|
|
|||||||
| Register | Blogs | FAQ | Forum Rules | VB Image Host | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Antiquity Discuss history of the ancient times. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Thursday, August 10th, 2006
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Some excerpts from Dienekes's site with permision of the author. I recommend to read the entire text from the original site.
Quote:
__________________
'Dardanidae duri, quae uos a stirpe parentum prima tulit tellus, eadem uos ubere laeto
accipiet reduces. Antiquam exquirite matrem: hic domus Aeneae cunctis dominabitur oris, et nati natorum, et qui nascentur ab illis.'  We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. –Plato– 
|
|
Sunday, August 13th, 2006
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Quote:
Maybe before anything we would have to have made a distinction as for what we understand for Greek. In my opinion we can understand for Greeks to all those that have inhabited and they inhabit the peninsula and the Greek islands along all the times or, to make a distinction and to understand and distinguish the real Greeks or the “Hellenes proper” (those that brought to Greece the Greek language), of Indo-European origin and the non real Greeks, I mean the pre-Greek/no-Indo-European autochthonous people of these lands. If we accept this last differentiation then it is clear what Francisco Villar, the best specialist in the Indo-European matters in Spain in the last times has said: "We can not have any doubt about the fact that the Greeks are not the autochthonous population from Greece. Naturally, "autochthonous" it is a relative term. Here I mean that they are not descending directly from the neolithic population, but rather they have penetrated in a date non-easy to determinate, but probably in the Age of the Bronze, perhaps starting from 1900 B.C. The own Greeks had conscience that before them there were other inhabitants that receive several names: pelasgians, tirsens, leleges, carios, eteocretenses. The Greeks considered to all them as barbarians, speaking “non Hellenic" languages”. About what Diniekes wrote: Early anthropologists commonly believed that the Hellenes belonged principally to the Mediterranean(a) race. This was the view shared by Sergi [1] and Ripley [2]. In a more recent study of the problem of Race, John R. Baker in [5] says that later studies “do not appear to have disproved” these views. Buxton in [3] shares this general view, although he observes that brachycephals(b) were a part of the Greek population from the beginning and that the Greeks were a mix of Alpine(c) and Mediterranean people from a “comparatively early date.” The American anthropologist Coon in [4] agrees when he asserts that the Greeks are an Alpine/Mediterranean mix, with a weak Nordic(d) component, being “remarkably similar” to their ancient ancestors. Here would be necessary to say that Sergi and Ripley have not been the only anthropologists that have studied the matter. It had been better to begin the sentence saying “some early anthropologists believed that the Hellenes belonged principally to the Mediterranean race”. Just if we check two more anthropologists, one considered as Sergi's antipode, we can mention Vacher of Lapouge that unquestionably considered the Greeks as Nordics. To mention another anthropologist considered, as one of the best in their days, and quite neutral as Ripley was would be necessary to speak about Bedoe that affirmed: “That the Hellenes proper were a race of the type we most of us call the long-headed Aryan, there seems no doubt. Nicollucci found an index of 75.8 in 26 ancient Greeks. The skulls that have come down to us from the classical period are generally long, rather narrow and high; and blond coloration was common and admired among the Greeks, at all events in the early historical period. Both the Achaens and the Dorians were apparently waves of migration from some more northern region. You will remember that almos all of Homer’s heroes were xanthous –blond or chestnut haired- Minerva was grey-eyed, but Juno ox-eyed- probably with dark as well as larg eyes. The earlier subject race, Pelasgic or what not, may have been dark – Hector was dark-haired-. The doctrine of the temperaments, taken with the physical traits attributed to each of them, indicates that there was much variety of colours among the Greeks of the classic period. Even the Macedonians of Alexander’s time, according to Ujfalvy, are portrayed as blond, with long rather low heads-quite northern type. But later on, in the Roman period, the Greeks in Egypt are all represented with dark eyes and hair. The Hellenic race was very prolific in its palmy days, like all military and exclusive castes it dwindled after a time: the true Spartans, for example, seem to have become almost extinct. Two natives of Sparta, whom I once had an opportunity of examining, might have belonged to some primitive Turanid race. They were tall, strongly built, swarthy and brachycephalic”. Anyway although it is certain that Ripley finally thought that the Hellenes were of mediterranean race: “As we shall see, every characteristic in their modern descendants and every analogy with the neighbouring populations, lead us to the conclusion that the classical Hellenes were distinctly of the Mediterranean racial type”. But he also wrote: “Nevertheless, Grecian history recounts a continuous succession of inroads from the landward north, as well as from the sea….Stephanos gives the average cranial index of them all (Troy people) as about 75.7, betokening a people like the present Calabrians in head form, and, for that matter, about as long-headed as the Anglo-Saxon in England and America. More than this concerning the physical traits of these ancient Greeks we can not establish with any certainty. No perfect skeletons from which we can ascertain their statures remain to us. No can we be more positive as to their brunetness. Their admiration for blondness in heroes and deities is well known. As Dr. Bedoe says, almost all of Homer’s leaders were blond or chestnut-haired, as well as large and tall. Lapouge seems inclined to regard this as proof that Greeks themselves were of this type”. I tend to think that as he did not have any good skeletons source to know how were the ancient Greeks just imagine that they were the same as the current population. What Baker wrote was: “Both Sergi and Ripley conclude that the brachycephalic immigrants subsequently spread from the north into Greece (mainly,it seems, from Albania, during the Christian era). It would not appear that later studies have disproved this opinion. Even in modern times the proportion of dolichocephalic people remains highest in the southern part of Greece, in which the centres of Helladic civilization were situated”. The sentence taken out from the context cannot make us to understand correctly what Baker wanted to say. Sergi is an anthropologist that we must read if possible because is very interesting; the problem with Sergi is he is used as a reference for the Afrocentrist movement: http://www.geocities.com/warriorvase/biblaf3.htm And the main problem is that we can start talking about African-Mediterranean origins for the Greek civilisation and we can finish defending theories as what the book “Black Atena” defend: Anyway to understand the main target of Sergi’s work I think would be interesting to read the following sentences because here we can see the conclusions Sergi wanted to maintain: From his work: The Mediterranean Race. A study of the Origin of European Peoples. He wanted to demonstrate: The conclusions I have sought to maintain are the following: 1) The primitive populations of Europe, after Homo Neanderthalensis, originated in Africa; these constitute the entire population of Neolithic times. 2) The basin of the Mediterranean was the chief centre of movements whence the African migrations reached the centre and the north of Europe. 3) From the great African stock were formed three varieties, in accordance with differing telluric and geographic conditions: one peculiarity African, remaining in the continent where it originated; another, the Mediterranean, which occupied the basin of that sea; and a third, the Nordic, which reached the north of Europe. These three varieties are the three great branches of one species, which I call Eurafrican, because it occupied, and still occupies, a large portion of the two continents of Africa and Europe. 4) These three human varieties have nothing in common with the so-called Aryan races; it is an error to maintain that the Germans and the Scandinavians, blond dolichocephals or long-headad (of the Reihengräber and Viking types), are Aryans; they are Eurafricans of the Nordic variety. 5) The Aryans are of Asiatic origin, and constitute a variety of the Eurasiatic species; the physical characters of their skeletons are different from those of the Eurafricans. 6) The primitive civilisation of the Eurafricans is Afro-Mediterranean, becoming eventually Afro-European. 7) The Mycenaean civilisation had its origin in Asia, and was transformed by diffusion in the Mediterranean. 8) The two classic civilisations, Greek and Latin, were not Aryan, but Mediterranean. The Aryans were savages when they invaded Europe: they destroyed in part the superior civilisation of the Neolithic populations, and could not have created the Greco-Latin civilisation. 9)In the course of the Aryan invasions the languages, of the Eurafrican species in Europe were transformed in Italy, Greece, and elsewhere, Celtic, German, Slavonic, etc. being genuine branches of the Aryan tongue; in other cases the Aryan languages underwent a transformation, preserving some elements of the conquered tongues, as in the Neo-Celtic of Wales. ... The most extensive study of modern Greeks has been carried by the Greek anthropologist Aris N. Poulianos [10,11]. Poulianos’ study included the collection and study of more than seventy anthropometric measurements from a large sample of thousands of Greeks from different parts of the country. His main conclusions are that both Greeks and their neighboring populations are basically a mixture of Aegeans (a Mediterranean type local to the area) and Epirotics (Dinarics(e)) and are descended from the ancient inhabitants of the lands in which they live. The presence of individuals which approximate the Nordic subrace is minimal, and does not exceed 4-6% even in the most depigmented groups of Greece. More frequent are individuals which approximate the Alpine race of Central Europe. These reach up to 20-30% of some groups and are often blended with more southern racial types. I can be more or less agreed with Poulianos as for the actual Greek populations is concerned, I have others analysis but basically are in the same line, just change the % of Alpines that some other anthropologist seems that is not so important as Poulianos believe. For example Nicholas Lahovary wrote: “It seems therefore that the modern Greeks belong for the two third to the former pre-aryan Mediterranean type. For the remaining, of 5 to 20% according to the regions, would have Nordic blood, especially in Thessaly and in some highlanders areas. The Dinaric influence, not very strong in the islands and in oriental Greece, would be stronger in the western Greece, where the Dinarics would constitute a very substantial proportion of the population; in exchange, the Alpines, relatively numerous at the Roman time, would not present, in the modern Greece, more that a reduced contingents”. And about the ancients Greeks or better to say “Hellenes proper” he wrote that they were pred. Nordids. Just see his great work “Les Peuples Européens. Leur passé ethnologique et leurs parentés réciproques d’après les dernières recherches sanguines et anthropologiques ». R. Battaglia wrote: “ In the overall racial picture of modern Greece is not always easy to isolate the elements that compose the population and to distinguish the pure forms of the local types and the products of the intersections. Schematizing, it could be said that the most representative type of modern Greek are the Mediterraneans and the Dinarics, but we must add in the islands more than few elements of Oriental origin, not always well definable and, in Creta, Armenoids whose first apparition in the island goes up again to the age of the bronze. Nucleuses of Dinarics are living in Epiro, the Peloponnesus and the Ionic islands. The Alpine type and the Baltic one don't seem common in Greece. Nevertheless the observation of Pittard about the existence of individuals with snub nose, could furnish a sign of the Baltic race that reaches the time of the Slavic raids in the Hellade. Körner say that in Laconia also elements of Nordic race are presents”. Some examples from Battaglia: Mediterranids:  Dinarids:   Mediterranid? and Armenoid:  The American anthropologist Roland Dixon studied the funeral masks of Spartans and found them to be Alpine [23]. Italian anthropologist Raffaello Battaglia found the death masks of the Shaft Grave Mycenaeans to represent Dinaric physiognomies [35]. J. Lawrence Angel exressed similar opinions in that he believed that northern intruders in Greece were always of “Dinaroid-Alpine central trend” [19] added to the earlier Mediterranean/Alpine blend. Racial elements were not separate but combined to produce Greek civilization [19]. What Raffaello Bataglia wrote was: "The gold masks from Mycenae and the human face engraved on a Cretens sceptre, reproduce, according to a current opinion, Nordic types. Nevertheless these long face bearded and moustached, with the leptorrhine nose, more than Nordic faces, remember the Dinaric physiognomies”. As for the Mycenaean gold mask, various observers have detected Nordid and Mediterranids traits (Fischer 1930, Stella 1960), Alpinids traits (Stella 1960), Dinarids and Armanoids (Faure 1974, Fischer 1931, Semper 1930) and even Mongoloid traits (Marinatos 1968), although the masks are really too crude and stylized to detect racial types according to Karo. The Spartans that were found in Lacedemonian tombs give us the skeletical evidence of 13 Spartans: 3 of them had very high stature (1,85,1,83,1,78) rest had a superior to the average stature and only one was 1,60 cm tall. Breitinger who studied such skeletical evidence found a strong Nordid component. Do not seems reasonable to think about the Spartans as Alpinids in my opinion. J. Lawrence Angel also found a type that was called Nordic-Iranian among the Greeks: “A Mediterranean minority persists, and heterogeneity is less striking than in the Middle Bronze Age. But as in that period, the change from a general “Mediterranean” norm is too great to explain except by invasion. The hypothesis of a northern, presumably eventually a Balkan or Central European source for the invaders seems certain….The relatively homogeneous Classical Greek series is significantly more dolichocrane and has a large, relatively smooth braincase with long parietals and skull base, well curved occiput, and relatively short, wide, and sloping forehead with clearcut browridges. Rectangular norma facialis goes with oblong orbits, and widely separated gonia. The facial profile is not over-orthognathous, and combines an average concavoconvex nose plus weak spine and slight subnasal grooving and no “Classical Greek profile” with a mouth tendency toward an overbite accompanied by better and less worn teeth than in the Early Iron Age, and ad added trend toward suppression of third molars. This skeletal norm fits the artistic ideal of the period well except for the nose where the ideal’s excess root height may represent a stretching of skin unsupported by bone. Figure 4 illustrates the Classical Greek blend as a less Alpine version on the total series, according precisely with dominance of all three long-headed types and specially with the Nordic-Iranian’s rise almost to its Middle Bronze Age frequency. A definite Mixed Alpine minority replaces the Alpine-Dinaric element of the preceding period, indicating a process of mixture of Early Iron Age invaders with Bronze Age leftovers. In this process recombination of Nordic-Iranians strains contained in both Dinaric-Mediterranean invaders and Basic White Mycenaeans contributes to the Classical excess of Nordic-Iranians, many of whom individually show Mediterranean, Basic White, or Alpine minor traits. Existence in Classical and Hellenistic times of a strong Nordic-Iranian element among Anatolian Greeks as well as Basic Whites and Mixed Alpines suggest that influx from this source is plausible at the start of the period”. Nordic-Iranian is a type invented by Angel where there is included a mixture of Coon’s Iron Age Nordics, Coon’s Corded Nordics, Coon’s Danubians and “Iranians” types. Angel terminology and racial classification is interesting but very complicated. If you like anthropology is interesting to know the work but I agreed with Day when he wrote: “Less convincing are the schemes of racial typologists. In one case, the British-born American anthropologist Lawrence Angel spent decades pigeon-holing ancient Greek cranioskeletal material into numerous subraces….Angel thought this “a fascinating and extraordinarly heterogenous mixture, which must have been stimulating and surprising to live with, like our own mixtures in America today” –exemplifying the belief, common in America and Britain, that civilizations arises from a medley of racial types. Perhaps Angel’s “early work on race and human diversity… seems clearly conceived as a rebuttial to Nazi ideals of genetic purity” (Jacobsen and Cullen 1990), but replacing one bias with another is not progress”. One of the Angel’s conclusions in his work Racial analysis of ancient Greeks was: “Reduction in variability in Mycenaean and Classical periods of historic achievement is associated with out breeding, or racial fusion, linked in turn with population increase, slowing of racial change, and ease to communication. I conclude that the Greeks, like other outstanding people, benefit from their racial mongrel origins”. Very "american" way of thinking. ... Baker [5] discusses the origin of blondism and says “It is often supposed that blondness is an indication of Nordid ancestry. Taken by itself, it is nothing of the kind.” Hence, it can be safely assumed that the existence of blond individuals in the Classical world does not require an explanation of Northern ancestry, as German anthropologist Hans Guenther [15] and the Nordicist school presumed. This view was shared by Buxton in [3] where he states “In regard to the Achaeans we have shown that there appears to be no good ground for suspecting the presence of Nordics.” What Baker wrote, and I agreed with him, is that “It is often supposed that blondness is an indication of Nordid ancestry. Taken by itself, it is nothing of the kind. The Dalofalids, for instance, who inhabit Westphalia and the province of Kopparbert in Sweden, are as blond as the most typical Nordids; so are the Osteuropids of north-eastern Europe….Fair hair and blue eyes also occur sporadically among the Kabyles of northern Algeria and the Kurds of northern Iraq and the adjacent parts of Turkey and Iran. The original inhabitants of the Canary Islands, the Guanches, were fair haired and blue eyed”. But for Baker “Too much stress has been laid by some authors on the colour of the scalp-hair in Nordids. It is commonly ash-blond (the “platinum blonde” of women), golden, golden brown, pale brown, or reddish-brown. Many adult Nordids whose hair is darker than any of these colours had golden locks when they were children. Gradual darkening is quite usual”. The point here is which sub-race or human population type can had given blond hair among the Hellenes proper. Certainly not the Berbers neither the Guanches and seems improbably that Osteuropids were the people who brought fair features among the Hellenes proper, so the only choices are Nordids or Dalofaelids but as we know Dalofaelids were and are minority among IE and even in nowadays northern populations so most probably was that the Nordid race who brought such type of hair colour among the Hellenes proper. ... American anthropologist Earnest Hooton [40] cautions that the existence of occasional blonds in Greek literature “does not justify inflation into pseudo-histories of conquering ‘Nordic’ tribes invading the Greek peninsula.” American anthropologist W. M. Krogman put it simply [36]: “Nordics today have not cornered the market on blondism!” What Earnest Hooton wrote about the migrations of “Nordic” tribes concerning Greece was: “Even before of the Neolithic period the Nordic tribes of northern Europe began to migrate southward, eastward, and westward from their homes around the Baltic. They seem early to have formed the virile blend which is called the British Bronze Age subrace, by mixing with Alpines somewhere in central Europe…. Similar Nordic-Alpine mixed stocks may have been responsible for the movement into the Greek peninsula of the conquering northern people known as the Achaeans, and some writers think that the destruction of the Second City of Troy is to be attributed to such an invasion. At the end of the Bronze Age, about 1100 B.C., it is probable that Nordic-Alpine people, who had learned the use of iron in the Austrian Tirol or some area farther to the east in central Europe, again invaded the Greek peninsula, where they were know as the Dorians, and at about the same time carried the knowledge of iron into Italy where culture is called the Villanovan culture”.
__________________
"With the miscegenation vary as much the form as the essence of the nations. The new foreign hereditary patrimony that circulates in the new popular organism, acts from now in the variability of the physical and psychic features of the group, from the more ordinary phenotypic and tenuous racial characteristics untill the highest spiritual capacities". ILSE SCHWIDETZKY, Grundzüge der Völkerbiologie. http://www.revistaidentidad.com/ http://www.id-press.eu/ http://www.editorialretorno.com/ Last edited by Visigodo; Sunday, August 13th, 2006 at 14:57.
|
|
Monday, August 14th, 2006
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Quote:
If Afrocentrist take Sergi as reference is just because they made an abusive interpretation of the term "EURAFRICAN"; they take by granted that as soon as a term containing the word "africa/can" is coined, they are making reference to negroes and the best exemple of this missuse of terms containing "african" is the mythomaniac paranoical and histeric negrocentrist "professor" Philippe Emeagwali. He claims to have invented the fastest computer in the world (which is false as his device could proces 3.1. G.flops/second whereas someone had achieved the same year a performance of 6 G.flops/second. e's also the author of poorly documented essais on the alleged nigrescence of Jesus Christ and Euclides!!! He claims that, as Euclides was born in Africa 5egyp) he was most probably black and there goes with speculations with no sustainable document or proof (typically afro centrist) here you see, just because the word "Africa" is present in Euclides life, he claims him as nigger!! Quote:
I'm reeading Angel's "People of Learna" which I purchased a few weeks ago. Acc. to what I've been reading by upto today Angel's point of view seems to be that nordics never entered into the Hellas in their purest form. He seems to claim that they were heavely mixed already. Strangely enough, in his comparative tableau he points nordics (even Halstadt!)to be hooked in nasal profile (!) On the other side, if you remember well the reading of R. baker's Race, he clealy states that it was the mediterranean type which was admired by classic sculptors. regarding the myceaenean masks:   Mi dispiace and not that I want to contest opinions of anthropologist better trained than me (that's for sure!) but... They look to wide faced for me. The first one looks very alpinid with that baby face and the second one, I'd tend to see a ressemblance with Italian physicist alessandro Volta (one out of the two only contemporarycolor portraits) but of course, this could be a relative interpretation and of course, more lepthorhine (the mask)  QUOTE WISIGODO As for the Mycenaean gold mask, various observers have detected Nordid and Mediterranids traits (Fischer 1930, Stella 1960), Alpinids traits (Stella 1960), Dinarids and Armanoids (Faure 1974, Fischer 1931, Semper 1930) Enough to discard the concept of a ruling aristocracy of Nordic racial type only  You also said that Dalofaelids where a minority among IE... if by Dalo-F you mean cromagnonids, I must disagree with you as a matter of fact PI were Cro-Ma (and yes, I say it aloud, I'm of a new scholl;THE CRO-MAGNISM  ) : the misterius IE spech speakers from Chinese Turkestan, the "tokharians" were cro-magnonids as well as their mummies and the chinese artist of the time show it:  About the admiration for blondness in ancient greeks, we have seen already how mitigated it was. If Pseudo Aristotle seemed to admire the blond hair (but not the "blond" eyes!) is just because it reminds him the colour of the lion's mane and not because it's implication to a given phenotype.
|
|
Monday, August 14th, 2006
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Quote:
and by dienekes; Color terms are notoriously relative; xanthos may only be taken to mean the fair end of the Greek hair continuum, not blond. This impression is enhanced by the descriptions of northern European hair as polios (gray, usually of old people) or leukon (white) to be found in Greek literature (Diodorus Siculus, Adamantius Judaeus) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
even considered in the most tolerant manner the above is not neutral Quote:
__________________
.
|
|
Monday, August 14th, 2006
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Quote:
As far as red I found much more references to "blond" hair than blue or light eyes. Beside Athenas glaukos eyes in the Odissey, what other references do you find???? I fpund in contrast referecnes to alkmene's drak eyes in Hesiod (who compares them to beauty canon dictated by Aphrodite) or Theseus dark eyes in Bacchilides. Also, I'm still wiating someone to explain how is it that in the Odissey, we have a "blond" Ulysses in chp. XIII and a brunet one in chapter XVI  Visigodo, Visigodo Visigodo, you deception me quoting authors such as Lapouge  i don't know what was his problem wth alpinids that he loved too much to label them as inferior (He wrote about the aryan ancestors practising already agriculture while those of the brachycephal alpinids lived still like animals)...Not to tell that if we can drive cars today is thanks in part to an alpinid [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME~1/carrial/LOCALS~1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG] [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME~1/carrial/LOCALS~1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.jpg[/IMG]
|
|
Monday, August 21st, 2006
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: The Greek Face - by R. Peterson
Quote:
If you like Angel, J.L. I also recommend to read “Race Type, and Ethnic Group in Ancient Greece”, “Eskeletal Change in Ancient Greece” and the most interesting in my opinion “A Racial Analysis of the Ancient Greeks”. The book you have is also interesting but as you know already complicated and in my opinion I think Angel seems that try to demonstrate that “race mixing” is something good “per se”.For example in “Race Type, and Ethnic Group in Ancient Greece” wrote: “Going on the fairly logical assumption that genetic mixture must parallel ethnic mixture to some extend, many historians and anthropologists have deduced that “race mixture” and variety are necessary for flowering of civilisation”. To me that is not strange as Angel use as bibliography to affirm such sentence works from Herstz and Ashely Montagu. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
”Nevertheless, many believers in racial typology have used the evidence of cranioskeletal remains and ancient texts to assign PIE speakers to a particular subrace or subraces. Among these hypothesized subraces are: NORDICS (INCLUDING FALICS) (Benoist 1979: 33; Biasutti 1954: 39-40; Coon 1939: 221 Coon et al. 1950: 83-4; Cornelius 1967: 13; Curtis 1988: 39, 56; Czekanowki 1939-40: 95; Dumézil 1941a: 12-13; Eickstedt 1934a: 458 ff.; 1934b: 47; Ekholm 1926: 29; Fick 1905: 246-7; Gayre 1972: 52; Günther 1933: 335, 338; Haudry 1981: 122-4; Huxley and Haddon 1935: 197-8; Keane 1896: 80; Kossina 1909-10:20; Kühn 1976: 361; Lahovary 1946: 297; 311; Lelekov 1982: 33-4; Locchi 1968: 38 n. 1; Meyer 1948: 15-16; Moret 1936: 30; Mühlmann 1936: 226; Nagel 1987: 198; Poesche 1878: 12; Pokorny 1954: 404; Quatrefrages 1871: 650; Reche 1936a: 312; 1936b: 117; Reinach 1909:68; Romer 1959: 402; Schomoeckel 1985: 18; Scwantes 1958: 361; Scwidetzky 1950b: 274; Sweet 1900: 129; Tucker 1908: 241; Uhlenbeck 1937: 393; Vacher de Lapouge 1899; 10-19; Van Windekens 1941a: 186; 1941b: xxv; Velden 1912:87; Vries 1941: 10; Wilke 1918: 6; Wirth 1914: 124; Wolf 1914-15: 311-12; 1954: 191; cf. Eickstedt 1963: 314; Linnaeus 1746: 1; 1758: 211) NORDICS AND ALPINES (Lefévre 1889a: 131; 1895: 28-9; Lundman 1952: 43-4 ff. 54; 1967b: 12; 1976-7: 115; Poisson 1939: 230; Rosny 1895: 198-200; Roy 1989: 2; Royer 1880: 329-30; Semper: 347,352) ALPINES AND MEDITERRANEANS (Kerns 1985: 156) ALPINES-MONGOLOIDS AND MEDITERRANEANS (Pillai 1935: 923-4) ALPINES AND ARMENOIDS (Laviosa Zambotti 1948: 14; 1949: 300) LIGHT-HAIRED BRACHYCRANES (Taylor 1892: 295; Van Lysebeth 1988: 31-2: cf. Wolff 1927: 80) MEDITERRANEANS (Calestani 1941: 82; Mantegazza 1883-4, XIII: 205; Rai 1987: 11; Ridgeway 1921: 17-18) ARMENOIDS (Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1985a: 77-8; 1995: 847; cf. Diakooff 1985b: 153-4) RACIALLY MIXED CAUCASOIDS (Feist 1924: 35; Paret 1942: 68 Schmidt 1946: 246; Schader 1916: 15, Stuart-Glennie 1890: 971) MESOCRANIC CENTUM SPEAKERS AND DOLICHOCRANIC SATEM SPEAKERS (Kappers 1934: 85; cf. Lundman 1955:90). But see Anttila (1989:306) and Tischler (1990:94) on the importance of the centum-satem isogloss. CRO-MAGNONS (Gooch 1977: 129 ff.) As you can see just Gooch was the only one who say that IE were just Cro-Magnons. Lothar Kilian in his work “Zum Ursprung der Indogermanen”, Bonn 1988. One of the more accurate works made about the Indoeuropeans lately (100% scientific and serious) a book that I really recommend (there is also a French edition) reach the following conclusions about the Indo-Europeans: · The anthropological investigation is essentially unanimous when affirming that the Indo-European belonged predominantly to the Nordic race. · Nevertheless, different relative opinions exist to the concept of Nordic race in anthropology. Our definition is very next to the concept of race teutonordic of Von Eickstedt. · The Nordic race (Nordid) and the race Dalofaelid (Dalide) they have been developed starting from two types different from the Upper Paleolithic and, therefore, they constitute two independent races. However, it is possible to recognize hybrid types. · Cannot settle down a comparison among Nordic and Indo-European race. A net racial frontier has never existed for what we can find Nordic types in neighbouring non Indo-European Populations. · In function coexistence of the Nordids and Dalofaelid, as well as of their partial hybridization, the Indo-European natives should have had certain Dalofaelids proportion although the prevalence corresponds to the Nordic ones, prevalence that will vary in intensity in the different areas. Neither it would be necessary to exclude other components, especially Mediterranean. · The Schnurkeramiker that with all security was Indo-European, belonged in a predominant way but not in their entirety to the Nordic race. They don't differ essentially of the payees of the culture of the funnel glasses neither of those of the culture of the ceramic of bands. · Doesn’t exist tests neither convincing indications of any class that allow to consider western Siberia or Asia in general as the area of origin of the Nordic race. · The development of the Nordic race starting from the types of Brünn and of Capelle in the Nordic Mitteleuropa during the last glaciation presents a high grade of verisimilitude. · The formation of the race Dalofaelid starting from the Cromagnid type from the north appears as a parallel process to the previous one. · By confirming the hypothesis here outlined about the origin of the Nordic race, the Northern Mitteleuropa should have constituted part essential of the Indo-European Heimat.  About if the Hellenes had a Dalofaelid component among them Günther wrote: “If it is contemplated the immense work of Griechiche Porträts de Arendt y Brunn and Hekler, Die Bildniskunft der Griechen und Römer (1912), a surprising prevalence of the Nordic features can be observed, certain that with frequent non Nordic components, being the Dinaric component, probably, the most evident; they are sometimes documented faces that don't present - even when one makes abstraction of the beard that enlarges the faces - the thinness of the Nordic face, but that they don't never allow or very rarely to recognize a Dalic component. Only a Hellenistic warrior (of Gallic origin?)... The presence of a Dalic component should not be admitted in the archaic periods of the Hellenic civilization, when in fact this race, apparently, remained bounded to the tribes of the North-western Europe, mainly among the Germans and Celts. Neither the Hellenes have never presented in any place psychic features characteristic of the Dalic race, such and like they can be recognized among the Germans, the Celts and even the Romans. All the indications point toward that the blond hair, the blue eyes and the skin whiteness among the Hellenes was a racial characteristic exclusively from a Nordic source”. Regarding the racial composition of the kurgan population there is a line inside the core of those that have studied the IE that have intended to interpret kurgan people like a simple pastoral extension of an Indo-European culture that it would have been developed in the northern-central Europe; this is, a part of these kurgan population, after having destroyed the European paleolithic culture, they would have descended toward the south (the "Streitaxtvölker") diffusing techniques of the polished stone culture firstly and after the metallurgy of the bronze. (Alain de Benoist) Swidetzky in the article "The Influence of the Steppe People Based on the Physical Anthropological Data in Special Consideration to the Corded-Battle-Axe Culture" it is true that the types for her studied are classified as Proto-Europids, but the same Gimbutas speaks in general about a gracil cromagnid type with narrow face (Nordoid), to which would belong the kurgan people. On the contrary, other scholars pointed out the presence of a robust cromagnid type among the kurgan population. Nevertheless, without samples of the entirety of the bony material, it is impossible to emit a sure statement but the most probable thing is that among the kurgan populations existed, as Olga Necrasov, has studied an amalgam of robust and dolychocephals Cromagnids of wide face and more gracil Nordoides but still showing certain robustness with narrow face but also to some mediterranean types and brachycephalic ones but in smaller quantity: “The analyses of an intergroup of individual combinations of the main characteristics (metrical and descriptive) has indicated that the core of the population consisted of proto-europids (cro-magnons sensus lato), more or less attenuated (many almost classical proto-europids), as well as nordoids or proto-nordoids. To this should be added a few mediterranoids (more frequent in the femal group), a very few and very moderate brachycranes with the aspect of attenuated and brachycraned protoeuropids” (Olga Necrasov). About the Tocharians Mallory in “The Tarim Mummis” wrote: “The Qäwrighul remains are relatively homogenous and they exhibit features associated with a type known as Proto-Eurpoid, a rather robust Caucasoid, especially well represented in Northern Europe and the stepplands and forest-steppe of Russia and the Ukrania”. “By now, the attentive reader will know we owe another caveat: the three physical types employed by Han Kangxin –Proto-Erupids, Indo-Afghans and Pamir-Ferghanans- are largely labelled Nordics, Mediterraneans and Alpines, terms that send shiver of apprehension down the spines of Western biological anthropologists. To be sure, Han is also working with a considerable suite of measurements but his typological approach or, at least, his terminology must admittedly be regarded as extremely old fashioned”. The mummies that I have seen in the two books I have from the matter “Las momias de Ürümuch” from E. W. Barber and “The Tarim mummies” from Mallory seems to me to be mostly “Nordoids” and very tall people according to some data. There is on man 2 meters tall and one woman 1.9 meters tall¡¡¡ Here you can see some examples.       Quote:
Günther, for example, wrote: “Still the medical Hipocrat, born the 460 B.C. and deceased approximately in 377 B.C in its writing "About the air, the water and the places" talk about the blue eyes as something not specially extraordinary. For him it is surprising, that at the present time can be explain by means of the recessives character of the blond hair and blue eyes, that parents with blue eyes only can have children with blue eyes. Hipocrat would also want to conclude that parents of long skulls have children with long skulls too. Therefore, for him the difference in the cranial forms should be something that gets the attention. The testimony of Hipocrat about the blue eyes among the Hellenic people however already constitutes a testimony that during the late period of the Hellenic people about the disappearance in the Hellenic superior stratum because of the war of the Peloponnesus”. If light eyes were common among the Indoeuropean Hellenic population can be proved as Reche did when he wrote: "Especially a small Greek word demonstrates everything: the name of the iris of the eye, “Iris” that equally means "rainbow". a people that has brown or black eyes could never end up conceiving the idea of comparing its color of eyes with the rainbow because the rainbow is not brown neither black. Only some light eyes - blue, grey, green or blue with an orange arch in border of the pupils - they could motivate a such name, colour therefore that they are only in the Nordic race or in some of the mixed races formed starting from her." Reche, Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte, entry «Griechen». Certainly, as Pontikos say, nowadays light eyes are not uncommon in Greece population but do not make sense that the word Iris was created by the pre-Indoeuropean population, as he Pontikos would like, because the population was predominantly Mediterranid and dark pigmented, so I think is quite normal that such word was introduced by the Indoeuropean people were the light eyes were more common that among the pre-Indoeuropean population. What Pontikos wrote has no sense in my opinion, he say that the work Iris was introduced in the Greek language during the late 2nd c. AD (Julius Pollux) or that the earlier name for eyes was “the black”?? even if the pre-Indoeuropean was pred. Mediterranean pure dark black eyes are less common being dark-brown more normal, anyway think about the Indoeuropeans Greeks calling the Iris “the black” has not much sense. About Odysseus described with black hair Günther wrote: “Odysseus, husband of the truly Nordic Penelope, is not the pure Nordic hero, because already present certain Armenoid features... in the breast of the Hellenic tradition Odysseus is so serpentine, so "rich in artifices", so skilled when adapting to the psychic life of other people that cannot be considered as purely Nordic. It could be said that is characterized to be mainly Nordic with Armenoid components. In a curious coincidence with Odysseus's racially characterization, as it has already been commented previously, it is described in a passage of the Odyssey (XIII, 397) as blond, while, on the contrary, in other two (VI, 250 and XXVIII, 158) with the hair and the dark beard”. Quote:
I have two works of him and perhaps I forgot such a affirmation but as far as I do not think he never said that Alpinids were like “animals”. Sergi for example say that the Aryans were savages and the great Eurafrican race was the top of the line of the humanity. Aryans for him were Eurasiatics where you can include Alpinids, East-Baltids, etc. So according to Sergi Alpinids were real savages unable to create any great civilisation, he wrote about the brachycephals: “These invaders were savages, inferior to the Neolithic Europeans, whose civilisation they in large part destroyed, re-plunging Europe into barbarism, also introducing the new burial custom of cremation, together with other customs which it is not necessary to investigate here, and transforming the existing languages into their own… I term it the Euroasiatic species, because, since the invasions just mentioned, it has occupied a large part of Europe. Others, with Linnaeus, have termed these Asiatics Homo Alpinus; it seems to me erroneous, however, to preserve this name, for these people are not only found in the Alps but they are also found in Germany and France, and they occupy the plains of Russia, that is to say a great part of Central Europe from east to west, as well as the valley of the Po which is anything but Alpine. I am convinced that this Eurasiatic species is of Asiatic origin; since Ujfalvy has found in the Hindu-Kush the same types that are found in Europe; and since their cephalic forms are all Asiatic, and are found not only among the so-called Aryans of the Hindu-Kush, but among the Mongols and others…. I am, finally convinced that these Aryans when they invaded Europe were savages, very inferior in civilisation to the Neolithic Eurafricans, and that hence they were not the importers of a new and superior civilisation… This is not the place to speak at length of the Eurasiatics; on another occasion I propose to deal with their physical characters and their primitive civilisation”. Frankly speaking Lapouge had a something better opinion about the Alpinids (well about brachycephals in general): “The brachycephalic is prudent, freeing, laborious. It is very prudent and always worries in any circumstance. Without being cowardly, it doesn't possess, however, warrior’s qualities. It is tied to their countryside and their soil. It is rarely an futile persone, however difficultly it overcomes the limits of the mediocrity. Their targets are limited, working patiently for their realization". Lapouge ideas about the Alpinids were something better that Sergi ideas in mi opinion and even had good opinions about the Asiatics as Baker wrote: “Lapouge was chiefly interested in the peoples of Europe. It must be mentioned, however, that he had particular admiration for the skill of the Chinese in agriculture, and regarded them as ‘not inferior to the majority of Europeans’ though different in character”.
__________________ "With the miscegenation vary as much the form as the essence of the nations. The new foreign hereditary patrimony that circulates in the new popular organism, acts from now in the variability of the physical and psychic features of the group, from the more ordinary phenotypic and tenuous racial characteristics untill the highest spiritual capacities". |
