When did blonde haired, blue eyed peoples...

Originally posted by Serge L It's usually explained with the fact hair becomes thicker when growing, so while the melanin keeps the same tone, since  every single hair is semi-transparent, the bulk of them seems darker when they are thicker.

Which is not true, at least not in general. I know several people who had blond here when young, but black now. And every single strand is black if you look at it individually.

I personally had blond hair as a kid, but no longer. Now it's brownish (though whenever I leave Scandinavia people call it "blonde" anyway, so maybe my reply to the above is a bit due to translation errors).

Serge L.THANKS

"two brown eyed parents can produce a blue eyed child." with a little help of the milkman

The thing about blondes not nesesarily having blue eys is true,so lets not consider all blondes blue eyed.

Strange also is the fact that most kids who are blondes when they young,but with brown or green eys (not blue) tend to get their hair browner and browner as they grow older, i am an example of this.

Edited by HEROI - 21-Feb-2008 at 02:03

According to the latest information, blue eyes came from one common ancestor form out've the near East during the Neolithic.

The theory that blue eyes was miraculously created because to attract more mates is nonsense really. Not all brunette's are brown eyed and not all blonds are blue eyed besides, moreover two brown eyed parents can produce a blue eyed child.

Also the idea that Red hair came from Neanderthals is moronic. Just because they had it too, doest mean that somehow Scottish or Irish people are Neanderthal. Red hair is a mutation its a very small minority percentage  found in populations and always has been. Its really beyond stupidity but its rather typical of science news, lots of ridiculous claims and silliness its often hard to separate fact from fiction with alotve these articles. Too many in science prefer the mixed race extinction of Neanderthals, despite the fact that no current genetic nor anthropological evidence shows such, yet its still pushed forward.

Just looking at some Neanderthal reconstruction's too,  some like  portraying  them looking way too modern human..namely like Rupert Grint from  Harry Potter fame:



The reality is that they wouldve looked more like this:




The Germanic's themeselves vary, they arent a race of clones:

Ancient Germans weren't so fair

http://dienekes.50webs.com/blog/archives/000634.html

________________

*Blond hair can be found in non-Caucasoid populations:




Edited by Tyranos - 17-Feb-2008 at 17:49

Indeed very interesting article, Serge L! I was always thinking that the dark eye color is dominant, when someone has both dark-eyed and light-eyed predecessors.

Sence they where up far north ? some Endogami perhaps , and sexual atracktion.

Edited by Tore The Dog - 17-Feb-2008 at 13:03

See if i can put in 2 maps over blondes and eye color here , and i think it is also milk tolerance in this game of quizz to , then we are landing in  "Fal Byggden" an ancient place whit stone megalits from 6000 years ago.

Edited by Tore The Dog - 17-Feb-2008 at 12:25

I don't know in Bulgaria, but in Romania there are some areas with characteristic typologies. Most distinct is Maramures (extreme North), which are mostly blonde. Also, in North and East Moldavia the people are blond and have a "Russian" look. In Transylvania there are areas were most people are blonde: Bistrita-Nasaud, Hunedoara, Alba. But the types of faces at these groups are different. I can recognize someone from Hunedoara, is a type seeming with the faces of Dacians on the Trajan's Column, a type of blonde dinaric (atheltic profile at males, faces with well profiled traits).

At the darker haired groups too can be made distinctions. The people from Romanian Plain (Southern Romania) are different, say, for the ones from Central Modavia. In the mountainous part of Wallachia there are several types and some too are identifiable in a measure.


All these are the result of centuries and millenia of population movement and mixages.

It is almost not any resemblance between a Romanian from North of country and one from South, or one from West and one from East etc. What is common is the language (an impressive unity, due perhaps to the low level of population in the migration period) and the feelings.