Wallace and Webber lines separate not just marsupials and placentals but also southerly and northerly types of humans. North of the lines, all humans have the bow; south of the lines, no humans have the bow. Clearly; there is something about this region of Indonesia that slows the progress of all invasive species (though what that is remains elusive to me).

This is not a small confession. If it is just one bunch of people, any you're hanging you whole hat on it, why can't it be they found boomerangs better than bow-and-arrows for their particular (and unique) brand of fauna? (Or whatever.)

The Wallace and Webber lines are indeed a "front" (in keeping with my initial insight), marking the current limit of the southward progress of northerly species, but the region of these lines clearly functions also as an insulator, if not an impregnable barrier. We may yet discover the nature of this insulator but I've not yet gotten that far.

You better had because there is no earthly reason why the Wallace/Webber lines (which can at a push hold back placental mammals) could hold back human beings.

Nevertheless; the human beings that are present on Planet Earth appear to be of more complex composition than the mere binary division my hypothetical equatorial barrier facilitates. "Northerly" types, which are infinitely more numerous than the remaining southerly types, come in many varieties.

Perhaps I missed something but these 'varieties' which seem to me much more similar one to another than they do to us 'northerly types', have not been subject to the Wallace/Webber limitation ordinance, have they?

Some of that variety I account for with interbreeding between Hyperboreans and the local robust humans, which were originally stratified at various northern latitudes. But, given this origin, how did those northerly types that spearheaded the invasion of the global south---and which are now native to those lands immediately north of the Wallace and Webber Lines (but range as far and wide as Brazil and Paupa New Guinea)---come to inherit at least some Hyperborean genetics and technology and yet so few of the other characteristics we generally associate with civilization?

I'd dearly like at least one striking characteristic.

One characteristic in particular is strikingly absent among them. An aversion to cannibalism.

I didn't see that coming.

An uncomfortable truth about the Aborigines, not yet mentioned, is that they were not only given to nakedness when discovered, they were also partial to eating each other. Strangely, despite sharing little else culturally or genetically with those humans to their immediate north, they did share with the Indonesians this same propensity. The natives of the southwestern Pacific were known man-eaters into the 20th century. And this trait they shared with the far-away natives of Brazil who, to this day, are still not so finicky as to refuse a morsel of man-flesh.

Cannibalism got through but not the bow and arrow.

All of those peoples are known also for their extreme hostility to outsiders. The hate they have for one another is what enabled tribes sharing the same hunting acreages to develop not only divergent costuming but also mutually indecipherable languages. That would be impossible except they went millennia without cause or desire even to speak with one another! I doubt they differentiate between outsiders and beasts, hunting and consuming everything but family members.

This is indeed a striking characteristic.

These are not northerly traits. Canibalism, in particular, is known only in the global south. It doesn't exist in the north, except perhaps as ritual and then only among the most southerly peoples. We seem to have then a second type of human, in addition to Aborigine, which is not fully "modern." This second type of non-modern man, however, is also not truly Southerly.

I am unaware of any name for these peoples---one that encompasses their types all the way from Brazil to Cambodia (and possibly Southern Africa)---so I will have to invent one. I propose we call them "bowmen." Men with bows---and little else but loincloths. The question is: What is the origin of these bowmen?

My guess is that bow and arrows, being weapons of war as well as hunting implements, were used by visitors with evil intent. And eagerly embraced by the natives for when they came next time.

Display posts from previous: