Who are you claiming they invaded?
Depends on who you think they are.
It used to be (and often, still is) the thing to believe the Jews to be Armenoid in type.
But anthropology says the Armenians and Hittites are the Alpine type.
Some say the Jews are Arabs, which would make them the Mediterranean type.
And since the
Jews tell us they are Spartans... which means Greek...
"When we consider how instinctively we regard the Greeks as typical of Mediterranean humanity, this sounds at first sight almost incredible; but Dr. von Luschan's observations in Lycia show that here, as in the Riviera, a continental type known as "Anatolian" or "Armenoid," which is the eastward counterpart of the Alpine and continuous with it, descends to sea-level and restricts Mediterranean man to the coast. The same is true of the whole eastern side of the Adriatic, and southward thence to the Gulf of Corinth; and there is growing reason to believe that the strong "Alpine" strain in the Morea, which is certainly ancient, may even be primitive there. Even in the Aegean islands, and in Crete, which were admittedly occupied early and decisively by Mediterranean man, traces of continental intruders, of Alpine affinity, begin already at the close of the Stone Age, showing that Alpine man was already present in force on the neighbouring mainlands. Mediterranean man, therefore, must be regarded as in all probability an intruder from the south; just as "Alpine"
[41]
man reveals himself more and more clearly now, as a longitudinal immigrant from the east, along the Mountain Zone. Both movements alike are very ancient, and are a part of a much larger convergence of animals and plants from the south and south-east into the colder, moister regions which have been released since the Ice Age closed.
It entirely accords with this view of the origin of Mediterranean man to find that outside the Mediterranean region, this type spreads widely away in three principal directions. Southwards, with little modification, it dominated all habitable lands of North Africa until the arrival of the Arabs, so that the Egyptian's portrait of his western neighbour, the Libyan, shows him almost indistinguishable from his contemporaries "within the Great Sea." Eastward, these southern types seem to link up very closely with those which inhabit all Arabia; the difference between them being rather facial than structural, just as the physical breach of continuity between Arabia and Africa is a very late incident of their geological story. Between them now, however, the permeable barrier of the Red Sea is answered, beyond the Gulf of Atabah, by a promontory of "Annenoid" (that is to say East-Alpine) types, which run out from Eastern Asia Minor, down the Syrian hills, to their Palestinian extrem-
[42]
ity, cutting off the Arab from the Mediterranean and from Africa in a highly significant way. Contrast with this the fact that throughout historic times the African shore of the Red Sea has been just as "Arabian" in population as the eastern. These southern and southeastern extensions of our Mediterranean type entirely support the view stated here, that it originates south of the Mediterranean, and that its partial occupancy of the north shore is recent.
Thirdly, to the north-west, in proportion as the Atlantic seaboard enjoys a milder climate, and is at the same time rendered more accessible from the Mediterranean, round the flanks of the Pyrenees, the Mediterranean types, popularly grouped as "Iberian," have long been propagated as far north as our own islands, and eastwards as far as the Rhine and Upper Danube. Their arrival here seems to have been considerably earlier than the westward spread of "Alpine" man into central and south-central France, or the fenland of the Lower Rhine. Such a long northwestward extension of the area of Mediterranean man is again exactly what would occur if the main check upon him northward were his notorious intolerance of cold and his high mortality from diseases of the lungs. His true home is on the northern margin of the deserts which separate him from the negro, and he only extends as far
[43]
away from this as his sensitive physique will allow. It is probably for this reason that he ends off short, as he does, at the foot of the Mountain Zone, and at the Palestinian hills.
The "Alpine" type, on the other hand, and still more its eastern "Armenoid" equivalent, seems almost as intolerant of lowland life, and fades out rapidly in the foothills: so much so, that it has even been thought that "Alpine" types are actually formed out of lowland peoples who have been pushed up into the hills and rigidly selected there. This view, however, hardly does justice to the longitudinal continuity of type within the mountain zone itself, or to the evidence, archaeological and historic, as to actual movements along it.
With the blonde giants of the north, whose place of origin, and purest survivals still, are round the shores of the Baltic, and in all southern Scandinavia, we shall have little to do, till the latter part of our story, when we find them penetrating the mountain barrier at several distinct points. We have to note, however, that there is considerable probability that in early times they (or near kinsfolk of theirs) held at least the western half of the northern grassland; and the legends of blonde invaders of Northern India suggest that once they ranged over the whole. In any case, there seems no reason to believe
[44]
that the coming of Mongol folk into this region is other than quite recent. The comparative beardlessness of this type of man was still unfamiliar enough after the Greek exploration of South Russia, to give rise to controversy, and to legends of "women-warriors" on the steppe. And even among the Scythians, who were crossing the Don about 700, this peculiarity was far from universal. If they were Mongoloid at all, which seems really doubtful, there was some other large ingredient. On the tableland of Asia Minor, the earliest portraits of Hittite peoples (about 1285 B.C.) have been thought by some to be Mongoloid; but the evidence is still scanty and inconclusive: on Hittite monuments, bearded figures are frequent, and the type is Armenoid."
--J.L. Myres, The Dawn of History
One of the "some" Myres mentions is Sayce, who wrote that the Hittites were Mongoloid. I'm thinking that Sayce thought more about color than about profiles. Armenoid is a very distinctive type, and has nothing in common with orientals. And Hurrians were also Armenoid, according to Godbey et al. In addition, Sumerians look almost exactly the same. And we know for a fact that Sumerians were not Akkadian-Jews. And we should also have learned that Jews are neither Hittites nor Amorites (of either the prehistoric-giant or the Amurru-Sumerian type).
