|
|
Post by Glenlivet on Dec 3, 2005 21:11:37 GMT -5
 I can see something East-Baltid in the second guy from left. There are Swedes with some Finnish ancestors. The rest look pretty much Göta. The first guy look Trönder. I think it it is the same guy in the first four pictures. Lots of Baltids among the Swedes as well. |
|
|
|
Post by mattt25 on Dec 7, 2005 16:53:37 GMT -5
Lots of different opinions.  Many thanks to all those who took the time to answer! |
|
corda
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by corda on Dec 9, 2005 18:57:10 GMT -5
Lots of different opinions. Many thanks to all those who took the time to answer! Interesting, even though some links do not work. img436.imageshack.us/img436/5523/8016898ov.jpgI guess this one was taken during infamous Iraq escapade, wasn't it? Anyway, not very suitable for classification purposes. According to Polish anthropology Nordic is the most numerous element among Poles. Its quite obvious. ps jestes Polakiem? |
|
|
|
Post by quarryman on Dec 9, 2005 22:35:04 GMT -5
According to Polish anthropology Nordic is the most numerous element among Poles. Its quite obvious. Well, from a non-Polish point of view it's obvious that the Nordid element is much weaker than in all neighbouring countries to the West and North. My rough guess would be cca 40% East Baltid and about 20% each of Nordid, Alpinid and Dinarid. |
|
corda
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by corda on Dec 10, 2005 4:52:26 GMT -5
According to Polish anthropology Nordic is the most numerous element among Poles. Its quite obvious. Well, from a non-Polish point of view it's obvious that the Nordid element is much weaker than in all neighbouring countries to the West and North. My rough guess would be cca 40% East Baltid and about 20% each of Nordid, Alpinid and Dinarid. What is your source for this fantastic figures?  Mesocephaly, projecting occiput and narrow, straight or convex nose are not E. Baltic but Nordid features. Here you are quite informative plate explaining the differences and similarities of Nordid (Homo Nordicus) and Baltic (Fano Brachycephalus). You can see pred. Nordid father and below sons- examples of different predominant types- Nordid and Baltic. [Kashubians]  According to Finnish data, the eye pigmentation indeed can differ East/South and West Baltic but in reverse direction.  You don't want to say that Nordic element is correlated with brown eyes? Well, from a non-Polish point of view it's obvious that you are wrong, because not only Czekanowski but also both Eickstedt and Biasutti have pointed anthropologic continuum Germany-Poland.   Thanks to extensive work of Soviet and Polish anthropologists we know that territory of Nordid majority doesn’t end in East Poland but stretches through the N. Ukraine to L.Volga and Kuban which has anthropometrical profile quite similar to British population. |
|
|
|
Post by quarryman on Dec 11, 2005 10:49:34 GMT -5
I wrote it is a rough guess. I didn't say that there are no Nordid elements in Poland (or further east), only that they are a lot weaker than in neighbouring Germany, Scandinavia and Latvia (Lithuania is more similar to Poland). Poles have on average a much lower stature, more massive built bodies and more pachymorph features than Germans, Scandinavians and Lithuanians. Also, the heads are higher. I don't really get the point with the Kashubian pictures. Yes, the dad looks mixed and the sons look different. And they al look Polish. Look at the "Nordid" son's head - I'm not sure it's longer then the "Baltid" ones. But it's higher for sure. I don't get the point with the pigmentation map either. I never said Poles were darker than the Germans in the west or Belarussians in the east. As opposed to Czekanowski, Eickstedt and Biasutti, Bertil Lundman pointet out the relatively sharp division between lower heads in the west and higher in the east. This gives the Poles another look than predominantly Nordid populations. I picked two random pictures from the net where this is obvious. Poles:  Germans:  I don't get the point making the Poles more Nordid than they are. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenlivet on Dec 11, 2005 11:51:51 GMT -5
I would also like to mention some other aspects of Lundman. I am not sure if Lundman is the best source. It could be Bunak and I think the main difference is between what (mainly Russian anthropologists?) called North European (Atlanto-Baltic) Race and South European (Indo-Mediterranean) Race. Lundman spoke highly of Bunak. It is true like you say that he pointed a sharp division (he even gave an example between western and eastern Germany and western Poland in skull height and blood group B). One can criticise Lundman's typology in the sense that like Biasutti (who was originally a geographer) it is more (anthropo-) geographical than individual. I also question his East-Mediterranids in southern Russia. A lot of knowledgeable people online have opened my eyes on that and I think that corda make a valid point with the comparison between Brits (Atlantic formation of Czekanowski?) and some South Russians, although I should say that I have seen many more Brits than South Russians. Those who read Lundman often feel he is talking to himself with a lot of question marks in parentheses. All his works have basically the same info and he certainly was proud in his western (Atlantic) low-skulled and eastern (Caspian) high-skulled racial group, a division he believed has not varied much since the Stone Age. Lundman claim a lot but cite very little. He is also a bit too quick when he dismiss other physical anthropologists. Coon's typology may seem too complex but I noticed that his knowledge was more extensive and his descriptions more detailed. Neither was he into Nordicism, which make it easier to take him seriously. However, I do not like the fact that Coon used tribal names as racial types too, e.g. Keltic Nordic and Anglo-Saxon. That was easy to criticise and Lundman took that opportunity. You need more than that. High heads are also found among the English and Dutch (see Nyessen and the Groterpian skulls) and the Trönder in Scandinavia has a HLI of approximately 74. Northern Poland is Nordid in the following map from Lundman (1943):  I can see East-Nordid (ÖN in the map) in western Finland and in the western part of Latvia and Estonia, but not Poland. As opposed to Czekanowski, Eickstedt and Biasutti, Bertil Lundman pointet out the relatively sharp division between lower heads in the west and higher in the east. This gives the Poles another look than predominantly Nordid populations. I picked two random pictures from the net where this is obvious. |
|
corda
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by corda on Dec 11, 2005 13:58:24 GMT -5
I wrote it is a rough guess. . Very scientific indeed. You are wrong taking Germany as whole Nordid element is slightly weaker then in Poland although N.W. Germans are slightly more Nordic then Vistula region. The differences is only stronger Mediteranean element in Germany. This element is first of all responsible for relatively darker eyes among Germans and slightly longer heads. Considering the second linear feature- face index there is no significant difference. Map of HFK Günther, img212.imageshack.us/img212/5829/mapix9rz.jpgOh I see … another “rough guess”. In two sentences more then 5 mistakes or strains of interpretation. It is really hard to find to race with “more massive built bodies and more pachymorph features” then typical for Germany Alpines or Borrebies. Much lower means 3,2-3,6 cm shorter then young Germans and Swedes. Considering that data for Germans is from 2004 and Poles from 1995 and considering the average growth per 10y in Poland (2,1cm so 2x faster then in W. Europe) the difference is really “impressive”. It seems that you don’t understand the difference between snub-nosed short headed E.Baltic and Nordids that’s why I decided to enlighten you a bit. I don’t think Eicksted and Biasutti recognized the head height as main anthropologic factor. It was Lundman who has used it. He also noted there are two versions of Nordics- low and high headed. In Baltic region HLI has rather geographical then racial significance. Actually N.Poles had similar HLI to most of the Swedes and lower then E.Germans. www.snpa.nordish.net/bilder/rastyper-karta06.jpgI can post many pictures showing the difference between Nordoid Poles or other Slavonics and Alpine Germans just don’t see the point doing it. I don't get the point making the Poles less Nordid than they are. |
|
|
|
Post by Polako on Dec 11, 2005 23:34:39 GMT -5
I wrote it is a rough guess. I didn't say that there are no Nordid elements in Poland (or further east), only that they are a lot weaker than in neighbouring Germany, Scandinavia and Latvia (Lithuania is more similar to Poland). Poles have on average a much lower stature, more massive built bodies and more pachymorph features than Germans, Scandinavians and Lithuanians. Also, the heads are higher. Poles aren't any shorter or more massive than Germans. Comparing young people of course. The data posted from Wikpedia here was rubbish. |
|
|
|
Post by personx on Dec 12, 2005 4:47:32 GMT -5
Quarryman's point is well taken. The picture he provided, of a random group of Polish people, does not show people who are particularly Nordic. Especially the girl in the yellow t-shirt; there's no way she could be classified as Nordic. From my experience, when you look at a Polish population you're going to be looking at a group that is predominantly Baltid and Alpinid. Again, Quarryman's picture is a good example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polako on Dec 12, 2005 5:33:53 GMT -5
Quarryman's point is well taken. The picture he provided, of a random group of Polish people, does not show people who are particularly Nordic. Especially the girl in the yellow t-shirt; there's no way she could be classified as Nordic. From my experience, when you look at a Polish population you're going to be looking at a group that is predominantly Baltid and Alpinid. Again, Quarryman's picture is a good example. He doesn't have a point, because taking a small group of people and claiming they're representative of a population like Poland, is very stupid and highly unscientific. But very Dodona like. |
|
|
|
Post by henerte on Dec 12, 2005 5:44:37 GMT -5
Quarryman's point is well taken. The picture he provided, of a random group of Polish people, does not show people who are particularly Nordic. Especially the girl in the yellow t-shirt; there's no way she could be classified as Nordic. From my experience, when you look at a Polish population you're going to be looking at a group that is predominantly Baltid and Alpinid. Again, Quarryman's picture is a good example. That girl in the yellow t-shirt is not even polish.  The majority of people on this photo are not polish either. Simply, go to Google, type "polish team" and you will get this photo. You will see on this website that this photo was taken during some kind of competition of teams composed of 4 players. Only the guys with medals are polish, the rest of people are guides, organizators etc. Anyway, I just don't see how one photo can be representative for any given population. Doing simple googling can also yield such results:  Germans:   The guy to the right on the last photo looks middle eastern in my opinion.  |
|
|
|
Post by personx on Dec 12, 2005 6:07:07 GMT -5
Whatever.
This whole idea about Poles morphing from shorter, round-headed types into Nordics over a couple of generations seems a little weird to me. I don't buy it. Sure, maybe succesive generations get taller. That's normal in all populations. However, Poles generally have a distinct look, and it's not Nordic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polako on Dec 12, 2005 7:23:40 GMT -5
Whatever. This whole idea about Poles morphing from shorter, round-headed types into Nordics over a couple of generations seems a little weird to me. I don't buy it. Sure, maybe succesive generations get taller. That's normal in all populations. However, Poles generally have a distinct look, and it's not Nordic. Yeah, so distnictive that you thought the non-Poles were typically Polish. Bwahaha...whatever indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by henerte on Dec 12, 2005 7:25:50 GMT -5
|
|
The majority of people on this photo are not polish either. 