What is the difference between Nordics and Nordids?

[Nordish Persephone]

Is there a difference? Isn't Nordic a more broad term that applies to a bunch of different subraces?

[Guapo]

Nordic can mean a few things, nordic countries, nordic sports etc. Nordid means a person of the nordic physical type.

[Sol Invictus]

Yup. It's just a matter of phenotype when -id is attached..

Mediterranean meaning the region, Mediterranid meaning a person from the region.

[Pallantides]

Nordic countries:
(Greenland should not be included imo.)

Nordic People:
Norwegians
Swedes
Danes
Icelanders
Faroese people


Nordid is a phenotype ,ex: a large portion of Norwegians for example are not Nordid but they are Nordic people.

[The Ripper]

Also Finland and the Finns are part of the concept of Norden.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Also Finland and the Finns are part of the concept of Norden.

And what about Russian Karelia and Kola peninsula?

[Eins Zwei Polizei]

Is there a difference? Isn't Nordic a more broad term that applies to a bunch of different subraces?

Lundman and Eickstedt applied the suffix -id to their racial types not to confuse with geographical definitions (I mean, you can be "Nordic" as a Scandinavian and still look Baltid, or live in the "Mediterranean" area and show Alpinid traits rather than Mediterranid proper, and so on).

The Necessity of a Handy and Clear Terminology

That only a strict clearness of term can protect against confusion and with it against misunderstandings in anthropological matters, should the just explained sufficient shed light on. Things would look better for much if one beared that more in mind. The clearness of term has also to find its expression in terminology.
Here it is not only essential that general and substantival terms like race or people always are used in an unequivocal way, but also that special and adjectival epithets exclude grosser mistakes. That's why one did already agree on, following the example of E. Fischer, to speak not only of a Negro race, a Mongolian or European race, but of a Negrid, a Mongolid and a Europid race circle (Rassenkreis). As a result it turns out to be a special advantage that the suffix -id is already used in zoology for the designation of groups of individuals (comp. Bovid, Felid, Canid). In accordance with linguistic rules, the suffix itself is added to the stem of the basic word - therefore not Europaeid, but Europoid.
But in the interest of scientific clearness also the wider spreading of this principle is urgently desired. Because terms like Melanesian, Australian or Oriental first have to be related to lingual and cultural communities, and one does not always want to or be able to put in far going subordinate clauses as a statement of the correct context. To exclude therefore any mistake, this principle was applied to in the following first try of a systematic division of the races of all race circles on Earth, which necessarily could not do without the creation of a couple of new - as short and easy to keep in the mind as possible - proper names.
Moreover, for reasons of verbal melodiousness and corresponding to the Latin usage, at compounds of several adjectives the suffix -id of the first adjective will be replaced by an -o, so that e. g. it will be spoken of Turano-Orientaloid individuals (mixed types) or of a Sudano-Niloid population (mixed people). But if the pronounced predominance of a certain race can be found in such mixtures, which only more or less seems influenced or slightly shifted by alien and perhaps not even in every single case clearly capable elements, we will have to speak of Turanoid or Sudanoid individuals or populations, in contrast to purely Turanoid or Sudanoid groups or individuals. So the suffix -oid means as much as "similar", similar to the Turanoid etc. race. Also, a Turanoid element can leave a "Turanoid" etc., that means: similar to the Turanoid race, stamp on an individual of a different race.
In the mentioned cases there is a physical similarity because of genetic connection assumed, namely the partial sharing of a common pre-parental genetic heritage. But cases occur where a form similarity is not determined by racial relationship, but because of convergence, mutations or development stage. Then, race-historically meaningless form similarities can result. That applies for a form development such as the epicanthus at young Caucasoids. The epicanthus is not a question of Mongoloid or Mongoloid form development, because there is no racial element, but only a Mongoliform characteristic. So as we here use the ending -iform (following Gusinde) as designation of a form similarity which we constate as such and without connection with its reason, we will use the suffix -(i)morphic (following Stratz) as characterization of the belonging to a morphological development stratum. For example there occur not seldom in older geological epochs and different withdraw areas of the Earth primitive form developments which we know today especially from the Australoids. Therefore in these cases it is to be spoken of Australimorphic features, just as we speak quite generally of protomorphic, metamorphic and archimorphic development stages of mankind. So we gain the followng terminological clarification:
It will be used for the adjectival characterization of
1. physical form groups (race circles, races, sub-races and local forms) and more-less racial pure individuals the suffix -id,
2. race mixtures with the predominance of a certain race or alien characteristics at a single individual the ending -oid,
3. members of similar development strata the ending -imorphic,
4. form similarity as such, which seems to be based neither on racial relationship nor on the same development stage, the ending -iform,
5. linguistical or cultural groups and communities (in German) the suffix -isch.

(Egon von Eickstedt, Rassenkunde und Rassengeschichte der Menschheit, Stuttgart 1934, p. 19-21, Translated by Agrippa)

[SilverFish]

Nordic means:
Nordids
Baltids
Borrebies
Faelids
Bruenns
Keltic Nordics
Paleo Atlantids?(they look more med, although they came from Norway, weird...)

Central European:
Alpinids
SubNordics
Norics
Dinarics
Atlanto Meds

Southern European:
Meds

[Agrippa]

The others explained it already, but to elaborate a little bit on that, its the suffix system many anthropologists and actually even other biologists used to make an easy and clear cut distinction.

Here I quote Nordgau in one of his great posts, a translation of v. Eickstedt, from Skadi:

The following text is an excerpt from Egon von Eickstedt, Rassenkunde und Rassengeschichte der Menschheit, Stuttgart 1934, p. 19-21, which I translated from German:


The Necessity of a Handy and Clear Terminology

That only a strict clearness of term can protect against confusion and with it against misunderstandings in anthropological matters, should the just explained sufficient shed light on. Things would look better for much if one beared that more in mind. The clearness of term has also to find its expression in terminology.

Here it is not only essential that general and substantival terms like race or people always are used in an unequivocal way, but also that special and adjectival epithets exclude grosser mistakes. That's why one did already agree on, following the example of E. Fischer, to speak not only of a Negro race, a Mongolian or European race, but of a Negrid, a Mongolid and a Europid race circle (Rassenkreis). As a result it turns out to be a special advantage that the suffix -id is already used in zoology for the designation of groups of individuals (comp. Bovid, Felid, Canid). In accordance with linguistic rules, the suffix itself is added to the stem of the basic word - therefore not Europaeid, but Europid.

But in the interest of scientific clearness also the wider spreading of this principle is urgently desired. Because terms like Melanesian, Australian or Oriental first have to be related to lingual and cultural communities, and one does not always want to or be able to put in far going subordinate clauses as a statement of the correct context. To exclude therefore any mistake, this principle was applied to in the following first try of a systematic division of the races of all race circles on Earth, which necessarily could not do without the creation of a couple of new - as short and easy to keep in the mind as possible - proper names.

Moreover, for reasons of verbal melodiousness and corresponding to the Latin usage, at compounds of several adjectives the suffix -id of the first adjective will be replaced by an -o, so that e. g. it will be spoken of Turano-Orientalid individuals (mixed types) or of a Sudano-Nilotid population (mixed people). But if the pronounced predominance of a certain race can be found in such mixtures, which only more or less seems influenced or slightly shifted by alien and perhaps not even in every single case clearly capable elements, we will have to speak of Turanoid or Sudanoid individuals or populations, in contrast to purely Turanid or Sudanid groups or individuals. So the suffix -oid means as much as "similar", similar to the Turanid etc. race. Also, a Turanid element can leave a "Turanoid" etc., that means: similar to the Turanid race, stamp on an individual of a different race.

In the mentioned cases there is a physical similarity because of genetic connection assumed, namely the partial sharing of a common pre-parental genetic heritage. But cases occur where a form similarity is not determined by racial relationship, but because of convergence, mutations or development stage. Then, race-historically meaningless form similarities can result. That applies for a form development such as the epicanthus at young Europids. The epicanthus is not a question of Mongolid or Mongoloid form development, because there is no racial element, but only a Mongoliform characteristic. So as we here use the ending -iform (following Gusinde) as designation of a form similarity which we constate as such and without connection with its reason, we will use the suffix -(i)morphic (following Stratz) as characterization of the belonging to a morphological development stratum. For example there occur not seldom in older geological epochs and different withdraw areas of the Earth primitive form developments which we know today especially from the Australids. Therefore in these cases it is to be spoken of Australimorphic features, just as we speak quite generally of protomorphic, metamorphic and archimorphic development stages of mankind. So we gain the followng terminological clarification:

It will be used for the adjectival characterization of :

1. physical form groups (race circles, races, sub-races and local forms) and more-less racial pure individuals the suffix -id,

2. race mixtures with the predominance of a certain race or alien characteristics at a single individual the ending -oid,

3. members of similar development strata the ending -imorphic,

4. form similarity as such, which seems to be based neither on racial relationship nor on the same development stage, the ending -iform,

5. linguistical or cultural groups and communities (in German) the suffix -isch.

So in a racial sense, Nordic and Nordid means basically the same, but Nordid is preferable because its a clear term, used for a specific racial type and its variants, not that easy to confuse.

Like Alpinid, since in the Alps live a lot of people, not all of them are Alpinid obviously, some might confuse that if just using "Alpine", but there can be little doubts about "Alpinid".

[Eins Zwei Polizei]

Here I quote Nordgau in one of his great posts, a translation of v. Eickstedt, from Skadi:

Was it you or Nordgau translating from Eickstedt? I found the post here with credits to yours.