close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

An analysis of the human skeletal material from burial mounds in north central Kansas. By Terrell W. Phenice. 79 pp. figures tables bibliography. University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology No. 1 Lawrence 1969. $2

код для вставкиСкачать
330
BOOK REVIEWS
plementary information on taxonomy,
language, genetics, human paleontology,
social divisions of man, and the history
of racial thought. Each of these topics is
related to the main theme so that even a
reader with little background knowledge
will be able to see their relevance. Emphasis is placed upon the development of
racism rather than with human variation
itself. Relatively little discussion is devoted
to the clinal and populational methods.
The overall tone is an orthodox academic
liberalism .
There are some minor errors of substance. Mules are not always sterile (pp.
21, 126) since fertile females have occasionally been reported. The dates for
Ramapithecus and Australopithecus need
revising (pp. 142-143). The illustration
(p. 32) depicting the measurement of the
cephalic index actually depicts measuring the cranial index. Beyond this, some
statements should be qualified. It is, for
instance, questionable that “most mutations are believed to be lethal,” and that
“six pairs of genes direct the appearance
of skin color.” Contrary to the authors’
opinion, blood typing for the ABO - or
any other system-is
not reliable w i t h
absolute certainty (italics theirs). The
heredity of eye color is more complex than
a reader would gather from their presentation. Finally, physical barriers are not
necessarily more effective than social
barriers. Technological evolution greatly
diminishes the importance of the former.
In many countries of the world today, as
in the United States, the social circumstances are more effective isolating mechanism s .
Such criticism should not, however,
obscure the merit of the book; it is an
excellent survey of racism, written on a
level which makes it particularly useful
for introductory classes or the general
public .
THE LEAVENWORTH
S~TE
CEMETERY:ARCHAEOLOGY AND PHYSICAL
ANTNROPOLOGY. By William M. Bass, David R.
Evans and Richard L. Jantz. 200 pp.,
figures, tables, bibliography. University
of Kansas Publications in Anthropology No. 2, Lawrence. 1971. $4.50
(paper).
With the publication of two monographs
dealing with American Indian osteology,
the University of Kansas has launched a
new series of occasional papers in anthropology. The first monograph in the series
is Phenice’s Ph.D. dissertation, and deals
with fragmentary skeletal material from
Middle Woodland burial mounds along
the Lower Republican River in Kansas.
The stated purpose of the paper is to describe the skeletal material in terms of
metrical, morphological and pathological
details and burial customs, and to infer
relationships with other series from the
Plains.
The extent of fragmentation of this
skeletal material from the Schultz Focus
is indeed awesome, as Phenice examined
something over 20,037 bone fragments
and teeth, representing an estimated 191
individuals. That he managed to finish
such a project and derive useful information from it is commendable; that he
began it is perhaps incomprehensible.
After a relatively lengthy section in
which the material is described in terms
of numbers of fragments and individuals
and bone pathology, Phenice deals with a
metric description of the 17 measurable
adult skulls. Happily, the metrics are
presented by individual and in summation. Stature estimates indicate a rather
short population, with males averaging
65 inches and females about 62 inches.
These values are most likely artifacts of
Genoves’ tables which were used for stature estimation, and the population was
KENNETH L. BEALS
probably as much as two to three inches
Oregon Sttrte Uirive?srty
taller.
A section on burial customs follows, in
AN ANALYSISOF THE HUMANSKELETALwhich Phenice infers various cultural
MATERIAL FROM BURIAL MOUNDS IN practices from the nature and number of
NORTHCENTRAL KANSAS. By Terrell bone fragments. There is rather convincW. Phenice. 79 pp., figures, tables, bib- ing evidence, for example, that the bodies
liography. University of Kansas Publi- were dismembered before burial, based
cations in Anthropology No. 1, Law- on the non-random distribution of skeletal
parts. Thousands of fragments were
rence. 1969. $2.50 (paper).
BOOK REVIEWS
burned, and they were duly counted and
sorted in an attempt to discover where
fire was placed relative to the bodies, or
vice versa. No sound conclusions could
be drawn, however.
The section on dentition includes some
metric data, such as mean mesio-distal
diameter and mean crown module, but
the buccal-lingual diameters are not presented. Phenice also compares the Schultz
dentition with that of two other skeletal
series from the Plains in terms of “pathology.” Pathology in this case consists of a
combination of dental abcess and premortem tooth loss. The Schultz teeth are considerably less pathoIogical than those of
the other series, but is is unclear why.
Caries are not considered pathology, and
i n fact the most “pathological” series is
also the least carious. Some of the confusion centers around one of the comparative series, consisting of teeth from three
South Dakota sites belonging to the
Sonota complex. The Sonota series is the
most pathological (in terms of abscesses
and tooth loss), but it also contains more
old individuals. Age was determined by
dental attrition and pre-mortem tooth
loss!
A short section on cranial deformation
is basically a restatement of the conclusions of a paper written 30 years ago by
T. D. Stewart. Phenice thus notes that
intentional cranial deformation is mostly
restricted to the Gulf States and to later
archaeological periods, then notes that
two Hopewellian skulls from Louisiana
are deformed. So are hundreds of skulls
from Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan
and virtually everywhere else where Hopewellian influence was evident.
The final section deals with assessment
of biological relationships, and is perhaps
the weakest part of the paper. First,
Phenice notes obvious physical similarities
between his Schultz crania and those from
the Kansas City Hopewell series originally
described by Stewart. He then proposed
a new physical type, the Kansas CitySchultz type. In addition to the Kansas
City series, the Schultz crania are compared with six skulls from six different
sites, and with six other series consisting
of 2 to 43 crania each. The series are
compared on the basis of one measurement
(minimum frontal breadth) and three
331
indices. Despite the previously noted similarities between the Shultz series and the
Kansas City Hopewellians, and despite
Stewart’s claim that the Kansas City series
was similar to Illinois Hopewell, Phenice
argues for Plains-based ancestral forms.
He bases this argument on metric similarities between the Shultz crania and a
combination of Lansing Man and two
Archaic females. As a finale, Phenice sees
a series from Nebraska as possibly representing a hybrid population of a Kansas
City-Schultz and Sonota cross, since one
measurement and one index of the Nebraska group are half-way between the
values for the two putative parental series.
In making a claim for a Plains origin for
his new physical type, Phenice has ignored previously demonstrated biological
and cultural similarities with populations
to the east.
The second monograph in the series
deals with an historic Arikara cemetery
in northern South Dakota. The bulk of
the report was written by Bass and Evans,
with a skeletal analysis by Jantz and an
appendix on the dentition by Douglas H.
Ubelaker.
The Leavenworth site is a well-documented village and cemetery complex on
the Missouri River. It was occupied between 1800 and 1832, and was visited or
seen by a substantial number of explorers,
such as Lewis and Clark and Catlin. Excerpts from the original accounts of these
early travelers are presented, which add
a n invaluable ethnohistoric background
to the analysis. Diseases, population size,
number of dogs, ceremonial trappings and
gene flow are all indicated in the writings
of the early visitors to the site. A large
portion of this monograph is devoted to
the description of the burials and associated material. Such a description represents a n important source of information
for comparative work, and a publication
series such as this would seem to be the
ideal format for the dispersal of such
information.
Because of space limitations, I will limit
my comments to the sections of the monograph which deal exclusively with the
analysis of the skeletal material. The analysis of the 285 individuals excavated by
Bass begins with a discussion of demography. Jantz finds that adult males and
332
BOOK REVIEWS
females are equally represented, and that
infant and subadult mortality were high.
Sixty-five per cent of the individuals were
less than 18 years old, and 39% were less
than 12 months; less than 6% lived beyond 40 years.
A measure of sexual dimorphism is included in the analysis, and Jantz shows
that Leavenworth adults are not very
dimorphic. No attempt is made to explain
this situation, nor why the question of
dimorphism was asked in the first place.
The Leavenworth dimorphism is compared
to that calculated by Howells for such
groups as Hawaiians, Eskimos and Austrians, and is found to be less than some
of these groups for some measurements.
Post-cranially, all unpaired long bone
measurements were discarded, leaving 9
to 25 individuals in the sample. Measurements for paired bones were used to assess
bilateral asymmetry. Like all other human populations, post-contact Arikara
were bilaterally asymmetrical and presumably righthanded. The significance
of such a finding is not discussed.
Inter-population variability is expressed
as a series of F-ratios between Leavenworth and seven other skeletal series.
Leavenworth was found to be somewhat
more homogeneous than most of the other
series, and males less variable than the
females. There is documentation of gene
flow into the Leavenworth Arikara population, and Jantz assumes that the
offspring from these matings are not represented in the sample, due to the homogeneity. This same homogeneity is seen
as being due to inbreeding among Arikara
families who survived a smallpox epidemic
in 1780-1781. While far from being documented, this is a n interesting thesis which
deserves further study.
Penrose’s size and shape statistics are
used to assess biological relationships, as
Jantz notes that Dz is a better approach,
but one which requires individual measurements. I will reiterate that this is
precisely the type of publication in which
such data should be presented. The results of the distance analysis are very
much as expected, in that the Leavenworth series is most similar to the Sully
series, a slightly earlier Arikara group,
and a series of Pawnee crania. An ancillary finding which is sure to thrill some
is that a Mandan series was found to be
closer to a group of Norse skulls than to
the Pawnee. As Jantz notes, this is difficult to explain.
Despite such a disturbance, the biological relationships indicated in the analysis
largely conform to what might have been
predicted from cultural and ethnohistorical data. To this extent, the analysis
would seem to be successful. Jantz wisely
refuses to search for physical types, noting instead the large amount of variability
within the series. Ubelaker’s section on
the dentition is primarily a description of
the metrics and pathology of the Leavenworth teeth. As such it is useful in providing data which are too infrequently
found.
Both monographs present a body of
information which students of Plain Indians should find useful. I would argue,
in fact, that even more data might have
been presented. Just as both monographs
are useful for their data, they also suffer
together for their interpretive weaknesses.
I found myself wondering when Phenice
would say something conclusive, only to
find that he would not. The report by
Bass, Evans and Jantz was considerably
more satisfying in this regard, but still
seemed to be a preliminary report.
RICHARD G. WILKINSON
State University of New Y o r k ,
Albtrny
THEORIGINSOF THEORETICAL
POPULATION
GENETICS.By William B. Provine. xi f
201 pp., bibliography, index. University
of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1971. $7.75
(cloth).
The development of population genetics
required the integration of both the qualitative and quantitative approaches to the
study of natural variation which were
initiated in the latter 19th century.
Francis Galton developed the techniques
of correlation and regression to describe
quantitative variation among individuals
of varying relatedness. This line of research was continued by Pearson and his
associates who made numerous statistical
contributions in their attempt to analyze
the phenotypic correlations among relatives. Galton believed that evolution pro-
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
3
Размер файла
287 Кб
Теги
burial, figuren, university, 1969, material, human, bibliography, lawrence, mound, central, skeletal, phenice, north, publication, kansas, Anthropology, analysis, tablet, terrell
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа