How accurate do you think this 19th century map is? Kaukasische = caucasian, arier = aryan, etc

How accurate do you think this 19th century map is? Kaukasische = caucasian, arier = aryan, etc..

Attached: Meyers1885.jpg (2048x1625, 769.55K)

1pbtid also bong

Remember where your country came from sonny jim

Very true

Tasmania never had abos

The grouping of Finns as mongols is iriulous.

*ridiculous

You are a paki, you are not “aryan”, you will never be white

Yeah I agree, it also groups Latvians and Estonians into that group which obviously isn't true

What are you then, kangaroo enjoyer

It's a degenerate Mercator projection, for one.

why is the very southern end of spain semitic but sicily's not

Attached: med (3).jpg (133x546, 19.21K)

Also I dont know what "Hamiten" are. And how are they caucasian? Do they mean Tuareg?

jazz jennings do b lookin guuuuud

Mate we have photos of them from the 1820s ...

Attached: 1_Aboriginals_131821795 - 0035.jpg (1062x350, 295.65K)

the sons of ham.

Hamites, the sons of Ham. Cush (Ethiopia), Mizraim (Egypt), Put (Libya), and Canaan.

Ok, but what people are these nowadays? That live in the Sahara? Must be Tuareg.

Pretty map, but these are meaningless distinctions. Everyone that is not Anglo is a subhuman and should be treated as such. That appears to be the only distinction of relevance.

Attached: 1657087855854.png (1300x1102, 640.74K)

Hamitic, I believe it mainly relates to a sub-group of afro-asiatic languages. It referred to Berber, Egyptian, Ethiopian peoples. Obviously it is a pretty bad indicator of race

Attached: an-1888-ethological-map-of-africa-showing-distribution-of-indigenous-races-tribes-R15FTY.jpg (1165x1390, 346.01K)

North Africans, Tuareg would be included.

Berbers and such , tuareg are predominantly sub saharan mixes, hamites are dark dark caucasoids which is confusing because the group that calls themselves hammites in modernity are actually black ethiops in actuality meaning they are the beasts of the field rather than curse sons of noah.

Arent North Africans basically Arabs otherwise?

Originally "Ham" was most likely cognate with kmt, the Egyptian name for themselves.

Quite so, old bean! Fancy murdering some negroes with me tomorrow?

Attached: gb_emp3.gif (360x216, 24.91K)

An interesting fact: Soviet scientists discovered the genes of breakaway Aryans in Yakutia, but the matter was quickly hushed up. The leading scientist (Fefelova V.V) is still alive, after the collapse of the USSR, she again began to promote her scientific work on the Aryans, but this did not go beyond conspiracy theories.

Attached: bad ending.jpg (811x843, 71.31K)

While visually similar they are different ,Berbers are the indigenous people of North Africa while Arabs are native to the Arabian Peninsula in the Middle East. Berber dna is almost identical to south iberian where as arabs cluster closer to modern greeks.

Arabs were confined to Arabia until the 600s. Maghrebis and Mesotopamians and Levantines are of course related to Arabs but the Arabs did not kill and replace the populations they conquered. Horn Africans are also typically counted as Hamites.

>No California island
This map is propaganda

Mainly berber, tuareg are a sub-group of these people, usually from the southern part of sahara desert. Tuareg are a mix of berber and sub-saharan africans which were enslaved by the berbers when they migrated south after being pushed out by the romans