0







| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 29/5 Given: 0/1 |
Pre-Greek Anatolian groups like the Hittites were overwhelmingly Armenid, so I don’t see the controversy in stating that Pre-Greek Anatolian=Armenid, as I thought this was one of the most obvious of my pairings of Autosomal DNA Ancestry Components in the Charts I posted with their dominant Subrace/Phenotype, out of curiosity do you agree with any of my pairings,?


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 47/124 Given: 106/434 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 5,202/8 Given: 4,308/7 |
Eickstedt’s ‘East Europid’ is not any kind of late stabilized mix (there is no genetic evidence (neither autosomal nor Y-chromosome) for all Slavs having absorbed any Finno-Ugric groups, let alone the Sámi). Czekanowski already proved over 100 years ago at the Anthropological Conference in Helsinki that Osteuropid is nothing other than the Paleo-Europid (Cro-Magnon type). Genetically, this Cro-Magnon surplus in the Baltic refugium is very pronounced. It is also worth noting that this Baltic hunter-gatherer and his close relative from Motala are the primary source of depigmentation in Northern Europe.


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 5,202/8 Given: 4,308/7 |
The situation with the descendants of the Andronovo culture is completely different, and their centuries-long coexistence with non-European populations is a genetically confirmed fact. Nevertheless, for example, Afghans remain the closest living non-European genetic relatives of Northern European populations.







| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 29/5 Given: 0/1 |
Eickstedt clearly states that the Osteuropid/East Europid is a Contact/Intermediate form between Nordid and Lappid, in this quote on Pg. 368-369 of “Rassenkunde Und Rassengeschichte Der Menschheit”,:
“Although the Osteuropids are a homogeneous somatic form circle today, this must not have been the case in ancient times of racial history. This restriction provides a room for consolidation with those who do not recognize the Osteuropid independence. Because MongolOid traits (similiar to those of Mongolids) can be noticed in Osteuropids, next to their distinct traits. On the other hand there are several, even more numerous, Europid traits, thus these individuals must be considered part of the Europid racial circle. Those “Mongoloidisms” one may see in the oblique eye-openings and the forward-deployed cheekbones. How can their emergence be explained? Is it the result of an independent mutation (or as a better term, a peristatic transformation, in the way of Osborn, 1927) of a Europid population, e.g. one out of the short-headed belt? Osteuropids are short-headed. But this is just a hypothesis.
Not an hypothesis but reality is that Osteuropids live and have lived in the borderlands of Europids and Mongolids and it is not just an assumption but an obvious fact that everywhere were great races meet each other vast areas of contact forms can be found. Even at the time of the emergences of the modern races – which are anything but static and stable constants – in those areas those various tendencies of differentiatial development already interacted. This does not concern, like it was already hinted at with the blond hair of the Nordics, the groups of today we can unite as races because of their trait combinations, but simply a form circle that has the biological and geographical potential to develop into them. As strictly as one must deny the term “Mongolian admixture” when it comes to the Osteuropids of today; when it comes to racial history it is entirely possible (and in my opinion the only explanation of the obvious facts) that the early occurance of heritage tendencies we can call “Mongoloidisms” played a part in the formation of the Osteuropid type. Transistional traits and races exist, there is no clear cut in nature in the way we would want to have (and need) it when working in our labratories or at our desks. Following the racial movements in the European space will provide the geographical opposition to the described genetic approach. The Osteuropids are thus a typical intermediate form, an independently differentiated and developed body form group out of the contact area of the North-Europid-directed and “East Asian”-influenced proto-Hominids.”
Last edited by King Lear; 11-27-2025 at 04:31 AM.


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 5,202/8 Given: 4,308/7 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 47/124 Given: 106/434 |
Ale czy Czekanowski (1934) był w błędzie gdy postawił taką hipotezę, że Europejczycy ze wschodu wykazali wpływ lapanoidalny? Co miał na myślę?


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 5,202/8 Given: 4,308/7 |
Yes and no. He likely identified the Alpine/Laponoid core of Central Europe correctly. In Czekanowski’s view, this core referred to the mountain belt stretching from France to the Carpathians. No, because—like all anthropologists of his time—he relied on the idea of the relative stability of anthropometric traits. In reality, however, within-population (environmental) plasticity plays a much greater role than external influences.







| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 29/5 Given: 0/1 |
This study still shows that Eickstedt was right that Osteuropids/East Europids have Lappid influence due to mixing with Uralic people, particularly in Finland and Northern Russia, though I will admit that it is probably more accurate to describe Osteuropids/East Europids as a stabilized East Nordid-Alpinid-Lappid mixture instead of just a stabilized East Nordid-Lappid mixture,!
Last edited by King Lear; 11-30-2025 at 06:24 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks