Category Archives: Northeast Asians

The Races of China and Japan

Pretty cool old anthropology article on the Chinese and Japanese races. It’s wrong in some ways, but it still has a lot that should be of value. Obviously such an article could not appear in any anthropology journal today, which is pitiful. Blame PC for that.

The Races of China and Japan

by Harry Paxton Howard

The China Weekly Review, Vol. 60 (12 March 1932), pp. 48–50

The Chinese and Japanese are two separate and distinct peoples, as separate and distinct as is the southern Italian from the Norwegian taken in the mass. There is no scientific basis for the assertion that they are of the same race, and indeed anyone at all familiar with the two peoples is readily able to distinguish between the general type. There is the lesser height of the Japanese (due mainly to shorter legs), the more rugged features, the sharper, longer, and narrower eyes (usually black as compared with the typical Chinese brown), the more brownish skin-color, the much greater frequency of beard.

On the other hand, there are certain sub-types which both peoples possess and which make it possible for thousands of Japanese in this country to pass as Chinese, while there are many pure Chinese who may be mistaken for Japanese. The reason for this is that each people is a mixture of different elements. Some of the elements are common to both peoples. Some elements one people possesses but not the other.

Chinese Racial Origins

Many anthropologists have devoted themselves to analyzing and distinguishing the racial elements in the two countries. Buxton, Li Chi, Shirokogoroff and some others have given special study to the Chinese people, and all distinguish different types among the population, as do also Haddon, Morant and others.

The most complete study to date is that made by Dr. Stevenson of the P.U.M.C. at Peiping, in his ‘Collected Anthropometric Data on the Chinese,’ showing at least two distinct types, though Stevenson is too cautious a scientist to state any definite conclusions as yet. And as regards racial origins in the North, the data given in Black’s study of skulls from prehistoric sites in Kansu and Honan suggest answers to some long-debated problems when considered in connection with some physical types already distinguished by different anthropologists.

First of all there is a Chinese type which is also found among the Manchus and by students is regarded as the fundamental ‘Manchu’ type. It is of short or medium stature, with broad head, low orbits (apparently associate with a long and narrow eye-slit), narrow nose often aquiline, frequently fair and ruddy skin. This type exists in Manchuria and in North China today, and is found further south as well.

Secondly, there is a type which, if placed side by side with the foregoing, will show marked differences. It is taller, with longer skull, wider forehead, higher orbits (‘rounder’ and more open eye), broader nose. It is frequent in North China, but is found to be predominant and characteristic among the Kham Tibetans of the territory adjoining Kansu.

The Primitive Mixture

The study of prehistoric skulls referred to above indicates the existence of these very types in the China of four thousand years ago. The earliest skulls, from Neolithic cities in Kansu and Honan, present ‘several suggestive similarities to Kham Tibetans’ though differing from more recent North China skulls in being longer, ‘with somewhat wide foreheads and longer skull bases, and slightly broader palates and lower orbits.’

The aspects in which these Neolithic skulls differ from the Kham Tibetans, however, are very significant. In addition to the Tibetan type, they include a type with broader head, narrow nose, and lower orbits. Such features are characteristic of the Manchu type referred to above, which fact leaves little doubt that the Neolithic people were a mixture of these Kham Tibetan and ‘Manchu’ types.

Judging from their later distribution, it is probable that the ‘Manchu’ type was more characteristic of the Honan communities, the Kham Tibetan type of those in Kansu, but the study referred to above, unfortunately, does not distinguish between the two localities, grouping them all together as ‘Yang Shao’ (Neolithic).

The Turkish Element

Others of these prehistoric communities, evidently later in date and showing the use of bronze in addition to stone, show the addition of another type which, combined with the previous ones, makes up a mixture hardly distinguishable from the Northern Chinese of more recent times. As previously stated, the primitive mixture differed from the more recent by its narrower skull, broader foreheads, and lower orbits. The new type evidently possessed a broader skull, with relatively narrower forehead and higher orbits.

These features are characteristic of the Turki, with their broad skull, long oval face, and generally non-Mongolian eyes. From the study mentioned…it would appear that the lower orbits are generally an Oriental characteristic. They are apparently associated with the longer, narrower eye. No other race in this part of the world seems to possess just these characteristics, and we know that the early home of the Turkish peoples was somewhere in the interior of Asia. It is an interesting confirmation of the theory held by many historical students (e.g., Hirth), on different grounds, that the Turkish element is present and is of some significance in China.

[It should be understood that the word Turki here refers not to the tribe, but to the racial stock. This stock is predominant among the Turkish peoples, though now apparently mixed with other elements.]

This element, indeed, would explain the presence of the occasional ‘hairy’ type among the Chinese. Most Chinese, like Mongolian peoples as a whole, have little hair either on face on body. The Turki, however, possess a plentiful beard, and a fair supply of hair on the body as well, in distinct contrast to the Mongolian peoples. We find some Chinese possess beards and growth of hair on the body, and the Turkish element would account for this. Hairiness, indeed, is a distinguishing feature of Chinese Moslems, who quite clearly have a strong non-Mongolian element in them.

Four Types

This Turkish element seems to have come in together with bronze in the legendary period just preceding more definite history. The early Hsiung-nu (on the plains to the north of the Yellow River in ancient China) appear to have been Turkish, and Hirth believes that the Chou Dynasty was of Turkish origin. It was apparently in the second millennium B.C. that this element became mixed with the Kham Tibetans and Manchu types referred to above, producing a mixture similar to that of North China today.

There is, however, a fourth type, of the presence of which Chinese history leaves no doubt whatsoever – the Mongol. This type, distinguished from the mass of Chinese by the lowness of the Mongol head and breadth of the face and head, as well as the little flat nose and low stature, has apparently existed for long in the Chinese mixture. Its coming into China was during the historic period, with one invasion after another by Mongol peoples (as well as by others) during the past two thousand years.

There may be distinguished, therefore, four racial types of some importance in North China,— the Manchu, the Kham Tibetan, the Turki, and the Mongol. These four elements, with their combinations, seem to account for every type of any frequency in North China and are found further south as well.

It should be noted however, that three of the types, judging from their present-day representatives, possess certain essential characters of the Mongolian group – hair straight, black, and scanty on face and body; eyes usually relatively long and narrow, generally brown in color, and commonly with the characteristic Mongolian eye-fold; skin color varying from yellowish-white to yellow-brown, though there are fair and ruddy complexions also.

The Turki are closer to the Caucasian owing to their abundant hair on face and body, frequently if not typically wavy; eyes generally full and round (though often – apparently through admixture – with Mongolian fold); skin color from pinkish-white to brown.

The South

The above-named elements are characteristic of North China, but they extend into the South as well. Here, however, they come into contact with other types rarely found among natives of the North. First of all there is an element with wavy or even curly hair, open and round non-Mongolian eye, short stature but relatively long legs, long and narrow head, and broad nose. These characters, which set this type distinctly apart from the Mongolian races, belong to many southern aborigines as well as Chinese, distinguishing a race which Buxton and Haddon link up with the Indonesians or Nesiots.

There is still another element present in the South, a quite different race but now generally mixed with other types – the Negrito. This type is characterized by its woolly hair, very short stature, very dark skin and broad nose, and full or thick lips. Li Chi and other anthropologists have pointed out indications of such a type.

It appears indeed, that the occasionally curly-haired Chinese in the south is usually a cross between this woolly-haired type and either the wavy-haired Indonesian or straight-haired Mongolian element. And other Negroid characters such as prognathism, black skin, pigmentation of the eye, the full or even thick lips also occur. Negrito peoples still exist scattered over a considerable area in southeastern Asia and the adjoining islands, and probably at one time occupied a much greater part of southeastern Asia than at present.

Stevenson believes there is still another type present in the South which he terms Polynesian, rather similar to the Indonesian but with finer and more prominent features.

The Chinese Mixture

There are therefore several races or sub-races among the Chinese people. There is indeed little agreement among anthropologists as to what constitutes a race, some defining 19 or 20, others 40-60, among the peoples of the earth.

There is wide agreement among competent anthropologists, however, as to certain broad divisions of the human species, and Boas…recognizes two main divisions, the Caucasian-Mongolian and the Afro-Australian.

In the first division the Mongolians have straight black hair, flat or broad face, Mongolian eye-fold, frequently yellowish (though often fair, ruddy, or brown) skin color. The Caucasian hair is often wavy or curly and of lighter color, and the Mongolian eye-fold and yellowish skin color are ordinarily absent. The most fundamental distinction between the two however is the relative hairiness of the Caucasian and the hairlessness (on face and body) of the Mongolian.

The Blacks of the second division differ from both members of the first division by their woolly or frizzly hair, their black skin (with a degree of pigmentation which even affects the eye), their frequently thick and everted lips, and by actual bodily proportions, the Negro leg being differently formed from that of ‘White’ or ‘Yellow’ man. The most marked point of distinction between Negro and Australian is the relative hairiness of the latter and the fact that this hair is not woolly but curly or frizzly.

Of these four main physical divisions of mankind we find the Mongolian most common in China. The extent of the Caucasian element depends upon how the Indonesian and Turkish types are classified. Some group the Indonesians with Caucasians because of their wavy or curly hair and open, round, non-Mongolian eye. Elliott Smith groups them together with the Mediterranean peoples as the Brown Race. The Turki are also a people regarding whose classification there is a difference of opinion, their straight black hair making it possible to group them with the Mongolians, while its abundance and their lack of other specifically Mongolian characters marks them as Caucasian.

Besides the Mongolian and Caucasian elements in China, there is only the Negrito, which is slight. We find, therefore, six recognized types in China, three being Mongolian – the Mongol, Manchu, and Kham Tibetan (though Morant thinks the last-named type is not Mongolian at all – two being classifiable as ‘Caucasian – the Turki and the Indonesians – and one being Negrito. There are some other rather infrequent physical types not yet clearly defined and classified.

Japanese Racial Origins

The racial analysis of the Japanese is in some ways easier than that of the Chinese owing to their being concentrated in a very much smaller area and owing to their being a more recent mixture of which the various elements are still fairly distinct in many cases. Three thousand years ago the ‘North China’ type seems to have already been formed, with its Manchu, Tibetan, and Turkish elements, but nothing whatever is known of the Japanese at that period. In the next thousand years the Chinese penetrated into the south and mixed with the Indonesian and other non-Mongolian elements there, but still nothing is known of the Japanese.

There are indications however that while this continual push to the southward was taking place on the mainland, there were movements in a northerly direction off and along the coast. Just when this movement of a southern maritime people reached Kyushu, the big southern island of Japan, we do not know, but it was probably not much before the Christian era. The present distribution of physical types in Japan, however, and their outside associations permit us to outline roughly the development which took place there just as we have done for China.

The early natives of the Japanese islands were the short, fair-skinned, hairy, non-Mongolian people known as the Ainu, now found, in fairly pure form in their communities only in Hokkaido, the most northerly of the three big islands but probably occupying practically the whole of the main island (Hondo) two thousand years ago. This people, whose affinities are Caucasian and who indeed show much resemblance to certain Russian types, were steadily driven north by the invasion from the south, continuing for century after century.

Negritos and Malays

In Kyushu there may have been another element – Negrito – prior to the maritime invasion. The wide territory over which the Negritos are scattered and the probability that they formerly occupied a much greater area than at present has already been referred to. At the present time, as regards Japan, this type seems more common in Kyushu than elsewhere, though it is scattered through the islands, and clearly recognizable Negroid or specifically Negrito types can be noted, though generally mixed with other elements.

In speaking of the Japanese types, our task is simplified by the fact that most of the racial types have already been defined for China. When we speak of the Malays therefore we can state the general type by simply noting that anthropologists tend to regard this type as a mixture of the Indonesian peoples with a Mongolian element from the north. The Mongolian element is shown more specifically in the eyes; the Indonesian in the short stature and occasionally wavy hair. The Malays themselves therefore are an ancient mixture – how old we do not know, though perhaps more recent than the early North China mixture.

This brown Malay element is probably the most important type in Japan, but for fully two thousand years it has been mixed with the Negrito, and also with types from the Asiatic mainland via Korea. These mainland types are of interest here.

Manchus and Ainus

The earliest known center of civilization in Japan was at a point opposite Korea where certain types evidently came across from the mainland. Among these types there was the ‘Manchu’ type which has already been defined, and probably the ‘North China’ type which had already been formed from the mixture of different elements previously referred to. There are Malay and other elements in Korea also.

Of these elements, the Manchu-Korean appears to have left the widest traces in Japan. Though there was some Chinese migration both in prehistoric and historic times, this was not sufficient in quantity or contained too little of the tall Kham Tibetan type, to affect the short Malay physique to any extent. The ‘Chinese type’ however is distinctly present in Japan, though its proportion to the whole is apparently not great.

Far more important than the Chinese element was that of the White aborigines, the savage Ainu.

As the Japanese people (mainly Malay but mixed with Negrito, some Manchu-Korean, and a slighter Chinese element) advanced northward in their steady conquest of the islands, they exterminated, enslaved, or absorbed those of the natives who did not give war before them. They certainly absorbed a very large number of them, as is shown today by the frequency of individuals with Ainu characteristics among the Japanese.

Most recognizable is the Ainu hairiness. Some have estimated that the Japanese people of today are more than one-third Ainu, though this figure is probably too high.

The Japanese Mixture

When we consider the four main physical divisions of mankind already referred to we find the Japanese are a quite different mixture from the Chinese.

While the Malay element is apparently of most importance, this must itself be divided into Mongolian and Indonesian. Another Mongolian element is seen in the Manchu-Korean type and in the occasional ‘Chinese’ type (which includes however other elements). The Mongolian element is therefore the most important quantitatively speaking, though this includes much more of the Manchu type than is the case with the Chinese, as shown by the long, narrow eyes characteristic of the Japanese.

The extent of the Caucasian element depends partly on how the Indonesians are classified, but there is little doubt of the essentially Caucasian characters of the hairy Ainu. The importance of the Negrito element is considerable, much greater than in China.

We find, therefore, six recognizable types in Japan, three being Mongolian – the Manchu type, and the Mongolian elements in the Malays and Chinese – two being classifiable as ‘Caucasians’ – the Ainu and the Indonesians – and one being Negrito.

Through the different methods of combination in the Japanese and Chinese peoples, therefore, we can see some of the reasons for the physical differences between the two. There is little sign among the Japanese of the Kham Tibetan and Turkish types which add height to the Chinese (particularly the northern Chinese) as well as making for a rounder and more open eye. There is no sign among the Chinese of the Ainu type which gives the more frequent hairiness and more rugged features to the Japanese. And so we have two separate people, generally easily distinguishable but containing many individuals of similar types.

Other Differences

Probably more important than race, however, are other differences. For four thousand years and more, the Chinese people have been agricultural villagers, tillers of the soil, conquered by pastoral nomads from time to time but absorbing their conquerors.

But for most of this period, the Japanese were a maritime people, raiding their way north and in the islands of Japan conquering and absorbing a White native population even more savage than themselves. China’s age of military feudalism came to an end two thousand years ago, and though there have been relapses, the essential principles of private ownership and a peasantry free from feudal shackles have remained.

But at that time Japan had not yet emerged from the darkness of savagery, and when many centuries later the light of Chinese civilization shed its rays over the islands, it illuminated a primitive military feudalism which continued to exist down to two short generations ago. The inhabitants of the islands cultivate the soil, but the peasantry remained serfs under feudal masters until a little over half a century ago, and military feudalism remained the law of the land.

It is differences in psychology resulting from these things which are probably more vital and fundamental than the physical differences between the two peoples…

14 Comments

Filed under Ainu, Anthropology, Asia, Asian, Asians, Blacks, China, Chinese (Ethnic), Cultural, Europeans, History, Indonesians, Japan, Japanese, Koreans, Malays, Mongolians, NE Asia, Negritos, Northeast Asians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, SE Asia, SE Asians, Tibetans, Turks

Most Caucasian Populations Have Significant Non-Caucasian Elements

I received this comment today. I deleted the comment and banned the poster because he insulted me, but his comments are interesting nonetheless. His position is that most Caucasian populations are significantly admixed with non-Caucasian, and I am afraid he is right. There are probably few if any pure Whites or pure Caucasians.

The guy appears to be some sort of a Hindu nationalist type and he seems to be making a big deal out of the fact that Indians are mostly White, especially high caste ones of which he seems to be a part. He is quite offended by the idea that Indians are part-Australoid, but that is how they show up on some charts.

He says the Australoid component is more similiar to SE Asians such as Thai people. However, this Asian component also looks something like the Asian part of the Ancient Northeast Asian group. The Asian part of the ANE’s has been called different things, but to me they look Ainuid. So the Asian part of Indians looks like Ainuids/Thais. I think he may really be onto something here. It is a good hypothesis.

He is just wrong about some things below. ANE did not originate in Amerindians (How did that happen? Did it move back from the Americas to Asia?); instead, Amerindians are obviously partly derived from ANE from Northeast Asia itself. The Karitiana of Brazil have the highest ANE ever found. They may be the remains of some of the earliest settlers to the Americans.

The Chukchi are probably also heavily ANE somehow because these very Asian-looking Eskimo like people actually plot Caucasian on some charts! So in Far Northeastern Asia, early Caucasoids and early Asians have been mixing it up for some time. He also notes that Berbers have a lot of Black blood. This is correct. In fact, on some charts, Berbers plot outside of Caucasian altogether and end up slightly into the the Black or African quadrant.

He also says that Ashkenazi Jews have a lot of Asian and Black in them. Asian maybe (ancient Asian). Black, no way. I have seen charts showing that Ashkenazi Jews and other people of the Caucasus have the least amount of Black of any White group on Earth. How hilarious for Stormfronters that Jews are the most pure of all the Whites. Australoids are absolutely not archaic Whites or archaic Caucasians.

This is an interesting blog. What I’d like to point out, however, is that there is quite a bit of misinformation regarding the genetic makeup/ancestry of races and ethnic groups/castes found in India on this blog. I noticed you implied in some of your posts here that Indians are hybrid population between two groups, one most similar to present-day non-White Caucasoids, and one most similar to Australian Aboriginals.

Let me explain what the genetic/latest research has actually shown, as far as India’s demographics and the genetic composition of its castes is concerned. What follows is a detailed explanation of South Asian genetics and therefore, I must warn you, it is a long wall of text but completely accurate and supported by the latest research, despite containing a lot of jargon that may give you a headache. Bear with me here.

Indians are composed of two composite groups: ANI or the Ancestral North Indians, a group which itself is a composite of two or more different Caucasoid populations, that are on average, closest to present-day Georgians in genetic makeup, and ASI, or the Ancestral South Indians, a group which is also a composite of two or more different populations, at least half of which is Caucasoid in nature, with the other half varying in composition from one ethnic group to another.

In other words, while ANI is completely Caucasoid in nature, ASI is 50-60% Caucasoid in nature depending on the caste in question, and the remainder of ASI ancestry is either composed of Mongoloid, proto-Mongoloid, proto-Caucasoid or in exceptionally rare, isolated cases like the Paniya tribe of South India, of proto-Australoid-like ancestry which still isn’t the same as having Australoid ancestry. Keep in mind that Australoids themselves are at least 80% Mongoloid in genetic makeup and are considered to be archaic Whites themselves.

They are also the furthest group genetically on Earth, from the Negroids/Congoids/Bantuids of Sub-Saharan Africa. So, apart from a minority of untouchables of South India and parts of East India who are not even a part of the caste system to begin with, no other group in South Asia has any proto-Australoid-like admixture to speak of. And Indians are predominantly Caucasoid and group with other Caucasoids according to every genetic test/anthropometric study since the dawn of time. More information here.

It is crucial to remember that Indians have nothing to do with Australoids – those people are completely different apart from a very few isolated tribes in India that have real proto-Australoid-like admixture due to their status and extreme isolation. And this admixture has nothing to do with ASI admixture – ASI is just like the paleolithic ANE influence in Europeans, and half of it is Caucasian (at least half, if not more, it varies for different people in India) and it is a composite just like ANI is with different components for different people/castes in India.

The Reich et al paper even pointed out that the Onge were at best a poor proxy to get something without ANI admixture and little ASI admixture, and even then, it was a worse proxy than the Han Chinese. In other words, East Asians were a better proxy than the Onge themselves.

The reason they picked the Onge as a (poor) proxy was because they were the only group they could find in that region without ANI admixture and because they are such an old population that has been isolated and separated from mainland populations for a very long period of time. They also have very few individuals left, so owing to the problems of genetic drift, they assume ownership of a component, and the admixture program tries to force the Onge component in an admixture model of South Asians.

In more recent papers, this has been clarified further and it has been stated that they were simply making a poor guess when using the Onge as a proxy in the model.

Furthermore, to illustrate just how poor of a guess it was, they pointed out that ASI is massively separated from the Onge. In fact, ASI is just as far from the Onge as the Utah Whites (a group of random Euro-descent samples from Utah in the States) are from the Onge, indicating that ASI is as related to Onge as Utah Whites are.

Papuans and Onge have no relation to India at all – the Onge are in SE Asia. Han are a much better proxy. In addition, Indians lack Denisovan admixture and other crucial haplogroups found commonly in the Onge as well.

It must also be said that if Indians are erroneously assumed to have proto-Australoid-like ancestry, so are Europeans.

You might be under the false assumption that Europeans are somehow a “pure” Caucasoid population, when in fact that couldn’t be further from the truth. The latest genetic research conclusively shown that Europeans are all admixed to different degrees between at least four main populations of people: West European Hunter-Gatherer (WHG), Early European Farmer (EEF), Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer (SHG), and Ancient North Eurasian (ANE).

It has also conclusively shown that all populations of Europeans and other “White” Caucasoids have significant to huge amounts of non-Caucasoid ancestry due to the fact that the ANE/Ancient North Eurasian component is at least 45% East Asian/Mongoloid in ancestry. The ANE component is based on the genome of the infamous Mal’ta boy or MA-1.

In Europe today, it peaks among Estonians at just over 18%, and intriguingly, reaches a similar level among Scots. Finns, Russians and Mordovians also carry very high ANE in addition to very high amounts of much more recent Siberian admixture. What’s even more interesting is that this ANE influence is the very influence found among South Asians, albeit in a slightly different variety known as ASI.

What the aforementioned information means is the following: Indians are not a hybrid population between Caucasoids and Australoids. In reality, the vast majority of Indians are an admixed population between Caucasoids and Mongoloids – except in this case, the Mongoloids are most similar in phenotype and genotype to SE Asians like the Thai.

According to the latest research, the average Indian is at least 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian – these figures have been substantiated by multiple reports including the National Geographic Project’s Geno 2.0 DNA ancestry test samples, the 23andme test samples, and even the Reich et. al paper published in the highly-cited/high impact factor scientific journal Nature.

It has been conclusively proven that South Asians/Indians range from 5-10% Asian to 35% Asian or in other words from 65% Caucasian to 95% Caucasian. The most Caucasian people in the region are from the northwest of the Indian subcontinent, and the least Caucasian people are from the east and south. Only one person broke the magic 35% barrier, and he was a Bangladeshi (38%).

If you’d like a layman’s interpretation of the data in the aforementioned sources, check out this article by Razib Khan, one of the pioneers in the field of population genetics, particularly as it pertains to the archaeogenetics of South Asia as a whole – he writes articles for Discover Magazine, which is a well respected source. He is also a PhD student at UC Davis. Here is a post describing the general findings of genetic research into South Asian populations

In addition to the Reich et. al paper and other landmark papers in this field, the Harappa Ancestry Project, which is helmed by a genetic expert and is working in combination with Reich’s data is also another landmark study into the archaeogenetics of South Asia. It has conclusively proven and further substantiated the results I aforementioned.

According to the samples collected by the project, there is a sharp correlation between caste/location and Caucasian ancestry in India, with the upper castes in all parts of India being significantly more Caucasian than the lower castes, and the North-West Indian/South Asian upper castes being the most Caucasian of all – up to 95%.

All of the Northwest Indian/Pakistani/Nepali/Afghani upper castes are between 5-18% admixed with East Eurasians/Mongoloids; in other words all of them are between 82-95% Caucasian. These castes would include the Rajputs, Jatts, Khatris, Gujjars, Sindhis, Brahmins, Bhumihars, Balochis, Brahuis, and certain upper caste Punjabis, and Pathans. Note that this is only applicable to the upper castes aforementioned that are in the North and North-West of India as well as Pakistan and Nepal.

As for the rest of India (and Bangladesh/Sri Lanka), as I mentioned earlier, the average South Asian is 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian, so a good amount of South Asians are more Caucasian than 75%, and a good amount are less Caucasian.

For instance, the average Tamil (from South India, and well represented in the diaspora in the USA as the “typical Indian” stereotype) is 33-34% non-Caucasian, and the average Bengali/Bangaladeshi is closer to 55-60% Caucasian. The dalits of Tamil Nadu or the lowest caste Tamils (also well represented in the States), are at least 40% non-Caucasian. The lowest castes of India, the Chamars, who are found all over India (also in the States) are also in the 50-60% Caucasian range. Upper caste Indians in the rest of India (apart from the Northwest) tend to be 70-80% Caucasian.

If you’d like to see the data for yourself, here is the link to the spreadsheet.

For reference, the “South Indian” component is 50-60% Caucasian, and the ANE/NE Asian component is 45% non-Caucasian. The SE Asian, Siberian, Papuan, American and Beringian components are all Mongoloid, and the E. African, San, Pygmy and W. African components are all Negroid. Keep in mind that the data here is accurate only for South Asians, other regions are too under-sampled in the project.

Now you might be wondering, if South Asians, particularly the upper castes in the North and Northwest, are between 5-18% admixed, are they alone in this predicament? As I alluded to earlier, they are anything but alone.

Let’s start with Middle Easterners and Northern Africans. Egyptians, Moroccans, Libyans, and other North Africans are on average 15% Black/Negroid admixed. In fact, according to the latest research, the average North African is 15-16% black, and individual countries like Egypt and Tunisia are 18-21% Black on average, so some would be more than 21% black, some less.

The highest admixture is found among Moroccans and Berbers, who can be up to 30% Black/Negroid admixed on average. As far as the Middle East goes, Yemeni people have been shown to be 18-19% black on average, and the Bedouin tribes have been shown to be 16-18% Black on average as well. Qataris are 12-16% Black, and Saudi Arabians range from 14-18% black as well, on average. Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim, have also been shown to be 16.5% admixed with Mongoloid and Black/Negroid on average.

So on average, MENA people are 75-85% Caucasoid and 15-25% Black/Negroid admixed, therefore its safe to say that MENA people are Caucasoid-Negroid hybrids, with some groups being more and others less Negroid. All these figures have been collected by National Geographic and many other researchers.

As far as West Asians/Central Asians are concerned, they show significant amounts of Mongoloid admixture on average.Tajiks have 15% Mongoloid admixture on average, while Turkmen have 16% Mongoloid admixture on average.

However, some groups of Turkmen average 27% Mongoloid, and some are 35-56% Mongoloid. Southern Turkmen on average are only 1/8 to 1/3 Mongoloid or better said 13-31% Mongoloid. However in some parts of Turkmenistan like the northern and eastern parts, the Mongoloid DNA reaches 33-55%. Other parts of Turkmenistan are 33-55% Mongoloid.

Even many Turkish people are 10-20% Mongoloid and 15% Mongoloid on average. Iranians are also Mongoloid admixed – up to 10% on average, with the Azeris of Iran being even more admixed. Tatars are 16% Mongoloid admixed on average.

So, its safe to say that most West Asian groups are a hybrid of Mongoloids and Caucasoids, being on average 80-85% Caucasian and 15-20% Mongoloid, with some groups being much less Caucasian and much more Mongoloid.

Now, lets look at the European data. All non-Sardinian Europeans have been shown to have significant amounts of ANE ancestry due to the Malt’a boy mentioned earlier, and this ANE ancestry is related to/is the same as ASI ancestry in South Asians, relating Europeans to Amerindians and East Asians.

The ANE component is composed of 45% Mongoloid and Australoid-like ancestry (similar to the distant relation that some South Asians have to proto-Australoids), and the Malt’a boy also has a proto-Australoid ASE component on the order of 10%.

This ANE component peaks in the Karitiana Indians of South America

More info about ANE’s relationship to ASI is available at this link which itself references this landmark paper:

It is also pertinent to point out the fact that ANE ancestry in all Europeans with the exception of Sardinians (who have very minor ANE ancestry) is mostly (45-55%) non-Caucasoid in nature, and does not include separate additional East Asian ancestry that is due to much more recent admixture with Mongoloids from the Golden Horde and other admixture events.

ANE or NE Asian is best thought of as very ancient Asian admixture, while the recent admixture is added separately. A recent landmark paper definitively showed a clear signal of admixture in Northern Europe, represented by the ANE/NE Asian component. Here is the link to the paper and here is a link to the layman’s explanation of it.

What this paper definitively shows (as do successive papers recently released after it) is that Europeans, especially Northern Europeans, have huge amounts of NE Asian, also known as ANE, admixture. This is because they are descended in part from an Amerindian population.

What is the actual amount? Well, remember that ANE or NE Asian is made up of two components – one is Caucasian and related to Levantine ancestry and the other is related to NE Asia/Siberians and the American Indians, peaking in the Karitiana Indians of South America.

Therefore, according to the research data in the latest papers, Northern Europeans are 5-18% admixed with Mongoloids, or in other words, Northern Europeans are 5-18% Non-Caucasoid, and the authors pointed out that this is actually a conservative estimate, one that is lower than what the actual value is likely to be – which is purported to be even higher than the 5-18% range, easily crossing over into the 10-20%+ non-Caucasoid range.

Keeping in mind that in the Near East among Lezgins, Chechens and Ossetians, ANE is in the 23-27%+ range. This means that other Eastern Europeans not residing in Northern Europe are also heavily admixed with non-Caucasian ANE ancestry as well. The ANE ancestry is 45% East Asian/Amerindian in composition and 10% SE Asian in ancestry, so 55% non-Caucasian and ANE ancestry ranges from 8-21%+ in almost all Europeans except Sardinians.

A table with ANE scores from a recent paper. Remember how I mentioned earlier that this ANE non-Caucasoid ancestry did not include additional, more recent, non-Caucasoid East Asian ancestry?

Well, lets take a look at that data as well. Russians and Finns are 80-88% Caucasian depending on the person (not including non-Caucasoid ANE admixture which would make them even less Caucasoid) because of much more recent East Asian admixture with the areas with the higher non-Caucasian mixture in the 12-20% range around Leningrad.

Finnish people, according to the latest genetic study, are at least 13-17% East Asian, and Russians, according to the latest genetic study, are 12-18% East Asian. More info here.

Lithuanians and Swedes are at least 10%-20% admixed with recent East/Mongoloid mixture. If we add this recent Mongoloid admixture to the more ancient ANE ancestry in Europeans, we get the following numbers: Russians, Finns and Swedes are 17-30% Mongoloid/Non-Caucasoid and 70-83% Caucasoid. Because of this, Finns have been found to be distinct from other Europeans and don’t cluster as close to them. Russians in the North are much the same way.

Therefore we can sum up the above with the following three sentences:

  • Proto West Eurasians + ANE/ASI-like = Europeans and Latin Americans
  • Proto West Eurasians + ASI/ANE-like = South Asians and Central and West Asians
  • Proto West Eurasians + African = Middle Easterners and Northern Africans

And since everyone in these regions can be as much as 30% non-Caucasoid due to either Mongoloid or Negroid ancestry, (but closer to 20-25% non-Caucasoid), Indians are definitely not alone in being admixed Caucasoids on this planet. They are actually part of the norm, being on average, 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian,

The data clearly shows that Indians are as admixed as other Caucasian groups throughout the world, and in some causes, purer, particularly in the case of the upper caste North and North-West Indians, who are at most 18% admixed or less and thus 82-95% Caucasian.

9 Comments

Filed under Aborigines, Ainu, Amerindians, Anthropology, Arabs, Asia, Asians, Azeris, Bedouins, Berbers, Blacks, Central Asians, Chechens, Chinese (Ethnic), Chuckchi, East Indians, Egyptians, Estonians, Europeans, Finns, Genetics, India, Iranians, Jews, Lithuanians, Moroccans, Near Easterners, North Africans, Northeast Asians, Papuans, Physical, Pygmies, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Russians, Scottish, SE Asians, Siberians, Sociology, South Asia, South Asians, Swedes, Tajiks, Thai, Turks, Yemenis

Guilt, Inhibition, Suicide and Race

EPGAH writes:

You know I wonder. Given my rant about whites not liking to be the Responsible Son in the other page here, do you think the reason whites’ suicide is supposedly highest is BECAUSE we’re so restrained and we’re finally snapping as others are getting less and less restrained, possibly due to some Conspiracy Theory, possibly just to see what they can get away with? Every culture has some variant of, “If you don’t bend, you’ll break”–and we might be finally hitting that Breaking Point!

First of all, I would like to see some evidence that the White suicide rate is going up. I doubt if it is.

No, there is nothing special breaking us Whites at the moment. Whites’ relatively high suicide rate is due more to the fact that inhibited, moral, depressive types always have high suicide rates. Whites in Europe in the far north and even down in Hungary have very high suicide rates. Good people feel guilty. Guilty people feel bad. When you feel guilty and bad, you can kill yourself.

Japanese people are also very introverted, inhibited, and hypermoral. They see themselves as very good people. Good people often feel a lot of guilt, so good people can often feel bad. When you are so guilty you feel bad, you can kill yourself. The Japanese have a very high suicide rate tied massively into shame and guilt over personal failures.

Bad people don’t feel bad. Bad people feel good. They never feel guilty because bad people don’t experience guilt. Because they do not feel guilt and therefore rarely feel bad, they don’t kill themselves very often. Bad people externalize all blame outwards at other people, often innocent people, in the form of anger and even violence.

Humans who act out and externalize everything have low rates of depression and suicide. Historically, Blacks have had a much lower suicide rate than Whites.

Good people feel bad. The best people feel the worst.
Bad people feel good. The worst people feel the best.

Doesn’t that seem strange?

93 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Culture, Depression, Europeans, Japanese, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Northeast Asians, Personality, Psychology, Psychopathology, Race/Ethnicity, Whites

A Biological Association Between IQ and Skin Color in Japan

The journal article is here.

There is a significant gap in intelligence in Japan that correlates almost perfectly with latitude and even skin color.

The North-South intelligence gap in Japan is 11 points – 107 IQ in the north and 96 IQ in Okinawa. In addition, Japanese get taller as you go towards the north.

In Japan, lighter skin has a .42 correlation with elevated IQ. In other words, in Japan, the lighter the skin, the higher the IQ.

There is a remarkable correlation between IQ and homicide in Japan that is much greater than the IQ-skin color correlation.

In Japan, the higher the IQ, the lower the homicide rate – the correlation is stunningly high at .79 correlation.

However, there is downside to living in the north of Japan where folks are much more intelligent and vastly less homicidal. Weaker sunlight in the north makes people depressed and increases suicide rates.Apparently rates of depression and suicide rates increase as you go north in Japan.

Higher IQ is probably not more likely to make on depressed or suicidal, though this is an open question. Surely lighter skin is not more likely to make one depressed or suicidal as there is not even a good hypothesis there – why would having lighter skin be more depressing or make you want to kill yourself? It makes no sense.

Instead the correlation is simply due to the obvious – the weather. It is well known that the weaker the sunlight is, the more people get depressed, drink alcohol and commit suicide. Scandinavian countries had high suicide rates under all sorts of economic systems, and Scandinavians do not commit any more suicide than others living in the far north such as Greenlanders, Eskimos and Whites living in the Yukon or Alaska.In addition, Siberians have always had high suicide rates.

High rates of alcohol are also found all across the north in these very same areas. When the sun doesn’t come out at all for half the year, that is extremely depressing!

The highest IQ areas in Japan have the lowest homicide rates, and the lowest IQ areas have the highest homicide rates. The relationship between IQ and homicide in Japan is linear and almost perfect. The dumber people are, the more they kill other people. The smarter people are, the less they kill other humans.

In addition, there is an excellent relationship between IQ and income in Japan.

With every 1 IQ point rise, incomes increase by 2.5%. The smarter you are, the more money you make and the dumber you are, the less money you make.

In capitalism, many poor or low income people may be poor or low income simply because they are not very intelligent and for no other reason. Societal oppression is not always to blame for poverty and low income in capitalism as capitalism is like a footrace with 1000 sprinters and no matter how hard anyone tries, 300 men will always come in 700th-100th. And that’s if everyone is trying their hardest and running as fast as they can. Poverty is an intrinsic aspect of capitalism. You can’t have capitalism without poverty. It’s baked right into the system.

The Yayoi were the more Neomongoloid types who moved into Japan 2,300 years ago from Korea. They then slowly conquered, killed, enslaved and frankly genocided the Australoid Jomon or Ryukuyan/Ainu types as they moved north.

The Neomongoloid Yayoi appear to have been were smarter and taller than the Australoid Jomon.

We know this because pure Neomongoloid Chinese Koreans consistently outscore the Neomongoloid/Australoid Japanese on IQ.

37 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Amerindians, Anthropology, Asia, Asians, Capitalism, Crime, Depressants, Depression, Economics, Europe, Intelligence, Intoxicants, Japan, Japanese, Koreans, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Mother Nature, NE Asia, Northeast Asians, Physical, Psychology, Psychopathology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Siberians, Social Problems, Sociology, Weather

What Race Is This Person

Ethnic Chinese from Pernakan, Malaysia

A Peranakan Ethnic Chinese from Singapore.

Here we have an interesting phenotype. I knew this woman was an ethnic Chinese Teochew speaker originally from Malaysia now relocated to Singapore. The weird thing is she looks part-Caucasian! She is also said to be part-Malay, that is, she has some Malay blood mixed into her Chinese. Her Chinese line came from Guangdong in the far south of China over 600 years ago. This is where the Teochew speakers came from and where Teochew is still spoken to this very day.

Since Malays are frankly Paleomongoloids (Australoid-Mongoloid transitionals), I thought perhaps her Caucasoid appearance meant that she was mostly a Paleomongoloid. That is because when you interbreed an Australoid and a Mongoloid, you can sometimes end up with a Caucasoid looking phenotype. The Ainu, the Taiwanese aborigines, and some Polynesians and Khmer are evidence of this.

However digging into it a bit more, I discovered that she is a Peranakan Chinese. The Peranakans came to Malaysia between the 1400’s and 1600’s. Many settled in Malacca State adjacent to the Straits of Malacca. The former Dutch colony of Indonesia is a short boat ride away and supposedly there were many Dutch living in Malacca at the time having moved there from Sumatra. This woman is rumored to be part-Caucasian by her family. People say that many Peranakans are part Dutch, as the Dutch bred in with many of the locals. The best theory is that this woman is mostly Chinese, part Malay and also part Dutch. There is a huge Peranakan community in Singapore.

All in all, a pretty interesting phenotype.

3 Comments

Filed under Ainu, Anthropology, Asia, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Dutch, Europeans, Khmer, Malays, Malaysia, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Polynesians, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, SE Asia, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines

Position Statement on HBD and Race Realism

Anti Hereditarian writes:

As it appears to me, Robert Lindsay is not convinced by the equality of races. He does not exclude environmental causes in racial differences, but he does not either believe that races have equal genetic potential for achievment. That’s my humble opinion.

This is immaculate. Of course the races are not equal. They are not equal on all sorts of variables, talents, achievements, commendable behaviors, pathologies and failures. That’s just observational fact.

Now the question is are these differences written in stone by our genes. I say no, but I also say that races are born with inborn genetic tendencies towards talents, achievements, personality styles, commendable behaviors, pathologies and failures. And in many cases, the races will simply more or less express their genetic roots in a deterministic fashion.

However, I would argue that serious improvements in environment could improve some races with lower genetic potential simply because outcome is predicate don genes + environment, not just genes. So environment can maybe make up for a lower genetic potential with the end result being races that are much less equal.

However, I would describe this as a “super-environment.” Perhaps something like the modern UK, which is sort of the ultimate PC country, could create the super-environment needed to raise Blacks above their genetic set-points to where they substantially close gaps with higher performing races and possibly even to where Blacks nearly match Whites, Indians, etc. on some important variables like intelligence. So in that case, environment would create some races than are not genetically equal at all but are performing near equal with the end result being racial equality of outcome on some variables such as intelligence.

The races seem to differ in the environment that they need.

The NE Asians seem to flourish even amidst some very nasty poverty. Their genetic set-point is so high that it enables them to rise above and transcend whatever obstacles that lousy environment throws in their way. Poor and non-poor UK Chinese score exactly the same on the GCSE.

Whites have lower genetic potential than NE Asians, so Whites placed in poverty will underperform non-poor Whites. In other words, poverty will hit Whites and set them back. But I think it will set them back less than some other races such as Indians and Blacks.

Indians seem to have a somewhat lower genetic potential than Whites but new Indian “subraces” seem to be developing in the West that are made up of very high performing Indians who dramatically outperform those at home. A souped up environment can conceivably boost Indians so high to where they are matching Whites on intelligence.

The Indians are a conundrum as we do not know how selective immigration to the West was. In the case of Pakistanis to the UK, apparently it was not selective at all. Indian IQ in South Asia appears lower than Western Black IQ on the surface probably because of the horrific environment over there dramatically stunts Indians brain-wise. However, I believe that true Indian genetic IQ set-point is higher than Blacks. Also I would argue that poverty will hit Indians harder than Whites but less hard than it hits Blacks.

Of NE Asians, Whites, Indians and Blacks (African and Caribbean origin), the Blacks seem to have the lowest IQ set-point. However, I am willing to consider that with a dramatically souped up environment, Blacks could go quite a bit beyond their genetic potential to where they approach or even match Whites on IQ. But Blacks are going to need a Hell of a lot more help to approach equality with say, Whites and Indians.

The problem is that creating these dramatically souped up environments is not easy, and political, economic and cultural realities limit the creation of these super-environments in most nations, the result being that Blacks often fall back more towards genetic set-points in most nations.

I suppose that is some sort of “modified HBD,” as I allow a quite powerful role for environment, but I ay that such a powerful environment is going to be hard for humans to create in most places. Hence groups in most cases are going to crash back down towards their genetic set-points on personality, criminality, intelligence, etc.

Environment then is a very powerful tool, but it is very hard to operate such that most of the time it doesn’t even work very well, and it doesn’t have dramatic effects on outcome. But that’s not probably always going to be the case as some places are going to be so advanced that they can finally figure out how to wield this difficult to use tool in such a way as to let it do its magic.

184 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, East Indians, Europeans, Northeast Asians, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asians, Whites

What Is the Evidence for Genetic Effects on IQ?

and guessing a combination of genes and environment is weird when there’s only actual evidence of one and not the other.

In response to the Bell Curve controversy, a large number of intelligence researchers, the best in their field, authored a letter to the New York Times on the state of the scientific consensus about intelligence, genes and environment. The conclusion of over 100 top experts in the field was that intelligence was caused by a combination of genes and environment. So that was the consensus of the top experts in the field ~15-20 years ago. So my conclusion is not weird at all. In fact, it is consensus in the field and in the 18 years since, the consensus has only gotten stronger.

And I believe the twin studies are excellent evidence for a genetic role in IQ. Identical twins raised apart were very close in IQ.

Monozygotic twins correlate very highly on IQ. I believe it is .7

Dizygotic twins correlate quite a bit lower and siblings have an even lower correlation.

In families where you have one or more of the types – MZ twins, DZ twins and siblings, they are obviously all being raised in the same environment.

There are other things too. Black kids adopted away into upper middle class White homes crash back down to 89 IQ by adulthood.

Korean kids adopted into White homes end up with 109 IQ’s, higher than their adopted family and much closer to their birth families. The IQ’s of the Korean adoptees were also higher than for their siblings in the adopted family. The children of the adoptee family had IQ’s that looked like their parents. The Korean kids had IQ’s that looked like their birth parents and the Korean kids were smarter than the White nonadoptee siblings even though they were all raised together.

Kids adopted away have IQ’s that are a lot closer to their birth parents than to the adopted family in which they were raised.

Black people’s IQ scores go up as they get lighter. The more White they have in them, the higher the IQ.

African immigrants to the US have IQ’s of 108. However, their children born in the US have IQ’s of only 89. What is going on here is that the children’s IQ’s are regressing down towards the African genetic mean.

All of that looks excellent evidence for genetic effects on IQ to me.

239 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Culture, Genetics, Immigration, Intelligence, Koreans, Northeast Asians, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Whites

Do Schoolteachers Believe in HBD?

Anti-Hereditarian writes:

Stupidity is rarely a cause of school failure, poor achievement deals more with deficient executive functions, one’s hardships with focusing and persevering with their schoolwork. If teachers are not really fond of HBD, it’s not because they are blind leftists but because they see students that have attitudes that are not compatible with academic excellence.

I do not know. I taught school in the Los Angeles area for 6 years. I started out as a somewhat blind environmentalist with some HBD leanings.

After 6 years teaching all sorts of different ethnic groups, I could practically predict the behavior and the intelligence of a classroom as it filed in the door merely by observing the ethnic makeup of the group. Interestingly, the intelligence of the groups lined up almost perfectly with IQ scores. Further, behavior conformed to stereotypes.

The Japanese and Jews were smartest and best behaved, then the Whites, then the Filipinos, then the Hispanics, then maybe the Polynesians (close call) and then the Blacks. Perfect lineup. As as the intelligence of a group went down, the group become more disorderly, loud, confrontational, lazy, combative, destructive, menacing and even violent. As the intelligence of a group rose, they became a lot more calmed down and sedated. You would think a classroom full of Japanese kids has been sedated with Valium.

Now apparently my observations are not scientifically proven. That’s fine. Science has hardly proven anything we believe in in our day to day lives. If we had to operate our day to day lives only on things proven by science, we wouldn’t even be able to get out of bed. I assure you that 95% of the things I believe are not proven by science, and I could care less about that.

I simply make observations. Where I see the same pattern repeating over and over, which I do all the time, I make a generalization type of opinion about what is “basically” going on here. Now 98% of the time, that generalization is not proven by science, but so what?

Personally, I did feel that stupidity was a cause of school failure. Of course it gets complicated because as the group gets dumber, they try less in school, and you end up with whole classes full of kids who do nothing but screw off all class.

I did have some Black male students who I felt very sorry for though. We were studying Shakespeare once with some Black sophomores in Compton, and some Black girls were really getting into it. I forget what we were discussing, but this 15 year old Black boy was getting involved, and he really wanted to learn whatever we were learning. But it was painfully obvious that he simply was not very intelligent at all. I even think he realized it on some level and was depressed about it. Seeing that boy like that almost broke my heart, it was so sad. I felt so sorry for him.

39 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Education, Filipinos, Gender Studies, Hispanics, Intelligence, Japanese, Jews, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Polynesians, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Science, SE Asians, Whites

Link Between Amazonian Indians and Australoids

From my Facebook page.

Will Hyres writes:

Did you see the recent DNA research that links Amazonian Amerindians to Australian Aboriginals? I wonder how extensive that link really is? I’m assuming the majority of Amerinds are mostly related to the Siberian migration.

It’s not as crazy as it sounds. The very first people to the Americas were Australoids. On skulls, they would resemble Aborigines, as Aborigines are Australoids. The early Amerind skulls look Australoid. Some look like Melanesians or Ainu. Melanesian and Ainu skulls are Australoid. As the early Amerinds came from the north, perhaps the early Amerinds were linked to the Ainuids. We know that skulls from NE Asia before 9,000 YBP look like Aborigines.

I am not sure what the link between Amazonian Indians and Aborigines is. Is it on genes or on skulls? Can someone link me to this stuff?

3 Comments

Filed under Aborigines, Ainu, Amerindians, Anthropology, Melanesians, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity

A Division of the Asian Races

Found on the Internet:

My definition of the subgroup of mongoloid appearance due to their climatic origin. I am referring to the pure ethnic group before any mixing of ethnic groups.

  • 1. Northern Mongoloid: Tungusic, Mongol, Tibetan, Korean, Northern Chinese, Japanese, Nivki, Chukchi, Yakut, Tuva, Yukaghir, Samoyedic
  • Very cold climate – cold winter, cool summer
  • Small eyes, single eyelid
  • Very Pale skin
  • 2. Southern Mongoloid: Southern Chinese, Burmese, Thai, Lao, Hmong, Mien, Vietnamese, Chin, Shan, Kuki, Bai, Lahu
  • Temperate climate – cool winter, warm summer
  • Medium sized eyes, double eyelids
  • Fair skin
  • 3. Southeast Mongoloid: (Paleomongoloid or Australoid-Mongoloid transitionals) – Taiwan aborigine, Montagnard, Akha, Khmer, Filipino, Indonesian, Malay in Malaysia/Singapore, Karen, Karenni, Naga, Rohinga
  • Hot, tropical climate – no winter, hot summer
  • Large eyes, double or triple eyelids.
  • Brown skin

32 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Asians, Burmese, Chinese (Ethnic), Filipinos, Hmong, Indonesians, Japanese, Khmer, Koreans, Lao, Malays, Mongolians, Northeast Asians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines, Thai, Vietnamese