Martin scale tables

[Melkiirs]

Sorry for you. In terms of pure light eyes, Ireland competes successfully with the blondest regions of Scandinavia! What are you up to now? Are you trying to say that Insular Celts aren't light-eyed? I saw your bias from afar. The Scandinavians, the Northern Dutch and the Northwestern Germans are not equally light-eyed to begin with. Despite the fact that they are Germanic cousins. The Irish compete with the blondest regions of Scandinavia, these are the bluest-eyed regions of Scandinavia. True blue eyes are most common amongst Insular Celts, pure brown eyes were at their lowest amongst them as well.

No pervasive bias here. Just trying to make sense of data. It’s called critical thinking.

Here is Supercomputer’s map which shows that the most typical Germanics (North Dutch, Northwest Germans, Scandinavians, Frisians) are quite close for light eyes:


Dark hazel eyes Martin #5-6 is likely not so uncommon among Irish. I know of a study of genetic traits among 313 Irish Americans from Boston area by Michael Saint-Paul and Michael P. Walsh that found some significant differences from the overall results of Hooton and Dupertuis with Irish adult males. For example brown eyes were found much more common among the Irish-Americans. Saint-Paul and Walsh found 17.25% Martin #1-6 against the 0.5% pure brown found in Ireland. The 3.83% regular light brown eyes Martin #4 found among the Irish-American sample is likely comparable with Hooton & Dupertuis’ figure for pure brown. The authors try to account for this significant discrepancy by noting Western Ireland the predominant area of descent as being relativity darker eyed.

This is the study, although I have only searched it on Google Books snippet view becuase of the paywall:
https://karger.com/books/book/3098/c...rectedFrom=PDF

Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?newbk...volume&q=irish


Here is Gray & Tocher’s data on Irish schoolchildren in Glasgow (darker hazel shades were counted as dark):


Regarding Irish matching the blondest regions of Scandinavia, this is the Coon quote I think you are referring to:

“ the proportion of pure light eyes, Ireland competes successfully with the blondest regions of Scandinavia. Over 46 per cent of the total group has pure light eyes, and of these all but 4 per cent are blue. Very light-mixed eyes (equivalent to Martin #13-14) account for another 30 per cent, while less than one-half of one per cent have pure brown. There is probably no population of equal size in the world which is lighter eyed, and blue eyed, than the Irish. The almost total absence of gray eyes corresponds to the equal paucity of ash-blond hair.”

Hooton & Dupertuis never used scales so exact equivalencies cannot accurately be made. Thus Coon was making a sort of educated guess. By exercising a little cleverness we still have a good idea of how Irish and Norwegians really compare in eye color. Gray & Tocher found 19.8% pure light eyes among roughly 500 Jewish schoolchildren attending school around the Gorbals neighborhood in Glasgow. Karl Pearson found 19.7% Martin #12-16 among 516 alien Jewish boys and he can be particularly trusted to be thorough. Light eyes for Gray & Tocher thus approximately meant Martin #12-16. Bryn found about 72.4% Martin #12-16 among his largest survey of Norwegian recruits.

It is quite clear that when compared with Northern Germanics Irish stand out mainly in terms of pure blue eyes Martin #15-16 rather than light eyes overall. Irish people are not lighter eyed overall than Norwegians or Scandinavians at large. They stand out as distinctly light eyed in a general European context but not in a strictly Northern European context.

[Valenman]

No pervasive bias here. Just trying to make sense of data. It’s called critical thinking.

Here is Supercomputer’s map which shows that the most typical Germanics (North Dutch, Northwest Germans, Scandinavians, Frisians) are quite close for light eyes:


Dark hazel eyes Martin #5-6 is likely not so uncommon among Irish. I know of a study of genetic traits among 313 Irish Americans from Boston area by Michael Saint-Paul and Michael P. Walsh that found some significant differences from the overall results of Hooton and Dupertuis with Irish adult males. For example brown eyes were found much more common among the Irish-Americans. Saint-Paul and Walsh found 17.25% Martin #1-6 against the 0.5% pure brown found in Ireland. The 3.83% regular light brown eyes Martin #4 found among the Irish-American sample is likely comparable with Hooton & Dupertuis’ figure for pure brown. The authors try to account for this significant discrepancy by noting Western Ireland the predominant area of descent as being relativity darker eyed.

This is the study, although I have only searched it on Google Books snippet view becuase of the paywall:
https://karger.com/books/book/3098/c...rectedFrom=PDF

Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?newbk...volume&q=irish


Here is Gray & Tocher’s data on Irish schoolchildren in Glasgow (darker hazel shades were counted as dark):


Regarding Irish matching the blondest regions of Scandinavia, this is the Coon quote I think you are referring to:


Hooton & Dupertuis never used scales so exact equivalencies cannot accurately be made. Thus Coon was making a sort of educated guess. By exercising a little cleverness we still have a good idea of how Irish and Norwegians really compare in eye color. Gray & Tocher found 19.8% pure light eyes among roughly 500 Jewish schoolchildren attending school around the Gorbals neighborhood in Glasgow. Karl Pearson found 19.7% Martin #12-16 among 516 alien Jewish boys and he can be particularly trusted to be thorough. Light eyes for Gray & Tocher thus approximately meant Martin #12-16. Bryn found about 76% Martin #12-16 among his largest survey of Norwegian recruits.

It is quite clear that when compared with Northern Germanics Irish stand out mainly in terms of pure blue eyes Martin #15-16 rather than light eyes overall. Irish people are not lighter eyed overall than Norwegians or Scandinavians at large. They stand out as distinctly light eyed in a general European context but not in a strictly Northern European context.

Probably in pure Brown it refers only to tones 1-2 or 1-3 On the Martin scale, two studies that used different methods cannot be compared. That is why you can never trust a single study.

[Melkiirs]

Probably in pure Brown it refers only to tones 1-2 or 1-3 On the Martin scale, two studies that used different methods cannot be compared. That is why you can never trust a single study.

Pure brown can mean only homogenous brown. When there is a rayed pattern there is often a subtle lighter rim.

These eye shade could still be considered dark by many sources and be far from homogeneous brown:

[Valenman]

Pure brown can mean only homogenous brown. When there is a rayed pattern there is often a subtle lighter rim.

These eye shade could still be considered dark by many sources and be far from homogeneous brown:

That's why I say that you should not trust a single study, whether from Anthropology or whatever, because for example on some scales Dark means only 1-4 or even only 1-3, that's why I imagine there is so much difference between studies in this case and in others. The one you showed is obviously not Pure Brown, it is 5 on the Martin scale

[Melkiirs]

Two HQ but sligthly different versions of Martin scale. Probably second is better as nr 6 is what I expect from definition.
This is not question of shade of the colors in different jpgs but clearly number 6 is different glass in both, also 9...

Was the first scale in Soviet use? A Martin-Bunak correspondence I found was: Martin #1-5>Bunak #1-4; Martin #6-11>Bunak #5-8; Martin #12-16>Bunak #8-12.
The first #6 seems to better correspond to Bunak #5 than the second.

https://books.google.com/books?id=f5...%206-11%20)%22

[Valenman]

Was the first scale in Soviet use? A Martin-Bunak correspondence I found was: Martin #1-5>Bunak #1-4; Martin #6-11>Bunak #5-8; Martin #12-16>Bunak #8-12.
The first #6 seems to better correspond to Bunak #5 than the second.

https://books.google.com/books?id=f5...%206-11%20)%22

Surely yes, in Bunak 1-4 is black, dark brown, light brown (which is not pure) and Amber, which would be 5 on the Martin scale.

[Lucas]

Was the first scale in Soviet use? A Martin-Bunak correspondence I found was: Martin #1-5>Bunak #1-4; Martin #6-11>Bunak #5-8; Martin #12-16>Bunak #8-12.
The first #6 seems to better correspond to Bunak #5 than the second.

https://books.google.com/books?id=f5...%206-11%20)%22

First is from German paper, second from Czech... Although both recent.