PDA

View Full Version : Anthropological studies of Early Slavs



Tomenable
07-26-2016, 09:41 PM
Here are some that I have found:

Adelheid Bach, "Germanen-Slawen-Deutsche" - https://www.db-thueringen.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/dbt_derivate_00027577/TLDA_WMUF_13027304X_19.pdf

Ilse Schwidetzky, "Rassenkunde der Altslawen" - https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/ilse-schwidetzky-rassenkunde-der-altslawen.pdf

Rösing, Schwidetzky, "Vergleichend-statstische Untersuchungen zur Anthropologie des fruhen Mittelalters":

http://www.mgh.de/bibliothek/opac/?wa72ci_url=/cgi-bin/mgh/regsrchindex.pl?wert=vergleichend-statistische+untersuchungen+zur+anthropologie+des+ fruehen+mittelalters+500-1000+n+d+z&recnums=59363&index=1&db=opac

PDF: http://www.mgh-bibliothek.de//cgi-bin/digilib.pl?ident=b060379&dir=b&img=0&tit=R”sing%20Vergleichend-statistische

J. Piontek, "Antropologia o pochodzeniu Słowian" - http://www.geoinfo.amu.edu.pl/sas/06/01/ANTROPOLOGIA/PIONTEK%202008.pdf

Are there any other similar studies?

Captain Nordic
07-27-2016, 06:50 PM
Unfortunately, i do not speak German or Polish :(
What was their conclusion? :)

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:26 PM
A recent, important and available in English one you have missed is Alexeeva (2003). After considering the Slavic homeland, she describes five main Slavic 'antrhpological types' :

(1)
The first, White Sea-and-Baltic, type is represented by the Belorussians, and in part by the Poles and northern Russians. These are individuals with fair skin and blond hair, and medium facial features; they are predominantly meso* and brachycephals**. These populations are within the northern or Baltic branch of Europeoids and differ from West Baltic (or Atlantic-Baltic) tribes-to which most of the Scandinavians belong-in less prominent noses, sparser beards and a slight swelling of the upper eyelid. All these tokens betray a very small and ancient racial admixture dating to the Neolithic time in consequence of the Mongoloid drive west across the forest belt of Western Siberia and Eastern Europe.

(2) The second, East European, type comprises nearly all territorial groups of the Russian people (except northern Russians) and part of the Belorussians populating predominantly Russia's east and south. This type is distinguished for darker hair and eyes. The anthropological characteristics of the Russians and Belorussians-largely, their cranial and facial features-are indicative of several local sets of characters. Victor Bunak dates this group's formative period to the Neolithic stage. Indeed, the then anthropological composition of East European populations emerged through intermixing among the indigenous northern, southern and Ural tribes. Those folks had long or medium heads, large facial features, sharp horizontal profiles and prominent noses. Such features are proper to representatives of the Narva and Volosovo cultures. Crossing the Urals from the east was a tribe with somewhat flattened faces and less prominent noses. Both groups must have created an anthropological groundwork for the formation of a significant part of the population inhabiting the East European Plain (apparently, of the Finno-Ugric type) that mixed with the Eastern Slavs.

(3) The third, Dnieper-Carpathian, type includes Ukrainians, ethnic groups populating the Carpathian area, Slovaks and some of the Czechs. These are rather dark bra- chycephals ("short heads") with relatively broad faces. We find cranio-logical analogies in Slavic burial grounds of Slovakia and Moldavia. Morphologically, those people were akin to the Alpine ethnic type (according to William Ripley, an American economist and anthropologist of the late 19th-early 20th centuries) that settled what is now Austria, Switzerland and part of northern Italy. It might be that the Dnieper- Carpathian populations are a northeastern variant of this local race.

(4) Now to the fourth, Pontic type. It is represented mostly by Bulgarians: dark-haired, of medium height, with longish or medium heads. Their facial features are moderately broad or else narrow. Judging by paleoanthropo-logical data, this combination type, a variant of the southern branch of Europeoids, must have originated in the Eastern Europe of the Neolithic time, though its origins might be traced earlier than that, when its tribes settled in these parts. The propagation of the Pontic type from the Mediterranean and Caucasia to southern Russian steppes continued down to the Late Bronze Age (1st millennium B.C.). Its traces are present in Eastern Slavs, the plainsmen of the Middle Age, in the contemporary Ukrainian population related to the Pruth anthropological type, and among the Russians of the Don-Sura Region

(5) And the fifth, Dinaric, ethnic group takes in Yugoslavia's high-landers. Tall and short- headed, they have very broad faces, protruding noses and profuse hair growth. They differ from the other southern Europeoids in the lighter color of eyes. These summary features resemble the morphological complex of the peoples of Central Caucasia. That is why some ethnologists suggest certain genetic affinity among these tribes.
The origins of the Dinaric group are still an open question. On one hand, many of its distinctive characteristics appear to be of ancient origin; but there are hardly any analogies found in the evidentiary materials. Similar distinctions are detected in the Kura-Araxes culture (Armenia, Berkaber burial ground). Now what concerns Slavs with Dinaric racial features-the result of their contacts with local non-Slavic tribes. This is shown by my data on the Walachians of the mid 15th-century in Bosnia and Herzegovina

-------------------------------
How relevant is physical anthropology today ? I think a lot is significant generalization of an idealized type by ethnicity or country, but some of what Alexeeva says makes sense (apart from the stuff about Dinarics, with whom a link to "Armenoid" race was popular amongst Physical anthropologists.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:33 PM
Gravetto-Danubian,

You are confusing typology (which has been rejected by modern anthropology) with anthropology itself. Modern anthropology compares various measurable variables to establish relationships between studied populations.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:37 PM
Gravetto-Danubian,

You are confusing typology (which has been rejected by modern anthropology) with anthropology itself. Modern anthropology compares various measurable variables to establish relationships between studied populations.

Which ever method, either only occasionally correlate with actual genetic data. Several of the latter approach have been already disproven. Mostly, they work with miniscule ancient sample sizes which prevent any conclusions.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:38 PM
Unfortunately, i do not speak German or Polish :(
What was their conclusion? :)

Statistical data from A. Bach and J. Piontek show that Slavic populations and earlier East Germanic populations (skeletons from archeological cultures considered East Germanic) were anthropologically closer to each other than East Germanics were to North Germanics (Scandinavians) or to West Germanics (Germans).

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:40 PM
Statistical data from A. Bach and J. Piontek show that Slavic populations and earlier East Germanic populations were anthropologically closer to each other than East Germanics were to North Germanics (Scandinavians) or to West Germanics (Germans).

So east Germanics are closer to each other, than to non non-East Germanics.
Go figure

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:40 PM
Mostly, they work with miniscule ancient sample sizes

Hundreds of specimen are not miniscule samples.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:42 PM
So east Germanics are closer to each other, than non to non-East Germanics.

East Germanics are closer to Slavs than to other Germanics (such as Medieval Germans).

See for example page 43 from Adelheid Bach's book (Abb. 12 and Abb. 13).

DEU = Medieval Germans

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:44 PM
Hundreds of specimen are not miniscule samples.

"Hundreds "?
What were the conclusions of all studies ?

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:45 PM
Which ever method, either only occasionally correlate with actual genetic data.

And this conclusion is based on which examples exactly - where lack of correlation was observed ???

IIRC so far in most cases new genetical data appears consistent with previous anthropological studies.

For example autosomal DNA of Yamnaya seems consistent with previous conclusions of anthropologists.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:49 PM
And this conclusion is based on which examples exactly - where lack of correlation was observed ???

IIRC so far in most cases new genetical data appears consistent with previous anthropological studies.

For example autosomal DNA of Yamnaya seems consistent with previous conclusions of anthropologists.

So, what was the conclusions based on PA about Yamnaya ?
Yet it states most CWC were predominantly gracile Mediterranean , and similar to preceding TRB ?
PA unequivocally claimed that EE Scythians freshly migrated from the Altai ..
That was based on variable, Measurable, objective traits

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:50 PM
What were the conclusions of Piontek?
Let me guess- Slavs came from ......

Piontek concluded that Slavs lived in Poland already before the Migration Period.

But later he added, that in fact his research is just showing biological continuity.

Quote:


- We anthropologists don't claim, that we are explaining political, historical, and ethno-cultural transformations. - said Piontek - We indicate, that the popular allochthonistic hypothesis, which assumes a depopulation of the Odra-Vistula basins and a renewed colonization of those areas by a distinct immigrant population, isn't correct.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 10:51 PM
Piontek concluded that Slavs lived in Poland already before the Migration Period.

But later he added, that in fact his research is just showing biological continuity.

Quote:

Yeah, that's what is suggested
Some genomic aDNA is on the way, right ?

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:52 PM
Some genomic aDNA is on the way, right ?

Yeah, according to Davidski it should be published this Autumn/Winter.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:59 PM
So, what was the conclusions based on PA about Yamnaya ?

That they were a mixture of native European HG and East Mediterranean anthropological types.

Genetics confirms - since they turned out to be a mix of Euro HG and Caucasus-like HG/farmer.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 11:16 PM
That they were a mixture of native European HG and East Mediterranean anthropological types.

Genetics confirms - since they turned out to be a mix of Euro HG and Caucasus-like HG/farmer.

Indeed, they were close
But "East Med" & "Mesolithic EE" are 'typological types'
;)

Tomenable
08-06-2016, 09:41 PM
A recent, important and available in English one you have missed is Alexeeva (2003). After considering the Slavic homeland, she describes five main Slavic 'antrhpological types' :

(...)

Schwidetzky also distinguished five main types, but named them differently:

https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/ilse-schwidetzky-rassenkunde-der-altslawen.pdf

Nordic (n), Easteuropid (o), Alpinid or Lappid (a), Dinaric (d), Mediterranid (m):

https://s7.postimg.org/uql8nmaob/antropologia_S_owian.png

Captain Nordic
09-01-2016, 12:03 PM
Statistical data from A. Bach and J. Piontek show that Slavic populations and earlier East Germanic populations (skeletons from archeological cultures considered East Germanic) were anthropologically closer to each other than East Germanics were to North Germanics (Scandinavians) or to West Germanics (Germans).

Maybe the samples they studied were mixed with indigenous Slavs?

I wouldn't imagine Goths looking Polish before their migration from Gotland to East europe.

alan
09-19-2017, 11:23 AM
Strange seeing the word ruddy applied to Slavic complexion. They in my experience tend the be able to take a golden 'Nordic tan' similar to Germans. It's people like the British and Irish who tend to go red when exposed to the sun or a lot of fresh air or just through aging.

lgmayka
09-19-2017, 09:15 PM
It's people like the British and Irish who tend to go red when exposed to the sun or a lot of fresh air or just through aging.
Two of my five brothers have red hair; and we have all ended up with "ruddy" faces. My mother was even diagnosed with bacterial rosacea--by a general practitioner who didn't bother to run any tests--but of course the medicine did not change her complexion, which was naturally "ruddy." We are 100% rural southeastern Polish.