Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 9th, 2015, 03:42 PM   #31
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Pyrinos Polemos
Posts: 451

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viriathus View Post
"Nordic" or "Northerners" are usually associated with high stature and in terms of height, Balts are among the taller peoples in Europe:

Distribution of average male height in Europe:

Click the image to open in full size.

Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...70677X14000665

I was surprised by this rather short stature of the English males according to this data, on the other hand. But wikipedia confirms:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_h...ound_the_world
Ukraine also surprised me, I thought they were taller. But they are a poor country, so it might be caused by poor nutrition.

On the other hand, these South Slavic countries with very tall people are also not so rich. So maybe poor nutrition is no excuse.

Last edited by Viriathus; May 9th, 2015 at 03:48 PM.
Viriathus is offline  
Remove Ads
Old May 9th, 2015, 06:43 PM   #32

Yaroslav the Wise's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Canada
Posts: 319

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viriathus View Post
Ukraine also surprised me, I thought they were taller. But they are a poor country, so it might be caused by poor nutrition.

On the other hand, these South Slavic countries with very tall people are also not so rich. So maybe poor nutrition is no excuse.
Ukraine really surprised me. It's not a poor country, and malnutrition is not a problem at all.
Yaroslav the Wise is offline  
Old May 9th, 2015, 10:16 PM   #33

Nicator's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Belgrade
Posts: 192

Quote:
On the other hand, these South Slavic countries with very tall people are also not so rich. So maybe poor nutrition is no excuse.
Montenegrins and Herzegovinians are well known for their height.

Basically, mountains.
Nicator is offline  
Old May 9th, 2015, 10:45 PM   #34
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2014
From: Lithuania
Posts: 1,503

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viriathus View Post
"Nordic" or "Northerners" are usually associated with high stature and in terms of height, Balts are among the taller peoples in Europe:

Distribution of average male height in Europe:

Click the image to open in full size.

Source: The role of nutrition and genetics as key determinants of the positive height trend

I was surprised by this rather short stature of the English males according to this data, on the other hand. But wikipedia confirms:

Human height - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have read that English population lost a lot of height during industrial revolution. Basically they used to be taller, but because of horribly conditions in cities during revolution lost quite a bit of height. This may be remaining cause, with time all countries with good diet should even out in height.
janusdviveidis is offline  
Old May 11th, 2015, 07:10 PM   #35
Citizen
 
Joined: Mar 2015
From: Drammen, Norway
Posts: 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatstreetwarrior View Post
Are Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia more Germanic or are they more Nordic?

It`s more complicated than this. In Medieval times there were four tribes, basically shamanists I believe, living in this area of the Baltic; Latgallians, Couroioans, Selonians and Semigallians.
Latvia is named after the Latgallians and was mixed with Fins known as Livonians from early on. The Latvian language is Indo-European but Livonian is still spoken there, and that is of course quite close to Finnish. Later Lativa has been under Polish; Swedish, German/Teutonic and Russian control. The German element was wiped out in WWII but many Latvians still speak Russian.
Lithuania is a bit different because it was united quite early, although from the same tribal origins as Latvia. For a time Lithuania was the largest and most powerful country in Eastern Europe, stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea. This Medieval imperialist past still lingers somewhat there, just as it does in Poland. The Lithuanian language is very similar to Latvian and also an Indo European language.
Estonian is a Finnish language. The Swedes (Who ruled Finland until quite recently) always insisted that the south coast of the Gulf of Finland belonged to them because they considered the Estonians Finnish. St Petersburg was in fact originally founded where it is by Russia to demonstrate against these Swedish claims to the Baltic Sea.

So in short none of these people are either Nordic or Germanic linguistically. They are Indo-Europeans, except the Estonians who are Finnish-Ugric. But as with most European history this is an oversimplification. All these countries have spent centuries under the domination of more powerful neighbors for centuries and centuries. Early on the Baltic heathens were customary summer targets for various micro crusades the HRE emperors would arrange more or less for propaganda purposes. If we go back to about 1200AD this pagan control of the southern Baltic stretched as far west as Brandenburg and Schwerin (North of Berlin). By about 1400 they had almost all been either converted or wiped out, as in most other places in Europe.
In this general context the German orders of Teuton were in the general area of the modern Baltic states in 13th century and provided considerable German influence. The Teutons were basically the German crusader order against Baltic pagans. So many German junkers held estates in particularly Latvia until the Red Army rolled into town in 44-45 and it had all been partly German for many centuries. And there are also powerful Polish, Swedish and Russian influences, and of course there is the fact that Lithuania once conquered all of this area to consider. All this has as usual created a wonderfully European hodgepodge of little groups of stubborn people speaking different languages. None of which are Germanic.

Last edited by Fishslap; May 11th, 2015 at 07:14 PM.
Fishslap is offline  
Old May 11th, 2015, 07:37 PM   #36

Kotromanic's Avatar
McCartneynite-Lennonist
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Iowa USA
Posts: 3,819
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicator View Post
Montenegrins and Herzegovinians are well known for their height.

Basically, mountains.
What's the Swiss excuse, then?

Cultural selection I think more than Darwinian pressure explains Dinaric height?
Kotromanic is online now  
Old July 17th, 2016, 05:51 AM   #37
Citizen
 
Joined: Jul 2016
From: Earth
Posts: 3
East Baltic Countries


East Baltic Countries (not Baltic States), which are not states, but countries, have not much in common despite their small size and some genetics. No one says "Low States" or "North Sea Republics" for BeNeLux as an example. They are not Germanic, but they do have a tiny bit of Germanic genetics. Latvia has common religion with both Estonia and Lithuania, while Lithuania has nothing in common with Estonia except genetics. Talking about Lithuania, at some point in time Lithuania was larger than Poland. Lithuanian culture and language are very distinct, unlike any other (except Latvian), which despite attempt to pair it with Slavic, it is not. Lithuanian language has a couple hundred words that are somehow related with Slavic, which could be either borrowing from either side and even common ancestry from thousands of years ago when most Europeans were much closer related. Romanian (Romance group) language has more common words with Slavic languages than Lithuanian does. Think about it. Those fools of convenience who couple Lithuanians with Slavs do it out of pure convenience and out of lack of deep knowledge. Baltic or Lithuanian language(s) have as much in common with Latin and Germanic languages as they do with Slavic and Greek - some, but not much. Because small tiny nations usually get absorbed and abused, Lithuania as a very distinct culture and language because of its recent past of the past 200 years get a "Russian" or "Slavic" label, which is absolutely wrong. If you study and investigate Lithuanian language, you will see that apart froma couple hundred similar words it has nothing in common with Slavic, Germanic or Latin languages. It is a language and a (Baltic) language group all on its own. Not Balto-Slavic and not Balto-Germanic and not Balto-Hellenic ior Balto-Latino. Not even Balto-Finnic. It is Baltic. Period. Take a Lithuanian-Russian Dictionary and compare words and you will see. No one groups Germany and France into one Franco-Germanic linguistic group even that they have much in common, especially the English and the French (Latin). Even that English has a LOT MORE in common with French, Spanish, Portuguese than Lithuanian has in common with Slavic languages. Much more. So there should be Franco-Germanic group is much more likely than Balto-Slavic idiocy that is created for a mere purpose of insult. Get a life, you do not place German and Polish languages into one group just because they are neighbours.

Example for comparison purpose:

Lithuanian: Atvaziavo vyras pasiimti savo vaiku, bet surado tik shuni.
Russian: Priekhal muzhchina zabrat' svoix detey, no nashyol tol´ko sobaku.
Englisce: Man arrived to pick his children up, but found only a dog.

Last edited by Spindesys; July 17th, 2016 at 06:10 AM.
Spindesys is offline  
Old July 17th, 2016, 07:21 AM   #38
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,260

Well, Estonia is Finno-Ugric in language, closest to Finnish and the two languages are mutually intelligible. The Estonians are also religiously Lutheran Protestants, like the Finns — and the Swedes, and the Danes and Norwegians. Linguistically both Estonian and Finnish are very different from Scandinavian, Germanic or even Indoeuropean languages.

While Latvian and Lithuanian are linguistically Baltic, and so quite different from Estonian. And Lithuania is Catholic. Latvia seems pretty evenly divided between Lutheran, Orthodox and Catholic (certain preponderance for Lutheranism).

So, linguistically, no they are rather "un-Germanic" overall. Religiously otoh, Estonia and to a certain extent Latvia shares a religious history with Scandinavia and northern Germany — not least because they share history. Lithuania otoh doesn't share that — they're Catholic and have rather more in common with Polish history.
Larrey is offline  
Old July 17th, 2016, 07:24 AM   #39
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Italy
Posts: 439

^ I agree that the Balto-Slavic label was created by Russian and Polish imperialists to suppress the Balts.

Balto-Slavic makes as much sense as Greco-Armenian.
God Emperor is offline  
Old July 17th, 2016, 11:41 AM   #40

notgivenaway's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2015
From: UK
Posts: 5,231

Finns aren't Germanic. Finnish isn't a Germanic language, even though the Norse must have raided, traded and settled there. This must have been Danes, Swedes and Norwegian Norse.
notgivenaway is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
baltic, germanic, nordic, states



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Germanic or Nordic rite of Manhood or "Vision Quest" THusar Ancient History 7 March 3rd, 2015 05:42 PM
Russia Attempts to Destabilize the Baltic States in the Early 2000s? Futurist Speculative History 6 November 24th, 2014 02:05 PM
Trying to find ancient Nordic & Germanic names Shadowclaw European History 23 November 17th, 2013 01:26 PM
Germanic States (1700-1800s) conningcris European History 5 January 31st, 2011 04:12 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.