https://i.ibb.co/0XfsH76/nordictoeastern.png
https://i.ibb.co/PYgrrcF/nordictoeastern2.png
Considering that some people will "object" sooner or later; those guys were actually measured in a real field study.
https://i.ibb.co/0XfsH76/nordictoeastern.png
https://i.ibb.co/PYgrrcF/nordictoeastern2.png
Considering that some people will "object" sooner or later; those guys were actually measured in a real field study.
Be honest, first is too wide / short faced for "pure" Nordic. His face is nearly round.
On the other hand third is Faelid. Nothing Osteuropid in him.
Have you not read what I have written? Those guys were measured in a field study - and you do know that photographs are a 2D abstraction of a 3D entity, thus will always be somewhat "distorted".Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukasz
Nothing Faelid about the other guy, BWT.
Yep but German anthro school has different view of what is Nordic. Even brachycephalic with Nordic facial features was considered as such.
This is why Eickstedt considered most of Silesia as Nordic (except Sudeten) even if it was predominantly brachy region (I speak about pre-war Germans of course).
They concentrated on measurement- mainly on Halstatt findings, yet disregarded the Corded Nordic differences. Metrically the first guy is perfect Halstatt, but still some features are off/ has Osteuropid tendencies. While 3rd one is feauture wise more Nordo-Cm than Osteuropid
With the exception of third guy, who looks German (Faelid mainly), all others are typical Poles: a mix of native (pre-Slavic) and Slavic types.
No different view about Nordics, in Eickstedt's racial formula Nordic is supposed to be long-headed, you can still turn out to be very Nordic, if not, but it is still calculated into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukasz