|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 10:22:18 GMT -5
Post by Agrippa on Dec 6, 2005 10:22:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 10:39:41 GMT -5
Post by Mike the Jedi on Dec 6, 2005 10:39:41 GMT -5
Nice. But why didn't you just go ahead and add the Orientalid group, too?
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 12:30:17 GMT -5
Post by Agrippa on Dec 6, 2005 12:30:17 GMT -5
Because its not present in Europe nor at its borders and to add it would be problematic in such a 2dimensional scheme too. Though it could be added between Mediterranid, Armenoid and Indid.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 13:05:38 GMT -5
Post by murphee on Dec 6, 2005 13:05:38 GMT -5
Request for your graphics to be posted here; I am not allowed access to them at Stirpes not being a registered member
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 13:30:03 GMT -5
Post by One Humanity on Dec 6, 2005 13:30:03 GMT -5
It's a valuable approach.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 14:13:46 GMT -5
Post by OdinofOssetia on Dec 6, 2005 14:13:46 GMT -5
I already stated it once on this forum, but here it is again: Falish - essentially a mixed East Baltic - Nordic race (you should get the idea of what I mean if you take into account the fact that Hamburg used to be called as a "Slavic city"), found across much of northern Germany. There was even a Slavic name for Hamburg, but I don't remember it. Slavic settlement extended quite deeply even into former West Germany. There was even a Slavic enclave in the southern Netherlands. michalw.narod.ru/SlavicSpain.htmlOn this page is a map by R. Biasutti that shows that the main area of the Falish race is actually a mixture of the Alpine, Baltic, and Nordic races: asaland.proboards26.com/index.cgi?board=other&action=display&thread=1103318310PS - I prefer the name East Baltic, because Baltic can be a confusing term, easily mistaken with the Baltic branch of the Indo-Europeans, whereas in the racial sense this term is much more encompassing. I noticed that Biasutti chose to simply call it as Baltic.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 15:19:57 GMT -5
Post by asdf on Dec 6, 2005 15:19:57 GMT -5
Well, there's my take from a couple of days ago. I guess it's not very accurate, but I haven't read anything, so don't expect too much.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 16:52:50 GMT -5
Post by Agrippa on Dec 6, 2005 16:52:50 GMT -5
Well, there's my take from a couple of days ago. I guess it's not very accurate, but I haven't read anything, so don't expect too much. Well, it makes sense, good work generally speaking. The problem is just that its rather confusing now and the basic tendencies get lost - it seems they are all related via single connections, not centered, what they are as well, but the centres of development are crucial. And it shows why I didnt worked with all Europid types, because its problematic 2dimensional. But again, nice done and I can agree with most of it. Odin: Dalofaelids/Cromagnids are older and Baltids are just a rather recent phenomenon in the whole of Eastern Europe - Baltisation is a process and the original form was Cromagnoid obviously. Nonsense to state Dalofaelids are a mixture...
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 19:18:56 GMT -5
Post by OdinofOssetia on Dec 6, 2005 19:18:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 20:33:08 GMT -5
Post by Agrippa on Dec 6, 2005 20:33:08 GMT -5
Biasutti's map proves my point: Did he really referred to Dalofaelids? Because if, he would lose a lot of reputation from my side. Where its possible to argue that "Borrebies" are related to Osteuropids (as one German anthropologist claimed once), the same is absurd if its about Dalofaelids, at least if going after the most common definitions. Concerning the map - well, nothing against Eastern Austria being Nordid, Nordid is strong there though I would count it as mixed area, but not stronger Nordid than Niedersachsen, Hamburg, Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg in Germany...compare Biasutties map with more reasonable ones... Furthermore how can the mixture of "Nordid-Baltid-Alpinid" be as long headed absolute and relative as Nordids are - what Dalofaelids are by definition (dolicho- to mesocephalic) - not to speak about anatomical differences to such mixtures and such typical features like the angular jaws are not present in all of them but typical Cromagnids from 10.000 years ago before Baltid populations were proven... And finally some regions which are most important for the Dalofaelid type are considered being Nordic in that map (Dalofaelids are often included into Nordid in the wider sense)... Southern Germany being Alpinid and not mixed area as a whole is nonsense either - again read other sources. The result of Nordid+Baltid+Alpinid = not Dalofaelid. Furthermore to claim that the German North Sea coastal regions are not Nordid is false also. Just read "Rassengeschichte der Menschheit" if you can read German, this series, the part about Germany and the Netherlands, was posted on Skadi. Brachycephalic groups are generally more recent and Cromagnids are one of the oldest forms in Europe with the name giving Cro Magnon findings and f.e. Oberkassel - Oberkassel is in line with later Dalofaelids - just compare the rounded features of Baltids with that of Cromagnids/Dalofaelids, thats not just the result of admixture, in fact its the result of late brachymorphisation-reduction-partly infantilisation - Cromagnid is definitely the older form - Baltids are mostly descendents of Cromagnoids in the East which had certain trends towards such boreal forms with tendencies I mentioned - if with Lappoid admixture = Eastbaltid.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 20:49:23 GMT -5
Post by $$$ FD $$$ on Dec 6, 2005 20:49:23 GMT -5
what does a faelish look like -
lower face index membraneous lips and longer in the upper lip segment straight fine crisp blond hair pyknic - corpulent, heavy boned or heavy bodied - broad the sides of the head are steep sided forward facing compressed cheek slabs (non retrognathic malars) the eyes seem to bulge out the nose is mesorrhine, the tip of the nose is elevated and points upward typically mesocephallic much shorter than commonrun brunn and borebby men and doesn't share the same degree of associated largeness or ruggedness as the latter.
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 21:11:55 GMT -5
Post by $$$ FD $$$ on Dec 6, 2005 21:11:55 GMT -5
homer and bart simpson are caracaturistic approximations although balding must not be a characteristic with this type - www.homersimpson.com//
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 21:12:34 GMT -5
Post by $$$ FD $$$ on Dec 6, 2005 21:12:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Dalic
Dec 6, 2005 21:33:48 GMT -5
Post by Agrippa on Dec 6, 2005 21:33:48 GMT -5
pyknic - corpulent, heavy boned or heavy bodied - broad Dalofaelids are more pyknomorphic than Nordids, thats for sure, but usually they are in young age rather athletic, mesomorphic build - get corpulent mostly in later and latest age - different from typical Alpinids which are in middle age already rather corpulent more often. Not too mention that they have longer and more muscular, but less fat, less subcutaneous fat in particular, extremities. Thats at least true for Bruenn/Dalofaelid/Cromagnid, Borrebies are more what you said FD, rather between Dalofaelid and Alpinoid with many features. Oliver Kahn is just a great example of a Dalofaelid - shows clearly the difference to Nordids (Skando- and Eastnordid) on the one hand, and the reduced-gracilised-infantilised Baltids on the other... I think I will make an own thread with my graph and add comments... dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=physanth&thread=1133923297
|
|
Synthesis
Full Member
Hegelian Leftist
Posts: 156
|
Dalic
Dec 7, 2005 8:22:16 GMT -5
Post by Synthesis on Dec 7, 2005 8:22:16 GMT -5
Oliver Kahn is just a great example of a Dalofaelid - shows clearly the difference to Nordids (Skando- and Eastnordid) on the one hand, and the reduced-gracilised-infantilised Baltids on the other... Actually his face is too short to be considered a good example of Dalofaelid/Phalian. The "Brünns" on Coon's plates might be better examples. However, how would you classify the Irish "Upper Palaeolithic" types? Still Dalofaelid? Or another Cromagnid subvariety?
|
|