close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

Anthropological studies on nicaraguan indians.

код для вставкиСкачать
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON
NICARAGUAN INDIANS
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
Laboruiory of Physical Anthropology, Department of Anatomy,
JoAns Hopkins Medical School
Introduction. Relatively little is known of the bodily features of
Central-American Indians. For this reason i t would seem worth while
to place on record the following observations, made by the author in
the course of his second trip to Nicaragua, even though these observations constitute but a meagre contribution, being based upon only two
small series. The number of pure-blooded Indians on the East coast of
Nicaragua is rapidly dwindling, influenza, tuberculosis, and malaria
taking a heavy toll among them. During seven weeks in the field only
a little over one hundred Indians, other than the so-called Miskitos
(who are largely intermixed with negroes), were encountered. Of these
a total of 37 adult men could be measured, and this only after their
natural shyness and reluctance had been overcome with much persuasion. It was found quite impossible to examine any of the women.
Very little could have been accomplished without the effective intercession of h!k. Grossmann, the superintendent of the Moravian Mission
in the eastern part of Nicaragua, who has been active among these
Indians for the past 35 years. The author wishes to express his gratitude to Mr. Grossniann for his kind help and reliable information in
connection with these investigations.
The two groups studied belong to the Rama and Sumu tribes and
number 25 and 12 adult men respectively. The Rama Indians were
visited on a small island (Rama Cay) in the Bluefields lagoon, about 10
miles south of Bluefields. These Indians came originally from the interior of eastern Nicaragua, from where they had migrated about 75
years ago to Punta Gordas (near Monkey Point) on the cowt. After a
tribal war part of them (according to Mr. Grossrnann, about 200) came
to Rama Cay, where they have lived in practically complete isolation
ever since. Their main occupation is fishing, but occasionally they go
hunting on the nearby mainland. An influenza epidemic has decimated
their number a great deal, so that inbreeding is even more pronounced
'This paper is one of a series of reports on material and data obtained in 1924 in
Nicaragua, by an expedition from the Johns Hopkins Medical School. The personnel
of the expedition consisted of Dr. A. H. Schultz, Dr. G. B. Wislocki, Dr. F. F. Snyder,
and Mr. 0. 0. Heard. The expenses were defrayed in part by a grant from t h e
Linton Fund of the Johns Hopkins Medical School and by an additional grant from
the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
AM.
J. PHYS. ANTHROP..1926. Vol. IX. No.
65
I.
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
66
to-day than before. According to the Mission records there are many
more girls than boys. The language of the Rama Indians is quite different from that of the Sumu or that of the Miskito Indians.
The Sumu Indians were met with in the region of the Princapolka
river which enters the Caribbean Sea some SO miles north of Bluefields. Their few small settlements are scattered along the river course
anywhere from 70 to 110 miles from the coast. These natives live by
hunting and fishing and occasionally raise some corn and bananas; in
general they are even poorer than the Ramas.
The author has been assured that the strict customs of both the Sumus
and the Ramas prevent intermamage outside the tribe.
Measurements. It was originally planned to take a larger number of
measurements and observations, but unfortunately quite a few had to
be omitted on account of the objections of the natives. Those finally
selected are here listed; their detailed technique has been described by
Martin (1914)under the numbers mentioned after each measurement.
Stature (l),shoulder height ( 8 ) , middle finger (ll),arm length (8-11),
sitting height (23), biacromial breadth (35), hand length (49), hand
breadth ( 5 2 ) , foot length (5S), foot breadth (59) (5s and 59 taken with
the foot on a bench, so that the body weight does not rest on the foot).
Head measurements: length (l), breadth ( 3 ) ,minimum frontal breadth
(4), bizygomatic breadth (7), bigonial breadth (8),interocular breadth
(9), nose breadth (13), mouth breadth (14), auricular head height (15),
total face height (18), upper face height (19),nose height (21), ear
height (29), and ear breadth (30). All the absolute measurements in
this paper are given in millimeters.
Age. The age of the Rama Indians studied could be ascertained
exactly with the help of the missionary; it varied between 21 and 40
years, with an average of 29 years. The age of the Sumus was obtained
only by estimation; its average and range is most likely the same as in
the RamasPexceptfor one individual (No. 6) who was about 50, certainly
not over 55 years old.
Ski%color. The skin color was compared with the skin color scale of
von Luschan, invariably over the middle of the corpus sterni, a region
TABLE
1.PERCENTAGES
OF CASES
WITH A GWENSKIN
COLOR
(SCALE
OF v. LUSCHAN).
No. of color
Sumu
Rama
20
21
22
23
25
9
33
33
4
24
25
-
8
32
20
12
24
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES. ON NICARAGUAN INDIANS
67
which in all the Indians examined is not exposed to the sun, being constantly covered by a shirt. From Table 1 it can be seen that among the
Rama Indians there occur some slightly darker colors than in the Sumus,
who, on an average, tend to be somewhat lighter.
Hair. In both groups the hair color was found to be black without a
single exception. No cases of gray or white hair occurred nor was any
degree of baldness noted. The hair forni was determined to be perfectly
straight in all but two of the Sumus and in all but one of the Ramas.
The three exceptions showed very long low waves.z The hair texture
was, as a rule, not quite as coarse as in North American Indians.
Chest hair was definitely lacking in all Sumus and in all but one Rania;
the latter (No. 19) had a thin coat of short black hairs in the area
between the nipples. This fact may indicate some white adniixture,
but since no other point augmented this suspicion, the individual was
not excluded from the series.
A beard was present in 5 Sumus and in G Ramas; in all these it was
very scantily developed, a few scattered hairs reaching a t best a length
of two inches. The development of the moustache was noted as follows:
none” in 2 Sumus and 3 Rainas; “very sparse” and only over the
comers of the mouth in 7 Sumus and 17 Ramas;“moderate” in 3 Sumus
and 3 Ramas; and “marked” (but as compared with the average moustache in whites, still “sparse”) in 2 Ramas.
Stature. As shown by Table 2 the stature in these Nicaraguan Indians
is quite low. The Sumus are on an average nearly 8 cm. shorter than
the Ramas. A stature below 1612 111111. occurs in two-thirds of the
Sumus but in only one fifth of the Ramas. The average stature of the
Sumus is about the same as that of the South American Machiganga
( 3 1559 mm.) and Quichua ( 3 1584 mm.) Indians (Ferris, 1921), and
as that of the Indians of Southern Mexico ( 3 1575 mm.; Starr, 1902).
11
TABLE2. AVERAGES
AND RANGESOF VARIATION
OF STATURE
AND PERCENTAGE
DISTRIBUTION
OF CASES
IN FIVESTATURE
CLASSES,
63 MM. EACH.
Stature
Sumu
Rama
Min.
Max.
1581.6 1427
1660.8 1538
1680
1738
Ave.
1420-1483 1484-1547 124E-1611
8
-
17
8
42
12
1612-1675 1676-1739
25
8
40
40
Sifting height. The sitting height is proportionately short in both
groups of Indians, the sitting height-stature ratio amounting on an
average in the Sumus to 50.83, in the Ramas to 50.60. According to
Bean (1922), the general average of this proportion in American Indians
SThe degree of this waviness did not surpass grade c of the series of diagramatic
hair forms, pictured by Martin (1914, p. 189). Since there was never more than one
wave, this might have been caused artificially.
68
-4DOLPH H. SCHLJLTZ
is higher, namely, in males 52.3. The tables of Bardeen (1923), containing average relative sitting heights in male Indians, list only three
groups with values below that of the Sumus, namely, the Machigangas
(50.1), the Arawaks (50.7), and the Pimas (50.7), whereas the 23 other
groups mentioned have values above those of the Nicaraguan Indians.
ShouZdw breadth. The greatest width between the two acromial
processes in percentage of the stature was in the Sumus 23.32 and in
the Ramas 23.38. If these values are compared with the compilation
of the averages for this proportion in different human races (Martin,
1914), it becomes evident that these Indians are relatively broadshouldred. This is a further support of the general rule, that the shorter
a race the relatively broader the shoulder width.
Upper extremity. The total arm length (on the left) averages in the
Sumus 725.0 mm., in the Ramas 735.6 mm. In its percentage relation
t o the stature the total a m length in the Sumus amounts t o 46.21 on
an average, with a range extending from 44.2 to 47.9, and in the Ramas
t o 44.26 on an average, ranging between 42.5 and 46.1. Judging by the
values of this proportion quoted by Martin for American aborigines,
the Sumus are fairly long-armed, whereas the Ramas fall among the
groups characterized by a medium, if not a short arm length.
Hand. The hand length (left) in relation to the stature is slightly
greater in the Ramas (10.83) than in the Sumus (10.76). An almost
identical averaEe for this relative measurement exists in the male
Quichua Indians, namely 10.8 (Ferris, 1921). Compared particularly
with whites and negroes, the hands of these Indians are very short.
Of the total arni length the hand constitutes on an average 23.51
per cent in the Sumus and 24.47 per cent in the Ramas. In this proportion the difference between the two is much more pronounced than in
the hand length-stature ratio. The Ramas with their relatively short
arms have a proportionately longer hand than the Sumus with their
long arms.
The hand index is slightly lower in the Ramas (44.30) than in the
Sumus (44.97), but with the scarcity of material such small differences
have little if any significance. Both these averages can be considered
as indicating a hand of more than medium relative breadth when compared with values in other races, The average hand index in men ranges
according to Martin from 38.9 in Massai to 48.1 in the population of
Baden, Germany; the mean for the 21 races listed by this author lies at
43.7. I n connection with another, as yet unpublished, study the author
obtained an average hand index of 43.88for adult male negroes and one
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON NICARAGUAN INDIANS
69
of 45.38 for adult white men (both groups from the eastern United
States).
Fingers. The relation in length between the second and fourth finger
is of considerable racial interest. Among the Sumus the annulark
projected further than the index finger in two-thirds of the cases, in onethird these two fingers were of equal length. Among the Ramas in 67
per cent of the individuals the fourth finger was longer than the second,
in 24 per cent the two fingers were of equal length, and in only one case
was the index finger the longer. A finger formula reading 1I)IV is
therefore exceedingly rare in the Indian; it is known to occur only exceptionally in the negro, never in monkeys or apes, but with considerable frequency in the white race. The reversed formula, IV)II, is
rather uncommon in whites, but is the rule in negroes and, apparently,
in Indians.
The little finger of all Rama and, to a lesser extent, the Sumu men
seems almost rudimentary and stands inside of the direction of the ulnar
edge of the palm, as if it had been crowded toward the fourth finger
(see Figure 1). All these Indians spend a great deal of their time in
paddling canoes and the handle of their paddles is shaped in a manner
which squeezes the inserted fingers I1 to V of the adult hand. It seems
quite likely that the above mentioned position and smallness of the
fifth finger is not an inherited racial character but the direct result of
the narrow paddle handles. This assumption was strengthened by finding
that these conditions are not yet apparent on the hands of children.
Rama Hand
Grip
on paddle
FIGURE
1. Sketch of hand of a Rama Indian (8,
ad.) and of the manner in which
the handle of a Nicaraguan paddle is gripped. Note the position of the little finger
70
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
LOWHextremity. The sitting height of the Nicaraguan Indians was
found to be short relative to the stature, a fact from which one may conclude that the lower limbs must be proportionately long. The length of
the latter (below the ischia) in the Sumus amounts on an average to
49.17 per cent of the stature, and in Ramas to 49.40 per cent. The
range of variation in this relative leg length extends from 46.1 to 51.3.
Foot. The foot length (left), in relation to the stature, averages in
Sumus 15.28, in Ramas 15.16. In the Machiganga Indians the relative
foot length amounts to 14.6 and in the Quichua Indians to 15.0 (Ferris,
1921). Figures quoted by Martin for American aborigines range from
13.7 to 15.2. It can be stated, therefore, that the Nicaraguan Indians
have rather long feet.
The average foot index in the Sumus is 39.05, in the Ramas 39.92.
These values indicate proportionately narrow feet. In the Quichuas
this index amounts to 42.4, in the Machigangas to 41.8 (Ferris, 1921),
and in Colorado Indians to 44.8 (quoted from Martin).
Head size. The size of the head is best characterized by the arithmetic
mean of head length, breadth, and height, or the so-called cephalic
module. This measurement amounts in the Sumus on an average to
151.4, in the Ramas to 155.9mm. In relation to the stature the cephalic
module averages in the former 9.59 and in the latter 9.40, i.e., the taller
Ramas have proportionately a somewhat smaller head. This correlation holds true also within a given race, inasmuch as, generally speaking,
the greater the stature of an individual the relatively smaller is the head.
Figure 2 serves as an illustration of this rule. The example of the Rama
188
1578
1618
458
1698
4738 STATURE
FIGURE
2. Correlationbetween stature and relativecephalic module in Rama IndiaL I l S .
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON NICARAGUAN INDIANS
71
Indians would indicate that individuals of less than average stature
have in general a relative head size above the average, and vice versa.
The following comparison of the relative head sizes in various groups
of male American Indians (listed according to increasing stature) shows
clearly that the Sumus have proportionately small heads, whereas in
the Ramas the head is of typical size (for Indians) in relation to their
stature.
Race
Machiganga
Sumu
Quichua
Otomi
Aztec
Tarasco
Cora
Rama
Apache
Choctaw
Pima.
Author
Ferris, 1921
Schultz, 1926
Ferris, 1921
Hrdlicka, 1912
HrdliEka, 1912
HrdliEka, 1912
HrdliEka, 1912
Schultz, 1926
HrdliEka, 1908
Collins, 1925
HrdliEka, 1908
Stature
Relative cephalic module
1559
1582
1584
1593
1610
1631
1641
1661
1697
1714
1718
9.73
9.59
10.00
9.73
9.58
9.50
9.63
9.40
9.40
9.36
9.23
Cephalic Z'Fzdex. Both the Sumus and the Ramas are on an average
hyperbrachycephalic, the cephalic index of the former being 89.48 and
of the latter 85.92. The range of variation and the distribution of the
individual values is shown for both groups in Figure 3. The Sumus have
FIGURE
3. Percentage distribution of the cephalic index among nine classes of 1.9
index units each.
re
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
such a high cephalic index that it stands almost unsurpassed by any
other American aborigine^.^
Head height. The Ramas have a somewhat higher head than the
Sumus, as evidenced by the average percentage relation between the
head height and the mean of head length and head breadth, which
amounts in the former to 79.84, in the latter to 78.71. These values are
somewhat below that of male Choctaw Indians (average 80.4, Collins,
1925), and they fall well within the range of the values given by HrdliEka
(1925) for the same index in whites.
Forehead. The Ramas, with their greater stature and the larger absolute head size, have a slightly narrower forehead (107.1 mm.) than the
small Sumus (107.4 mm.). In relation to the greatest breadth of the
head the breadth of the forehead (transverse fronto-parietal index)
averages in Ramas 69.28 and in Sumus 69.80. These are rather high
values for brachycephalic races.
Morphological face index. Both groups of Nicaraguan Indians are on
an average mesoprosopic, the Sumus having a face index of 84.82, the
Ramas one of 85.20. Male Shoshoni Indians average for this index 80.5
(Boas, quoted by Martin), male Sioux Indians 83.6 (Sullivan, 1920),
male Apache Indians 78.8, male Pima Indians 84.6 (HrdliEka, 1908),
and male Quichua Indians 82.9 (Ferris, 1916). Judging by these meagre
comparative data the Nicaraguan Indians have proportionately narrow
faces.
Bizygolnatic breadth. This same conclusion is also reached when the
width of the face is expressed in relation to the width of the head (transverse cephalo-facial index). This proportion amounts on an average to
91.55 in Sumus and to 92.63 in Ramas. In male Quichua Indians this
index is on an average 9G.10 (calculated from the figures of Ferris, 1921,
for the two breadth dimensions). In other male Indians this index
amounts to 94.30 in Apaches, 94.90 in Mexicans, 95.30 in Peruvians,
97.19 in Ojibways, 98.63 in Pimas (quoted from Wissler, 1917), and 94.8
in Athapascans (quoted from Martin, 1914). These are all much higher
figures than those found in the Nicaraguan Indians; the latter, therefore,
have an unusually narrow face, not only in relation t o the face height
but also in proportion to the head breadth. It may be mentioned here
&Boas(quoted by Martin) found an average cephalic index in Wichita Indians of
both sexes of 89.5 and one of 89.7in male California Indians.
The author is convinced that the exceedinglybroad heads of the Sumus and Ramas
are not the result of artificial deformation, since no indication of the latter was
found in any of the subjects measured, and the missionaries, when questioned on this
point, emphatically denied the existence of such a practice among any Indians in
Eastern Nicaragua.
PLATEI.
PLATE
I. Heads of adult Rama men and of a Ratna girl (No. 38) ( 0 . 0 .Heard photo.)
PLATE11.
P L ~ T E11. Heads of Sumu men and of two Sumu women (0. 0. Heard photo.).
Due to adverse climatic conditions, other Indian photographs did not t.urn out
satisfactory.
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON NICARAGUAN INDIANS
73
that in spite of the small width between the zygomatic arches the malar
bones are quite prominent in the great majority of the Nicaraguan
Indians.
Bigonial breadth. The width between the angles of the lower jaw
follows to a considerable extent (within one race and one sex) the width
between the zygomatic arches, as is shown by Figure4. Theaverage
relation between these two measurements is somewhat different in
Sumus and Ramas. In the latter the bigonial breadth constitutes 78.21
per cent of the face breadth, in the former only 75.85 percent; i. e., the
Ramas have a relatively broader mandible.
FIGURE
4. Bizygomatic breadth, bigonial breadth, and breadth of mouth in %ma
Indians, arranged according t o decreasing bizygomatic breadth.
Mouth. From Figure 4 it can be concluded that in general in individuals of one race the broader the face the broader is the mouth. In
the Sumus the breadth of the mouth ranges from 48 to 64 mm., with an
average of 55.6 mm., whereas the taller Ramas have an average of only
52.2 mm. with a range from 45 to 60 mm. This racial difference in the
breadth of the mouth is still more clearly brought out by expressing it
in percentage of the bizygomatic breadth. This relative mouth width
averages 39.49 in Sumus and 36.45 in Ramas.
The lips were “moderate” in 75 per cent of the Sumus and in 28 per
cent of the Ramas, they were of “medium” thickness in 25 per cent of
the former and in 64 per cent of the latter, while 8 per cent of the Ramas
had lips of “more than medium” thickness. In general, therefore, the
Sumus have thinner lips than the Ramas.
A slight degree of under-bite occurred in one Sumu, 9 others showed
edge-to-edge bite, and in the two remaining cases (17%) there existed
74
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
slight over-bite. In the Ramas 36 per cent of the cases had edge-to-edge
bite and 64 per cent over-bite (52% of slight, and 12% of marked degree).
Chin. The chin was “receding” in 10 Sumus and in 14 Ramas,
“medium” in 2 Sumus and 10 Ramas, and “prominent” only in one
Rama.
Nose. The nose height amounts on an average to 70.26 per cent of
the upper face height in the Sumus and to 69.59 per cent in the Ramas.
The breadth of the nose constitutes on an average 27.91 per cent of the
bizygomatic breadth in Sumus and 25.42 per cent in Ramas. I t can be
stated, therefore, that the Ramas have the proportionately smaller
nose, both in regard to height and width, but the difference is much
greater in regard t o the latter.
The Ramas have the narrower nose, not only in relation to the face
width but also in proportion to the nose height, as shown by a comparison
between the nasal indices in the two races. This index averages 65.96
in the Ramas and 73.76 in the Sumus. The range of variation extends
in the former from 57.6 to 75.9 and in the latter from 66.0 to 83.3. These
Indians are, therefore, without exception, either leptorrhinic or mesorrhinic, the first being characteristic of the Rama, the second of the Sumu.
The average nasal index of the Ramas is rather unusually low for
American Indians.
‘
The profile of the nose was straight in 4 Sumus and 20 Ramas and
slightly convex in 8 Sumus and 5 Ramas. A perfectly straight nose is
therefore the rule for Ramas but rather exceptional in Sumus.
Eyes. The Sumus have an absolutely as well as relatively narrower
distance between the inner angles of the eyes than the Ramas. The
absolute interocular breadth averages in the former 33.9 mm., in the
latter only 33.0 mm. In relation to the bizygomatic breadth, the width
between the eyes amounts on an average t o 24.08 in the Sumus with a
range of variation from 21.1 to 28.2; in the Ramas the average is lower,
namely 23.05 and the range of variation extends from 20.0 to 26.4. In
a series of American white men the author obtained an average for this
index of 23.01 and in a series of adult male negroes an average of 24.81 ;
the Nicaraguan Indians fall in this respect between the whites and
negroes. It is of interest here to recall that not only the interorbital
septum, but also the nose and the mouth were found to be narrower in
the taller Ramas than in the Sumus.
The eye color was noted as “medium brown” only in one Rama (No.
AKTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON NICARAGUAN IR’DIANS
75
31) as “dark brown” in 13 Ramas and 9 Suinus, and as “very dark
brown” in 10 Ramas and 3 Sumus.
A small plica marginalis (epicanthus) was found in one Rama Indian.
Ears. The Sumus have relatively broader ears than the Ramas, the
physiognomic ear index in the former averaging 54.09, in the latter 52.64.
Both these values are very low, judging by Martin’s tabulation of this
index in various human races, where it is shown to range from 52.8 in
Ainos t o 66.2 in Mawamby pygmies. Male Choctow Indians have an
ear index of 54.2 (Collins, 1925), male Colorado Indians one of 59.0
(Rivet, quoted by Martin), and the South American Quichua and
Machiganga men one of 61.1 and 61.9 respectively (Ferris, 1921). These
are sufficient figures to show that the author’s Central American series,
particularly the Ramas, have relatively narrow ears.
The relative ear size is obtained by expressing the arithmetic mean of
the two ear diameters in per mille of the stature. This ratio varies in
the Nicaraguan Indians between 27.3 and 34.9; in the Sumus it averages
31.13 and in the Ramas 29.66. The former value is higher than any of
the figures given by HrdliZka (1925) for whites.
The ears lay flat against the head in 5 Sumus and 7 Ranas; they were
moderately flaring in 7 Sumus and 16 Ramas, and markedly flaring in
2 Ramas. The helix was rolled in for only one-third (the upper one) of
its extent in 3 Sumus and 11 Ramas, for two-thirds in 8 Sumus and 14
Ramas, and entirely in only 1 Suniu. The lobule was very small in 8
Sumus and 13 Ramas, of medium size in 2 Sumus and 11 Ramas, and
large in 2 Sumus and 1 Rama. Only in 3 of the 12 Sumus and in 2 of
the 25 Ramas was the lobule free; in all the others (75% of Sumus and
92% of Ramas) it was completely attached to the head. Martin states
that an attached ear lobule is a primitive condition which seems to be
most frequent among Mongoloid races. The percentage frequencies for
AND AVERAGE
TABLE
3. PERCENTAGE FREQUENCIES OF SYMMETRY AND ASYMMETRIES
DIFFERENCES
(INCLUDING CASES OF SYMMETRY) BETWEEN
MEASUREMENTS
ON
THE KIGHTAND ON THE LEFT (EXPRESSED
IN PERCENTAGE
OF SMALLER
MEASUREMENT)
IN INDIANS (RAMAS AND SUMUS COMBINED)
AND WHITES.
l.>r.
37
54
14
32
3.20
Foot length
Indians
Whites4
37
500
49
31
5
16
46
53
1.11
Ear breadth
Indians
37
38
14
48
4.97
Measurement
Race:
Cases:
r.>l.
Aver. % differ.
r.=l.
Foot breadth Indians
1.31
Indians
37
38
19
43
2.79
Emhkght
mites
100
33
37
30
1.85
‘For the measurements on 438 whites of this series the author is indebted to Dr..
R. B. Bean.
76
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
the attachment of the lobule in various races, quoted by Martin, are
all lower than those in the Nicaraguan Indians.
Asymmetries. The measurements on the foot and those on the ear
were taken on the right and on the left side in order to gain some idea
on the prevalence of asymmetries in Indians. Table 3 summarizes the
results and compares them with some of the author’s findings from
another, as yet unpublished, study on asymmetries in whites. The
small number of Indians does not permit any definite conclusions in
regard t o the question as to which of the two sides is most frequently
characterized by the larger measurements. It seems certain, however,
that the ears are more asymmetrical than the feet in whites as well as in
Indians, and that the breadth measurements show greater asymmetries
than the dimensions in length. It will be of interest to learn from future
investigations whether the tentative conclusion can be confirmed that
Indians possess a greater tendency t o asymmetries than whites.
SUMMARY
The following enumeration of the more important observations and
measurements may serve as a condensed characterization of these
Nicaraguan Indians and at the same time will show those points in
which the two tribes differ from each other.
Average condition in:
Sumus
Ramas
Skin color
No. 22
No. 23 (slightly darker)
Hair color
black in both
Eye color
dark brown
dark brown to very dark br.
Stature
1582 111111.
1661 mm.
proportionately short in both
Sitting height
proportionately broad in both
Shoulder width
Relative arm length
fairly long
rather short
above average in both
Hand index
Relative lower limb length
relatively long in both
relatively long in both
Foot length
below average in both
Foot index
Relative head size
small for stature
average for stature
89.5 (very broad heads) 85.9
Cephalic index
Morphological face index
84.8 (very narrow faces) 85.2
Breadth of mouth
large (39.5 mm.)
small (36.4 mm.)
Lips
thin
medium thick
Size of nose
relatively large
relatively small
Nasal index
73.8
66.0 (low for Indian)
Nasal profile
slightly convex
straight
Ears
proportionately narrow in both
Even though more extensive series might eliminate some of the
apparent differences between the Ramas and Sumus, the author is
convinced that sufficient distinctions would remain to separate the two
tribes. In many respects these Indians can be regarded as rather extreme. An average stature of only 158 cm., an average cephalic index
of as much as 89.5, a face index of 85.2, a face breadth-head breadth
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON MCARAGUBN INDIANS
77
index of as little as 91.5, a nose index of only 66.0, and an ear index of
no more than 52.6 are uncommon among American aborigines. It
remains to be seen to what extent these conditions are typical for
Central American Indians.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bardeen, C. R. 1923. General relations of sitting height to stature and of sitting
height and stature to weight. Am. J . Phys. Anthrop., VI, 355-388.
Bean, R. B. 1922. The sitting height. A m . J . Phys. Anthrop., V, 349-390.
Collins, H. B., jr. 1925. Anthropometric observations on the Choctaw. A m . J.
Phys. Anthrop., VIII, 425436.
Fems, H. B. 1916. The Indians of Cuzco and the Apurimac. Mem. Am. Anthrop.
Assoc., 111, No. 2.
1921. Anthropological studies on the Quichua and Machiganga Indians.
Trans. Conn. Ac. Arts & Sci., XXV, 1-92.
KrdliEka, A. 1908. Physiological and medical observations among the Indians of
Southwestern United States and Northern Mexico. Bull. 34, Bureau Amer. Ethnol.
1912. Thenatives of Kharga Oasis, Egypt. Smiths. Misc. Cull., LIX, No. 1.
1925. The old Americans. 8", Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore.
Martin, R. 1914. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Jena.
Starr, F. 1902. Physical characters of the Indians of Southern Mexico. Chicago.
Sullivan, 1,. R. 1920. Anthropometry of the Siouan tribes. Anthrop. Papers
Am. Mu.Nut. Hist., XXIII, part 3.
Wissler, C. 1917. The American Indian. So, N. Y.
ADOLPH H. SCWLTZ
88
5
a
.+
d
E
2
(IJ
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Average
3.
1427
1505
1537
1562
1575
1576
1595
1602
1615
1643
1662
1680
1581.6
1538
1545
1580
1688
1596
1615
1633
1647
1648
1651
1652
1662
1668
1669
1674
1688
1695
1704
1711
1713
1720
1723
1727
1734
1738
1660.8
2m
.2
.2
-z
P
'2
c
2
B
i;j
731
794
786
805
349
375
361
363
376
339
377
360
392
387
392
355
368.8
379
355
355
355
382
402
394
366
399
385
400
399
376
370
382
406
390
409
414
399
389
390
415
381
416
388.3
809
786
813
825
812
814
824
855
804.5
778
810
770
802
815
835
821
845
830
830
854
897
842
823
850
834
847
903
860
a55
917
845
853
846
854
840.6
9
m
f
e
5m
8
e
2
v
-B
z
'c
;j
'd
660
687
716
731
738
750
157
157
164
164
175
175
174
172
174
180
172
179
170.3
162
162
167
173
186
178
172
170
174
182
184
184
181
181
177
187
174
179
189
181
189
188
190
192
198
180.0
s
684
709
723
741
771
790
725.0
656
664
725
712
737
714
728
721
725
725
729
706
723
709
734
764
765
753
763
777
780
749
778
779
773
735.6
c:
v
3
-3
2
2
e
-3
m4
70
70
72
79
76
76
83
79
74
80
78
82
76.6
74
77
75
75
78
84
79
74
73
82
79
80
85
77
81
85
76
86
81
79
85
83
80
82
83
79.7
,-
v
5m
--B
v
4
5
B
e
0
c
5
P
@
-0
5
1
t!
a
0
&
!z
5
2
205
234
237
232
239
241
243
249
236
271
247
271
242.1
230
220
242
241
248
253
256
237
248
254
212
253
249
260
248
259
252
257
266
254
255
263
270
266
279
252.1
82
161
172
178
174
168
169
170
167
172
178
179
177
172.1
170
183
176
180
183
182
177
174
178
182
182
176
178
177
176
178
181
383
182
176
184
183
190
184
186
180.0
145
148
150
148
166
163
162
I64
169
155
152
160
153.8
159
156
158
159
153
159
149
1%
160
169
155
152
150
1M
152
162
15%
154
165
153
148
152
107
163
150
194.6
0
88
94
87
91
91
101
102
89
110
98
102
94.6
99
93
95
94
101
95
99
89
97
96
101
103
106
101
98
103
102
102
104
98
112
110
112
101
105
100.6
Absolute measurements of Sumus (above) and Ramas (below).
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES ON NICARAGUAN INDIANS
79
TABLE OF ABSOLUTE MEASUREMENTS-Contind
5
d
.
33
I_
2
2
5
2
4
1
2
3
4
5
117
124
130
120
129
132
130
136
128
133
126
135
128.3
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Average
E
I46
133
137
133
125
137
137
125
127
126
128
128
137
126
128
138
142
132
135
139
131
136
139
141
136
133.4
ze
.*
5
."Ej
*
u
2
105
101
107
106
112
106
107
108
110
108
107
112
107.4
109
102
101
200
108
108
106
102
113
106
113
103
104
109
108
104
112
106
I19
104
105
105
113
108
109
107.1
2
z
d
m
c.
i:
114
122
121
118
117
123
113
126
123
124
112
119
119.3
118
122
122
120
120
119
130
116
130
116
126
120
120
120
113
125
114
127
127
124
125
120
128
117
130
122.0
2
2
3
d
8
d
k
73
75
78
74
76
82
67
81
74
82
73
77
76.0
79
77
79
80
81
75
84
79
89
75
80
80
79
81
74
80
75
83
83
82
81
73
82
77
81
79.6
56
51
57
53
56
59
48
55
53
51
50
52
53.4
57
50
54
55
57
55
57
54
61
54
55
54
54
57
53
54
51
60
60
59
59
50
57
55
53
55.4
138
135
141
129
139
150
140
147
150
142
139
140
140.8
144
136
132
143
144
144
139
140
149
145
151
143
143
140
143
140
146
142
148
140
142
150
150
142
145
143.2
9
9
3
e:
n
.B
5
3
e:
P
9
.D
m
d
98
110
99
104
103
119
105
105
108
114
106
111
106.8
113
105
103
110
110
52
48
55
49
59
115
110
112
116
113
115
108
113
114
110
108
115
110
116
106
112
117
116
114
119
112.0
64
55
57
55
61
55
57
55.6
51
46
49
51
54
52
50
48
56
53
56
54
51
53
53
45
55
53
55
46
55
55
GO
53
51
52.2
4
e
5
el
a
?
P
u
."B
s
ame:
8
z
43
37
41
35
37
45
40
39
40
39
39
37
39.3
34
35
35
38
35
35
38
36
36
36
37
39
41
39
35
32
39
36
36
34
38
36
39
35
37
36.4
Absolute measurements of Sumus (above) end Ramas (below).
-5
s
Y
39
31
35
33
36
37
33
33
36
30
33
31
33.9
38
35
34
36
32
33
33
32
34
36
31
30
30
34
32
31
35
30
31
33
33
30
36
36
30
33.0
*
v
I.
v
c1
5
2
e
P
L.
4
B
56
64
60
63
60
73
66
61
66
68
59
72
64.0
59
65
60
61
28
30
32
36
34
37
38
40
31
38
32
40
34.6
31
31
34
34
36
35
34
31
32
35
38
61
59
63
72
62
60
66
67
63
67
61
67
67
68
64
64
69
63
70
65
66
64.6
33
35
39
31
37
34
33
36
35
31
31
35
32
35
33.8
ADOLPH H. SCHULTZ
80
TABLE. OF INDICES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Average
51.2
52.7
51.1
51.5
51.3
49.8
50.9
51.4
50.3
49.5
49.5
50.8
50.83
50.5
52.4
48.7
50.5
51.0
51.7
50.2
51.3
50.3
50.2
51.7
53.9
50.5
49.3
50.8
49.4
49.9
53.0
50.2
49.9
53.3
49.0
49.4
48.8
49.1
50.60
46.2
45.6
46.6
46.7
46.8
47.5
47.9
44.2
44.7
45.0
46.3
47.0
46.21
42.6
43.0
45.8
44.8
46.1
44.2
44.5
43.8
44.0
43.9
44.2
42.5
43.3
42.5
43.8
45.2
45.1
44.2
44.6
45.3
45.3
43.4
45.0
44.9
44.5
44.26
40.0
9.9
37.6
9.8
43.9 15.4 39.6 10.0
9.4
48.1 14.8 37.5
9.6
43.4 15.2 38.0
9.8
43.4 15.3 37.7
9.7
47.7 15.2 41.6
9.5
45.9 15.5 41.0
42.5 14.6 37.7
9.5
9.4
44.4 16.5 40.6
9.2
45.3 14.9 39.6
9.3
45.8 16.1 37.7
44.97 15.28 39.05 9.59
45.6
15.0 43.0 10.1
47.5
14.2 42.3 10.2
44.9
15.3 39.2
9.9
43.3
15.2 39.0
9.9
41.9 15.5 40.7
9.7
47.2 15.7 37.5
9.9
45.9 15.7 38.6
9.4
43.5 14.4 37.5
9.2
41.9
15.0 39.1
9.4
45.0
15.4 37.8
9.4
42.9
14.6 41.7
9.4
43.5 15.2 40.7
9.1
46.9
14.9 42.6
9.3
42.5 15.6 38.8
9.1
45.7
14.8 39.5
9.1
45.4
15.3 39.8
9.2
43.7 14.9 40.5
9.4
48.0 15.1 39.7
9.2
11.0 42.8 15.5 39.1
9.2
10.6 43.6 14.8 38.5
9.1
11.0 44.9
14.8 43.9
9.0
10.9 44.1 15.3 41.8
9.1
11.0 42.1
15.6 41.5
9.5
11.1 42.7
15.3 38.0
9.2
11.4 41.9
16.0 37.7
9.0
10.83 44.30 15.16 39.92
9.40
11.0
10.4
10.7
10.5
11.1
11.1
10.9
10.7
10.8
10.9
10.3
10.7
10.76
10.5
10.5
10.6
10.9
11.6
11.0
10.5
10.3
10.5
11.0
11.1
11.1
10.8
10.8
10.6
11.1
10.3
10.5
44.6
14.4
44.6 15.5
90.1
86.1
84.3
82.2
92.3
96.4
95.3
92.2
92.4
87.1
85.0
90.4
89.48
93.5
85.3
88.6
88.3
83.6
87.4
84.2
88.5
89.9
87.4
85.2
86.4
84.3
87.0
86.4
85.4
84.5
84.2
85.2
86.9
80.4
83.1
87.9
83.2
81.1
85.92
76.5
77.5
79.3
75.7
79.4
79.5
78.3
84.7
77.3
79.9
76.2
80.2
78.71
85.1
78.5
82.5
78.5
74.4
80.3
84.0
76.2
75.2
73.9
76.0
78.1
83.5
76.2
78.1
83.6
85.0
78.4
80.1
84.5
79.9
81.2
77.9
83.7
81.2
79.84
Indices of Sumus (above) and Ramas (below).
82.6
90.4
85.8
91.5
84.2
82.0
80.7
85.7
82.0
87.3
80.6
85.0
84.82
81.9
89.7
92.4
83.9
83.3
82.6
93.5
82.9
87.3
80.0
83.4
83.9
83.9
85.7
79.0
89.3
78.1
89.4
85.8
88.6
88.0
80.0
85.3
82.4
89.7
85.20
76.8
72.6
71.9
66.0
66.1
76.3
83.3
70.9
75.5
76.5
78.0
71.2
73.76
59.7
70.0
64.8
69.1
61.4
63.6
66.7
66.7
59.0
66.7
67.3
72.2
75.9
68.4
66.0
59.3
76.5
50.0
46.9
53.3
55.6
56.7
50.7
57.6
65.6
47.0
55.9
54.2
55.6
54.09
52.5
47.7
56.7
55.7
59.0
59.3
54.0
43.1
51.6
53.0
57.6
49.3
55.6
58.2
50.8
55.2
50.8
60.0 48.5
60.0 56.3
57.6
54.7
64.4 44.9
72.0 49.2
68.4 50.0
63.6 49.2
69.8 53.0
66.96 52.64
29.4
31.2
29.9
31.3
29.8
34.9
32.6
31.5
30.0
32.2
27.4
33.3
31.13
29.2
31.0
29.7
29.9
30.3
29.1
29.7
31.3
28.5
30.6
31.5
30.0
29.3
31.7
27.5
30.8
29.8
29.6
29.2
28.9
29.1
27.3
30.4
28.0
29.0
29.66
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
0
Размер файла
1 969 Кб
Теги
anthropological, indian, studies, nicaragua
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа