XenophobicPrussian
05-24-2020, 08:09 PM
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/HalfdanBryn.jpg
https://photos.geni.com/p13/53/3b/ed/57/53444847c3634881/skjermbilde_2018-03-01_kl_original.jpg
https://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/2384/img-1.jpg
Looks Alpinized to me. I'd say Sub-Nordid. I notice a lot of old anthropologists really had a thing against Alpinids, and it being skull shape based rather than pigmentation. I don't agree or disagree btw with this, I have no idea, no one really can say they do. I just find it fascinating, but can't say I have noticed any correlates with skull shape within the same ethnicity(overall phenotype maybe to a certain extent, but not just "short faced vs long faced"). Don't find it overtly silly either, and if you think any anthropologist got into anthropology without caring about the psychological correlates, yeah, that's not going to be a thing.
On a random note, https://www.openbookpublishers.com/reader/123#page/1/mode/2up is a good read. Really shows how silly some of this stuff was, and it isn't written from a straight up race denying, SJW point of view. It's pretty much entirely a historical account and pretty neutral.
(these quotes are not from Halfdan btw, just discussing the book now)
"Arbo compared the distribution of short skulls and long skulls with the relative number of serviceable recruits and with assumed local differences in behaviour and lifestyle. On the basis of this comparison, he argued that racial difference in the Norwegian population could explain regional variations in health, military capability, personality/character, intelligence and behaviour. Whereas people from the typically brachycephalic populations along the coast stood out as weak, nervous, worried, petty and narrow-minded, he argued the overwhelmingly dolichocephalic rural inhabitants of the inland were brave, handsome, resilient, bold and open-minded."
"In his 1899 book Norwegian National Psychology, he demonstrated that the geographical distribution of short and long skulls coincided with the distribution of votes in the parliamentary elections, and claimed that this could be explained by the double racial origin of the nation (see. Fig. 6). Individuals from the predominantly Anaryan rural population on the west coast were distrustful, bigoted, backward-looking and politically conservative, and were therefore inclined to vote for the Høyre Party, while the predominantly Aryan population in the south eastern inland were more open-minded, courageous and intelligent, and thus they represented the progressive forces of society and would most likely vote for the Venstre Party." (I like this anthropologist's reason for disliking Alpinids though :) )
"Ammon was particularly thrilled by Hansen’s analysis of the psychological differences between the two races, contrasting the aristocratic, freedom-loving attitude of the long skulls with the excessive ideas of equality held by the short skulls, who lacked any sense of freedom. Hansen’s work demonstrated, according to Ammon, that the slave-like mentality of the short skulls and the aristocratic mentality of the long skulls were not the result of the centuries in which the Anaryans had been slaves to the Aryans; instead, the master/slave relationship had emerged naturally from the ancient inborn psychological differences between the two races."
"A linchpin of Hansen’s account was the notion of the two races within the Norwegian people. However, Hansen did not base this view upon his own empirical research; instead, he leaned strongly on the work of Arbo and others. This meant that Hansen ran into trouble when Arbo discovered that blondness tended to coincide with brachycephaly in southeast Norway and began arguing for the existence of a third race, one that was blond and short-skulled." :laugh:
https://photos.geni.com/p13/53/3b/ed/57/53444847c3634881/skjermbilde_2018-03-01_kl_original.jpg
https://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/2384/img-1.jpg
Looks Alpinized to me. I'd say Sub-Nordid. I notice a lot of old anthropologists really had a thing against Alpinids, and it being skull shape based rather than pigmentation. I don't agree or disagree btw with this, I have no idea, no one really can say they do. I just find it fascinating, but can't say I have noticed any correlates with skull shape within the same ethnicity(overall phenotype maybe to a certain extent, but not just "short faced vs long faced"). Don't find it overtly silly either, and if you think any anthropologist got into anthropology without caring about the psychological correlates, yeah, that's not going to be a thing.
On a random note, https://www.openbookpublishers.com/reader/123#page/1/mode/2up is a good read. Really shows how silly some of this stuff was, and it isn't written from a straight up race denying, SJW point of view. It's pretty much entirely a historical account and pretty neutral.
(these quotes are not from Halfdan btw, just discussing the book now)
"Arbo compared the distribution of short skulls and long skulls with the relative number of serviceable recruits and with assumed local differences in behaviour and lifestyle. On the basis of this comparison, he argued that racial difference in the Norwegian population could explain regional variations in health, military capability, personality/character, intelligence and behaviour. Whereas people from the typically brachycephalic populations along the coast stood out as weak, nervous, worried, petty and narrow-minded, he argued the overwhelmingly dolichocephalic rural inhabitants of the inland were brave, handsome, resilient, bold and open-minded."
"In his 1899 book Norwegian National Psychology, he demonstrated that the geographical distribution of short and long skulls coincided with the distribution of votes in the parliamentary elections, and claimed that this could be explained by the double racial origin of the nation (see. Fig. 6). Individuals from the predominantly Anaryan rural population on the west coast were distrustful, bigoted, backward-looking and politically conservative, and were therefore inclined to vote for the Høyre Party, while the predominantly Aryan population in the south eastern inland were more open-minded, courageous and intelligent, and thus they represented the progressive forces of society and would most likely vote for the Venstre Party." (I like this anthropologist's reason for disliking Alpinids though :) )
"Ammon was particularly thrilled by Hansen’s analysis of the psychological differences between the two races, contrasting the aristocratic, freedom-loving attitude of the long skulls with the excessive ideas of equality held by the short skulls, who lacked any sense of freedom. Hansen’s work demonstrated, according to Ammon, that the slave-like mentality of the short skulls and the aristocratic mentality of the long skulls were not the result of the centuries in which the Anaryans had been slaves to the Aryans; instead, the master/slave relationship had emerged naturally from the ancient inborn psychological differences between the two races."
"A linchpin of Hansen’s account was the notion of the two races within the Norwegian people. However, Hansen did not base this view upon his own empirical research; instead, he leaned strongly on the work of Arbo and others. This meant that Hansen ran into trouble when Arbo discovered that blondness tended to coincide with brachycephaly in southeast Norway and began arguing for the existence of a third race, one that was blond and short-skulled." :laugh: