Classify these Ancient Greek-style Nordids (no complaints about Ancient Greeks being Med.)

[Token]

Here I'm in complete disagreement, what about Asian and African Alpinoids? Why are Alpines rarer in NW Europe, which has higher Steppe ancestry? You still havent explained why there are so many clear phenotypical continuums that match known cultures.

For example, and also the genetic studies disagree with your BB-Atlantid claim, but Atlantids are very clearly related to Megalithic culture.

You are probably referring to craniometric continuum and yes, you are correct in this matter, but you need to look at the entire picture and not just a portion of it. To give you a example of how relying in number and measurements alone can be misleading, even Coon himself stated that a Corded crania would fit perfectly among some East African and Iranian plateau Neolithic crania without breaking the regional craniometric continuum. Also, a Atlanto-Mediterranid crania would fit equally well in a Hallstatt site. A lot of things stated by Physical Anthropologists in the past were assumptions, this is why there were so much divergence of ideas, and now that we have genetics, we can confirm which theories were correct, which were incorrect, and obviously, make new theroies but, now, with much more precision.

Alpinid is a pan-Western European type and is not rare in Northwestern Europe at all. Places like Germany and Netherlands, that have very high percentages of Steppe-related ancestry, is full of Alpinoids but there, robust Nordalpinoid forms are more common. Asiatic Alpinid do share some features with Euro-Alpinoids, but just superficial ones like neotenization and pykno-brachymorphic tendencies. The facial traits are different and the genetic profile associated with both types is particularly very distinct, i don't believe that there's a philogenetic relation between them, probably just a parallel evolution. Genetics are far from contradicting my hypothesis: almost the entire megalithic population of the British Isles was replaced by Bell-Beakers, according to recent genetic studies done by Olalde, and it's where the Atlantid type actually peaks.

Also, have you considered the following - maybe some phenotypes can be dominant. Well not maybe, plenty are - blue eyes for example. This would allow a resurgence of pre-IE phenotypes in Europe providing theyre dominant, which they generally are.

This is a interesting point but you missed a important and basic anthropologic concept: the phenotype of a individual always tends to correspond with his genotype, everything else is a exception. As Southern France is mainly Alpinid and, considering your view that Alpinid is a reduced Paleo-Mesolithic survivor, do you really believe that 5% of ther total genetic make-up is dominant over two thirds of IE-like ancestry? Also, there are no recessive or dominant types, there are certain superficial traits, like complexion, that are, but not morphologic ones.

[Laberia]

Specify what period you are talking about.



At first many nations were part of the Empire, which at its heart was Greek and a continuation of the Empire of Alexander. But gradually it became the medieval state of Greece. If the Eastern Roman Empire was truly as multiethnic or multicultural as you state, then Symeon should have become emperor.

The Byzantine Empire was not a multicultural civilization in fact it was a Greek empire with Greco-Roman institutions (including the ethno-religious Greek institution known as the Greek Orthodox Church).

Your only interest in your life is spamming in Apricity. We can't continue again and again to waste our time with your nationalistic crap. Here you have the answer:
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...nd#post4753808

[Hamlet]

You are probably referring to craniometric continuum and yes, you are correct in this matter, but you need to look at the entire picture and not just a portion of it. To give you a example of how relying in number and measurements alone can be misleading, even Coon himself stated that a Corded crania would fit perfectly among some East African and Iranian plateau Neolithic crania without breaking the regional craniometric continuum. Also, a Atlanto-Mediterranid crania would fit equally well in a Hallstatt site. A lot of things stated by Physical Anthropologists in the past were assumptions, this is why there were so much divergence of ideas, and now that we have genetics, we can confirm which theories were correct, which were incorrect, and obviously, make new theroies but, now, with much more precision.

Alpinid is a pan-Western European type and is not rare in Northwestern Europe at all. Places like Germany and Netherlands, that have very high percentages of Steppe-related ancestry, is full of Alpinoids but there, robust Nordalpinoid forms are more common. Asiatic Alpinid do share some features with Euro-Alpinoids, but just superficial ones like neotenization and pykno-brachymorphic tendencies. The facial traits are different and the genetic profile associated with both types is particularly very distinct, i don't believe that there's a philogenetic relation between them, probably just a parallel evolution. Genetics are far from contradicting my hypothesis: almost the entire megalithic population of the British Isles was replaced by Bell-Beakers, according to recent genetic studies done by Olalde, and it's where the Atlantid type actually peaks.


This is a interesting point but you missed a important and basic anthropologic concept: the phenotype of a individual always tends to correspond with his genotype, everything else is a exception. As Southern France is mainly Alpinid and, considering your view that Alpinid is a reduced Paleo-Mesolithic survivor, do you really believe that 5% of ther total genetic make-up is dominant over two thirds of IE-like ancestry? Also, there are no recessive or dominant types, there are certain superficial traits, like complexion, that are, but not morphologic ones.

I'm not just referring to craniometric continuums but also that of phenotypes - Atlantids sort of looking like David Tennant, and these Tennants roughly exist on the Atlantic fringe of Europe etc.

The Olalde study actually said the population was originally completely replaced, but then the OG Megalithic population started to grow back (so to speak). Bell Beakers were Dinarids, yet besides their obvious influence on Keltid types, there are very very few Dinarids in the UK.

Also, with the Alpine point.

Say you have a population that is originally 50% blue eyed "Corded" and 50% brown eyed "Shitskin". Eventually, that population will tend toward being entirely brown eyed. Yet the genetic makeup will still be 50% Corded, 50% Shitskin.

[Token]

I'm not just referring to craniometric continuums but also that of phenotypes - Atlantids sort of looking like David Tennant, and these Tennants roughly exist on the Atlantic fringe of Europe etc.

The Olalde study actually said the population was originally completely replaced, but then the OG Megalithic population started to grow back (so to speak). Bell Beakers were Dinarids, yet besides their obvious influence on Keltid types, there are very very few Dinarids in the UK.

There was a re-emergence of pre-Indo-European ancestry in Europe but mostly in the North Sea coast, look at the Haak et al Yamnaya percentages for modern Europeans: Scottish and Irish people remained basically the same since the Bronze Age, with Yamnaya-like ancestry almost as high as early Bell Beaker remains from Central Europe. All the Atlantic façade received Proto-Celtic speaking Bell Beakers, from Iberia up to the British Isles. Iberia was more populated at this time but modern Northern Spaniards can trace more than 50% of their ancestry back to these invaders. Your second statement sounds just nonsensical, i'm talking about morphologic traits, not superficial complexion.