This is the 1931 Saller scale Tamagnini used for his adult survey:Quote:
Originally Posted by Supercomputer
https://i.ibb.co/XxRJDdQ/C54-B74-A7-...D53-F200-D.png
Mixed M series clearly includes evenly mixed or hazel eyes as well as lighter mixed.
This is the 1931 Saller scale Tamagnini used for his adult survey:Quote:
Originally Posted by Supercomputer
https://i.ibb.co/XxRJDdQ/C54-B74-A7-...D53-F200-D.png
Mixed M series clearly includes evenly mixed or hazel eyes as well as lighter mixed.
I can list you several of examples where scales used in a given study don't match the actual numbers. The staff that does these measurements with hundreds of people don't spend particularly high amount of time pondering which eye on the scale matches those measured. It just isn't practical and they aren't interested in the subject. They just make quick calls which often leads to inaccuracies. Measuring eye colour even when using scales isn't as objective and scientific as measuring height or weight. It's a subjective call that results in lots of errors particularly in the mixed category.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkaner
I doubt determining the percentage of blue & light greyish eyes (#12-16 on Martin scale or #9-12 on Bunak scale) which count as pure light is particularity difficult. Various anthropological sources using different methodology and in varying places were able to obtain more or less the same percentage of pure light eyes among Ashkenazi Jews (~20%). This includes Karl Pearson for Alien Jewish Boys (Martin scale), James Fowler Tocher for Russian Jewish schoochildren in Glasgow, Maurice Fishberg for New York Jews, Paweł Sikora for interwar Polish-Jewish emigrants to Palestine (Martin scale). I could add more to this but the point is quite clear. When anthropologists are looking for pure light eyes they generally get the proportion of real pure light eyes without issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supercomputer
Distinguishing mixed and pure dark eyes can be more complicated in part because they are both pigmented just to varying degrees. There is much more potential overlap between Europe and MENAs or South/Central Asians with pure brown or dark eyes than with pure light eyes. German Dr. Albert Herrlich found about 5% pure light on Martin scale (originally 7.5% 1a - 6 on Martin-Schultz scale) of 275 Nuristanis from Kafiristan (there was a major 1935 German Hindu Kush expedition). This is higher than Sardinians but not most Southern European groups and Kafirstan is relatively fair compared to most other groups in MENA & South/Central Asia. With pure brown eyes there is a large degree of overlap with Southern Europeans as only 66% pure brown eyes on Martin scale were obtained (originally 58.3% 12-16 on Martin-Schultz scale). Coon writes that 83% of Lebanese are pure brown eyed which is only slightly higher than what Tamagnini found for Portuguese adults assuming the Saller scale was properly adhered to. If greenish and mixed eyes were totally excluded from a map of light eyes and only pure light was counted the gap between Europeans and non-Europeans might be more clear.
With that understood I am curious about the examples you are referring to.
Lie! Don't make Coon say what he did not say. The Portuguese are lighter-pigmented as a whole than the Syrian and Lebanese populations. They also lack the pure black hair one may find in that region ( Mid-East ).Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkaner
It was the Lebanese and Syrians are not darker:Quote:
Originally Posted by Septentrion
I have not compared other aspects of pigmentation to Portuguese besides pure brown eyes.Quote:
“ Most of the Lebanese have brunet-white unexposed skin color, although some 20 per cent have pinkish-white skin, as light as that of most northern Europeans. About 50 per cent have black hair, a higher incidence than was found among Turks, while most of the rest have dark brown. Eighty-three per cent have pure brown eyes, with dark brown in the majority; the principal mixed color scheme is green-brown. Some 5 per cent have eyes which are either pure or nearly pure blue. The hair is usually wavy, and often fine in texture; it is often heavy on the beard and body, while the eyebrows are frequently thick, and in 77 per cent, concurrent.”
And what was the scale used for the Lebanese? Does the 83% figure include P6, P7 and P8 Saller scale? Because those eyes don't seem "pure brown" to me, going by the image. Pure brown seems to end in P5.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkaner
P1-P5 would correspond to homogenous brown while P6-P8 would include amber or honey colored which are not homogeneous but still a purely dark mixture. Similar to #5-6 of Martin scale or #9-11 of Martin-Schultz scale.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damiăo de Góis
Tamagnini reflects this in his definition here:
Quote:
„ Dark eyes, corresponding to the terms P1-P8, in which the stroma of the iris appears evenly employing more or less dark brownish pigment, to which may be superimposed a lighter, brownish pigment with varying distribution. They comprise the so-called black and brown eyes of different shades and aspects.“
7.5% pure light and 34% mixed eyes including green, hence around 58% pure brown among Nuristanis. I've done multiple self studies on Afghans as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by Milkaner
Ok, the question still stands if the Lebanese number is measuring the same thing. Any information on the scale used?Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkaner
I read that with the conversion to Martin scale in intention to compare to another study pure light eyes from that study was around 5%, excluding cases of predominately light iris with pigmented spots. Likewise including light brown, hazel, honey-colored, and amber with other pure brown dark eyes rose to 66%. That leaves 29% with grey/green/blue combined with partial pigmentation which can be more easily compared.Quote:
Originally Posted by Avicenna