Mediterrenean Rome?

[RedEgosyntonicSun]

The Roman Empire wasn't Med only.

Point us an Empire that belongs to one and only subracial type?!

[Scoob]

Obviously I know that, but it was started by meds and the meds basically kept it alive and running, granted they did incorporate other peoples into it.

Lots of upper class Roman statues I've seen look very Alpine, including Julius Caesar. Others look more Med - and the type depicted in fresco paintings is usually quite Med. Maybe they were Med-Alpine with a Med aesthetic ideal?

[RedEgosyntonicSun]

Where's the proof of that?

In the books.
In Rome and Italy also.

[cosmocreator]

Lots of upper class Roman statues I've seen look very Alpine, including Julius Caesar. Others look more Med - and the type depicted in fresco paintings is usually quite Med. Maybe they were Med-Alpine with a Med aesthetic ideal?

I don't see how these small, short, small brained Southern Meds could build an Empire on their own.

[Awar]

Julius Caesar and a lot of other Romans looked Dinaric ( sort of ).
Nero was probably more of an Alpine.

[Frans_Jozef]

I don't see how these small, short, small brained Southern Meds could build an Empire on their own.

Southern Mediterreneans are Saharid, the Mediterrenean population in Italy was mostly Atlanto-mediterrenean and in some parts(Liguria, etc...) and in the pile dwellings more Danubian.
Between Etruscans and Romans were also differences in which I suspect that they contained a Med.strain that points to an older mesolithic but native stock, while Etruscans are more refined but cling closer to their Near Eastern cousins.

[Awar]

I don't see how these small, short, small brained Southern Meds could build an Empire on their own.

Well, all the proof of their 'superiority' can be found in the fertile crescent.
These neolithic types built the foundation of what we know as civilization.

In any case, Neanderthals had much larger brains than any modern humans, but that didn't work for them.

[nemo]

I don't see how these small, short, small brained Southern Meds could build an Empire on their own.

The Romans(Italians) were not small and short, why don't you educate yourself and read about the greatness of the Romans(Italians) instead of making ignorant statments and proving to everyone how ignorant you really are.

[Scoob]

The Romans(Italians) were not small and short, why don't you educate yourself and read about the greatness of the Romans(Italians) instead of making ignorant statments and proving to everyone how ignorant you really are.

Body proportions of Roman statues ("Classical Canon") are what I'd expect to see on someone 5'5" - 5'9" at most on a man. I'm not sure about this, but I think the Greeks and Romans weren't very big people - they'd look "short" walking around in the USA.

Northern Europeans have different proportions, since they are more adapted to hunting big animals in the cold north. Most animals in the ice ages were big and beefed-up. Of course many modern Italians and Greeks here in the USA get quite big at times with an American (Anglo-Saxon influenced) diet heavy in meat and dairy - quite unlike the Mediterranean diet.

Smaller, gracile people make better city dwellers. Big, muscular people require bigger chairs, bigger doors, more food, usually want more personal space, etc etc. Compare Siberian huskies with domestic house dogs for a good analogy.

I'd love to see neurological studies on human variation in various mental processes.

[cosmocreator]

Southern Mediterreneans are Saharid, the Mediterrenean population in Italy was mostly Atlanto-mediterrenean and in some parts(Liguria, etc...) and in the pile dwellings more Danubian.
Between Etruscans and Romans were also differences in which I suspect that they contained a Med.strain that points to an older mesolithic but native stock, while Etruscans are more refined but cling closer to their Near Eastern cousins.

I was talking about these guys:

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showpost...5&postcount=27

They are Southern European, not North African I believe.