Talk:Portuguese people
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] South African Portuguese Population
What is the source for arriving at 1 million people of Portguguese ancestry living in South Africa? This would immply that 1 in 5 white people in South Africa are of Portuguese extraction. Is there a census or other source of data that can back this claim up? The source should appear on this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.167.128.68 (talk • contribs)
- There are about 300,000 or 400,000 people of Portuguese extraction in SA. In the 1980s they represented about 9% of the white South African population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.198.37 (talk • contribs)
- That may be so. But what is your source? The Ogre 14:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,879516,00.html "Heavy Casualties. The combined Soviet-Cuban contingent has inflicted heavy casualties on the F.N.L.A. and UNITA forces, despite military support from Zaïre regulars and South African advisers. As a result, Portuguese businessmen are recruiting replacements from the large Portuguese community (400,000 people) in South Africa."
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=South+Africa Also includes Angloromani, Eastern Yiddish, Greek (70,000), Gujarati, Hai||om, Hakka Chinese (6,063), Kung-Ekoka (3,500), Portuguese (617,000), Standard German (45,000), Tamil (250,000), Yue Chinese (15,000), workers from nearby countries (2,700,000).
http://www.teiaportuguesa.com/cacaaotesourolusofonia/lusofoniajorgecouto.htm "Em África merecem ainda destaque o numero de falantes na África do Sul (superior a 1 milhão, dos quais 600 mil portugueses e 400 mil). Depois do inglês e do africano, línguas oficiais da África do Sul, o português surge como a primeira língua estrangeira. Na Namíbia, país que tem fronteira sul com Angola, um em cada cinco habitantes é falante de português."
http://www.igadi.org/arquivo/te_se05/transaccions_identitarias_a_diaspora_portuguesa.htm "Táboa 1. Portugueses que viven no estranxeiro* (1997) [...] África do Sur 500.000
- Cálculo estimativo.
Fonte: Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros (Portugal). Citado en Rocha-Trindade (2000)."
The figure of 600,000+ has been floating around for decades and originally referred to the number of Portuguese in ALL of southern africa (including angola, mozambique, et al.)--Paulalexdij (talk) 07:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Number of Brazilians claiming Portuguese Ancestry
I wonder where the 34,000,000 figure in the article comes from. As far as I know, the Brazilian census does not include any data on self-declared ancestry. There are no official estimates therefore of the number of Brazilians who claim to be descendents of Portuguese settlers or immigrants. However, a question on ancestry was introduced a few years ago in one of IBGE's annual national household sampling surveys ("pesquisa nacional por amostra de domicílios"). If I´m not mistaken, the percentage of Brazilians claiming Portuguese ancestry in that particular survey was merely 13 %. Considering the universe of the Brazilian population, that would represent approximately 20 million people today (as opposed to 34 million). 161.24.19.82 11:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know where that info. is from, but there are various official and non-official sources on the web which shows estimate of those with solely or mainly Portuguese ethnic origins from 20 million to 50 million or more. Considering over half of the population of Brazil has at least some degree of Portuguese ancestry, it is difficult to accurately tell in any census. Epf 21:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I believe 34 million is not an overstatement but an understatement, as before the independence in 1825 portuguese were the pretty much the single european settlers, and after the independence portuguese were at all times the larger numbers of immigrants. The referred 13% of brazilians claiming portuguese ancestry in that survey may refer only to those who can trace their origin back to a portuguese grandfather or grandmother but reflect at the most last century migration and not the 500 years of peopling. Fernão. 15.06.2006
Sources please. Proof that 34,000,000 identify themselves as "Portuguese".
- I've noticed that someone has decided to use another wikipedia article as a citation. This is not acceptable. Look at Citation #1. I also notice that citations are being used but citation templates are not being used with them. Templates provide a standard format for citations and often cause a contributor not to forget key elements. For example, the cite web template requires, URL, ACCESSDATE and TITLE. There are additional fields, but it will error out if you don't atleast contribute those 3 elements. Please see WP:CITET. Nhl4hamilton 18:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cape-Verdians?
I feel like this article should mention something about Cape Verde?? 141.154.255.167 Talk, 16:25, 27 April 2006.
Cape Verde is now an independant state. Its current population or its diaspora doesn´t consider itself Portuguese. Cape Verdean immigrants were considered "Black Portuguese" decades ago in New England, USA.
Cape Verde has a minor historical connection to Portugal and, of course, Portuguese culture has been subtantialy absorbed into Cape Verdian society. However, Cape Verdians have nothing to do with the NATIVE Portuguese. Their roots are Black African, but certainly many in the population are products of both black and caucasian.
Anthropologique 23:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
In matter of fact, there's a discussion if Cape Verde islands were inhabitated when europeans first arrived or not like document, by Elisa Andrade, issued by cape-verdian Instituto das Comunidades [www.ic.cv/Word/historiaCV.doc] (access on June, 14, 2007) "Although, we disagree from the majority that pretends that the Archipelago was inhabitated when it was found. Like many others – among them António Carreira - we are from the opinion that can't be excluded the hypothesis that Santiago has sheltered a little group of Jalofos shipwrecks or another inhabitants (Sereres, Felupes, Lêbus, etc) from Cape Verde (Senegal). Those last two groups, says the oral tradition, came to islands atracted for their fish abundance and to gather salt, in Sal island, that traded by gold from Tombuctu". However the portuguese presence on Cape Verde was massive, and cape-verdians claim to be "uma nação crioula" (a creole nation). Lfdneves 17:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Ogre (rv racilalist pov)
sorry, but it is a view which is valid ( Previous version ) and is not based on wishful thinking but historical and scientific facts and evidence. i could cite sources but i dont see a reason why, when it is not such a secret, other than to justify these claims to "racialists" of an opposing view who may want to suppress this information. if this is the case then i am in a position to require sources for the current claims in the article. in the Spaniard article claims of similar nature are made and mentions DNA etc. also to its own extent and i dont see it as being a problem over there. the theories in the pre-reverted version were not expressed as being fact moreso than what was already there. one could construe the action of reverting to be racialist since it is suppression of information not from my own research but from what wikipedia would consider verifiable external sources. it didnt all have to be deleted. even the part about skin tone and even average height was removed when i see it as being no different from the mention of hair and eye color (which makes a (racialist?) point of saying that blue and green eyes and blonde hair can be found) and the population is in fact now over 10.5 million according to the CIA worldbook of facts, which i may not necessarily always agree with but is a source which is external and i dont think a census is as subjective as certain other particulars. maybe this part was just a victim of complete reversion, nevertheless the information which was added is as valid as any other claims previously in the article with equal backing. --Lusitano Transmontano 01:05, 24 June 2006 (UTC
- - - -
Transmontano, the previous version was just plain wrong!! The article as now written is pretty darn accurate, thank you.
Foo Fighter
- - - -
No no no... it was NOT wrong. While some of it may have been negligible don't tell me it was wrong. It just doesn't want to be admitted. This would just have turned into a battle of egos. Portuguese don't want to admit a lot of things. But I know my background and I also know my own family history so I know I am right. Anyone serious about accuracy shouldn't even bother with a lot of Wikipedia articles anyway since they can't tell what is accurate, how much is suppressed and how much is propaganda. Anyone who needs to do serious work shouldn't stop at Wikipedia but go to REAL sources, go to a library or get a real encyclopedia for serious work people. And the Ogre tagging my view as racialist shoots him/her in their own foot. I say the Ogre is racialist and YOU are wrong Foo Fighter. Thank YOU.
Lusitano Transmontano 02:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Roman Catholicism and the Portuguese
This article mentions in its very first paragraph that Roman Catholicism is the predominant religion of the Portuguese. Although that cannot be considered false, one can nowadays easily witness that the majority of the Portuguese Catholics seldom practice Catholicism, with many not practicing it at all and identifying themselves as "catholics" just for the sake of it being the common norm. Atheism and Agnosticism are on the rise in Portugal, especially among the youth. Other religions are also present and growing. Therefore, I would suggest a section in the article refering to the religious panorama of the Portuguese, rather than the Catholicism reference in the first paragraph which may mislead the reader into believing that the Portuguese are usually devout Catholics.--Húsönd 00:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed! The Ogre 21:29, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
In the infoboxe it says "Religion: Catholicism". Shouldn't we say "Roman Catholicism" or something like that, since Catholic is also used by some other churchs (Anglicans, ...)?
- I believe that you might be confusing "Catholic" with "Christian". Anglicans, etc., are Christians, but not Catholics. Anyway, "Roman Catholicism" is indeed a more accurate form than just "Catholicism".--Húsönd 01:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I wasnt confusing, in fact, I read somewhere that some anglicans or protestants want to be called catholics but not in the roman meaning (francly, I don't understand that subject very well, but I think that it was because of that controversy that the article Catholic Church had to be renamed Roman Catholic church or something). Anyway, seeing that some portuguese may not be Roman catholic I will leave it like that. Cheers.
-
- I have never read so much foolishness as the comment stated by Husond. Catholics are indeed Christian. In fact, they are the largest Christian denomination in the world. Just read Wikipedia's Christianity page.
-
-
- I think you misunderstood Húsönd's comment. On the other hand, Húsönd does not seem to know that, indeed, the Roman Catholic Church is not the only Christian church which calls itself "Catholic". FilipeS 17:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Influence of the black people
Where is the influence of the black people in the portuguese? Portugal was the most slavery state in Europe. Thousands of slave came to Portugal and of Portuguese has blood of black people actually. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.6.19.29 (talk • contribs)
The above statement is so incredibly false it is laughable! A myth propagated by ignorant cretins...Grow up already! Also, kindly brush up on your English so people can actually make sense of what you are writing...
Barber of Seville
What influences?...Read some history. Black slaves at the highest point amounted to no more than 2% of the population. Mixing was practically non-existent. Now if you want to talk about Liverpool and Bristol, that's different. The great majority of slaves that came into Lisbon, Lagos and other ports were re-exported to the New World and other parts of Europe.
The Sharkman
Certainly, black slaves and servants either transited or lived in Portugal. The percentage that settled in the country after abolition was less than 1% of the total population and a fair number of those did apparently mix with white people, but, in VERY specific areas of southern Portugal, where Black and Berber-Arab slave labor communities existed during the mid-15th to mid-16th century period. Alcacer do Sal in the Alentejo is one example. The town was a center for salt production and a considerable Black and "Moorish" slave and servant population was clearly present in that village. In addition, Black and Arab / Moorish slaves who had developed leprocy were isolated there and in one or two other small villages. As a consequence, miscegenation came as much from necessity as choice. In sum, we are talking about an extremely low level of race mixing.
Henriques
Sources please. Preferably from serious sources, ie. no neo-nazi or "White Power" propaganda sites.
-
- No need to ask sources, it was just an oversensitive spaniard (look at the IP) probably tired of being called half-arab, half-gipsy from the forums he likes to read that has chosen to divert attentions by focusing on its neighbors. Pitiful.
Yes, to be sure...probably from some back water in Cadiz...whatever.
This "Portuguese are 10% Black" myth has been propagated by the likes of the late neo-nazi Dr. William Pierce, Tom Metzger who likes to have sex with Mexican hookers in Tijuana, and Kevin Strom who is an American neo-nazi pedophile njow in jail for stalking a 9 year old girl. The myth was created to present the Portuguese as an example of a decadent nation without a future and to humiliate Portuguese people as being inferior. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.0.106 (talk) 14:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nelly Furtado
Oh for god's sake, what is nelly furtado doing there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnYoNe! (talk • contribs)
- Nelly Furtado's parents are Portuguese... Opinoso 19:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. She's a Portuguese Canadian. The Ogre 16:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Friend, i'm portuguese, i've heard her talk portuguese and let me tell you, she most definetly does 'not speak fluent portuguese. At best she fits the same brand as Steve Perry, that doesn't make her portuguese. Switched her image with an image of Amália. --AnYoNe! 21:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Take Nelly Furtado's image out! She is NOT Portuguese! Her parents may be Portuguese, but she IS CANADIAN! Get a image of her parents if you like her so much, but her photo there is just wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.11.59 (talk • contribs)
- Done. I put Cavaco Silva, who is our current President. Yes, I'm Portuguese, that's why I, along with the others, got so upset about seeing Nelly Furtado there. Also, I've heard her in interviews and in songs, and she does NOT speak Portuguese correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.11.59 (talk • contribs)
Nelly Furtado is an ethnic Portuguese. And known worldwide, as are the others portraied (Vasco da Gama, Fernão de Magalhães e Durão Barroso). Furthermore, she is a woman and a picture of a woman should be included. Opinoso has already re-included her and well. I'm removing Cavaco Silva - it destroys the formating and does not respect the criteria of worldwide notability. Thank you. The Ogre 20:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well said! Ô 20:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Are you serious? Are you really saying that "Cavaco Silva" dosen't respect the worldwide notability? How can you say that? He is the president of Portugal! And Nelly Furtado only has portuguese parents, that dosen't make her portuguese, not even portuguese-canadian. She is canadian, no doubts about it. And yes, i'm portuguese too and she has a terrible portuguese. 23 August, 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Patomenn (talk • contribs) 02:25, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
- Hello and welcome Patomenn. Notice that you are replying to a discussion terminated on July. And no, Cavaco Silva is not known worldwide - most people outside Portugal do not know who the hell the Portuguese President is. And Nelly Furtado is not, obviously, a Portuguese Citizen - she is however an Ethnic Portuguese and a Canadian Citizen - in that sense she is a Portuguese Canadian, even if, agreed!, her Portuguese language skills suck! She would still be an Ethnic Portuguese even if she didn't spoke Portuguese at all! The Ogre 11:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Are you serious? Are you really saying that "Cavaco Silva" dosen't respect the worldwide notability? How can you say that? He is the president of Portugal! And Nelly Furtado only has portuguese parents, that dosen't make her portuguese, not even portuguese-canadian. She is canadian, no doubts about it. And yes, i'm portuguese too and she has a terrible portuguese. 23 August, 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Patomenn (talk • contribs) 02:25, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
People of unmixed Portuguese ancestry born or living abroad have every right to describe themselves as Portuguese even if they don´t know the language and NOTHING SOME RIDICULOUS HAUGHTY SO-CALLED "DOUTOR" (Note: Degrees from Portuguese learning institutions are not recognized as serious in foreign countries.) IN PORTUGAL CAN SAY WILL CHANGE THIS. People define themselves and not some corrupt "know it alls" in "Porchugall". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.0.106 (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese hair and eye color
I've added some percentages based on anthropologist Peter Frost[1]. The original source is: Frost, Peter (2006), "European hair and eye color - A case of frequency-dependent sexual selection?", Evolution and Human Behavior, n.27, 85-103. The Ogre 16:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well the source you provided is a joke with no reference at all to the source statistic material. There is no way portugal has 20% blondes in its population, believe me. Only countries in northern Europe have % that high. Watchan FC Porto game and tell me how many blondes you see in the crowd at the Dragao stadium. Like 1 in 1000. C'mon guy, don't be ridiculous here. 70.50.22.159 16:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello 70.50.22.159! You said:
eh - Listen guy, give me a break here. I know alot of Portuguese people, and I only know one who has MIXED blonde shades. No one in Portugal has lightest blodne shades seen in northern Europe and there is now way that 20% of the whole country has blonde hair ? Have yo uever been there ? There is NO way the country has that much blondes and I would bet my life on that. England barely has that percentage even though the majority of people there are of pale complexion. DOn't be riduloucs. The website you referenced is a joke. Portugal has one of the highest percetnages of darker complexions in all of Europe, and the smallest in lighter complexions.
First of all I must tell that it is a bit annoying to have to talk to an anonymous IP adress... Why don't you register? Secondly, regarding our small "war" in the Portuguese people article, let me tell you that it was never my intension to say that 50% of the Portuguese have blond hair! I also made a mistake, I meant light coloured hair, not blond. This includes various shades of brown and red hair. Notice also that the percentages are shown in intervals. The references I used are also shown in the articles White people and Hair color. And I am Portuguese! And I live in Portugal! And I am not a nordicist of any kind. I was just trying to find some sources and numbers to qualify the assertion. And there are a lot of Portuguese with light coloured eyes (I would say about 30%, but that is just my impression), as there are a lot of Portuguese, albeit and obvioulsy not the majority, that have some shade of light coloured hair (and I do known many that have absolutly blond hair). I wrote what I wrote because the article by Peter Frost (Why is Frost, Peter (2006), "European hair and eye color - A case of frequency-dependent sexual selection?", Evolution and Human Behavior, n.27, 85-103 "a joke"? Isn't a published article in a scientific paper a legitimate source?) is a recent source with numbers! I won't add it again soon. I'm waiting for reactions. Let's both relax a bit. Cheers! The Ogre 20:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- The maps shown in White people:
light color hair
light color hair
light colored
hair
light
colored hair
<
You may want to explore some DNA studies on the Portuguese. You could be surprised at what 1000 years of Celtic civilization and 400 years of Germanics have contributed. In any case, the percentage of light brown / auburn hair people in Portugal is fairly high and you certainly see some lighter blonds as you go further north. In Minho and Tras os Montes it is not all that uncommon to encounter redheads and light blonds. Also parts of the Beiras have quite a significant percentage of lighter types, mainly because of Visigothic influences. Blue and green eyes are quite common in the north. I would say the percentage of lighter haired people, at least in mainland Portugal, is about 25 to 35%. Lighter eyes (blue, green, grey) more like 30-35% (I am not including dark hazle eyes).
-
- Minor nitpick: the Celtic Civilization is hard to define. The original "Atlantic Celts" were dark-haired and dark-eyed - the English used this to call the Welsh and Irish Africans in the 19th century, see the "Index of negriscence" issue. What escapes most of the horribly ignorant people that like to write at lenght about what "Europeans" look like - I'm not talking about you, of course, you know what I mean - is that the base, Upper Paleolhitic substractum of Europe, from which Iberia more than any other region derives population-wise, was dark-haired and dark-eyed. I wouls day blonds are relatively rare around here (circa 8-10%) while lighter shades of brown or blondish hues around 20-30%.
Anthropologique 23:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Your points are very good and the percentages presented reasonable. I was born in the Alto Minho and hair shades are generally lighter there, although dark brown to black is still somewhat dominant. However, many people do have light eyes, sometimes even if their hair is dark and a majority have considerably fairer skin than in many parts of southern Portugal. I have at least three cousins with ice blue eyes who look more Irish than Portuguese or Southern European.
-
- Yes, Alto Minho has a higher degree of light eyes (probably Swebian? Not sure). I have family from that area, although they are brown eyed/brown haired. The green/blue eyed people in my family come from the interior Alentejo though, so this things are *far* from being clear-cut. Tras-os-montes, for example, near you, has a vast majority of brown eyed/brown haired people, with dark complexions, probably because they are the closest to the original inhabitants of Iberia. Also have in mind the different sun exposure, there is a cline from North to South. My point here is far from saying that light eyes/hair are rare - they aren't rare, they are a minority, it's diferent, but simply that this modern trend of bashing brown eyes as it's some sign of exoticness is utterly ridiculous. Also, the vast majority of our immigrants are from the North, not the South. That doesn't seem to bother those that have a nordicist agenda. Also, Irish is a broad term, and the original population there was actually brown eyed and brown haired (see the "Black Irish" article). "Southern European" is also a broad term... while phenotypically people from the South of Europe do share several traits in terms of haplogroups they are quite different in a West/East perspective (not better or worse for that though).
Anthropologique 18:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
BTW, did you chance upon a study conducted by Trinity College, Dublin done in cooperation with several other universities? ([2]). The conclusions are that the Scottish and Irish are much closer genetically to the Galicians (and Northern Portuguese) than any other peoples. Actually, I'm not all that surprised since, as you rightly mentioned, the Celtic "wave" flowed first into Iberia then North along the Atlantic fringe. The study is also mentioned in the 10 September 2004 edition of The Herald, Dublin.
Minhoto
-
- I'm logged in now, I'm the anonymous in the previous messages. Yes, I have read that study, that's part of what I was refering to. The study points to similarities between the indigenous Britons (e.g. pre anglo-saxon) and Iberians, particulary with Basques and the Northern Atlantic parts of Iberia. The Lebor Gabbala does mention that the Milesians set forth from Gallaecia. In any event the R1b distribution was already a good indicator. That also shows the perils of assuming that genetic resemblence automatically translates into phenotypical resemblence (although, as I said, both in Ireland and Wales there is a subset of the population that remains closer to Iberia than the rest). Another important point here, which I aluded before, is that the whole concept of "Celtic Wave" for this "primitive" Celts is being disputed... there are some authors that believe that one can't really put the Atlantic Celts and the Central European Celts in the same bag, the first being autoctonous. Curiously the "La Tene" Celts in Portugal had their major area of influence in the Alentejo (the "Celtici"). Another point I try to make (which can be disputed, of course) is that while there isn't perfect homogeneaty in Iberia, or Portugal particulary, differences seem to be blown out of proportion in some internet forums, more interesting in judging "whiteness" by some dubious criteria. Most studies about Portugal, for example, present the data in 3 regions, show the peculiarities, pinpoint one or another area (Coruche, Alcacer do Sal as examples) and then basically say that the samplings are close enough to use as a whole (btw, you as a Minhoto are of course extremely close to Galicians). Make no mistake: what seems to "bother" some people, probably unsure of their own contribution to Europa as a civilization, is that people are darker, period. You will see people from parts of Portugal with much less admixture than the average of Germany or France being characterized as "off-white" by the completely histerical, anglo-saxon inspired paranoia that thrives especially in the US. Bear in mind that for the English, for example, the Germans, Swedes and Irish weren't "really white". That's what happens when you use a word to mean something complex and give it to people incapable of having complex definitions. As I said before, the Welsh and Irish were called Africans by a XIX english theory. So, while this studies are very interesting, I don't think they will make much difference, well,at least for me they won't, having a superiority complex works wonders in fending off the misconceptions of the uninformed hordes.--Bellum sine bello 14:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Nicely said...You seem to know quite a bit about population genetics. Are you a professional in the genetics field or in physical anthropology? Years ago I planned a career in anthropology (earned a BA in social anthropology and an MA in economic anthropology / development economics), however, I ended up in investment banking...go figure!
One point, the majority of Americans (and I am American as well as Portuguese) are practically brain dead on matters of race and ethnicity. Moreover, a large percentage have a propensity to misclassify people constantly, particularly individuals from the "third world". Many Amerricans know little about and have little interest in their genetic and / or ethnic history (although that is changing somewhat in certain parts of the country). Perhaps it's a sign of some deep paranoia with respect to finding out "unpleasant" information regarding one's roots. Did you know that studies show that perhaps as many as 40% of Virginian whites who trace their ancestors to periods of institutionalized slavery have blacks in their blood line? I'm sure many of these people are uncomfortable with that statistic...I mean, why should they even care...Must be something primal.
I do believe that all human beings are "racist" (depending on how you define the word) to some extent, regardless of how open minded they may be. Humans have a propensity to look FIRST at the DIFFERENCES in others rather than similarities; I have brown eyes and his are green; my nose is long and her's is flat, etc. Perhaps it's a type of defensive mechanism from way back when...
Minhoto
-
- I'm not in the field of population genetics, only very inderectly perhaps since my academic background is History and Archaeology, which makes me curious in this matters as I look at those studies not as a be-all-end-all information but as a complement to what I know using classical historigraphic sources. In any event I am weary of using this as an "appeal to authority", the information is there and anybody can have valid opinions with or without academic education. As for the US you are of course right, and a glimpse at the "Hispanic" and "Latino" articles is enough to have a glimpse at the sometimes bewildering definitions... but it's something that is to be expected and explained by the specific immigration trends and history of the US. As for the North American admixture, well, I'm sure that lots could be said but I'm not easily tempted to make broad statements... in the same manner I dislike being "blackwashed" I will not do the same to others. It's of course to be expected that a huge country like the US that has had large contigents of people from all corners of the world has concrete cases of several different admixture, but I'm not one to say that "all US whites are part black and/or indian", because it's not true and one can't extrapolate from some examples the whole population. It's however interesting that people in the US would classify, for example, Val Kilmer (who has recent NA admixture) as "white" while calling Ray Romano, José Maria Aznar or Nelly Furtado "off-white". It's more a sociological phenomenon that anything else really. I hope you understand that I'm not accusing North Americans of anything, it's simply the outcome of specific concepts that are a result of its own history.
- As for racism, well, it's IMO both a "primal" reaction and a sociological construct.--Bellum sine bello 13:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Americans essentially look at race and ethnicity from a very narrow and uninformed perspective. It is truly remarkable how many people in the U.S. confuse notions of ethnicity and race. Much of it has to do with a type of frontier mentality that dominates a large part of the country (the exceptions are on the two coasts and larger mid-west cities, such as Chicago). There are so many poorly educated individuals (even some with a bit of higher education) that have little capacity for critical thinking.
Minhoto
Talking about Portuguese hair and eye clolour, I wuold like to add this: First of all I would like to erase the concept of "black hair" and englobe it in the "brown hair" category because jet black hair in Portugal is quiet uncommon. Usually, even the darkest hair shows traces of brown, specially in the sun. So, we can leave the black hair just for Asians and Africans. I say this because I read somewhere that "the European hair goes in various shades of brown, from the lightest (and nearly white) blonde to the "so called black"". It leads to a point where I do not know what my colour hair is because 50% of the people say it is black whereas another 50% say it is brown. All I know is it is dark. Assuming this presumption, I will divide hair colour in the following colours: Blonde, Light Brown, Medium Brown and Dark Brown (as my own). According to this classifications and counting only with natural hair, excluding dyed hair, I wolud say 20% or 50% blondes in Portugal to be a ridiculous number. Belive me, I am Portuguese, I have travelled for all over the country excepting the Islands. I would say that there are areas of Portugal with around 20% blondes like Minho and Douro Litoral but, taking Portugal as a statistical universe, the percentage of blondes would be around 10%. It certainly is between 8 to 13 per cent, being the rest of the population brown haired. It varies regionally averaging much less than 5% in lower Alentejo as in the city of Beja; In the city of Portalegre it is nearly around 5% but no more; In the Lisbon area, if we exclude all the non-ethnic Portuguese, it would reach more than 7% but no more than 12% so it is near the 10% figure; Around the Sado River's mouth if we exclude the non-ethnic Portuguese (who always apear in the genetic studies, inflacionating the high levels of sub-sahran african dna in south Portugal once they are an ostracized comunity since the XVI century of portuguese men who made families with african slaves) the results would be roughly the same as those in Lisbon; Moving Northwards the Tagus River, around the city of Castelo Branco, the blonde minority is more than 10%, circa 12%; In the Serra da Estrela/ Beira Alta Region, the blondes are shlightly more than 15% but they never reach the 18% figure; In the coast, around the area of the city of Leiria, the blondes comprehend shlightly more than 10%; Near the city of Coimbra the percentage of blondes is around 15%; In the area surrounding the city of Aveiro it is between 14 to 17%. In the costal regions North of Aveiro and up until Vila Nova de Gaia, the blondism rate is anormously high, ranging from 18 to 24 per cent, in general, in this zone the blondes are around 20% of the population. In Porto and around it, blondes are between 17 to 21 per cent, being the avarage of 20%; In the Minho region, in the areas of Braga and Guimarães blondes are more than 20% averaging from 19 to 23%; In Galiza (Galicia) blondes are between 17% to 32% of the population, averaging 23% of the total Galician Population. In Trás-ós-Montes the rate of blondism is around the 18% in Vila Real to no more than 16% North of Bragança. In Santarém or Ribatejo regions, I do not have any reliable data. In Algarve (specially costal) blondism is much more common than in Alentejo, it may be between 9 to 14 per cent. So Portugal is not a "blonde" country at all. Portugal has a blonde minority of ethnic Portuguese people which vary regonally. In Portugal blondes are between 8 to 13 per cent of the population where as brown haired people are more than 85% of the Population. So I guess we can say Portugal is 90% burnette and 10% Blonde. Having to guess, I wuold say that 10% of the Portuguese are blonde, 20% have light brown hair, 50% have medium brown hair and 20% have dark brown hair.
Now referring to the eye colour of the Portuguese people, I would say that about 60% have brown eyes, 10 to 15% have blue eyes, 5% have pure green eyes and 25 to 30% have some kind of mix between green and another colour eyes. (I guess its called hazel in English but in vernacular Portuguese it is called green). I have no data for the eye colour. It is only a guess.
DS2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.84.102 (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I´m a guy from Vigo, in Southern Galicia. I traveled all the Iberian Peninsula and much of western europe. It is true that you can find some villages in Galicia and north of Portugal 8i dont know the south) where there is a relatively large number of light haired/eyed people. But o the other hand the dark haired/eyed and even skined people seem to be much more numerous in a global approach of the whole area, and i dont mean brown haired people: i mean peolple of the darkest complession you can find in europe, many of them could even seem from morocco in some extreme cases. Actually, you can hardly find any other place in the internal of the iberian peninsula with a similar proportion of dark haired/eyed/skinned people, excepting the south coast of Andalusia, i guess. I found more blondes in Madrid than in some points of Galicia, although it is very difficult to make a comparison, since the rate seems to change a lot from a village to other, and it is difficult to get an objective idea. The only thing i can say with some convintionis that Galicia and northern Portugal are one of the areas traditionally more popolated of the iberian peninsula, where the proportion between native dark-complession popolation has been largest against the number of light haired invasors, who have settled in certain places, what would explain the blondism of some villages. Anyway, i would prefer to have clear data, rather than make such speculations. Where you founded the data you ofered of the hair colour in the different regions of Portugal? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.5.43.122 (talk) 21:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
The myth that people in Northern Portugal are distinguishably whiter than those in the South (that's a ~320 kilometer distance - about the same as between Naples and Florence - in a country with a shared history of hundreds - if not thousands - of years) will only end the day that a comprehensive and serious racial study is conducted in this country.
Until that happens, all we have are bogus statistics ("In Trás-ós-Montes the rate of blondism is around the 18% in Vila Real to no more than 16% North of Bragança") and a lot of wishful thinking, writing and rationalizing on the part of the usual bunch of wannabe Swedes.
--89.152.28.55 (talk) 00:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Wannabe Swedes? Oh really? In what world do you live? Swedes are not 10% blond as DS2 suggests or 20% blond as the DS2 suggests the Northern Portuguese are. They are around 80 to 90 per cent blond you idiot! Well, it is true that the distance between North and South Portugal is small (by the way it is sure more than 320 km, but never mind) but let History elucidate us. Everybody knowns the Northern Portuguese were "more Celtic" and that the Germanics had their capital in Braga, meanwhile the moors stayed less than 50 years in Braga and more than 500 years in Beja. Rapes were commited, of course. It is valid not only to Portugal but to all the Iberian Peninsula. Go to Vigo and then go to Murcia. Go to Porto and then go to Beja. Wake up man! Your fallacy consists in ignoring the muslim presence. Pardon my French. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.21.141 (talk) 14:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- The map of Frost is completely wrong , central and southern italians have more than 1-19% light eyes , greeks and spaniards are more darker than italians and in peter frost's map they are more light eyes and hair, absurd , these are real maps of pigmentation in italy and europe:
Blond hair in italy
http://aycu37.webshots.com/image/38316/2003631590295084685_rs.jpg
Pigmentation hair and eyes Europe
http://aycu29.webshots.com/image/39908/2003854802501020027_rs.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.223.7.10 (talk) 09:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Why are people so hung up on colour. You'd expect that after thousands of years of a sunny climate in southern Europe people would usually be darker. I was at an "Italian" restaurant where I guessed correctly that most of the staff weren't Italian but middle eastern (this happens a lot - also a lot going around calling themselves Spaniards - I always spot them). Then I asked the waiter to guess where I was from "Italian?, perhaps even Maltese". Then I indicated the blue eyed, fair haired woman sitting opposite - "she's of English descent" he said. Did you notice the similarity of facial features, bone structure? I said, and while he looked at me curiously I added "she's my sister". Provocateur (talk) 04:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- i'm not obsessionate with the colors, simply the map of frost is ridicolus , is normal that italians are more depigmentated (in the north especially) is due by the location , italy borders with austria and switzerland and spain border with southern france. That's all! But i can tell you that the spaniards are the most purest europeans , they have very little admixture with non caucasoid people as opposed of the Scandinavians who have large mongoloid admixture ,Finns in particular...and anyway is not true that in north-east italy the percentage of light eyes is 50-70 % like Frost say , if the percentage of light eyes in venetia is 70% in scandinavia is 120%!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by GaiusCrastinus (talk • contribs) 17:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
That map about Europe is nonsense. No way Madrid and Zaragoza are lighter than the North West of the Peninsula. Though it is clear that dark eyes and hair are prodominant in all the Peninsula. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.70.176 (talk) 14:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Is there a source for "Portuguese in Barbados???"
Must a be a few people in Barbados who are at least part Portuguese. A fairly large number found their way to Trinidad a couple of hundred years ago...and Barbados is a neighboring country. I'm sure the Barbadian government has some statistics...
????
CaribDigita 00:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I am aware of significant numbers of Portuguese decendants in Bermuda (Azorean) as well as Trinidad, Curaçau, and Guyana (Madeirans). Barbados isn´t known for having a significant Portuguese population although there are some decendants of Portuguese Sephardic Jews who settled their as colonists centuries ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.0.106 (talk) 14:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Portuguese ethnicity
Hello everyone. Anyone interested can participate at the discussion going on at Template talk:Portuguese ethnicity - Pictures. Thank you. The Ogre 15:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese in France
I highly doubt that there are 2,000,000 Portuguese in France. Where is the link for that??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galati (talk • contribs)
Portuguese Foreign Ministry sources place the number of Portuguese in France in the 700,000 range. This number probably doesn´t include some children or grandchildren of Portuguese immigrants who have French nationality and are not counted as Portuguese nationals. The number of Portuguese nationals plus French nationals of Portuguese decent probably goes above 1,000,000 but I really doubt it reaches the 2,000,000 mark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.202.72 (talk) 16:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese not an Iberian People
The only iberian people known is the catalan, which includes the valencia variety of the language. Iberia was the greek word for the latin word Hispania, used relatevely to the parts of the Hispanic Peninsula their were related to, and generally applied only to its mediterranean, nowadays catalanic border. The iberian people is clearly not an ancestor of the galician-portuguese people, who descend from a celtic background lesse influenced by vulgar latins invaders, as Galicia and Portugal were the last parts of the Peninsula romans did occupie.
The word hispanic, or spaniard, and Hispania, or Spain, is the only one to be used by natives of all countrys and kingdoms of the now called "Iberian Peninsula" till the XVIIth and XVIIIth centurys. As to be spaniard is not a cultural, or national, or political word, just a geographic one, like balkanic, european, or scandiavian, those other peninsulas sharing different nations. In XVIIIth century, the coming of the Bourbon family to the castilian throne, the wish to centralise and unified their hispanic nations under a castilianised and uniform notion, bring the word Iberia to scene, as "Spain", and "Spaniard" then become the official word for all nations under a castile rule. Therefore, iberian become, very unfairly, the eufemism to designate the whole of the Peninsula and its nations and different cultures and historys, when one needed to specify Portugal and the Portuguese within the geographical concept. From there, the word iberian was politically abused to show an "Iberian" culture, an Iberian Community, as it helped to centralise and subrodinate culturally and politically, inside Spain and abroad, the non castilians cultures, history, and nations.
What separated latin languages and cultures, over the centurys, is that having a common "father", vulgar latin, they have different "mothers", i.e., different genetic and cultural background of the people who adopted that vulgar latin as the only writen code.
I suggest then that the entry Portuguese People must go off the the group of the "Iberian Peoples and Languages", as in fact galician, and even castilian and basque, should go to, in attention to accuracy of History and truth, out of political purposes or cultural illiteracy. Portuguez 18:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
The Portuguese are an Iberian people since they live in the Iberian Peninsula and share cultural, linguistic and ethnic characteristics with the other peoples of the peninsula. Yes, there were a people in ancient times named the iberians, but that is irrelevant to the modern use of "Iberian peoples". Besides, the peoples who inhabited the Algarve were likely Iberian speaking, and it is thought that before the Celtic invasion, all the peninsula spoke Iberian dialects. Even the Celtic speaking tribes from northwestern Iberia were culturally related to the Iberian speaking tribes, as determined by archeological remnants and recognized when it refers to these Celtic tribes from the peninsula as Celtiberians.
The southern French are also not descended from the Franks and they are still French. Identity and culture are not about semantics. As for different genetic background this is clearly not true, as genetic studies have proven beyond doubt that genetic haplotypes are very similar in all the peninsula, from valencia to oporto. 84.90.19.75 12:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Man, Iberian happens to be the gentilic correspondent to the peninsular peoples, whether you want it or not. Spanish oh hispanic would be stupid. Joaopais 22:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Still, Portugal is not Iberian. Iberians were related to Celts? Come on!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.101.177 (talk) 19:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- There are many meanings to the word Iberian - The Portuguese are not descendents of the Iberians strictu senso, but they are Iberian only in the moder sense of being from the Iberian Peninsula. This article is in need of urgent improvement - will try to do so in the near future! The Ogre (talk) 19:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese colonization of the Philippines
I believe I have read that the portuguese colonized parts of the philippines, maybe I'm mistaken and it was the spaniards only. I am asking because I'm trying to do research regarding my gr grandparents. My gr grandfather was said to be filipino from the philippines, yet his surname was Estrada. My gr grandma on the other hand was portuguese from portugal, but I have yet to learn her maiden name. So confusing, lol. 71.234.209.185 11:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Marissa
- As far as I know, the Portuguese have never colonised the Philippines. Regarding the surname Estrada, it's not common in Portuguese; it's much more common in Spain. Fsouza 02:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What about Portuguese descent in Uruguay???
there is a signifacant NOT ALOT but a pretty large amount of portuguese people in Uruguay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piatti908 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Italians and Spaniards are by far, the largest white groups; the Portuguese are'nt that big!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 21:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, there are many people in Uruguay with Portuguese descent. I live in a Brazilian border region, I know many Uruguayans who have Portuguese origin and I know many cities and towns in Uruguay. The telephone books in this country have endless lists os Portuguese surnames (Pereira, Ferreira, Neves, Amaral, Vieira, Rocha, Branco, Lima, Silva, Coelho, Carvalho etc etc) Scheridon (talk) 01:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Italians and Spaniards are by far, the largest white groups; the Portuguese are'nt that big!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 21:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
The three departments of Uruguay that border Brazil are Artigas (78,000 people), Rivera (104,000 people), and Cerro Largo (86,000 people) with a total of less than 300,000 persons, out of a country of 3.6 million people. Even in those border regions I doubt that the Portuguese make more than half the population. Italians and Spaniards are by far the largest! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 18:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The three largest ethnic groups that occupied the Uruguay are (in order): Spaniards, Italians and Portuguese. Scheridon (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, it is Spaniards, Italians and Germans in Uruguay; in Argentina, it is Italians, Spaniards, Germans! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Last Sentence Silly
"The fact that the most common surnames in Brazil are Portuguese leads one to assume those of Portuguese background predominate in the country." Does that mean Filipino people are mainly of Spanish descent? Absolutely not! The answer is not only descent but history - Brazilian black and indigenous people ended up being given or adopting Portuguese names when enslaved, conquered or religiously converted. Provocateur (talk) 03:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, the Last Sentence Silly--79.2.242.65 (talk) 12:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Confusing article
This article was very confusing. It was talking about many things, such as the differences between Northern and Southern Europeans. Who cares about it?
This is article is about the Portuguese people, and it didn't talk about it. I reverted to an old version of the article (which was erased in the past with no explanation). This version does talk about the Portuguese ethnicity and makes the reader understand it. Opinoso (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Iberians
Ogre, you have greatly skewed and misinterpreted the data about Iberians. The Iberians did have a largely Neolithic, east Mediterranean origin, hence why they most densely settled along the Catalan coast. The Portuguese are not simply descended from the Paleolithic settlers and the Iberians were not merely a local development from these settlers. If this were the case, Portuguese would look strikinly different in appearance than they do. Ireland and Wales have thehighest degree of Paleolithic ancestry in Europe apart from the Basques but these people again look strikingly different. The Neolithic-era Mediterranean settlers was a massive movement of peoples and they gave one of the largest imapacts into Southern European populations and are responsible for the common, darker Mediterranean features among the Iberians, Occitans (southern French), Italians and Greeks. This is shown i ngenetic studies and the Neolithic-era genetic markers are most common in Eastern Europe and Southern Europe. Portuguese are a mainly descended from Celtiberians like the the Lusitanians which I know you agree with. The Iberian component though was a mix of the Iberians themselves and pre-Neolithic inidigenous inhabitants of Iberia (original Paleolithic settlers). Epf (talk) 05:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- I am not disputing you, Epf (by the way, please stop introducing the map you're introducing everywhere - it has serious big errors and is not sourced; please come to the Commons page for the other map and help us try to improve it!), and do feel free (of course!), to introduce the corrections you feel are needed, but remember, that you can not call the Pre-Indo-Europeans of Portugal (as well in other zones of Iberia), Iberians! They did not speak an Iberian language as far as we know (and when we know, as Tartessian or Aquitanian, it was not Iberian). Also regarding the Neolithic component in Portuguese populations, do remember that, given the regional variance in Iberia, data must be specific to Portugal. I'm leaving the corrections you introduced, but changing "Iberians" to "Pre-Indo-Europeans (such as, in other parts of Iberia, the Iberians, Tartessians and Aquitanians)". Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 19:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Genetic studies
It seems ALL wiki articles and sections on genetic ancestry of some European groups, specially Western Europeans, are written by the same team of editors: they all reference Oppenheimer's or Syke's hypotheses as such they were uncontroversial, accepted-by-all-researchers facts, and no opposite point of view is presented. -- Curiously such articles contrast some other wiki texts. This article reads:
The earliest modern humans inhabiting Portugal are believed to have been Paleolithic peoples that may have arrived in the Iberian Peninsula as early as 35,000-40,000 years ago.
According to Oppenheimer, the paternal lineage which marks those Paleolithic peoples is the R1b Y-chromosome haplotype. However, at the Haplogroup R article, we find that this haplogroup is speculated to have ocurred "in Northwest Asia between 30,000 and 35,000 years ago." Well... R1b arrived at Iberian Peninsula 35,000-40,000, however, its grandparent R* might have originated 5,000 to 10,000 later? The article further continues:
Experts such as Barry Cunliffe, Bryan Sykes and Stephen Oppenheimer have put forward theories, supported by genetic and archaeological studies
I can't really argue on archealogical grounds, but genetic data do not support Oppenheimer's hypothesis that there's a close link between Basques and Celtic-speaking peoples, and they do not support the theory that R1b expanded to Europe from Iberia, based on the hypothesis that Iberia was a refugium from which modern humans expanded after the last Ice Age, as R1b is measured to be older as one moves east from Western Europe. Genetic data argue that r1b expanded from the east to the west, not the other way around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.171.64 (talk) 00:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese ancestry of brazilian people
Why is it so emphasized in this article? Why not move it to the brazilian people article and mention it the same way as portuguese descendents in other countries are mentioned? Why are the brazilians so important? We don't go into so much detail about French-Portuguese, or Angolans, etc.. Recently there have a been a lot of Italians immirating to Brazil, do you see a section about it in the talian article? Not even the portuguese language article goes into so much detail about it...