Comments by Anonymous

azeris are of course not persian, infact they are of turanid-turkic descent and have distinctively different features when compared to persians- farsi descended populations. for example most of the kurds and persians have real dark skin resulting 11 and more in luschan scale and mostly are dolicocephalic. turkic populations in contrary mostly have dark hair-eyes accompanied with occasional light skin & bracycephaly (a progressive trait). irano afghan race infact is subrace under mediterranean-caucasoid category. the same subrace(w/o dravidic elements unlike in iran) overrun by alpine populations have resulted in the hyper bracycephalic light skinned hook nosed armenoid type common among some armenians, minor in eastern anatolian turks(planoccupitalism never occurs in these cases) and mostly among ashkenazi jews. the irano-afghan type itself is very common among sepharadic jews and unmixed arabs of yemen and whole saudi peninsula. there are theories that nordic populations have also descended from these dark caucasians(irano-afghan) of iranian plateau and got depigmented along the migrations northwards but this can be refuted by the scientific fact the whole trans-iranian plateua could never support such a stream of population. what we can easily detect is that the whole iranian plateau which was once populated by mediterranean populations were first invaded by small numbers of nordic invaders originationg from transoxania whom imposed their warrior-aryan legacy and language over the native populations(a good percentage of mixtures have occured as can be seen from the pictures of the exotic indo european speakers such with extreme dark skin, long faces and light eyes (ie farsi, mzandarani, lori, gilaki, northern indians, kashmiris, kurds, gypsies etc) iran then was subsequently overrun by turkic populations in the north and a strong dravidic influence among all iranian populations except azeris(oghuz turks) and northern farsis whom intermixed with turkic or caucasian(alan, sarmatian etc) populations.

persians along with all other middle easterners and southwest asians have a small amount of nordic admixture(so do the gypsies, kashmiris, bengalis, arabs etc). shame on you trying to portray your own people as of european stock instead of cherishing your rich heritage, trying to be whites and insulting turanic people for it. a clear demonstration of inferiority complex.

--
Posted by Anonymous to Persians and Hollywood at 11/03/2005 04:56:25 PM

I think you misunderstand what Nordic means. You should read my blog on Nordic. Nordic does not mean blond hair. It only defines the dimensions of the skull. According to that, then Persians are nordic. And the history you are describing is mostly imaginary history. But I agree with you that Azeris originate from Turanid-Turks. And they have different racial characteristics from Persians. Persians want to be portrayed as Persians and not as Turks or Arabs. That is what this blog is about. Otherwise Persians have very good relation with all central Asian and Anatolian Turks and Azeri Turks. Here is the definition of Nordic-Iranian:

The Nordic-Iranian type D1 lies between Anglo-Saxon and Keltic area norms, and D2 is the earlier pre-Bronze Age Corded form which Coon identifies. Type D3, lighter and more hawk-nosed, is transitional to the Mediterranean type B4 and to type D4 (Iranian), which is the Proto-Iranian of Vallois, Irano-Afghan of others, and Proto-Nordic of Krogman, and which is more linear and more rugged than D3 and has a more tilted chewing plane, more nasal convexity, and deeper occiput. Type D5 approximates Coon's Danubian-Halstatt and successor Central European forms.