Southern Europeans, the Mediterranean Race and the Europid Concept

[Siegfried]

There has been quite some discussion on this forum and others about 'Mediterraneans' and their 'whiteness'. Physical anthropologists like Coon often used the word 'Mediterranean' in a very broad way, often including many North Africans, Middle Easterners, and sometimes even Indians, Irano-Afghans, etc. If Coon's data is to be believed, there is indeed a band of relative morphological homogeneity that stretches from Iberia across North Africa into Asia.

Yet several genetic studies (see, for example, the images below) show that Europeans tend to cluster together and that there is a significant genetic gap between Southern Europe and North Africa. This is remarkable, given the similarities physical anthropologists saw. So how is this to be explained? Can we speak of a Europid proper race (i.e. a typically European branch of the wider Caucasoid race) - and how does the idea of an intercontinental Mediterranean race fit in?

I'd like to use this thread to discuss the validity of the Europid concept and how the 'Mediterranean' Europeans fit in, especially since there has been a conflict of opinion on this between grand members Loki and Eriksson. While Eriksson defended the idea of a Nordish group within a Europid proper group within a wider Caucasoid race, Loki only acknowledged the validity of the Nordish and Caucasoid concepts. I think this is an important issue that should be tackled.

To avoid confusion, please do not equate Europid with Caucasoid in this thread. Europid will be defined as the typically European branch of the Caucasoid race, including the following subracial types; Nordid, East Baltid, Alpinid, Dinarid & Mediterranean (in Baker's terminology) or, in Gunther's terms, Nordisch, Fälisch, Ostisch, Westisch, Ostbaltisch, Dinarisch.

Personally, I think there actually was a Mediterranean root race from which the Southern Europeans, North Africans, Middle Easterners, etc descend. However, these groups drifted apart because of cultural and geographical barriers. Moreover, the North African groups absorbed local blood (and a little Negroid, especially recently), while the Southern Europeans primarily exchanged genes with the more northern Europeans. Madison Grant even called Southern Europeans 'Nordicized Mediterraneans'.

As Mediterranean traits tend to be dominant while Central and (especially) Northern European traits are more recessive, a certain degree of phenotypical resemblence between the Mediterranean types was maintained (though no schooled man would confuse the average Iberian with an Arab).

This might be an explanation, but I'm not sure how many reliable evidence there is for this theory. Just for the record; I do ascribe to the Europid concept, even though the borders are obviously very blurred (but so are the Nordish, and Caucasoid borders) and the races that belong to the Europid group have a diverse evolutionary past.







Discuss

[morfrain_encilgar]

Yet several genetic studies (see, for example, the images below) show that Europeans tend to cluster together and that there is a significant genetic gap between Southern Europe and North Africa. This is remarkable, given the similarities physical anthropologists saw.

It's less remarkable, when you think of Europeans as being produced from different lineages hybridising, in a European centre. This, explains the physical variety of Europeans. Some Caucasoid regions, like the Maghreb, are isolated from the main zones of hybridisation, and they appear as the more distant lineages.

[Northern Paladin]

Some Caucasoid regions, like the Maghreb, are isolated from the main zones of hybridisation, and they appear as the more distant lineages.

Where is the Maghreb? Central Europe?

Perhaps understanding the Major Migrations to Europe and in Europe is the key to defining and distinguising between different "Europid" Groups. And then there is of Course Phenotype.

[Siegfried]

Where is the Maghreb? Central Europe?

Northwest Africa, actually.

[Northern Paladin]

Northwest Africa, actually.

Of course it's Vice Versa. That's what I wanted to say(my brain is fried).

TY

[aftermundo]

Statements like ``southern-europeans are white`` or ``southern-europeans are not white`` are bogus.

Most Southern-Europeans ive seen are white but ive also met Southern-Europeans who are not white.

However its safe to say that the majority of South-Europeans are white.

[Scoob]

Italian Americans in the USA are some of the few ethnic groups to maintain their European culture here, instead of fading to a nondescript, consumer-clone "Whiteness." For this they are important and deserve recognition.

[Northern Paladin]

Italian Americans in the USA are some of the few ethnic groups to maintain their European culture here, instead of fading to a nondescript, consumer-clone "Whiteness." For this they are important and deserve recognition.

It's easier for them. They have a large enough community and a distinctness about them. However there are many Italians who have been assilimated into the "General" white culture.

I believe Italians have already gotten their recognition. Their Food and Culture has become part of America.

[goidelicwarrior]

Where is the Maghreb? Central Europe?

Perhaps understanding the Major Migrations to Europe and in Europe is the key to defining and distinguising between different "Europid" Groups. And then there is of Course Phenotype.

maghreb is Northern Africa..

[herr georg]

Funny how quickly people are to exclude north africans and middle easterners as white.
The genetic difference between south europeans and middle easterners is very little and insignificant.
Can I ask why there is any reason to include greeks and south italians as white and not,
saddam hussein for instance? care to point out what isn't white about him ? keeping in mind that the vast majority of arabs look like that. White skinned mediterraneans.