Mapping Human History: Genes, Race, and Our Common Origins

This is a very well written and engaging book that tells a story that has been told elsewhere by other scientists, but is still worth reading for this author's particular insights and perspective - and despite the fact that our knowledge of genetic history has increased dramatically since the writing of this book.The following is intended as a partial summary of Olson's conclusions: Olson begins by observing that most Americans make immediate assumptions about a person's place of origin were they to meet someone on a street in an American city. Dark skin signifies a person of African descent, an extra fold of skin over the eye lid signifies an Asian, a prominent nose, deep-set eyes and light skin signify a person of European ancestry. The problem with said assumptions is that dark-skinned people are found in southern India, Australia and large parts of Southeast Asia. Not only Asians, but non-Asians found in southern Africa and North and South America also have the same type of eye lids, and light-skinned people are found not only in Europe but in India, Polynesia and the Americas. Not only are appearances skin deep, the truth is that we are all much more closely related than we could ever have imagined. The story begins somewhere in Africa, perhaps Ethiopia or Tanzania or Kenya, with a woman who lived about 150,000 years ago and to whom scientists refer as our genetic Eve. She was not the first human but most certainly the genetic mother of all living human beings. Her descendants, in turn, left Africa about 100,000 years ago and headed into the Middle East. Another 40,000 years later these humans had walked all the way from Saudi Arabia to Papua New Guinea from whence they sailed to Australia 60,000 years ago. This long journey along the coastline of Asia explains the startling commonalities in appearance between the peoples of southern India, Southeast Asia, Australia and Africa. Some 40,000 years ago another group of humans left Africa and then branched off as some moved into Europe while others headed for Southeast Asia and the Far East. Finally, over 10,000 years ago people made their way down a long wide plain that joined Siberia and Alaska and colonized the Americas. Olson combats both racism, racial stereotypes and ethnocentrism. Not only does he mention the horrors of the African slave trade after a detailed discussion of human origins in Africa as well as a genetic history of the Jewish people; he also offers humorous anecdotes about how many people groups are not willing to accept the notion that all humans are ultimately of African descent. Many Chinese, for instance, still believe they are all descended from the Yellow Emperor, Huang Ti, who unified all of China 4,500 years ago. Many Chinese anthropologists argue for a Chinese origin of their people given the existence of "Peking man." Such ethnocentrism forced one Chinese scientist to collect genetic data from over 10,000 Chinese males. After having analyzed the Y Chromosomes of all 10,000 men not a single unusual marker was found to prove a distinctive Chinese origin for the Chinese people. Rather the genetic evidence suggests Chinese, Koreans and Japanese are all descended from southern Asians. There is much greater genetic variation in Southeast Asia, making it clear "modern" Asians first lived in the south and then migrated north. This lack of genetic variation of northern Asians suggests they are late comers to the game even though northern Asians are now the most numerous ethnic group in the world. The explosion of Chinese agriculture 7,000 years ago guaranteed the spread of ethnic Chinese beyond their core homeland. Modern Tibetans, for instance, are a mix of ancient Chinese immigrants and Central Asians. Nevertheless one should not confuse typical northern Asian features such as the epicanthic fold over the eye lid, light skin, and a relatively flat face with the Asian "race" as a whole given the complex layers of people groups and physical characteristics one finds in Asia. On the island of Japan, for instance, two people groups, one with typical Asian features and one with European features have lived alongside one another for over two millennia. The Ainu of northern Japan have light skin and curly hair and are the descendants of a people that lived in Japan for at least 10,000 years. The modern-day Japanese began to arrive no later than 2,300 years ago and slowly pushed the Ainu's ancestors into the northern reaches of the islands. But how could a people with European features be found so far removed from Europe? The answer lies in Central Asia where common ancestors of the Ainu and modern Europeans once lived about 40,000 years ago before one branch migrated to Europe while others remained in Central Asia even as others headed all the way to Siberia and Japan. This also explains why the people of Central Asia to this day, in places such as Kazakhstan, have both typically Asian and European features. The mix can be so startling in such places that one might encounter a light-skinned woman with blue eyes and the "typically" Asian epicanthic fold over the eye lids. Thus Asia is home to peoples descended directly from African explorers, the peoples of Southeast Asia who spread north who developed the more "typical" Asian features in the past 10,000 years and the peoples of Central Asia who retain features common to both Europeans and Asians. Europeans share a common ancestry not only with Ice Age Hunter Gatherers who first colonized Europe 40,000 years ago but they are also related to farmers from the Middle East who brought agriculture with them into Europe as early as 9,000 years ago. Olson mentions the once contentious theory first put forward by Luca Cavalli-Sforza, the true pioneer of human origins, over 40 years ago. Cavalli-Sforza observed even before the advent of genetics that genetic variations among Europeans were most common in southeastern Europe (Greece and the Balkans) and least common in northwestern Europe (Britain and Scandinavia). This theory indirectly suggested southeastern Europeans were less European than their northern counterparts. The idea was unwelcome at the time given the ugly history of racism in Europe and North America but the science of genetics has proved Cavalli-Sforza correct as Middle Eastern farmers did enter Europe via Greece and the rest of the Mediterranean and then intermarried with the Hunter Gatherers of Europe. In fact, every European is a direct descendant of either a Middle Eastern farmer or an Ice Age Hunter Gatherer. Regarding the Americas the Jesuit scholar Jose de Acosta speculated in 1589 that Native Americans had originated in Siberia. This idea has held up rather well over the past 400 years. Until recently there was a consensus that people or peoples from Asia migrated to the Americas around 13,500 years ago given the archaeological evidence. But even this date is now disputed and the issue of Native American genes became more complex as one researcher discovered all American peoples belonged to one of four different genetic haplogroups named A, B, C and D. More, said researcher discovered the corresponding haplogroups near the border of Mongolia and Siberia while the closest of all the haplogroups was discovered in Southeast Asia, signifying Native Americans have been in the Americas for an even longer time than previously believed. To muddy the waters further a fifth genetic group called X was discovered that corresponded more closely to Europeans than to Asians. Did that signify European origins for some Native Americans? Probably not, but the possibilities of who and when the Americas were colonized continue to puzzle the scientists. By the early 1990s it had become clear that scientists could now map the history and origins of the human race even as globalization was endangering many people groups around the world who had remained isolated for thousands of years and who thus held the keys to the mysteries of human origins. Again the pioneering Luca Cavalli-Sforza published an earnest appeal in 1991 to have the genes of the world surveyed and analyzed before it was too late. Many of said people groups were in danger of dying out given war, famine and outright discrimination. The time was ripe for a worldwide survey before it was too late. Surprisingly the reaction to the Human Genome Diversity Project was overwhelmingly negative as scientists feared new outbreaks of racism given the focus on human differences even as Native Americans feared it would be further justification for European Americans to undermine their claims to their ancestral homelands. Despite great opposition the project did proceed but not without grave reservations. The Oklahoma Apache, for instance, did offer their genes for research but requested no genetic or historical correlations be made between themselves and any other Native American tribe. Diversity has not always been a positive for non-Europeans over the past four hundred years. In the final chapter Olson discusses Hawaii and the end of "race." Hawaii is one of the most racially mixed places in the world. Approximately half of the entire Hawaiian population of 1.2 million people are of at least two races and meeting people whose descendants are Portuguese, Filipino, Chinese, and Hawaiian is no rarity there. Hawaii is the most racially diverse state in the US and may be the harbinger of things to come as inter-racial couples are on the rise on the US mainland. Nevertheless racism and discrimination persist even in Hawaii and Olson notes the people who benefit the least from the tourist trade are the original inhabitants of Hawaii, i.e., the native Hawaiians. Positively Hawaiians take pride in their ethnic identity and even the language is taught in the public schools, but this Hawaiian renaissance for better or worse can not be furthered by genetic analyses. Many today who wish to prove their Hawaiian ancestry via genetic testing discover such tests offer no guarantee of one's ethnicity, for the Hawaiians have been intermarrying with non-Hawaiians since Captain Cook arrived in 1778. Therefore many of the most "pure" Hawaiians may discover they have a European Y Chromosome if their male ancestor was a European sailor or the mitochondrial DNA inherited from their mother may have genetic markers that are just as similar to those of a Filipino or a Samoan given the common origins of Hawaiians and other peoples in Southeast Asia and Melanesia. In other words, the geneticist views a person's genes as the byproduct of the ebb and flow of peoples and migrations over thousands of years. Genetic tests should never be allowed to determine one's destiny or shackle one to an identity alien to one's experience as a human being. In the end we are all related to one another and our personal experiences and collective journey as humans across the globe has been vast and complex.

Mapping Human History discusses how the use of mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomal DNA can be used to trace the common origins of humans. Steve builds a case for how humans appeared as a distinct group about 150,000 to 200,000 years ago based on genetic variation we see in people today. By using genetics and the study of haplotypes and haplogroups, it believed that one can trace our ancestry back to a common "Mitochondrial Eve" or an "Adam" neither of which may have lived at the same time. He covers the encounters with other species such as Neanterthal, emergence of agriculture and the development of ethnicity.Steve covers most of the globe in this quest for common origins: Africa, Middle East, Asia, Australia, and Europe and finally the Americas. The evidence tends to support an African origin. I found the discussion of the settlement of the Americas interesting. The ultimate conclusion of all of this is the commonality of the human species. A case is made for the irrelevance of race; this seems to be a prominent theme throughout the book.One thing that I found interesting was the fact that written language goes back only to about 3400 BCE. This tends to support the Bible chronology of humans being created only about 6000 years ago (you can't have written history that predates humans), but then this would be in conflict with the genetic findings.I also read the book The Journey of Man by Spencer Wells which also discusses the genetic history of man. Neither book really discussed, to my satisfaction, exactly how one gets from the genetic variations to the time periods for the existence of humans being promulgated. It would be of value to have more input in this regard.

I turned to Mapping Human History after an exciting odyssey from Noah's Flood through In Search of the Indo-Europeans. I was looking for genetic confirmation of the location of the earliest speakers of Proto-Indo-European. I had concluded from the first book that the great flood had indeed been the torrent that drowned a drying fresh water lake and left it the Black Sea about 7,500 years ago. The second book placed the most likely homeland of the Proto-Indo-Europeans as the area between the Caspian and Black Seas. As only archaeological and linguistic data had been used in that very careful study, I thought I would see what light newer genetic data might throw on the subject.Unfortunately, Olson is so concerned with debunking Aryan myths and assuring us that all men are brothers that he is not much help. He mentions the Caspian and Black Sea homeland as one hypothesis and raises a second one which would make the Proto-Indo-Europeans the first farmers from the Middle East who spread into western Asia and Europe beginning about 9,000 years ago. In spite of his own objections to that theory, he later comes down in favor of the farmers.The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language makes it clear that it developed in a pastoral, horse breeding culture not a primarily farming one. Olson's genetic data is overwhelmed by his proselytizing. He reports that the mitochondrial DNA now in Europe reflects several broad waves of immigration into the continent. He says that 10% came from the original "out of Africa" group. The majority came during the waxing and waning of the Ice age, "probably as the result of a continuous trickle of people from the Middle East", and finally, "about one-fifth from the movement of Middle-Eastern farmers into Europe ". Olson wants to deny the overwhelming evidence for the steppe origins of the Indo-Europeans, I think he is being politically correct. I would rather he just be correct.

The book does well at explaining complicated science and putting it in verbiage everyone can understand. Good book based upon current science methodology and current paradigms of thought. The author doesn't do well with accepting scientific reasoning outside of the current paradigm.

I was not impressed enough by the book, it is now a bit out of date, as new data are becoming availible with the genetics advances.

Sehr interessant, bloß schade, dass US-Bhhcer immer auf so billigem Papier gedruckt werden. Trotzdem: lesenswert!

Als gebrauchtes Buch ist das Buch gut