Quote:
Originally Posted by unregistered
In the anciet days probably aquiring a new technique simply meant that integrating a minority of immigrants who were familiar with the technology and it spread most probably by marriages in the days of peace. I tink this is an old tradition that the noblemen has the most mixed blood. Coons nordic is just a generalization for it seems coon was quite antiseperationst. His book was written in 1939 those days promoting freedom brotherhood and equality was "being politically incorrect", those days intoxicated by the scienific progressivism and because of the divided religious authority, while instead of surrendering to God, having surrendered to Ceasar within natural borders of people who were simply identified by the ability of understanding each other's language, people felt high and confident about themselves which fed their ego and greed. Coon is clearly against any neoautochtonous dream. coon is the evangelist of globalism.
Anyway, the sarmatians are low vaulted iron age nordics who are mixed with the halstatt mixed with upper paleolithic components, this is visible though in the cranias of the original halstatt site with the presence of broad faced individuals. grailized cromagnis ,unlike what gimbutas had proposed, would make a borreby,
sarmatians are continental european and are very unlikely to contain any r1a if they had not been heavily turkicized or had not absorbed some small kurganid minority that had introduced them horse technology.
|
The skulls of the Anglo-Saxons who invaded England in the fourth and fifth centuries of the present era79 (see Appendix I, col. 43) are almost identical with this Hannover group. It is to this same specific category that the Spanish Visigothic skulls to which we have already referred belong. To it must be added two series of old Frisians from northern Holland,80 which are identical in every respect. The skulls of these old Saxons, old Hanoverians, and old Frisians differ in a number of ways from those of other Nordics which we have studied. They arc larger than the Aunjetitz group and the Danes, and in fact any other series of Indo-European speakers that we have met, except the Norwegians. They lack the low vault and sloping forehead common to the earlier Nordics of Denmark, the Gauls, and the Scyths. The vault is moderately high; while the cranial index is on the border of dolicho- and mesocephaly. Compared with the other Nordics, the forehead is relatively straight, the browridges are greater, the muscular markings more pronounced, the cranial base wider, the face longer and somewhat wider.
The type represented by these three groups and by the Visigoths seems to be a variant of the Nordic type to which the early Indo-European speakers belonged. Its difference is one of size, and it appears to have attained this distinction through a mixture, in southern Scandinavia and Germany, between the older local population, consisting of a combination of Megalithic, Corded, and Borreby elements, and the purely Nordic Danish Iron Age group. The resultant type approaches in some respects, but does not even approximate in size, the coastal Norwegian population which we have already studied, and it deviates far less from the central European Nordic than does the Norwegian group.
kind regards
T.