The goal of this article is to describe the prehistoric origins of extant Caucasoid subraces using both physical anthropology and genetic science.

Cro-Magnid

The Cro-Magnid subrace is likely one of the oldest Caucasoid subraces. It is often characterized in contrast to Nordic and Mediterranean phenotypes by its robust skeletal build and broad face. However, because of very heavy admixture with Neolithic migrants from Anatolia and the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, it is no longer present in its original form, and now is only responsible for producing a somewhat more robust face in certain phenotypes which are otherwise more recent in origin (Borreby, Dalo-Faelid, Paleo-Atlantid, Tavastid). The populations in which modern Cro-Magnid phenotypic features sometimes persist are not surprisingly Northern European, having significant Hunter-Gatherer ancestry (see admixture estimates) related to the Loschbour specimen shown below.

Mediterranean (Mediterranid, Orientalid, Indid, Armenoid (?))

Compared to the Cro-Magnid, the Mediterranean is more gracile. This could be a result of a Neolithic adaptation to less dietary vitamin D as fatty animal foods were no longer relied upon for energy. It could also be from living in a warmer climate in which a stocky, robust body is no longer needed to maintain an ideal body temperature.

All of the prehistoric peoples which gave rise to Mediterranean subraces share significant admixture containing a combination of Upper Paleolithic (Epigravettian) European hunter-gatherer and “basal Eurasian” DNA. This “basal rich” admixture, as it is called on the blog Eurogenes, might be considered proto-Mediterranean; it most likely emerged in Northern Africa or the Middle East and is distinct from the Sub-Saharan African genetic admixture. It would form a significant component of the ancestries of the earliest farmers of the Levant and Anatolia as well as hunter gatherers and early herders of the Caucasus and Iran. While this basal rich admixture is most abundant in racially Mediterranean populations, it is, in fact, ubiquitous in all extant Caucasoid populations.

The Mediterranean subrace, in broad terms, is not limited to Europe, or even the Mediterranean basin. The Orientalid phenotype is often considered a Mediterranean racial type; however, its inclusion of both Arabs and Iranians can be misleading as Iranians are in fact more closely related to the “Armenoid” people of Armenia and the Caucasus than to the Arabs also considered Orientalid.

Modern Arabs are closely related to Neolithic inhabitants of the Levant, and modern Armenoids and Iranians are genetically similar to the people of the (Kura-Araxes) Bronze Age Armenian Plateau, possibly descended from the Anatolian Neolithic and a population similar to the hunter gatherers of Iran and the Caucasus (Shinde et al., 2019). The Indid phenotype common among modern Indo-Aryans is sometimes considered Mediterranean. The people of the Indus Valley civilization were mostly descended from a West Asian population related to Iranian hunter gatherers and herders (Shinde et al., 2019), and it may have been in this prehistoric-Iranian-like population that the Indid phenotype originated. The ancient Egyptians were most likely Mediterranean Caucasoids who appear to derive their ancestry from both the Anatolian Neolithic and the Neolithic Levant (Schuenemann et al., 2017).

Europeans belonging to the Mediterranean subrace (“Mediterranids” proper) derive most of their ancestry from a series of Near Eastern migrations into Europe, beginning with early Neolithic Anatolian farmers. In contrast with earlier Neolithic Europeans, relatively small amounts of Caucasus admixture are present in Minoans and Mycenaean samples; Bronze age Anatolians were a likely vehicle of this Caucasus admixture to the Aegean (Lazaridis et al., 2017; Raveane et al., 2019). Caucasus admixture (CHG) increases in Italy during the Chalcolithic and at the start of the Roman republic the Central Italian population, including Italic and Etruscan tribes, was genetically most similar to modern Northern Italians and Spaniards; CHG in Italians increases again during the Iron Age and Roman period (Antonio et al. 2019; fine scale qpAdm analysis). The authors of this study suggest that the Iron Age CHG admixture could result from the immigration of Greek, Carthaginian, and Phoenician diasporas. They also discuss archaeological evidence that Phrygians, Syrians, Jews, and Egyptians immigrated to Italy during the imperial period, possibly bringing additional CHG admixture. However, the close genetic similarity of modern Siclians with modern Peloponnesian and Cretan Greeks, and the PCA clustering of modern Tuscans between Iberians (cf. Etruscans, earliest Romans) and these Greek populations, makes Iron Age Greek colonization (Magna Graecia) the simplest explanation of this admixture event (Stamatoyannopoulos et al., 2017; Drineas et al., 2019). Modern Greeks, Southern Italians, and Siclians may have slightly more CHG admixture compared with Mycenean Greeks because of Luwian raids in the Aegean c. 1200-1000 BC.

Greater admixture from the Caucasus and/or Iran in Greece and Southern Italy is likely responsible for the Armenoid facial features (such as an aquilline nose) and sometimes darker complexions observed in the modern inhabitants of these regions. This can be contrasted with Iberians, Sardinians, and Northern Italians (ex. Pietro Boselli), who often have facial features more similar to those of Northwestern Europeans, but who also have dark hair and eye pigmentation.

Amphorae and sculptures from ancient Greece would seem to indicate that the majority of the population and some prominent aristocrats, particularly in Athens (such as Pericles), had a Mediterranean phenotype, having dark wavy or curly hair which is much less common in Northern Europe. Surviving sculptures of prominent Romans, such as Cicero, Cato the Younger, and Julius Caesar also show facial features similar to modern Italians; these individuals may have likewise had some Near Eastern admixture from population movements during the Bronze Age and later.

Nordic (Nordid, East Europid(?))

The Nordic subrace possesses a geographic range including Southern Scandinavia, the British Isles, Northern France, the Low Countries, Northern Germany, and the eastern shore of the Baltic Sea, extending somewhat into Russia. Archaeogenetic research indicates that Nordic populations possess almost all of their ancestry from three earlier Caucasoid groups: Neolithic Anatolian farmers, steppe pastoralists and European hunter-gatherers, who began combining in the Corded Ware Culture c. 3000-2300 BC (Allentoft et al., 2015; Lazaridis et al., 2016), and northern Bell Beaker cultures c. 2500-1800 BC (Olade et al., 2018). Y-haplogroup R1b-L11 was predominant among both Northern European Bell Beaker males and certain Corded Ware males living in Southern Poland c. 2600-2350 BC (Linderholm et al., 2020). The most recent patrilineal common ancestor for all R1b-L11 males also lived c. 2800 BC (yfull). This suggests a very close relationship between these populations, possibly the direct descent of Northern European Bell Beaker people from slightly older Corded Ware populations.

In the absence of Cro-Magnid influences, both the Nordic and Mediterranean subraces are characterized by a gracile skeletal build which in both subraces is likely inherited from Anatolian Neolithic farmers. Both Neolithic European farmers and steppe pastoralists often possessed the alleles associated with light skin in modern Northern Europeans (Allentoft et al., 2015), so both likely contributed to this phenotype in modern Nordic peoples. However, the depigmentation of the hair and eyes present in modern Nordics is unlikely to be a result of admixture from steppe pastoralists, as genome sequencing indicates that late Chalcolithic and early Bronze Age steppe peoples of the Yamna/Yamnaya/Pit Grave culture (3300-2600 BC) had brown eyes and dark hair (link). However blond hair and blue eyes were already very common among Neolithic agriculturalists of the Globular Amphora (GAC) (3400 – 2800 BC) and Funnelbeaker (TRB) (4300 BC – 2650 BC) cultures, appearing in at least 50 % of unearthed individuals from each culture (link).

These GAC and TRB peoples often possessing blond hair and blue eyes were descended mostly from Anatolian Neolithic farmers, and to a lesser extent Mesolithic Europeans (Mathieson et al., 2017; Skoglund, Malmstrom et al., 2014). The Corded Ware people who succeeded them accumulated increasing Anatolian Neolithic admixture as they remained in the same area where TRB and GAC cultures once existed (Mathieson et al., 2017; link). So, there were likely genetic contributions from the TRB and GAC peoples to the Corded Ware people. This could be responsible for the prevalence of blue eyes and blond hair in populations partly or mostly derived from the late Corded Ware peoples from the Baltic (Balto-Slavic and certain Finno-Ugric peoples (link)), the interior of Eastern Europe (early Graeco-Aryan peoples (link, link), including the Sintashta), and Germanic peoples (link).

The very light skin and fair hair pigmentation likely predominated in Northern European Neolithic peoples as a result of a need to effectively synthesize vitamin D using sunlight at high latitudes given the lack thereof in a diet based on cereal grains and pulses. The alleles for light eye color could have predominated partially through a sexual selection, and because at least some of these alleles (such as rs12913832) also depigment the skin and hair allowing for adequate vitamin D synthesis in northern latitudes. The high frequency of lactase persistence developed due to reliance on cow-milk as a food source. However, the allele rs4988235 for lactase persistence was uncommon in the people of the Bell Beaker and Sintashta cultures, demonstrating that lactose tolerance likely reached its current prevalence in Northern Europe later during the Bronze and/or Iron Age(s).

The tribes which introduced Indo-European languages into the Mediterranean from Northern and Eastern Europe would have carried with them genetic variants which produce Nordic traits and as a result, these traits sometimes appear in Mediterranean a populations extending back to the Bronze Age. Classical literature would seem to substantiate this. Many Greek mythological figures such as Menelaus, Achilles, Apollo, Aphrodite, and Athena are all described as having light pigmentation. Certain Romans such as Augustus and Marcus Junius Brutus (the younger) possessed somewhat Nordic facial features. Augustus and many other Roman emperors also possessed, according to records, light pigmentation of the hair and eyes (link). Later, the Visigoths, Suebi, and Ostrogoths would add to the Nordic component in the Balkans, Italy, and Iberia. This would remain visible in the aristocracy of Spain for 1000 years after these invasions; Queen Isabella de Castille, born in 1451, possessed strikingly Nordic traits compared to the average Iberian, and even her own husband.

On the Relevance of Cephalic and Facial Indices

During the 19th and early 20th century, it was common to use facial index and cephalic index in racial classification. Some populations were classified as Alpinid, Dinarid, East Europid, and Armenoid, in part because of their brachycephaly. East Europids and Alpinids were also distinguished by their broad faces.

It is completely possible if not probable that genetic variation between populations is responsible for some of the variation in cephalic and facial indices between populations (Stoev, 2013). A colder climate does appear correlated with a more brachycephalic skull (Beals, 1972; Bharati et al., 2001), probably because head-shape is related to cranial surface-area/volume ratio, which influences how well the cranium retains heat. Given that brachycephaly and a wider facial shape are both neotenous characteristics, selecting for brachycephaly could accidentally select for greater neoteny in general, leading to a broader facial shape, which may explain why these two traits often coincide. Exogamy also appears correlated with longer and narrower (less brachycephalic) head shapes (Billy, 1975), suggesting that brachycephaly results from the expression of recessive alleles. This could account for the brachycephaly of some populations inhabiting warmer climates, but which are subject to population isolation for cultural and/or geographical reasons: likely examples include the rural French, Albanians, and Italians of the Apennines and Po valley. This relationship may also account for the mesocephalic head shape of some ethnic groups inhabiting colder climates, such as certain Russians, Ob-Ugric peoples, and Finno-Volgaic peoples, who live near relatively large traversable waterways that allow for greater exogamy.

From 1200 AD to 1700 AD in Poland and surrounding countries, the average cephalic index increased drastically, from about 75 (dolichocephalic) to about 83 (brachycephalic) (Henneberg, 1976). Because brachycephaly is probably selected for by a colder climate, this increase in the cephalic index could be an adaptive reaction to the temperature decrease between 1100 AD and 1600 AD.

Despite their drastic change in average cephalic index, modern Northern Slavs and Balts still form genetic clusters with individuals from the areas surrounding Poland (Pomerania, Bohemia, and the East Baltic) who lived well before 1200 AD (Mittnik et al., 2018; link; link). Likewise, the cephalic index of a population can change very rapidly and significantly over the course of a few decades (Pavlica et al., 2018; Stoev, 2013). Facial index has also been demonstrated to change significantly within a few decades in Croatia and in the Meitei people of India (Pavlica et al., 2018; Devi et al., 2016), and like cephalic index, may have much greater flexibility than the components of genetic variation which can be used to distinguish different ethnic groups and subraces.

In summary: it is likely that cephalic and facial indices are at least partly controlled by genetics, but given their flexibility, it may not be appropriate to use indices in subracial classification. Excluding the use of facial and cephalic indices in subracial classification, the genomic analysis of modern populations would likely result in the classification of East Europid and Nordid as variants within a single subrace; Central and Southeastern European Dinarid and Alpinid subraces as mixtures of Nordid and Mediterranid subraces; and Armenoid and the Iranian “Orientalid” variant as belonging to the same subrace. See the PCA below (modified from one originally from this article) for the genetic clustering patterns that support these classifications.

What is White?

Returning to the main dilemma which many are facing; one might like to ask the question of what is white? All commonly called “whites” are racially Caucasoid. In most formal discussions, “White” is often equated with Caucasoid, and can thus include both Middle Eastern and European ethnic groups. In more common or “folk” parlance, white usually refers to Caucasoids with a fair skin phenotype common in populations with an abundance of Nordic racial ancestry. Hence, when speaking accurately with regards to genetic ancestry, “White” should either refer to “Caucasoid” or to racially Nordic Caucasoids. If the former option is chosen, Europeans may be considered “white-Europeans” or “European whites”.

Addendum: Non-Caucasoid Admixture in Majority Caucasoids

To address this topic I will first use the Eurogenes K7 admixture calculator which uses Caucasoid admixtures sourced from ancient populations prior to the Neolithic, Bronze age, Iron age, and Medieval population movements. When viewing the spreadsheet, the populations ancestral to all modern Caucasoids are labeled “Villabruna-related”, “Ancient_North_Eurasia” and “Basal-rich”. East Asian ancestry is called “East Eurasian”, and Sub-Saharan African ancestry is referred to as “Sub-Saharan”; the “Southeast Asian” and “Oceanian” ancestry groups are predominate in Australoid populations.

Modern Semitic populations in Arabia and the Levant have little to no Australoid admixture and trace Sub-Saharan African admixture at around 1-3 % as well as some occasional East Asian admixture at ~0.5%. The Druze, Samaritans, and Lebanese Christians lack this additional East Asian and Sub-Saharan African Admixture. Most modern Indic and Iranic populations, except for some Kurds and Zoroastrian Iranians, possess some East Asian admixture (~1-9%), and Australoid admixture (~0.4-9%). Middle Eastern Islamic populations almost as a rule possess more non-Caucasoid admixture than Middle Eastern populations which have remained non-Muslim. This may be due to the conversion of Central Asian Turkic peoples and Sub-Saharan Africans to Islam. Ironically, some modern linguistic Turks, living in Trabzon, possess no more Sub-Saharan African, or East Asian ancestry compared to most Europeans.

Europeans, in general, do not possess much Sub-Saharan African ancestry, almost invariably under 0.2% in most of Europe (usually fluctuating greatly below this level in the same populations; an indication of calculator “noise”). In Europe, Sub-Saharan African admixture reaches maxima of 0.2-0.5 % in Sicily, and 0.5-1% in Portugal. 96 % of European Americans possess less than 1% Sub-Saharan African Admixture according to 23andMe (link). East Asian admixtures are present at .5-2% in West Russian, Ukrainian, and Eastern Baltic Populations. Russians in Kargopol are ~4-6 % East Asian. Finns have roughly 6-7% East Asian admixture; the Saami possess about 20% East Asian admixture. Other European populations have between 0.01 to 0.5 % East Asian admixture, often possessing almost this entire percentage range within the same populations, possibly indicating calculator noise at this level. Australoid ancestry fluctuates erratically in the European continent between 0.0 % and 0.8 %, possibly a sign calculator noise, or of certain populations possessing minimally less genetic drift away from the ancestral Eurasian population dwelling in India 70,000 years ago.

The Eurogenes K8 test also utilizes certain paleolithic West Eurasian populations to define admixtures, and two maps produced of Sub-Saharan African and East Asian ancestry, respectively, appear below. The results are not distant from those of the K7 test discussed above.

Generally, below a certain level, trace genetic admixtures are able to be considered “noise” or erroneous defects caused by the imperfection of the genetic model used to calculate admixture percentages. However, it seems likely that millennia of proximity with neighboring Uralic populations has led to the small peak in East Asian admixture among the Eastern Slavs and Balts, and that admixture from invading Moors gave a very small amount of Sub-Saharan African admixture to Portugal and Sicily which is not present elsewhere in Europe. In time, these trace admixtures may be selected out of the populations which possess them just as Neanderthal ancestry in humans has decreased from 3-6% 40,000 years ago to 2% in the present day (Fu et al., 2016).