pablo-ali
03-27-2019, 10:40 PM
I was thinking, the race called "Nordic", is basically a typical East European (with the exception of southeast) - Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, Ukraine, Hungary...
My way of thinking, is that the "Nordic" race, aka slim guys with round, femine faces, is not originally Nordic, but is an effect of Uralic infuence.
On the other hand, the "Cro Magnon" race, big, muscular-and-fat guys with square faces and red-or-blonde beard, is definitely more Celtic than Nordic.
So, in my opinion, Nordic people don't have their own "race" - they are a balanced mix of Celtic and Northeast European.
Intrigued with this, I researched a bit on ancient migrations in northeast Europe. And, I found out a particularly interesting thing - south of the Baltic Sea, there are 2 major Germanic clusters:
1 - East Baltic, today's Lithuania, Belarus and Poland, where Germanic people originally lived
2 - West Baltic, today's Germany and Denmark, where they moved during the Migration period (Bronze Age)
Now, for the Slavs. According to science, some Mongolian invaders came to East Europe. Do Slavs look Mongolian? - well, not really. Maybe a few, if you visit Czechia. But that's because of Hungarian influence, anyway.
Anyway, when you think of Russia, you don't think about slim, toned, handsome guys, do you?
In East European countries, Slavic languages dominate. And they are definitely harder to learn, than Germanic ones.
So, here is my reasoning: Slavic influence on Europe is deeper than you think. Vikings, instead of sailing East and settling there, just brought slaves and germanized them. In written history, Germanization is definitely more common than Slavicization. But, there's no need to look at history - just look at the XXI century. Compare the amount of Slavs learning Swedish, Norwegian, German, English... to the amount of Brites learning Russian.
My way of thinking is that Germanic culture was way easier for foreigners to adjust, than Slavic. So, Vikings were more likely to either die or return, while Slavs were more likely to blend in.
So, let's be optimistic and say that Sweden is genetically 50% Slavic. That would explain a lot of similarities between Swedes, and Slavs/Lithuanians.
So...
Polish people are approximately 42% Nordic, but only 3% are of "pure Nordic race".
Norwegians are approximately 67% Nordic, but 39% are of "pure Nordic race".
Norway had very little documented influence on East Europe. Poland has a lot of documented mixing with other cultures.
So, here is how I think about that:
The "Nordic race" is made up of the look of a stereotypical Norwegian. But, average Norwegian is a mix of multiple races.
Poland is definitely mixed up a lot, because of its location right in the middle of everything. Half of trade roads in Europe, crossed Poland. From European regions, only Asia Minor beats Poland in that.
Norway is definitely quite isolated, and it had little contact with other regions, except for North Atlantic islands.
Sweden is quite isolated from north Norway, but not from south Norway or Finland or Russia or Ukraine or Poland or Arabia... thanks to the Amber Road.
So, one can easily make up a sort of gradient between the regions:
British Isles -> Norway -> Sweden -> Poland -> Ukraine -> Arabia
Asia Minor, due to its location and history, has a lot more diverse admixture and doesn't count in.
But, Sweden and Norway also had some influence from the Northeast, the Reindeer herder culture.
So, in fact, what we call "Nordic", is just an average Norwegian. A balanced mix of Celtic, Slavic and Arctic peoples.
Sweden, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, part of Finland and part of Poland, are basically East Baltic, and racially referred to as a branch of Nordic.
Ireland is how an average Norwegian would look like, if not the Eastern influence.
Ancient Europe wasn't that complex - it was basically mostly Celtic, but Northeast Europe was Germanic.
Before the Migration of the People, Germans lived in northeast Europe - today's Lithuania, Belarus and Poland. People that live there, have darker hair than today's Slavs.
I'd say that the original Celts had brighter hair (red), than Germans (black) - the blonde hair was brought from the East. That's why blonde hair is so common on the British Isles, but not in Iberia.
And, here is my approximate of how the ancient populations looked like:
Arctic and Paleo Eskimo - white skin, bright hair, mtDNA C haplogroup, originating from around the North Pole. Dorset and Nordic peoples were closely related. Icelandic may be similar to other Germanic languages, but they all have more Cletic influence than Icelandic - even though Iceland was settled by more Celts than Scandinavia. That suggests that Old Norse is a Native American language, Paleo Eskimo, not actually Germanic. Or, the Paleo Eskimo originated from Europe? Who knows... it was all one big continent back then, after all...
One Icelandic explorer claimed to have found Eskimo tribe with blonde hair and blue eyes, that spoke a language similar to Icelandic. Scientists agreed that it was a haox made up by the Icelander out of his pride. But, maybe that was the Dorset culture? Anyway, Icelanders aren't that much blonde, compared to Sweden and many other East European regions. ("Blond Eskimos")
That Arctic Group had weakness for travels, exploration and discovery. Also, they were quite good at adapting to climates with relatively low winds and short-term temperature variation, but didn't care about the humidity, annual temperature variation, or warmth. That made them ideal for some Arctic and tropical climates. Mountains and caves were a great plus for them. Thatīs why it loved Scandinavia so much, but hated Southwest Europe.
Now, the next group:
Cro Magnon. Black skin, black hair, lived in temperate climates of Europe, Asia and America. Y-DNA haplogroup R is specific to them. Inuit have a lot of their blood, Irish have a bit less, Scandinavians have quite little.
They were very conservative. Blondes' superiority forced them to accept their terms and religion, and their conservativity made them keep that terms. That conservativity also helped Christianity and Islam gain today's popularity, while Blondes' adaptability resulted in crazy movements such as Flying Spaghetti Monster.
And, other groups:
Original Caucassians - so-called Farmers. That area felt decent to migrants from the Arctic. That migration also explains weird things happening in the Semitic cultures. They also influenced East Asia. Though, due to their isolation from their northern cousins, their language changed a lot, and adjusted to more tropical climates. Climate affects the ability to pronounce some phones. That's why Russian is so hard to learn to someone who lives in North Europe, but not that hard to South Europeans.
Today's Slavic, and Celtic languages, have a lot of similarities, that are less present in Germanic languages. That's because Germanic were more influenced by the original Arctic peoples (blonde hair), while Slavic and Celtic were more influenced by the temperate climate peoples (black)
Africa remained black due to its geographical conditions (jungles and sea)
There are traces of trade between Mediterranean Sea and South America. There are written proofs of that occurring in post-collumbic era. There are not enough clues to say whether Atlantis existed or not, because Spanish Inquisition burned a lot.
My way of thinking, is that the "Nordic" race, aka slim guys with round, femine faces, is not originally Nordic, but is an effect of Uralic infuence.
On the other hand, the "Cro Magnon" race, big, muscular-and-fat guys with square faces and red-or-blonde beard, is definitely more Celtic than Nordic.
So, in my opinion, Nordic people don't have their own "race" - they are a balanced mix of Celtic and Northeast European.
Intrigued with this, I researched a bit on ancient migrations in northeast Europe. And, I found out a particularly interesting thing - south of the Baltic Sea, there are 2 major Germanic clusters:
1 - East Baltic, today's Lithuania, Belarus and Poland, where Germanic people originally lived
2 - West Baltic, today's Germany and Denmark, where they moved during the Migration period (Bronze Age)
Now, for the Slavs. According to science, some Mongolian invaders came to East Europe. Do Slavs look Mongolian? - well, not really. Maybe a few, if you visit Czechia. But that's because of Hungarian influence, anyway.
Anyway, when you think of Russia, you don't think about slim, toned, handsome guys, do you?
In East European countries, Slavic languages dominate. And they are definitely harder to learn, than Germanic ones.
So, here is my reasoning: Slavic influence on Europe is deeper than you think. Vikings, instead of sailing East and settling there, just brought slaves and germanized them. In written history, Germanization is definitely more common than Slavicization. But, there's no need to look at history - just look at the XXI century. Compare the amount of Slavs learning Swedish, Norwegian, German, English... to the amount of Brites learning Russian.
My way of thinking is that Germanic culture was way easier for foreigners to adjust, than Slavic. So, Vikings were more likely to either die or return, while Slavs were more likely to blend in.
So, let's be optimistic and say that Sweden is genetically 50% Slavic. That would explain a lot of similarities between Swedes, and Slavs/Lithuanians.
So...
Polish people are approximately 42% Nordic, but only 3% are of "pure Nordic race".
Norwegians are approximately 67% Nordic, but 39% are of "pure Nordic race".
Norway had very little documented influence on East Europe. Poland has a lot of documented mixing with other cultures.
So, here is how I think about that:
The "Nordic race" is made up of the look of a stereotypical Norwegian. But, average Norwegian is a mix of multiple races.
Poland is definitely mixed up a lot, because of its location right in the middle of everything. Half of trade roads in Europe, crossed Poland. From European regions, only Asia Minor beats Poland in that.
Norway is definitely quite isolated, and it had little contact with other regions, except for North Atlantic islands.
Sweden is quite isolated from north Norway, but not from south Norway or Finland or Russia or Ukraine or Poland or Arabia... thanks to the Amber Road.
So, one can easily make up a sort of gradient between the regions:
British Isles -> Norway -> Sweden -> Poland -> Ukraine -> Arabia
Asia Minor, due to its location and history, has a lot more diverse admixture and doesn't count in.
But, Sweden and Norway also had some influence from the Northeast, the Reindeer herder culture.
So, in fact, what we call "Nordic", is just an average Norwegian. A balanced mix of Celtic, Slavic and Arctic peoples.
Sweden, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, part of Finland and part of Poland, are basically East Baltic, and racially referred to as a branch of Nordic.
Ireland is how an average Norwegian would look like, if not the Eastern influence.
Ancient Europe wasn't that complex - it was basically mostly Celtic, but Northeast Europe was Germanic.
Before the Migration of the People, Germans lived in northeast Europe - today's Lithuania, Belarus and Poland. People that live there, have darker hair than today's Slavs.
I'd say that the original Celts had brighter hair (red), than Germans (black) - the blonde hair was brought from the East. That's why blonde hair is so common on the British Isles, but not in Iberia.
And, here is my approximate of how the ancient populations looked like:
Arctic and Paleo Eskimo - white skin, bright hair, mtDNA C haplogroup, originating from around the North Pole. Dorset and Nordic peoples were closely related. Icelandic may be similar to other Germanic languages, but they all have more Cletic influence than Icelandic - even though Iceland was settled by more Celts than Scandinavia. That suggests that Old Norse is a Native American language, Paleo Eskimo, not actually Germanic. Or, the Paleo Eskimo originated from Europe? Who knows... it was all one big continent back then, after all...
One Icelandic explorer claimed to have found Eskimo tribe with blonde hair and blue eyes, that spoke a language similar to Icelandic. Scientists agreed that it was a haox made up by the Icelander out of his pride. But, maybe that was the Dorset culture? Anyway, Icelanders aren't that much blonde, compared to Sweden and many other East European regions. ("Blond Eskimos")
That Arctic Group had weakness for travels, exploration and discovery. Also, they were quite good at adapting to climates with relatively low winds and short-term temperature variation, but didn't care about the humidity, annual temperature variation, or warmth. That made them ideal for some Arctic and tropical climates. Mountains and caves were a great plus for them. Thatīs why it loved Scandinavia so much, but hated Southwest Europe.
Now, the next group:
Cro Magnon. Black skin, black hair, lived in temperate climates of Europe, Asia and America. Y-DNA haplogroup R is specific to them. Inuit have a lot of their blood, Irish have a bit less, Scandinavians have quite little.
They were very conservative. Blondes' superiority forced them to accept their terms and religion, and their conservativity made them keep that terms. That conservativity also helped Christianity and Islam gain today's popularity, while Blondes' adaptability resulted in crazy movements such as Flying Spaghetti Monster.
And, other groups:
Original Caucassians - so-called Farmers. That area felt decent to migrants from the Arctic. That migration also explains weird things happening in the Semitic cultures. They also influenced East Asia. Though, due to their isolation from their northern cousins, their language changed a lot, and adjusted to more tropical climates. Climate affects the ability to pronounce some phones. That's why Russian is so hard to learn to someone who lives in North Europe, but not that hard to South Europeans.
Today's Slavic, and Celtic languages, have a lot of similarities, that are less present in Germanic languages. That's because Germanic were more influenced by the original Arctic peoples (blonde hair), while Slavic and Celtic were more influenced by the temperate climate peoples (black)
Africa remained black due to its geographical conditions (jungles and sea)
There are traces of trade between Mediterranean Sea and South America. There are written proofs of that occurring in post-collumbic era. There are not enough clues to say whether Atlantis existed or not, because Spanish Inquisition burned a lot.