Via Italian Wikipedia.
Update addressing some questions/comments:
(1) The map specifically shows the frequency of blond hair; so yes the frequency of light hair in general will be higher.
(2) The map is adapted from Biasutti's Razze e popoli della Terra. The data was originally collected by Ridolfo Livi in 1859-1863.
(3) The Biasutti/Livi map shows a higher frequency of blond hair in Corsica than in Sardinia. In keeping with the apparent pattern elsewhere in Italy, the frequency of R1b appears to be markedly higher in Corsicans than in Sardinians (in this paper, "HG 1" in combination with "HG 22" roughly corresponds to R1b).
(4) "Does R1b necessarily correlate with light hair?" In Italy it pretty clearly does. If you mean am I suggesting a strict correspondence between light hair and haplogroup R1b, obviously I am not. Looking at Europe as a whole, I doubt much of a correlation exists. But the evidence is consistent with the bearers of R1b (or more specifically subclades of R-L11) being lighter than the previous inhabitants of Italy. This doesn't mean the original carriers of R-M417 and some subclades of I weren't probably also lighter-haired, or that as R1b spread throughout Europe and mixing occurred, R1b always remained associated with light hair. It does tend to add yet more weight against attempts to link R1b in Europe to migration of Neolithic farmers from Anatolia, but dispensing with that question for good awaits large, high-resolution studies of ancient and modern DNA.
"haplogroup R1b is found in some of it's highest concentrations among European peoples in Spain and Portugal -- two countries hardly known for blondes."
Within Iberia, though, it's certainly possible the pattern will hold. Among Iberians, Basques have some of the highest frequencies of both R1b and blondism. According to Coon: 'The French Basques are by no means all brunet; Collignon finds 22 per cent of blue eyes, 44 per cent of "medium," and 34 per cent of dark. Black hair is found in 7 per cent of the group, brown in 77 per cent, and light brown to blond in 16 per cent. Among the Spanish Basques the incidence of blondism is somewhat lower, but the Basques are still light when compared to most other inhabitants of Spain.'
(1) The map specifically shows the frequency of blond hair; so yes the frequency of light hair in general will be higher.
(2) The map is adapted from Biasutti's Razze e popoli della Terra. The data was originally collected by Ridolfo Livi in 1859-1863.
(3) The Biasutti/Livi map shows a higher frequency of blond hair in Corsica than in Sardinia. In keeping with the apparent pattern elsewhere in Italy, the frequency of R1b appears to be markedly higher in Corsicans than in Sardinians (in this paper, "HG 1" in combination with "HG 22" roughly corresponds to R1b).
(4) "Does R1b necessarily correlate with light hair?" In Italy it pretty clearly does. If you mean am I suggesting a strict correspondence between light hair and haplogroup R1b, obviously I am not. Looking at Europe as a whole, I doubt much of a correlation exists. But the evidence is consistent with the bearers of R1b (or more specifically subclades of R-L11) being lighter than the previous inhabitants of Italy. This doesn't mean the original carriers of R-M417 and some subclades of I weren't probably also lighter-haired, or that as R1b spread throughout Europe and mixing occurred, R1b always remained associated with light hair. It does tend to add yet more weight against attempts to link R1b in Europe to migration of Neolithic farmers from Anatolia, but dispensing with that question for good awaits large, high-resolution studies of ancient and modern DNA.
"haplogroup R1b is found in some of it's highest concentrations among European peoples in Spain and Portugal -- two countries hardly known for blondes."
Within Iberia, though, it's certainly possible the pattern will hold. Among Iberians, Basques have some of the highest frequencies of both R1b and blondism. According to Coon: 'The French Basques are by no means all brunet; Collignon finds 22 per cent of blue eyes, 44 per cent of "medium," and 34 per cent of dark. Black hair is found in 7 per cent of the group, brown in 77 per cent, and light brown to blond in 16 per cent. Among the Spanish Basques the incidence of blondism is somewhat lower, but the Basques are still light when compared to most other inhabitants of Spain.'
Because if that is the case, Italy north of Rome has an appreciably larger percentage of its people that qualifies as having lighter hair (particularly not black or dark brown/brunette).
Wonder if the formerly Italian island of Corsica just to its north (home of the famous - or infamous - Napoleone Buonaparte) is also of similar genetic and phenotypic makeup?
Does R1b necessarily correlate with light hair?
This could certainly be an example of correlation not necessarily proving causation -- since haplogroup R1b is found in some of it's highest concentrations among European peoples in Spain and Portugal -- two countries hardly known for blondes.
The north south direction is the only real way to travel in italy, and many factors will show a north south cline as the influences will be lessened as distance increases. The differnt climates in Italy will also impede the flows of certain factors in Italy from north to south and vice versa, and help support a north south cline.
The blond hair could have easily come to Italy from a northern migration pre r1b. Or you could just say dark hair came to peninsular Italy with... J2? I'm sure there's more.
One would assume that there would be at least a fairly strong correspondence of blondness (or fair-complectedness)on the Italian peninsula in those areas most historically populated by the invaders, and settlers, from the north, particularly in the post-Roman Empire, especially with the heavy migrations of the Germanic Lombards/Langobards.
I suppose as well, if Nordic theory is correct, that if the ancient Romans were disproportionately Nordic (at least to the rest of the Italic peninsula's peoples), those areas they most heavily settled should also correspond with higher rates of blondness.
*Additionally, if in fact the ancient Greeks were also disproportionately Nordic, I imagine as well that even in southern Italy and Sicily these same genetic markers for lightness/fairness should also be present due to the ancient Greek settlements there that long-preceeded the Roman and Italic settlement/conquest this area long known as Magna Graecia ("Greater Greece").
Not all Romans but the patricians.
In general you see that among all races the upper class is lighter.
That is like saying "not all Americans but the Anglo-Saxons".
Point is that, originally, the Roman people shared a common descent; then it became more of a patrician -> 'plebian' divide as the population became more racially and ethnically mixed.
Just like in modern-day America (although AmeriKwa (and Britain) in so many ways is much, much worse off).
" In general you see that among all races the upper class is lighter." anon 2
Those are two very different claims!
And even if the ruling class of the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, ect... tended to be lighter than the general population both them and their subjects were darker than the Germans, English, Scandinavians, balkans, ect...
Secondly, gdp and the number of Nobel prizes a country gets is correlated with the countries overall average iq. I don't think an elite can do much without a good population. Consider that many of the greatest scientists/inventors, poets, generals, and other great individuals didn't even come an elite and look how much they did. And even the average persons proficiency goes down as their iq does so they produce less.
To credit so much of what the Mediterraneans did to a Nordic elite is ridiculous. Give the Mediterraneans their due.
It's also hypocritical to talk about how minorities are burdening the whites in America then go and say that Nordic Roman elite conquered much of the world.
Then you can see that while the north tends to be smarter than the south there are many exceptions. Spain is smarter than France, Ireland, and Russia. And Italy (maybe just northern Italy) is plain smart... So why not give them credit for Rome?
And just like Asia the northernmost populations in Europe are not the smartest. There are other factors...
Good work men!
n/a,
For these types of studies, do darker shades of blonde ("dirty-blonde") to lighter shades of brown (like chestnut or auburn) hair qualify as light hair, again for the purposes of these observations?
How about you post about the Bilderbergers, n/a? For the "blue blood" Nordic-worshippers, the Rockefellers, Bushes, and related clans couldn't care less about exterminating most White Americans so long as they profit. They gots dat psychpathic DNA.
You've got that Pole Zbigniew Brzezinski who feels, as a noble, that most White Americans are expendable pieces of biomass. And he has been given his post by his "blue blood" CFR pals and overseers. Buncha inbred scum. I don't think he gives a shit about Italian DNA.
Notably, Italians have been placed into the highest positions within the military-industrial complex. Not bad for a group of people that 2,000 years ago was subservient, if we are to trust this pit as a source. Go figure. :P
I forgot about that. :P
n/a seems obsessed with Italians for some reason.
Actually, I am Italian-American myself and think n/a is very fair and even-handed - both with Italians - or whatever other ethnic or racial group he is speaking of. Some of his commentators, however... (oh, its no problem there either, and even they are often hysterical in their verbal jeramiads against 'swarthoids' - lol).
As per your claims regarding the Bilderburgers (and secret societies in general) and Ron Paul, I agree those are important issues, but are ancillary to this site, which is researching and understanding the underlying genetic components of race and culture (I would love to see a genetic study done on the Anglosphere "elites", however, and the reasons why they hate, or at least hold in contempt, their own People, Nation and Tribe).
Within Iberia, though, it's certainly possible the pattern will hold. Among Iberians, Basques have some of the highest frequencies of both R1b and blondism.
That is rather interesting, n/a, since, if the Basques are purportedly to be of non-Indo-European ancestry, this would further compound this paradox, since blondism, especially due to its recessive nature, would more likely be found among the subsequent Indo-European invaders of the Iberian peninsula rather than its earliest inhabitants -- as well as it being highly interesting that some of the highest concentrations and frequencies of R1b being found among a largely endogenous people/tribe of non-Aryan origins.
*The Basque language, btw, is known as "Euskara Batua", and is definitively not related to any other European language groups:
The Basque language is an inflected language whose origin is still somewhat puzzling. The fact that it is not an Indoeuropean language, and shows no ressemblance to languages in neighbouring countries, has led to the formulation of a variety of hypotheses to explain its existence. ...
http://planetrjl.tripod.com/LaFraughName/id14.html
Indo-European is a lingustic category, not a racial or biological taxa. There is also no such thing as 'Indo-European' hair color.
Languages are intrinsically tied to the people who speak them.
Well then you should be a little more precise don't you think? A super language group spoken by billions ranging from the North sea to the Indian ocean is a little too broad and unprecise. Racially the non Indo-European Basques are much closer to Indo-European Spaniards than either group are to 'Indo-European' Pakistanis or even 'Indo-European' Russians. Indo-European speaking Nordish groups like Lithuanians are closer to non Indo-European Nordish groups like Estonians than to Indo-European swarthoid Sicilians.
Ancient Phoenicians and modern Jews speak Afro-Asiatic languages but that does not mean they are the same as 'Afro-Asiatic' Somalis, or have the same hair color. lol
You might as well have said migrations of people "who don't speak with with clicks" into the Iberian peninsula.
Not really, plenty of non-Whites speak Indo-European languages these days as their native tongue.
*The Basque language, btw, is known as "Euskara Batua", and is definitively not related to any other European language groups:"
I don't see a paradox in the likelihood that Basques are partly descended from Indo-European invaders. Coon:
Both the Atlanto-Mediterranean and Dinaric elements mentioned were present as early as the Copper Age in North Central Spain, where they were partially identified with the early Bell Beaker culture. The Keltic Iron Age racial type of Britain, which the living Spanish Basques so closely? resemble, was produced originally in southern Germany from a combination of Nordics with Bell Beaker or other Dinarics, and imported into England where Mediterranean and Atlanto-Mediterranean elements, as well as some Bronze Age Dinaric factors, were already present. The mixture of similar ingredients in different places produces similar results. Seen in the light of modern physical anthropology, the Basques are still interesting, and perhaps romantic, but no longer mysterious.
There's nothing special about the Basque language except that it happened to survive -- any number of other languages will have been present in Europe before and during the spread of Indo-European.
The Vasconic substratum theory is a proposal that many western European languages contain remnants of an old language family of Vasconic languages, of which Basque is the only surviving member. The proposal was made by the German linguist Theo Vennemann, but has been rejected by other linguists. According to Vennemann, Vasconic languages were once widespread on the European continent before they were mostly replaced by Indo-European languages. Relics of these languages include toponyms across Central and Western Europe and some vocabulary in Germanic and Balto-Slavic languages that cannot be traced to a common Indo-European ancestor.
Pictish is a term used for the extinct language or languages thought to have been spoken by the Picts, the people of northern and central Scotland in the Early Middle Ages. The idea that a distinct Pictish language was perceived at some point is attested clearly in Bede's early 8th-century Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, which names Pictish as a language distinct from both Welsh and Gaelic.[1]
There is virtually no direct attestation of Pictish, short of a limited number of place names and names of people found on monuments and the contemporary records in the area controlled by the Kingdom of the Picts.
[...]
John Rhys, in 1892, proposed that Pictish was a non-Indo-European language. This opinion was based on the apparently unintelligible ogham inscriptions found in historically Pictish areas. He initially attempted to align the language with Basque,[17] but later revised his opinion, settling for an unspecified non-Indo-European language.[18] Heinrich Zimmer took a similar position, arguing in 1898 that Pictish was fundamentally "non-Aryan" (i.e. non-Indo-European), overlaid with Goidelic and Brittonic. His view was influenced by Rhys' study of inscriptions, supported by cultural practices he considered to be non-Indo-European, i.e. tattooing and matriliny.[19] This position was maintained well into the 20th century by the likes of MacNeill and by Macalister.[20] Occasional attempts have been made to align Pictish with modern non-Indo-European languages, but these have met with little success and have been firmly rejected by academics.[21]
[...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictish_language
As the old saying goes -
"He who smelt it, dealt it..."
- Fr. John+
- Fr. John+
Uh, no John, I am hardly anti-White.
I was saying that Anon #26 was the anti-White racist.
http://racehist.blogspot.com/2011/08/y-haplogroup-r1b-and-light-hair-in.html