This is the account of the discovery of a skull that has the potential to change what we know about human evolution, and a suppression and cover-up which followed.
In 1959, in an area called Chalkidiki in Petralona, Northern Greece, a shepherd came across a small opening to a cave, which became visible when a thick covering of snow finally melted. He gathered a group of villagers to help him clear the entrance so they could go inside and explore. They found a cave rich in stalactites and stalagmites. But they also found something surprising – a human skull embedded in the wall (later research also uncovered a huge number of fossils including pre-human species, animal hair, fossilized wood, and stone and bone tools).
The skull was given to the University of Thessaloniki in Greece by the President of the Petralona Community. The agreement was that once the research was done, a museum would be opened featuring the findings from the Petralona cave, and the skull would be returned to be displayed in the museum – something that never happened.
Dr Aris Poulianos, member of the UNESCO's IUAES (International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences), later founder of the Anthropological Association of Greece, and an expert anthropologist who was working at the University of Moscow at the time, was invited by the Prime Minister of Greece to return to Greece to take a position of a University Chair in Athens. This was due to the publication of his book, ‘The Origins of the Greeks’, which provides excellent research showing that Greek people didn’t originate from the Slavic nations but were indigenous to Greece. Upon his return to Greece, Dr Poulianos was made aware of the discovery of the skull at Petralona, and immediately started studying the Petralona cave and skull.
The ‘Petralona man’, or Archanthropus of Petralona, as it has since been called, was found to be 700,000 years old, making it the oldest human europeoid (presenting European traits) of that age ever discovered in Europe. Dr Poulianos’ research showed that the Petralona man evolved separately in Europe and was not an ancestor of a species that came out of Africa.
In 1964, independent German researchers, Breitinger and Sickenberg, tried to dismiss Dr Poulianos’ findings, arguing that the skull was only 50,000 years old and was indeed an ancestor that came from Africa. However, research published in the US in 1971 in the prestigious Archaeology magazine, backed up the findings that the skull was indeed 700,000 years old. This was based on an analysis of the cave’s stratigraphy and the sediment in which the skull was embedded. Further research in the cave discovered isolated teeth and two pre-human skeletons dating back 800,000 years, as well as other fossils of various species.
Today, most academics who have analyzed the Petralona remains say that the cranium of the Archanthropus of Petralona belongs to an archaic hominid distinguished from Homo erectus, and from both the classic Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans, but showing characterists of all those species and presenting strong European traits. A skull dating back 700,000 which is either Homo sapien or part Homo sapien is in direct conflict with the Out of Africa theory of human evolution.
Further excavations continued in the cave of Petralona with the participation of international researchers (46 specialists from 12 separate countries), which provided further proof of Dr Poulianos’ claims, including remarkable findings like fossilized pieces of wood, an oak leaf, animal hair and coprolites, which enabled accurate dating, as well as the almost continuous presence of stone and bone tools of the Archanthropus evolutionary stage, from the lower (750,000 years) to the upper (550,000 years) layers of sediment within the cave.
The research, after an interruption due to the dictatorship in Greece, continued up to 1983. It was then ordered by the government that all excavations at the site were forbidden to anyone, including the original archaeological team, and for 15 years nobody had access to the site or to the findings – no reason was provided by the government. Was this denial of access to prevent the extraction of whatever new scientific conclusions remained hidden within the incredible fossils embedded within the layers of the caves’ walls?
After the Anthropological Society of Greece took the case to the courts, 15 years later they were again allowed access to the cave. Since then the Ministry of Culture is trying in any way to overcome the Courts decision and further trials proceed.
Dr Poulianos’ findings contradicted conventional views regarding human evolution and his research was suppressed. Dr Poulianos and his wife were physically attacked and injured in their home in 2012 and the culprits were never found. He and his team have been denied further access to the cave to complete their research and study, and the whereabouts of the skull is now unknown.
Today a sign sits outside the cave of Petralona stating that the skull found in the cave was 300,000 years old, and on Wikipedia today you will see references dismissing the evidence and trying to date the Petralona skull within acceptable parameters – between 160,000 and 240,000 years old.
Recently, Professor C.G. Nicholas Mascie-Taylor of the University of Cambridge sent a letter to the Ministry of Culture in Greece saying that the correct date of the skull is 700,000 years old and not 300,000. He has also challenged the government’s suppression of information regarding this incredible discovery.
The Greek Ministry of Education, Religions, Culture and Sports,
Bouboulinas 20-22,
Athens 106 82,
Greece
5 September 2012
Dear Sir,
I am writing on behalf of the European Anthropological Association, which is the umbrella professional and academic association linking all of the national European biological anthropology and human biology societies, to express our concerns about the conservation of the Petralona Cave and Skull, the misinformation of the dating of the skull, as well as the treatment of personnel associated with the conservation of the Cave.
The bases of our concerns are that the skull has been damaged through many scratches and the crown of a tooth (1st molar) cut off. As requested by Anthropological Association of Greece what is required is a detailed description of the present status of the skull, so that no one in future can arbitrarily damage it further. There is also the problem of dating which has been scientifically dated at about 700,000 years ago not 300,000 as is given at the information desk. There is a very detailed record of the excavations and findings which need to receive further public presentation but which have never been catalogued so as to prevent specimens going missing.
It is very unfortunate that the Greek Archaeological Department stopped Dr Aris Poulianos from further work in the Cave without any explanation. It is also very worrying that Dr Poulianos and his wife were physically attacked and injured in their home earlier this year and the culprits have not been found. He was also verbally abused when attempting to give an invited presentation to teachers and school children.
Senior anthropologists and geologists have also been denied access to the Cave and the specimens for further study on a number of occasions without substantive reasons. Earlier this year there has also been misinformation given to the Greek Parliament concerning financial aspects of the Cave.
I look forward to receiving answers to these questions.
Yours faithfully
Professor C G N Mascie-Taylor MA, PhD, ScD (all Cambridge), FSB, FNAS (Hungary)
Professor of Human Population Biology and Health and President of the European Anthropological Association
The most important conclusion of Dr Poulianos' research regards the co-existence of all main anthropological types (African – Kobi, Asian – Beijing and European – Petralona) at the same almost period (700,000, 500,000 and 750,000 respectively). That means: the appearance of the today human main populations (races or even better phyllae - from the Greek language and that’s why polyphyletic etc) is tending to almost 1,000,000 m.y.a. and not to only 10,000 or 30,000 years as currently considered world wide.
However, independently if there is a scientific dispute on the above, it is only sad to become aware that research is not allowed to those who are not coordinated to the “standard” knowledge, risking even their lives in front of gun shooters.
Is this a cover up of an incredible discovery that the powers-that-be do not want us to have access to? You be the judge.
Update from editor 31 December, 2018: Dr Poulianos wrote to Ancient Origins to state that unfortunately the suppression of information regarding the Petralona skull has continued:
“Experiencing the above I am asserting that the prohibition of research regarding human history is due to the following (most obvious, i.e. not exposing political) reasons:
Various (Worldwide) Universities and their state allied forums have the power to influence all of the small range national institutions in order to achieve the aforementioned prohibition. In turn, this is most probably due to the fact that such research is allowed only to some “confidential” persons. Thus, re-righting chapters of human history is only their “right”. Whoever does not belong to such clubs and / or forums has to be stopped by all existing means, even by falsifying the truth against well documented evidence (i.e. without providing any scientific contradicting argument). Obviously I am asserting that knowledge is under control, especially what concerns human history. Therefore I agree with Lenie Reedijk’s description regarding the “Cover Up”, as well as the following comments to her article.”
By John Black
Related Links
The 40th Anniversary since the discovery of the Petralona Archanthropus' skull
The significance of the fossil hominid skull from Petralona, Greece
Related Videos
Where is your ABSOLUTE proof
Permalink
In reply to Out of Africa by deb burks (not verified)
Where is your ABSOLUTE proof that ALL humans have to come out of Africa? I totally disagree with the out of Africa theory, there are too many finds that keep pushin the "certain" dates off the table. And there are too many limits on the DNA studies as well. We have 7 Billion people on the planet so how does the DNA of 1000 to 2000 people show any NORM or STANDARD in our history and evolution. That is only 0.00000029% of the population; there is nothing statistically realistic about that fraction.
No Neanderthal remains have
Permalink
In reply to Out of Africa by deb burks (not verified)
No Neanderthal remains have ever been found in sub Saharan Africa; ditto Denisovan. At Dmanisi in Georgia, the fossil remains, remarkably in tact, appear to be homo erectus and are older than homo erectus found in Africa. If all humanity's origins can be definitively as opposed to speculatively to Africa then it was an exodus that occurred nearly two million years ago, not the current utterly preposterous suggestion of 60-100kya. Out of Asia is still a viable theory but sadly if you say that out loud, many will accuse you of being a racist, a Nazi or white supremacist, as if science serves social agendas as opposed to a search for accuracy and truth.
seriously? You're kidding
Permalink
In reply to No Neanderthal remains have by Ekaterina (not verified)
seriously? You're kidding right? Out of Asia? what exactly is that even? Of course an exodus took place at the time of Homo Erectus 2 million + years ago! It hurts my mind how little people actually do their homework before commenting on these things. The question isn't whether or not Homo Erectus left Africa (and evolved into Neanderthal, Denisovan, etc.). That is a well known and well supported scientific fact. The question is whether HOMO SAPIEN evolved from HOMO Erectus simultaneously everywhere in Asia (called the multi-regional hypothesis [not out of Asia, whatever that even means]), or if it evolved from a specific variant of Homo Erectus IN AFRICA (the Out-of-Africa hypothesis)! as for now, the evidence suggests that Homo Sapien evolved from a variant of Homo Erectus IN AFRICA, and then left to eventually meet up with its distant cousins (also evolved from Homo Erectus I might add) the Neanderthals, Denisovans, Floresienses, etc. I am sincerely boggled at how many people don't even seem to understand what it is they are actually arguing against, including the author of this article! While I am not denying that Homo Sapien could have plausibly evolved from an Erectus somewhere in Asia (or even elsewhere) the oldest fossil evidence for Homo Sapien is in Southern Africa! Only following this time do we see evidence for HOMO SAPIEN elsewhere in the world, suggesting a migration by HOMO SAPIEN OUT OF AFRICA. this has nothing to do with a social agenda... at least not for me. It's science, plain and simple.
Your post is filled with
Permalink
In reply to seriously? You're kidding by Anthropos323 (not verified)
Your post is filled with hypothetical statements presented as scientific fact that it screams "I once took Anthropology 101 online and got a C-!" The evidence you suggest that proves AMH evolved solely in Africa before spreading and replacing is not convincing. The evidence, such as it is, pertains to fossils that include robust, archaic features, yet are still categorized as homo sapiens. The few that might not reflect features atypical of homo sapiens or AMH are so incomplete and scant it renders their taxonomy erroneous and baseless at worst, disingenuous and suspect at best. I am basically a subscriber to Multiregionalism insofar as I think the evidence we have thus far (fossil and genetics, although there remains significant conflict between the two) suggests that populations evolved in relative isolation for long periods of time. The Out of Africa theory became pc gospel around the time of Mitochondrial Eve, which allegedly proved that we are all the descendants of either one woman or a small group of women, who Rebecca Cann, one of the study's authors, claimed "probably lived in Africa." Notice Cann did not state that Africa WAS the origin of homo sapiens just that she believed it was probable. However, even Cann's (along with the late Wilson and Stoneking) "probably" is based on shoddy data. OOA was predicated on assumptions, one of the major ones related to rate of mutation and the so called "molecular clock." There's too much conjecture and prediction factored into this concept and upon closer examination by other scientists, the molecular clock did not prove accurate. One of the other concepts that has played a starring role in OOA is African genetic diversity. This led OOA's authors' to make yet another assumption (guesses ARE NOT scientific nor are they "evidence") that it meant Africans were the oldest population because their diversity was because time equals mutations and therefore, because they were the oldest, all other populations descended from them. My sister is older than I am, but I am not descended from her. A populations age does NOT speak to whether other populations are descended from them or not. Also, African genetic diversity could just as likely, if not more, be the result of the high variation that we know existed on the continent. Interbreeding between these variable populations would easily lead to more genetically diverse descendants. Yet, the three scientists who authored OOA turned away from any other obvious or plausible explanation and picked which explanations best fit their emerging theory. Legitimate scientific theories are not predicated on such arbitrary, capricious choices. I could go on, but from your post you clearly possess a shallow depth of knowledge in this area and do not have any advanced degrees in relative fields.
OOA or out of the Dark?
Permalink
In reply to Your post is filled with by Ekaterina (not verified)
#EKaterina,
Thank you. I appreciated your calm well-defined/determined, non-rock-throwing post in this matter.
It is so easy to be bogged down in minutae on research that doesn’t actually lend itself to – especially – a politically correct solution.
The “Academic” and not necessarily sound-science based projections made from amassed data can be overwhelming to those not within a specific field.
In this case, as with many, there is a missing factor in such long bow drawn conclusions by people working from a very, very narrow set of data.
What on earth would give any geologically/topologically aware researcher, the idea that Africa would be a logical source for the development and the even more extreme idea of the incredibly venturesome colonisation of of the rest of the planet by super-primitives?
Had the theory been originated to say everything began from Australia, we might have a chance of some credibility for a single Out Of Anywhere flight of fancy, at least from a geological/topgraphical point of view.
However, I would be first to agree that the O.O.Australia theory is definitely not a politically acceptable one….