View Full Version : Why Are Dinarics Considered "Alpine" in the Wider Sense?

Wednesday, July 12th, 2006, 01:30 AM

Is there such a relation?, these are seperate subgroups in much of the anthropological work out there.

Wednesday, July 12th, 2006, 12:39 PM
Most later anthropologists did/do not consider Dinarids to be Alpinoids. This traditional grouping is a relic from the time when European populations were classified solely by cephalic index and pigmentation, and the connection is therefore arbitrary and artificial.

Alpinoids are broad- rather than short-headed pyknomorphs, the result of particular evolutionary processes (alpinization) not responsible for Dinarids (and Taurids in general), the latter of which are not equally broad-headed, but rather short-headed and typically planoccipital, and not at all pyknomorphic. Alpinids and Dinarids are quite different in most features, and in many ways reflect opposing tendencies in Europids.

The Grant map is bollocks. You should throw it in the bin.

Sunday, July 23rd, 2006, 05:38 PM
Why is ther no baltid in there, if they are not related to the other ones mentioned?

Sunday, September 10th, 2006, 04:06 AM
their pigmentation are similar.