PDA

View Full Version : Viking, phenotypes and old racial thought!



Northener
24-07-16, 20:14
Gwyn Jones has written a standard and appreciated book about the Vikings. In his A History Of The Vikings (second edition 2001) he writes some interesting things about the Scandinavian phenotype. Interesting because it’s says something about the use of phenotypes without a critical look at the background of it:

page 67 and 68
"The viking peoples who lived between the neck of Jutland and the Lofotens, Sogn, and Uppsala, were not all alike, and emphatically not of one 'pure' Nordic race. But two main types of Scandinavian have always been recognizable: the one tall of stature, fair or ruddy complexioned, light-haired, blue-eyed, long of face and skull; the other shorter, dark-complexioned, brown- or dark-haired, brown-eyed, broad faced and round of skull…

Fortunately, these picturesque notions never became the systemized and malignant myth that race has become in our own day… Much has been written about the differences of temperament between these blond and dark types. The dolichocephalic, we are instructed, is an innovator and adventurer, not easily discouraged and steady under pressure. His view of life, rational and hopeful, sees things much as they are. He can command others and drive himself. He can also relax. The brachycephalic is conservative, distrustful not only of change but of himself, quick to enthusiasm, prompt to despair, emotional in politics, personal relationships, and religion. And on him, like moonlight on water, or phosphorescence on a rotten log (the image goes with one's own cephalic index), will be found the gleam of poetry and music. The classification is too glib, but if we allow generously for exceptions not unhelpful.

The percentage of tall, long-skulled, blue-eyed people is today highest in Sweden and lowest in Denmark, which probably reflects their degree of intercourse with other European peoples over a long period of time. Certainly a community which combines the practical with the visionary, intellectual curiosity with emotional fervour, the power to innovate with the will to endure, and which can embrace the future without forsaking the past, need not complain of its inheritance."

This phenotypes darkish round headed (‘brachy’) vs light long headed (‘dolio’) are product of racial minds of the mid nineteenth century. An important figure in this respect was the Swedish anatomist Anders Retzius (1796-1860). In his Om Formen paa Nordboernes Cranier [On the Shape of the Northerners’ skulls] (1843), he introduced a new method to measure skulls into two basic races, dolichocephalic (long skulls) and brachycephal (short skulls), even though most people represented a mix of the two types.
Retzius assumed that an individual’s mental and moral capacities could be established by such measurements. For example, he argued that European Stone Age people were brachycephalic and that more progressive Bronze Age people consisting of Aryan dolichocephalics had invaded and displaced the former brachycephalic people. He carried forward the distinction into the present-day, arguing that dolichocephalics, represented by contemporary white Nordic people, were superior to brachycephalic people, represented by people of color. Retzius believed that there were still some of the original brachycepghalic people left in Europe; they could be found among the “less developed” Finns and Sami people

See: https://www.academia.edu/15504884/Danish_perceptions_of_race_and_anthropological_sci ence_at_the_turn_of_the_twentieth_century._In_The_ invention_of_race_Scientific_and_Popular_Represent ations._Eds._Nicolas_Bancel_et_al.._New_York_Routl edge_2014

Arbo Stone age 'dark' vs Iron Age 'light' features
At the end of the nineteenth century the Nore Carl Oscar Eugen Arbo (1837-1906) went in the slipstream of Retzius: Arbo measured traits such as the length of the face, width of the cheek, angle of the jaw, body height, eye and hair color, and, most importantly, the cephalic index. Arbo (1897) de- scribed a pattern of geographical distribution of skull shapes in Norway with a relatively high frequency of dark-haired and brown-eyed individuals with short skulls (“brachycephalics”) along the west and south coast while eastern Norway, especially the inland valleys, was inhabited mostly by people with blond hair, blue eyes, and long skulls (“dolichocephalics”).

Arbo suggested that the brown-eyed, dark-haired people with short skulls were the descendants of Stone Age and Bronze Age people, while the blue-eyed and blond inhabitants of eastern Norway descended from Iron Age Germanic invaders. Because both groups were ethnically Norwegians, this meant the Norwegian population was racially divided, and only the blond long-skulled eastern Norwegians could claim genuine biological ties to ancient Norsemen. Arbo (1897) believed these racial differences explained geographical differences in mentality, behavior, temperament, and health, describing the short skulls of the west as weak, shy, nervous, petty, and narrow minded in contrast with the bolder, braver, and stronger long skulls of the inland valleys. By the turn of the twentieth century, Arbo was the leading Norwegian physical anthropologist.

Hansen brachy: ‘weak and primitive dwarfs’
However, the most prominent popularizer of anthropological racial theories was not Arbo but the amateur scientist and writer Andreas M. Hansen (1857-1932), who gathered knowledge from various disciplines, including geology, archaeology, linguistics, and geography, and con- structed a historical synthesis based on the anthropometric findings of Arbo and others. Hansen went a step further, claiming that the primitive short-skulled race along the coast were the earliest inhabitants of all Scandinavia, even the Sami regions in the north. The particularly “primitive,” “weak,” and “dwarflike” Sami, according to Hansen, were not indigenous inhabitants of north Scandinavia but had migrated into Scandinavia from Asia in the Middle Ages.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/662332?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Edel Germanen?
It was clear in the creation of “das Herrenvolk” (tall, longheaded, light featured) that more darkish and/or round headed didn’t fit in the picture. Hansen/ Arbo/Retzius tried to retouch this from the scene or convict them to the marginal outcasts and/or Cro Magnon types. Not suitable for the “Edel-Germanen”

Continuity after WW 2
After the second world war these ideas found an uncritical entrance in the works of Carleton S. Coon (1904-1981) and Bertil Lundman (1899-1993). Coon’s description of the Borreby and Brunn are exactly the same as Retzius, Arbo and Hansen ‘brachy’:

“A. LARGE-HEADED PALAEOLITHIC SURVIVORS
(1) Brünn: (Crô-Magnon, to some extent) found in solution with Borreby, Nordic, and other elements, mostly in Scandinavia and the British Isles, also in North Africa and Canary Islands. May appear in comparatively pure form among individuals although nowhere as a total population.
(2) Borreby: Large-headed brachycephals of Ofnet-Afalou type, the unreduced brachycephalic strain in Crô-Magnon; found in solution in peripheral regions of northwestern Europe, and as a major population element in most of northern and central Germany, and in Belgium. Like the Brünn race, with which it is often associated, it occurs also in North Africa and the Canary Islands.”

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-VIII6.htm

In stead of Borreby, Lundman used the term Strandid (after the beach or coastal zones of especially Norway).

Nowadays we see on different places, especially on the internet like Apricity, Anthroscape and also in serious literature like Lynn, Personality and National Character (1971) a recycling and mostly uncritical use of the Coon and Lundman phenotypes. https://books.google.fr/books?id=JJhGBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA162&lpg=PA162&dq=Borreby+Germany++Lynn&source=bl&ots=Cq2ufKTxn8&sig=alPmx9nWhvBD5aWYvY8RKlZWB5M&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiC3o3Bt4zOAhVE2BoKHYBMDroQ6AEINzAD#v=on epage&q=Borreby%20Germany%20%20Lynn&f=false

Update
Isn’t it time to get rid of the not yet cleared background of the Coon and Lundman phenotypes? I think we must throw away the inherent thought behind use of terms like Borreby, Brunn and Strandid. The “brachy’s” are not residue, archaic or artefact phenotypes, who in fact didn’t deserve to be “Northern Europeans.” We must throw away that old racial kind of thoughts.
By the way modern DNA techniques create more and more possibilities to show that genetic diversity is not only something of the present but certainly also of the past!


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Tomenable
24-07-16, 23:14
He carried forward the distinction into the present-day, arguing that dolichocephalics, represented by contemporary white Nordic people, were superior to brachycephalic people, represented by people of color.

Which people of color ??? Because Sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines are very clearly dolichocephalic.

Dinarid
24-07-16, 23:42
Interesting that in Europe, most blond people I see are also short and brachycephalic, which makes sense because of the Baltics and Finns, and also northern Russians. In the Balkans the taller people usually have darker hair.

Northener
25-07-16, 00:22
Which people of color ??? Because Sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines are very clearly dolichocephalic.

Correct, but the old racialist were in this respect not reasonable......


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Angela
25-07-16, 01:19
Gwyn Jones has written a standard and appreciated book about the Vikings. In his A History Of The Vikings (second edition 2001) he writes some interesting things about the Scandinavian phenotype. Interesting because it’s says something about the use of phenotypes without a critical look at the background of it:

page 67 and 68
"The viking peoples who lived between the neck of Jutland and the Lofotens, Sogn, and Uppsala, were not all alike, and emphatically not of one 'pure' Nordic race. But two main types of Scandinavian have always been recognizable: the one tall of stature, fair or ruddy complexioned, light-haired, blue-eyed, long of face and skull; the other shorter, dark-complexioned, brown- or dark-haired, brown-eyed, broad faced and round of skull…

Fortunately, these picturesque notions never became the systemized and malignant myth that race has become in our own day… Much has been written about the differences of temperament between these blond and dark types. The dolichocephalic, we are instructed, is an innovator and adventurer, not easily discouraged and steady under pressure. His view of life, rational and hopeful, sees things much as they are. He can command others and drive himself. He can also relax. The brachycephalic is conservative, distrustful not only of change but of himself, quick to enthusiasm, prompt to despair, emotional in politics, personal relationships, and religion. And on him, like moonlight on water, or phosphorescence on a rotten log (the image goes with one's own cephalic index), will be found the gleam of poetry and music. The classification is too glib, but if we allow generously for exceptions not unhelpful.

The percentage of tall, long-skulled, blue-eyed people is today highest in Sweden and lowest in Denmark, which probably reflects their degree of intercourse with other European peoples over a long period of time. Certainly a community which combines the practical with the visionary, intellectual curiosity with emotional fervour, the power to innovate with the will to endure, and which can embrace the future without forsaking the past, need not complain of its inheritance."

This phenotypes darkish round headed (‘brachy’) vs light long headed (‘dolio’) are product of racial minds of the mid nineteenth century. An important figure in this respect was the Swedish anatomist Anders Retzius (1796-1860). In his Om Formen paa Nordboernes Cranier [On the Shape of the Northerners’ skulls] (1843), he introduced a new method to measure skulls into two basic races, dolichocephalic (long skulls) and brachycephal (short skulls), even though most people represented a mix of the two types.
Retzius assumed that an individual’s mental and moral capacities could be established by such measurements. For example, he argued that European Stone Age people were brachycephalic and that more progressive Bronze Age people consisting of Aryan dolichocephalics had invaded and displaced the former brachycephalic people. He carried forward the distinction into the present-day, arguing that dolichocephalics, represented by contemporary white Nordic people, were superior to brachycephalic people, represented by people of color. Retzius believed that there were still some of the original brachycepghalic people left in Europe; they could be found among the “less developed” Finns and Sami people

See: https://www.academia.edu/15504884/Danish_perceptions_of_race_and_anthropological_sci ence_at_the_turn_of_the_twentieth_century._In_The_ invention_of_race_Scientific_and_Popular_Represent ations._Eds._Nicolas_Bancel_et_al.._New_York_Routl edge_2014

Arbo Stone age 'dark' vs Iron Age 'light' features
At the end of the nineteenth century the Nore Carl Oscar Eugen Arbo (1837-1906) went in the slipstream of Retzius: Arbo measured traits such as the length of the face, width of the cheek, angle of the jaw, body height, eye and hair color, and, most importantly, the cephalic index. Arbo (1897) de- scribed a pattern of geographical distribution of skull shapes in Norway with a relatively high frequency of dark-haired and brown-eyed individuals with short skulls (“brachycephalics”) along the west and south coast while eastern Norway, especially the inland valleys, was inhabited mostly by people with blond hair, blue eyes, and long skulls (“dolichocephalics”).

Arbo suggested that the brown-eyed, dark-haired people with short skulls were the descendants of Stone Age and Bronze Age people, while the blue-eyed and blond inhabitants of eastern Norway descended from Iron Age Germanic invaders. Because both groups were ethnically Norwegians, this meant the Norwegian population was racially divided, and only the blond long-skulled eastern Norwegians could claim genuine biological ties to ancient Norsemen. Arbo (1897) believed these racial differences explained geographical differences in mentality, behavior, temperament, and health, describing the short skulls of the west as weak, shy, nervous, petty, and narrow minded in contrast with the bolder, braver, and stronger long skulls of the inland valleys. By the turn of the twentieth century, Arbo was the leading Norwegian physical anthropologist.

Hansen brachy: ‘weak and primitive dwarfs’
However, the most prominent popularizer of anthropological racial theories was not Arbo but the amateur scientist and writer Andreas M. Hansen (1857-1932), who gathered knowledge from various disciplines, including geology, archaeology, linguistics, and geography, and con- structed a historical synthesis based on the anthropometric findings of Arbo and others. Hansen went a step further, claiming that the primitive short-skulled race along the coast were the earliest inhabitants of all Scandinavia, even the Sami regions in the north. The particularly “primitive,” “weak,” and “dwarflike” Sami, according to Hansen, were not indigenous inhabitants of north Scandinavia but had migrated into Scandinavia from Asia in the Middle Ages.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/662332?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Edel Germanen?
It was clear in the creation of “das Herrenvolk” (tall, longheaded, light featured) that more darkish and/or round headed didn’t fit in the picture. Hansen/ Arbo/Retzius tried to retouch this from the scene or convict them to the marginal outcasts and/or Cro Magnon types. Not suitable for the “Edel-Germanen”

Continuity after WW 2
After the second world war these ideas found an uncritical entrance in the works of Carleton S. Coon (1904-1981) and Bertil Lundman (1899-1993). Coon’s description of the Borreby and Brunn are exactly the same as Retzius, Arbo and Hansen ‘brachy’:

“A. LARGE-HEADED PALAEOLITHIC SURVIVORS
(1) Brünn: (Crô-Magnon, to some extent) found in solution with Borreby, Nordic, and other elements, mostly in Scandinavia and the British Isles, also in North Africa and Canary Islands. May appear in comparatively pure form among individuals although nowhere as a total population.
(2) Borreby: Large-headed brachycephals of Ofnet-Afalou type, the unreduced brachycephalic strain in Crô-Magnon; found in solution in peripheral regions of northwestern Europe, and as a major population element in most of northern and central Germany, and in Belgium. Like the Brünn race, with which it is often associated, it occurs also in North Africa and the Canary Islands.”

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-VIII6.htm

In stead of Borreby, Lundman used the term Strandid (after the beach or coastal zones of especially Norway).

Nowadays we see on different places, especially on the internet like Apricity, Anthroscape and also in serious literature like Lynn, Personality and National Character (1971) a recycling and mostly uncritical use of the Coon and Lundman phenotypes. https://books.google.fr/books?id=JJhGBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA162&lpg=PA162&dq=Borreby+Germany++Lynn&source=bl&ots=Cq2ufKTxn8&sig=alPmx9nWhvBD5aWYvY8RKlZWB5M&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiC3o3Bt4zOAhVE2BoKHYBMDroQ6AEINzAD#v=on epage&q=Borreby%20Germany%20%20Lynn&f=false

Update
Isn’t it time to get rid of the not yet cleared background of the Coon and Lundman phenotypes? I think we must throw away the inherent thought behind use of terms like Borreby, Brunn and Strandid. The “brachy’s” are not residue, archaic or artefact phenotypes, who in fact didn’t deserve to be “Northern Europeans.” We must throw away that old racial kind of thoughts.
By the way modern DNA techniques create more and more possibilities to show that genetic diversity is not only something of the present but certainly also of the past!


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Of all the physical anthropologists, I think Coon's work comes closest to the genetics studies based on ancient dna. That said, he's also internally inconsistent on some things. Some of the pictures he posts don't, in my opinion, even match his verbal descriptions. Also, "Borreby" and "Brunn" categories, given that we now know we have such a tiny bit of ancestry from the Aurignacian and Gravettian peoples, would be WHG or EHG related. The Nordic "face" and head owes more to Mediterranean Danubian, which is heavily EEF admixed.

I don't give any head room whatsoever to the "classifications" done by anthrofora people pushing one agenda or another. So, despite all the physical anthropologists' descriptions and images, you get Stormfront Iberian whackos finding no Gracile Med in Spain. All of a sudden they're all Atlanto-Med, which is a very specific type supposedly found in northwestern Europe. Then you get the occasional wacko Italian who finds no Dinaric in Italy at all, or people thinking every Scandinavian looks "Nordic". I have no patience with agendas or deliberate distortion no matter who is doing it.

So, I just don't go into any of this except in the most general of terms and for fun. What I think you can do, if you're a native of an area or have spent a lot of time there, is say whether "X" person would look out of place in that region, or may perhaps be quite typical of a region. That's it.

Oh, and that may have nothing to do with some percentages on an Admixture calculator. As I've said on another thread, when you have a lot of genetic variation, as in Italy, for example, you can have one person who looks very "Germanic" versus another who looks very "Mediterranean" not only coming from families who have lived in the same area for generations and generations, but even from the same family, i.e. siblings. My husband's family is like that: my husband is black haired, brown eyed and olive skinned, and his full blood sister is blonde, blue-eyed and fair skinned. Their Admixture scores are virtually identical, and obviously they come from the same uniparental lines.

As I've also mentioned before, Admixture calculators are based on "junk dna", i.e. non-coding dna. Phenotype snps, of which there aren't that many, are obviously "coding" dna that appear on the autosomes, not the yDna or mtDna, so they "float" free of those more geographically tied snps.

What I can say after reading the ancient dna papers of the last five years is that in my opinion there is no such thing as a "pure" ethnic group or "pure" race. The history of human-kind is a history of admixture, from AMHs and Neanderthals, to Basal Eurasian and some group of West Eurasian hunter gatherers, to Villabruna types with Anatolian farmers, to EHG and people from south of the Caucasus and on and on.

ThirdTerm
25-07-16, 02:01
https://s32.postimg.org/qthmh2yyt/AJHGv74p661fg4.jpg
Schematic reconstruction of possible entry routes of the predominant Saami maternal (A) and paternal (B) lineages to Fennoscandia. Broken lines indicate that the exact place of origin/route of spread of the haplogroup is unsolved/not indicated (Tambets et al. 2004).

The Saami motif U5b1b1 entered Scandinavia 7,500 ybp and the Asian-specific haplogroup Z1 is associated with the appearance of the Kama culture ∼8,000 ybp. Haplogroup D5 arrived from East Asia after the Late Glacial Maximum (∼20,000 ybp), which preceded U5b1b1 and Z1. D5 and Z1 make up 16% in the Saami in Flnland today. The Saami with D5 and Z1 were the oldest settlers in Scandinavia, who were the brown-eyed, dark-haired people, and they admixed with U5b1b1 people from 7,500 ybp, which made them acquire European physical traits such as blond hair and blue eyes. Haplogroup U5 is the European hunter-gatherer haplogroup along with U4.



Only a minor portion of the Saami maternal lineages (average ∼5%) that exhibit restricted diversity belong to haplogroups that are characteristic of Asian populations—that is, D5 and Z (table 1). These eastern Eurasian haplogroups are significantly more frequent (P<.05) among the Finnish Saami compared with Norwegian and Swedish Saami samples (table 2). Such fluctuations in haplogroup frequencies could be due to genetic drift or just due to stochastic variation in relatively small samples. At the same time, the similar pattern of mtDNA haplogroup distribution found in different subpopulations of the Saami provides evidence of their common genetic background.

Uralic-speaking Samoyeds, Khants, Mansis, and Altaic-speaking Siberians virtually lack the European mtDNA haplogroups V and U5b1b1 that predominate in the Saami mtDNA pool (fig. 1; table 1). Eastern Eurasian mtDNA variants in the Saami are represented by a restricted set of lineages that belong to superhaplogroup M. In this respect, the Saami do not differ markedly from Finnic-speaking Karelians, Maris, Komis, Udmurts, or northern Russians, all of whom possess haplogroups of eastern Eurasian origin at similar frequencies (table 1). This minor part of the Saami mtDNA pool consists of two branches of the eastern Eurasian mtDNA tree—D5 and Z1. According to published data, the frequency of haplogroup D5 is relatively high in China (Yao et al. 2002). D5 is also present among Mongols and Siberians (Kolman et al. 1996; Derbeneva et al. 2002b). However, the Saami haplogroup D5 lineages, with the HVS-I motif 16126-16136-16360 and its derivatives (defined as “D5b” by Derenko et al. 2003), have been identified only in some northern and eastern European populations (among Karelians, Finns, Estonians, North-Russians, and Komis) and in some Siberian populations but not in Samoyeds (table 1). This suggests, again, the lack of gene flow from Samoyeds to eastern Europe.

Haplogroup Z, a subcluster of the M8 clade within the haplogroup M family of mtDNA (Kivisild et al. 2002), is found at highest frequencies in the northeastern Asians: the Itelmens and Koryaks (Schurr et al. 1999). It is also present in several Siberian populations, including the Altaic people (table 1). Though not identified in a large data set of the Yakuts (Fedorova et al. 2003; Pakendorf et al. 2003), haplogroup Z has been observed among several Finnic- and Turkic-speaking populations of the Volga-Ural region (Bermisheva et al. 2002). It is curious that it is more frequent there in Finnic- than in Turkic-speaking populations. The absence of haplogroup Z from most of the Siberian Uralic-speaking populations (Samoyedic-speaking Nenets and Selkups, as well as Siberian Ob-Ugric-speaking Khants and Mansis) (table 1) is therefore striking. We note that all haplogroup Z lineages that are found in eastern Europe belong to a subhaplogroup Z1, characterized by transitions at nps 151, 10325, and 16129 within the Z phylogeny (Kong et al. 2003a, 2003b). A matching HVS-I founder haplotype has been observed in the Koryak and the Itelmen populations (Schurr et al. 1999). The limited diversity of haplogroup Z in Europe suggests its relatively recent spread west of the Urals.

Northener
26-07-16, 10:23
[QUOTE=Angela;485127]O/QUOTE]

"We seek constancy in heredity- and finds it's opposite variation."

S. Mukherejee, The Gene an intimate story (2016)

Exactly!
On the one hand I'am curious, what's behind these physical appearance, what are the patterns and similarities. On the other hand the reality is always divers, and messy and therefore beautiful. The nicest flowers grow always at the edges. And I know this attitude, finding patterns vs messy diversity, is not without contradictions. But I think this is a healthy contradiction.
That's also the case with classifying, with phenotypes. It seems to be that it often comes to stereotyping and prejudice. It's looks like as if it is (although not surprisingly) especially attractive to those who underline kinship and homogenity. In the end it comes to closed mind....
So how to combine our curiosity driven eagerness to go into our heredity, 'detect patterns' without ending in stereotyping!?
May be Eupedia is the place where I can find these kind of "fellow travelers"!






L]












Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Northener
26-07-16, 21:29
“We seek constancy in heredity- and finds it’s opposite variation.”

S. Mukherjee, The Gene An intimate story (2016)

Exactly!
In genetics I’am ambivalent. On the one hand I’am curious and fascinated by history, roots and ancestry. Can we find patterns in it? On the other hand I’am convinced that reality is always diverse and messy. The nicest flowers live on the edge! ;) But this ambivalent attitude can be healthy is my opinion.
Because otherwise can phenotypes easily lead to prejudice and stereotyping,. That’s because it can be inherent in classification. This attracts especially people who are attracted to homogenity and/ore close kinship… with Storm front in the ultimate end of it….
So it’s nice to see Angela that there are more “fellow travelers” who have this same combination: eye for roots, heritage and at the same time eye for flux and diversity!



Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Angela
26-07-16, 22:33
[QUOTE=Angela;485127]O/QUOTE]

"We seek constancy in heredity- and finds it's opposite variation."

S. Mukherejee, The Gene an intimate story (2016)

Exactly!
On the one hand I'am curious, what's behind these physical appearance, what are the patterns and similarities. On the other hand the reality is always divers, and messy and therefore beautiful. The nicest flowers grow always at the edges. And I know this attitude, finding patterns vs messy diversity, is not without contradictions. But I think this is a healthy contradiction.
That's also the case with classifying, with phenotypes. It seems to be that it often comes to stereotyping and prejudice. It's looks like as if it is (although not surprisingly) especially attractive to those who underline kinship and homogenity. In the end it comes to closed mind....
So how to combine our curiosity driven eagerness to go into our heredity, 'detect patterns' without ending in stereotyping!?
May be Eupedia is the place where I can find these kind of "fellow travelers"!






L]












Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

I couldn't agree more, and you will indeed find people here who have this kind of attitude.

Dominicanese
06-09-16, 21:57
but at 5-9 to 6-3, many were tall but idk about today\s standards but they were pretty strong people

MOESAN
15-09-16, 17:56
@Northerner:
You writes surprising things (to me at least):
Danes would be darker as a whole than Swedes: where did you check this?!? Even Norwegians as a whole are very close to Swedes (and Finns of West-Finland) concerning light pigmentation. Individuals very-dark-brown/black ahirs are in the proportions of about 4% in Sweden and Denmark (average) and 5% in Norway - diverse brown (most: middle and light) are between 31 and 33% (averages); the darker Scandinavian are the Islanders and Feroeers and the dark hues are not above 6%!
Some districts are a bit darker: North of Sjaelland (DK), Samsoe Island (DK) and Western and Northern (Finn influenced) Norway: light gets down to about 50% only (!!!) and dark to 6-7%: not Sardinia or Portugal I think.
it's only the brown hues which strike a litlle (not too much): about 42-45%;
as a whole the darker condition of Icelanders is explained by a) Irish and British Celts "blood" (women for the most) - b) the most of first Vikings came from Norway, and in Norway the most came from the West. Today, people from other areas than Scandinavia marry Icelanders, even if it is still at the mergins. I add Icelanders have the most often light eyes, even more than other Scandinavians: it's to say one of their "black haired" elements have often enough blue eyes: this points again towards Ireland.
+
the brachycephally among Norwegians (partially among Danes) is not always link to darker pigmentation of hairs: the famous "borreby" type whatever the details shows often sub-brachycephally associated with blondism (very light blond spite harsh thick straight hairs). by the way this type is one of the elements of the forged "east-baltic" type. Things are not so simple. Some of the old books had some merits but others spred wrong information.

this extreme blondism, not present among very individual of the sub-brachycephallic northern regions, is still to be explained: one specific mutation or a cumulative effect of several mutations ??? (suppos: one >> middle-light beown hair + second added >> flaxen blond???

Northener
03-11-16, 19:55
@Northerner:
You writes surprising things (to me at least):
Danes would be darker as a whole than Swedes: where did you check this?!? Even Norwegians as a whole are very close to Swedes (and Finns of West-Finland) concerning light pigmentation. Individuals very-dark-brown/black ahirs are in the proportions of about 4% in Sweden and Denmark (average) and 5% in Norway - diverse brown (most: middle and light) are between 31 and 33% (averages); the darker Scandinavian are the Islanders and Feroeers and the dark hues are not above 6%!
Some districts are a bit darker: North of Sjaelland (DK), Samsoe Island (DK) and Western and Northern (Finn influenced) Norway: light gets down to about 50% only (!!!) and dark to 6-7%: not Sardinia or Portugal I think.
it's only the brown hues which strike a litlle (not too much): about 42-45%;
as a whole the darker condition of Icelanders is explained by a) Irish and British Celts "blood" (women for the most) - b) the most of first Vikings came from Norway, and in Norway the most came from the West. Today, people from other areas than Scandinavia marry Icelanders, even if it is still at the mergins. I add Icelanders have the most often light eyes, even more than other Scandinavians: it's to say one of their "black haired" elements have often enough blue eyes: this points again towards Ireland.
+
the brachycephally among Norwegians (partially among Danes) is not always link to darker pigmentation of hairs: the famous "borreby" type whatever the details shows often sub-brachycephally associated with blondism (very light blond spite harsh thick straight hairs). by the way this type is one of the elements of the forged "east-baltic" type. Things are not so simple. Some of the old books had some merits but others spred wrong information.

this extreme blondism, not present among very individual of the sub-brachycephallic northern regions, is still to be explained: one specific mutation or a cumulative effect of several mutations ??? (suppos: one >> middle-light beown hair + second added >> flaxen blond???

Sorry Moesan for my late comment!
I guess you are right with your descriptions of the Scandinavian situation. To make it clear, I was surprised too with those descriptions in a classic book about the Vikings. So no doubts about that. I think that the key issue is that from about the nineteenth century until ww2 in Northern Europe was an upheal of Nordicism (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Nordicism). In this picture was the Nordic phenotype (tall, blond, blue eyed and most of all dolio) not only a description but also a kind of aim. Everything outside these norm were retouched from the Nordic picture! Or seen a less worthy....
After Coon (one of the last generations of physical anthropologist , wo was partly and/or in advance a racialist and in a way Nordicist) phenotyping never developed any further. Partly as a consequence of that the old Nordicist stereotypes still play a rol in 'serious' literature like that of Jones.

MOESAN
04-11-16, 17:47
@Northerner: OK
Now, a today rare dark haired element among North lands of Europe doesn' tdisprove a small group of dominantly dark haired people in ancient times, before absorbtion by larger groups of fair haired people; I think the middle brown hair, common enough in North, are in part the result of these crossings. (some middle hues can be caused by mutations with moderate effects but my experience says to me the most of middle hues are the results of heterozygoty (some brown parents give birth to AND brown, AND blond AND blakish haired children). That said I red somewhere the Black famous Danes were called like that for clothes or sails colours, not for their heirs...? And if you like take a laugh from time to time, do read this (where the complexes of inferiority can lead people to)!

The ancient Celts and Vikings were Black people – By Dr Clyde ... (https://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjIldinq4_QAhWD0RQKHdtXAk4QFggzMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.africaresource.com%2Frasta%2F articles%2Fthe-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-black-people-by-dr-clyde-winters%2F&usg=AFQjCNECEcEHYsGYgUIXvb2HS6a-FWzDIw)www.africaresource.com/.../the-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-bla...

Northener
05-11-16, 13:42
Yes ;) that's Nordicism in the mirror ;)


@Northerner: OK
Now, a today rare dark haired element among North lands of Europe doesn' tdisprove a small group of dominantly dark haired people in ancient times, before absorbtion by larger groups of fair haired people; I think the middle brown hair, common enough in North, are in part the result of these crossings. (some middle hues can be caused by mutations with moderate effects but my experience says to me the most of middle hues are the results of heterozygoty (some brown parents give birth to AND brown, AND blond AND blakish haired children). That said I red somewhere the Black famous Danes were called like that for clothes or sails colours, not for their heirs...? And if you like take a laugh from time to time, do read this (where the complexes of inferiority can lead people to)!

The ancient Celts and Vikings were Black people – By Dr Clyde ... (https://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjIldinq4_QAhWD0RQKHdtXAk4QFggzMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.africaresource.com%2Frasta%2F articles%2Fthe-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-black-people-by-dr-clyde-winters%2F&usg=AFQjCNECEcEHYsGYgUIXvb2HS6a-FWzDIw)

www.africaresource.com/.../the-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-bla...