Where Do You Begin?

[Oresai]

I never studied classification. The first thought I gave to it, to be honest, was on another forum, which also had areas dedicated to it and a wealth of information that was to someone like me, with no knowledge at all, a little frightening...
And so because of that forum and this one, I now find myself looking at random people on tv and trying to guess their ethnic origin or race, without realising I`m doing it! :eek: :D
Of course, the trouble is, I know absolutely nothing about such things.
Is there an idiots guide? Or something that makes easy reading, to ease my way into learning about it? Maybe something which gives plain and basic pointers to look for in faces or body types?
Much of the information I`ve looked at tends to assume the reader has had a grounding in such a subject, but I haven`t.
Any advice greatly appreciated. :)

[Fortis in Arduis]

Although the geographical distribution of the sub-races do correlate with the geographical distribution of DNA haplotypes, physical classification and taxonomy are a pseudo-science.

I am not an expert myself but Carleton Coon's 'Race of Europe' is the definitive work, according to many. It costs about £50 to buy new. Sigurd has a copy. It makes interesting reading, if you like the subject matter, and there is a good section on Keltic-Nordics.

[Oresai]

Thanks, I`ve read about Coon before, I think some of his work is available online? I really would like to learn more about this, it`s fascinating to be able to look at someone and tell their ancestry.
"We are the sum of our ancestors...their lives have gone into making us who we are"
:)

[Goswinus]

Although the geographical distribution of the sub-races do correlate with the geographical distribution of DNA haplotypes, physical classification and taxonomy are a pseudo-science.

I am not an expert myself but Carleton Coon's 'Race of Europe' is the definitive work, according to many. It costs about £50 to buy new. Sigurd has a copy. It makes interesting reading, if you like the subject matter, and there is a good section on Keltic-Nordics.

It's not a pseudo-science, it works on another level and is to some degree interconnected with DNA haplotypes. It's not because quantumphysics warped our perception of how reality is build and given substance, than the laws of Newton are invalidated and hence redundant.

[Fortis in Arduis]

It's not a pseudo-science, it works on another level and is to some degree interconnected with DNA haplotypes. It's not because quantumphysics warped our perception of how reality is build and given substance, that the laws of Newton are invalidated and hence redundant.

I work with the three doshas, vata, pitta and kapha, which derive from the five elements, so I do appreciate what you are saying, but I also suspect that a more updated system of racial taxonomy is in the pipeline and I have to tell you that my classification of 'sub-nordic' means very little to me, because it says very little about my physiology.

In the same way that the Linnean system of taxonomy is being phased out in favour of the evolutionary tree, so shall physical anthropology be replaced by something not dissimilar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_tree

In the future, those who win the game will be the players who can match their DNA to each other and evolve their culture onward, not those who just look similar, or just have a similar culture.

Such peoples will resort to abstraction to protect their flimsy ethnicities, but nature will always be unkind, so it is better to avert the danger which has not yet come.

[Goswinus]

There is here around a thread where I went to discuss the untenable use of the term "Sub-Nordid" given that it had in various classifications and its proper origins therein; it was a slightly revised piece of irrelevant writing which originally was written for Skadi Forum in 2006 or 2007.
It doesn't matter as nearly no one actually cared back then to go through it and use it.

Since 2003 I have tried to correct information on racial anthropology and bring the many, sometimes conflicting pieces of this huge jigsaw puzzle into a more or less coherent, harmonious and easy accessible tableau, using archaeology and paleaoanthropology to back up the theories proposed in my writings. But hey, who gives a damn when I wrote about Azilian culture, pot shards and huts, moats and kitchenalia of the Seine-Oise-Marne and Funnel Beaker culture, the difference between East Mediterrenean and Transdanubian religious symbolism and the problem of acculturation and so forth, even though it might have helped to explain where when who came from and how skull type this and mandible that was introduced in a given corner of Europe.

And the countless PDF's and commentaries scattered over forum pages about species, race and evolution, re-emerging or not up from the Neolithic, where largely unread too, except maybe for the abstract.

Anyway, I, and a couple of friends of mine, were working on this evolutionary anthropology of races before taxonomy in forums degenerated into a mixture of a running joke, a raffle and a vanity context...

End of rant.

[Vulpix]

Oresai, have a look at SNPA (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/../snpa/) :). You will also find Coon's The Races of Europe (http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/index2.htm) book available there ;).

[Oresai]

Many thanks, I will. :)

[TiBi]

Hi guys,
do you have suggestions for me on what to read to help me know more about Taxonomy?
I am reading The Races Of Europe, I don't necessarily agree with the assumptions it moves from but I find it interesting nonetheless.
Advice?

Thank you very much in advance.

[Osprey]

View Agrippa's posts in Skadi and Theapricity.
That should be enough, putting more than a particular amount of time is wastage, because these 'taxonomies' are just for the sake of the viewer's hobby and should not be considered as passionate pursuit.
Just a general advice, do what you will!

[TiBi]

Thank you, but would like to understand if there are more takes than only Coon's or similar kinds of "sciences".
My approach is historic and of human geography, also metaphisics.
Still would like to know more of the "empiric" side.

Will check Agrippa's posts!

[Osprey]

Well there was Gunther....
SNPA is a good place to check on the Northern Specimens.
Not sure what you're trying to ask...
Do you want to know if there is another way of classifying individuals?
If so, then i don't think there is.
All classifications are relative to each other. Think of it like this:
a dark haired person in Sweden will be known as a Dark Blonde person in Austria and as Golden Haired in Greece.
Its the same for classifications...
What an American might classify as East-Baltid, a Finn might classify as Faelid and Swiss, as Borreby.
All depending on perspectives.
Hope this helps....

[GeistFaust]

I say don't trust many of these old timers, although they were trailblazers in terms of laying the groundworks to understand the concept of sub-types in a more detailed fashion. Coon likes to generalize things too much, and I think that although he does a good job at identifying and positioning types into a geographical region, he does a poor job at differentiating.


The reason for this is because he puts multiple sub-types into a larger category instead of differentiating them in a much more detailed manner. Lundmann and Eickstedt are a good read, but the terminology might leave you hanging if you compare it with the standard terminology we deal with in terms of sub-types.


Hans Gunther is one of great anthropologists that I have read, but I think some people can find him to Romanticize and Mythologize things too much. His ties with the Nazis also get him branded a bit as a negative figure, but he has many good things to say. Von Eickstedt has a wide range of anthropological knowledge, and he took many different trips throughout the world, which gave him first hand accounts of his anthropological subjects.


I would read people like Agrippa though who have constructed a very systematic methodology and format for anthropological investigations. I would advise you to research what he has to say, and don't forget people will tell you that you are not truly classifying people in a scientific manner on here. Don't listen to them, because using measuring devices to figure things out is an overrated method in my opinion.

[TiBi]

To Osprey:

I see your point, I am asking if there are other books or texts I can read, other branches of this science, other approaches or even just other authors of the same approach etc etc
I know almost nothing, so anything can be useful, thank you again.

[GeistFaust]

Well there was Gunther....
SNPA is a good place to check on the Northern Specimens.
Not sure what you're trying to ask...
Do you want to know if there is another way of classifying individuals?
If so, then i don't think there is.
All classifications are relative to each other. Think of it like this:
a dark haired person in Sweden will be known as a Dark Blonde person in Austria and as Golden Haired in Greece.
Its the same for classifications...
What an American might classify as East-Baltid, a Finn might classify as Faelid and Swiss, as Borreby.
All depending on perspectives.
Hope this helps....



A lot of the time it has to do with interpretations and subjective interpretations made and constructed around general categories and apriori types in anthropology.

That said the material we are dealing with is uniform enough that we can make a fairly accurate approximation with only a marginal errror included in the process.

I think that basically its our task to affirm through synthetic measures and through a systematic methodology to understand and pinpoint the details the compose these general categories.

[TiBi]

I say don't trust many of these old timers, although they were trailblazers in terms of laying the groundworks to understand the concept of sub-types in a more detailed fashion. Coon likes to generalize things too much, and I think that although he does a good job at identifying and positioning types into a geographical region, he does a poor job at differentiating.


The reason for this is because he puts multiple sub-types into a larger category instead of differentiating them in a much more detailed manner. Lundmann and Eickstedt are a good read, but the terminology might leave you hanging if you compare it with the standard terminology we deal with in terms of sub-types.


Hans Gunther is one of great anthropologists that I have read, but I think some people can find him to Romanticize and Mythologize things too much. His ties with the Nazis also get him branded a bit as a negative figure, but he has many good things to say. Von Eickstedt has a wide range of anthropological knowledge, and he took many different trips throughout the world, which gave him first hand accounts of his anthropological subjects.


I would read people like Agrippa though who have constructed a very systematic methodology and format for anthropological investigations. I would advise you to research what he has to say, and don't forget people will tell you that you are not truly classifying people in a scientific manner on here. Don't listen to them, because using measuring devices to figure things out is an overrated method in my opinion.

Thank you Geist, will check those authors tomorrow.
I come from a certain basis and I am trying to integrate.
Hope I make sense lol

[GeistFaust]

To Osprey:

I see your point, I am asking if there are other books or texts I can read, other branches of this science, other approaches or even just other authors of the same approach etc etc
I know almost nothing, so anything can be useful, thank you again.



Ethnology and the Race History of Mankind is a good book written by Von Eickstedt, and I would advise it as a must read to understanding the important racial sub-types.

Agrippa's entire system is based on Von Eickstedt's, but he has elaborated a bit more on it with a much more extensive and detailed format.


The Racial Elements of European history is a good book by Hans F.K. Gunther, and he elaborates over not just the physical traits of the European subtypes, but their psychological mode of distilling and reacting to their environment.

[TiBi]

Thanks very much!

Do you guys (generally) agree with an "evolutionary" point of view?

[Osprey]

Geist Faust is more of an expert than I am, so........

[TiBi]

Geist Faust is more of an expert than I am, so........

I really can use any suggestion and point of view, thank you for taking my requests into consideration :)

[GeistFaust]

Thanks very much!

Do you guys (generally) agree with an "evolutionary" point of view?



Yes, an evolutionary approach is necessary to understand all this scientific information, and all else is a vagary and not worth incorporating within the scientific framework.

If you don't work within an evolutionary framework you will not be able to track and understand the gradual processes, which have been occuring and are occuring within an anthropological framework.

Its important to understand these general categories and apriori sub-types are not just fixed states, but as dynamically evolving constantly, whether it be due to changes in their environment or culture + interaction and hybridization of types.

[Osprey]

Just be sure to read the 'On Progressive types', a thread started by Agrippa.
It will be quite an earful and is a very interesting read.

[TiBi]

To Geist:
Sí, I understand.
I think my question should have been: is it the general consensus on these fora that:

1) Darwin was right (at large, anyway)
2) Evolution is good

To Osprey:
Will search for the thread!

Thanks again guys/gentlemen

[GeistFaust]

To Geist:
Sí, I understand.
I think my question should have been: is it the general consensus on these fora that:

1) Darwin was right (at large, anyway)
2) Evolution is good

To Osprey:
Will search for the thread!

Thanks again guys/gentlemen



Darwin has some notable flaws, but future people have been able to back Darwin up. I think evolution is just a natural process of nature and the environment, and its not a matter of it being or good.


Its what has occured over time as a mechanism that has operated as a self-regulator between the way the environment and climate causes things to adapt for the sake of survival.

I think anyone who wants to challenge Darwin's main thesis about natural selection is coming from a backwards mentality. Evolution is something which should be taught, because its scientific and practical, and not psuedo-scientific like other types of study.

[TiBi]

Thank you.
Coming from a similar idea I now sail in completely opposite waters.
Still I do think I can learn, although I will "naturally" filter what I find, for me, untrue.

Hope I made sense, late at night and not mother tongue.
Grazie Mille for your time!

More inputs welcome, anyone.

Sogni d'oro.

[TiBi]

Bumpy in case anyone has suggestions for this noobie.

[CelticViking]

Another website:

http://www.amorsite.sitesled.com/index_files/Mediterraneans.htm

[TiBi]

Thank you CV and thank you mysterious mod for appropriate title and tags :)

[CelticViking]

Thank you CV and thank you mysterious mod for appropriate title and tags :)

I did most the tags and asked for it to be merged with an older thread.
You're welcome though :)

[Amapola]

Excuse my sarcasm, but you normally begin with lots of curiosity and eagerness, and you finish with lots of indifference and boredom. ;) It happens with irrelevant stuff.

[TiBi]

Excuse my sarcasm, but you normally begin with lots of curiosity and eagerness, and you finish with lots of indifference and boredom. ;) It happens with irrelevant stuff.
I understand your point but I think this stuff can be a tool, even if you don't agree with the complete "implant of theories" behind it.
I don't find my search irrelevant, I always find I have to little time actually lol

[TiBi]

I did most the tags and asked for it to be merged with an older thread.
You're welcome though :)


Thank you even more so :)

[Amapola]

I understand your point but I think this stuff can be a tool, even if you don't agree with the complete "implant of theories" behind it.
I don't find my search irrelevant, I always find I have to little time actually lol

No I don't agree with the implant and I don't see the point but I won't deny it can be interesting and entertaining, especially when you are starting to learn about it. Been there too and even furthern;)

I suppose people would suggest you read Coon for this anthropological beginning? When I asked the same question I was always directed to old Coon. He has many haters though, and it's a bit outdated.

[CelticViking]

Links

Nordish Gallery
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/rg-main.htm

http://www.amorsite.sitesled.com

http://www.amorsite.sitesled.com/index_files/Mediterraneans.htm

Examples of European types
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/tags.php?tag=examples

(See tags for more examples)

Borreby
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37801

Brunn
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51757

Kelto-Brunn
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51758

Keltic Nordid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51759

Kelto-Saxon
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51760

Anglo Saxon
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51769

Faelid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51763

Hallstatt Nordid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51744

East Nordid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51748

Tronder
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51755

Bell Beaker
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51761

Noric/Norid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51770

Sub-Nordid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51662

Paleo-Atlantid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30650&page=3

Tydal
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17359

Northern Atlantid/Atlanto-Nordid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51745

Atlanto-Mediterranid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51756

Mediterranid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51754

Berid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51753

Pontid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19825&page=8

Baskid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51750

East-Baltid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51749

Baltid

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51774

Alpine/Alpinoid /Alpinid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51665

Dinaric/Dinarid
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51776

Female Exemplars
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1466

Male Exemplars
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51743

[MIRRORD]

What are Darwins flaws that you mention?

[fenix978]

I hope this blog is worth visiting. :cool:

http://anthroeurope.blogspot.com/ (http://anthroeurope.blogspot.com/)