What is your cephalic index?

[MOESAN]

Sorry for this answer to Carlos which falls a bit lately! after the long text I already wrote before!

 

[Hauteville]

My cephalic index is 78 and i was classified as Atlanto Mediterranean in an italian page of anthro.

 

[Angela]

I don't remember, but I know it came out mesocephalic, which surprised me, as I suppose I conflated "large" with a high cephalic index. (My head is embarrassingly big, I will confess...just like my Dad, who always wore the largest men's hat size...thank God for lots of long hair and that I don't have to worry about balding. etrified: ) The closest country was Slovenia. I have no idea what that means. (I used Dienekes' calculator.)

 

[Dalmat]

My CI is 81

 

[oreo_cookie]

My head is somewhat round, but what's most distinct is the back of my head is almost completely flat, which is something I have seen only in Balkan people.

 

[MOESAN]

That makes you dolicocephalic, close to hyperdolicocepahlic. If you measured properly you fit in the minority for Iranian peoples.Here are the scientific studies I know about Iranians :

Morphological Evaluation of Head in Turkman Males in Gorgan-North of Iran, Golalipur et al. (2007)

Out of 198 young Turkman males tested, 8% were dolicocephalic, 40% mesocephalic, 42.5% brachycephalic and 7.5% hyperbrachycephalic.


Cephalometry in 14-18 Years Old Girls and Boys of Shiraz-Iran High School, Vojdani et al. (2009)

They measured the head shape of 867 girls and 960 boys. Among the boys there were 7.5% of dolicocephalic, 28.5% of mesocephalic, 30% of brachycephalic and 34.5% of hyperbrachycephalic. The girls only had 4.8% of dolicocephalic types.


In both studies (North and South Iran), the brachycephalic type is overwhelming. So perhaps your ancestry is not purely Iranic.

VERY LATE ANSWER FOR VERY OLD POST

I red not long ago a study aboutcephalic index among populations of Iran. I was amazed by the resultsof these studies compared to older ones made between 50 and 70 yearsago. Not only by the results of measures but by the conclusions aboutthem.
Before the 1950's, the Iran mean for CIwas about 76-< 78 at most. Some regions (a central spot) shew CI'sof 84-85 but the more common means were regions with 73 to < 77plus some regions with 82 to < 84, these last ones in North, that's to say south the Caspian and in South. It's true these means arebased on geographical maps without ethnic specifications, what couldmask some differences.
Concerning ethnic groups, I red theCI's for Parsi in India were about 82-83...
the recent survey of M.J. Golalipour onSouth Caspian Pars(i) and Turkmen females of 17-20 years age found CI82,8 for 203 Turkmen females and CI 85,0 for 207 Pars females ;the first result is not astonishing, see above, but the 85 for Parsseems very high, compared to the CI of 75,0 found in past in Teheran,and the 81,20 found elsewhere, and the 80,8 found among Gujaratis -
this other results, more ancient it'strue, show that the global mean was surely about the 78 when we see(saw) CI's of 75/76 among mots of the I-Ean Afghans, and 72/73 amongthe Pathans of Pakistan...
&: uneasy to extrapolate from socontradictory means – we know already there were geographic andethnic differences within Iran (I don't know the CI for Lurs/Luri,maybe close to first Tadjiks?) - I think the fragmentation of thepopulation in numerous subpopulations or clans is a cause of possibledrifts (small stocks for endogamy) ; left aside theenvironment-climatic effects, in a generally dolichocephalic orbrachycephalic small population (« matings circle ») thedrift is light enough and conduct to an exageration of the dominanttrait – but as I say, IC's of 82 are not brachycephalic, but aremesocephalic in the sense of possible crossing between two extremes –and then a first large group of people about the 80-83 can remainstable as long as the matings concern the whole population, but ifsmall groups of same previous mean population migrate and goeveryone its way, drift can oppose after a few generations IC's of76/78 and others of 84-97 easily enough... and we (readers) don'tknow the way of mating of some clans : endogame, exogame ???
I think even the today iranic speakingpopulation of Iran is not of the very same origin according toregions : someones more autochtonous and I-Ean accultured, othermore steppic ancient Iranians (even the steppic I-Eans are far to bea one stem descendance)... For Kurds an ancient study spoke of 3populations with CI's of more than 84/85 and 1 sub-dolichocephalicbut I've not the localizations.
Concerning environment-way-of-lifeimpact, I very strongly doubt they can produce a change of 5-6 indexin two generations !
&: I would be very glad if thepapers about metric anthropologic would specify some indexes andabsolute measures concerning the ancient populations supposed to beenvolved in the I-Ean story, and not only the personal conclusions ofauthors, but...
+
'borreby' is a recent term of classification (taxinomy), not too precise in fact, BUT refers to a crania found in Borreby village, Denmark if I recall well, - i'm not sure it was Paleolithical, rather late-mesolithical I think - I' ll try to find the correct date -

 

[MOESAN]

Damned!
I never found any precise date for Borreby's skull!!!
but from what I red it seems this crania is not older than the Eneolithic or Neolithic-Chalcolithic transition in Northern Europe - so not autochtonous but the (maybe crossed with strong 'brünn' accretions) member of early Bell Beakers advance there? I lack archeologic precise works but it seems Bell beakers and other Beakers colonized Scandinavia at these times or very short time after (early Bronze) -
the today 'borreby's types present two tendancies: a more cromagnoid form, with middle-low skull, broad square face with very broad lower jaw, evovled skull lines and weak enough browridges, small orbits, and a more brünnoïd type, with very receding front, very strong browridges and less broad lower jaw, spite it's heavy too, larger orbits - the brachycephaly (limited in some part) of these type adress the question of a crossing or an internal process: but the cromagnoid phylum that produced certainly 'alpine' type can explain the first borreby type - in Norway, when the more rugged more brutal secod type seems dominating, the brachycephaly diminish so... the frist "gentle" type (but robust!!!) appears to me as a fidele duplication of the Hvellinge crania of the same periods in Skane, near Malmö (see peter LARSSON Swede footballer born 1961 Nässjö) -
all the way, all that seems confirming brachycephaly is not too old in Scandinavia and can be linked to external influences, Saami being newcomers too -

 

[Mars]

I found an old calculator by Dienekes, it requires various skull mesaurements, one of them is the cephalix index, it's 77.5 in my case (mesocephalic). It says I'm "proto-europoid"

 

[MOESAN]

I found an old calculator by Dienekes, it requires various skull mesaurements, one of them is the cephalix index, it's 77.5 in my case (mesocephalic). It says I'm "proto-europoid"

proto-europoid, inded!?!

in fact so a CI can be the evolution of a type (hypothesis) OR the crossing between two very different types but with a predominance of the more dolichocephalic -
I've no proof but after personal observations, it seems to me skulls can take very various and opposed and astonishing forms through crossings, it could prove that more than a genes pair is involved in the genotype - that doesn't exclude that more common forms show very more often in a population, according to "pure" types or mixed types numerically dominant.
so meso or subdolichocephaly can be the result of ONE type or of MORE than ONE type - a diagnostic implies other measurements and shape observations (left aside possible deformations by disease) -
as a whole, on CRANIA, all the means from Paleolithic to early Neolithic in Europewere under 75, the most between 71 and 74 - EXCEPT in the Alps and Jura were roughly some 82-84 were found since the 6000 BC -
the first mediterranean Neolithic men shew as a whole CI's of 72-73 as means, and the so called braycephals of Mugem were fornt-to-rear compressed skulls, their supposed true Ci's being mesocephal rather than brachycephal (and yet we have to take inaccount the terminology for SKULLS where 80 is already considered as "brachy"...
the Cro-Magnon phylum shew a tendancy towards sub-dolichocephaly, with means of 73 to less than 75 - constant enough -

&: when we find CI's about the 77-80 on crania, whe have to examine the shapes and compare the middle element to the other elements: is it an homogenous serie of skulls between 77/80 or only a MEAN with extremes form say 68 to 94??? (it exists!!!)
in SOM late Neolithic there were 'mediterranean' skulls very recognizible for shapes, found too in caves of the southern France Causses, about the 72-73, brachy's about 83-84 or more, with easily identifiable 'alpine' shapes, and , among the meso's, a serie of very "brutally shaped" skulls; named 'sequanian' type:

someones thought it was a naturally mesocepahlic type for its peculiar shapes - possible, but i rather think it 's a dominently 'brünnoid-capelloid' type (remnants of Hunters-Gatherers as among Michelsberg culture) with a slight accretion of 'alpine' or cromagnoid on way to 'alpine', already present on the France soils : my 'borreby-B' in formation??? -
all this to say: we can inheritate our C-I from genetically homogenous or heterogneous sources, and we have to take in account the time or the generation which is ours, to try to calculate the effects of way of life and environment.

 

[Parafarne]

Mine is CI=84 and my language is Persian. I should do more checks coz its very hard!

 

[vandalorum]

what if my CI is 75,2 and head is large 21x15,8?
big head Northern Europe but dolichocephalic = Iberia and Arabian Peninsula

 

[Lemonade]

77 - mesocephalic

 

[Rico33]

My cephalic index is about 88.
My haplogroup is G1, but I didn't take the test personally and forgot specifications.

 

[MOESAN]

what if my CI is 75,2 and head is large 21x15,8?
big head Northern Europe but dolichocephalic = Iberia and Arabian Peninsula

boring matter I know, but:
in the 36-45 period, the most of Swede regions had CI means of 76 to 77,9, the same for regions of Norway, but here with western regions means of 81-82,9,even more - some regions of wales were at 74-75 (total mean about 78,5, like SCotland), and in England the most of the regions means were 76 to 77,9 too - almost no region above CI 80,9 -Spain (total mean about 77,5 like England) had almost the same means for the most of it regions, but with peaks to more than CI 80 in coastal Asturias, with two peaks (today I don't know) of 84 and 85 (!): one in extreme West, the other in extreme East of Asturias - only N-E Portugal and some remote regions of Corsica and Sardigna had means of 73 to 74,9 (total means: about 76-77) - Bedwins of Arabia are rather 72 to 73,9 as a whole, but some southern mountainous regions, in Yemen, had people above the 80 -it's true you don"t speak of northern "Arabs" (Syria, Lebanon and even Palestina) who had very diverse regional CI means -
to verify things is not useless - No offense, BTW. (and todate, these means locally could have evolved).