|
Post by Drooperdoo on Dec 19, 2005 11:51:24 GMT -5
The oldest Austrian type was brunet. The blondes came later. The aborigines that the invaders found were typically Mediterranean in appearance: brown hair, brown eyes, short and furry-chested. My Austrian wife's grandfather is of this older Austrian type. (He could pass for a Spaniard or Italian.) He's from the Tyrol region of Austria, which is where Oetzi's from. So, since Oetzi is probably from the older stock, it's a safer guess to assume he was dark. (I'm sure his mummy yielded dark-brown hair, hence the brown hair on the reconstruction.) The question is whether he had fair eyes. I'd guess no--judging by my wife's grandfather. But who knows? (Even the pre-Aryan paleolithic stock had low incidences of blue eyes.) It just wasn't as frequent as the blondism rates held by the invaders.
P.S.--Judging by the Big Brother-style tactics of the European Union, I'm surprised that they don't throw Oetzi's corpse into prison. After all, it had one or two swastika tattoos (as did several of his personal belongings). Maybe the E.U. is having scientists try to "re-animate" him so that they can remand him Israel to make him stand trial for crimes against humanity. Bwa-ha-ha-ha
|
|
|
Post by Glenlivet on Dec 19, 2005 12:18:23 GMT -5
Drooperdoo, are you sure he is Mediterranid and not Dinarid?
Why do you think there has been such a continuation in Austria?
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Dec 19, 2005 14:55:39 GMT -5
Yeah, he's 0% Dinaric. By saying he could pass for a Spaniard or an Italian, I don't mean the Dinaric-looking ones. Think of someone who looks like Antonio Banderas, not like Al Pacino: I.e., small, well-shaped nose, honey-hewn skin, dark brown hair, etc. The Pacino/Mediterraneans and Dinaric types have long prominent noses, more "ethnic" features. My wife's grandfather doesn't look "ethnic" at all. I mean, think of Gregory Peck (who's of Irish extraction). He doesn't look the least bit "ethnic," despite having pitch-black hair, brown eyes, olive skin, etc. Her grandfather's dark in ther Atlanto-Med way, not in the Dinaric way. P.S.--As to the "continuation" of the paleolithic type surrounded by the newer Nordic type, I didn't make that up: Carleton Coon in his Races of Europe made the observation, and it's based on skulls and ancient burial sites. The Nordic skulls don't show up until fairly recently--apparently arriving with the "Aryan invasion". The oldest skulls are identical to the brunet populations still living in Austria today. Coon said that, in modern Austria, 25% of the population go back to this original paleolithic type, while 75% are Nordic. My wife's family cartoonishly conforms to that: 3 of her 4 grandparents are blonds with blue eyes and Nordic skulls, and 1 of her grandparents is the older brunet type--akin to Gregory Peck, Tyrone Power, etc: Olive-skinned, brown-haired, brown-eyed, and a big hairy chest. But I must caution you not to hear the term "brunet" and jump to the conclusion that I'm describing some ethnic-looking Mediterranean. Here's a picture of the Austrian pop-singer Falco, who looks just like my wife's grandfather and uncle: He has the Alpine skull, brown eyes, dark-brown hair, paleolithic hairiness, etc. * Humorously, her grandfather still combs his hair like Falco, slicked back in 1930s fashion.
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Dec 19, 2005 18:11:50 GMT -5
Real Atlantomediterranids are strongest in Tyrol I'd say, especially Southern Tyrol which is now part of the Italian state but ethnic German, elsewhere its rather about dark Nordids, Nordid with Dinarid or Alpinid admixture but morphologically mostly Nordid, Nordid with Mediterranid admixture and a low percentage of Pontids coming especially with Czechs. Atlantomediterranids exist elsewhere too obviously, but in rather low percentages.
Furthermore its too easy to say that the "UP's", Cromagnoid were darker I think.
|
|
|
Post by curiousman on Dec 20, 2005 3:07:43 GMT -5
I know his mtDNA has been tested and it belongs to the haplogroup K. I wonder if anyone has made any test on the Y-chromosome.... I've read that in England it has been found a woman who is a direct descendant of Oetzi. Which "daughter of (mitocondrial)Eve" corresponds to haplogroup K?
|
|
|
Post by Ilmatar on Dec 20, 2005 7:58:22 GMT -5
Bryan Sykes called haplogroup K "Katrina" in The Seven Daughters of Eve. He was probably wrong about the place where the mutation defining the haplogroup first occured, as he was with haplogroup T (Tara). Both K and T have much more Eastern origins than the modern Italy. And I think he also was mistaken about H (Helena). It seems some of the H mutations first occured in Southern France, but that H too is more Eastern. But his mistakes were understandable, given they had very much less data when he wrote the book.
|
|
|
Post by curiousman on Dec 20, 2005 8:12:54 GMT -5
Bryan Sykes called haplogroup K "Katrina" in The Seven Daughters of Eve. He was probably wrong about the place where the mutation defining the haplogroup first occured, as he was with haplogroup T (Tara). Both K and T have much more Eastern origins than the modern Italy. And I think he also was mistaken about H (Helena). It seems some of the H mutations first occured in Southern France, but that H too is more Eastern. But his mistakes were understandable, given they had very much less data when he wrote the book. Interesting! Where can one find more recent data?
|
|
|
Post by Ilmatar on Dec 20, 2005 11:08:29 GMT -5
All around internet. Really, most of the latest, influential studies on population genetics have been published on-line. Dienekes' blog is good, even if I don't always agree with him he offers great links. They have published a couple of "popular" books on genetics as well.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Dec 20, 2005 12:00:26 GMT -5
Ilmatar, Oetzi was discovered on the borderline between Italy and Austria. His dna established that he was from prehistoric Austria, not Italy. So you said that his haplogroup wasn't found much in Italy. Of course. Though Sykes theorizes that the haplogroup may have originated in extreme Northern Italy or Southern Austria, it's common on the Austrian side and extremely less so on the Italian side. So in modern terms, Oetzi wasn't "Italian". He's only on display in Italy because he was found a few paces over on the Italian side of the border. He was what we might term a preheistoric Alpine man, whose ancestors lie to the north of the Alps not the south. P.S.--Check out this link. www.txczgs.org/Genetic.html It says: "One unanticipated result concerned haplogroup K. We have found that three Czech Texans have exactly the same mtDNA as the "Iceman".
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Dec 20, 2005 13:35:33 GMT -5
I dont know! The Tyrol region as I far as I'am aware has been like a highway almost,between Italic,Germanic and Gaulish people passing through since around 3-5,000 years ago Droop. The Raetians, where the ones originally inhabitaing that area,and they seem to be closely related to the Etruscans or where in fact a splinter tribe of Etruscans,who themselves may even be from Asia Minor,or even an offshoot of the Elymians of Sicily. Tyrol only became partve Kingdom of Austria during the middle ages,way after the Fall of the Roman Empire,so to call our friend un-Italian,may perhaps be a mistake?!
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Dec 20, 2005 13:43:48 GMT -5
Crimson Guard, I know you're a big Italophile, but the dna evidence on Oetzi is pretty clear that he wasn't related to the Italic tribes to the south, but to the Swiss-Alpine types to the north. Even to this day in modern Italy, the extreme northern part of Italy is only "Italian" in name. The villages are all German, with people named Hans and Dieter and Inge. That's why Mussolini was annoyed at Hitler's plan for a pan-Germanic state in Central Europe. He didn't want to lose those extreme portions of Italy that are not culturally, ethnically or historically Italian. In terms of history, modern historical boundaries are meaningless. P.S.--As to the Etruscan origins, that's a hotly debated topic. I think that an Indo-European origin is unlikely since they didn't speak an Indo-European language. So an Anatolian origin seems linguistically implausible (since all the groups from Anatolia at that time-period spoke some form of Indo-European language). But from a dna-standpoint, they may well have emerged from a pre-Aryan Anatolia. If so, that would imply an extremely old age. DNA analysis--itself a hotly debated topic--seems to imply that the Etruscans were more Eastern Mediterranean than modern Italian populations. They were also extremely homogenous. They surprised geneticists, who expected more Gaulic, Germanic and Celtic strains--but they didn't find any. So the inhabitants of Northern Italy were far more isolated than was previously thought. (It also throws into question the notion that modern Italians bred in with the Etruscans to the extent previously assumed--since the Etruscan dna is so distinctive and isn't found widely in modern Italian populations.) Look at this genetic study: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15015132
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Dec 20, 2005 13:57:06 GMT -5
know you're a big Italophile>> LOL,not partically,and I wanst being really being wholly serious Dropp,hense the winking Eye smily..however just was pointing some food for thought. Also the Anatolians where home of Greeks aswel among groups. The Ancient Dacians and Thracians are also related to Italic people ,and they where Central and Eastern European ,just North of the Alps. the country of Austria only became Germanized during the last 500-800 years ago. It wasnt always a Germanic land Droop!
|
|
|
Post by curiousman on Dec 20, 2005 13:59:40 GMT -5
Of course, Drooperdoo, Oetzi wasn't "Italian". "Italy" and "Austria" are modern political terms and it's pure nonsence to apply these terms to men who lived 7000 years ago. I don't understand only how the three Czech you cited proof that the ancestors of Oetzi lived north of the Alps ... I would say that his modern descendants live north of the Alps ... Btw, I don't know where are you from, but I'd like to inform you that a large part of the Alps lie in (Northern)Italy and only a little fraction of it coincide with South Tyrol ...
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Dec 20, 2005 14:02:44 GMT -5
yes thats part've what I'am trying to say to Droop.You cant call him either un-Italian or Austrian,its to modern.
|
|
|
Post by curiousman on Dec 20, 2005 14:13:27 GMT -5
Crimson Guard, Even to this day in modern Italy, the extreme northern part of Italy is only "Italian" in name. The villages are all German, with people named Hans and Dieter and Inge. Are you sure? Have you ever been in Northern Italy (outside South Tyrol?). Have you ever heard of rheto-romance speaking peoples of the Alps? Where are they from?
|
|