Jan Czekanowski's plates

[Vojvoda]

Courtesy of norda

Nordic race


North-West type (Med/Nor intermediate)


Subnoridc type (Nor/Lap)


Littoral type (Med/Arm) and Armenoid race


Dinaric types (Arm/Nor)


Lapponoid race and Sublapponoid type (Lap/Med intermediate)


Alpine type (Lap/Arm mix)

[Agrippa]

Interesting pictures, good material. But to assume Alpinids are a combination of Lappid with Armenid is somewhat very strange...
I think he reduced everything to a small set of types but went to far. The general typology is well known and more or less the classical one.

[SouthernBoy]

I saw a man the other day who was a perfect example of what I consider to be Dinarid. Czekanowski's example has too much Nordid admixture to be considered typical, IMO.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy

I saw a man the other day who was a perfect example of what I consider to be Dinarid. Czekanowski's example has too much Nordid admixture to be considered typical, IMO.

Thats true, his Dinarid is rather Norid. He made, like many other anthropologists either, his typology for Poland first, and for Poland it fits, from a wider European picture it can be discussed.

[SouthernBoy]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Thats true, his Dinarid is rather Norid. He made, like many other anthropologists either, his typology for Poland first, and for Poland it fits, from a wider European picture it can be discussed.

I was wondering, as there doesn't seem to be as much variation in his plates as in Lundman's or Coon's.

[norda]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Thats true, his Dinarid is rather Norid. He made, like many other anthropologists either, his typology for Poland first, and for Poland it fits, from a wider European picture it can be discussed.

I agree that his Dinaric type (understand as Nordic & Armenoid elements) taken from classic Deniker should be rather equivalent of later Coon’s Noric.

Considering that such type should correspond to anthropologic reality of Western and Central Balkan region probably that’s the only way of interpretation of both high frequency of nordoid types and light pigmentation (mainly eyes) especially in the Slavic layers.

[Hussar]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Thats true, his Dinarid is rather Norid. .

Not necessarly. His pigmentation fits in the range of the classic dinarid, and his traits are only a bit less distinct (noroid admixture). Imo, he could pass for dinarid in the complex.

[Vojvoda]

Originally Posted by norda

I agree that his Dinaric type (understand as Nordic & Armenoid elements) taken from classic Deniker should be rather equivalent of later Coon’s Noric.

Considering that such type should correspond to anthropologic reality of Western and Central Balkan region probably that’s the only way of interpretation of both high frequency of nordoid types and light pigmentation (mainly eyes) especially in the Slavic layers.

I'm pretty sure that Yugoslav anthropologists such as Skerlj and Males also went by his definiton of Dinaric.

[Hussar]

Czekanowski theory of Dinarid origin like "Nordic-Armenoid" is unheard but interesting.

[Vojvoda]

Originally Posted by Celtic Tiger

Czekanowski theory of Dinarid origin like "Nordic-Armenoid" is unheard but interesting.

Does anyone think it makes more sense than Coon's 'Mediterranean(Pontid?)+Alpinid=Dinarid' theory?


Czekanowski's Dinarid or Coon's Noric ?

[Hussar]

Originally Posted by Vojvoda

Does anyone think it makes more sense than Coon's 'Mediterranean(Pontid?)+Alpinid=Dinarid' theory?


Czekanowski's Dinarid or Coon's Noric ?

Vojvoda, what you say is very interesting and makes sense. I'm very skeptical about the Mediterranean + Alpinid. I am sure of this. Anyway, i want to say this : there is a big confusion about the the Coon definition ; he said imponent a nd tall Atlantid-Med (and NOT the "classic" short statured gracileMed. there is a notable difference) + Alpinid. Anyway neither this is the exact truth, i think.............

[Exeter]

Lundman (1940) saw the Dinarids as an offshot of Pontids. That does not explain the flat skull (partially because of cradling?), the acrocephalic tendencies, stronger cheekbones (not in all?) and nasal convexity. Pontids are known for their narrow straight noses.

Hooton's definition of Dinarid is more complex. He defined them as "probably Upper Palaeolithic + Alpine + Armenoid + Nordic; mediumly to lightly pigmented, hook-nosed, acrocephalic round-heads".

Coon's definition of Dinarid:

"A tall, brachycephalic type of intermediate pigmentation, usually planoccipital, and showing the facial and nasal prominence of Near Eastern peoples. The basic population of the whole Dinaric-Alpine highlands from Switzerland to Epirus, also in the Carpathians and Caucasus, as well as Syria and Asia Minor. Apparently a brachycephalized blend in which Atlanto-Mediterranean and Cappadocian strains are important, with Alpine acting as the brachycephalizing agent in mixture. Borreby and Corded elements, also Nordic, appear to be involved in some regions."

Originally Posted by Vojvoda

Does anyone think it makes more sense than Coon's 'Mediterranean(Pontid?)+Alpinid=Dinarid' theory?

[Vojvoda]

Originally Posted by Celtic Tiger

Vojvoda, what you say is very interesting and makes sense. I'm very skeptical about the Mediterranean + Alpinid. I am sure of this. Anyway, i want to say this : there is a big confusion about the the Coon definition ; he said imponent a nd tall Atlantid-Med (and NOT the "classic" short statured gracileMed. there is a notable difference) + Alpinid. Anyway neither this is the exact truth, i think.............

Yeah, who knows. Czekanowski might have come to the conclusion that Dinarids are a blend of Neolithic farmers from Anatolia(hence the 'Armenoid' label) and Corded ware/Battle Axe and Halstatt invaders of which the ancient Illyirans might have been(famous anthropological site of Glasinac where a large series of late Illyrian remains contained a mixture of types) The Balkans was the melting pot of Europe for thousands of years.....

The finds, unique in the Neolithic culture of south-east Europe, show that the first farmers of the Danubian valley belonged to a peculiar anthropological type, characterised by features of the ancient European population combined with those of graceous Mediterranean people. The same blend of old Balkanic, autochthonous elements and Mediterranean are observed in the Starcevo culture, namely in the first Vinca inhabitants.

http://www.rastko.org.yu/arheologija...vinca_eng.html

[Vojvoda]

Originally Posted by Exeter

partially because of cradling?

The Pinocchio effect

Hooton's definition of Dinarid is more complex. He defined them as "probably Upper Palaeolithic + Alpine + Armenoid + Nordic; mediumly to lightly pigmented, hook-nosed, acrocephalic round-heads".

Coon's definition of Dinarid:

"A tall, brachycephalic type of intermediate pigmentation, usually planoccipital, and showing the facial and nasal prominence of Near Eastern peoples. The basic population of the whole Dinaric-Alpine highlands from Switzerland to Epirus, also in the Carpathians and Caucasus, as well as Syria and Asia Minor. Apparently a brachycephalized blend in which Atlanto-Mediterranean and Cappadocian strains are important, with Alpine acting as the brachycephalizing agent in mixture. Borreby and Corded elements, also Nordic, appear to be involved in some regions."

Well, they both sound like a more complex version of Czekanowski's definiton.

[SouthernBoy]

Originally Posted by Vojvoda

Does anyone think it makes more sense than Coon's 'Mediterranean(Pontid?)+Alpinid=Dinarid' theory?


Czekanowski's Dinarid or Coon's Noric ?

I think they are a mixture of proto-Armenids and Cro-Magnids. They are far closer to Armenid than they are to Nordid, IMO.

[Vojvoda]

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy

I think they are a mixture of proto-Armenids and Cro-Magnids. They are far closer to Armenid than they are to Nordid, IMO.

You mean the two pictures I attached or Dinarids in general?

[SouthernBoy]

Originally Posted by Vojvoda

You mean the two pictures I attached or Dinarids in general?

I mean Dinarids in general.

Czekanowski's examples don't look like what I would call typical for Dinarids though. They are rather Norid, or Dinarid/Nordid: when Dinarid is understood as an unreduced Armenoid.

[Hussar]

[quote=SouthernBoy]I mean Dinarids in general.

Czekanowski's examples don't look like what I would call typical for Dinarids though. They are rather Norid, or Dinarid/Nordid: when Dinarid is understood as an unreduced Armenoid.[/QUO



I think your image of Dinarid type, is slightly wrong, Southernboy. The examples reported could be considered inside the Dinarid category without necessarly some direct nordid influence ; the pure dinarid type itself could contain an important Nordid component in its creation process.

If the pure dinarid type is the result of Nordic-Armenid mix, i think the proportion is exactly 50%-50% . Dinarids are not closer to Armenids than they're to Nordics. They're in the middle i think.

Anyway, i disagree with this general theory. Like i've said in the past, Imo the dinarid type is a stabilized blend of Borreby + Atlanto-Med less or more (not Alpine+Med then, rather the unreduced forms of Alpine and Med).