Roman/Greek Ethnicy and Physical Traits

Well, I sense that some will think that this topic is irrelevant, useless, and maybe racist for some. I just want to make it clear: I'm not a racist. It's as simple as that.

Now, why would I care about this?
Well, there's a belief called "Nordicism". That belief basically says that Nordics are the superior race and that are responsible for almost all the greatest civilizations in history, as Rome, Greece, and Egypt would be. Please, let's not touch Egypt in this topic, since there's a lot to talk about that: This is solely about Romans and Greeks.
While I love Nordic culture and civilizations, I really don't believe that this culture or people are responsible for Rome and Greece. I think that both of them were Mediterrean. I asked some historians about this and they almost laugh when I said them that some people think that they were Nordics, and while maybe it is a theory to laugh about (no offense to anyone), lots of people believe it.
I guess that everything was started by historian "Arthur Kemp". He has a website and a book, called "The March of the Titans", which tells the story of Whites as a whole. Other than (well founded and probably correct) acussations of racism, he says that Roman and Greek nobles were Nordic, giving pictures of sculptures as a source.

What do you all think about this? Would you recommend me anything to read about this topic?

My opinion is that while they had a degree of light hair and eyes, they were mostly dark haired and eyed, and light skin. Euro-Mediterrean features basically. Though I never read anything about this specific topic, I'm writing by general things about this civilizations I read and common sense (Southern Europe=Mostly Mediterrean).

The agriculture and first Neolithic civilisations have been brought in all Europe by migrants from Minor Asia, Levant and Mesopotamia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Neolithic

Menumorut wrote: The agriculture and first Neolithic civilisations have been brought in all Europe by migrants from Minor Asia, Levant and Mesopotamia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Neolithic

kudos to you

You should check out this site "Greek and Roman Art".

http://www.flickr.com/groups/492405@N20/pool/

Through the contemporary portraits you can gain a vague idea of what Romans and Greeks looked like. Another good source is via the frescos and mosaics of Pompeii, that have survived intact over the millenium. Just scan for "Pompeii, fresco", or "Pompeii, mosaic", a series of collections would come up.
Most of the sources seem to indicate that the ancient Greeks and Italians looked very similar to their modern descendants.

Another thing to be careful about is that "Roman" is not an ethnicity, nor is it a race; instead, it is a "citizenship" of a multi-ethnic state.
It started off as a city state in Central Italy, and gradually expanded throughout Italy and the Mediterranean to absorb new peoples into its society. By the Pax Romana in the 1st-2nd centuries A.D.; a Roman citizen could come from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds: Celtic, Latin, Greek, Numidian, Lybian, Syrian, Illyrian, Nubian, or any of the obscure nationalities of the Balkans and Asia Minor.

There is an enduring misconception that the Greeks and Romans were "European civilizations". I'd best describe them as "Mediterranean" rather than European; because Romanization occured in North Africa, Asia Minor, and the Middle East as much as it did in Europe (but it did not in Germany); and the Greeks received far more cultural influences from nations of the other side of the Mediterranean than from Central Europe.

What happened was that "European Civilization", that evolved after the Middle Ages, took inspirations from Greece and Rome.

This statue looks more "Etruscan" than "Roman" to me, especially in the shape of the eyes.
Is your cousin's wife Italian?

Dúnadan wrote: I obviously agree with you, but do you have any source? I want to write something about it once for all. When you google "Race Romans", you get tons of websites telling that they were Nordic. Thus more and more people get confused, so I feel that I need to do something about it. I guess that few peopel care about it because is quite obvious, how would Romans or Greeks be Nordic?

Ok, as I promised.
There's a blog of an anthropologist that has taken personaly care of Arthur Kemp and his girberish: http://dienekes.110mb.com/articles/kemp/

All you need about his falacies are there. He has posted photoshoped pictures from his book and compares them to the original. Everytime Arthur Kemp tryes to correct himself this guy updates his blog with the new data. It's all you need about Arthur Kemp written by a pro.

When it comes to Greeks and their background i suggest this article: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199902/ai_n8845695/pg_4/?tag=content;col1

What is good is that it contains references on many many studies in that matter, that you can check out by searching on the same page.

About the Minoans civilization you can check this forum's thread "Minoan Civilization originated in Anatolia" here.

As for the Romans, as Calvo said it is a multiethnic empire. You could start with the Etruscans that most probably were non-IE people comming from Anatolia and were one of the biggest cultural influences of Rome.

Now, i don't know if those white-supremacists touched Egypt, but there it's not hard to proove things since Egyptians spoke an Afroasiatic language.

I will probably return with more info on the Romans.