Are uralids caucasoids?

[MisterSinister]

Originally Posted by Kalevi

And the "re"-constructions of the Comb-Ceramic crania are also rather controversial. There has been claims that at least the Ladoga skulls which show Mongoloid tendencies were "re-constructed" from fragments by the contemporary Soviet anthropologists to match their theories (a claim made by Niskanen, according to what he heard from Russian colleagues in international conferences).



But it's evident that you are confused with the terminology here: a term ending with -id (like in Uralid) is purely biological, referring (in humans) to a group of people sharing a set of physical characteristics. So, a Uralid is by definition somebody who is heavily borealized - showing at least Mongoloid-like tendencies (I'm not an expert on physical anthropology) - and the term doesn't have a relation to the broad linguistic term 'Uralic', that is nowadays used synonymously with Finno-Ugric.

I know of this reconstruction as well. Everything points to it being a bogus reconstruction of fragments of a skull with the sole purpose of reconstructing a mongoloid skull because that is what the soviets wanted it to be.

Therefore, Agrippa still fails to give a serious source.

I'm not confused about the terms. I massed them together on purpose.

[MisterSinister]

Corded/Fatjanovo reconstructions:



You claim them to be Nordid? Fatjanovo culture?

[Kalevi]

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

I'm not confused about the terms. I massed them together on purpose.

Why? It is very clear that the two haven't got much connection with each others. There's plenty of people that do speak a Uralic language as their mother tongue, but haven't still got much anything to do with the 'Uralid' classification of phenotype.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

Corded/Fatjanovo reconstructions:



You claim them to be Nordid? Fatjanovo culture?

They are at least Nordoid, to put it that way. As you can see here, there is a Nordoid group of presumably Indoeuropean ethnolinguistic and cultural affiliations in the Neolithic skull-variation (cluster analysis after I. Schwidetzky):


I have the information about the Neotlithic Lappoid variants and Mongoloid influences in Finno-Ugrians among others from:
Wolfram Bernhard (ed.), Anneliese Kandler-Palsson (ed.), Ethnogenese europäischer Völker - Aus der Sicht der Anthropologie und Ur- und Frühgeschichte, 1986.

This important graphic is from this work as well:


The reconstructions are from anthropologists like Gerasimov (1955) and Mark (1959). The reconstructions are obvious and pretty good because they skull structure was shown as well for comparison. The skull structure itself is clear enough, with or without the reconstructions and was analysed among others by I. Schwidetzky, which wrote the chapter about Finno-Ugrians in the above mentioned work. In this chapter she also used the map in which the South of Finland is predominantely Nordoid.

The deviating character of the Mongoloid and Lappoid skulls found in various Comb Ceramic graves was at that time, in which classic Europid, more progressive and mature types absolutely dominated Europe, even more striking than it would be today in certain areas, because since that time Europeans degenerated biologically-racially rather than improved themselves because of contraselective trends.

Originally Posted by Kalevi

Why? It is very clear that the two haven't got much connection with each others. There's plenty of people that do speak a Uralic language as their mother tongue, but haven't still got much anything to do with the 'Uralid' classification of phenotype.

Of course, these Lappoid and even Mongoloid people of North Eastern Europe were a minority element rather and a Nordoid Finn or Dinarid-Alpinid Hungarian of today has, from a racial standpoint, not more to do with those minority element than any Slav, Balt or Germanic - some Eastbaltid strains in those groups are even closer related by race to those prehistoric people actually.

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

I know of this reconstruction as well. Everything points to it being a bogus reconstruction of fragments of a skull with the sole purpose of reconstructing a mongoloid skull because that is what the soviets wanted it to be.

Well, look at these prehistoric skulls of Eastern Europe too, without reconstruction:
a)


b)

Compare their traits. The first one (a) is a classic Europid, mature-progressive skull from Eastern Europe, the second is a reduced-infantile and part-Mongolised skull from North Eastern Europe. The relations are clear at the first look actually. Even other brachycephalic Europid variants, like the majority of typical Alpinids, are clearly Europid and can be distinguished from those.
This can be shown in living examples of today as well and even better.

[MisterSinister]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

They are at least Nordoid, to put it that way. As you can see here, there is a Nordoid group of presumably Indoeuropean ethnolinguistic and cultural affiliations in the Neolithic skull-variation (cluster analysis after I. Schwidetzky):


I have the information about the Neotlithic Lappoid variants and Mongoloid influences in Finno-Ugrians among others from:
Wolfram Bernhard (ed.), Anneliese Kandler-Palsson (ed.), Ethnogenese europäischer Völker - Aus der Sicht der Anthropologie und Ur- und Frühgeschichte, 1986.

This important graphic is from this work as well:


The reconstructions are from anthropologists like Gerasimov (1955) and Mark (1959). The reconstructions are obvious and pretty good because they skull structure was shown as well for comparison. The skull structure itself is clear enough, with or without the reconstructions and was analysed among others by I. Schwidetzky, which wrote the chapter about Finno-Ugrians in the above mentioned work. In this chapter she also used the map in which the South of Finland is predominantely Nordoid.

The deviating character of the Mongoloid and Lappoid skulls found in various Comb Ceramic graves was at that time, in which classic Europid, more progressive and mature types absolutely dominated Europe, even more striking than it would be today in certain areas, because since that time Europeans degenerated biologically-racially rather than improved themselves because of contraselective trends.



Of course, these Lappoid and even Mongoloid people of North Eastern Europe were a minority element rather and a Nordoid Finn or Dinarid-Alpinid Hungarian of today has, from a racial standpoint, not more to do with those minority element than any Slav, Balt or Germanic - some Eastbaltid strains in those groups are even closer related by race to those prehistoric people actually.



Well, look at these prehistoric skulls of Eastern Europe too, without reconstruction:
a)


b)

Compare their traits. The first one (a) is a classic Europid, mature-progressive skull from Eastern Europe, the second is a reduced-infantile and part-Mongolised skull from North Eastern Europe. The relations are clear at the first look actually. Even other brachycephalic Europid variants, like the majority of typical Alpinids, are clearly Europid and can be distinguished from those.
This can be shown in living examples of today as well and even better.

This is a very weak case, Agrippa. You are referring to the Soviet skulls again. And your litterature is outdated and no good.

[MisterSinister]

Fatjanovo skulls:
The skeletons of the ancient Kyro people were small young people, thought to be Lapps. Their skulls were long and narrow, which is a deviation from the form of the Lapps’ heads and their physical structure separates them from the larger build of the Finns and Scandinavians.

One who later researched the skeletons of the ancient Kyro people is Tarja Formisto who received a Doctor’s degree at the University of Stockholm in 1993. She completed her research that compares her own results with information of different people who lived within a radius of 100 kilometers. The results showed that the ancient Kyro people greatly resembled the people who lived in central Russia, around the area of the rivers Volga and Oka. They were of the Fatjanovo culture from the Bronze Age.