PDA

View Full Version : Nordic-Mediterranean common origin?



Theudiskaz
Monday, March 6th, 2006, 11:04 PM
Didn't Carleton S. Coon conclude that Hallstatt Nordics were simply an overgrown, depigmented variant of the old Mediterranean race? It certainly seems possible to me, considering that Hallstatts have much more gracile, dolichocephalic, ovicular skulls, unlike UP races, but like the Mediterranean race. The racial type portrayed in classical Greek art looks VERY similar to the Hallstatt/Skandonordic/Goetatyp. How much evidence is there for this theory? Is there any genetic evidence? What are your own opinions on this matter?

I have attached pictures which illustrate the similarity between the two races.

Dombvi
Monday, March 6th, 2006, 11:58 PM
Yea they do look very facially similar, like the narrow faces.


The Nordic race is a partially depigmented branch of the greater Mediterranean
racial stock. It is probably a composite race made up of two or more basic Mediter-
ranean strains, depigmented separately or in conjunction by a progressive evolutionary
process. As has been demonstrated on plates 9 and 10, it is impossible, as some European
anthropologists believe, to derive a Nordic directly from a dolichocephalic Upper Palae-
olithic ancestor of Brünn or Crô-Magnon type. Reduction of these overgrown races
produces a result which is quite un-Nordic morphologically as well as in constitutional
type. It is the author's thesis that the Nordic race in Europe was caused by a blending
of the early Danubian Mediterranean strain with the later Corded element. At the
present time both Corded and Danubian elements may be isolated, while other Nordics
preserve the blended form. Nordics in eastern Europe, Asia, and North Africa may
have been formed by separate recombinations or simple depigmentations of comparable
Mediterranean strains, or by invasions of these regions from an European or West
Asiatic depigmentation center.

Agrippa
Tuesday, March 7th, 2006, 02:09 AM
Nordids and Mediterranids share partly the same roots, at least if speaking about West- and Atlantomediterranids. Even though Nordids might have a stronger Cromagnoid component in their ancestors, Cromagnoid was also present in the more Southern regions of the Atlantic facade and finally Nordids and especially Atlantomediterranids are a very similar specialisation, just more Northern and more Southern-warmer adapted, thats the main difference. But there is no fundamental difference in the character of their specialisation beside the UV-related adaptation.

But to call Nordids just "depigmented Mediterranids" like Coon did goes just a way too far. Some shared roots dont make them the same...finally if speaking about types its about specialisations and basic physical variation and even the differences might not be huge, they are big enough. Differences are bigger if comparing standard Skandonordids with standard Gracilmediterranids - which are even morphologically more different than Atlantomediterranids.

Marco Bianchi
Tuesday, March 7th, 2006, 01:32 PM
Didn't Carleton S. Coon conclude that Hallstatt Nordics were simply an overgrown, depigmented variant of the old Mediterranean race? It certainly seems possible to me, considering that Hallstatts have much more gracile, dolichocephalic, ovicular skulls, unlike UP races, but like the Mediterranean race. The racial type portrayed in classical Greek art looks VERY similar to the Hallstatt/Skandonordic/Goetatyp. How much evidence is there for this theory? Is there any genetic evidence? What are your own opinions on this matter?

I have attached pictures which illustrate the similarity between the two races.


I do not think so. By the way Carleton is a valid sourch of Jews and Southern Italians like the founder of "Racial reality" and his FKG "March of the Giants".
North is North and Mediterrany is Mediterrany. Of course I am not so like to be able to say the same thing for my sad North Italy (sad because on 10 personse, 5 are from South)

Weltfaschist
Wednesday, March 8th, 2006, 03:56 PM
Of course I am not so like to be able to say the same thing for my sad North Italy (sad because on 10 personse, 5 are from South)

Sad North Italy? I would say: sad South Italy. Because the immigration of non-europeans in South Italy is stronger than in the North. I know a lot of people from the South who looks more nordic than people from the North. Europe is a mix from all european subraces. You can also find mediteranid people in France, Belgium or Spain. I dont understand where the problem is?

Marco Bianchi
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 06:29 AM
Sad North Italy? I would say: sad South Italy. Because the immigration of non-europeans in South Italy is stronger than in the North. I know a lot of people from the South who looks more nordic than people from the North. Europe is a mix from all european subraces. You can also find mediteranid people in France, Belgium or Spain. I dont understand where the problem is?

Which kind of sourch, statistic or other did you show that in South Italy there are more non European immigrants??? Lombardia is the country's region with more non European immigrants than in the whole country.

By the way the immigrants enter in the South through the sea and than move to the North Italians area or to other countries.

You know more Southern Italians that look more Nordic than Northern Italians?? Ok send them to us (in the North Italy) and we will give back to the South those (80% of them) who loks and live to us like gipsy.

You don't understand where is the problem?? Me too. I don't understand where you see a problem.

Weltfaschist
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 09:29 AM
You know more Southern Italians that look more Nordic than Northern Italians?? Ok send them to us (in the North Italy) and we will give back to the South those (80% of them) who loks and live to us like gipsy.



Do you know, that people with Brown or Black hair also can be Nordic like people with Blond Hair:oanieyes
You can also find Nordic People of Sicily.
I think, that you know nothing about the european subraces.
Italy is a great European Land and it belongs with germany to the heart of europe.

By the way: Germany and France have more non-european immigration than Italy. And the Italian people have much more National and Racial Pride than germany and France together.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:17 AM
Do you know, that people with Brown or Black hair also can be Nordic like people with Blond Hair:oanieyes
You can also find Nordic People of Sicily.
I think, that you know nothing about the european subraces.
Italy is a great European Land and it belongs with germany to the heart of europe.

By the way: Germany and France have more non-european immigration than Italy. And the Italian people have much more National and Racial Pride than germany and France together.

Can people with black hair be Nordic? Sorry, if i may seem naive here.
If they can, then i assume that we accept there are different levels of Nordic purity. Do you mean Nordish? That would make more sense. :)

Weltfaschist
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:57 AM
Can people with black hair be Nordic? Sorry, if i may seem naive here.
If they can, then i assume that we accept there are different levels of Nordic purity. Do you mean Nordish? That would make more sense. :)

I have many Comrades with black or brown Hair, who looks Nordish/Baltid or Nordish/Dinarid. A lot of my german Comrades have brown Eyes and Black or brouwn Hairs. They are all pure German. That is, what i sayed about the Subraces in all euruopean Countrys. You can find them everywhere. And the mediteranid Subrace in South-Italy can you also find in France, south-Germany, belgium or Switzerland.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 11:03 AM
I have many Comrades with black or brown Hair, who looks Nordish/Baltid or Nordish/Dinarid. A lot of my german Comrades have brown Eyes and Black or brouwn Hairs. They are all pure German. That is, what i sayed about the Subraces in all euruopean Countrys. You can find them everywhere. And the mediteranid Subrace in South-Italy can you also find in France, south-Germany, belgium or Switzerland.

Ofcourse, but Although pigmentation isn't the be all end all, it's certainly significant. I thought Anthropological studies found it rare for a Nordid to have Black Hair with Brown Eyes? Those types you mentioned, mediterranid(atlantid/paleo's) are found in all of Europe, in North Europe, it's mainly the coastal regions i believe.

As far as im aware, someone with Black hair and brown eyes isn't Nordic, They are ofcourse, in your example, German and Germanic. But they may be Alpinid,Paleo Atlantid,Nord Atlantid for example.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 02:08 PM
I would like to remind everyone that the topic of this thread is not whether dark haired and dark skinned people can be classified as nordic, but rather, "Didn't Carleton S. Coon conclude that Hallstatt Nordics were simply an overgrown, depigmented variant of the old Mediterranean race? It certainly seems possible to me, considering that Hallstatts have much more gracile, dolichocephalic, ovicular skulls, unlike UP races, but like the Mediterranean race. The racial type portrayed in classical Greek art looks VERY similar to the Hallstatt/Skandonordic/Goetatyp. How much evidence is there for this theory? Is there any genetic evidence? What are your own opinions on this matter?"

Please see the pictures at the beginning of the thread.

Agrippa
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 03:43 PM
Simple put, like I said in the thread about "height importance", pigmentation is just one trait or maximal 3 traits, so somebody can be pred. Nordid even if being somewhat darker (obviously not too dark for European standards) but not "pure", since the typological concept is determined by a set of traits, is one is absent (f.e. dark pigmentation, small height, broad nose, short head, short face etc.) this person cannot be considered typical or must be considered "admixed". Finally it depends on the whole set of traits whether someone could be "still predominantely" Nordid or not. F.e. if just the hair is darker, thats rather unimportant, but if the skin and eyes are darker too, its something different, and if something else doesnt fit in, the importance of the deviating pigmentation traits would be strengthened.

Eugene
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 04:52 PM
According the Gitlerjugend book for children there are 5 or 6 subraces in Germany.Mostly mixed.So,it suppose to be possible to have genes combination and get nordic/dinaric with Nordic shape skull and brown eyes and black hair.But what I don't understand: I read 1926 year book and author[I don't remember who] wrote about only 25% of Nordics in 1926 in Germany.But in book for Gitlerjugend they mention 50%[1938].

Weltfaschist
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 06:01 PM
I would say, 70% of the Germans are Nordish. And the most nordish people in germany you can find in North-Germany, mainly on the islands.

Who is Gitler?;)

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 06:20 PM
I would like to remind everyone that the topic of this thread is not whether dark haired and dark skinned people can be classified as nordic, but rather, "Didn't Carleton S. Coon conclude that Hallstatt Nordics were simply an overgrown, depigmented variant of the old Mediterranean race? It certainly seems possible to me, considering that Hallstatts have much more gracile, dolichocephalic, ovicular skulls, unlike UP races, but like the Mediterranean race. The racial type portrayed in classical Greek art looks VERY similar to the Hallstatt/Skandonordic/Goetatyp. How much evidence is there for this theory? Is there any genetic evidence? What are your own opinions on this matter?"

Please see the pictures at the beginning of the thread.

I don't understand this, wouldn't that then make the most Nordid type actually a strain of mediterranid? I think Agrippa pointed out earlier in the thread the problems with this theory.

Eugene
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 07:49 PM
B/c I am a russian-german occasionally I confuse :Gitler--spelling in russian[Hitler].

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:15 PM
Yes, this theory does suggest that a pure Hallstatt is closer related evolutionarily to Mediterraneans than to Upper Paleolithics, including even Cromagnons.;) I'm pretty certain that I read this in Coon's Races of Europe. But I don't have access to this book at the moment. It sounds ironic and strange but it does have its merits. If this theory is true, then it further complicated by the fact that people who are phenotypically Scandonordic/Hallstat/Goeta certainly have more Cromagnon blood, than Mediterraneans, as Agrippa said, because their ancestors have lived with and interbred with them ever since they moved into northern Europe.

Agrippa pointed out that this theory does not suggest that the two are the same race but someone else, I think on a different thread said that Hallstatts/Goetas are a Corded/West Mediterranean hybrid. I have heard people mention this corded race before but I can't find any more info about them. Maybe someone could explain what exactly Corded means. I think that the material I have read uses some different terms from the sources used by others on the Forum.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:23 PM
Yes, this theory does suggest that a pure Hallstatt is closer related evolutionarily to Mediterraneans than to Upper Paleolithics, including even Cromagnons.;) I'm pretty certain that I read this in Coon's Races of Europe. But I don't have access to this book at the moment. It sounds ironic and strange but it does have its merits.

Agrippa pointed out that this theory does not suggest that the two are the same race but I think it was he, maybe it was someone else, who said that Hallstatts/Goetas are a Corded/West Mediterranean hybrid. I have heard people mention this corded race before but I can't find any more info about them. Maybe someone could explain what exactly Corded means. I think that the material I have read uses some different terms from the sources used by others on the Forum.

I hope not, Im Gota ;)
It still doesn't make sense to me.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by from racial reality
The Nordic race is a partially depigmented branch of the greater Mediterranean
racial stock. It is probably a composite race made up of two or more basic Mediter-
ranean strains, depigmented separately or in conjunction by a progressive evolutionary
process. As has been demonstrated on plates 9 and 10, it is impossible, as some European
anthropologists believe, to derive a Nordic directly from a dolichocephalic Upper Palae-
olithic ancestor of Brünn or Crô-Magnon type. Reduction of these overgrown races
produces a result which is quite un-Nordic morphologically as well as in constitutional
type. It is the author's thesis that the Nordic race in Europe was caused by a blending
of the early Danubian Mediterranean strain with the later Corded element. At the
present time both Corded and Danubian elements may be isolated, while other Nordics
preserve the blended form. Nordics in eastern Europe, Asia, and North Africa may
have been formed by separate recombinations or simple depigmentations of comparable
Mediterranean strains, or by invasions of these regions from an European or West
Asiatic depigmentation center.


I had never heard of this book until I saw it quoted earlier in this thread, nor do I know who the author is. But I think this summarizes the theory pretty well. It seems to make sense to me.

Imperator X
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:48 PM
I am a perfect example of a cross between Hallstat Nordic and Mediterranid subraces resulting in North Atlantid. Predominantly Nordid, but some Med. from Milesian (proto-Iberian) Irish and Romance admixture.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:50 PM
Originally Posted by from racial reality
The Nordic race is a partially depigmented branch of the greater Mediterranean
racial stock. It is probably a composite race made up of two or more basic Mediter-
ranean strains, depigmented separately or in conjunction by a progressive evolutionary
process. As has been demonstrated on plates 9 and 10, it is impossible, as some European
anthropologists believe, to derive a Nordic directly from a dolichocephalic Upper Palae-
olithic ancestor of Brünn or Crô-Magnon type. Reduction of these overgrown races
produces a result which is quite un-Nordic morphologically as well as in constitutional
type. It is the author's thesis that the Nordic race in Europe was caused by a blending
of the early Danubian Mediterranean strain with the later Corded element. At the
present time both Corded and Danubian elements may be isolated, while other Nordics
preserve the blended form. Nordics in eastern Europe, Asia, and North Africa may
have been formed by separate recombinations or simple depigmentations of comparable
Mediterranean strains, or by invasions of these regions from an European or West
Asiatic depigmentation center.


I had never heard of this book until I saw it quoted earlier in this thread, nor do I know who the author is. But I think this summarizes the theory pretty well. It seems to make sense to me.

So the Nordic(Gota) isn't north european then? If it's more closely aligned to Mediterranids. This is where i don't understand it. If it's seen as the text book nordic, The most pure sub racial type i North europe, how can it be if it's ... yeah well, It all doesn't make much sense.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 08:54 PM
Nordids and Mediterranids share partly the same roots, at least if speaking about West- and Atlantomediterranids. Even though Nordids might have a stronger Cromagnoid component in their ancestors, Cromagnoid was also present in the more Southern regions of the Atlantic facade and finally Nordids and especially Atlantomediterranids are a very similar specialisation, just more Northern and more Southern-warmer adapted, thats the main difference. But there is no fundamental difference in the character of their specialisation beside the UV-related adaptation.

But to call Nordids just "depigmented Mediterranids" like Coon did goes just a way too far. Some shared roots dont make them the same...finally if speaking about types its about specialisations and basic physical variation and even the differences might not be huge, they are big enough. Differences are bigger if comparing standard Skandonordids with standard Gracilmediterranids - which are even morphologically more different than Atlantomediterranids.

I think Agrippa Has it right.

Thruthheim
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 09:01 PM
http://nordish.com/

Hallstatt Nordic


Origin:
Relatively unmixed Nordic or proto-Nordic (Danubian and Battle-Axe types) agriculturalists of Indo-European language and tradition who settled in Scandinavia and northern Germany ca. 3000 B.C., following a central European sojourn. Many would later, organized in Germanic tribes, proceed to invade central and southern Europe.

Agrippa
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 09:19 PM
Coon is really not the best source on all matters. Finally neither Nordid nor Mediterranid had just one root and it was the common ancestry OF A CERTAIN TIME in which the respective features were selected made the type, even of people coming from "various direction". All were caught in the specific system (ecological, habitat, social, subsistence pattern, way of human competition etc.) which produced via selection the respective types in a certain time. Probably even in various regions and times - but under basically the same conditions. Thats not always that easy to distinguish.
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=43330

For a racial specialisation the analogous development is more important than the homologous one - but finally to drastic differences between ancestry and racial specialisation are rather the exception in humans.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 09:28 PM
Most modern experts in Nordic Physical Anthropology, whether they support this theory of a Nordic-Mediterranean common origin or not, all believe that the Goeta is the original Nordic type which probably entered Europe some 5,000 years ago initiating the Bronze Age, and bearing Indo-European language and culture. The Nordicists of the 19th century and early 20th century believed that the Nordic Race originated in Scandinavia, and that it was one in the same with the Germanic peoples. The term Nordic is somewhat misleading , because the Corded type Indo-Europeans are now believed to have originated somewhere in Eurasia. Some say they came from the Steppes, others say they came from Turkey. However the term "Nordic" remains useful because during recorded history northern Europe, mostly Germanic Europe, has been the primary seat of the Nordic Race and this is where it remains most pure today.


From SNPA:

Hallstatt Nordic



Etymology:
Hallstatt is the name of an Austrian village and a nearby archaeological site where extensive skeletal remains were discovered. This region seems to have been the seat of the Hallstatt Nordic racial type prior to its northward migration ca. 3000 B.C.


Other names:
- Germanic type (popular anthropology)
- Götatyp (Bertil Lundman; Sw., "Gothic type")
- Norrøn type (K.E. Schreiner; Norw., "Norse type")
- Teuto-Nordic (Paudler)
- Østerdal type (Halfdan Bryn; Østerdalen is a long valley in eastern Norway)


Origin:
Relatively unmixed Nordic or proto-Nordic (Danubian and Battle-Axe types) agriculturalists of Indo-European language and tradition who settled in Scandinavia and northern Germany ca. 3000 B.C., following a central European sojourn. Many would later, organized in Germanic tribes, proceed to invade central and southern Europe.


Description:
The Hallstatt Nordic is the 'classic' Nordic racial type, and lies metrically close to the original central European Nordic type preserved in Iron Age skeletal material.

Huzar
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 09:37 PM
Differences are bigger if comparing standard Skandonordids with standard Gracilmediterranids - which are even morphologically more different than Atlantomediterranids.


That's the point. Many people, often say simply "Mediterranean", without fundamental distinction between Atlanto-med and Gracile-med ; imo, the only "real", or stereotypical, souther european Mediteranean type is the Gracile-med one.

Atlanto-Med is something of different i think.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:24 PM
Agrippa, please elaborate on the "common ancestry of a certain time" bit. No offense, but I often find it difficult to understand exactly what you mean. I don't think it would be overly presumptuous for me to venture that you are not a native speaker of English. But it seems to me that what you claim doesn't really differ from Coon.

I understand that the consensus is that Atlanto-Meds are a Mediterranean Nordic hybrid. But because I have yet to see any genetic evidence for this relationship, I wonder whether it is equally possible that Atlanto-Meds represent an intermediate or transitionary phase from Mediterranean to Nordic instead of a convergence of the two. This thread seems to have spawned more questions than answers, atleast for me.:(

Waarnemer
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:39 PM
Agrippa, please elaborate on the "common ancestry of a certain time" bit. No offense, but I often find it difficult to understand exactly what you mean. I don't think it would be overly presumptuous for me to venture that you are not a native speaker of English. But it seems to me that what you claim doesn't really differ from Coon.

I understand that the consensus is that Atlanto-Meds are a Mediterranean Nordic hybrid. But because I have yet to see any genetic evidence for this relationship, I wonder whether it is equally possible that Atlanto-Meds represent an intermediate or transitionary phase from Mediterranean to Nordic instead of a convergence of the two. This thread seems to have spawned more questions than answers, atleast for me.:(

The "common ancestry" would lie primarily in the neolithic.

And AM's aren't nordids, their specialisation is just similar. Infact AM in specialisation stands close to the east nordid racial tree.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:56 PM
Well there seem to be a lot of people who think Atlanto-Mediterraneans are nordids, in as much as they are believed to be a hybrid between Scandonordics and Mediterraneans, just as Anglo-Saxons are believed to be hybrid of Brunns with Scandonordics. I'm still fairly new here at the forum, but I am now beginning to realize that most members seem to agree on very little concerning Nord. Physical Anthropology, other than which Names are given to which subrace, and even here there is still much confusion.

There seems to be much disagreement concerning the nature and origin of the subraces (e.g. does a given subrace represent a hybrid of two races or a specialized version of one, or a combination of both) Until someone can explain the origins and relationships of these various subraces using GENETIC or blood type eveidence, then we are basically guessing everything, based on phenotype and geographical distribution.:|

Agrippa
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 10:59 PM
Agrippa, please elaborate on the "common ancestry of a certain time" bit. No offense, but I often find it difficult to understand exactly what you mean. I don't think it would be overly presumptuous for me to venture that you are not a native speaker of English. But it seems to me that what you claim doesn't really differ from Coon.

I understand that the consensus is that Atlanto-Meds are a Mediterranean Nordic hybrid. But because I have yet to see any genetic evidence for this relationship, I wonder whether it is equally possible that Atlanto-Meds represent an intermediate or transitionary phase from Mediterranean to Nordic instead of a convergence of the two. This thread seems to have spawned more questions than answers, atleast for me.:(

There was mixture and there are fluent borders but finally Atlantomediterranids are just robust Mediterranids similar by specialisation not common ancestry and many Nordids of today might have had different backgrounds, even including ancient Atlantomediterranid/Protomediterranids, but all went through the same selective filters at a certain time: So through the selective filter selecting for high-leptomorphic growth, long-narrow-head, nose, face, light pigmentation etc.
With mixture I mean mixture taken place AFTER the evolution of the respective types, genetically there no pure subraces in Europe, with pure I mean phenotypically pure and at best it means "not mixed after evolved". So f.e. in a mix which evolved to Nordid Atlantomediterranids were included, but the Atlantomediterranid traits disappeared and the descendents are all Nordid phenotypically and after that happened no new mixture took place = "pure" in the subracial typological sense.


This thread might help too:
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=48678

Waarnemer
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 11:04 PM
Well there seem to be a lot of people who think Atlanto-Mediterraneans are nordids, in as much as they are believed to be a hybrifd between Scandonordics and Mediterraneans, just as Anglo-Saxons are believed to be hybrid of Brunns with Scandonordics. I'm still fairly new here at the forum, but I am now beginning to realize that most members seem to agree on little concerning Nord. Physical Anthropology, other than which Names are given to which subrace, and even here there is still much confusion.

There seems to be much disagreement concerning the nature and origin of the subraces (e.g. does a given subrace represent a hybrid of two races or a specialized version of one, or a combination of both) Until someone can explain the origins and relationships of these various subraces using GENETIC or blood type eveidence, then we are basically guessing everything, based on phenotype and geographical distribution.:|
No atlanto-mediterranean is a pure mediterranid type, but you have Nord-atlantid (lundman's "version") which is to some extent an "intermediary race" between nordids (of gotatyp) and insular's (grazilmediterranid). And than northwestern which is also an Nord-Med intermediate type (deniker's system). But however AM is mediterranid and by specialisation close to (east) nordid.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 11:36 PM
Thank you Arthur Eld. I was not aware that there were similar types. SNPA, which has almost exclusively been my source for what little I know about Nordic Phyisical Anthropology, either does not list these types or the description of their origins is confusing and need smore elaboration. Could someone list the sources, title and Author, that they either own or have consulted for their knowledge of Europid or Nordish Physical Anthropology. I am also curious as to whether Nordish or Europid physical anthropology is covered in Physical or Biological anthropolgy courses at American or European Universities any longer. Has anyone ever taken any courses in which this material was covered? It seems far too taboo to discuss such a subject in a liberal/communist run public school. The subject is simply too divisive and politically incorrect for their "liberal" minds to handle.

The Black Prince
Thursday, March 9th, 2006, 11:59 PM
just as Anglo-Saxons are believed to be hybrid of Brunns with Scandonordics.

Read this many times, but a Faelid + Nordid would most of the time give something else as the Anglo-Saxon or Trønder phenotype..

Originally Anglo-Saxon was a Nordid + Bruenn(Faelid)/Borreby admixture + Corded excesses. (most found in old: Reihengrabers, Frisians, Anglosaxons and etcetera: Northsea coast dwellers)

Basically thus along this line, Slender, longfaced and highheaded Faelid/Rugged, boney, large vaulted overgrown Nordid, which probably caused the confusion concerning the so called Faelid/Nordid hybrid being seen the same as Anglo-Saxon.

Textbook examples so to say are rare but this also counts for textbook Skando-Nordids or textbook Faelids. (its a sport to find them :D )


I'm still fairly new here at the forum, but I am now beginning to realize that most members seem to agree on very little concerning Nord. Physical Anthropology, other than which Names are given to which subrace, and even here there is still much confusion.
Thats true,

Most people here who are interested in physical anthropology read various sources (to get a wider picture) its no more as obvious thus that they are beginning to think themself concerning a clear phenotype classification schema.
And as long they can defend their opinions (with source and physical examples) its no problem, the most famous anthropologists (Deniker, Coon, Lundman, Hooton, Baker, etc..) did basically the same and made their racial schemas too based on their observations and measurements, existing anthropographic measurements and most important: sources of other anthropologists/historians/linguists/biologists/..etc.

Which may shed some confusion but otherwise is also a good indicator of which theories are accepted and which not. And which sources are sounding doubtfull and which not.

Otherwise the classification forum would be a very dull place...;)

Agrippa
Friday, March 10th, 2006, 12:12 AM
I was not aware that there were similar types. SNPA, which has almost exclusively been my source for what little I know about Nordic Phyisical Anthropology, either does not list these types or the description of their origins is confusing and need smore elaboration.

Well, in SNPA terms Palae-Atlantid, which would be after Lundman an archaic Cromagnoid variant of the North, is in fact Atlantomediterranid/Atlantid de facto. The authors of the site clarified that by pointing out that Palae-Atlantid had different meanings in other typologies themselves.


Could someone list the sources, title and Author, that they either own or have consulted for their knowledge of Europid or Nordish Physical Anthropology.

The titles which I know that they are good and I read most (no list about all articles), most is in German obviously, but I highlighted those authors which should be available in English too, at least articles of them, partly even on the internet if you search:

John R. Baker, Die Rassen der Menschheit (engl. "Race").
Wolfram Bernhard (editor), Bevölkerungsbiologie.
Wolfram Bernhard, Ethnische Anthropologie von Afghanistan, Pakistan und Kashmir.
Wolfram Bernhard (editor), Ethnogenese europäischer Völker.
Egon Freiherr von Eickstedt, Forschung am Menschen.
Egon Freiherr von Eickstedt, Die rassischen Grundlagen des deutschen Volkes.
Egon Freiherr von Eickstedt, Die Rassendynamik von Ostasien.
Historia Mundi (various authors), 1. Band - Die frühe Menschheit.
Georg Glowatzki, Die Rassen des Menschen.
H.F.K. Günther, Rassenkunde des deutschen Volkes.
Editor Gerhard Heberer, various authors, Das Fischer Lexikon - Anthropologie.
Rainer Knußmann, in Säugetiere : Primaten : Menschen (Grzimek Enzyklopädie).
Rainer Knußmann, Vergleichende Biologie des Menschen.
Bertil Lundman, Umriß der Rassenkunde des Menschen in geschichtlicher Zeit.
Bertil Lundman, Geographische Anthropologie.
Hans Roessner (editor), Der ganze Mensch.
Karl Saller, Grundlagen der Anthropologie
Karl Saller, Art- und Rassenlehre des Menschen
Ilse Schwidetzky, Grundlagen der Rassensystematik.
Ilse Schwidetzky, Rassen und Rassenbildung beim Menschen.
Ilse Schwidetzky, Turaniden-Studien.
Christian Vogel, Menschliche Stammesgeschichte - Populationsdifferenzierung, in Biologie in Stichworten, V Humanbiologie, Kiel 1974.

And generally the series “Rassengeschichte der Menschheit” (founded by Karl Saller, most edited by Ilse Schwidetzky), which has many volumes which deal with the various regions of the world.
The only author of the mentioned with which I’m not really satisfied is Saller, who had some good methological aspects but made various severe mistakes and is a personally problematic case as well.



I am also curious as to whether Nordish or Europid physical anthropology is covered in Physical or Biological anthropolgy courses at American or European Universities any longer. Has anyone ever taken any courses in which this material was covered?

Yes, physical anthropology is still alive, but typology isnt, which means we are dealing with statistical approaches to populations, mostly dealing with small traits of genetic relevance rather than specialisations and subracial categories in detail, though there are exceptions. However, the typological concept is out of use, mainly for political reasons since its still useful to describe basic variation and evolutionary tendencies both inside of the species and local populations since most modern greater populations dont represent a former specialisation type themselves, but a mixture of different ones from the respective region.
I had some experience I wrote down in a 'German essay', you might use Babelfish if you are really interested...
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=13364