On brachycephalisation and debrachyliocephalisation

[Ariets]

Brachyliocephalisation was a "weird" process in middle ages, and brachyliocephaly is quite new "feature", lets see how people of Siksali (somewhere in S.E. Estonia) changed in past. Ah, and why someone belief that these bollocks called "types" et cetera are unchangable?

The anthropometric characterization of the Siksali population compared with the archeological populations of the adjecent territories. Gradual changes took place in all bone dimensions of both males and famales. The average cranial lenght and height of the male population diminished by 7 mm durring 300 year and the stature by 5-6 cm.

(...)

During the whole period of the use of the cemetery, gradual changes ware taking place in cranial dimensions as well as in the stature of the population (Table 2). The average cranial lenght and height, for example, of the male population diminished by 7 mm, bizygomatic breadth by 2,2 mm, the stature by 5-6 cm during 300 years.


(...)

Changes of cranial dimensions as well as body stature could be explained by temporal changes. However, in Siksali, a small influx of inhabitants could have taken place supposedly at the beginning of the 13th century when the opposite orientation of burials appears.

That data comes from work "The population of the SE corner of Estonia at the end of the Iron Age and in the Middle Ages" (Acta Medica Lituanica, 2006, v 13 no.2)

Need to find:
KOZAK J.: Proces brachycefalizacji na terenie ziem Polski w okresie feudalnym. Przegl. Antropol. 1995, 58,
HENNEBERG M.: Redukcje strukturalne w mikroewolucji Homo Sapiens: aparat ¿ucia, gracylizacja, brachycefalizacja. Przegl. Antropol. 1983, 49,

In the article the development of skull measurements and head measurements (length and breadth) and of the cephalic index, calculated from these measurements, since the Neolithic period are presented. The results obtained from the historical material are compared with those of living persons. The measurements as well of the skull as of the head show secular changes. The following general trend was found: an increase of body height is connected with a debrachycephalisation* and a decrease of body height is connected with a brachycephalisation. It can be emphasized that brachycephalisation/debrachycephalisation are part of the secular trend. Therefore environmental factors are responsible for the described changes of measurements of the skull and the head in a broadest sense.

"Is head size modified by environmental factors?" Z Morphol Anthropol. 1998;82(1):59-66.


More stuff on brachyliocephalization and debrachyliocephalization:

• The phenomenon of debrachycephalization in Jena school children
  [The phenomenon of debrachycephalization in Jena s...[Anthropol Anz. 1998] - PubMed Result
• Debrachycephalization in Lodz, Poland
  http://www.apsl.edu.pl/biologia/spb_1/Lorkiewicz.pdf
• Influence of positioning of infants on long-term changes of cephalic dimensions.
  IndexCopernicus - Journals Master List
• Secular changes in the Japanese head form viewed from somatometric data
  ASE : Vol. 112 (2004) , No. 1 pp.41-52
• Biological traits of spouses: socio-cultural and economic context in the urban and rural environments.
  Biological traits of spouses: socio-cultural and e...[Stud Hum Ecol. 1992] - PubMed Result
• Changes in anthropometrical data of the hungarian child and adult population during the last thirty years based on family studies conducted by the Department of Forensic Medicine at Budapest
  Changes in anthropometrical data of the hungarian child and adult population during the last thirty years based on family studies conducted by the Department of Forensic Medicine at Budapest
• The brachycephalisation problem, a nutrition constitutional problem?
  [The brachycephalisation problem, a nutrition cons...[Gegenbaurs Morphol Jahrb. 1989] - PubMed Result
• Is head size modified by environmental factors?
  [Is head size modified by environmental factors?] [Z Morphol Anthropol. 1998] - PubMed Result
• Some environmental factors in biological diffrentation of human populations (page 2 maybe be interesing in that aspect) Some environmental factors in biological diffrentation of human populations
• Secular change of craniofacial measures in Croatian younger adults Secular change of craniofacial measures in Croatia...[Am J Hum Biol. 2006 Sep-Oct] - PubMed Result
• Secular change in body height and cephalic index of Croatian medical students (University of Rijeka) Secular change in body height and cephalic index o...[Am J Phys Anthropol. 2004] - PubMed Result
• Rapid change of head and face measurements in university students in Hungary Rapid change of head and face measurements in univ...[Anthropol Anz. 1994] - PubMed Result

Feel free to comment, discuss

[Agrippa]

However, in Siksali, a small influx of inhabitants could have taken place supposedly at the beginning of the 13th century when the opposite orientation of burials appears.

So there was a possible influx of different, most likely more Osteuropid/Baltised people

Its worth to note that Baltisation as a process goes beyond brachycephalisation and being a "syndrome" rather than "such a simple" symptom.

And finally the direction of environmental changes often points to the selective pressures working on a group. So f.e. if a populations shrinks first because of worseing of the nutritional status, the selection of more reduced and broader genetic variants will follow, since they will be able to deal better with such a condition of deficiency.

If dealing with environmental influences alone, the reactions to a certain given living condition can be quite different if looking different racial and constitutional forms.

F.e. certain Mongoloid variants change in a different direction if looking at their craniofacial traits since the secular acceleration and change began than Europids and leptomorphic Europids in particular.

Also compare to this:
Asthenic type and debrachycephalization

That there are secular changes in populations doesnt mean that racial types dont exist nor that they would react all the same. If f.e. looking at male European individuals of a height above 180 cm, you will rarely see more otherwise infantilised Alpinid or Osteuropid variants among them than Nordid, Atlantomediterranid, Dalofaelid and Dinarid f.e., like one would expect. So even though they gained cm's as well, they are still shorter than other generally taller types which were affected by the same conditions.

Its like it is with height and intelligence in general, the potential, the upper limits being determined genetically, but in between the upper limit and the limit necessary for survival everything is possible depending on the situation. Simple put, the potential for Alpinids and Baltids for debrachycephalisation, taller and more leptomorphic stature etc. being significantly lower than that of Nordids or Atlantomediterranids, whereas their potential for brachycephalisation and pyknomorphisation is much higher than in the latter.

There potential limits are different and there will be rarely if ever an overlap in many individuals, yet alone in whole populations which are pred. of this or that Europid basic form type (Aurignacoid vs. reduced Cromagnoid f.e.).

[Ariets]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

So there was a possible influx of different, most likely more Osteuropid/Baltised people

BUAHAHAHHAHA, please Agrippa you killing me, can you prove that influx of "Osteuropid" army?


Its worth to note that Baltisation as a process goes beyond brachycephalisation and being a "syndrome" rather than "such a simple" symptom.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

And finally the direction of environmental changes often points to the selective pressures working on a group. So f.e. if a populations shrinks first because of worseing of the nutritional status, the selection of more reduced and broader genetic variantswill follow, since they will be able to deal better with such a condition of deficiency.

If dealing with environmental influences alone, the reactions to a certain given living condition can be quite different if looking different racial and constitutional forms.

F.e. certain Mongoloid variants change in a different direction if looking at their craniofacial traits since the secular acceleration and change began than Europids and leptomorphic Europids in particular.

Also compare to this:
Asthenic type and debrachycephalization

You are killing me Agrippa

Originally Posted by Agrippa

That there are secular changes in populations doesnt mean that racial types dont exist nor that they would react all the same.

Is there any genetical formula for "type"? What does exacly "type" mean from modern biological view? If these types are changable then how they are types?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

If f.e. looking at male European individuals of a height above 180 cm, you will rarely see more otherwise infantilised Alpinid or Osteuropid variants among them than Nordid, Atlantomediterranid, Dalofaelid and Dinarid f.e., like one would expect.

Imagine something like that: male, white, "osteuropid" (btw. truly stupid term) his son's craniofacial structure change due secular change, head become longer and narrower, face also (higher/narrower) what will see our eyes?

Ps. Since when secular changes are only related to height? LOL

Originally Posted by Agrippa

So even though they gained cm's as well, they are still shorter than other generally taller types which were affected by the same conditions.

Any scientific prove?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Its like it is with height and intelligence in general, the potential, the upper limits being determined genetically, but in between the upper limit and the limit necessary for survival everything is possible depending on the situation. Simple put, the potential for Alpinids and Baltids for debrachycephalisation, taller and more leptomorphic stature etc. being significantly lower than that of Nordids or Atlantomediterranids, whereas their potential for brachycephalisation and pyknomorphisation is much higher than in the latter.

Its your phantasy or any scientificaly proved fact?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

There potential limits are different and there will be rarely if ever an overlap in many individuals, yet alone in whole populations which are pred. of this or that Europid basic form type (Aurignacoid vs. reduced Cromagnoid f.e.).

Its just variation related to common genepool of Europids, and these "Cromagnoids" are in fact "fathers" of these Aurignacoids as you call them, but even so, one can produce second, and second can produce, depends of environments factors and living conditions, nothing more.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Ariets

BUAHAHAHHAHA, please Agrippa you killing me, [...]

You are killing me Agrippa

[...] what will see our eyes?

[...] LOL
Its your phantasy or any scientificaly proved fact?

Need I say more?

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Ariets

BUAHAHAHHAHA, please Agrippa you killing me, can you prove that influx of "Osteuropid" army?

Ok, since you seem to follow "a certain source of knowledge" (very personalised) with a specific agenda and try to mock me in a childish way, I will answer in a more elaborated way, even though such words dont deserve that.

I will specifically refer to this document:
http://images.katalogas.lt/maleidykl...d2_109-114.pdf

Its about the population of South Eastern Estonia, as the title already suggestsa region which became more Baltised over time. Originally especially the coastal region was more Nordoid/classic Europid.

After Ilse Schwidetzky, Hauptprobleme der Anthropologie - Bevölkerungsbiologie und Evolution des Menschen (1971):


a) The percentages in the first image refer to people which are high statured-high faced-long headed (= Nordid for that depigmented area) in recruits.

b)
-1 long headed-long faced
-2 short headed-short faced
The dashed line shows the Western border of flat faced brachycephals in the Neolithicum.

From other studies we know, that the distribution of Nordoid variants was once even more widespread and clear, related to the Fatyanovo-Balanovo culture, which examples and reconstructions being shown here more than once.

Also compare to this thread:
Racial Types of Finno-Ugrians, Baltisation and Eastbaltids

So this South Eastern region of Estonia, was a borderland. What we can see too, is that at start they were more warlike, with a strong, I would assume positive, selection in warlike activities in the age of 20-39.

The mortality rate among the youngest became more pronounced in the later period, this again leads to what I usually correlate with Baltisation, namely a situation of deficiency and higher infant mortalities. This had not just an effect on the individuals in the sense of modification, but also selective pressures working on the population. They became dependent farmers also.

Major military actions of armies are usually contraselective and these took place there, as well as plagues, often accompanying it the wars, as the paper puts it. Famine occured 1211-1212.

The population of Siksaly was originally rather mesocran-mesomorphic, so I would assume rather Cromagniform Osteuropids-Cromagnoids or an Osteuropid-Cromagnoid-Nordoid mixed population (s.b.)

They cluster with the South Eastern people, which were less Nordoid (s.a.) and in the paper they state:
"Apparently these cranial samples are characterised by a common morphological component, and that anthropological type was evidently wider spread in ancient times." (S. 112)

So they clearly state that we deal with a specific form, variant or even type, and there was a change going beyond simple modification in that area in question (rather Cromagnoid).

Interesting is S. 113, on which they point to the Western Nordoid influences in the region ("mesocranic narrow-faced anthropological type"). Those were also partly related to certain changes of dimensions in the population. So I was on that part really wrong, namely that more gracile and rather, through modification primarily, somewhat smaller Nordoids came in too.

Interesting read in any case and I hope they work further on that issue, especially in identifying the different components of the population.

Is there any genetical formula for "type"? What does exacly "type" mean from modern biological view? If these types are changable then how they are types?

Compare with this:
What does a basic racial typology describe in Europe?

Of course there is a genetic formula, in the sense of traits being genetically determined. We can even partly associate haplogroups with types, especially in this region, compare with:

One of these antedates the linguistic split between West and East Slavonic-speaking people and is common for the two groups; the other is genetically highlighted by the pre-eminence of haplogroup (hg) N3 and is most parsimoniously explained by extensive assimilation of (or language change in) northeastern indigenous Finno-Ugric tribes.

Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: Russian Y chromosomes

Roughly we can distinguish classic Europid markers of Upper Palaeolithic, Neolithic and Borealised variants:
Male y-DNA Varianten there are two big sources in Russia, namely the more Southern classic Europid one (nordo-cromagnoid-mediterranid) and the North-Eastern Borealised, one (Borealised Cromagnoids, Baltised, part Mongoliform = ostbaltid-lappoid).

The classic Europid hg's would be in Russians primarily R1a und I1b, secundarily I1a und R1b, sowie E3b und J2 (primary Neolithic influences?), for the Borealised N2 and N3.

Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: Haplogroup correlations in Russia

Or other world regions, this time mtDNA and facial height:
Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: mtDNA correlated with facial height in Chad Basin

This is obviously no direct correlation since the y-DNA or mtDNA doesnt determine craniofacial traits really, but they point to such population movements.

The types being determined by traits which have different inheritance patterns and stabilities, which means that f.e. the nasal shape might be much more stable than body height, but both being inherited, for the latter its just an upper limit but still. So especially these times, Nordids will almost reach their upper limit, as will infantile Baltids, with the latter being much shorter however.


So again:

Is there any genetical formula for "type"? What does exacly "type" mean from modern biological view? If these types are changable then how they are types?

Modification can work on them, selective pressures and genflow can change the genetic make up and population's characteristic, but those populations of a certain type keep the specific potentials. F.e. the Icelandic population is mostly Nordid-Cromagnoid-Atlantid, so three tall forms, but in the times of famine and hunger, the - for all of Europe - horrible time of the "Little Ice Age", they began to shrink. However, as soon as the conditions became better again, they were among the tallest in Europe too and because there were not as much different variants in Iceland Alpinisation or Baltisation couldnt happen as fast as in f.e. parts of France, Austria or Poland for that matter.

Imagine something like that: male, white, "osteuropid" (btw. truly stupid term) his son's craniofacial structure change due secular change, head become longer and narrower, face also (higher/narrower) what will see our eyes?

I would at first look at the father if he is really Osteuropid, or Baltid if you prefer that term, and then at his wife, his ancestors and finally at the son. Since being Nordid is not just about a longer head and narrower face, though that are crucial traits. In any case a typical Baltid will, without having recessive genes for the Nordid type or such genes coming in through his partner, never give birth to a Nordid, thats absurd.

And the most idiotic argument of this "racial milieu theory" is "that Nordoid phenotypes increased" through to secular change. THEY DONT!

The Nordoid traits can become however, especially in the more mixed individuals, MORE PRONOUNCED in an environment which suits them, with sufficient nutrition etc.

Funny thing is, there are running plenty of typical Osteuropid/Baltid individuals around in Eastern Europe, so I ask you, if you try to be smart, how comes? Even in siblings being raised the same way, coming from the same mother, same nutrition etc., but one might inherit the Nordoid traits from the mother, the other the Baltid from the father to give an example. But oh yes, the Nordoid one is the result of "secular change" while the Baltid is - what?

Ps. Since when secular changes are only related to height?

Did I say so?

Any scientific prove?

A scientific prove could only come if they would analyse typologically, what they dont in a sufficient way at least, however, we can refer to populations in states and subpopulations of regions, one example being Estonia. The clearly Alpinid and Baltid areas dont close up to the Nordid-Dalofaelid and Dinarid areas. They simply dont.
Some of the tallest people of Europe come from the Dinaric Alps, since they are mostly Dinarid and mature-progressive, rather lepto-mesomorphic, I might ask you, whether the living conditions in shorter statured areas of Europe are always worse or less favourable for a "drastic secular change" form Baltid to Nordid f.e. - what a joke.

Its your phantasy or any scientificaly proved fact?

Its a scientifically proven fact insofar, as we can look at the populations in question, their original status before the Baltisation-Alpinisation in early Medieval times in some regions, during that process and with the secular change happening after the "Little Ice Age" and under modern living conditions.

Its just variation related to common genepool of Europids, and these "Cromagnoids" are in fact "fathers" of these Aurignacoids as you call them, but even so, one can produce second, and second can produce, depends of environments factors and living conditions, nothing more.

Thats absolutely false. You may say that a mixed individual of unclear status can become significantly altered this or that way depending on the living conditons, but the same can't be said for typical individuals. If one is borderline in various traits, the environment might make him look "more this or that", but he will still not be a typical x or y, nor comparable to typical individuals.

There are in Norway, I might point to that region, plenty of both, Aurignacoid or Aurignaciform Nordids and Cromagnoid or Cromagniform Dalofaelid and Alpinoid variants.
Now even if they live in the same city, have the same social status, are siblings even, they differ drastically in various traits including metrical and non-metrical traits.

So at least for these two classic Nordid and Dalofaelid people, you can say without a doubt that this has zero to do with living conditions. You can claim that there is a certain statistical influence due to secular changes, but this:
-Being not necessarily equally distributed
-Nor does such a shift on average eliminate the typological differences inside of the population and on an individual level

There is no scientifical proof for that and will never be, because its not the case in the sense you describe it.

I might also quote your fellow countryman about the process of brachycephalisation from:
Wolfram Bernhard and Anneliese Kandler, Bevölkerungsbiologie (1974); Brachycephalisation: Definitions and statistical facts by Andrzej Wiercinsky.


So there was a trend of brachycephalisation related to infantilisation and this trend was of different intensity depending on the region. Wiercinsky also correctly pointed out, that the differences in ontogentic development being even more prounounced on an intrapopulation level than between populations, which shows us the typological differences (racial and constitutional) as explained above. This also relates to the study about the study I linked above but you were unable to answer in a decent way:
Asthenic type and debrachycephalization

There are arguments for the significance of secular change which can affect a lot of traits, thats not the real question actually, but this doesnt necessarily contradict the typological concept if being properly understood.

And every form of life can be modificated, the expression of a genetic trait can vary, but what makes up the racial-constitutional forms and variation in Europe is exactly the way how it becomes realised on an individual phenotypical level - and those differences being often even more exaggerated by the secular change.

Since the difference of "shorter Alpinid" (lets say 165) and "taller Nordid" (lets say 172) were often less pronounced on an individual than they are now, with typical Alpinids (reduced-infantile) gained little and Nordids towering them with an average of above 180 cm. Now you can come again with "scientifical proofs" for that, like if you have some claiming the opposite, but you very well know that such studies being not undertaken for quite some time mainly because of political pressures and the lack of material - a concentration on traits which are less affected by selective change to reconstruct evolutionary trees also.

This begins to change hopefully again and if looking at the studies and results we have for different nations and populations, we can still conclude enough like the example of the Dinarid areas shows, which tower as a rule even the most prosperous Alpinid or Baltid areas. This is a simple example but with no more simplification than the claims of those which try to tell us that just because there is secular change there were no and are no racial types and everything in the genpool is arbitrary. With a simple look at the people in question all such notions become ridiculous. One would have to analyse the secular change type wise, using a basic but sufficient trait combination - which was not done. All studies which consider intrapopulation variation point to the fact that the different variants being not equally affected by the secular changes. A rather simple allometric law can be applied to certain changes of stature and craniofacial wise, but this must be put into context and differentiated on an individual and typological level, whats not done!

I can confess however, that my original assumption to this study was wrong, since it seems that there was also a significant Nordoid influence resulting in shorter measurements, making the whole situation of the archaeological population in question more complicated than originally assumed by myself.

[Ariets]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Ok, since you seem to follow "a certain source of knowledge" (very personalised) with a specific agenda and try to mock me in a childish way, I will answer in a more elaborated way, even though such words dont deserve that.

Agenda? Are you kidding me? You are the one who follow silly things like super-duper progressive Nordids, which are obviosuly Meds, how can be else? Why Nordids? Why not Iranids? Even your view of "racial progression" I like personally in few things it have some partholes. To much Eickstedt here, huh wasn't he said that Alpines stoped their own evolution?

Ps. There's nothing superrior about Nordids.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

I will specifically refer to this document:
http://images.katalogas.lt/maleidykl...d2_109-114.pdf

Its about the population of South Eastern Estonia, as the title already suggestsa region which became more Baltised over time. Originally especially the coastal region was more Nordoid/classic Europid.

Yes, you use that words, Baltised, why Nordoids can become "Baltised"? Just why?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

After Ilse Schwidetzky, Hauptprobleme der Anthropologie - Bevölkerungsbiologie und Evolution des Menschen (1971):


a) The percentages in the first image refer to people which are high statured-high faced-long headed (= Nordid for that depigmented area) in recruits.

b)
-1 long headed-long faced
-2 short headed-short faced
The dashed line shows the Western border of flat faced brachycephals in the Neolithicum.

From other studies we know, that the distribution of Nordoid variants was once even more widespread and clear, related to the Fatyanovo-Balanovo culture, which examples and reconstructions being shown here more than once.

Yes, I know, in times where poplations ware stricly related and isolated as whole population living in same living conditions, environments and diet people ware much more similar to themself because of same factors.

Ps. As for Nordids as "of Mediterrean stock", Schwitedzky says:
"To imagine a colonization of Central-, North- and Eastern Europe by humans which expanded from the Mediterranean Sea and brought the indigenous populations to extinction by cultural or biological superiority, is so absurd, that it does not even deserve to be discussed."
Ilse Schwidetzky, 1969

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Also compare to this thread:
Racial Types of Finno-Ugrians, Baltisation and Eastbaltids

So this South Eastern region of Estonia, was a borderland. What we can see too, is that at start they were more warlike, with a strong, I would assume positive, selection in warlike activities in the age of 20-39.

The mortality rate among the youngest became more pronounced in the later period, this again leads to what I usually correlate with Baltisation, namely a situation of deficiency and higher infant mortalities. This had not just an effect on the individuals in the sense of modification, but also selective pressures working on the population. They became dependent farmers also.

Major military actions of armies are usually contraselective and these took place there, as well as plagues, often accompanying it the wars, as the paper puts it. Famine occured 1211-1212.

The population of Siksaly was originally rather mesocran-mesomorphic, so I would assume rather Cromagniform Osteuropids-Cromagnoids or an Osteuropid-Cromagnoid-Nordoid mixed population (s.b.)

Just a simple note, why mixed?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

They cluster with the South Eastern people, which were less Nordoid (s.a.) and in the paper they state:
"Apparently these cranial samples are characterised by a common morphological component, and that anthropological type was evidently wider spread in ancient times." (S. 112)

So they clearly state that we deal with a specific form, variant or even type, and there was a change going beyond simple modification in that area in question (rather Cromagnoid).

Interesting is S. 113, on which they point to the Western Nordoid influences in the region ("mesocranic narrow-faced anthropological type"). Those were also partly related to certain changes of dimensions in the population. So I was on that part really wrong, namely that more gracile and rather, through modification primarily, somewhat smaller Nordoids came in too.

Interesting read in any case and I hope they work further on that issue, especially in identifying the different components of the population.

Nah, in same populations ware two diffrent "types", but shared common features and being relative, severed by geographical territory and living conditions, and period (when changes happened too).

"The investigations of the Estonian paleopopulations and the distribution of anthropological types in Estonia using the craniological material have mainly been carried out by K. Mark (1956; 1965). According to K. Mark, two main clearly distinguishable raniological types have been established among the Estonian cranial samples (Fig. 6). One type is characterised by very large measurements, massive, with long, narrow and high dolichocran skulls, with a high face and narrow nose. That type occurred almost everywhere in Estonia in the pit graves of the 11th–13th centuries – in West and North Estonia (at Martna, Haimre, Küti, Tammiku) and also in Tartu district (Õvi, Lahepera). The Karja sample from Saaremaa (Mark, 1965) as well as the Viiraküla sample from Muhu Island (Heapost, 1997) also belongs to that type. The other type is mesocranic, more gracile, with a broader, lower and slightly flattened face. That type is spread in East Estonia (as indicate the skulls from Jõuga mounds in North-East Estonia, the skull samples from South-East Estonia – Otepää, Makita and others from the 11th–15th centuries and later) (Mark, 1965; Heapost, 1993). Both these types are Europoid. Deciding by the long bones the first type was high of stature (about 172 cm) and the other of a little shorter stature (about 167–168 cm) (Mark, 1962:178; Heapost, 1993:247)"

Don't you see resemblance?

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Compare with this:
What does a basic racial typology describe in Europe?

Of course there is a genetic formula, in the sense of traits being genetically determined. We can even partly associate haplogroups with types, especially in this region, compare with:

Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: Russian Y chromosomes

a) Formula for type?
b) Not all traits are determined by genotype, to phenotype environment has clear influnce, beside of that certain genes are turned on or off by geography and lifestyle. Similarity among Europids, Europeans etc. in diffrent populations come from common genepool among them, and living conditions, not by affinity.
c) Associate with haplogroups? Since when, seriously I'd like to read serious study that write "huh, dude aR1an's are Baltid, R1b are Nordick's" (j/k, i know a bit infantile, but I guess you get what I mean). Their variation aren't specially related to their haplogroup/types, we can find "Nordid" guy with N3a, I1a, R1b, R1a etc haplogroup, and that does not mean anything. (I know, you write only "partly")

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Roughly we can distinguish classic Europid markers of Upper Palaeolithic, Neolithic and Borealised variants:
Male y-DNA Varianten there are two big sources in Russia, namely the more Southern classic Europid one (nordo-cromagnoid-mediterranid) and the North-Eastern Borealised, one (Borealised Cromagnoids, Baltised, part Mongoliform = ostbaltid-lappoid).

The classic Europid hg's would be in Russians primarily R1a und I1b, secundarily I1a und R1b, sowie E3b und J2 (primary Neolithic influences?), for the Borealised N2 and N3.

Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: Haplogroup correlations in Russia

Or other world regions, this time mtDNA and facial height:
Dienekes\' Anthropology Blog: mtDNA correlated with facial height in Chad Basin

This is obviously no direct correlation since the y-DNA or mtDNA doesnt determine craniofacial traits really, but they point to such population movements.

Last bold text says all. Beside, baltised, borealised, why only "Cromagnoids"? (do you have any prove for that Nordoid cannot be borealised?).

Originally Posted by Agrippa

The types being determined by traits which have different inheritance patterns and stabilities, which means that f.e. the nasal shape might be much more stable than body height, but both being inherited, for the latter its just an upper limit but still. So especially these times, Nordids will almost reach their upper limit, as will infantile Baltids, with the latter being much shorter however.

Nah, nothing like that.

young:

older:


For typologist it's still same? That dude, get weight and more "Alpinoid" look. Its not single example, I can provide picture of a guy who "was Nordid" and become totally Alpinoid, so is he is still Nordid or no?

Dude, these whole stuff aren't stable thats why basic "spectrum" should taken by genetics rather that few features.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Modification can work on them, selective pressures and genflow can change the genetic make up and population's characteristic, but those populations of a certain type keep the specific potentials. F.e. the Icelandic population is mostly Nordid-Cromagnoid-Atlantid, so three tall forms, but in the times of famine and hunger, the - for all of Europe - horrible time of the "Little Ice Age", they began to shrink. However, as soon as the conditions became better again, they were among the tallest in Europe too and because there were not as much different variants in Iceland Alpinisation or Baltisation couldnt happen as fast as in f.e. parts of France, Austria or Poland for that matter.

Yes, exacly they began to shrink, and not only by stature but for sure about their characteristics too. There's certain influnce of diet also to peoples cranial-craniofacial morphology.

How is for example for Poles, in early Middle Ages, long-headed, high-statured Nordoid population become "baltised" or "alpinised" as you may say in late Middle Ages, become brachylicephalised, shrink, and how in XX century? Poles in last 80 years grow sometimes about 18-25 cm's, being of average stature of 180-182 cm's (after Malinowski), what does that mean to you? Just Alpines or what? There was no influx of foreing influnce of some kind Army of Osteuropids since Poles are genetically rather homogeneus to most degree.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

I would at first look at the father if he is really Osteuropid, or Baltid if you prefer that term, and then at his wife, his ancestors and finally at the son. Since being Nordid is not just about a longer head and narrower face, though that are crucial traits. In any case a typical Baltid will, without having recessive genes for the Nordid type or such genes coming in through his partner, never give birth to a Nordid, thats absurd.

So you say, that "Osteuropid" can't progress? Because of WHAT? You say that once get adopted to once type of environment/living condition factors are now of unchangable character? That does not make sense to any degree.

Ps. I preffer none of that terms, because both are stupid and outdated.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

And the most idiotic argument of this "racial milieu theory" is "that Nordoid phenotypes increased" through to secular change. THEY DONT!

No, no dude. These Nordoids ware Nordoid before they become "Alpinised" or whatever you call it, when they had bad living conditions, now durring acceleration of secular change they "come back" to their proper "version".

Originally Posted by Agrippa

The Nordoid traits can become however, especially in the more mixed individuals, MORE PRONOUNCED in an environment which suits them, with sufficient nutrition etc.

There's no need to be mixed, Nordoid people are just type of trend rather than specific type, where all Nordoids are related et cetera

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Funny thing is, there are running plenty of typical Osteuropid/Baltid individuals around in Eastern Europe, so I ask you, if you try to be smart, how comes? Even in siblings being raised the same way, coming from the same mother, same nutrition etc., but one might inherit the Nordoid traits from the mother, the other the Baltid from the father to give an example. But oh yes, the Nordoid one is the result of "secular change" while the Baltid is - what?

Now you talk about randomisation of features, not all need to come in same way.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Did I say so?

Nope, but you reffered only to height.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

A scientific prove could only come if they would analyse typologically, what they dont in a sufficient way at least, however, we can refer to populations in states and subpopulations of regions, one example being Estonia. The clearly Alpinid and Baltid areas dont close up to the Nordid-Dalofaelid and Dinarid areas. They simply dont.
Some of the tallest people of Europe come from the Dinaric Alps, since they are mostly Dinarid and mature-progressive, rather lepto-mesomorphic, I might ask you, whether the living conditions in shorter statured areas of Europe are always worse or less favourable for a "drastic secular change" form Baltid to Nordid f.e. - what a joke.

Joke come's from you, since I don't see any prove , beside of that not all populations have similar trends (f.e. Germany vs Poland) and/or similar living conditions in same or in other period.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Its a scientifically proven fact insofar, as we can look at the populations in question, their original status before the Baltisation-Alpinisation in early Medieval times in some regions, during that process and with the secular change happening after the "Little Ice Age" and under modern living conditions.

If you are saying that "Nordid" guy what will not eat much calcium, than "Alpine" guy will be allways taller than the second, now there's a joke, now thats truly funny

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Thats absolutely false. You may say that a mixed individual of unclear status can become significantly altered this or that way depending on the living conditons, but the same can't be said for typical individuals. If one is borderline in various traits, the environment might make him look "more this or that", but he will still not be a typical x or y, nor comparable to typical individuals.

Prove your claim, and prove that Europeans/Europids does not share common genepool. Btw. Prove that there is so great diffrentation among Europids of Aurignacid vs Cromagnoid.

Originally Posted by Agrippa

There are in Norway, I might point to that region, plenty of both, Aurignacoid or Aurignaciform Nordids and Cromagnoid or Cromagniform Dalofaelid and Alpinoid variants.
Now even if they live in the same city, have the same social status, are siblings even, they differ drastically in various traits including metrical and non-metrical traits.

So at least for these two classic Nordid and Dalofaelid people, you can say without a doubt that this has zero to do with living conditions. You can claim that there is a certain statistical influence due to secular changes, but this:
-Being not necessarily equally distributed
-Nor does such a shift on average eliminate the typological differences inside of the population and on an individual level

There is no scientifical proof for that and will never be, because its not the case in the sense you describe it.

I might also quote your fellow countryman about the process of brachycephalisation from:
Wolfram Bernhard and Anneliese Kandler, Bevölkerungsbiologie (1974); Brachycephalisation: Definitions and statistical facts by Andrzej Wiercinsky.


So there was a trend of brachycephalisation related to infantilisation and this trend was of different intensity depending on the region. Wiercinsky also correctly pointed out, that the differences in ontogentic development being even more prounounced on an intrapopulation level than between populations, which shows us the typological differences (racial and constitutional) as explained above. This also relates to the study about the study I linked above but you were unable to answer in a decent way:
Asthenic type and debrachycephalization

There are arguments for the significance of secular change which can affect a lot of traits, thats not the real question actually, but this doesnt necessarily contradict the typological concept if being properly understood.

And every form of life can be modificated, the expression of a genetic trait can vary, but what makes up the racial-constitutional forms and variation in Europe is exactly the way how it becomes realised on an individual phenotypical level - and those differences being often even more exaggerated by the secular change.

Since the difference of "shorter Alpinid" (lets say 165) and "taller Nordid" (lets say 172) were often less pronounced on an individual than they are now, with typical Alpinids (reduced-infantile) gained little and Nordids towering them with an average of above 180 cm. Now you can come again with "scientifical proofs" for that, like if you have some claiming the opposite, but you very well know that such studies being not undertaken for quite some time mainly because of political pressures and the lack of material - a concentration on traits which are less affected by selective change to reconstruct evolutionary trees also.

This begins to change hopefully again and if looking at the studies and results we have for different nations and populations, we can still conclude enough like the example of the Dinarid areas shows, which tower as a rule even the most prosperous Alpinid or Baltid areas. This is a simple example but with no more simplification than the claims of those which try to tell us that just because there is secular change there were no and are no racial types and everything in the genpool is arbitrary. With a simple look at the people in question all such notions become ridiculous. One would have to analyse the secular change type wise, using a basic but sufficient trait combination - which was not done. All studies which consider intrapopulation variation point to the fact that the different variants being not equally affected by the secular changes. A rather simple allometric law can be applied to certain changes of stature and craniofacial wise, but this must be put into context and differentiated on an individual and typological level, whats not done!

Dude, great ilustration here are these two Estonian skulls of same related populations, but from diffrent geografical area and period, first "Nordid" and the second "Cromagnoid" (could be called as well Nordo-Cromagnoid, or even proto-Nordid). But both are OF SAME "TYPE", BUT OF DIFFRENT PROCESS "GIVEN". Its same crap, please compare them both.


Ps. Give me one biological-anthropological book, of "modern age" that use typological terminology seriously.