Posted: Jan 06, 2011 1:11 pm
ali_ihsan21 wrote:
I have something interesting too. A world atlas from 1939. There is a race map inside it too
Uh... that looks like a map of language families, not of races. It contains some erroneous information, like lumping Romance languages with Greek and Chinese with Korean and Japanese but other than that it's pretty accurate.
EDIT: Hm... this is getting curiouser and curiouser. Why is northern China marked as "Mongolian"? Chinese languages originated in North China, where there has never been to my knowledge a Mongolic-speaking majority. Why is Semitic-speaking northern Sudan "Hamitic" (which is no longer considered a language family, interestingly enough)? Why are Slavic speaking areas of Russia marked as Uralic - where these Uralic-majority areas in 1939?
Oops, it seems like you're right, Africa is marked as "Negro Zencileri", which Google Translate thinks means "negro niggaz" bu
t I assume actually means "Black Negroes". But the rest of the map seems oddly consistent with linguistic groupings of humans.SECOND EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fenno ... people.png this seems to be a historical distribution, and it's not as wide as your atlas's map's.
