|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 0:56:21 GMT -5
^Doubt that, Dark hair is native to the area, Mongols have nothing to do with it...completely irrelevant to the Sarmatians. Greeks knew the Sarmatians as the "Sauro-Matae" which roughly means "Lizard-eyes", because their eyes had more slant than the round-eyed Hellens. This characteristic is highly common amongst Serbs, much more than the other Slavs except the Russians and Ukrainians...who not only reside in former Sarmatian territories, but also had inter-mixing with Mongols and Huns, thus their high-cheekbones, and other characteristics, which the Serbs do not share, because Serbs did not have any real contact with Mongols, nor any traditionally asiatic peoples. Ossetians are closest to Western Europeans you say? Who, like the Spaniards or French? ;D Obviously you haven't looked at Ossetians....they're nearly strikingly similar to Serbs, more specifically Herzegovinians and Montenegrins (the purest Serbs). Like Irish, Welsh, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian. All of those people are predominantly dark haired. Basically non-Germano-Slavo-Batics. You're speaking of distinct peoples: Celts and Latins, Germanics, with them are western European don't lie to yourself now. People when they branched off from the Proto-Indo-Europeans, they settled in Europe and there there languages evolved. Greeks, an example of this, are one of the first Indo-European peoples to branch off, thus their language is one of the most unique of the IE langs. Next after them were the Armenians, Latins, Celts and Germanics. Much later after these came the Slavs, Iranians and Dravidians (Indians). Sanskrit (Indic), Ancient Persian (Avestan), and Proto-Slavic (which may have simply been a branch-off of Iranic) have more in common, then with the rest of IE. The people, accordingly have more in common, in culture and looks. As far as I know, the only predominantly light-featured IE peoples are the Germanics (Scandinavians & Anglos included), the Celts (Irish, Welsh), and Western Slavs (due to heavy intermixing with Germanics & Celts) and the Balts (Who's connection to Slavs is still debated). Other than that there are non-IE peoples such as the Uralic peoples (Finns & Hungarians & Saami, ect). The lightness of Eastern Slavs like the Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians can be attributed to Scandinavians/Germanics (Created Kiev Rus), Baltic peoples (lived in close proximity to Russians and Belarusians for a long period), as well as the huge influence of the Uralic peoples (who are light haired but have mongolic features - note: they did not have much interaction with invading mongols of the 12th century, being located up isolated near the arctic ocean. Thus, these stereotypical "Slavic" looks people attribute to the Ukrainians and Russians, are more or less just Balto-Germanic and Uralic imports. The problem with this is that the Haplogroup does not determine phenotype (physical appearance), autosomal DNA does. So it still doesn't mean anything. Every Serb knows, that there is no Serb (nor people) closer to a Herzegovinian than a Montenegrin, and vice-versa. These two sub-groups are nearly the same sub-group, the dialect being nearly identical, traditional clothes and customs are identical, and both are tribal-based. I think everyone on here would agree Montenegrins look more like Herzegovinians than like Macedonians. Again, having similar haplogroups doesn't mean anything, I might share one with a Sri Lankan, does that mean we're twins?!?
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 7, 2011 2:47:29 GMT -5
I agree with Krivo. At least his points are better than anyone elses. The slavs/Serbs of Dalmatia are all of this stock. Please explain why/how they would collectively change their language to a purely slavic one with no legacy of previous for a couple of blond people that came along??? See it just sounds ridiculous and the people who advocate this idea don't even attempt to do it. Also, we do know what happens anyway when a large portion of non slavs do take up a slavic language by looking at the Bulgarians. They end up with different grammar and they join the Balkan sprachbund. If Serbs are native then I think we must have already been speaking a slavic language. To further Krivo's ideas, keep in mind Dinarid also most closely resembles Armenoid & Caucasid racial classifications.
|
|
|
Post by tsompanos on Jan 7, 2011 12:44:16 GMT -5
one thing i dont get is , do montenegrins live in tribes today ?
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 7, 2011 14:22:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 16:40:59 GMT -5
Ok, however once again, their conclusion that south Siberians must be "Green-eyed and light-haired" is wrong. It's wrong because Y-DNA or mtDNA do not determine your physical appearance. Your physical appearance is determined by your autosomal DNA. In other words, your specific traits are not caused by your Y-DNA haplogroup but by genes in other chromosomes. There might be correlation, but no causation. A common research fallacy. I prefer dealing with real things, things that are substantiative; looks + history + language + geography + customs. Oh really? Look at the significant amount of German loanwords in Slavic languages and very limited (if at all) amount of Slavic in German. The Germanics were a much larger group. The Franks, Norse, Dutch, Vandals, Goths, all Germanics who throughout history settled and conquered much of Europe, they subjugated Slavs especially since they were neighbors. Celts are not dark, this is very wrong. Irish are stereotypically known for being red-haired and freckled for a reason. Same with the other Celtics, such as the Welsh and Gauls. Here is an ancient Roman account: "The Gauls are tall of body with rippling muscles and white of skin and their hair is blond" - Diodorus Siculus Yes they do. They still hold tribal meetings, events and celebrations...people still associate themselves with their tribe, and it's a regular topic of discussion for Montenegrins, most of the pictures here I extracted from facebook groups of said tribes. Tribal affiliation can be seen in Montenegrin parliament; most of the people in the ruling coalition are Cuce or Ceklin, many take sides in politics according to tribe. Although obviously it isn't as important as it once was, tribes today can be seen as an extension of family.
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 7, 2011 16:59:23 GMT -5
Modern day Irish, Welsh, Scottish are known as dark haired people and they have reddish skins. Cradle of Celtic culture was in modern day Austria, thus they were clearly blond there. However those today are not, they have just a bit more significant percentage of reddish people, but generally black haired people are not unusual, where as most are dark brown.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 17:43:30 GMT -5
Modern day Irish, Welsh, Scottish are known as dark haired people and they have reddish skins. Cradle of Celtic culture was in modern day Austria, thus they were clearly blond there. However those today are not, they have just a bit more significant percentage of reddish people, but generally black haired people are not unusual, where as most are dark brown. I don't know, I live in America amongst a great number of Irish and Scottish-decent people, trust me they redefine pale. Take a look at Conan O'brien, typical irish look. Colin Farrell is not typical. Welsh are a mix of light-haired and dark-haired (dark brown, no black)...trust me contrary to what you might think (or hope), Catherine Zeta Jones is not your typical Welsh woman, she plays many Spanish and Italian roles for a reason. Remember there was alot of Roman migration to the British Isles, the "Black Irish" being Spanish sailors who crash-landed on Ireland, etc, etc. That explains small minorities like Sean Connery, Catherine or Colin Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 7, 2011 19:53:38 GMT -5
and Welsh people also not light:
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 7, 2011 20:03:18 GMT -5
George Best would look like typical Irish
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 21:48:40 GMT -5
George Best would look like typical Irish I read this fast and thought it said he'd look like a typical fish lol I'd fully agree with that sentiment
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 21:53:44 GMT -5
and Welsh people also not light: I see pale faces and light features ulf, P.S. the dark one in the red shirt is half Sardinian, and like I said Catherine Zeta ain't a typical Welsh. 90% of the people in that Irish collage have light eyes ulf, I think you need to take off the blinders. Btw there are more Scots & Irish in the US than there are in Ireland and Scotland so go figure
|
|
|
Post by coke&broke on Jan 7, 2011 22:21:26 GMT -5
Catherine Zeta Jones is half Irish, and the person in the dark red shirt is Welsh footballer Ryan Giggs whose grandfather is from Sierra Leone. I reside in England and most Welsh people are indistinguishable from the Scots and English. They may have a tendency to have darker hair than their neighbours, but that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 7, 2011 23:07:15 GMT -5
^Oh I mistaked him for Joe Calzaghe. Nevertheless, Ryan Giggs has black ancestry, so it proves my point.
|
|
|
Post by odel on Jan 8, 2011 5:46:33 GMT -5
The thing is that the Celts are usually dark haired (except a lot of them have red hair, lies around 10% in Scotland and in Ireland) blond hair is not that usual though. However, according to what I have read the Irish have the largest amount of blue eyes in the world and that they have the largest amount of blue-eyes.
From what I have seen personally they are (together with all of the people of the British isles) darker than the Norwegians, they are much shorter too but at the same time broadly built.
|
|
|
Post by Babylon Enigma on Jan 8, 2011 17:58:56 GMT -5
Fantasy? This idea everyone in the steppes were once blonde haired and blue eyed is the the biggest fantasy there is! Some maybe, but definitely not the Iranian peoples that's for sure. Let's be serious here! It's not a fantasy when something is a fact. Maybe you can't grasp the concept of fact vs fantasy. PS I said everyone? Their haplogroup and autosomal DNA does not match or come close to any Yugoslav population, I do not see how they can possibly be related to Montenegrins when they are different products(DNA). The similarities seem to exists in your head.
|
|
|
Post by Babylon Enigma on Jan 8, 2011 18:02:20 GMT -5
I agree with Krivo. At least his points are better than anyone elses. The slavs/Serbs of Dalmatia are all of this stock. Please explain why/how they would collectively change their language to a purely slavic one with no legacy of previous for a couple of blond people that came along??? See it just sounds ridiculous and the people who advocate this idea don't even attempt to do it. Also, we do know what happens anyway when a large portion of non slavs do take up a slavic language by looking at the Bulgarians. They end up with different grammar and they join the Balkan sprachbund. If Serbs are native then I think we must have already been speaking a slavic language. To further Krivo's ideas, keep in mind Dinarid also most closely resembles Armenoid & Caucasid racial classifications. Keep in mind that there is zero relation genetically between Yugoslavs and Caucasids/Armenids. This is like taking a DNA father test, if there is no DNA match, person B is not your father. Period.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 8, 2011 18:07:59 GMT -5
^Here I will copy/paste what I wrote earlier because it seems you only like to listen to yourself
|
|
|
Post by Babylon Enigma on Jan 8, 2011 18:12:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Babylon Enigma on Jan 8, 2011 18:15:36 GMT -5
Y-DNA or mtDNA do not determine your physical appearance. Your physical appearance is determined by your autosomal DNA. In other words, your specific traits are not caused by your Y-DNA haplogroup but by genes in other chromosomes. There might be correlation, but no causation. A common research fallacy. [/quote] I'll repost my response. "Their haplogroup and autosomal DNA does not match or come close to any Yugoslav population," Can you please share with us this similarity in autosomal DNA between your folks and Ossetians? No one seems to be aware of this discovery, other than you.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 8, 2011 18:21:16 GMT -5
^That's mtDNA, it's not indicative of they're physical appearance! Geez you're dense
|
|