NEW LIGHT ON THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF NORTIJEASTERN SIBERIA 'Chester S. Chard Few areas aof the world s0 crucial for the racial hi.story of mankind are as little known as northeastern Siberila. Here may be expected to lie the answers to many Asiatic problems, and, even more important, to those of the entire New World. Yet despite the obvious importance of the area, the amount of work which has been carried out there in physical anthropology is totally inadequate'to the scope of the problem. (The same statement could, of course, be made with regard to archaeology also.) True, few regions of the world are more difficult of access, yet this has not prevented its becoming one of the best known ethno- graphically. A brief outline of previous work will provide a background for the new material to be presented. The bulk of the information on living subjects resulted, as might be expected, from the activities of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, although this material did not appear in its published reports. Bogoras measured 61 males and 80 female Asiatio Eskimo; 31 male and 8 female Tungus of the Kolyma and Anadyr districts; 24 male and 19 female "Kamchatka Koryak" (without indicating whether these are reindeer nomads or sedentary coast dwellers); 63 male and 65 female Kamohadal (again, no location given; heavy Russian admixture in all but a few settlements makes provenience highly important -in evaluating any Kamchadal data); and 148 male and 49 femAle Chukchi (Reindeer and Maritime lumped to- gether without indication). Madame Jochelson measured 70 males and 39 female Yukaghir, 61 female Yakut, 52 male and 72 female Tungus of the Gischiga district, and 173 male and 133 female Koryak of the same district--not identified as to which belonged to nomad and which to sedentary groups. The combined materials were published by the latter worker.(l) Tables give u8 the individual range in measurements of stature, head length and breadth, cephalic index, facial width, and facial index. There are also tables giving group averages on a limited number of Yukaghir, Tungus, and Yakut women for head height;, and nasal dimensions and index. For the nasal data the Tungus and Yukaghir are for some reason lumped together, still further reducing its useful- ness. Madame Jochelson also provides us with a long series of various bodily measurements on her female subjects, scientifically fashionable at the time, no doubt, but of somewhat limited interest for our present; conoerns. A small group of Maritime Chukchi, brought to Seattle for the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, was measured by A. L. Kroeber, who publishbd individual figures on the stature, head length and breadth, cephalic index, nasal length and breadth (and index), chin-nasion, and 26 face width for 9 adult males and 6 females.(2) He further noted that the "coolor of the skin-was almost identical with that of the Indians of Northwestern California, as similarly tested."(3) In addition, there is a series of 14 male and 3 female Chukohi measured by Olsuljefft4) This report was not available to the pre- sent writer, and there is no information as to the measurements taken or the provenience of the subjects. Cranial material is even scantier. Aside from a few scattered early descriptions of individual crania, only four studies are avail- able. Pridolin(5) published a series of 64 alleged Chukohi skulls' from the dollecotions of what is now the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography if the Aoademy of Sciences in Leningrad. Both Montandon and Levin(6) are very aritical of the identification and provenience of the material, and the manner in wrhich it was studied. The mthfhod- ology, at best, is obsolete. Montandon described the few "ptleosi- berienne" crania available in Paris(7), and utilized to the t as comparative material all the socattered published referenoes, but it adds up to very little. More impressive ere the recent studies by Hrdlicka(8) and Levin(8a), which, however, duplicate each other to a considerable extent, being based largely on the same collections (which probably include some of the Fridolin specimens mentioned above). Although these series look impressive in sum, they are com- posed of driblets of 1 to 4 skulls from different localities, of upnorwn and. possibly varying age, and not too convincing ethnia identification. HrdliSka' s material is virtually undocumented, although his measurements are probably more acourate. It is not just a question of the quantitative inadequacy of' this material, but (aside from the recent cranial studies) even more of the qualitative. The number of measurements and observa- tions reported on is for the most part very limited, and insuf- ficient for racial determinations by present standards Moreover, the provenience of most of it is too vague, and subdivisions are combined so as to obsoure differences that may prove to be of the greatest historical significanoe (e.g. between Reindeer and )a-ri- time ChukcOhi). The prev.ailing hypothesis for the past fifty years as to the racial history and composition of northeastern Siberia-what we might call 'the "'Amerioanoid Theory" -was actually based almost entirely on- cultural grounds rather than on the rather inconclu- sive data outlined above. In essence, this hypthesis regarded the Palaeoasiatics of extreme northeast Siberia and the Indians ,of northwestern North America as an ethnic unit which had been split in two in comparatively recent times by a wedge of invading 3stimQ .(9) The idea was advanoed by some(10) that the Siberian half of this continuum represented a backwash ofu peoples who had lived for a while in the New World and then returneds aotuaL Aerioans rather than mere kinsmen. 27 TMhis is not the place to go into a diseussion of the eultursl basis for this hypothesis. Suiffice it to .say that the siilarites in this realm are valid enough, but open to other -interpretations. We .are concerned solely with racia1 matters, and it is evident that -the data of; pysical anthropology have been inadequate to fonLrm or deny this jypothesis, or tos upplant it with a ne one_and that this impasse would remain until intensive field.work by modern mebhods was carried out in northeastem Siberia. It will therefore be, of the gveatest interest to those con- cerned with such problems to learn that fieldsinvestigation on the living populations of this region re undertaken in 1945-47 by G# Fe Debets, the leading Soviet physical anthropolegist. In this period he measured 118Q male and 772 female subjects, care- fully doctznented, representig -all ethnic groups from Bering Strait to southern Kamohatkca. His preliminary reports have been puib.ish}w (11) and provide group averages for each sex of forty measurement and observations. Inoluded for comparative purposes are series 0' Buryats and northern Korens rwhich present interest in themselves. (See tables)( ) Unsatisfaotory as this brief sumwary presentation may be (the ranges of variation are not even indicated), it still represents a great improvement over our previou knowledge Moreover, it is likely to be all that we will learn' of this important work for a long time to come, so It behooves us to make the mbst of it, sketchy as it is. The Soviets at best *aro not noted for pvomptiess in pro- ducing final reports and detailed monographs on their field,work and studies. And in this cas6 there is the further complication that Debets and hi school are currently out of official favor. The present writer is not a physical anthropologist and does not feel oompetent to interpret the- dat' himself or to evaluate the oonclusions that Debets draws from it. He does feel, however, that the material is important and, should be made more readily available to those who are interested in it and capable of utilizing it. Debtat' conclusions are stated for wbat they may be worth; they at least deserve our attention, On the baais of his work, Debots distinguishes three ba s ic. racial ntypes iatthe living ppulation of noi"theastern Siberia which have blended in varying proportiohns to produce the present picture. TUee. he has labelled FPalaeo4;iberian", skiwimoI', and "Iamohatkan" -.namesa which are somewhat misleading arid apt to cause confusion, in the present writer'.'s opinion. He gives little; description of the first two. The Palaeo-Siberian type is strongly Mongoloid, but its soft (althou;h straight) hair and' white skin (acoompanied by-4 certain depisrentat.ioi. of eyes and hair)diffterentiate it from tlh 'class i0 jngQ1loid type.* The LAmut (a northern Tungus group) are typical repreiedntatives, so an etamination of the data in the tables should provide additional informatlon .(l3) -The Eskino type is 28 oharacterized (mainly in contrast to the Kamchatkan) by less frequext epioanthus; marked development of beard; narrower and more sharply out- lined nose;. stiffer hair; black hair (Fischer No. 27) more commonr and only rare occurrence of transverse positimn of nostrils and strongly developed alae. Again, since this type- is overwhelmingly predominant among the Asiatic Eskimo, we refer the reader to the tables for further data. The Kamchatkan type is desoribed in some detail as follows: skin oolor (unexposed) white or slightly swarthy (Luschan Nos. 7-13); on face (easily tanned) it runs to No. 25. Eyes dark in almost every case. Hair black, but often with a brownish tinge (Fischer No. 4). Hair form straight, moderately stiff. Weak development of body- and facial hair, although mustaohes are encountered, and growth of eyebrows is moderate. Face flat (but malars less prominent than, e-g., among Lamut), moderate in -sie (morphologioal height from lower edge of brows averages 128mm in males, malar diameter 145mm). Lower jaw is wide, especially ins oom- parison with the moderate width across the malars. Nasal outline is moderate or weak (though markedly stronger than among Lamut). 'Nasal width in men of middle age moet often 38-39mm. Transverse, position of nostrils and marked development of alae often enoountered. Concave 11asal profiles more frequent than oonvex, but straight profiles predom- inate. Epicanthus occurs in .40-60% of males of middle age.. The fold of the eyelid it moderately developed.: Lips moderately thiok (greater than among Lamut). Mouth wide. Head form moderately brachycephalic (80-83). Forehead usually straight, with weakly or moderately developed supraorbital a'rohesw, Stature averages 158-160cm (male,s) . Debets summarizes his view of the racial composition of the various ethnic groups in northeastern Siberia by- means of the following chart, which indicates the approximate proportions of these basic types enter- ing into the formation of each group, as well as the European element, where presento. 4 indicates niarked predominance of a type; X indicates participation as c-ae of the basic components; / indicates a small but still noticeable admixture. ,, Eskimo~ ~ # !X i/ Kamchttkax x X X X / / European ~ ~~~~ / t x~~~~01 - 29 The Reindeer Chukohi and Reindeer Koryak are virtually indistin_. guiseable, and there is amazing uniformity over a vast area. The Kam- chatkan type predominates. Maritime Chukohi and Maritime Koryak diverge from their respective reindeer-breeding counterparts in the same direc- tion. In general, they are intermediate -between the Kamchatkan and Eskimo types, although one- group studi-ed (Rekinnikovskii) is rather typical of the Kamchatkan. Debets uses the term "Itelmen," according to currentt Russian prac- tioe, for the surviving autoohthones of Kamchatka who still preserve their old language, while- labelling the Russianized natives as "Kamohadale" This is highly oonfusing to Western readers, who are -familiar with the latter term in connection with the former group.-.however much it may correspond to- local usage. The resemblances to the Eskimo type among these Itelmen (nose form, eyelid struoture, beard developmeht) are due to Russian admixture, Debets contends (quite reasonably, for that matter, since despite their claim to being "pure" aborigines, there are no "pure blood-s"l surviving today). The Russianized Itelmen ("Kamchadal" of --Debets), who admit to Russian "blood," differ in being closer to theRussian type. In general, they seem intermediate between the Itelmen and the old eztab- lished Russian peasantry of Kamehatkm (who themselves are not unmixed with native elemehits). The Itelmen, therefore, do preserve more of the original type. Debets thinks tbat, the ancient Itelmen (we would call them Kamehadal) probably resembled the-Maritime Koryak very closely. The Asiatic Eskimo are intermediate between Amerioan Indians and Siberian Mongoloids. Their "Amerioanoid" traits-the "non-Mongoloid" features which set them apart from the Chukohi (e.g.)nose form, less ocourrence of epicanthus)..w-cannot be explained by European admixture, although this might seem an obvious solutioxv. While mixture with Europeans in the Bering Strait region has undeniably occurred, the differences exhibited by the Eskimo cannot be ascribed only' to this, for in other traits they- stand farther from north Europeans than do the Reindeer Chukchee, who have had the least opportunity for such: admixture (e.g.jwiry hair, blue-black hair oolot, skin color). And in size and horizontal profile of face (in which Europeans differ markedly from' Mongoloids), the Eskimo and Chukohi are almost identical. The prevailing idea of an Eskimo "wedge" dividing the Indians from the Palaeo-Asiatics is without foundation racially, for the Reindeer Chukchi have proved to be closer to the Mongoloid peoples of northern and eastern Asia than to the American Indians. "Americanoid" features are ocaracteristic only for the Eskimo, and to a lesser degree oocur among the Maritime Chukchi andMaritime Koryak. Their presence in the latter case might be explained, Debets suggests, if this area had anciently been ocoupied by an "Amerioanoid" popu- lation (lacking the epicanthus, in partioular), whioh moved over into the New World and waXs replaced by more Mongoloid types. Some mixing of the two groups would have been inevitable, and the modern population thus retains a legacy from the previous oeceupants. 30 Where, when and how did theae basic racial ty-pe soriginate, and how did they reach northeastern' Siberia? Debets does not discuss the Palaeo-Siberian type further; it was Aintroduced into the area with the expansien of the Lamut (about 1000 A.D*, according twv cur- rent estimate). As for the Eskimo type, itg specific peculiarities .find no analogies among the people s of; Siberia- at least the modern ems. The picture might be different as regards the anc5,aent popula- tion, however, and oomparative studies of Neolithio and Eskimo crania should be undertaken. -Preserving as it doe s features regarded as primitive Mongoloid, the EskiiAo type might be the ancient substratum in the area. The Kamohatkan type, probably morphologically more reoent, may have entered later. Or the Eskimo might represent a return migra- tion frcm America. Lack of cranial materials from archaeological excavations in this region makes any determination of the chronological relationships of these two types impossible. Their distribution shows no oannection with the present ethnic divisions of the Palaeo-Asiatics. It might possibly, however, reveal traces of a more ancient ethnic demarcation, reindeer breeders on the one hand, coastal hunters on the other. The suggestion is tantalising, but unfortunately we know nothing of the pre-reindeer culture of interior northeastern Siberia. It must remain, for the present, only a suggestion. As to the origin of the Kamchatkan type, it could have arisen as the result of the impapt of the expanding Lamut on a pre-existing population of Eskimo type r-reindeer breeding being simultaneously introduced to the area (thus dovetailing neatly with current culture- historical hypotheses); or it could be an independent Mongoloid type which appeared in northeastern Siberia before the Lamut expansion. Since the Reindeer Chukchi display features which differ from both Lamut and Eskimo, Debets regards the second possibility as definitely established, although Lamut admixture has probably occurred subsequently among the reindeer Palaeo-Asiaticsa(14) There remains the problem of where the Kamchatkan type arose, and what its affinities are. But existing csmparative materials from inner Siberia, northwestem North America, and southeastern Asia are insufficient to determine this. On the basis of available data, the Kamehatkan type differs essentially from other Siberian peoples (e.g. Buryat, Lamut), though better know- ledge of the whole of Siberia may change the picture. The resemblances are mostly in general characteristics of the Mongoloid primry race as a whole. Southeastern Asiatic populations show combinations of features reminiscent of the Kamohatkan type, but the existing materials are not methodologically suitable for oomparative purposes. The series of northern Koreans proved to be closer to the Reindeer Chukohi and Reindeer Koryak in many features than are the Buryat and Lamut, and this may be a significant cLue. Better data on AmertLcan Indians might even show a closer relationship than appears to be the case in the light of our present knowledge* Should the Ainu prove to be the sole aborigines of Japan, those islands are ruled out either as a source or as a route of entry; but here also our information is inadequate. Again, if Chukchi-Koryak-Kamchadal is really a linguistic unit, and if its appear- ance in northeastern Siberia represented a migration frm outside, that 31 same migration might have brought with it the Kamohatkcan racial type as wel1, in which oase A- determination of linguistic relation- ships. outside -the region. ight fu-rnish a elue. In concolusion, much work rbmains to be done, as Debets himself is the first to point- out, before the general oitlines of the racial history of northeastern Siberia beoome even moderately dlear, a.nd able to shed lighit on New World problems. But here at least is a step in the right direction, and on ti firmer ground. r'ABLJI s EASUREMENTS FOR Fs :~~~~~~~~ . ' o ~~~~~~~I :R AOUPS MEASURED ~ -', -1-1- 1- - - I- ra ESKTIkO 1. Diomede 2. Naukan 3. Southeastern (Unlga4,lk A Serinek) 4. Combii2ed E-Icimo 6 . Ue llen-Dszsnev 15.~~~ 0 MlARITIl i 6. Eastern (Bering Sea) ?,(iUCC '.'?. Northern ; 18. Combined aritime j4 .Chuokohi REINDEER 9* Chuokchi Peninsula ;CHACKCHII w Aniu. ;(eaAtrCHU) 1 0d .Aniui l " . _ .......................,.,I- iF.................R...... (CHAUICHU- VENY)3. -RI' IM4 MAR A.E KORYAK (HIY,tLLANY & R.,ME- 11., Penzhina 2.2 Kameohatku I~Rekinnikcov, 14 Pe2 ii hn a(Kamen- Itklan) , 15. Palan [;16.1IEME ; 17. 'ZAMCHADAI' 18. ('PD RUSSIAN SETTLERS IN ;M dCFAn,,A; K9w Avi.iui LAMUTT ko Aradyr-P6nzhina !4 .1 ' *11- Kt- mo.3atica . 2 -j22 Combined Lamut 23. ALAR BURIAT I 24. NORTHERN KOREANS BY AGE GROUPS-% ak a '.0 IA 0 S. '25 32 66 27.2 100- 20 1' 191 24.1 22 82 86 I 190 18.1 "'26.8 26.7 .225.8 to $4 S0 toH Iz LO 36 '47 56 50.3 63.7 47.6 51,2 561, 4 0 >.a I 0 32 25.8 24 25.6 ' 18.1 25.6 2201 23.2 96 22.9 '49 28.1 i. .. 80 -26.2 I. 5' 0 30 I 6 64 '2'6.6 47.5 26.2' 42 28'' 45.3 28 1 ; 54?20o4 61.1 18n5 ' -73 30.'2 53*.5 16;4' 72 19.4 51.4 29 ,2 -89 20*2 50.6 29o2' 90 21.1 36o7 42o2 100 21 .. 1 27 14.8 47 34 57. 15.8 131 420o1 45' 31 63 2 o2 .* 414 7 2 2 13 4 3, .* 14 O 83 .4'r3.I 1- 938 ,z J P- 0' i . I W p 1653 193.3; 1627 191.3 1616- 189.0 153.3 155.8 154.1 1 .19. 1 '1625-'190.3 154.6 '1636 1659 1617 1629 . 19003 190.9 189.2 '1904 153.2 154.4 154.4 154.3, 1617 188.7:153*7 1588-188.7 156.5 1586 190.8 152'.7 1591' 192.4'152.3 '1582- 1617 190.3 151.06 194.2 151.2 1617 193.2"149.6 1627' 193.4 152.4 1636' 192.0 151.7 16,48 192o3 151*0 1593'195.8 155.4 1607. 193.9 154.4: q16Q8 194.5 154.5 1604' i194.6 ' 154.'6 250 22.8 44 33.2 1630 192.8 157.8 1 122 23 54 23 1628 183.1 154.4 - to .-- _ __ _ __ __ 0-4 00 r 04 CO or24 0 M I o t c O o 0 Z0 40Z co o0 7945 147*6 81.6 149..5 81.5 147.9 81.2 148*4 80.6 144.5 80*9 148.5 81*6 147.0 81*2 - 147*4 81*5 146.3 83.0 147.7 80s 0- 145.4 79,2 144*5 79.6 144.6 77.9 145.1 77.4 143.3 78.8 144*3 78*6 142.7 78*5 141.9 79A 146.6 79*6 148.2 79*4 14 To3 79.5 147.5 81.9 148*8 24. 84*3 143.9 117,2 61s.3 54*2 116.8 61.3 53.4 119*6 6208 55*4 118.3 62*0 54.6 116.4 59.7 52.5 118*9 61.6 54*2 117.6 60.7 52.8 118.0 61.0 53.4 11792 5Q*2 51*8 115.6 58*4 51.6 116*6 58*2 50*4 118.4 58.8 50*8 120*3 56*6 48.6 119*4 61.1 51.5 119.4 56.4 50*1 120.3 57.4 5147 117*5 57*8 52*5 114.9 -579 .53.6 115*8 63*0 52.0 116.8 61,3 49*5 117*3 62*4 53*1 116*8 62.1 51*6 115.2 63.5 53s7 112*1 58*9 51.4 37.0 37.6 37.7 37.6 37. 1 37.8 37e7 37*7 38*7 38.8 37*9 37*6 37.6 36*4 368 37J2 36*5 35*9 38*0 35*3 CIS.1 36*2 36*6 60*7 69.2 19 0 5654 61.7 70.6 18.1 56*4 60*2 68*0 18.7 56*6 60.6 68.6 18.5 56.4 62*1 70.6 18.1 57.2 61e3 69o7 18,2 55o9 6290 71.4- 18.5 56,1 61.8 70*5 18.4 66.1 65.4 74*6 17.8 56.9 67*1 75.7 18*3 56*7 65*1 75*2 17o5 53.9 63.9 74,0 17.5 53.1 66.2 77*2 17*6 54*3 59o5 70*6 18*7 61*9 6542 73.5 18.3 62.2 64.7 7149 18;5 51.2 63.1 69*5 18.4 52.4 61.9 67*0 17.8 60.8 60.3 73.0 1991 54*2 57.6 71.2 19,3 51.1 57a8 68o0 18.4 52.7 58.3 70.1 1899 52*4 68.0 68*3 18*2 51*4 37.3 63.2 72.5 16*1 43.7 19.0 17.9 18.7 18.5 17*6 19*5 18*09 19*0 18*3 18.0 18.0 14.7 17.6 16.5 17.2 17;6 16*1 14*3 15 . 16.3 18.1 135.9 134. 3 137e 5 136.a 132.0 136.8 134,4 135.1 132o1 128.6 128.0 128.0 125*7 133.00 128*4 130*0 130.4 130.6 136*4 133e9 13509 19*4 131 .0 34 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10* 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16* 17* 18. 19. 20, 21* 22. 25. .1 r I 7 1 r-4 , S CD NASAL SPINE e- _ 2 rzg C'2 0 ~ Vz.0 0 F4 @ 0 8-40 O E-i - 8- C') C/ I E-' 4. 1.64 2.32 1.42 2.06 1.71 2*03i 1.60 2*08 1.55 1.77 1,49 1.98 1,37 1.75 1.44. 1.84 1.39 1.69 1931] 1.70 1.29 1.76 1,44 2.08 132 1076 160 1.92 1*56 2 .02 1.76 2A10 1*88 2.12 2.34 2.64 1419 1.61 1l07 1. 35 1.18 ls79 114. 1.59 1.42 1.71 1.16 1.88 8.0 12 . 1 10.2 10,6 - 31.8 23.2 29.4 27.0 26.0 3308 24*5 17.2 38.* 9 16.4 33.3 22*5 15.6 6.0 52 0 63.7 50.7 54 .5 41.4 58.8 5008 53.1 48.7 61.2 64.7 46.3 54.8 57.0 66.3 68.9 72.0 7.7. 76.9 32.6. 60c9 12.5 64.3 18.8 65.6 6.4 69.1 10.7 59.8 20.*0 12l. 20.4 17.5 9*1 .25.6 8.2 15.9 13*5 10.0 4.1 15.6 11.1 20*6 9*7 5*6. 5*5 11,0 7.7 4*3 7.1 6.2 12*.1 16.4 20.O 1. 92 12.1. 1.71 27.5 1.79 21.2 1.78 4 6 1 .73 9,8 1o72 3*5 1*81 6.3 1.75 7o3 1.70 7.5 1.63 10.2 1.92 12o5 1.97 3.7 1.74 8*2 1.56 0.0 1*42 5*6. 1*63 100 1.72 11.0 1.77 7.7 1.65 2a2. 1,26 16.1 . 1. 68 9.4 1*52 2*00 1.72 1.76 1*89 1.78 1.90 2.00 1.85 2.06 1.96 1.82 1.97 2.05 2.00 2.05 1.84. 1.66 1*84 1.79 1.78 1.78 1.84 1.75 1.84 1.61 2*13.... 2*24 1.63 2.20* -. 1.63 2.29 2.35 1.66f 2.00 2. 31 1.67 2.24 2.46 l.92 2.00 2.14 2.01 1.74 2.19 2.08 1.57 1.89 2.09 1.58 1.90 2.33 1.64 1.87 1.73 1.73 - 1.94 1.57 1.62 1089 1.64 1.93 1.88 1.63 1.80 12.4 1.53. 1.97 1.60 1.75 13.1. 1.68. 1.71 1.62 2.09 35 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12., 13.. 14.. 150 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21.. 22-. 23. 24. t EYE FOLD (21) @ Co o:o wo Co *Hm~ tQ . ox %- E-4r N ~~-4 rz4 E E-p:;b.4 00 9 2E4 rzE'C4 c ~I4Z 6" ~ ~ ?~ zi o~co o 1.13 1.25 1.26 1.47 1.56 1.52, 1.42 1.51 1.46 1.39 1.49 1.45 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.70 1.74 1.73 1.94 2.02 1.94 1.75 1.81 1.76 208 2.27 2.23 2.03 2.14 2.14 1.84 2.08 1.94 1*73 1.82 1.77 1.73 1.79 1.79 1.69 1.71 1.65 1.5l 1.69 1.67 1.00 1.40 1.40 1.12 1.43 1.37 0.67 1.12 1.12 2.19 2.30 2.24 2.64 2.62 2.62 2.61 2.66 2.66 2.53 2.57 2*55 1.59 2.18 1.66 2.32 1.79 2.21' 1.78 2.b28 .1.85 2.16 .93. 2.25 1.93 2.28 2.28.0 .2.05 1.55 2.60 1.57 2.45 1.56 2.51 23. 1.99 2.25 2.22 1.80 2.52 24. 2.21 2.20 2.18 1.66 2.30 33*3 42.4 28.3 33.9 27.3 6401 61.2 58.5 360.4 59.0 51.0 38,68 51 9; 51.4 48.6 31.5 20 . 2 2*36 2.36 2.23 2*29 2. 59 2*62 2 *53 2*58 2*74 2.56 2 * 54 2 . 63 2*65 2.53 2.80 2*64 a*59 1.36 1.39 1.50 1.45 1.45 1.32 1.23 1.30 1*18 1.21 1*32 1.28 1.26 1.27 1.11 1.17 1.29 4.0.2.35 1.5S 77.7 2.58 1.19 84.5 2.26 1*32 66.0 2.19 1.47 76.0 2.29 1.36 54.4 2.61 1.26 67.4 2.70 .1.24 1.08 1.00 1.11 1.07 1.00 1.04 1.05 1.04 1.05 1.08 1.06 1*11 1.04 1.03 1.08 1.20 1.40 1.98 1.00 1.00 1.02 1.01 1.05 __ 1.74 MD 1.74 _m 1.74 -- 1.60 __ 1.59 -- 1.89 -- 1.78 -- 2.32 1.86 2.21 1.89 2.18 1.87 2 *00 1.92 1.78 1.74 1.78 1489 1.75 1.91 2.04 2.14 2.23 1.46 1.40 1.43 1970 2924 2.02 2.12 1.93 1.05 1.76 1.72 36 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. -1 N4~~~~~~~. e ; S ,, e _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E- t 1. 1.44 2.12 95.7 4.3 1.53 2.44 84.0 100.0 82.5 2. 1.24 2.33 89.8 2.0 1.56 1.95 40.0 92.4 83.6 3. 1.24 2.64 63.2 8.1 1.68 1w94 64.5 96.0 65.1 4. 1.27 2.47 80.2 4.9 1.62 2.01 58.5 95.3 73.8 5. 1.36 1*82 69.2 7.7 1.33 2.14 83.4 86.4 65.0 6. 1.21 2.14 74.7 8.4 1.35 2*19 65*7 96.4 55*3 7. 1.19 2.12 56.8 9.4 1.19 2.11 74.6 93.0 40.0 8. 1.22 2.10 66.5 8.7 1*28 2.14 71.1 93.7 49.7 9. 1.20 2.39 35.7 3.6 1.15 2.01 54.1 92*8 25.0 10. 1.09 2.44 44.0 6.0 1.14 1.95 50.7 93.7 24.3 11. 1.04 2.04 45.5 0.0 1.06 2.02 81.9 93.8 47.2 12. 1.26 1.78 56.1 7.3 1.11 1.73 28.4 87.6 41.5 13. 1.08 1.74 50.0 5.0 1.23 2.04 77.1 96*2 40.0 14. 1.17 1.90 62.1 5.4 1.35 1.99 52.3 98.6 76.3 15. 1.28 1.93 79.0 7.8 1.52 2.03 39.3 90.1 69.0 16. t 1.46 1.88 56.0 9.3 1.56 1.93 40.9 76.5 42.2 17. 1.61 2.09 32.4 12.7 2.31 2.00 28.3 60.1 5.1 18. 1.82 2.32 11.5 27.0 2.67 2.01 18.7 22.0 3.7 19. 1.23 2.11 37.5 3.8 1.04 1.52 11.1 48.1 3.7 20. 1.00 2*19 40.7 3.1 1.03 1.71 24.0 65.2 14.7 21. 1.06 2.08 30.6 8.2 1.04 1.30 16.3 51.8 23*5 22. 1.07 2.13 35.2 547 1.04 1.49 16.9 55*8 16.1 23. 1.13 2.04 75.0 5.7 1.51 1.78 28*3 75.2 20.8 24. 1.11 1.57 80.0 2.5 1.33 1.55 55.5 88.5 73.1 37 I TABDLE 2% BY AGE MEASUREIMENTS FOR GROUPS-% : .ROIUE \ oE o 0 . LO _ C:Q z . 4. C'mbind Sakimo 8. Combined Maritime Chukclli . 9. Reindeer COhukohi (Chauohu) X Chukohi Peninsula REINDEER 11. Penshina KORYAI. (CHAUCHU- 12 . Kamohatka VENYY, MALRITIME 13. Rekinnikov KOR(T-a 14. Pen-hina (Kamen- (llYrTLbANY Itkan) & RE1lXE- 15. Palan KEN) .-.,....- 16. ITELMEN 17. ItKAMCHADAL"f 18. COLD RUSSIAN SETTLERS IN KAMCHATKA 20. Anadyr-Peiizhina LAMUT. 21. Ka m ohatk"a 22. Combined Lmaxut 235 ALAR BURIAT 85 271.48.2 87 25*3 42 26.2 58 34o.5 80 23*8 28 17.9 56 19.6. 79 2696 86 26.8 75 26*7. 81 23.4 51 27.4 45 13*3 .96 20-8. 200 24.5 51.7 4208 4408 52 * 5 60.7 66.1 5006 50.0- 40.0 4892 5409 -5505 5502 2407 23 .0 31.0 2007 . I 23. 8 21.4 14.3 2208 2302 33.3 28.4 170. 6 31.1 U.0 47*0.28*5 1531 184.9 152*4 38 1519 1520 1536 1479 1487 1463 1491 1500 1507 *1529 1537 1486 1489 1488 183.4 1831 5 183s9 185*6 1~.6 186*7 185*3 186*6 185*6 18 6.4 184*6 .N . . 183*4 186*4 187.9 187. 1 149.6 149.2 149.3 147.6 146.5 148.1 14698 144*7 14608 146*0 145*0 146.7 1468.7 147.7 I 4 cel E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-i E-4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ I i P4 M0~~4 404 81.5 140.3 112.0 81.4 141.0 11.3P 87.3 139.5 111.7 71o5 139.1 112.6 78.5 x138.0 112.0 79.9 138.Z 114.1 78.S 140.4 115.5 77.9 134.6 111.1 78.9 135.7 111.5 79.1 133.8 108.3 79.0 132.a2- 104.6 78.6 138.5 109.8 79.1 138.3 108.3 78.8 138.4 109a1 82.5 140.3 108.1 58.4 50..1 57.9 48.2 57.9 48.5 55.3 44.9 56.0 47.8 52.6 44.2 58.9 47.0 52.8 45.3 52.9 46.6 53.1 46*4 52.0 48.2 57.5 44*6 59.3 48.5 5803 46.4 60.1 48.2 34.4 35.V) 35*6 3595 33.8 33.9 33.9 32.7 33.6 33.7 32.7 31*7 33.3l 32A4 33.4 58.8 68.7 17.4 60.3 72.6 17.2 61.4 73.4 17 *A 64.2 78.9 16.4 60.3 70.7 16.5 64.5 76.7 1J.8 57.5 72.1 17.0 61.9 72.2 16.3 63.4 72.1 16.3 63.5 72.5 17.0 62.8 67.9 16.4 55.1 71.1 18.3 53.8 68.2 18.3 55.4 69.8 18.2 55.7 69.7 16.9 39 3 4. 8. 9. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 21. 22. 23. 52.4 53*5 55.4 51.8 49.7 50A 4 50*6 47.6 47.8 47.7 46.3 49.1 48.7 48.9 47*5 17.0 19.5 17*9 16.7 14*1 17.1 16.6 18.4 17.4 15.9 14.2 16.0 15.5 15.8 17.3 127.5 1327 . 3 127.6 121.3 122.8 120.5 126.6 120 * 7 120.5 121.2 120.1 12697 128*0 127.3 129.9 I . I i - - 4 NASAL SPINE I V., CQ .V 27.1. 45.7 54.8 53.4 3102 64.2 45.4 51.0 60.7 54.7 40.7 51.0 28.9 40.6 23.6 44.7 48.2 42*8 43.1 6193 35.8 42.8 43.0 32.2 42.7 51.9 49*.0 66.7 57.3 62.3 20.0 6.8 2.4 1*7 5.0 0.0 5.4 2.5 4.7 1.3 6.2 0 .0 4.4 2.1 9.6 8.2 2.3 0.0 1.7 2.5 0.0 5.4 2.5 2.4 1,3 1,2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 t- t 0 '- m 1.68 1417 1.48 1. 60 1.42 1.48 1*41 1.o45 1*53 10 59 1.26 1040 1.33 1.48 0%-" OE-4 0 - 60 C-40 2.01 1.86 1071 1053 1.80 1093 1087 2.08 2.11 1.93 2 * 20 1.98 1.98 1.98 2.03 1085 1072 2.02 2 .07 1.56 1093 1.88 1958 1.63 1.69 1.72 1.49 1.49 1.43 1.49 1.87 1.77 1.91 2.00 1.85 2.11 1.89 1*70 1074 1.83 1.86 1.33 1.63 1.47 1.62. 40 Ul) '5, I I, H ii. rA " %% W4 Rx A co 4. 8. 9. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 21. 22. 23. 1*33 1.17 1.029 1.25 1*02 1.18 1.55 I ~53 1.95 1.04 1*02. 1.03 1003 i1.14 1q64 1.31 1.45 1*24 1.79 1.57 1.50 1*70 1*86 1*81 2.20 1.18 1.45 1.30 .2 1-,02 I I II --- - - I -- -- EYE FOLiD ( 21) 1 t t t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O X t5 O~~up.M- P z H X H~~~ Z; S n S S S~ W;R ME 0 q. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z . w E - F 0 .: _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. i-4 PO t e 1.52 1.55 1.55 1.98 2.09- 2.05 1.86 2.07 2.05 1.55 1.73 1.66 1.71 1.76 1.76 1.50 1*50 1.42 1.50 1.46 1.46 1.62 1.65 1.62 1.35 1.89 1.89 1.29 1.61 1.61 0.90 1*19 1.19 2.29 2.31 2931 2.27 2.41 2s.3 2.28 2.36 2.36 1.75 1*87 1.57 1.98 2.06 2.10 2.09 2*17 1.71 1.76 1.73 -- 48.2 -- 71.1 __ 69.5 2.44 67.3 2.41 50.6 2o39 53.8 2 *29 44.4 2.32 60.6 2.36 50.0 2.31 44.0 2914 24.7 2.63 8244 2.61 70*5 2.62 76*8 2,94 2 *92 2993 2.*98 2*91 2096 2.96 2*98 2*99 3.00 2.98 2.88 2.91 2.90 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1*02 1.00 1.01 1.04 __ 1.01 -- 1.00 __ 1.02 1.45 10l 1.40 1.00 1*50 J..00 1.52 1.00 1.51 1 04 1.* e 1.04 1.71 1.32 1.79 1.00 1.10 1600 1 .02 1.00 1.06 23. 12.20. 2.28 2624 1.94 2.66 73.4 2.95 1.00 1.00 1.39 41 I 0 4. 8. 9. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20 . 21. 22. 1.87 1095 2.31 2*24 2o14 2.00 1.80 1078 2.00 1.82 2 908 2 * 28 1 *89 2.11 2.06 s I 1-4 cg 1-' 4e 1*06 2.07 77.6 5.9 1*42 64*6 96.5 72 ,2 8. 1e01 1.80 62,.1 4.6 1.28 69*6 97a7 5243 9. 1*00 2421 59*5 4.8 1.52 86.5 95.3 38.1 11. 1.00 1.97 62.0 34A 1*73 93.2 98.2 48.3 12.6 1.14 1669 77 u2 0*0 1.48 60.2 97-so 4k ,3 13* leOO 1e.8 60X7 3.6 1.68 76.O 88 9 42.8 14.6 1302 1 60 80. 2 3,6 let. 55 76; 6 100. 0 6 S . 1 15. L01 163 65.3 0.0 1.75 56)2 100,0 57*3 16. 1.14 1.84 52.2 3.6 1.69 57.9 86.0 23.2 17* 1.20 1.63 27.4 2.7 1.63 73.0 77.3 8.1 18. 1351 1,95 11.5 226 1e62 34.8 71.5 5.2 20. 1*00 1*86 19A6 OoO 1e22 16.6 88 r2 5.19 21. 1.05 1.57 43-.3 2.3 1.1J.. 26.2 8. s8 9.5b 22. 1.02 1.72 30o5 1o1 1'017 22.3 85c42 7T5 23. L 06 1.85 710 - 0O0o 1031 50.6 85.0 10*1 42 ENDNOTES (1) Jochelson-Brodsky, 1906; reprinted, idem, 1907. (2) Kroeber, 1909. (3) Kroeber, 1909, p. 533. (4) Published in Roshdestvensky, 1896. (Title from Jochelson- Brodsky, 1906.) (5) Fridolin, 1904. (6) Montandon, 1926, p. 284; Levin, 1949, p. 293. (7) Montandon, 1926. (2 male arid 3 female Reindeer Chukohi; 8 male and 1 female Maritime Chukchi; 1 unidentified male Chukchi; 1 male and 1 female Asiatic Eskimo; and 1 very dubious male Kamehada l.) (8) Hrdlicka, 1942, 1944. The former includes a handful of Asiatic Eskimo. The latter contains data on 125 supposedly Chukohi crania (55 ma le, 70 female) . some of which are probably Eskime, others at least mixed..-but virtually nothing else pertaining to our area. Despite the title, -all but five of these specimens were measured by Hrdlitka in Russian museums. (8a) Levin, 1949. On a geographical basis, the author identifies his material as followss 34 male and 13 female Reindeer Chukohi; 8 male and 3 female Maritime Chukohi; 11 male and 11 female Asiatic Eskimo; llmale and 10 female "mixed." (9) See for instance Joohelson, 1926, p. 95.6 (10) E.g. by Boas (Boas, 1910, p. 534) . (11) Debets, 1946, 1947, 1949. (12) These tables, here translated and reproduced in full, appear in Debets, 1949. (13) A more detailed description of the Palaeo-Siberian type is given in Levin, 1960, p. 56. It also goes under the name of "Bailcal type" in the literature. (14) Levin (whose views are based on cranial studies), stresses the general similarity of physical type among all Chukchi, Koryak, and Eskimo, and feels that the Eskimo type is predominant in all these peoples. I find his arguments less convinoing than those of Debets, although they cannot be ignored. The confused nature of the ethnio identification of his specimens could 43 have given rise to an impress`ioh o`f uniformity more apparent than real. Nor is there any evidence that his studies included Koryak crania, and it iS. `onsequently:-nrot elear on. what bdsis he ven- tures to pass judgment on ti physical type of this people. Also we must bear in mind that Debets relies heavily- onmorphologioai` details observable on the living subject only. Levin admits a subordinate non-Eskimo element, especially noticeabl9- in the reindeer groups, and suggests an early pre-Lamut penetration of the north by the Palaeo-Siberian type (possibly represented by the Yukaghir). Whether this is a substitute forDebete' Kamchatkan type or an addition to it is not quite clear. (16) Graded 1-3. (16) Grad4d 1-3. (17) Graded 1-3; 1 a raised. (18) Graded 1-3; 1 transverse. (19) Graded 1-3; we . ak. (20) Graded 1-3; 1 8 w'eak. (21) Graded 0-3. (22) Graded 1-3 1 s narrow. (23) Graded 1-3; 3 outer corner higher. (24) Graded 1-3; 1 very sloping. (25) Graded 1-4. (26) Graded 1-3. (27) Graded 1-3; 1 - very prominent. (28) Graded 0-3; 0 X negatie to plan oOf lower Jaw. (29) Graded 1-3; 1 * rokheilila. (30) Graded 1-3; 1 attached (or' grown together) (31) On persons over 25 years of age, graded 1-5. (32) Graded 1-3. (33) Inner surface of am, No. 10-and'.darker. 44 (34) Groups omitted from charts for females: 1. Diomede. 2. Naukan. 3. Southeastern (Ungarik and Serinekc). 5 . Uellen-Dezhneve. 6. Eastern (Bering Sea). 7. Northern, 10. Aniui. 19. Aniui. 24. Northern Knreans. 45 BIBLIOGRAPHY Boas, Franz 1910. "Ethnological Problems in Canada," in Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, volu pp. 579- 539. Tondonm- Debets, G. F. 1946. "Contribution to the Anthropology of the Chukohis Preliminary Report," in Kratkie Soobshoheniia, Institut ERnoLafii, Akademiia Naulc SSSR, Noo 1, pp. 63-64.- Mocw nd eningrad. (in Russian) 1947. "Contribution to the Anthropology of the Eskimo: Preliminary Report," in Kratkie Soobahcheniia, Institut Etnografii, Aka aWNauk SSSR, No., 3, p * o08CX and a (TT UBsian) 1949. "Anthropological Investigations in Kamohatka: Preliminary Report," in Kratkie Soobshcheniia, Instiltut Etnogr2aft i, Akad_em i1WNaU_SS, N 5, 3C. n iMswand ingrad7 (in Rssian) Fridolin, Julius 1.904. "Tschuktschenscghdel," in Aro iv, Antolo , volume 28, supplement, pp. 1-17. Braunsohweig, Ge rma ny. Hrdlihka, Ale"' 1942. "Catalog of Human Crania in the United States National Museum: Eskimo in General," in Proceedings of the UJnited States National Museum, volume 91, pp. 19-4 ashington, D. C. 1944. "Catalog of Human Crania in the United States National Museum: Non-Eskimo People of the Northwest Coast, Alaska, and Siberia," in Proceedings of the United States National Museum, voi e 94,PP 1p-72. Wash ngton, D C. 46 Joohelson, Waldemar 1926. "The Ethnological Problems of Bering Sea," in Natural History, volume 26, pp. 90-95. New York. Jochelson-Brodsky, Dina 1906. "Zur Topographie des weiblichen Korpers nordost- sibiriseher Volker,," in Archiv fur Anthropologie, volume 33, pp. 1-58. Braunschweig, Germany. 1907. "Contribution to the Anthropology of the Women of the Northeastern Siberian Tribes," in Russkii Antropologiaheskii Zhurnal, 1907, No*. 12p. 1-87. Kroeber, A. L. 1909. "Measurements of Chuklchis," in Amnerioan Anthropologist, n. s., volume 11, pp. 531-533. Lancaster, Syevania. Levin, M. G. 1949. "Craniological, Types of Chtkchi and Eskimo (in Relation to Problems of Ethnogenesis in Northeastern Asia)," in Sbornik Muzeia Antropologii i 3tnagra fii, Akademiia iaSSSR, volum X,pp. 29S307* Moscowr and Leningrad. (in Russian) 1950. "Anthropological Types of Siberia and the Far East (Contribution to the Problem of the Ethnogenesis of the Peoples of Northern Asia),." in Sovetskaia Etnografiia, 1950, No. 2, pp. 53-64. Akademiia Nauk SSSR Moow and Leningrad. (in Russian) Montandon, George 1926. "Craniologie Paleosiberienne (Neolithiques, Mongol- Oides, Tchouktchi,, Eskimo, Aleoutes, Kamtchadales, Ainou, Ghiliak, Negroides du Nord)," in L'4ro41c- ge, rvolume 36, pp. 209-296, 447-542. PF i V Roshde'stvensky, A. G. 1896. 'Olsuljeffs Meterialen Zum Studium des physischen Typus der Tsohukts8henh und Lamuten," in Momo iren der Amurschen 'Sektion der Kaiserl.' russischen Geise1l- schaQT-h, BdTIIe He ("Min Russian) 47