First Posted September 08, 2002
Revised January 11, 2003
Minor grammatical revision October 30, 2003
More Than Human: Sentinels and Guides as Non-Human Species
by De Engi
Much is known about Sentinels and Guides. Much more is speculated. But many questions remain: Why is a Sentinel able to do the things they do? How does a Guide help control and focus a Sentinel's ability? What is the connection between a Sentinel and a Guide?
However, one question has never even been asked.
What if Sentinels and Guides aren't even Human?
What if both Sentinels and Guides are part of two non-human species? Two species that evolved around the same time as Humans, and at about the same pace - but not from the same line of hominids.
Ninety-nine percent of everything on the planet Earth is genetically identical. All the birds and dogs and elephants. There is only approximately a ten percent genetic difference between one living being and another. The genetic difference between a Human and a Chimpanzee, for instance, is only about one percent.
What if the genetic difference between a Human and a Sentinel, or a Human and a Guide, or a Sentinel and a Guide, is also about one percent?
Out of data from the human fossil record as well as from the laboratories of molecular biology, came the prevailing opinion as of 1996, that suggests that between 5 and 8 million years ago, there lived in Africa a hominoid which would ultimately give rise to the first hominids.
Anatomist and paleoanthropologist Russell Tuttle, from the University of Chicago, believes Humans evolved from bipedal arboreals of the Miocene period (5-23 million years ago, with the furthest ancestors of Humans probably arising between 5 and 7 million years ago), who spent their days hunting for food on the ground, and their nights sleeping in trees for safety. They slowly became solely terrestrial (ground-dwelling). Owen Lovejoy, on the other hand, believes that some form of arboreal, in traversing the expanding savannahs of that period, would have encountered carrion left by the predators, as well as young or ailing animals. Getting this food back to the forest would have required that it be carried. Lovejoy believes that this food would have been “useful only to those who, due to natural genetic variation resulting in some forms being more disposed to carrying than others, were able to walk bipedally, enabling them to carry objects, in this case, food.” Lovejoy also believes that “this early hominid behavior might have resulted in the early formation of hominid pair-bonding which would have led the males to begin to recognize their mates, to provision their mates and to become more attentive to their offspring than are modern day non-human primates.” This pair-bonding, again according to Lovejoy, might have lead to the beginnings of the nuclear, and, ultimately, the extended family. Such a circumstance would have had a profound effect on the reproductive behavior of these early hominids. For example, the closest living relatives of human beings are the bonobo and common chimpanzee (Pan troglodyte) whose reproductive behaviors and cycles are vastly different from modern humans. Lovejoy hypothesizes that if “the nuclear and extended family had its beginnings in these early hominid groups, females would not have been totally responsible for the care of the offspring. With the care of the offspring now shared by a nuclear group, hominid females were then free to produce more offspring and thus the human birth cycle was established. It cannot be an accident that living chimps, particularly the common chimp, generally have only one offspring which matures in six years and for which she is responsible. During that period, if the offspring is healthy, the chimp mother does not go into estrus. She is solely responsible for the care of the infant. Having more than one infant at a time therefore would prove evolutionarily disadvantageous since two offspring could not be cared for properly by only one mother. The human condition, however, is remarkably different, which explains why the number of chimpanzees who live on this planet number only several thousand while human beings number into the billions. Returning to Lovejoy's model, the elements of bipedality, carrying and sharing, and the notion of reduced birth spacing in humans are all interlinking ideas intertwined in an elaborate feedback system.”
(However, if Lovejoy is correct, then this predilection for pair-bonding does not explain the Sentinel mating drive, which seems to be entirely different from human reproductive behavior. Human females’ sex drive is not solely dependent upon her estrus cycle, nor does she display an overwhelming urge to mate for the purpose of procreation - except for the infamous “biological clock” syndrome, in which an older female without offspring feels the need to reproduce before she becomes incapable of doing so. However, even in that case, the need to mate is never an uncontrollable compulsion. In contrast, the mating urge of Sentinels seems more like that of chimpanzees and other animals who mate only once in a specific time period, depending upon their life-span, and the speed at which offspring mature. [For chimps, it’s once every three to four years]. This mating drive would be better explained if Sentinels remained solitary , with the females, having to care for the young on their own, only going into estrus say, every five years or so. There are several different mating behaviors shown in nature at that point. For example, the female might then secrete pheromones which would alert all males in the area to the female’s readiness to mate. Then, perhaps, if more than one male responded, they would fight until there was one clear winner. This strongest male would then mate with the female, who would accept this method of choosing a mate in order to bear the strongest, healthiest offspring. Or, perhaps, as with whitetail deer [Odocoileus virginianus], a male may find and stay with the female during estrus until conception occurs, then revert back to the normal solitary life-style.
And, if Guide mating cycles follow the same pattern, then the same evolutionary conditions would most likely exist.)
Other theories for the origin of bipedality exist, and there is currently no full agreement among anthropologists as to which may have actually taken place, if in fact, only one such theory is correct. What is commonly accepted, however, is that, whatever its cause, and contrary to the clear implications of the infamous Piltdown Man, the first element in the human evolutionary journey was the origin of upright walking, instead of development of a large braincase, and with it, greater intelligence. The same is most likely true of hominid Sentinels and Guides, also.
After the bipedal arboreals, the next evidence of Human evolution comes from fossil sites near Lake Turkana in Kenya, East Africa. Australopithecus anamensis comes from Lake Kanapoi, and is dated to more than 4 million years. This species demonstrates a structure of the shin bone and the thinner of the two lower leg bones (tibia) that was human-like. At the same time, these leg bones are associated with a 4.1 million year old jaw which is still ape-like. Additional finds from the Tuckwell Site near Lake Turkana suggest that the hamate (one of the bones of the wrist) was larger than those of modern humans, which infers that the owner of this bone might have still been adapted to forearm suspension; again, an ape-like characteristic.
Several other species of Australopithecus existed in the same region within the next 3 or so million years, which may or may not have been precursors to Humans (there is some disagreement as to whether A. africanus became extinct like A. boisei, or continued evolving, eventually becoming the ancestor to Homo). These species included: Australopithecus afarensis(the so-called “missing link” nicknamed Lucy), Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus robustus, and Australopithecus boisei.
In the early 1960's a hominid skull between 1.6 and 2 million years old was found in South Africa. Called Homo habilis, it included a brain-case of about 600-800 cubic centimeters, with a large region for the speech center of the brain. Stone tools, and evidence of their use on animal bones, was also discovered.
From H. habilis evolved Homo erectus approximately 1.6 million years ago. H. erectuswas larger, with a bigger cranial cavity, and used better tools as well as fire. It has been found throughout Europe.
At about the same time H. erectus existed in Africa, a species now called Homo ergasterexisted in Asia. It is not considered the same species as H. erectus (even though a form of H. erectus with a different morphology evidently also existed in Asia), due to considerable skull differences. In fact, it shares more characteristics of Homo sapiens than it does with even the Asian H. erectus. However, some consider H. ergaster a sister species to H. erectus, rather than a descendant.
After H. erectus came the so-called Neanderthal man, which either preceded or co-existed with Cro-Magnon or Modern man (there is some debate about this).
Thus is the probable origins of Humans, as far as we can tell at this point. But what of Sentinels and Guides? What if Sentinels and Guides also evolved from the bipedal arboreals, but then went a slightly different route? As illustrated above, there is plenty of fossil evidence which proves that several species of hominids existed, some of them side-by-side. Our belief today, of course, is that all of these but one died out: the one that eventually became Modern Human.
But what if that belief is wrong?
What if not all of those "sister species" died out? What if one of them evolved into Sentinels, and one became Guides?
However, if, indeed, this is the case, how is it that Sentinels and Guides are so similar to Humans? If the divergence of these species goes back that far, wouldn’t they be more different?
Not necessarily. Take the Big Cats, as an example. About 10 million years ago, Pumas branched off from the parent stem of Ur-Cats [Pseudaelurus], which appeared in the Miocene period, and from which directly evolved the species felis, which includes the small wild cats. And yet, the pumas, while separate from, say, panthera which includes jaguars and lions, and which branched off about 5 million years ago, it is still of the genus felinae (therefore, by definition, still retaining several similarities, such as skull construction, dentition, etc.). In fact, not only are two members of panthera, Jaguars and Leopards, often mistaken for each other, but they are also confused with Cheetahs ( Acinonyx jubatus) which branched off from the Ur-Cats 10 million years ago - five millions years before panthera - and isn’t even in the same Subfamily! That being the case, is it so hard to believe that Humans, Sentinels, and Guides could be different species that diverged many millions of years ago, but still look the same on the outside, and still be of the genusHomo?
There is an on-going debate as to the origins of Neanderthals, and whether or not Humans evolved from them, or whether they were replaced by the species Cro-Magnon man, and then died out. The very existence of this disagreement makes it possible to theorize that Sentinels and Guides came from other hominid branches that we have not yet traced in unbroken line to their ultimate beginnings.
Therefore, let us take this theory of Sentinels and Guides as different hominid species as a given, and speculate from there as to how they became what they are today.
First, let us classify these two “new” species of the genus Homo. Modern humans are known technically as Homo sapiens sapiens, from the Latin, meaning “rational man” (the “sapiens sapiens” being used to distinguish Modern Humans from immediately preceding evolutionary ancestors, such as Neanderthal [Homo sapiens neanderthalensis]). Since Sentinels and Guides so closely resemble Humans, at least in outward appearance, and have many of the same general characteristics (bipedal, omnivorous, etc.), we can safely classify them in the genusHomo. However, since we will show them to be of different species (and have, in fact already begun doing so), let us not classify them as Homo sapiens--- , but as entirely new species ofHomo. Since Sentinels are best known for their extraordinary sensory capabilities, let us distinguish them thusly, and call them Homo sentus, [sentus being from L “sent[tire]” feel + “tus” suffix denoting the verb form] and, since Guides, while being hard to quantify, have shown themselves most in their ability to control the Sentinels’ abilities through what are believed to be psychic means, as well as in their inclination towards mental abilities and pursuits, let us classify them as Homo psyche (“psyche” from the L & Gk mind or soul).
Next, let us speculate as to why Sentinels and Guides would have evolved as they did. Let’s start with Sentinels. If, as earlier theorized, Sentinels came from a bipedal arboreal that did not develop pair-bonding, but instead remained solitary, we may have the following developments in behavior: the solitary nature of Sentinels co-existed (and still does) with their territorial nature. Each creature would have staked a claim to a specific region, and would have restricted it’s hunting to this area. That being the case, there would have been no competition for food among themselves, but there probably would have been between the Sentinels’ arboreal ancestors, and Humans’. This, combined with the low birth rate and lack of mutual protection inherent in multi-member groups, might have been what led to the beginnings of the hyper-acute senses Sentinels are known for. These senses would have been useful in finding food, and in detecting danger. It would also account for why Sentinels tend to be stronger, faster, and able to resist disease and heal from wounds better than most Humans. All of these things would have combined to raise a Sentinel’s chances of survival.
Because both kinds of creatures overlapped in territory, and because the ancestors of humans were gregarious beings, they may have not only recognized, but also decided to take advantage of, these heightened senses. Quite possibly, somewhere along the line, a bargain may have been struck between Humans and Sentinels, wherein the Sentinels provided services such as location of game animals and early warning of danger, in exchange for protection and shelter. The fact that Sentinels are both solitary and territorial probably would not have proven a problem, as Humans tend to band together in groups that are more or less tightly-knit while at the same time separating themselves one group from another. Thus, one Sentinel would have agreed to provide the above-mentioned services to one group or “tribe”in one area, while another Sentinel would have allied with a group in another region, and “never the twain shall meet”. The result was that everyone’s needs would have been satisfied.
At this point, we may briefly speculate that Sentinels probably show as much diversity among their species as Humans do. Some Sentinels would have shown one or more senses to be stronger than others, for example, and some Sentinels may be generally more powerful, and able to sense things from greater distances or with better precision than others. Therefore, stronger Sentinels were almost certainly capable of holding a larger territory, with a greater population of Humans living therein. It is possible that one Sentinel may have been strong enough to attempt to enlarge his or her territory by forcibly taking territory from another. Given both the solitary nature and the territoriality of Sentinels, the result may well have been a fight to the death, with the winner both annexing the territory, and agreeing to provide services for the Humans within that new area. This would have been especially true if Sentinels had by this time developed the strong protective instinct we see today. (In fact, this instinct may actually be part of the instinct to protect the young, Humans being weaker than Sentinels, and, therefore, the Sentinels may equate this weakness with the vulnerability seen in children).
There is also the possibility that, in addition to the Sentinels’ actions when annexing new territory and agreeing to protect all tribes within that area, Humans may have reacted as much to the presence of the stronger Sentinel as to their own gregariousness, by joining together the different groups into one larger one, thus making it easier for the Sentinel to provide the agreed-upon services. This, along with a growing population that spread out to occupy available territory, therefore reducing the amount of territory available, may actually have been the beginnings of the Human predilection for living in larger and larger groups. These larger groups led to villages, then towns, and so on, all protected by any Sentinel strong enough to do so. It may even, though no study has been done, result in continued evolution by Sentinels into stronger and stronger individuals; this evolution taking place through the time-tested “survival of the fittest” method: the stronger the Sentinel, the better the chance of survival and, therefore, procreation, resulting in the passing on of this ever-increasing strength.
And so, by our theory, stands the modern Homo sentus.
Now, as a living example, let us take the case of a known Sentinel we will refer to as C.
C is a 37 year-old, Caucasian male, divorced. He has a living father (A) and younger brother (D); mother’s (B’s) whereabouts and status is unknown. C is a member of law enforcement, A and D are businessmen working for A’s company. C’s Guide, E, is a 30-year-old, Caucasian male. E’s mother, F, travels extensively, as did E, until he started college. E’s father is unknown.
C’s sensory abilities manifested themselves early on. By the time he was twelve years of age, he was capable of seeing a person’s face well enough for positive identification from approximately one half mile away. He was also capable of identifying by smell what his father’s housekeeper was cooking for dinner from several blocks away. His other senses were equally acute.
That year, his mother divorced his father, and left the family unit. She has never had any contact with anyone in the immediate family after that. Shortly thereafter, A began to push his sons to compete against each other for the stated purpose of teaching them to be strong enough to survive in a competitive world. Both boys eventually learned to compete, however, D also learned to cheat and deceive, while C refused to do so. A encouraged D openly. That same year, C’s mentor was murdered. When he stated he could identify the man’s killer, A sternly reprimanded the boy, ostensibly because he didn’t want C gaining a reputation as a “freak”.
All of the above incidents led to an eventual estrangement between C and his father and younger brother, with whom he had no contact for 15 years - between the time C left home to join the military, and two specific incidents that led to tentative reconciliations.
During those 15 years, C suppressed his sensory abilities in order to live as an “ordinary human”. However, after experiencing an 18-month period of enforced isolation under dangerous circumstances, C’s sensory abilities returned. Demonstrably, those abilities were stronger than they’d been as a child, allowing him to survive until he was rescued.
After his rescue, he evidently underwent a period of emotional difficulty stemming from the involuntary nature of his isolation. These records have been strictly classified by the military, and are unobtainable. However, it is known that, in the course of his debriefing, he also underwent psychological therapy (although no details are known), and once more suppressed his sensory abilities.
During the course of the next five years, C became a law enforcement officer of some note who advanced with extraordinary rapidity through the ranks. He was also married and divorced.
An incident then occurred wherein he voluntarily, and during the course of his duties, underwent another short period of isolation (four days) in a dangerous situation. This incident once more caused a return of C’s sensory capabilities, however, once the period of isolation was over, the danger remained, and C’s senses remained at a partially and intermittently hyperacute level.
Very shortly thereafter, C met E, a student with knowledge of Sentinels. Over the course of the next four years, and with E’s help, C gained phenomenal control over his senses. At the same time, C and E formed a close partnership, and E became C’s room mate. During those same four years, C, who had always been very fit and healthy, was injured several times. In an ordinary human, those injuries would have been serious and resulted in an extended period of recuperation. However, not in this case. A gunshot wound that would have taken two weeks to heal, required half that time in C, and a cold, usually lasting 5-7 days in most people, was gone in three days. These are but a few examples of extraordinary healing and recovery in C.
In studying C, it is obvious that C is not a “normal” human. His sensory abilities alone are proof of that; “ordinary” or “normal” humans simply can not perceive things from the distances or with the precision that C is capable of.
Therefore, let us discuss the possibility that C is not Human.
First, as far as can be told, A and D are both Human. Therefore, how can C not be? Only if B isn’t. And if, as this report states, Sentinels are of a different species than Humans, and can not cross-breed with Humans, there is only one possibility. Since A refuses to speak at length about his family at all, we can only speculate. Is it possible that C is not, in fact, A’s biological son at all? Not having access to any of their records at this time, we do not know if the children were born before or after B’s marriage to A. It is possible that C is B’s son, and D is A’s son. If this is the case, then A’s actions in forcing the two boys to compete against each other for his attention may be as much motivated by a dislike of B’s son, partly because he is not A’s, and partly as transference of his anger at B’s abandonment of her family, as by his stated reason. In other words, A began to favor his own son over B’s. There have been many cases of a man favoring his own biological offspring over his wife’s by another man; C’s “freakish” abilities may only have made this worse. Also, since B wasn’t present for A to be angry at, he transferred that anger to B’s son, C. Again, many similar cases exist.
Since so little is known of the next fifteen years, we can not go into any real detail of that time, except to say that, during his 18-month isolation, the dangerous situation would have obviously been a trigger to re-activate the senses that were evolved specifically to ensure a Sentinel’s survival. The same with the 4-day period that took place five years later.
There is some speculation that the reason C’s marriage was so short-lived was because his hyperacute senses drove him to physical and emotional withdrawal, however, since it has been clearly stated that he had again suppressed his senses to “human-normal”, this theory is obviously incorrect. While it is implied that it was C’s wife who initiated the divorce proceedings as a result of said withdrawal, the separation seems to be mutually amicable, and no further attempt was ever made to reconcile. Was this because Sentinels in general and C in particular is simply not inclined to pair-bond with anyone but his Guide in the necessary symbiotic relationship? Because Sentinels and Guides can not survive without this relationship, it is possible that the nature of the relationship is encompassing enough to make any other, equally close, long-term relationship impossible - there is too much chance of interference with the symbiosis. This, of course, is in addition to the solitary nature of Sentinels already discussed.
There has also been speculation that C was able to suppress his senses to “human-normal” only because his Guide was not yet ready for the symbiotic relationship they would later develop. If that is the case, then do other Sentinels do this also? Perhaps some do. After all, we have already speculated that there is a wide range of diversity among Sentinels, so maybe some are capable of suppressing their abilities. They then require a period of isolation, with or without accompanying danger, to re-activate their sensory abilities - hopefully only after being paired with their Guides. Some Sentinels may not be capable of this, however, or may end up with their senses re-activated outside the presence of their Guides, and go insane. Who knows how many Sentinels reside in asylums right now who don’t need to? How many are not sane because we do not know what they are or what is needed to help them? We can only wonder.
What we do know, however, is that, after C began associating with his Guide, E, C began to gain real control over his senses. As a child, perhaps, a Guide wasn’t needed simply because C’s senses were not mature enough to require it. Maybe only an adult Sentinel’s abilities are strong enough to present a danger to himself. During his 18-month period of enforced isolation, C had good control over his abilities, but he also had a Guide, then. However, by his own admission, C was not capable of much beyond simple control of his abilities. In other words, he could not perform the kinds of feats he is capable of now, paired with what even he admits is his true Guide, in the full symbiotic relationship he now has with E.
Such relationships, and the things C is capable of within the confines of that relationship, are not normal to Humans. There is, in fact, no evidence that this is possible even for “abnormal” Humans. Yes, there have been cases of heightened senses in Humans, but none of these cases have shown anywhere near the extent or strength of what a Sentinel is capable of. In fact, E studied the phenomena of heightened senses and Sentinels quite extensively, and C was the first one he found with the abilities he had at the strength he showed. Quite simply, since Humans can’t do what C can do, with or without E, then C, who is definitely a Sentinel, can’t be Human, and neither can Sentinels. Or so this theory states.
As to Guides, their evolutionary path is, of course, much more vague. As with Sentinels, there is no clear indication of which ancestral species led to Guides. In fact, if anything, Guides are the biggest evolutionary mystery of all. We believe that, like Sentinels, Guides evolved from arboreal hominoids. Then they seem to have taken a different path. Instead of evolving the acute sensory abilities of Sentinels, Guides evolved psychic abilities.
It is theorized that, if psychic abilities exist at all (which we do not have the technology to test), then they may have developed as a defense mechanism. In other words, in order to compensate for the lack of the sharp claws and better senses of animals, Guides may have developed telepathy, so they could call for help over great distances, or clairvoyance, so they could tell if there was danger before encountering it, etc. It has been believed for some time that some Humans have psychic abilities, and some don’t. But why? Why would some have such abilities, but others don’t? Wouldn’t it be more logical that all Humans have them? Wouldn’t those without have been killed early on, therefore “culling” the race of anyone without because being without psychic talent would make them too weak to survive? Is the answer in the diversity of Humans? Or perhaps the talents slowly atrophied and died out as technology and intelligence increased, thus decreasing the need for psychic abilities?
Maybe Humans don’t even have psychic abilities. Maybe Humans never had psychic abilities at all - Guides did. Perhaps those rare people with strong psychic abilities are really unrecognized Guides, instead.
We in this modern, technological age, seem to have lost as much as we’ve gained. Among the things we seem to have lost, until recently, is knowledge of the very existence of Sentinels and Guides. Many of them walk among us without either species even being aware of it. Only with modern technology would we even be able to tell Humans from Sentinels from Guides. As a result, many people considered not sane due to chemical imbalances or even unknown causes, may actually be Sentinels or Guides - and no one knows it. Or that their problems could be solved by pairing them with the symbiotic partner they need. In fact, the genetic differences in the species may also account for adverse reactions to medicines, chemicals, or situations that would not affect Humans the same way. (Since Humans are the more numerous, a decidedly Human prejudice exists with regards to the properties and usage of such medicines or chemicals. Medical knowledge, too, assumes that all patients are Human, and treats everyone the same way only until a problem develops with that treatment, at which time, the treatment is modified accordingly - but still without considering the possibility that a patient may not even be Human. In fact, the existence of three different Homo species may account for what we now assume is simply an enormous variation in “Human norms.” This wide variety is rarely seen in any other “natural” species [in other words, species that have not been interfered with the way Humans have interfered with, for example, dogs, or cats, or horses, by deliberately creating different breeds for different uses]. For example, there is little variation from member to member among Zebras - they are all equines of similar height, build, and stripe pattern. They do not, for instance, vary by as much as two feet in height, nor do any of them boast spots instead of stripes. Even foxes, which have dozens of different subspecies worldwide, do not vary that much from member to member among a single subspecies. Perhaps, as with most species of animals, the variation from member to member within the Human species is not so broad as we believe. What exists instead may be the variation from species to species between Humans, Sentinels, and Guides.)
We know only that, at some point, Guides and Sentinels discovered the weaknesses in themselves, and the strengths within each other, that resulted in the mutualistic/symbiotic relationship we know today. We also figure that, as with Sentinels, Guides allied with Humans to their mutual benefit. This alliance between Guides and Humans may have involved trading shelter and food for the use of the Guide’s psychic abilities.
We theorize that Guides also evolved from arboreals that did not practice pair-bonding - or, at least, the pair-bonding of male/female for the purpose of procreation and nurturing of the young. Guides may be as solitary and territorial as Sentinels, although, apparently, more nomadic, but both H. sentus and H. psyche seem to have the ability to form a kind of pair-bond with each other: in other words, the symbiotic relationship they develop.
This mutualist relationship results in a life-long bond of mutual service and protection much like the pair-bonding of Humans but without the sexual component. Why no sexual component? Because the facetious taunt “I don’t date outside my species” is actually literally true in 99% of all creatures on earth. After all, since most species are not capable of cross-breeding with other species, why bother courting or mating with them? The need to procreate and provide for the continuation of the race would, therefore, preclude inter-species pairing, as it does in nature.
That said, Humans frequently seem to break the rules simply out of sheer cussedness. The same can also be said of Sentinels and Guides. Therefore, inter-species pairing is not unknown. There is, however, no possibility of offspring. This, combined with the fact that, because, until recently, we didn’t even know Humans, Sentinels, and Guides were different species, has probably resulted in many inadvertent inter-species pairings which have not resulted in the birth of children. It is also very possible, therefore, that many such couples who are infertile, and for which no clear reason for this infertility can be found except the vague “genetic incompatibility”, may unknowingly be a Sentinel/Human or Guide/Human couple.
As for the symbiosis between Sentinel and Guide, we can not, at our present level of technology, detect the mechanism by which Sentinels and Guides provide for the mutual benefit of each other. In other words, we simply don’t know how a Guide helps a Sentinel control and focus his/her abilities, nor do we even know what, exactly, a Guide gains from a Sentinel. We suspect that the bond between them is psychic in nature, and that the Guide controls the Sentinel’s abilities through that psychic bond, but there is no way to prove it at this time. We also theorize that the Sentinel somehow corrects and controls the brain chemistry of the Guide. (Although this is only a theory, based upon E’s admission of being under a therapist’s care for many years - up until meeting C. After that, despite being involved in numerous situations - like being kidnaped by a serial killer - which most humans would require therapy to recover from, E seemed to recover well on his own or with only C’s help - even though C had neither training, nor experience, in therapy or counseling. Could the previous therapy involved the use of medication, necessary due to chemical imbalances in the brain that were corrected through the psychic link with C?)
Also, because Sentinel and Guide bond for life, there must be complete compatibility between them. And not only directly related to their individual talents and physiological needs, but their personalities must mesh, too. There must be complete emotional compatibility. As a result, there is only one suitable match between them. One Sentinel, one Guide. Of course, going back to the “sheer cussedness” syndrome, there are probably exceptions to this, too. Generally speaking, however, Sentinels and Guides bond for life, and the death of one usually means the other will suffer deprivation of whatever it is the other provided. That deprivation generally results in the death or loss of sanity of the surviving partner soon after.
Unfortunately, because of the above-mentioned “Human prejudice”, as well as modern ease of travel causing many Sentinels and Guides to be far from their original “home” territory where they might normally have found their “match” with ease, many Sentinels and Guides nowadays never find their compatible partners (although the Guide’s natural nomadic nature may compensate for - or even be driven by - these factors). Although seen in nature (such as the relationship between sharks and remoras), the Human species has no such need for a symbiotic partner (the well-known need for a “soul-mate” doesn’t really count, since there is no true biological component to the partnership). However, if we can find Sentinels and Guides willing to undergo the experiments and tests (mostly genetic) that are necessary to prove that they are members of species other than Homo sapiens, we can begin to make the accommodations necessary to their needs. Of course, given how xenophobic Humans can be, they may not want to, preferring instead to deny Sentinels and Guides the same rights Humans have solely becausethey are not Human. Allowing them to be kept as pets or slaves is not beyond the realm of possibility - Humans have even done so with members of their own species! After all, Sentinels are physically and Guides psychically (we believe) are demonstrably more powerful than Humans, which can engender the fear in Humans that Sentinels and Guides may try to enslave or wipe out Humans (the argument that the Sentinels’ and Guides’ protective nature precludes this probably wouldn’t be enough to dispel the fear - Humans tend to believe what they want to believe, no matter what the facts or truth say). That said, Humans have passed laws making it illegal to hunt endangered species - which Sentinels and Guides could be classified as, due to their low birthrate and population - so it may be possible to prevent fear-based genocide or abuse.
At any rate, simply recognizing Sentinels and Guides as separate species from each other and from Humans can lead to a better understanding of all three species, and, therefore, a more beneficial co-existence.
In conclusion, while we have no proof at this point as to whether or not Sentinels and Guides are the same species as Human, there is sufficient evidence to at least point to thepossibility that they are not. And, if this is the case, an effort must be made to preserve these selfless Protectors of Humanity.
Bibliography:
History and Evolution/The Prehistoric Cats at:http://www.dspace.dial.pipex.com/agarman/bco/prehistoric.htm
History and Culture of the Wild Cat at http://www.hdw-inc.com/HistoryCultureofWildCats.HTM
University of Michigan Animal Diversity Web at:http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/index.html
General Article on Homo habilis by: Ryan Stifter-Article: June 1, 1996 at: www.versiontech.com/origins/news/news_article.asp?news_id=27
General Article On Homo erectus by: BjÖrn Edlund - Article June 1, 1996 at: www.versiontech.com/origins/news/news_article.asp?news_id=29
General Article On Homo ergaster By: Holly Reeser -Article June 1, 1996 at: www.versiontech.com/origins/news/news_article.asp?news_id=31
An Early Upper Pleistocene and African Origin for the Neanderthals By: Patrick Fleming at: www.versiontech.com/origins/news/news_article.asp?news_id=32
Lower Than the Angels: The Human Evolutionary Journey by Albert Eugene Johnson Jr., Ph.D.at: http://www.pro-am.com/origins/research/book.htm