Andy White Anthropology
  • Home
  • Research Interests
    • Complexity Science
    • Prehistoric Social Networks
    • Eastern Woodlands Prehistory
    • Ancient Giants
  • Blog
  • Work in Progress
    • The Kirk Project >
      • Kirk 3D Models list
      • Kirk 3D Models embedded
      • Kirk 2D images >
        • Indiana
        • Kentucky
        • Michigan
        • Ontario
      • Kirk Project Datasets
    • Computational Modeling >
      • FN3D_V3
    • Radiocarbon Compilation
    • Fake Hercules Swords
    • Wild Carolina >
      • Plants >
        • Mosses
        • Ferns
        • Conifers
        • Flowering Plants >
          • Grasses
          • Trees
          • Other Flowering Plants
      • Animals >
        • Birds
        • Mammals
        • Crustaceans
        • Insects
        • Arachnids
        • Millipedes and Centipedes
        • Reptiles and Amphibians
      • Fungi
  • Annotated Publications
    • Journal Articles
    • Technical Reports
    • Doctoral Dissertation
  • Bibliography
  • Data

"Giants" and Typologies of Race: The Example of Dinaric Skulls

6/9/2015

11 Comments

 
Many of those who are enamored with the idea of the existence of giants in the ancient past are also enthusiastic users (and misusers) of antiquated ideas about the existence and meaning of "race" among human populations. This follows a general pattern, I think, of 21st century "alternative" theorists uncritically embracing discredited concepts from the Victorian age.  Want to believe in a flat earth? A hollow earth? No problem. Everything old is new again in the age of the internet.

The fetish that giantologists have for recycling out-dated concepts of race would give the flat earth people a run for their money in a competition for attaching the most weight to the worst idea. If I wanted to argue for the existence of giants and I wanted to still sound like a reasonable person, I would avoid basing my arguments for giants on racial typologies that went out style along with slavery, eugenics, and World War II-era Nazism. But giantologists, for the most part, seem to be largely unfettered by the desire to sound reasonable.  Or the desire to understand the history, context, and implications of the racial concepts they are so quick to employ.  Or the desire to be correct in facts, citations, quotations . . . you get the idea.

There are a lot of examples of modern giant enthusiasts throwing around the term "race" in reference to their assertions about giants (Google "race of giants" and you'll see what I mean).  I don't think I've ever run across an example of a giant enthusiast actually defining what he means by "race," but I gather that the term is generally used to denote a population that is genetically different from other populations and has shared physical characteristics that can be reliably used to discriminate its members from those of other "races" (basically a 19th and early 20th century definition of "race").  Defining the shared physical characteristics for this "giant race" that we are supposed to believe existed has proven tricky for giant enthusiasts.  Other than being tall, what shared features does this "race of giants" have?  Double rows of teeth? No, not really (see this post, this one, this one, etc.).  Six fingers and six toes along with "double rows of teeth"?  Not so far (see this post). So what's left of our "giant" race once we kick those legs out from under the stool?

Not much. Some tall people here and there?

Ah, but wait: there's still all that bad 19th and earth 20th century scientific racism to mine for "evidence" in the quest to define a "race" of giants.  It's old and out-dated, so it's fair game.

Fritz Zimmerman is in love with what he terms a "giant race called the Dinaric."  His web pages contain many assertions about the giant "Dinaric people" of Europe and the Levant spreading into the New World, and it is to the "Dinaric race" that he attributes the construction of the Early and Middle Woodland earthen mounds of eastern North America. Here is his story from the Europe side:

"The Dinaric spread through conquest out of the Caucasus into central Germany to Northern France. From France, the Dinarics advanced into the British Isles. Another group of seafaring Dinarics is found throughout the Mediterranean. There is evidence that the Dinarics were in the Levant at the time of the Amorites. Several of the Dinaric skulls were found in Palestine and Israel, that at first were believed to be Peruvian skulls, however, identical skulls were found and it was realized that these unique head shapes represented a different type of people. One of these skull was found in Damascus, within the realm of the Amorites and Og."

There are several different issues to unwrap here.  What does "Dinaric" mean? How do you identify a "Dinaric skull"? How do we know these "Dinaric people" were giants?  I wasn't familiar with the concept of a "Dinaric race," so I put some effort into trying to understand what this was about.  Spoiler alert: there's no substance in the idea that "Dinaric" skulls can be used to identify a "race of giants."  That's predictable.  But the issue is interesting to me for a couple of reasons.  First, it's useful as an example of the strangely haphazard way that giantologists employ discredited racial classifications to support their belief systems about giants.  And second, it illustrates once again the shallowness of the scholarship that is uncovered when you scratch the surface of the "research" on giants.

The Origin and Development of the Concept of a "Dinaric Race"

The concept of a Dinaric race began with Joseph Deniker, back in the heyday of racial cartography in the late 1800s. In his book The Races of Man (1900), Deniker describes the Dinaric race as one of six principal races among the living peoples of Europe:
PictureDeniker's (1900) map of the races of Europe showing the distribution of the Dinaric race (modified to highlight the distribution in red). Base map source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/Deniker%27s_Races_de_l%27Europe_%281899%29.jpg
"6. Dark, brachycephalic, tall race, called Adriatic or Dinaric, because its purest representatives are met with along the coast of the Northern Adriatic and especially in Bosnia, Dalmatia, and Croatia. They are also found in Rumania, Venetia, among the Slovenes, the Ladinos of the Tyrol, the Romansch of Switzerland, as well as in the populations of the tract of country which extends south to north from Lyons to Liège, at first between the Loire and the Saône, then on to the table-land of Langres, in the upper valleys of the Saône and the Moselle, and into the Ardennes. In all these parts the Adriatic race appears with its essential characters: lofty stature (1 m. 68 to 1 m. 72 on an average), extreme brachycephaly (ceph. ind. 85–86), brown or black wavy hair; dark eyes, straight eyebrows; elongated face, delicate straight or aquiline nose; slightly tawny skin. The same characters, somewhat softened, are met with among the populations of the lower valley of the Po, of the north-west of Bohemia, in Roman Switzerland, in Alsace, in the middle basin of the Loire, among the Polish and Ruthenian mountaineers of the Carpathians, and lastly among the Malorousses or Little Russians, and probably among the Albanians and the inhabitants of Servia." (pp. 333-334)

Brachycephaly refers to head shape:
a skull that is brachycephalic ("short-headed") is relatively short front-to-back.  Note the "lofty stature:"  about 5'8" tall. 

In his effort to classify the living peoples of the world based (in part) on their physical characteristics, Deniker wrestled with the same basic issues that confront any scientist trying to define discrete "types" among populations that vary continuously.  In the introduction to the volume, he recognized that variability in language, ethnicity, and culture were not isomorphic with biological variability, and that "races" did not form discrete units that could be reliably used to recognize populations.  The "Dinaric race," then, was defined as a hypothetical physical "type" that could be recognized most clearly among the living peoples of southern Europe. 


PictureExamples of people belonging to the Dinaric race, according to Hans F. K. Günther. Apparently, Fritz Zimmerman thinks these people are closely related to the builders of the Adena mounds.
The concept of a Dinaric race was expanded upon by Nazi eugenicist Hans F. K. Günther in his 1927 book The Racial Elements of European History. Günther's description of the physical characteristics of the Dinaric race echoes that of Deniker, emphasizing tall stature (about 5'8" for males), brachycephaly, brown skin, dark hair, and dark eyes. I've clipped some examples of Dinarics from Günther's book so you can see what he thought the "race" looked like.

To the physical descriptions of the races of Europe,
Günther added an assessment of their mental characteristics: 

"The Dinaric man is characterized by a warm feeling for nature, a strong love of the home, and a spirit of creativeness in fashioning the surroundings to be the ordered expression of himself in houses, implements, customs, and forms of speech. He does not, however, turn his gifts so much to the vaster undertakings, to leadership in the most varied spheres of life, or to restless progress and strenuous competition. He lives more in the present than does the provident, foreseeing Nordic. The boldness of the Dinaric is rather one of bodily achievements; a real spiritual urge to conquest, such as often characterizes Nordic men, seems to be rarer. Characteristic of the Dinaric is an inclination to sudden outbursts, to quick anger, and to combativeness -- characteristics, however, which but stand out from the general level of a disposition that is on the whole good-tempered, cheerful, and friendly. But it is not mere chance that the predominantly Dinaric south-east of the German-speaking area (like the East with its East Baltic strain) is marked by a particularly high percentage of convictions for dangerous bodily wounding, and in general by a relatively high percentage of criminal convictions.

The Dinaric nature has a range of development decidedly narrower in every direction than that of the Nordic. The signs are wanting of any great mental acumen, or of stern determination. The spiritual outlook is narrower, though the will may be as strong. On the whole the Dinaric race represents a stock which is not seldom somewhat uncouth, with a rough cheerfulness, or even wit, and is easily stirred to enthusiasm; it has a gift for coarse repartee and vivid description, showing a decided knowledge of mankind and histrionic powers as a racial endowment. Business capacity, too, seems to be not rare. The gift for music, above all for song, is particularly pronounced. The predominantly Dinaric Alpine district is where German folk-songs most flourish. The gift of tongues, too, would seem more frequent in the Dinaric race. The sociableness of this race is a rough and noisy one; as between man and man it is generally sincere and upright. For mental capacity I would put the Dinaric race second among the races of Europe."


So there you have it:  the Dinaric race has a lot going for it but, according to a future Nazi (
Günther didn't join the Nazi party until 1932), just doesn't quite stack up to the Nordics.  I'll bet you didn't see that one coming.

In his first chapter, Günther provided an explicit definition of race:

"A race shows itself in a human group which is marked off from every other human group through its own proper combination of bodily and mental characteristics, and in turn produces only its like."

He followed this definition with a clear statement that "Ethnology yields hardly any example of such a true-breeding human group." In reality,
Günther said, there is a lot of mixture between the races.  In the eyes of the Nazis, that obviously sets up a problem for the "best" of the races (the Nordic race), as any mixture with other, inferior races dilutes its qualities.

Anyway, another person worth mentioning on the Dinaric race issue is Carleton Coon, a University of Pennsylvania anthropologist perhaps most infamous for proclaiming as late as 1962 that the "five races" of humans had formed prior to the evolution of Homo sapiens.   In Chapter XII of his (1939) book The Races of Europe, Coon gave his conclusions on the Dinaric "race:"

"Dinaricism is not a quality pertaining to a single race, it is a condition. This condition is common in Europe; it is also common in western Asia. Furthermore, it is not confined to the white racial stock; the principle of hybrid inheritance which produces Dinarics in Europe has also produced Papuans in New Guinea, the Arii aristocrats in Polynesia, and many American Indians."

Look carefully at what Coon is saying in that passage:  even if you can identify a Dinaric "type" (based on skull morphology, for example), that type doesn't have any historical meaning.  "Dinaric" skulls are found in many parts of the world in populations that are not related to one another. 

My take on all of this is that the originator of the concept of a "Dinaric race" (Deniker), Nazi racial scientists (
Günther), and one of the last American physical anthropologists who openly embraced racial classification (Coon) all agree that the term "Dinaric race" doesn't really describe a single people, or even mark a population that has a single origin. This is in direct contradiction to Zimmerman's argument that Dinaric skulls are "unique" and therefore can be used as a marker of a distinct population (and a giant one, to boot).  I very seriously doubt Zimmerman knows something about the "Dinaric race" that Deniker, Günther, and Coon did not. 
Günther
So how do these brachycephalic, noisy, 5'8" peoples spread across southern Europe become both biblical giants and the constructors of earthen mounds in eastern North America?  How do the people of the Balkans become the Amorites, and how do the Amorites get to Kentucky and Ohio? 

A Dinaric Skull in the Near East?

Zimmerman attempts to connect the "Dinaric race" to biblical giants by saying that a Dinaric skull was found in Damascus, near where Og and the Amorites lived (see the quote above).  He doesn't provide a reference in the page I quoted, but elsewhere he says that a Dinaric skull "near the Damascus Gate at Jerusalem" was
"discovered by Prof. Retzius, who described it in the Proceeding of the Royal Academy of Science, 1902." 

There are a couple of errors here, and a bit of sleight of hand. 

First is the location: note that it's the Damascus Gate at Jerusalem, not Damascus as Zimmerman says above. 

Second, I found the original publication by searching on a sentence that Zimmerman quotes, and it's not a 1902 document.  The passage he quotes is originally from an 1879 book titled The North Americans of Antiquity by John Thomas Short.  In the section on "Head Flattening," that book describes a discussion of an artificially deformed skull from Austria described by "Prof. Retzius" in "The Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Stockholm in 1844" (that's a reference line within the work, not the reference of the work itself, and it's 1844, not 1902).  Here is an 1855 paper by Retzius describing that skull and other artificially deformed crania.

Third, the deformed skull from near the Damascus Gate, which seems to be key to Zimmerman's attempt to connect the "Dinaric race" to the Amorites, was discovered in 1856 by J. Hudson Barclay and described in an 1859 paper by J. A. Meigs titled "
Description of a deformed, fragmentary human skull : found in an ancient quarry-cave at Jerusalem : with an attempt to determine, by its configuration alone, the ethnical type to which it belongs."  That paper does not illustrate the skull, and if you search for the term "Dinaric" within it you'll come up empty (Deniker, the originator of the term, wasn't even born until 1852).  If you look at that paper, you'll see a lot of discussion trying to figure out the "ethnical type" to which the skull belongs.  It's fragmentary, undated, artificially deformed, and not a "Dinaric skull." So much for that.

Maybe there's some other component to Zimmerman's argument that the "Dinaric race" is related to the Amorite "giants" of the Near East.  As far as I can tell, however, the notion seems to be based primarily on a misreferenced, misunderstood paper about an artificially-deformed, fragmentary skull that was published decades before the concept of a "Dinaric race" was even formalized.  If so, it's nonsense. 

"Dinaric" Skulls in the Eastern Woodlands?

With the link between the "Dinaric race" and giants severed, identifying "Dinaric" skulls in the Eastern Woodlands becomes largely moot.  But it's an interesting part of the story and worth mentioning.

The crucial component of this part of Zimmerman's argument seems to be the
description of Adena skeletal remains as "brachycephalic."  As discussed above, brachycephaly was one of the defining characteristics of the Dinaric "type."  Adena skeletal remains were described as brachycephalic by Charles Snow in the 1940s and 1950s, when the definition and identification of physical "types" was still popular in physical anthropology in the United States.  Many of the Adena skulls that Snow looked at were artificially deformed, heightening the impression of extreme brachycephaly.  Some of the Adena were also described as relatively tall, even up to 7' or so.

What the Giantologists Got Wrong

The equation here just doesn't add up at all. The Adena skulls are brachycephalic (enhanced by artificial cranial deformation), brachycephaly is one of the characteristics of the "Dinaric race" in Europe, there was an artificially-deformed skull discovered in the Near East in 1856, ergo the earthen monuments of eastern North America were constructed by biblical giants?  Is that the whole story?

If you detect a few missing connections in that line of reasoning, I'm right there with you.  How a racial category constructed around the 5'8" people of southern Europe became the link between Og of the Old Testament and the Adena is beyond me. It's silly.

I think the main rabbit hole in this case is the uncritical acceptance of the racial typologizing and
classification that was a mainstay of anthropology in the 19th and early 20th centuries.  If you're going to embrace the same racial "science" as the Nazis, you're kind of setting yourself up for failure.  That's pretty obvious.  There's even a discussion on Stormfront (a white supremacist website) that complains that having writing about things like the "Dinaric race" on the forum "will make Stormfront a laughing stock."

The example of the "Dinaric race" should be a cautionary tale to anyone looking to use pre-World War II racial typologies to reconstruct population history, which is what Zimmerman attempts to do.  To anyone paying attention, the description of "Dinaricism" as "not a quality pertaining to a single race" by one of last prominent racist theorists in mainstream American anthropology (Coon) would seem to throw a bucket of cold water on the idea that a link between the populations of Europe and North America could be recognized based on the identification of "Dinaric" skulls. 

But I guess that's just another pesky detail (like the real story of the "Jerusalem skull)," and real giantologistis are not going let such trivia stand in the way of a good story.
  The "good story," of course, is one we've heard before: it's the Myth of the Moundbuilders all over again (i.e., the notion that white people, not Native Americans, were responsible for building the earthen monuments of eastern North America).  What's new here is the attempt to use discredited racial "science" to somehow bridge the gaps of space and time between the New World and the Old, and between a "race of giants" and normal human variation.   Haphazardly invoking antiquated racial typologies doesn't make the case stronger.

11 Comments
Scott Hamilton
6/9/2015 09:21:11 am

I've always been fascinated how pseudoscience types will fixate on a single legitimate academic idea and twist it to their needs. Usually it's the newest, most newsworthy idea, like quantum physics. Other times it's something that was pushed by some great scientist in the past, like the subset of perpetual motion people who still ascribe to Newton's aether gravity theory (only 500 years after Newton abandoned it). And sometimes it's something completely random, like this Dinaric race thing. Have you ever run across Andrew Collins in your research into giants? He is, for reasons that were still unclear to me after reading one of his books, obsessed with the idea that the Swiderian culture represents a caste of half-neanderthal priests who controlled all of humanity from the paleolithic to the bronze age by claiming detailed knowledge about the Younger Dryas impact. They were, needless to say, giants and both the Watchers and the Annunaki.

Reply
Andy White
6/10/2015 12:53:20 am

Hi Scott.

No, I haven't read much Andrew Collins yet.

The Dinaric thing is interesting because it gets twisted past whatever reality even its original proponents thought it had. Pointing out the errors with the characterization of the Jerusalem skull as "Dinaric" (the concept wasn't even invented yet when the artificially deformed skull was described in 1859) and the mangling of the citation got me nothing except being called an "academic hack" because I pay attention to detail. So there you go.

Reply
spookyparadigm
6/9/2015 11:16:29 pm

Are they using old racist ideas to support giantology?

Or are they trumpeting giants as just one part of a rejection of professional science and modern society broadly?

I think the latter. For a lot of these people, the attraction of giants, Bigfoot, UFOs, ESP, etc. is that they are a part of "science" where they can say what they want without reality contradicting them. And that's usually because they are unhappy with the broader framework of society. Sometimes that's a romantic disappointment with industrialism. But quite often when it comes to pseudoarchaeology, it is a desire to reject the results of professional biology etc. in the 20th century that reject racial theory, creationism, etc.

Reply
Andy White
6/10/2015 12:44:57 am

I think the use of these old racial typologies by giantologists is opportunistic. In the example of the Dinaric skulls, I think the idea gets embraced because it seems to support the idea that you can link these various populations using cranial characteristics. Even overt racists don't think the idea has much merit, however, which is why it's so bizarre.

Reply
JM
6/10/2015 01:18:06 am

I've been curious about the whole, ancient mound building white dudes in the Ohio valley, mystery for a while. These two links cite and reference a 1775 possibly 1776 interview of Chief Cornstalk that wasn't published until 1816. The account states that:
"During this visit Captain William McKee, one of the officers
assembled there for Hand's intended campaign, had frequent
conversations with Cornstalk with reference to the antiquities of
the West, in which the old chief evinced much intelligence and
reflection. In reply to an inquiry respecting the mound and fort-
builders, he stated that it was the current and assured tradition
among his people, that Ohio and Kentucky had once been settled
by a white race, possessed of arts of which the Indians had no
knowledge that, after many sanguinary contests with the na-
tives, these invaders were at length exterminated. McKee in-
quired why the Indians had not learned these arts of those
ancient white people? Cornstalk replied indefinitely, relating
that the Great Spirit had once given the Indians a book which
taught them all these arts; but they had lost it, and had never
since regained a knowledge of them. What people were they,
McKee asked, who made so many graves on the Ohio, and at
other places ? He declared that he did not know, and remarked
that it was not his nation, or any he had been acquainted with.
The Captain next practically repeated a former inquiry, by ask-
ing Cornstalk if he could tell who made those old forts, which displayed so much skill in fortifying? He answered, that he only
knew that a story had been handed down from a very long ago
people, that there had been a white race inhabiting the country
who made the graves and forts; and, added, that some Indians,
who had travelled very far west, or north-west, had found a
nation or people, who lived as Indians generally do, although of
a different complexion."

Page 14 (labeled 258 in the text)

http://publications.ohiohistory.org/ohj/browse/displaypages.php?display%5B%5D=0021&display%5B%5D=245&display%5B%5D=262

Referenced and expanded on in part 2 of this link

http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/saga2/sagawt0c.htm

(The 2nd link also takes a hard look at and calls into question the use of Native American legends for promoting Mormonism in it's early days)


Reply
Andy White
6/10/2015 04:03:02 am

Here's what Brad Lepper wrote about the Cornstalk account: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/06/06/Earthworks_history_remains_muddled.html

Reply
JM
6/10/2015 06:30:57 am

Thanks for that link Andy. I've been collecting stuff on Cornstalk. Brad Lepper is a personal hero of mine and I wasn't aware that he had written anything on the subject. Maybe I should have put scare quotes around the word "mystery" :D a few things jump out at me though. The parable idea seems like a possibility but also kind of speculative. I understand that it's an attempt to clear up something that doesn't align with the archaeological record...and that's why it is necessary. And on the flip side of the accuracy of oral histories argument, it has always seemed strange to me that the Native Americans (the obvious builders of the mounds) and their method of record keeping through oral histories has (at least at one time) been accurate and reliable enough to track the 18.6 lunar cycle of the moon like at Newark (which would have taken nearly half a century just to check once) but not accurate enough to keep track of simple information such as who built them or if they themselves built the earthworks and mounds. Holy run on sentence...I'm glad there were still some parenthesis left after Treasure Force's Run on exclamation marks. Anyway, I appreciate what you're doing here on this blog, I've been telling my friends about it. Like I said before in another comment, it is nearly impossible to research my local area without running into the type of stuff that you are addressing here on this blog. As someone that is into the local history of the Ohio Valley area, when I run across things like these in the old histories it automatically makes one feel caught in the middle of two different schools of thought...just by living where I live and reading what the early settlers were writing about. I think a lot of other people could be feeling the same way about their local history as well.

Normandie Kent
2/6/2017 01:48:02 am

I guess because not one white European knows why some of their ancient ancestors build the Stonehenge Megalith, that must mean some red race of Native Americans built it be lifting the giant stones over their head and placing them in a circle on the Salisbury Plains, it must have been them since no one remembers who an for why they were built.

Reply
Geoffrey Sea
12/22/2015 02:32:39 pm

What you are missing in the Adena story is the origin of the "Adena" and "Hopewell" false categories in the great hoax of the Walam Olum. Simply put, since there was no distinction between the peoples of the middle Ohio Valley during the early and middle Woodland periods -- they were all Central Algonquians of one continuous civilization -- it became arbitrary how to divide them into two "warring races." This was continuous from the 19th century through to the present.

Constantine Rafinesque, who was a bona fide scientific genius, got the inspiration to write a parody of the Book of Mormon and pass it off as a genuine "Lenape" sacred text. To be a proper parody, it had to include two warring tribes in Ohio, which in the Joseph Smith version had been descendants of Israelites and Egyptians. Rafinesque, who was probably Jewish himself, converted this comical narrative into a caricatured war between gentiles, supposed ancestors of the Cherokees and the Lenape.

Since the Walum Olum was not exposed as a fraud until the 1980s, it continued to play in the minds of feeble thinkers like Warren K. Moorehead, who never had formal scientific training. He modelled the Adena and Hopewell (the former named by his colleague William Mills) after the two tribes of Rafinesque's hoax.

Since the Adena (including what has been called Hopewell) were a heterogeneous group, some naturally had broad skulls while others had narrow skulls, throughout the period in question. Before radiocarbon dating, it was very easy to label a brachycephalic specimen as "Adena" and a dolichocephalic specimen as "Hopewell," with all kinds of subsidiary fictions about how the "Hopewell" were the elite overlords of the "Adena," how the "Hopewell" were white and the "Adena" red, etc.

All of this was projection of the "warring races" paradigm established by Joseph Smith for the convenience of inspiring a religion based on violence.

And the nonsense won't stup until we recognize that they were all Adena.

Reply
Dan Todd
2/11/2019 08:53:04 pm

I stumbled on your page after googling "Who are Dinaric people" after seeing a documentary about genes and it mentioned how the Dinaric Alps people are tallest in the world - sorry the Dutch are the tallest Men+Women but the Dinarics have the tallest men. This fascinated me because the most common DNA Y haplo in Europe is I2a, and I2a2 is the Balkan Sardinian haplo, the oldest in Europe and present in every population. Having read everything here, I have to say the German Nazi guys had crazy ideas but they had some interesting observations (sans the rankings). This group of people appears to have been autochthonous to Europe some 43,000 years ago, and apparently are part of the Yamnaya culture and/or Dispilo civilization in Northern Greece and the Balkans, probably the oldest civilization with writing, and predating the Sumerians. This is probably the famous Kurgans or Aryans, or Proto-Indo-Europeans some 6000 years ago. The height is likely due to the dominant T gene expressing itself over a long time. But the Levant thing is cool too. If you've ever travelled to the Balkans the first thing you think is they're like a friendlier group of Jews.

The point I want to make, and it's really laughable, is the extent to which the human mind is directed and misdirected by basic and elementary cosmetics is amazing. The Nazis seem to me like a bunch of weak little pansies who literally only cared about cosmetic or superficial appearance. Studies into the Spanish population in Spain show they are some 80% Gaelic or Celtic. Yet they don't look anything like the super pale Scotts and Irish. Physical exterior is hardly a tell of anything.

Reply
Diana Drakulich
2/19/2021 05:15:51 pm

WIKI - DINARIC ALPS HEIGHT - 2020 - Tallest in the World

185.6 cm (6 ft 1 in) 171.8 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in) 1.08 17 (N=m: 2705 f: 2842) N/A Measured 2005 [59]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_human_height_by_country

Reply



Leave a Reply.


    All views expressed in my blog posts are my own. The views of those that comment are their own. That's how it works.

    I reserve the right to take down comments that I deem to be defamatory or harassing. 

    Andy White

    Follow me on Twitter: @Andrew_A_White

    Email me: andy.white.zpm@gmail.com

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    Picture

    Sick of the woo?  Want to help keep honest and open dialogue about pseudo-archaeology on the internet? Please consider contributing to Woo War Two.
    Picture

    Follow updates on posts related to giants on the Modern Mythology of Giants page on Facebook.

    Archives

    January 2023
    January 2022
    November 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    March 2021
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    3D Models
    AAA
    Adena
    Afrocentrism
    Agent Based Modeling
    Agent-based Modeling
    Aircraft
    Alabama
    Aliens
    Ancient Artifact Preservation Society
    Androgynous Fish Gods
    ANTH 227
    ANTH 291
    ANTH 322
    Anthropology History
    Anunnaki
    Appalachia
    Archaeology
    Ardipithecus
    Art
    Atlantis
    Australia
    Australopithecines
    Aviation History
    Bigfoot
    Birds
    Boas
    Book Of Mormon
    Broad River Archaeological Field School
    Bronze Age
    Caribou
    Carolina Bays
    Ceramics
    China
    Clovis
    Complexity
    Copper Culture
    Cotton Mather
    COVID-19
    Creationism
    Croatia
    Crow
    Demography
    Denisovans
    Diffusionism
    DINAA
    Dinosaurs
    Dirt Dance Floor
    Double Rows Of Teeth
    Dragonflies
    Early Archaic
    Early Woodland
    Earthworks
    Eastern Woodlands
    Eastern Woodlands Household Archaeology Data Project
    Education
    Egypt
    Europe
    Evolution
    Ewhadp
    Fake Hercules Swords
    Fetal Head Molding
    Field School
    Film
    Florida
    Forbidden Archaeology
    Forbidden History
    Four Field Anthropology
    Four-field Anthropology
    France
    Genetics
    Genus Homo
    Geology
    Geometry
    Geophysics
    Georgia
    Giants
    Giants Of Olden Times
    Gigantism
    Gigantopithecus
    Graham Hancock
    Grand Valley State
    Great Lakes
    Hollow Earth
    Homo Erectus
    Hunter Gatherers
    Hunter-gatherers
    Illinois
    India
    Indiana
    Indonesia
    Iowa
    Iraq
    Israel
    Jim Vieira
    Jobs
    Kensington Rune Stone
    Kentucky
    Kirk Project
    Late Archaic
    Lemuria
    Lithic Raw Materials
    Lithics
    Lizard Man
    Lomekwi
    Lost Continents
    Mack
    Mammoths
    Mastodons
    Maya
    Megafauna
    Megaliths
    Mesolithic
    Michigan
    Middle Archaic
    Middle Pleistocene
    Middle Woodland
    Midwest
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Mississippian
    Missouri
    Modeling
    Morphometric
    Mound Builder Myth
    Mu
    Music
    Nazis
    Neandertals
    Near East
    Nephilim
    Nevada
    New Mexico
    Newspapers
    New York
    North Carolina
    Oahspe
    Oak Island
    Obstetrics
    Ohio
    Ohio Valley
    Oldowan
    Olmec
    Open Data
    Paleoindian
    Paleolithic
    Pilumgate
    Pleistocene
    Pliocene
    Pre Clovis
    Pre-Clovis
    Prehistoric Families
    Pseudo Science
    Pseudo-science
    Radiocarbon
    Reality Check
    Rome
    Russia
    SAA
    Sardinia
    SCIAA
    Science
    Scientific Racism
    Sculpture
    SEAC
    Search For The Lost Giants
    Sexual Dimorphism
    Sitchin
    Social Complexity
    Social Networks
    Solutrean Hypothesis
    South Africa
    South America
    South Carolina
    Southeast
    Stone Holes
    Subsistence
    Swordgate
    Teaching
    Technology
    Teeth
    Television
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Topper
    Travel
    Travel Diaries
    Vaccines
    Washington
    Whatzit
    White Supremacists
    Wisconsin
    Woo War Two
    World War I
    World War II
    Writing
    Younger Dryas

    RSS Feed

    Picture
Proudly powered by Weebly