PDA

View Full Version : How Wide is the Gap between Nord Proper and Med?



Nordish
Monday, July 12th, 2004, 07:19 PM
Just how wide is the Gap between Nord Proper and Med in terms of Genetics and Morphology?

I've heard it said on other Forums that this Gap is negligable and the main difference is pigmentation.

What are your thoughts?

Jakub
Tuesday, July 13th, 2004, 01:11 AM
Well, it depends on which Nordics and Meds you are comparing.

For example, there is very little difference between the Intermarine (Slavic Nordic) and Pontic (Slavic Med) types.

The only real difference is pigmentation. I personally don't think there is any real genetic or bone structural disparity between the two. There may be some differences between populations which are predominantly Intermarine and predominantly Pontic, but these are coincidental I think. In other words, there will always be slight statistical differences between any populations, even of the same types. In fact, I believe there are more genetic differences between certain Intermarine populations, than between certain Intermarine and Pontic populations.

The same can be said for the British Isles (Nordics and Atlantids), or any other part of northern Europe.

Nordish
Tuesday, July 13th, 2004, 04:16 AM
What I meant was the "Classic Meds" Southern Italians, Greeks,Portuguese and Spainards. People like those on the Portgueses soccer team are what I am reffering to.

I agree with what you said.

However Atlandid and Pontid is not what I meant.

Atlandids have quite a bit of Nordic blood in them given that they reside in the British Isles.

Pontids have quite a bit of admixture with other more "Nordic" slavs as well.

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=14384&page=2&pp=20

Look for Volksdeutscher's post. The pic is there.

Jakub
Tuesday, July 13th, 2004, 06:02 AM
Ok, I see what you mean...

Well, that's a more complicated issue, but a similar one.

The Meds in Iberia aren't actually all that different from the Atlantids, and therefore Nordics, in Britain.

Iberia and the British Isles are very similar genetically. In fact, there are no statistically significant differences in terms of Y-chromosomes (paternal ancestry), and only slight statistical differences in terms of mtDNA (maternal ancestry).

As far as I know, autosomal DNA (genetic compsition, not just ancestry) is also almost the same in Iberia as it is in Britain. Although, not as similar as the ancestry markers would suggest.

If you look at the bone structure, and even size these days, the two regions also close.

So I would say that there is a very real racial link between Iberia and the British Isles.

The only difference, and it may be a significant one in terms of the whole "Nordish" concept, is that the British Isles show some links to Scandinavia in terms of genetics and pigmentation, while Iberia to North Africa. That's not surprising to anyone familiar with European history.

Southern Italy and the southern Balkans are very different from Iberia. Genetically as well as anthropologically they have less in common with north-western Europe, and more with south central Europe and the Mid East (a clear Neolithic influence).

Following on, the Meds in the eastern Balkans show clear links to Nordish Intermarine Slavs. In fact, in Bulgaria and Romania there is often a blurring of the two types.

So I think it's pretty obvious that although there is some kind of a unity in southern Europe, there are also significant differences, especially in the way different regions relate to northern Europeans.

It's impossible to say Mediterraneans and Nordics are related to this and that degree. It dpends which Meds you're talking about, and which Nords too.