Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: The Alekseev Manuscript

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, December 8th, 2006 @ 02:25 AM
    European Union European Union
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    Thanked in
    4 Posts

    Post The Alekseev Manuscript

    The Alekseev Manuscript

    I: Introduction by Alexseev and Chapter II: Lower Paleolithic in Eurasia (Lecture 1 delivered on 24 June 1991 )
    II: Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) in Eurasia (Lecture 2 delivered on 26 June 1991)
    III (concluded) and Chapter IV: Upper Paleolithic in Afro Eurasia (Lecture 3 delivered on 1 July 1991)
    IV (concluded) (Lecture 4 delivered 3 July 1991)
    V: Mesolithic in Eurasia (Lecture 5 delivered on 8 July 1991)
    6 Delivered on 10 July 1991 - Chapter VI: Neolithic in Eurasia
    V: Neolithic in Eurasia (continued) (Lecture 7 delivered 15 July 1991 )
    VI: Neolithic in Eurasia (concluded) and ChapterVII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (Lecture 8 delivered 17 July 1991)
    VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (Lecture 9 delivered 22 July 1991)
    VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (Lecture 10 Delivered 25 July 1991)
    VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (Lecture 11 Delivered 29 July 1991 )
    VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (continued) (Lecture 12 delivered 31 July 1991)
    VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia (concluded) and Chapter VIII: Iron Age in Eurasia (Lecture 13 delivered 5 August 1991)
    VIII: Iron Age in Eurasia (concluded) (Lecture 14 delivered 7 August 1991 )
    IX: Celebration and Conclusion


    Valery Pavlovich Alexeev came to Harvard University in Summer, 1991 to teach two anthropology courses: "Peoples and Cultures of the Soviet Union" and "Archaeology of the USSR". The subject matter for this volume, "A Brief Cultural History of Eurasia as told by Professor Alexeev to his student Geraldine Reinhardt", is based on these lectures; however, much of the information has been updated to reflect the current geography of Eurasia rather than preserving the once Soviet Union.

    Alexeev was considered one of the Soviet Union's most distinguished anthropologists. He directed the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow and was able to achieve full membership in the Soviet Academy of Sciences without ever having been a member of the Communist Party. He studied both ancient and contemporary cultures throughout the USSR; his studies also took him to Mongolia, Syria, India, Vietnam, and Cuba.

    As a staunch supporter of international collaboration way before the emergence of "perestroika", Alexeev participated in joint Soviet-American conferences on the Siberia/Alaska connection and was a paramount figure in establishing a role for Soviet scholars in Earthwatch sponsored field programs. It was Alexeev's wish to establish a world-class natural history and anthropological museum in Moscow.

    Professor Alexeev was truly an exemplary scholar. He read in five languages and commented that when he would sit in his easy chair and begin to read a volume, he would forget in which language he was reading. His lectures, all in English, were prepared with care and delivered without much assistance from fancy audio-visuals except for the books he passed around and The Map.

    The Map was one of Alexeev's prized possessions; he carried it in one hand and his briefcase in another. At the beginning of each class he would hand the map to one of the first row students who would then stand on a chair and attach it to its proper place on the blackboard. This ritual also took place when class ended. I recall one incident in The Yard when he and I were chatting briefly after his lecture. I turned quickly to leave and astonishingly all my papers spewed from the backpack I had forgotten to zipper. As I bent over to gather them, I looked up and there was Alexeev, briefcase in one hand and The Map in the other, laughing uproariously while apologizing that he would help if he could but his hands were full!

    The former Soviet Union was a huge place. For each geographic location Alexeev would mention, he would locate it on The Map; not simply by pointing in the general direction but actually walking to The Map and finding the exact location. For most of the Russian place names, he would write them on the blackboard. And this is how we learned the geography of Eurasia.

    Alexeev was a soft spoken man and began each lecture in a quiet voice and continued speaking while the classroom somehow automatically became quiet. For most of the lectures, he had us move our desks close to his; this reminded me of reading aloud time in lower school, perhaps then my most favorite "subject". But even as I write this paragraph, I can still hear his uproarious laughter, in a tone that definitely was neither meek nor mild.

    Out final exam was unusual. It was held at 102 Quincy House rather than in the classroom. When we arrived, Alexeev presented us with two questions, each one different from the others, and told us to share our information. Then he left the room. All of us had typed up his lecture notes on our computers and had met as a group before the final exam to share, compare, and bone up for the exam, but we still frantically asked each other for assistance.

    Then Alexeev returned and the exam began. One at a time, each of us answered our two questions, and were graded on the spot. And graded fairly. But a peculiar event occurred after the exam. One of the students, actually an undergraduate, was not satisfied with her grade of A- and asked to have her grade raised to an A. Alexeev handled this situation with finesse and tact. He told her he had already written the grade on the grade sheet (which he had done) and therefore was unable to change her grade. I wonder what I would have done in a similar situation?

    In reflecting back to that Summer of 1991, I most of all remember Alexeev's sense of humor. Now humor is something that is quite difficult to convey to people from another culture who also speak a different language. Humor is joke telling, wit, irony, intelligence, and perhaps most importantly, the ability to stand back and watch oneself fall. Humor in fact is humility. And it is this humility that I have attempted to convey by peppering the text with Alexeev's witty anecdotes.

    Alexeev came so fleetingly into our lives yet he left us with so much. Alexeev died in Moscow in November, 1991.

    When I had completed the detailed revision and editing of the lectures, I was amazed at how carefully and cleverly the information had been organized and presented. And Alexeev never used notes; all information had been precisely learned and adroitly conveyed to us, his audience, not in his native Russian but in English.

    The original lectures contain an archaeology and ethnography of the then Soviet Union. The archaeology consists of specific sites, grave goods, dates (C-14 dating is available for some sites, but not for all), ethnology of skeletal evidence, and archaeologist in charge for major sites from the Paleolithic through the Neolithic. The ethnography includes languages and people in Eurasia from the early migrations of the III millennium BC to medieval times.

    To the original lectures I have updated the geography to reflect Eurasia rather than the Soviet Union and expanded the text in a few ethnographic instances with information from the "Encyclopedia Britannica". With my computer modem and the Internet I was able to access the Union Catalog at Harvard via HOLLIS (Harvard On-Line Library Information System) from my study in Washington, DC. HOLLIS, an extremely valuable research tool, provided me with spellings for the authors and sites Alexeev had mentioned and enabled me to conduct searches based on author, title of volume, subject, and keyword listing. Using the keyword listings for a particular entry, I was able to expand a topic search to include a much larger field; this was especially valuable for expanding Alexeev's ethnographic information. HOLLIS also allowed me to separate language from ethnicity.

    The first compilation raised many questions and it was William Fitzhugh at the Smithsonian Institution who recommended that I collaborate with the noted Russian ethnologist Sergei Arutiunov, a visiting scholar at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks and a friend and colleague of the late Alexeev.

    Thus for the academic year 1995-1996, Sergei and I have communicated via electronic mail (e-mail), he in Fairbanks and I in DC:

    "Sergei, the temperatures are frigid in DC!"

    "Geraldine, I do not know what you call 'freezing' in DC. There is a limerick by Rudyard Kipling: There was a young man in Quebec, Who fell in snow up to his neck. When asked 'are you freeze', He answered 'I is', But we don't call it cold in Quebec."

    And regarding race:

    Dear Geraldine, about race. First of all, never confuse race and language. Preferably different words should be employed for ethnicity and language on one hand and for "race" on the other. Haitians are black (though some are only light brown) and speak a kind of French which is Indo European. Jews are white (though some are nearly black, like the Falasha) and speak a number of languages some of which are Semitic like Hebrew, others are Indo-European like Yiddish, and some are in other groups.

    Race or a racial type is a convenient categorization pigeon hole but contrary to language is a construction. Rarely do you find an individual who would represent any "race" in a clear and pure form. There is always only some approximation. But nevertheless we can speak of prevailing racial or physical features in every population. Alexeev used to single out only three Great Races: Europoid or in the more obsolete terminology "white", Mongoloid or "yellow" (in fact ranging from very white in the northern Siberian Evens to dark brown in some Indonesian populations) and Equatorial where he would lump Black Africans, Negritos of Andamans and other Southeast Asian islands i.e. Papuans, Australians etc.

    Great races, considering the differences in teeth and other genetic markers, are subdivided into local races. So Europoids are subdivided into xanthochroic (blond, nordic) and melanochroic (brunettes, southern Europoids from Spain and Morocco to Bangladesh). These can be further subdivided into second order local races, e.g. melanochroic are subdivided into Mediterranean (Spain, N.Africa, S.Italy, Greece), Near Eastern (Turkey, most Asian Arabs, many Jewish populations though not all, Caucasians), Indo-Pamiric (most of Iran and Afghanistan, south of Central Asia, north of India) and these are subdivided further into smaller local types and subtypes.

    However, among Georgians and Circassians, you find mostly Near Eastern types, but in some localities, especially in the west of their territories, the subtypes of the Mediterranean race prevail. You find several types and much intermediary shades among Italians, etc. Most Sudanese are mixed Europoid-Africanoid, most Kazakhs are mixed Mongoloid-Europoid, and so on. Any other questions? Please write.

    Dear Sergei, I wish to eradicate "race" in the same fashion that I needed to erase "Soviet Union" in the Alexeev lectures and relabel the physical geography of Eurasia. Our world has changed so quickly. The first battalion of the US Special Forces arrived yesterday in Sarajevo and saw the glow of Yule lights strung in the middle of a war zone. US troops, along with other NATO peacekeeping forces, will patrol the borders to keep the foes from killing each other. It's the correct thing to do. Rabin fought for West Bank and Gaza et al. territory only to return it to the Palestinians in the name of peace. It was the correct thing to do. Peres will continue Rabin's mission. When an Uzbek moves or is moved to Tajikistan, is he still an Uzbek or does he become a Tajik? You say that most Kazakhs are a mix of Mongoloid-Europoid; in Kazakhstan 37.8% of the population is Russian, 2% Uzbek, 5.8% German, 5.4% Ukrainian, 39.7% Kazakh, and 9.3% other. My daughter attends graduate school in Canada and is in an East Asian Study Program. Last weekend one of her professors hosted a Sunday party at 11:00 AM (Dim Sum hour). Her Asian friends brought "Chinese food" and she baked an apple pie. Everyone exchanged "secret santa" gifts. Holiday cheers.

    Dear Geraldine, first, you hardly can do without mentioning a race. Well, the word race is probably not politically correct (though I hate the very notion of political correctness - it is so hypocritical and demagogical), because "race" is rather apter applied to genetically discrete populations of domestic dogs or other animals who are prevented from interbreeding which is not the case with humans. But a difference between Mongoloids, Europoids and Africanoids, apart from mixed and intermediate forms, is an evident fact and one cannot disregard it. You can call them great or main or basic physical types or any other euphemism but it is all the same.

    So, if for simplicity's sake I am allowed to continue to use the term "race", then there are great races, or races of the first order, three as above, or four, if we consider Australoids different from Africanoids (Alexeev did not but I do)". Americans should abandon as utterly incorrect politically and scientifically a usage of Caucasian as designating the "white" or Europoid race. Caucasians are either native inhabitants of the Caucasus area (including Armenians, Azeris, Ossetians and other Turkic and Indo European speakers), or linguistically, the people who speak Caucasian languages (then the above must be excluded and the term would cover only Georgians or Kartwelic, Abkhazo-Adyghean and Nakh-Daghestanic). Racially or physically the term Caucasionic should be used. Best wishes for the season's holidays. And a happy new year to you!

    Dear Sergei, why does anyone need to use the word race! Even the Canadian census poll uses the term "ethnic identity". "Race" is a biological term and lends itself best to creating thoroughbreds or supermen. The word "race" is very POLITICALLY correct. Adolph Hitler capitalized on it in his creation of the Aryan superpower and his demoralization of Jewish populations (as well as Gypsies, homosexuals, Austrians, Poles, etc.). Stalin likened the Slavs to a race and likewise "did in" the Jewish populations. Whether one is or is not politically correct is presently irrelevant; what is of the utmost importance is being humanistically, historically, and ethically correct. The hubbub at the Smithsonian last season over the Enola Gay exhibit was the result of the politically correct gaining an upper hand and demanding revisionist history. The historical display being reduced to a single airplane was the correct thing to do.

    Our world has changed overnight. We are a great territory without a leader and, thank goodness, none have yet emerged. Because this political situation is very delicate, the major powers are in agreement that peace must be negotiated at all costs. Rabin believed this, so does Peres, Arafat, Major, Chirac, Kohl, Mubarick, Yeltsin, Clinton and hopefully many more. Thus to embrace a particular race be it Aryan, Europoid, Jewish, Slavic etc. is humanistically, historically, and ethically wrong headed. As an anthropologist (or archaeologist or ethnologist) it is my task to follow the direction of the present world leaders and advocate peace. It is the correct thing to do. Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah (and many menorahs) and a Happy New Year to you.

    Dear Geraldine, your angry letter was very politically correct, in the better sense of the word but not scholarly objective. Race and identity are definitely not the same. Identity is based on culture; race is based on biology. If you do not like the word, you may use another term like "basic physical type". Identities are defined by people themselves. Physical types are defined by observers and you can splinter or lump them at your convenience. It is a procedure of arbitrary character. It is like species and genera: species are (speaking of Lynneons) a given reality. Genera are created by biologists and may be argued about. However, you cannot work without the notion of genera and you cannot work without mentioning the physical type. Alexeev wrote a book "Geografia Chelovecheskikh Ras" (Geography of the Human Races) in which he speaks about "Ochagi Rasoobrazovania", literally hearthplaces of the formation of local races. This does not make him a racist. Well, a happy Hanukkah and a merry Christmas to you, too. I go to Utah tomorrow to visit my friend.

    Dear Sergei, my sincere apologies if my last letter was of an angry tone. I guess the hectic pace of the holiday season is taking its toll (right now I'm busy baking cranberry bread). Objective scholasticism is indeed a topic that warrants comment. Where is that fine line between scientific objectivism and humanism. At Hiroshima, Sacksenhausen, Chechnya? If and when we lose sight of human rights and the delicacy of human relationships, we devolve to a state of barbarism.

    What actually is a race? You live in Moscow therefore you're not Europoid. Because I live in the US, am I Americanoid which is likened to Mongoloid; but don't these terms reference indigenous populations of American Indians. Actually my ancestors were from Lithuania and Poland, so in fact, I'm Balto-Slavic or just plain Slavic. Are you Slavic too? Alexeev's book was written some time ago; at a time when the concept "heartland" was in vogue. But I truly believe that when Alexeev presented his lectures at Harvard, his racial concepts were in a state of change. He and I spent at least an hour discussing the ethnic makeup of Dynastic Egypt and Alexeev kept cajoling me into admitting that a "racial line" was drawn between Egypt and Nubia. I guess he thought ALL Americans have a problem with the assimilation of Black or African American into the white culture. I still view ancient Egypt as homogenized as a Benneton poster. When you say Stalin was always stressing that identity and race were different things, did Stalin use race or identity to justify his butchering hundreds of thousands of "others"? And what does Yeltsin call those insurgents in Chechnya? Have fun in Utah. I'm off to spend Christmas in Williamsburg.

    Hello, Geraldine! The moon and sun joke was good. Now, Americanoid is just having the racial features specific for ALL American Indians before Columbus. Americanoid, ethnic American (Yankee), native American (Indian), inhabitant of America, born in America, citizen of America are all quite different things. A race is created artificially, as well as genera, but it is a useful thing to create. Genus Felis (cats) - retractable claws, short muzzle, good night vision etc. Lions, panthers, lynxes, tigers are all cats. Similarly Americanoids: hair straight black, skin yellowish to brown, cheekbones high, epicanthic fold weak or absent, lips medium, blood group exclusively O, teeth orthognate, incisors shovel formed. I have a friend here. He claims he is Athabascan, behaves like an Indian (hunts, shares meat with old people), makes excellent Indian jewelry, and owns some of his clan. Well, he is grey eyed, rather blond, low cheek bones, and looks like a typical Anglo. Who is he? Ethnically he is American Indian. Racially he's surely Europoid. I am tall, sharp facial profile, hair slightly wavy, black hair (now grey), body hair highly developed, skin fair, eyes, brown, nose long and protruding. I am a very typical Near Eastern type of the southern European (melanochroic) subrace of Europoids but my identity is Armenian, citizenship Russian, place of birth and native tongue Georgian, ancestors Armenian, Georgian, Russian, Ukrainian, Hungarian, Italian, German, and probably Jewish too. Have a good cranberry cake.

    Dear Sergei, where can you find a "pure" Europoid? Isn't this what the White Supremacist groups such as the Aryan Nation or Neo Nazis search for? What about the KKK or Farrakhan's Nation of Islam who single out groups to hate. What about Zhiranovsky striking out at anything for the purpose of promoting a strong nationalism. Or for that matter, what of the DAR (daughters of the American Revolution) who must show 100% Yankee blood or the Daughters of the Confederacy who cannot show Yankee, Jewish, or Black blood. Who is Africanoid? The Masai do not resemble the Nigerians. As a former teacher who taught in the ghetto schools in Richmond, California during an era when Huey Newton and the Black Panthers instilled the fear of violence when they paraded through the school corridors, I was forced to face the issue of race on a daily basis. My students were no longer called colored; they were called Black. Today they would be called African American but this is also confusing because Afrikaaners are also African American and a Haitian isn't an African. I guess Africanoid is an abstract concept similar to Plato's chairs existing in a nether world.

    How can one determine race in the archaeological record? Cranial Index measurement is about as reliable as Broca's brain. What about the mummies from Xingjiang. To me they look like me; Alexeev would call them Europoid. Would a Chinese archaeologist think they looked like her? You claim that Americanoid is just having the racial features specific for ALL American Indians before Columbus. But this is not correct. Indians of the Pacific northwest surely differed from those in Florida. Thus for every "lumper" statement you make, I can respond with a "splitter" statement. And vice versa. Race is invoked when one wishes to show exclusivity. Do you really think your Athabascan friend is Athabascan? He likely has a good academic position and qualifies for grants directed to those with minority status. Do you know that when I lived in California, some of my Californian friends were either second or third generation Californian. Today most of them have children who have claimed minority status as "American Indian" to gain acceptance into top rank colleges and law schools. You say that race is created artificially, as well as genera, but it is a useful thing to create. Why? When I was a teenager I maintained two collections: a stamp collection and an insect collection. My stamp collection was very frustrating because countries kept changing names thus destroying the alphabetical listings I had compiled. My insect collection, on the other hand, was perfect. Everything lined up! And if I had difficulty in deciding whether a specimen had two wings or four, I would simply cut two wings in half to create four. I think race is simply a pejorative term utilized by those who have an agenda. So you're a mosaic of identities too. By the way, what is body hair highly developed? Are you furry? Happy New Year.

    Dear Geraldine, I just sat at my computer to send you an e-mail and discovered that there is a note from you. Thank you so much for a wonderful Christmas wreath that you have sent to me! It arrived exactly on the day of the Orthodox Christmas! As you probably know, we in the eastern churches continue to celebrate it by Julian calendar, so what in western Europe is on December 24, with us in the east in on January 6. The wreath hangs in my room and smells lovely.

    Dear Geraldine, the terms may be coined at will and are not a problem. If you don't like "race", use "population group", or "Genotype Cluster" or whatever. In any case, it is an artificial construct (same as genera) which we define to make a classification and comparison of various populations possible. In our research on India, we made a circle, divided it into three sectors, "white", "black" and "yellow", and then, by purely mathematical calculation, placed all the groups that we studied, in a place within this circle. "Pure blacks" would be on the periphery of the circle in the middle of the arch delimiting the "black" sector. Needless to say, no group was in such a position, since in reality there are no pure races. But there were some groups which were almost exactly in the center of the circle, i.e. groups which had features of black, yellow and white almost in equal proportions".

    Dear Sergei. Question: when Boris Yeltsin ordered the killing of people in Chechnya and now in Dagistan, did he shoot his "brothers" or "the others".

    Dear Geraldine, well, officially of course, all these people are considered citizens of the Russian federation, thus compatriots, but those shot at are declared criminals and bandits. The government says, yes, innocent civilians suffer, but this is because the bandits use them as a cover, so the bandits are to blame. The general opinion and the feeling of the public is, however, that though federal troops do not hesitate to shell quarters inhabited by ethnic Russians, still they feel more at ease when there are ethnic Caucasians. And the actions of federals were more aggressive in Pervomaiskoe than in Budionnovsk because the hostages in Budionnovsk were Russian and in Pervomaiskoe they were mostly Daghestanis. This is my impression too.

    Dear Sergei. To change a word from "race" to "genotype cluster" does not eliminate its meaning. Yes, race is an artificial construct but for what reasons do people or groups need to classify or compare people? Is it to deprive them of their property? Your research on India sounds quite peculiar. How can you take people, draw circles around them, and then color them in with white, black, or yellow? Also, mathematical calculation doesn't make something scientific. I'm pleased that you found no pure races, but to find groups in the center of the circle with the same proportions of black, yellow, and white sounds very contrived. On second thought, such a structured approach possibly might be applicable to fruit flies but surely not to people. You are correct that any scheme is an oversimplification of reality but "that a denial of racial differences is unscientific" is purely a way of invoking science to cover up bigotry and racism! I am pleased that you have a problem with craniological study; so do I. You get an "A" on Californians being a wide range of mixtures; actually I see them as having blond hair, bronze skin, well developed pectorals, a big smile, and the ability to say only 4 words: "have a nice day". Oh - your percentages for "the California Race": 45% white, 35% yellow, and 20% black - what color are Mexican Americans and California Indians? How can the old communists still be around when there are so many American "jeans" in Russia. In final assessment, I found your e-mail quite racist. Alexeev always said: "You can think it but not say it". His is good advice. My sons are in Bosnia because the Serbs hate the Muslims. Boris Yeltsin hates the Muslims. My Russian tutor named Lubof says she hates the Muslims because they sit on the floor and eat under a blanket. Do you hate the Muslims too? If you do, then you are not a good anthropologist. If you do not, then you must join me in viewing race as a mosaic of features arranged in such a way as to produce a unique and wonderful human being, furry or not. Take care, Geraldine.

    Dear Geraldine, Thank you for your letter. Reading it was really a fun. Well, to answer point by point: I do not mind being called a racist, even when I think that I'm really not. In fact, I am often thinking of ordering a T-shirt with an inscription: "I'm a racist son-of-a bitch and proudly a great big male chauvinist pig". It would be better than to pretend to tolerate all this Politically Correct hypocrisy. And I always say what I think. Happily, in Russia you do not end up in prison anymore for what you are saying (unlike America). No, I do not hate Muslims. However I cannot help it when so many Muslims hate me. To say the truth, some are my friends, and even best friends, but not many. Most old communists are wearing American jeans now, though generally not very fitting because most of them are fat. Democrats like jeans, too, but not all can afford them. Racial type of Mexicans and Indians: from what I have seen, Indians would fit into 75% Mongoloid, 20% Europoid, and less than 5% Africanoid. Mexicans probably 55% to 45% Mongoloid, up to 45% Europoid, and less than 10% Africanoid. This is a visual impression. Many untouchables seemed "white" to us in India. Surprisingly, after calculations, ALL untouchable happened to fit into the "black" section, and ALL Brahmins into the "white" one. Yes, Alexeev was fond of calculating genetic differences and I would be fond too, unfortunately, I do not know enough of mathematics to do it alone. Everything that can be calculated must be attempted to be calculated. The reason is most often the sheer curiosity, same as with classification of people into races or of animals into genera. The latter is not done exclusively to strip the poor critters of their skins - this objective can be achieved by simpler methods. I hope I can meet you sometime when I am in Washington, DC. I am going to be there between June 10 and July 10. Write more! To read your letters is refreshing!

    Dear Sergei, I am deeply saddened to learn that you take pride in being called a racist and chauvinist. In my country, these labels do not portray a good man. Alexeev was a good man. He never lectured about drawing circles around people and coloring in with black, white, or yellow; the ancient ethnic groups he spoke about were labelled Europoid. He even jokingly drew on the blackboard a caricature of a face without a prominent nose (Mongoloid) and stood in profile beside it. Alexeev also prided himself in never being a member of the Communist Party.

    Alexeev was the first Soviet I had ever met. I grew up being taught that Soviets were barbarians and the USSR a horrible place to live. For most of my lifetime the cold war defined friend and foe; these foes lived behind the iron curtain. Thus my first meeting with Alexeev at 102 Quincy House was very significant. To this meeting I brought two books; Gladkov's "Cement" and one by Tolstoy. Alexeev angrily shook his head wondering why Americans would read Gladkov; of Tolstoy he said: "he is a genius". However, Alexeev did add that he had not read "Anna Karenina"; his wife had. He then asked me a question: "Your constitution states that all men are equal. Do you believe this?" I immediately replied: "Of course not!" So began the summer of 1991.

    Sergei, why do you see the Muslims as your foe? Granted, some of the extremist terrorist groups are "bandits"; these criminals must be dealt with in the most severe way. But for the most part, Muslims are a gentle, friendly, and god worshipping people. In my travels through Morocco and Egypt I felt a gentle calm floating through the air. Memory of this serenity remains with me today. Granted that thoughts of an alliance between Gadhafi and Farrakhan makes me nervous and Bosnia's link with Iran could involve major problems for the peacekeepers, but what are the choices? The only alternative to peace is no peace. Boris Yeltsin has become a barbarian in his treatment of human beings in Chechnya and Dagistan. By appointing Kadannikov, the used car salesman, to replace Chubais, the reformer, Yeltsin signals that he is courting the old communists. Sure hope the International Monetary Fund withholds its $9 billion loan! If Yeltsin thinks he can return to the past and redraw the iron curtain, he's wrong.

    The world is now a different place; even the company my husband works for can photograph tanks behind the Kremlin wall. I actually sent Anatoly Derevyanko in Novosibirsk a photo of the Berteck Basin in the Altai. The picture was so crisp and clear his students could count the kurgans!

    "Politically correct" was a concept discussed with Alexeev in 1991 when Denish DeSousa's "Illiberal Education" was released. As I see it, p.c. is a means to serve special interest groups and as such has managed to curtail freedom of speech on major US college campuses. However, not to be politically correct does not give anyone license to treat another human being without dignity and in a pejorative fashion. It seems that the key world players recognize this; Yeltsin and the old commies do not. Sergei Kovalev, chairman of Yeltzin's human rights commission has resigned and portions of his resignation letter have been reprinted in the "Washington Post" - and the world has changed.

    Alexeev presented himself as a gentleman; as a scholar who was both scientist and humanist. If as a Soviet in the USSR he displayed himself as a "pure scientist" and drew circles around human populations and colored them in black, white, and yellow, then that was then when everyone was Marxist and followed the "party line". This is not what he presented in his lectures at Harvard in 1991. Classifying animals into genera is OK because they don't know what you are doing; they have no human intelligence. When you do this to people, you can insult certain groups thereby inflicting hurt and pain. That race is determined by skin color is a very old theory; presently passe. Passe also are B.F. Skinner, Freud, general systems theory, Binford, and most of the "new archaeologists". You say Alexeev was fond of calculating genetic differences. He did present demographics for ancient populations but NEVER in his lectures at Harvard did he divide races by skin color.

    I don't know if I wish to meet you when you are in Washington, DC because I am afraid you will insult me, hurt my feelings, and cause me much misery. You must be proud that with your newly found freedom of speech, you can say what you think. Zhiranovsky says what he thinks. "Zhiranovsky hot to Trotsky" reads the headline in a US tabloid. Zhiranovsky is scum! I would never wish to meet him. I liked Alexeev because he was a gentle man who knew: "one can think it but not say it". Sergei, I continue to appreciate the time you have spent making detailed corrections to the manuscript. I think you should capitalize on your tee shirt, make hundreds of copies, and sell them to your fellow barbarians. Without warm wishes,

    Dear Geraldine, How could you think I was seriously stating myself a racist and a chauvinist? Certainly I am not. And I certainly hate most profoundly any real, even the slightest manifestation of racism, chauvinism, xenophobia, sexism, and whatever other attempt to single out on any basis any distinct group of people as inferior or superior to any other group. I only wanted to express, in a form of joke, my negative attitude to all attempts to exaggerate the issue, to pin a label of racism or chauvinism onto things which are in fact, a pure, honest, clean, non committed science. And certainly I do not hate Muslims.

    Do you know,that recently I have been elected a honorary member of the Council of Elders of the Chechenian nation in exile, in a sign of gratitude to the speech I made (it was broadly published in the Russian progressive press) in the Russian constitutional court in June 1995, defending the Chechenian freedom fighters against really barbaric and inhuman war efforts of Yeltsin and his bloody generals? And I always publically object to all attempts to diabolicize Islam in general. It has a lot of humanism in it, as most other religions. But I really hate fundamentalists of any creed. But human beings are physically different, and where there is a difference, there is a field of study. And any study must be free of any "politically correct" interference, otherwise we plunge back into the abyss of medieval obscurantism. Hope to hear more from you. Yours sincerely,

    Hooray Sergei! I look forward to meeting you this summer in DC. With respect,

    Dear Geraldine. Again, never confuse languages and races. If, from many possible racial classifications, we accept the most suitable for an archaeologist, triple classification into Europoids, Mongoloids, and Equatorials (aka Negro-Australoids or Africanoids and Australoids together) or conventionally, and only conventionally, "white", "yellow" and "black", this triple thing is convenient for many reasons including that we do not know blood groups and other genetic data for excavated skeletons. We do not know skin color either, but orbits, nose, prognathism, cheek-bones etc. we do know, and it is enough. Then for India: there are all elements present - Europoid, Equatorial and a little Mongoloid. Very rarely are they more or less "pure", but mostly they are a mixture. There is an Indo-Mediterranean subrace, more or less purely Europoid. There is a Dravidoid subrace, a mixture of Europoid + Equatorial, but more Europoid. There is a Veddoid subrace, same mixture, but rather more Equatorial. There are Himalayan Mongoloids, and there are all possible mixtures of all these types. And there are languages. Indo-Aryan languages are today spoken by purely "white" and obviously "black" populations, but mostly by a mixture of the two. Dravidian languages are spoken by some pure Europoids, like Nambudiri-Brahmins, and by some very "black" tribes, but mostly by Dravidoids. Mudaric languages are spoken by Veddoid and mixed Veddoid Europoid populations. Himalaic languages (Sino-Tibetan family) are spoken mostly by Mongoloids. However, some Mongoloids speak Indo-Aryan languages, and some rather Europoid groups (like Balti in Kashmir) speak Sino-Tibetan. And remember, Alexeev and I have seen, studied, and measured all these groups, so we know all this not from books but from a first hand experience. And all this is still an oversimplification, and to describe the correlations between linguistic and racial groups in India, a thick volume would be not enough. And so on most questions you are asking. So I can give in every case only very simplified answers. Later I shall write again.

    Dear Sergei, I am caught in a lumper/splitter argument with you. You like races because you can see biological differences and you can thus divide races into a triple classification. With due respect, I must tell you that this method is archaic. Allow me to relate to you another Alexeev story:

    In one of our later meetings after we had gotten to know each other, Alexeev appeared a bit remote and unfocused. I inquired about his health and he replied: "Do you know Ernst Mayr?" I replied that I certainly did and that Mayr was one of Harvard's most famous scientists and biologists. Alexeev continued: "I met with him today. I am sad to say that I will never become a "geni" like Newton because my country has chosen to support other areas of study and not biology. And it's too late to catch up".

    Back to the biological. Simple observation of groups is no longer scientific since genetics, gene splitting, forensics, etc. have become the academic rage. A huge portion of US research funds are earmarked for the biological sciences i.e. genetic research. The chairman of Harvard's biology department commented that he couldn't understand why Harvard anthropology is funded to do biological research when he is no longer able to update his laboratories. With mitochondrial DNA research we are able to trace hereditary factors through the female line. This research became problematic because the scope was limited to the mitochondria and the genetic tracing was only among women. Y chromosomal DNA supposedly gives us the other side of the picture, however, at present I know very little about this.

    Have you seen Cavalli-Sforza's book entitled "History and Geography of Human Genes"? I have just ordered a copy from Princeton University Press and was outraged by the price of $150. I asked what happens if I don't like the text and I was told to return it for a full credit! That is what I think I shall do. Now if we can isolate a deadly virus (fungi such as cryptococcus neoformans or coccidioides immitis are currently in vogue) and then link disease with "race", we can scientifically control populations or better still eliminate inferior populations. This is very scary. More about this after I receive the text.

    Question: in Russian, what is the definition for the term "excavation"? The ownership of an archaeological site has become a very dicey question especially as pertains to Staroselie. That Formosov excavated and published a site report on Staroselie is not an issue. What is at issue is that Formosov was upstaged by Chubai with the backing of American dollars from Anthony Marks via NSF. For Marks, by his own admission, to have excavated over 100 archaeological sites in 30 years is a feat for a super man; that's over 3 sites a year! I am presently researching Marks's site report publications but in my initial researches, I find a paucity of information. Also at issue is what is meant by "working a site". Because Formosov physically has not been on the site of Staroselie for over 30 years necessarily does not mean he no longer is conducting research. Research is only partially conducted in the field; Formosov has published more than 18 texts since 1958 all of which likely reference his previous archaeological researches. A recent text entitled "Antologiia sovetskoi arkheologii" likely references Staroselie. Formosov appears to be a solid scholar; Marks is playing the role of dilettante. As well, Marks disparagingly references Neandertal presence at Staroselie while Alexeev states that Homo sapiens had been found and the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" states that the site belongs to the Mousterian culture and the remains of the child show many sapiens traits that distinguish it from Neandertal; "the child is representative of Homo sapiens or a form between Neandertal and Homo sapiens". Alexeev also states that three absolute dates place Homo sapiens with Mousterian tools at a date ca 52-60,000 BC. In my preliminary assessment, Marks didn't do his homework; he was too busy jetting from site to site rather than conducting a scholarly history for the site based on library research before beginning an expensive excavation. If he had bothered to contact Formosov, he would have received current information, possibly even C-14 dates. What Marks so sloppily has done is an infringement on archaeological scholarship and he should receive the severest form of reprimand by both his American academy and the Russian, Ukraine, and Crimean academies. Philip Kohl's call for an international organization such as UNESCO or the World Archaeological Congress to adjudicate such problems is an idea that should be given solid consideration by all archaeologists doing international work. The world has abruptly changed since 1989 and international archaeological projects need an internation regulatory agency to arbitrate disputes that could arise such as that presented by Chubai and Marks against Formosov.

    Question: when you and Alexeev studied all of your groups, not from books, but from first hand experience, did you use a color wheel? Happy Valentine's Day, Geraldine

    Dear Geraldine, As concerns the triple classification, it is arbitrary and depends on one's tasks and methods. It is possible to single out two, four or five main races, to consider three, four or more taxonomical levels etc. The triple approach is just more convenient - as a stool is most stable with three legs. Mitochondrial DNA is a very promising thing but it cannot substitute for all other approaches either. As concerns racial differences in immunity to certain diseases, they really exist but you never know with all these blood groups and abnormal hemoglobins etc. where is an advantage and where a disadvantage. And nobody in one's sane mind today may speak about extermination of "genetically deficient" populations.

    "Ownership" of a site is a difficult problem. Dikov had no legal right to excavate in Uelen, the cemetery being discovered by Sergeev, but he did it. Did we use a color wheel when working in India? Nearly so, in fact we used the Luschan's scale which consists of 32 opaque color glasses ranging from pure white (happens only on Albinos) to pure black. It is not very precise but generally sufficient. Very sincerely yours.

    While Sergei and I were in communication via e-mail, he was making careful additions to the text and answering questions I had raised. The first editing was completed on December 1, 1995 and sent to me via the postal service. Sergei's comments were added to the text as was most of the information in the footnotes. The revised manuscript was sent to Fairbanks in January 1996 and while Sergei was making a second addition to the text, I spent my time consulting the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" and made appropriate additions to the manuscript and grappled with how to present the ethnographic information from Alexeev, Aruitunov, and HOLLIS is a systematic fashion. Presently the conclusion and introduction near completion and Arutiunov is due to arrive in DC in the beginning of June for a final editing. This volume is presented, not as a definitive study of the anthropology and ethnology of Eurasia, but rather as an introductory text, a working text, including specific bibliographic references for more in depth study of particular areas. Spellings of authors and place names are according to Library of Congress specifications, except for one - Alexeev. Library of Congress spells the name Alekseev, however, on his business card he chose Alexeev, and for this volume, Alexeev it shall be.

    Professor Valery Alexeev was not only one of Russia's greatest scientists - he was so much more. Alexeev was a distinguished physical anthropologist, historian, archaeologist, sociologist, explorer, and humanist. In fact Alexeev was one the world's greatest 20th century scholars.

    Chapter I: Introduction By Alexeev
    [Lecture 1 delivered on 24 June 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This is the first in a series of fourteen lectures delivered by the distinguished Soviet scholar Valery Alexeev at Harvard University in the Summer of 1991, immediately before the coup and the transposition of the USSR from a socialistic republic to a democratic commonwealth of states. This introductory lecture contains a brief biographical sketch of Professor Alexeev, a commentary on the state of archaeology in the then Soviet Union, a brief description of the physical and political geography of Eurasia, an annotated listing of the only English language texts on Soviet archaeology in the Harvard Library system during the time the lectures were being given, and lastly the known beginnings of human occupation of Eurasia: the lower paleolithic at Filimoshki, Satani-Dar, and Azykh. To allow for an accurate and current interpretation of the physical and political geography and the present status of Russian archaeological material available in the Harvard Library System, I have taken the liberty to update the Alexeev lectures.

    Autobiographical Sketch by Alexeev; the beginning of fourteen lectures delivered at Harvard University, Summer 1991.

    Valery Pavlovich Alexeev received his doctorate from the Institute of Ethnography at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow. He was a scholar at the Institute of Oriental Languages and at the Institute of Ethnography. For the last four years he has directed the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow.

    His scholarly interests as reflected in his publications include population and genetics, paleoanthropology, physical anthropology of Russia, Vietnam, India, and Cuba, and the archaeology of Mongolia. Additional publications reference the Early Iron Age, Central Asian and Caucasian Islamic and Baltic settlements, and morphological observations and genetic markers for a collection of genealogical data.

    State of Archaeology in Eurasia (western Europe not included)

    According to Alexeev, at present there is no complete archaeological survey of the (then) Soviet Union because of its immense size. Areas that have been particularly neglected include Siberia, Northern Russia, and Central Asia. To have undertaken a complete survey would have required an increase in the number of Russian archaeologists of which there are no more than 2,500, not enough to have carefully studied the (then) Soviet Union. [Now that the Soviet Union is no longer a political reality, the decentralization into independent states and the strong collaborative efforts made with France, Japan, Mongolia, and the United States has aided in producing academically viable research, especially in Central Asia]

    In Eurasia there are Institutes of Archaeology located in Russia (Moscow and Leningrad); Minsk, Belarus; Novosibirsk, Siberia; and in the Baltic and Central Asian Republics. There are also large archaeological centers in Tbilisi, Georgia and Yerevan, Armenia as well as in Kiev and Kharkiv (Ukraine). Smaller archaeological centers are in most of the North Caucasian constituent republics of the Russian Federation i.e. Adygea, Karachai-Circassia, Kabardin-Balkaria, Ossetia, and Dagestan. There are two special institutes, both part of the Russian Academy of Sciences system, located in Moscow and Novosibirsk. The Moscow Institute houses a staff of 250 and Novosibirsk a staff of 150. As well, many of the local museums also staff archaeologists.

    Physical Geography of Eurasia (western Europe not discussed)

    Physically, the geography of the supercontinent of Eurasia can be divided into four major areas: western Europe; the east European plain; the border between Europe and Asia; and northern Asia.

    The East European plain is bounded by Poland, the Ural Mountains, and the Caucasus Mountains. This land mass is flat with forests to the north and steppes in the south. Small rivers and lakes are plentiful making this region very comfortable for hunting and fishing. Open air sites are found here dating from the Paleolithic. Cave sites are found in the Urals and Caucasus. Mousterian artifacts have been found at these sites and cultures extend from the Lower Paleolithic to the Middle Ages.

    The border between Europe and Asia consists of the Ural Mountains, the basin of the Ural River, the Caspian seacoast, and Central Caucasus Mountains. Extensive archaeological research has been conducted in this area.

    Northern Asia consists of Transcaucasia; Central Asia with its five republics of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan, Kirghizistan, and Kazahkstan; and Siberia. Transcaucasia is an extremely complicated area and will be given attention in the linguistic section below. Central Asia is a region of flat steppes in Kazakhstan and mountainous areas in the south; the major body of water is the Aral Sea and two major rivers are the Amu Darya and Syr Darya. A major international research endeavor has been conducted in Central Asia with participation from France, the United States, and Russia. The geography of Siberia is predominantly valley and flat taiga forest with tundra in the north. To the east of the Siberian Valley, the region becomes mountainous and extends to the Pacific Ocean providing geographical barriers for many ancient peoples such as the Yakuts (Sakha). The Chukchi (Chukot) Peninsula, bordering the Bering Strait is located in a tundra zone and the Kamchatka Peninsula, south of the Chukchi and separating the Okhotsk and Bering Seas, is in a forest zone. Siberia continues to be a major focus for research by Russian archaeologists.

    Political Geography of Eurasia (western Europe is not included)

    When Eurasia was under the aegis of the USSR, the political geography was determined by two major physical divisions: the European sector of the Soviet Union and the Asian sector of the Soviet Union. The European Soviet Union was comprised of Estonia whose peoples speak a Finno-Ugric language, and Latvia and Lithuania with people speaking Baltic languages. Belarus (White Russia) has a language distinct from but similar to Russian; its capital is at Minsk. Ukraine with its capital at Kiev speaks the Ukrainian language, more remote from the Russian than Byelorussian but still rather similar to it. Russia with Moscow as the capital has Russian as its language. The Asian Soviet Union consisted of Transcaucasia and Central Asia. The three major republics in Transcaucasia: Georgia with Tbilisi as capital, Armenia with its capital at Yerevan, and Azerbaijan whose capital is at Baku were joined from the north by seven minor republics including the break-away Chechnya. Central Asia's five Soviet republics: Turkmenistan with Ashkabad as capital, Uzbekistan with its capital at Tashkent, Tadzhikistan's capital at Dushanbe, Kirghizistan with Pishpek as capital, and Kazahkstan with its capital at Almaaty all speak a Turkish language with the exception of Tadzhik, a language which is a slightly different accentuated Persian. Thus the USSR had a widely disparate population composed of numerous ethnic groups and four major language families: Finno-Ugric, Baltic, Turkic, and Slavic and with hundreds of spoken dialects. Although Russian has been considered the official language, many small republics rigorously preserve their specific language(s) and dialect(s).

    At this time, the political geography of Eurasia remains in constant flux. The Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are independent states with very loose ties to Russia. Belarus continues with strong trade agreements with Russia while Ukraine continues to assert its independence. In the Caucasus, of the three major republics, Georgia seems most at unrest; and in the minor Caucasus republic of Chechnya a major insurgence has erupted necessitating the presence of Russian troops and much blood shed. War in Chechnya continues to be an embarrassment for the Russian government and a peaceful resolution is in the process of being negotiated . In Central Asia, the five republics remain independent, but the presence of crude oil makes these republics an attractive addition for Russian control. "Getting the oil out of Central Asia" poses the greatest current dilemma; if exit is via Russia to the Black Sea, environmental hazards appear certain. If exit is through Turkey to the Mediterranean, the possibility of fuelling an age old conflict seems very probable. At present, the most expeditious exit route is through Turkey to the Black Sea.
    Reference Sources, in English, Available at Tozzer Library

    Alexeev originally began this section stating that "at the Tozzer Library, Harvard University there is a good collection of Soviet works on archaeology written in Russian. However, there are no more than five good English language books on Soviet archaeology, and even these are not systematic; they are rather a collection of topics". The five works are as follows:
    Klein, Richard.G. 1973. Ice-age hunters of the Ukraine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. This is a volume in the series "Prehistoric archaeology and ecology" with focus on the Paleolithic period in the Ukraine.

    Soffer, Olga. 1985. The Upper Paleolithic of the Central Russian Plain. Orlando, Fla: Academic Press. This is a volume in the series "Studies in archaeology" and is perhaps the best account of European Soviet archaeology to date. No account written in Russian is as good.

    Gimbutas, Marija. 1965. Bronze age cultures in central and eastern Europe. The Hague: Mouton Press. This is now old fashioned but still has interesting ideas.

    Okladnikov, A.P. 1970. Yakutia before its incorporation into the Russian state. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. This volume is from a series of translations published by the North American Institute. The subject is the archaeology of Siberia.

    Martynov, A.I. 1991. The ancient art of northern Asia. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. This volume is not of general interest.

    There are also two books by Philip Kohl on the archaeology of Soviet Central Asia which are good but very detailed and therefore not of general interest. They are:
    Kohl, P. 1981. The Bronze Age civilization of Central Asia: recent Soviet discoveries. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    1984. Central Asia Paleolithic beginnings to the Iron Age = L'Asie centrale des origines a l'age du fer. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les civilizations.

    Alexeev continues: "there are also many English language articles in journals but they are specialist in nature. At the Peabody Museum is the Hallam Movius collection of artifacts from Asia, but none from the Soviet Union. Also there are some fossil remains in the Peabody Museum and in the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC."

    Since Alexeev used the Harvard library system in the summer of 1991, major changes have occurred. HOLLIS, the Harvard On Line Library Information System, is available on the Internet to all potential users without restriction. Since the Roman alphabet is used rather than the Cyrillic, Russian texts can be perused; with the elaborate keyword reference system, students with minimal knowledge of the Russian language can gain access to current material. Scholars with special access codes can access the guide to anthropological literature, a detailed compilation of all recent journal articles accessible not only with title and author commands, but with subject commands as well. This guide in invaluable for journal access; Harvard is the only library in the country, perhaps the world, to provide such a service.

    The collection of archaeological and anthropological texts written in Russian and located in Tozzer Library is most impressive and consists of more than 25,000 volumes. In addition, Widener Library contains a collection of Russian anthropological literature equally as impressive. Since the Harvard Library System and the Library of Congress are on-line, I have had the opportunity to access both electronically. The Library of Congress collection of Russian anthropological/ archaeological literature has been compiled for use by congressmen, not scholars! I have no doubt that the Harvard library system has the most extensive collection of resources in the world.

    Since Alexeev's visit to Harvard in 1991, many texts have been the result of international collaboration on a world basis and numerous Russian texts have been translated into English. Alexeev would be very impressed with the collection of Russian material now available at Tozzer Library.

    Chapter II: Lower Paleolithic in Eurasia
    [Lecture 1 delivered on 24 June 1991]

    Lower Paleolithic sites

    As per Alexeev, three ancient sites containing artifacts have been found in southern Siberia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. These lower paleolithic sites are respectively: Filimoshki, Satani-Dar, and Azykh.

    Filimoshki is located in the Zeia River Valley in Southern Siberia near the present day village of Filimoshki. The Zeia and Buria are the left tributaries of the Amur River. Findings at Filimoshki were first published in the early 1970's by the Siberian expert, Aleksei Okladnikov with a recent publication in 1977 by Siberian archaeologist, Anatoly Derevyanko 1. No human remains were discovered.

    The excavation at Filimoshki was small. Dating of the artifacts is inconclusive; they were collected on the surface and no sequencing was conducted. Dating is based solely on tool typology. The surficial features of these stone tools are very rough. A few of the tools have flakes. Some archaeologists believe these "tools" are of natural origin because similar formations are found in many river beds. Okladnikov, however, sees an artificial origin; he believes these rough rocks are man- made stone tools.

    Satani-Dar is located in the Aragats Mountains of Armenia, northwest of Yerevan and references Satan's mound in the Armenian language. The site is approximately 6-8 sq. km; artifacts collected on the surface consist of hand axes and are published in two volumes by Armenian scholars 2. No human remains were discovered.

    The hand axes are very well made so that by typology the tools fall into two groups: group one is similar to Acheulian hand axes of Europe (Europe's oldest hand axes) and group two is a miniature version of the first. However, because a stratigraphy was not analyzed this cannot be confirmed. This site could be a productive area for further excavation but because the area is so large it is difficult to decide where excavations should be conducted. Thus to continue archaeological research here would take many years of expensive work. Currently, the area is too politically unstable to support extensive excavations.

    Azykh archaeological site is located in Karabagh, the Armenian populated and now seceded autonomous district of Azerbaijan. The site is located in a mountainous area in the southwestern corner of Azerbaidjan. Azykh is a cave site excavated in the early 1960's by Mamedali Guseinov 3, an Azerbaijan archaeologist. Stratigraphy for the site was recorded and this site is considered to be the most ancient site in Transcaucasia. The lowest two levels reveal the first stages of Lower Paleolithic with chipping tools and choppers typical of many places in Africa and East Asia. The fifth layer from the bottom dates to the middle of the last stage of Acheulian and reveals bones of a lower jaw; the most ancient man in Europe. Phylogenetic morphology reveals many primitive features. Excavators thus consider it to be a special genus of ancient man and have labeled it Azykhanthropus; however, a recent study published in 1986 by Azerbaijan paleoanthropologist Rabiia Kasimova 4 concludes that this find should not be treated as a special genus. Rather, it is more likely an early form of Neandertal similar to other Neandertal remains in Europe. Kasimova considers the find to be an early form of Homo sapiens neandertalensis. Since the secession of Karabagh from Azerbaijan in 1988, the area is extremely politically unstable and no further research is possible.


    The Lower Paleolithic sites at Filimoshki (Siberia), Satani-Dar (Armenia), and Azykh (Azerbaijan) are the oldest sites containing artifacts found to date in Eurasia. Note that these sites are along the southern border of the country. Other Lower Paleolithic remains have been found in Eastern Asia, India, and Israel. Archaeological work in Mongolia in the last decade reveals sites with remains from Middle Paleolithic times but nowhere in Mongolia has a definite Lower Paleolithic layer been found.

    Back (Chapter I: Introduction By Alexeev)

    Next (Chapter III: Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter II

    [Please note that for this lecture I was not present in class. I wish to thank Sean Harriman for sharing his notes with me]

    1 I find 2 publications by A.P. Derevianko on the Amur River Valley. One of the publications is coauthored with A.P. Okladnikov.

    1970. "V strane trekh solnts; rasskazy arkheologa o drevnostiakh Priamur'ia" by A.P. Derevianko; published [Khabarovsk] Khabarovskoe knizhnoe izd-vo.

    1977. "Gromatukhinskaia kul'tura" by A.P. Okladnikov and A.P. Derevianko; published in Novosibirsk: Nauka. [back]

    2 Satani-Dar was excavated in 1945-1949 by S.A. Sardarian, S.N. Zamiatnin, and M.Z. Panichkina as per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia". Publication on the site is by M.Z. Panichkina:

    1950. "Paleolit Armenii" by M.Z. Panichkina; published in Leningrad. [back]

    3 This publication by Guseinov, M.M. (Mamedali Murad) on Azykh Cave is entitled:

    n.d. "Azykh Magharasy = The Azykh Cave"; published in Baku, Azerbaidjan: Akademiia Nauk Azerbaidzhanskoi SSR, Institut Istorii.

    Guseinov labels the bones of a jaw from Azih as Azihanthropus; Kasimova (1986) relabels the jawbone early Neandertal i.e. Homo sapiens neandertalensis. Most scholars now relate the jawbone to Neandertal. [back]

    4 The publication by Kasimova, R.M.M.K. (Rabiia Mamed Mekhti Kizy) is entitled:

    1986. "Pervaia naknodka samogo drevnego peshchernogo cheloveka na territorii SSSR: Azerbaidzhanskaia SSR, Azykh" and is published in Baku:Elm.

    Chapter III: Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) in Eurasia
    [Lecture 2 delivered on 26 June 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This second of fourteen lectures delivered by the prominent Soviet anthropologist Valery Alexeev at Harvard University concentrates on Middle Paleolithic archaeological sites with specific reference to the geographical areas of the Crimea, Southern Ukraine, Central Asia, and Siberia. The major focus of the lecture is one of Professor Alexeev's favorite topics: Paleolithic man in Eurasia. Alexeev discusses hominid finds at three specific sites: Kiik-Koba in the Crimea, Teshik-Tash in Uzbekistan, and Staroselie also in the Crimea. He then opens the question as to the relationship between Neandertal and Homo sapiens 5 and contrasts the interpretations of Russian archaeologists with those of prominent American paleo- anthropologists specifically referencing Ofer Bar-Yosef at Harvard and Milford Wolpoff at University of Michigan.
    Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) Studies

    According to Alexeev, Middle Paleolithic studies of the then Soviet Union are much more extensive than Lower Paleolithic researches. Approximately 50-60 sites belonging to the Middle Paleolithic period have been excavated and all represent various versions of the Mousterian Culture.

    Many archaeologists try to discern between local traditions or variations and a broader and more encompassing term, "culture". Local tradition can be the result of ecological adaptation or true tradition i.e. technologies such as flint working passed down from ancestors. At these Middle Paleolithic sites, no distinctive local traditions are evident; all variations are of the Mousterian Culture.
    Geography of Mousterian Sites in Eurasia

    Mousterian sites are located in the following geographical areas. In the mountainous areas of the Crimea are a special group of Mousterian cave sites. In southern Ukraine, the Dnieper Valley, along the Dniester River Valley, and along the border of Romania and the Republic of Moldavia are open air sites. Similar open air sites are also found in Russia in a region south of Moscow and close to the Ukraine, near the city of Voronezh. In the mountainous areas of the Caucasus, specifically in Georgia, there is another group of Mousterian cave sites. In Central Asia, near Tashkent, Uzbekistan there are Mousterian sites which have their own flint tradition. Also, Mousterian sites appear in Tadzhikistan. Some of these Central Asian sites are typically Mousterian while others are mixed i.e. both Mousterian and Lower Paleolithic and include primitive tools like choppers which are typical of Lower Paleolithic. In Siberia, Middle Paleolithic is known in the Altai Mountains but only based on very poor material finds. Siberian material is basically Upper Paleolithic. Mousterian tools include points, scrapers, and tools worked from both sides. The presence of Mousterian tools generally indicates Neandertal 6.
    Paleolithic Man in Eurasia

    As per Alexeev, in Eurasia there are three major cave sites in which Paleolithic hominid finds have been excavated. These sites include: Kiik-Koba in the Crimea, Teshik-Tash in Uzbekistan, and Staroselie also in the Crimea. Professor Ofer Bar-Yosef from Harvard University plans to visit the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) in the near future to date some of these early sites, including Teshik-Tash, which were excavated before C-14 dating became commonplace.

    Mousterian Sites in Eurasia

    Kiik-Koba, in the Crimea, is a Mousterian cave site excavated by Gleb Bonch-Osmolovskii in 1924-1925 7. The term Kiik-Koba is the Turkic word meaning "mountain goat cave". Excavation of the site by Bonch-Osmolovskii reveals a culture sequence of two layers with the lower level producing a disturbed grave containing the skeletal remains of an adult and a child.

    The remains of the child, although poorly preserved, were reconstructed in 1976 by the major Czech paleoanthropologist Emanuel Vlcek 8 for the National Museum of Prague. The remains of the adult, consisting only of one hand and two feet, have been reported on by Bonch-Osmolovskii in two books written in Russian: one on the hand published in 1941 9 and one on the two feet published in 1954 10; summaries are in French. The adult skeletal remains consist of extremely massive bones even when compared to Classic Neandertal from France. Of special interest is the first finger of the hand; the basal bone is flat at the bottom and there is no opposable thumb; even in Classic Neandertal there is some opposability of the thumb.

    Skeletal remains from the Kiik-Koba site have not been dated. Willard Libby's book on C-14 was not published until 1952 11 and only a few preliminary articles appeared in the magazine "Science" a few years earlier. Thus at Kiik-Koba in the Crimea we have the presence of Early Neandertal with no opposable thumb but with a Mousterian Culture 12.

    Teshik-Tash is a very small cave site located in the mountains of Central Asia near Bajsuntau, 350 km. southwest of Tashkent, Uzbekistan. This site was excavated in one season, 1938, by Aleksei Okladnikov. The site report was published by Okladnikov in 1940 13 and contains a description of the human remains by Georgii Debetz 14.

    Because World War II had just begun, the report and casts of the remains from Teshik-Tash were sent to Franz Weidenreich at the Laboratory of Human Paleontology in Beijing, China. Weidenreich later brought the casts to the Museum of Natural History in New York so both American and Soviet scholars could have access 15.

    The Teshik-Tash finds reveal Mousterian tools with Neandertal skeletal remains. The remains were of a child, nine or ten years of age, with the skull crushed into over a hundred pieces. Reconstruction of the skull indicates the following morphological details: a weak development of the chin; a strong upper brow; a flat forehead bone (typical of Neandertal in classic form); great height to the skull; and a modern structure to the face. Debetz claims the child is Classic Neandertal, similar to European finds, while Weidenreich claims the child has many progressive features more similar to Progressive Neandertal of the Near East, particularly from Skhul and Qafzeh in Israel 16. Scholars currently agree with Weidenreich.

    Originally the remains of the child were considered to be that of a male. Now, based on reconstruction of adult dimensions and stature by M.M. Gerasimov 17, the remains, measuring 142 cm, are now considered female. Grave goods consisting of wild goat horn as well as scrapers surrounded the skeletal remains. Some scholars believe the burial goods are accidental whereas Okladnikov believes the burial goods are intentional. Scholars today tend to agree with Okladnikov. Teshik-Tash is often cited as one of the early examples of Progressive Neandertal in a burial with Mousterian tools and other grave goods.

    Staroselie Cave, according to Alexeev, is located in the Crimea and is similar to Mousterian cave sites in France and Germany. The site was excavated by A.A. Formosov 18 in 1952-57 with the burial excavated in 1953. Professor Alexeev and his wife participated in the excavation. The remains are of a child considered to be approximately one year old; however, some American paleontologists think two to three years old (a female paleontologist from University of Pennsylvania thinks two to three years old). Morphologically the skull cap is large (the child possibly suffered from hydrocephaly), there is an absence of a thick brow, and the projection of the head is modern. There is no doubt that the burial is Homo sapiens sapiens. Based on the contents of organic material in the skeletal remains, C-14 dating has revealed three absolute dates at 52,000 - 60,000 + 4 - 5,000 BC. Thus we have at Staroselie the remains of Homo sapiens sapiens with Mousterian tools at a date ca. 52-60,000 BC.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", Staroselie is a cave site near the city of Bakhchisarai in the Crimea. The site is of the Mousterian culture, was discovered by Formosov in 1952, and the remains of the child has many sapiens traits which distinguish it from Neandertal; the child is either a representation of Homo sapiens or a form between Neandertal and Homo sapiens.

    Implication of Fossil Remains

    Based on the above evidence, it appears that the Mousterian Culture can relate to both Neandertal and Homo sapiens. Compared with some absolute dates by Ofer Bar-Yosef of early Homo sapiens sapiens from Skhul and Qafzeh at 100,000 BC, Staroselie (52,000 - 60,000 + 4-5,000 BC) is a late date. Compared with Saint Cesaire, France 19, a site excavated five to six years ago depicting morphologically typical (likely late) Neandertal with culture tools of early Upper Paleolithic and dating at 34,000 BC - 37,000 BC, Staroselie is an early date. This comparison demonstrates how complex was the formation of Homo sapiens sapiens.

    Geographic Distribution of Neanderthal and Homo sapiens

    An analysis of the geographic distribution of Neandertal and Homo sapiens is as follows. At Shanidar 20 in Iraq are found completely primitive skeletons (Neandertal) dating to 60,000 BC - 70,000 BC. At Amud Cave in Israel is primitive Neandertal, similar to Shanidar in Iraq. At Qafzeh in Israel is Homo sapiens dating to 100,000 BC and at Skhul in Israel is Homo sapiens dating similarly at 100,000 BC. The distance from Amud (primitive Neandertal) to Kafzeh (Homo sapiens sapiens) in Israel = 15 km; the distance from Amud (primitive Neandertal) to Skhul (Homo sapiens) in Israel = 20 km.

    Modern human forms i.e. Homo sapiens sapiens first appear in Israel at Skhul and Kafzeh at 100,000 BC. They then appear in the Crimea at Staroselie at 60,000 BC. However, in Iraq at Shanidar is primitive Neandertal at 60 - 70,000 BC; at Amud in Israel is primitive Neandertal at 60 - 70,000 BC; and in the Crimea at Kiik-Koba (not dated) is primitive Neandertal.

    In the Crimea at Staroselie (at 60,000 BC) is a modern morphology; in the Crimea at Kiik-Koba (not dated) is a primitive morphology. However, both Staroselie and Kiik-Koba have similar Mousterian artifacts and the geographic distance = 50 km. As is true above, the cultures are mixed; Mousterian is usually associated with Neandertal, but also can be associated with a modern morphology. At Staroselie is a modern morphology with a primitive Mousterian culture; this is in opposition to Saint-Cesaire where there is a primitive morphology and an advanced culture.

    Debate between Professors Bar-Yosef and Alexeev

    Professor Bar-Yosef views this early landscape as being comprised of various hominid groups with various cultural traditions moving through the region but with these various groups not being in contact with each other. Professor Alexeev disagrees and believes there must have been contact: "we know something about the longevity of these various groups but nothing aboout their demography".

    Most ssholars believe Neandertal has nothing to do with the formation of Homo sapiens. This view is countered by Professors Alexeev and Wolpoff. Milford Wolpoff in Paleoanthropology 21, one of the better books accessible to non experts, claims that Classic Neandertal did in some geographic areas relate to Homo sapiens. Classic Neandertal became extinct 40 - 50,000 years ago. Professor Alexeev sees no significant genetic variability (less than 10%) between Neandertal and Homo sapiens to prevent breeding: "Homo sapiens neandertalinsis and Homo sapiens sapiens have morphological differences no greater than that between Bushmen and Eskimos or between Scandinavians and Australian aborigines".

    In Siberia archaeological dates do not exceed 40,000 BC. i.e. there is a general absence of a Mousterian Culture

    [Lecture 3 delivered on 1 July 1991]
    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    In this the third lecture delivered by Professor Alexeev, slides are presented depicting remains from Middle Paleolithic sites. Two new Mousterian sites are introduced: Mezin and Molodova and a brief geography of the western Siberia is given.
    Middle Paleolithic Sites

    Alexeev continues: in addition to the Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) sites of Kiik-Koba in the Crimea, Teshik-Tash in Uzbekistan, and Staroselie also in the Crimea, there are two additional sites located in Ukraine: Mezin and Molodova.

    Mezin 22 is located in the Dnieper Valley of Ukraine. As per Alexeev, at this site a house composed of mammoth bones and skins has been discovered. This find is quite intriguing in that a nomadic group could feed and shelter themselves for an entire winter season based on the kill of one mammoth.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", Mezin was discovered by F.K. Volkov in 1908 and periodically investigated from 1909-1961 by P.P. Efimenko, M. Ia. Rudinskii, I.G. Shovkoplias and others. At the site are remains of dwellings and places where flint and bone were worked. Hearths were dug outside dwellings; the dwellings have a diameter of up to 6 m. and are built directly on the ground. Other dwellings are made of wood, covered with skins and edged with bones of animals.

    More than 4,000 flint tools have been found as well as sculptured female figurines and animals of ivory. Drawings on large mammoth bones were made with red ochre; seashells of southern origin were used as pendants.

    Molodova 23 is located in Southwest Ukraine on the right bank of the Dniester River. The site was investigated in the 1950's and 1960's by O.P. Chernysh. This site is of importance because settlements of various periods ranging from Mousterian to Mesolithic have been discovered; and here is found early evidence of building construction. At the site a structure of bones encircling tools has been found; likely fire was kept in the center. This site also produces Mousterian artifacts and tools. C-14 dates are at 44,000 BP as per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia".

    Summary of Mousterian Sites in Eurasia

    The number of Mousterian sites in Eurasia is 60 +; many are known only by tools found on the surface while others have been excavated. In general, these Mousterian sites are concentrated in several geographical areas. Only a few sites are found in the North regions i.e. nothing from Finland etc. All sites are located in flat areas where the climate is comfortable. Open air sites have been located in Central Russia, an area of great forests and huge steppes. In the Crimea and East Central Asia, caves were used as houses; here there is no evidence of wooden or bone construction. Open air and cave sites are indicative of Mousterian. Middle Paleolithic = Mousterian.

    The physical anthropology of these Mousterian sites is as follows. The site of Kiik-Koba in the Crimea produced an individual with extremely massive bones and without an opposable thumb. This is identified by Alexeev as Early Neandertal. At Teshik-Tash in Uzbekistan, Mousterian tools are found with Neandertal skeletal remains. Scholars are in general agreement that these remains are of Progressive Neandertal. At Staroselie in the Crimea, C-14 dating at 52-60,000 BC places Homo sapiens sapiens with Mousterian tools. At Mezin and Molodova we have building construction associated with Mousterian artifacts and tools. Based on this evidence, the Mousterian Culture can relate to both Neandertal and Homo sapiens.

    Brief Geography Lesson

    In western Siberia the Ob River runs south to north. This area is a flat plain at sea level. The Yenissei River begins in the south Siberian Mountains and proceeds north. The Lena River begins near Lake Baikal and also flows north

    Back (Chapter II: Lower Paleolithic in Eurasia)

    Next (Chapter IV: Upper Paleolithic in Afro Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter III

    [Please note that I was not present for lecture 2 and borrowed the notes from my classmate Sean Harriman]

    5 Accurate representation of these terms should be Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neandertalensis; however, for brevity many scholars shorten the terms to Homo sapiens and Neandertal. [back]

    6 That mousterian "generally" relates to Neandertal does not mean "always". As indicated below, there are sites with mousterian tool assemblages and Homo sapiens remains. [back]

    7 HOLLIS lists five publications for Kiik-Koba by Gleb A. Bonch Osmolovskii:

    1940. "Paleolit Kryma"; akademiia nauk SSSR. (HOLLIS lists two keywords: archaeology and hand).

    1940. "Grot Kiik-Koba; Moskva, Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    1941. "Kist iskopaemogo cheloveka grota Kiik-Koba"; Moskva, Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    1952. "The hand of Kiik-Koba man: originally published in Moscow in 1941 as "Kist iskopaemogo cheloveka grota Kiik-Koba" and translated by Mrs. David Huxley for Henry Field; Washington.

    1954. "Skelet stopy i goleni iskopaemogo cheloveka iz grota Kiik-Koba" [Skeletal feet and legs found in the cave of Kiik-Koba]; Moskva: Izatel'stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    For Kiik-Koba, the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", volume 12, p. 453 references:

    1953. "Pervobytnoe obshchestvo" by P.P. Efimenko; 3rd edition; published in Kiev. [back]

    8 Assuming Alexeev's date of 1976 for the reconstruction is accurate then the only relevant text by Emanuel Vlcek is:

    1980. "Bilzingsleben: Homo erectur, seine Kultur und seine Umwelt"; co-edited with Dietrich Mania and Volker Toepfer; published in Berlin by Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.

    An earlier volume by Vlcek:

    1969. "Neandertaler der tschechoslowaker" published in Prag: Academia; also Wien, Loln, Graz, and Bohlau. [back]

    9 This volume is:

    1941. "Kist iskopaemogo cheloveka iz grota Kiik-Koba" by Gleb Bonch Osmolovskii; published in Moscow.

    This volume was translated from the Russian to English in 1952 for Henry Field (at Harvard) by Mrs. David Huxley:

    1952. "Hand of Kiik Koba man" translated by Mrs. David Huxley; published in Washington, DC. [back]

    10 Publication on the skeletal feet and legs found in Kiik-Koba Cave is:

    1954. "Skelet stopy i goleni iskopaemogo cheloveka iz grota Kiik-Koba" by Gleb Bonch Osmolovskii; published in Moscow: Izatel'stvo Akademii nauk SSSR. [back]

    11 The text is:

    1952. Willard F. Libby. "Radiocarbon dating" by Willard F. Libby; published in Chicago: University of Chicago Press (a second edition was published in 1955). [back]

    12 Alexeev calls this find at Kiik-Koba Early Neandertal and stresses the massive size of the bone structure when compared with Classic Neandertal from France. Alexeev also calls Kiik-Koba a Mousterian site and states that the remains had no opposable thumb. According to Arutiunov, Mousterian tools were indeed found at Kiik-Koba and these tools could be used by a hand without an opposable thumb simply by grasping with the entire hand.
    The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" confirms that Bonch-Osmolovskii discovered the site in 1924-26, that the burial was of Neandertal man of the classical type, and that the small flint implements and bones of giant deer, red deer, saiga, wild horse, ass etc. indicate early Mousterian times. Kiik-Koba is a grotto on the right bank of the Zuia River 25 km east of Simferopol, Crimea.

    Another reference on Kiik-Koba from the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" is:

    1953. "Pervobytnoe obshchestvo" by P.P. Efimenko; (3rd edition); Kiev. [back]

    13 Okladnikov's report on Teshik-Tash, published in 1940 cannot be located in HOLLIS or Library of Congress on-line search. However, the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" references that in 1938-1939 Okladnikov discovered a habitation site of the Mousterian culture and excavated the skull and several bones of a Neandertal child 8 or 9 years old. The skull was of a large capacity with a brow ridge and prominent nose. As well, Arutiunov says that in 1958 Okladnikov was telling his students about the process of the excavations. It should be mentioned that Arutiunov was Okladnikov's student).

    Both HOLLIS and the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" reference the following:

    1949. "Teshik-Tash. Paleoliticheskii chelovek" (collection); Moscow (Russia). Universitet. Nauchno-issledovatel'skii institut antropologii; published by Izd-vo Moskovskogo universiteta.

    HOLLIS also references the following:

    n.d. "Teshik-Tash: a mousterian cave site in Central Asia" by Hallam Movius Jr. [no publication information available].

    For Teshik-Tash the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" also references:

    1966. "Vneevropeiskie paleoantropy" in (collection) "Iskopaemye hominidy i proiskhozhdenie cheloveka"; published in Moscow.

    In a personal communication with Olga Soffer, I was told that Teshik-Tash was not Okladnikov's site. Professor Lamberg-Karlovsky told me Movius wrote about Teshik-Tash but that it was not his site. And Arutiunov states that Okladnikov excavated at Teshik-Tash, that this is noted in the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", and that Okladnikov gave information of his excavations at Teshik-Tash to his students, one of whom was Arutiunov. Current analysis suggests that Teshik-Tash likely was Okladnikov's site. [back]

    14 .. Publications by Debetz, Alexeev's mentor, include:

    1948. "Paleoantropologiia SSSR"; published in Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    1951. "Antropologicheskie issledovaniia v Kamchatskoi oblasti"; published in Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii Nauk SSSR.

    1970. "Physical anthropology of Afghanistan" translated by Eugene V. Prostov and edited by Henry Field; Cambridge, Mass: Peabody Museum.

    1974. "Rasogeneticheskie protsessy v etnicheskoi istorii"; published in Moskva: Nauka. [back]

    15 Professor Alexeev and I would meet on Saturday afternoons at Quincy House in Cambridge. During one of our talks he told me that Weidenreich published seven volumes on Sinanthropus but that the Sinanthropus remains were lost during the war.
    In Carleton Coon's 1954 text The Story of Man, Coon states that casts were made of the Sinanthropus remains because the Chinese government wanted the originals to stay in Peking. Weidenreich, when forced to leave China, carried the casts with him to New York. Attempts were made to ship the originals to the United States via the "S.S. President Harrison" but the train carrying the remains to the coast was seized by the Japanese and the remains disappeared.

    Weidenreich's publications on Sinanthropus are as follows:

    1935? "The Sinanthropus population of Choukoutien (locality 1) with a preliminary report on new discoveries". No publication information; however this volume is cataloged at Tozzer.

    1936. "The mandibles of Sinanthropus pekinensis: a comparative study"; published in Peiping: Geological Survey of China.

    1936. "Observations on the form and proportions of the endocranial casts of Sinanthropus pekinensis, other hominids and the great apes: a comparative study of brain size"; published in Peiping: Geological Survey of China.

    1937. "The dentition of Sinanthropus pekinensis: a comparative odontography of the hominids"; published in Peiping: Geological Survey of China.

    1939. "Six lectures on Sinanthropus pekinensis and related problems; published in Peiping.

    1941. "The extremity bones of Sinanthropus pekinensis"; published in Peiping: Geological Survey of China.

    1943. "The skull of Sinanthropus pekinensis: a comparative study on a primitive hominid skull"; published in Pehpei, Chungking: Geological Survey of China. [back]

    16 Skhul and Qafzeh caves are in Israel. One reference to Qafzeh is:

    1981. "Les hommes fossiles de Qafzeh" by Bernard Vandermeersch; published in Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.

    Another is:

    1981. Bernard Vandermeersch and Ofer Bar-Yosef; "Notes concerning the possible age of Mousterian layers at Qafzeh Cave" in Prehistoire du Levant; edited by J. Cauvin and P. Sanlaville; Paris; CNRS.

    Alexeev claims that Weidenreich calls the remains of the child from Teshik-Tash "Progressive Neanderthal" and Alexeev relates it to the finds from Skhul and Qafzeh. Alexeev also claims that Debets, using the same skeletal remains, calls them "Classic Neandertal". As well, the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" labels the remains from Teshik-Tash as Neandertal.
    Weidenreich's research was with Sinanthropus pekinensis. In Carleton Coon's text "The Story of Man", 1954, Coon depicts his restorations in plates II and III of a male Sinanthropus, a female Neandertal, and a Neanderthaloid (Skhul V) from the Cave of the Kids at Mount Carmel. For his reconstructions, Coon states "the skulls and jaws were restored, and then the missing portions were filled in with imagination. Then the muscles were laid on, and finally the skin and hair were conjured up. The form of the soft parts, including lips, nose tips, ears, and hair, are wholly conjectural".
    Now, when I examine the photographs of the reconstructions, I am drawn to the immediate conclusion that all three restorations i.e. Sinanthropus, Neandertal, and Skhul V (which Coon calls an evolutionary stage between Neandertal and modern man and which Ofer Bar-Yosef labels Homo sapiens sapiens with a date at 100,000 BC) are very similar and are likely varieties of one species with most differences in facial features being in the areas of conjecture.
    According to Arutiunov: "many scholars claim that Classic Neandertal cannot be an ancestor to Homo sapiens sapiens at all. However, Progressive Neandertal certainly is ancestor to Homo sapiens". [back]

    17 A relevent HOLLIS listing for Gerasimov:

    1973. "Antropologicheskaia rekonstruktsiia i problemy paleoethografii; sbornik pamiati"; published in Moskva: Nauka. [back]

    18 According to Arutiunov: "Formosov excavated at Staroselie and when the child was found, Roginskii, Gerasimov, and Zamiatin arrived to verify the find. Alexeev and his wife participated in the excavation".

    New excavations were undertaken as part of the Joint Ukrainian/American Middle Paleolithic of the Crimea Project by Anthony Marks et. al and were designed to provide new, more detailed information concerning the cultural and natural stratigraphy and to acquire materials for absolute dating by uranium-series, electron spin resonance (ESR), and thermoluminescence (TL) on burned flint. During the 1993-94 excavations, two burials were uncovered: one of an infant (including only legs and feet) and the second of a middle-aged adult. The infant was buried in a semi-flexed position and the adult in an extended anatomical position. Neither burial included grave goods. These burials followed Muslim burial practices of an extended position on the back, with the head to the west and the face to the south. The Kanly-Dere Gorge where the re-excavations took place, was a tradition burial area during late-medieval times with a 17th-18th century Muslim cemetery just inside the canyon's east side ca. 100 m from Staroselie. Based on careful stratigraphic excavation, it is concluded by Marks et. al that the Staroselie child was an intrusive late-medieval burial (Current Anthropology, vol. 38, no. 1, February, 1977).

    HOLLIS lists the following relevent publications by Formosov:

    1958. "Peshchernaia stoianka Starosel'e i ee mesto v paleolite"; published in Moskva: Izd-vd Akademii Nauk SSSR.

    1980. "Pamiatniki pervobytnogo iskusstva na territorii SSSR" published in Moskva: Nauka.

    1995. "Antologiia sovetskoi arkheologii: 1917-1933; published in Moskva: Institut arkheologii RAN; Gosudarstvennyi istoricheskii muzei.

    The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" references the above 1958 publication as well as:

    1966. "Gominidy vtoroi poloviny srednego i nachala verkhnego pleistotsena Evropy" by V.P. Alekseev; in "Iskopaemye gominidy i proiskhozhdenie cheloveka"; published in Moscow.

    As per Arutiunov, a recent publication by Alexeev on Staroselie is:

    1993. "Obshchemie", part 5 in "Ethnografichesiese oborremie"; vol. 5, p. 133-142. [back]

    19 A recent reference to Saint Cesaire is:

    1993. "Context of a late Neandertal: implications of multidisciplinary research for the transition to Upper Paleolithic adaptations at Saint-Cesaire, Charante-Maritime, France" edited by Francois Leveque, Anna Mary Backer, and Michel Guilbaud; published in Madison, Wis: Prehistory Press. [back]

    20 For Shanidar Cave I find four major references. Alexeev referenced the one by Erik Trinkaus:

    1959. Senyurk, Muzaffer Suleyman; "A study of the deciduous teeth of the fossil Shanidar infant"; published in Ankara: Turk Tarih Hurumu Basimevi.

    1971. Solecki, Ralph; "Shanidar, the first flower people"; published in New York: Knopf.

    1981. Solecki, Rose; "An early village site at Zawi Chemi Shanidar"; published in Malibu, CA: Undena Publications.

    1983. Trinkaus, Erik; "The Shanidar Neandertals"; published in New York: Academic Press. [back]

    21 Reference to Wolpoff's text is:

    c1980. "Paleoanthropology" by Milford Wolpoff [back]

    22 A recent publication on the Dnieper River Region is:

    1992. "Istoryko-kul'turnyii rozvytok Pivdennoho Podniprov'ia v IX-XIV" by A.O. Kozlovs'kyi and published in Kyiv: Nauk. dumka.

    The only publication listed in HOLLIS for the Mezyn site is:

    1981. "Drevneishii muzykal'nyi kompleks iz kostei mamonta: ocherk material'noi i dukhovnoi kul'tury paleoliticheskogo cheloveka" by Sergei Nikolaevich Bibikov; published in Kiev: Nauk. dumka.

    The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" references Mezin as an upper Paleolithic settlement and lists the following publication:

    1965. "Mexinskaia stoinka" by I.G. Shovkoplias; published in Kiev.[back]

    23 For the site Molodova, HOLLIS lists:

    1982. "Molodova I: unikal'noe must'erskoe poselenie na Srednem Dnestre" by Irina Ivanova Konstantinovna; published in Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka".

    1987. "Mnogosloinaia paleoliticheskaia stoianka Molodova V: liudi damennogo veka i okryzhaiushchaia sreda: k Xii Kongressu INKVS (Kanada)" by Gavriil Ivanovich Goretskii; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" lists:

    1961. "Paleolitychna stoianka Molodove V" by O.P. Chernysh; published in Kiev.

    Chapter IV: Upper Paleolithic in Afro Eurasia
    [Lecture 3 delivered on 1 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhard

    This half of the lecture introduces Upper Paleolithic sites in Afro Eurasia highlighting the sites Kostenki, Sungir, Pronyatin, Bilzingsleben, Heidelberg, and the Omo Valley in Nubia (Ethiopia/Kenya). In Europe, Upper Paleolithic is synonymous with art.
    Upper Paleolithic Sites

    According to Alexeev, in Siberia the Upper Paleolithic sites are centralized in the Southern regions, in the Lena Valley, in a great zone of not very high mountains and surrounding steppe. Here in the Lena Valley, tools are in the form of flaked blades as contrasted to the Caucasus where stone and bone variations are found (bone tools are likely used for hunting birds, not animals). These tools are Upper Paleolithic. In Europe, Upper Paleolithic is synonymous with art.

    Kostenki 1 is located in the Don River Basin near the Sea of Azov. It is a small village surrounded by hills and dry valleys, ideal for hunting. At the site of Kostenki, both stone and bone tools have been found as well as stone and bone sculptures. Alexander Marshack 2 interprets decorations found on bone pieces as astrological calculations. Bone female figurines also have been found; these are similar to those found in Villendorf, Austria and are examples of Kostenki art. Here at Kostenki there is also evidence of houses.

    Both Kostenki II and Kostenki XIV produced burials of Upper Paleolithic man. Skeletal remains from Kostenki II are of an adult male, tall, and approximately fifty years of age. Reconstruction of the head reveals a broad face and narrow brow. The head from Kostenki XIV is the best preserved; no bones were destroyed except for the end of the nasal bone which had been crushed by the investigator. Reconstruction reflects a very strong adult individual with a combination of morphological features. The nose is very broad, similar to African or Australian. This strong development around the nose is not typical for Europoid but is similar to East African populations; however, Negroid nasal bones are flat while Kostenki XIV is strong. This find is a combination of features whose origin is different from other groups.

    Thus, at Kostenki, we have both stone and bone tools and sculptures as well as houses, female figurines similar the "Venus of Villendorf", and the remains of Upper Paleolithic man. From Kostenki II we have a broad head and narrow brow and from Kostenki XIV we have a tall adult exhibiting a combination of strong physical features which differ from typical Europoid.

    Sungir 3 is located 200 kl east of Moscow and reveals several burials; therefore, it is considered to be the first cemetery in Russia. A total of five burials, all from the same layer produced 4 adults and 2 teenagers (together in one burial).

    Burial #1 was of an adult male, 35-40 years of age. Reconstruction of skeletal remains reveal huge shoulders; nothing like this has been found in Upper Europe. Also in the burial were bones from a furbearing animal.

    Burial #5 was of 2 teenagers placed head to head; the male was eleven years of age and the female thirteen. Alongside the burial was a long spear, 2.5 meters in length and made of one piece of straight ivory. Alexeev's Question: how was the ivory straightened 4?

    Pronyatin is a site near Molodova in Southwestern Ukraine. This site has many layers with three layers of Upper Paleolithic (and other layers of Mousterian). Found in one of the Mousterian layers was a piece of bone in the shape of an animal. On the bone is what appears to be drawings. Possibly this is the first instance of drawing from a Mousterian site. Or possibly the bone came from the Upper Paleolithic layer and moved from one layer to another.

    Bilzingsleben 5 is located in Germany 80 kl from Weimar, the birthplace of Goethe. This site was excavated by Dietrich Mania in 1975. Found at Bilzingsleban were Acheulian bone and stone implements with the skull of Homo erectus. Also present was a broken rhinoceros bone 6 with thirteen or possibly fourteen incised lines. This likely is not a piece of art but is the first evidence of mental activity. What we have here is Homo erectus, Acheullian tools, and evidence of mental activity 7.

    The archaeological site at Heidelberg in Germany produced the remains Homo erectus. The discovery was made in 1907 8.

    Omo Valley in Nubia (Ethiopia and Kenya) has produced the remains of either late Australopithicines or Homo erectus dating to the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC 9.

    Brief Digressions

    An outline of Russian archaeology can be found in Prehistoric Russia by Tadeusz Solimersky, 1970 10.

    Japanese scholars believe no finds can be dated before 600,000 years. From China it's 600,000 -400,000 years.

    A conference held in 1959 surveyed one hundred years of Neandertal discoveries 11.

    Reconstruction techniques were developed in the early 1930's by M.M. Gerasimov. Working with cadavers, he analyzed soft tissue and bone structure and found that the greater the bone structure, the thicker the soft tissue. His book was translated into German and Japanese 12.

    Henri Vallois published a work dedicated to Neandertal skulls in 1989 or 1960. This work was published in German and English.

    [Lecture 4 delivered 3 July 1991]
    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    The fourth lecture in the series is delivered the day before American Independence Day. The Upper Paleolithic sites of Mal'ta and Bureti in Siberia are presented with both sites producing art objects and/or calendrics and female figurines. Professor Alexeev then introduces the concept of migration i.e. mass movement from the west to east across the Russian steppe, but refutes this concept claiming that instead of migration there was a diffusion of cultural, technological, and ideological exchange throughout the area. As concerns the peopling of America, Alexeev presents his reasons why there was no movement from Eurasia to America using dates from Duktai and Ushki to substantiate his argument. In discussing Upper Paleolithic art, Alexeev contrasts the cave art from Altamira in Spain with the art from Kapovaia Cave in Russia. Concluding this lecture, in a lighter frame of reference, Alexeev tells a delightful anecdote about Big and Little Diomedes and a dog. After class our conversations continue in The Yard with a recipe for piroshke from him and a "dasvedanya" from us. He then very solemnly wishes us a very happy Independence Day.

    Upper Paleolithic Sites

    Alexeev continues: Mal'ta 13 is located in the Angara River Valley near Lake Baikal, Siberia. The Angara River Valley begins in the Baikal Sea and this steppe zone extends to the Yenissei River. This area has produced the remains of a rhinoceros covered with wool 14.

    Mal'ta was excavated by M.M. Gerasimov in 1956-58. This site reveals rich cultural material including art objects as burial goods, engraved bone pieces, animal bone remains which depict both the species hunted and the usage of bone in technology. The species hunted are typical for Siberia i.e. rhinoceros and ox; there is no indication that the horse was hunted. Houses are also found at Malta.

    According to the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" Mal'ta is an upper paleolithic site on the Belaia River near the village of Mal'ta. This site, discovered in 1928 by Gerasimov, was investigated by him until 1959. Mal'ta produced remains of different types of dwellings (tepee-like, semi subterranean, and surface) which existed simultaneously. The Mal'ta burial was that of a child with rich grave goods, similar to the find at Bureti site.

    Bureti is also located in the Angara River Valley and was excavated by the same person who discovered Teshik-Tash Cave [i.e. Okladnikov] 15. Excavations at Bureti reveal the same results as at Mal'ta; however, Mal'ta is the larger site. Currently the two sites are considered to be one unit left behind by one population. The distance from Bureti to Mal'ta is 12-14 kl; a two hour walk.

    Bureti is located in a steppe zone with narrow hills. The climate is dry and animal life is rich. At the confluence of the Angara and Belaia Rivers were discovered the remains of animals that had been killed. Possibly Bureti was a campsite; this site could have been inhabited in winter when the rivers would have been frozen.

    Upper Paleolithic Migrations

    As per Alexeev, it is Okladnikov who proposes the following hypothesis: in the Paleolithic era, the Caspian Sea was larger than at present and occupied much of the western Ural area. Thus this great water barrier eliminated a direct path from west to east 16. The Okladnikov theory counters earlier hypotheses that the first migrations were from the west to the east across the steppes and Urals to Lake Baikal. Alexeev questions: Why is there a similarity between Czech sites and Lake Baikal sites? Possibly sites in between were destroyed by water.

    Professor Alexeev disagrees with migration theories. Instead he believes that there was a diffusion of cultural, technological, and ideological exchange throughout the area.

    Art Objects from Mal'ta

    Pieces of ivory, likely that from mammoth, have been found at Mal'ta. These paleolithic art objects are similar to those found in European and Czech sites and are examples of Upper Paleolithic art. Also from Malta comes an image of a mammoth; however, only a few bones of mammoth have been discovered at the site. Most of the bones found were from rhinoceros.

    Also found and carved in ivory are figures of birds. A plate with many ornamental figures is likely a calendar recording (or predicting) seasonal events and climatic changes. This plate is similar to those found at some sites in France, most specifically the calendars from Fausi Cave, although the calendars are different.

    An old photograph depicts houses with some use of stone which had been transported from an area 8-10 kilometers away. In addition to using stone in house construction, bones of rhinoceros are used to construct the frame of a house. These bones are then covered with the skins of many animals.

    A burial, that of a child 2-4 years of age, was originally thought to be of a young person with strange morphological, possibly even pathological features. Actually the burial is of two children i.e. a secondary burial of a newborn placed with the older child. An ornamental plate was found on the remains of the elder child; the many ornamental figures on the plate can be interpreted as possibly a calendar for seasonal events and climatic changes. One interpretation of this unusual burial is that the father of these children had been an interpreter of calendrics.

    Female figurines also have been discovered at Mal'ta 17. One is of a figure wrapped in a costume which also shrouds the head. Her face is broad with a flat nose and narrow eyes; possibly a similarity exists between this figurine and a native American. A second figurine is of bone, thin, and covered with auger marks.

    Tools and the Peopling of America

    In North America there are three types of tools: Sandia, Clovis, and Folsom points. Sandia points, in a triangular shape with the base curved convexly, are entirely napped except for a "new moon" sliver at the base (this is the only flat part). Sandia points come from sites dating to 12-10,000 BC and have been found from sites in Kentucky 18. Folsom points are also triangularly shaped except the only areas knapped are along the edges of the legs. The base is smooth. Folsom points are found in Mexico 19. Clovis points 20 belong to the same grouping as Sandia; both are 2-3,000 years later than Folsom points. These points: Sandia, Folsom, and Clovis are not found in Siberia 21.

    In reply to the question as to whether America was settled from Siberia, Professor Alexeev thinks there is no typological relationship between Siberia and America. Of importance is the fact that sites in Central Asia and Eastern China are not included in the discussion of populating America.

    The Duktai Culture is found in the small village of Duktai located on a coast of the Aldan River at the point where the Aldan flows into the Lena River. The site is a small cave and was excavated in the 1960's by Iurii Alekseevich Mochanov 22. This site has no complicated stratigraphy; only one cultural layer. As per Alexeev, there are other small caves in the Aldan and Lena Valleys which have been found with Upper Paleolithic tools.

    Alexeev continues: the distribution of the Duktai Culture is only in the Aldan/Lena area, in the mid Lena Valley; however there is a possibility that some Duktai people did in fact reach the coast. C-14 dates for the Duktai Culture place it at existing from 30,000-10,000 BC 23. Some scholars think this culture could not have existed for so long a period of time, and there is doubt regarding the early dates from the caves. Only dates at 10,000 BC can be approved in conjunction with the cultural material; Mochanov argues for a date at 20,000 BC.

    As per Alexeev, in the Duktai Culture there are no Folsom, Sandia, or Clovis points and the implements found are unexpressive. Mochanov's position is that the dates for the Duktai Culture are at 20,000 BC 24. However, in personal communication with American scholars such as Dennis Stanford and William Fitzhugh, this information is inaccurate. In the Smithsonian Institution collections, there are paleoindian materials dating only to 10-12,000 BC. At this time America had already been settled by early immigrants from Asia.

    Ushki is located on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Siberia and was discovered by Nikolai Dikov 25. The site reveals houses with fireplaces; however, the tools are unexpressive like the Duktai Culture tools. C-14 dates are at 12,000-10,000, a late date and the same as the last stage of the Duktai Culture. At this time early man had already entered America.

    Conclusion: in southern Siberia there are C-14 dates at 40,000-32,000 with some Mousterian traditions but there is no resemblance with sites in America. Therefore, as per Alexeev, the peopling of America cannot be substantiated by the archaeological data.

    Upper Paleolithic Art in Eurasia

    The history of Upper Paleolithic art is complicated. Careful attention has been given to the first discoveries of Upper Paleolithic art in Eurasia. These discoveries have been declared to be falsifications by Europeans who could not believe in the existence of Upper Paleolithic art in Eurasia.

    At Altamira Cave in Spain, cave art was accidently discovered in 1879 26. The art consists of color drawings of bison, horses, and two wild beasts. Professor Alexeev questions whether this art is a later (later than Upper Paleolithic) falsification and questions whether this area is the only location in the world where Upper Paleolithic art is located. This area, known as the Franco Contabrian region of Central and Southern France on the border of France and the Iberian Peninsula, appears to have the greatest concentration of Upper Paleolithic art. In addition to color drawings, small sculptures of stone and clay have been found; a figure of a bison has been discovered in Tuc d'Audubert Cave. Paolo Graziosi has published a book on Paleolithic art which was translated from the Italian 27.

    Professor Alexeev also cites page 478 of "National Geographic"; October, 1988 as another reference for Upper Paleolithic art. This citation references Alexander Marshack's article entitled "An Ice Age Ancestor?" which describes an ivory carved portrait of an Upper Paleolithic hunter;

    "an extraordinarily powerful male head with staring eyes, pinpoint holes in the irises, heavy brows, a strong upturned nose, a beard, and long deeply incised hair".

    This bust supposedly was discovered in the 1890's in a field near Dolni Vestonice in Czechoslovakia.

    In Eurasia, only one place has been found containing Upper Paleolithic Art and that place is Kapovaia Cave, discovered by Otto Nikolaevich Bader 28. The cave is located in the southern Ural Mountains on the right bank of the Belaia River (different from Belaia, tributary of Angara). This cave painting is of a small horse, a rhinoceros, a mammoth, and a large horse all in color. This is definitely a composition.

    No sculptured pieces in clay have been found in European Russia; only one piece, a human figure, has been found at the site of Krasnoyarsk near Novosibirsk. Professor Alexeev questions why there is only one colored cave painting and only one clay object discovered in European and/or Asian Russia and why everything else is concentrated in western Europe. However, small sculptures of bone and stone are well distributed throughout the territory of Russia 29.

    The Famous Dog Story

    Well into the second week of lecture, as Professor Alexeev became more familiar and relaxed with the class, he told this anecdote:

    "Two islands, Big Diomedes and Little Diomedes, were what separated the cold war enemies: the Soviet Union and the United States. Early in the cold war, Russian scientists would stand on Big Diomedes and with their binoculars would spy on the Americans on Little Diomedes. The Americans on Little Diomedes would be standing there with their binoculars focused on the Soviets. This process continued for some time, each formally spying on the other. After a great while, one of the Russian scientists raised his hand, not too high, perhaps only to his shoulders. In response, one of the American scientists raised his hand, also not too high. So it continued -- the stiff gesture slowly becoming a gentle nod. Then suddenly the ice broke. And from the American side came a dog leaping from one ice patch to another until he reached Big Diomedes. The Russians were very excited to greet an American dog and they invited the dog into their cabin to have some food. But the dog didn't respond. He wasn't very well trained. He was a very dumb dog"!

    In response, one of my classmates exclaimed: "Must have been a Samoyed"!

    Back (Chapter III: Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) in Eurasia)

    Next (Chapter V: Mesolithic in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter IV

    1 For the site Kostenki, HOLLIS lists six references:

    1955. "Aleksandrovskoe Poselenie Drevnekamennogo Veka U Sela Kostenki Na Donu" by A.N. Rogachev; published in Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii Nauk SSSR.

    1958. "Kostenki Pervye" by Petr Petrovich Efimenko; published in Leningrad: Izd-vo Akademii Nauk SSSR.

    1963. "Ocherki Po Paleolitu Basseina Dona Maloizuchennye Poseleniia Drevnego Kamennogo Beka V Kostenkakh" by Pavel Iosifovich Boriskovskii; published in Moskva, Izd-vo Akad. Nauk SSSR.

    1982. "Paleolit Kostenkovsko-Borshchevskogo RAiona Na Donu 1879-1979: Nekotorye Itogi Polevykh Issledovanii" by N.D. Praslov; published in Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Nauka.

    1991. "Le Paleolithique superieur european: rapport quinquennal" edited by Marcel Otte; published in Liege: Universite de Liege.

    1993. "From Kostenki to Clovis: Upper Paleolithic Paleo-Indian Adaptations" by Olga Soffer; New York: Plenum Press.[back]

    2 This publication by Alexander Marshack is:

    c1972. "The roots of civilization: the cognitive beginnings of man's first art, symbol, and notation"; published in New York: McGraw-Hill.

    The first edition was updated in c1991:

    c1991. "The roots of civilization: the cognitive beginnings of man's first art, symbol, and notation"; (revised and expanded); published in Mount Kisco, N.Y.: Moyer Bell.[back]

    3 For the Sungir site HOLLIS lists:

    1978. "Sungir': verkhnepaleoliticheskaia stoianka" by O.N. Bader; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    1984. "Sungir': antropologischeskoe issledovanie" edited by A.A. Zubov; published in Moskva: Nauka.[back]

    4 Alexeev's question is quite interesting. Arutiunov claims that ivory can be straightened by a preliminary softening in boiling water; thus this ivory is of ordinary mammoth but straightened. On the other hand, I have discovered that Palaeoloxodon antiquus is a straight-tusked elephant.[back]

    5 For the site Bilzingsleben, HOLLIS lists two references. Please note that the first publication is in collaboration with Emanuel Vlcek:

    1980. "Bilzingsleben: Homo erectur, seine Kultur und seine Umwelt" by Dietrich Mania, Volker Toepfer, and Emanuel Vlcek; published in Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.

    1990. "Auf den Spuren des Urmenschen: die Funde aus der Steinrinne von Bilzingsleben" by Dietrich Mania; published in Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.[back]

    6 This bone was actually of an elephant.[back]

    7 Acheulian tools are earlier than Mousterian. What we have here is a Lower Paleolithic site with Acheulean tools.[back]

    8 For Homo erectus in Heidelberg, HOLLIS lists:

    1992. "Schichten von Mauer: 85 Jahre Homo erectus heidelbergensis: [Ausstellung des Museums fur Archaologie und Volkerkunde im Reiss-Museum der Stadt Mannheim, Archaologische Sammlungen in Zusammenarbeit mit Michael Amesbury, 21. Oktober 1992 bus 28. Marz 1993]" by herausgegeben von Karl W. Beinhauer und Gunther A. Wagner; mit Beitragen von Michael Amesbury et al; published in Mannheim: Edition Braus, Reiss-Museum.

    In reference to Homo erectus, the following current works might be of interest:

    1990. "The evolution of Homo erectus: comparative anatomical studies of an extinct human species" by G. Philip Rightmire; published in Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    1991. "Aux origines d'Homo sapiens" under the direction of Jean-Jacques Hublin and Anne-Marie Tillier; published in Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

    1993. "The Nariokotome Homo erectus skeleton" edited by Alan Walker and Richard Leakey; published in Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.[back]

    9 For the Omo Valley in Nubia, HOLLIS lists:

    1983. "The Omo Group: archives of the international Omo Research Expedition"; edited by J. de Heinzelin and published in Tervuren, Belgique: Musee royal de L'Afrique centrale.

    1984. "The Omo micromammals: systematics and paleoecology of early man sites from Ethiopia" by Henry B. Wesselman; published in New York: S. Karger.[back]

    10 The full reference to Sulimirski's publication is:

    1970. "Prehistoric Russia: an outline" by Tadeus Sulimirski; published in London: J. Baker and in New York: Humanities Press.[back]

    11 A Conference on Neanderthal discoveries was held in 1956. This conference is the Internationale Neanderthal Feier (1956: Dusseldorf) and the proceedings from the conference are:

    1958. "Hundert Jahre Neanderthaler, Neanderthal centenary, 1856-1956; Gedenkbuch der Internationalen Neanderthal Feier, Dusseldorf, 26-30 August 1956, mit Beitragen von: H. Breuil [et al.] Fur die Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, Inc., New York; published in Utrecht: Kemink.[back]

    12 HOLLIS lists the following 5 publications by Mikhail Mikhailovich:

    1955. "Vosstanovlenie litsa po cherepu (sovremennyi i iskopaemyi chelovek)"; published in Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    1958. "Opyt vosproizvedeniia dokumental'nogo portreta po skelety iz Pandzhruda"; published in Stalinabad: Tadzhikskoe gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo.

    1964. "Liudi kamennogo veka"; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    1971. "Ich suchte Gesichter" [the face finder]; translated from the German by Alan Houghton Brodrick; Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.

    1973. "Antropologicheskaia rekonstruktsiia i problemy paleoetnografii"; published in Moskva: Nauka.[back]

    13 HOLLIS lists the following references by M.M. Gerasimov on Mal'ta:

    1935. "Raskopki paleoliticheskoi stoianki v sele Mal'te" in "Izvestiia Gosudarstvennoi akademii istorii matereal'noi kul'tury #118"; published in Leningrad-Moscow.

    1958. "Paleoliticheskaia stoianka Mal'ta (Rasskopki 1956-1957)"; in "Sovetskaia etnografiia #3".[back]

    14 This statement re: a rhino covered with wool could possibly be an error in that I misheard, but I don't think so. Arutiunov confirms there is a species of woolly rhinoceros which has been unearthed from permafrost. Guess when they moved south they shed their woollies![back]

    15 The person referred to is Aleksei Pavlovich Okladnikov.
    HOLLIS lists three publications on the Angara River Valley, one of which is by Okladnikov and specifically references Bureti:

    1974. "Neoliticheskie pamiatniki Angary: ot Shchukino do Buretti" by A.P. Okladnikov; published in Novosibirsk: Nauka.

    1976. "Neoliticheskie pamiatniki Nizhnei Angary, ot Serovo do Bratska" by A.P. Okladnikov; [An SSSR, Sib. otd-nie, in-t istorii, filologii i filosofii]; published in Novosibirsk: Nauka.

    1978. "Drevnie kultury Priangaria" by Rusean Sergeevich Vasilevskii; published in Novosibirsk: Nauka.[back]

    16 The Okladnikov hypotheses is similar to that proposed by Raphael Pumpelly. Pumpelly referenced an Asian Mediterranean i.e. the extension of the Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea, possibly even to Lake Baikal, in paleolithic times. This theory is still unsubstantiated.

    Perhaps Pumpelly's best known expedition is his work in Turkestan as referenced in HOLLIS:

    1908. "Explorations in Turkestan; expedition of 1904. Prehistoric civilizations of Anau; origins, growth, and influence of environment"; Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.[back]

    17 Of interest is the similarity between this shrouded figure and a similar object discovered at Hierakonpolis by Quibell and Green:

    1900-02. "Hierakonpolis" by J.E. Quibell and F.W. Green; published in London: B. Quaritch.[back]

    18 I have found no reference to Sandia points in HOLLIS and as yet I'm still unable to verify Sandia points from sites in Kentucky. But I have discovered several publications that reference Sandia Cave in New Mexico:

    1941. "Evidence of early occupation in Sandia Cave, New Mexico, and other sites in the Sandia-Manzano region" by Frank C. Hibben; published in Washington, DC: The Smithsonian Institution.

    1975. "Sandia Cave: a study in controversy" by Dominique E. Stevens; published in Portales: Eastern New Mexico University, Paleo-Indian Institute.

    1986. "Geochronology of Sandia Cave" by C. Vance Haynes, Fr. and George A. Agogino; published in Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

    Also, of interest, is the following conference proceedings which, although no mention of Sandia is located in the title or keyword reference, the HOLLIS kw lists it as "kw" Sandia:

    1943. "Recent advances in American archaeology. Papers read before the American philosophical society annual meeting, April 23, 24, 25, 1943 [i.e. 1942]"; published in Philadelphia: The American philosophical society.

    Sergei Arutiunov references Inna Laricheva and her work with Sandia points but as yet I have been unable to locate the appropriate references.[back]

    19 Folsom points are also found in Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia.

    For Alexeev's Mexican reference see:

    1987. "Las Haciendas, a cairn-burial assemblage from northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico" by Robert J. Mallouf; published in Austin: Texas Historical Commission.[back]

    20 For recent analyses of the Clovis Culture see:

    1988. "Early human occupation in far western North America: the Clovis-Archaic interface" edited by Judith A. Willig, C. Melvin Aikens, and John L. Fagan; published in Carson City, Nev: Nevada State Museum.

    1993. "From Kostenki to Clovis: Upper Paleolithic Paleo-Indian Adaptations" by Olga Soffer; New York: Plenum Press.[back]

    21 That Sandia, Clovis, and Folsom points are not found in Eurasia has been verified by Arutiunov. He says they are typically North American varieties.

    Thus, Olga Soffer's claim that Clovis extends from Kostenki eastward is in question; both Alexeev and Arutiunov claim that there are no Folsom, Sandia, or Clovis points present in the Duktai Culture. Thus the Russian scholars claim that Sandia, Clovis, and Folsom points are not found in Eurasia while the American scholars still seek to identify an origin in the Duktai Culture. Only new archaeological evidence can claim which of the two groups is correct.[back]

    22 Mochanov has three texts listed in HOLLIS:

    1991. "Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki IAkutti: basseiny Viliuia, Anabara i Oleneka; published in Moskva: "Nauka".

    1992. "Arkheologicheskie issledovaniia v IAutii: trudy Prilenskoi arkheologicheskoi ekspeditsii" published in Novosibirsk: VO "Nauka".

    1992. "Drevneishii paleolit Diringa i problema vnetropicheskoi prarodiny chelovechestva"; published in Novosibirsk: VO "Nauka".[back]

    23 I asked Arutiunov whether this date for the Duktai Culture at 30,000 - 10,000 BC can be substantiated and Arutiunov stated that this is what Mochanov reports.[back]

    24 Mochanov's date of 20,000 BC has not been confirmed by American scholars. Smithsonian dates for the Paleo-Indian collections is at 12,000 - 9,000 BP as indicated by William Fitzhugh and Dennis Stanford . Arutiunov comments that Mochanov believes that the Paleo-Indian industry developed from Duktai; however, the American scholars are not denying the possibility of a relationship between Paleo-Indian and Duktai could in fact exist, rather the American scholars do not accept a direct sequence.

    In summary, Mochanov and the Russian scholars date Paleo-Indian at 20,000 BC while the Americans place a date of 12,000 - 9,000 BC; both Russian and American scholars look to Duktai as the place from which the Paleo-Indian industry developed. Further research is needed to resolve the dating of paleo-Indian and its relationship to Duktai.[back]

    25 Nikolai Nikolaevich Dikov's publications relevant to the Kamchatka Peninsula are:

    1977. "Arkkheologicheskie pamiatniki Kamchatki, Chukotki I Verkhnei Kolymy = Archeologic momuments in Kamchatka, Chukotka and the upper reaches of the Kolyma: Aziia na styke s Amerikoi v Drevnosti"; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    1994. "Paleolit Kamchatki i Chukotki v sviazi s problemoi pervonachal'nogo zaseleniia Ameriki: publikatsiia k mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii "Mosty nauki mezhdu Severnoi Amerikoi i Rossiiskim Dal'nym Vostokom: (Vladivostok, 29 avgusta - 2 centiabria 1994 g.); published in Magadan: Severo-Vost. According to Arutiunov, the terms Chukchee, Chukchi, Chukot, Chukotsky, Chukotka penisnula are all interchangeable.[back]

    26 The following publications on Altamira Cave in Spain are listed in HOLLIS:

    1906. "La caverne d'Altamira a Santillane pres Santander (Espagne)" by Emile Cartailhac and l'abbe Henri Breuil; published in Monqdo: Impr. de Monaco.

    1931. "Zveri v peshchere" by Mikhail Osipovich Gershenzon; published in MOskva: Molodaia gvardiia.

    1935. "cave of Altamira at Santillana del Mar, Spain" by Henri Breuil and Dr. Hugo Obermaier; foreword by the Duke of Berwick and Alba; English text by Mary E. Boyle; published in Madrid: Tip. de Archivos.

    1938. "Altamira, a note upon which the palaeolithic paintings in the cave of Altamira near Santillane del Mar in the Spanish province of Santander; wih a collotype in colour reproducing all the principal paintings" by William Hutton Riddell; published in Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.

    1950. "El descubrimiento de la cueva y pinturas de Altamira, por D. Marcelino S. de Sautuola; noticias historicas; published in Santander: Patronato de las Cuevas Prehistoricas de la Provincia.

    1956. "Santillana del Mar y Altamira" by Manuel Pereda de la Reguera; published in Santander: Editorial Cantabria.[back]

    27 Paolo Graziosi's text is:

    1960. "Paleolithic Art / translation from the Italian"; published in Hew York: McGraw Hill.[back]

    28 Otto Nikolaevich Bader published the following text on Paleolithic paintings from Kapovaia Cave:

    1965. "Kapovaia peshchera: paleoliticheskaia zhivopis" published in Moskva: Nauka.

    As per Arutiunov: "to find Capovaia Cave on a map, you need to obtain a more or less detailed map of the southern Ural area. Draw a straight line between the cities of Ufa and Magnitigorsk. Where the line crosses the Belaia River, there is Capovaia Cave. It is located on the right shore of the Belaia River, a few hundred feet away from the water level".[back]

    29 Possibly one reason for the lack of Upper Paleolithic art such as cave paintings and large clay sculptings could be that the art of nomadic people differs from the art of sedentary populations.

    Chapter V: Mesolithic in Eurasia
    [Lecture 5 delivered on 8 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This fifth lecture in the series introduces the Mesolithic period in the archaeology of Eurasia (not to include western Europe). To examine the Mesolithic is to examine the time period between the traditional Paleolithic and Neolithic, an era that Professor Alexeev thinks should be given great historical importance. A brief introduction to the geomorphology of Eurasia is presented stressing the extinction of large Paleolithic game and replacement by smaller Mesolithic game necessitating the invention of a new tool kit. This new technology is produced in three geographical provinces which Alexeev identifies as the Eastern European Province, the Central Asia and Caucasus Province, and the Siberian Province. Alexeev then discusses agriculture and the domestication of animals, and questions whether this adaptation actually originates in the Near East; he uses information from Oberkassel in Germany and Alimov Cave in the Crimea to support his query.

    Alexeev correlates cemeteries with the Mesolithic and sees this period as the first archaeological confirmation of self consciousness i.e. man's awareness of his difference from other groups of living things. He again references the site of Kostenki and introduces Afontova Gora II in Siberia in conjunction with Mongoloid morphological features discovered at both sites. A brief discussion of the paleodemography of Eurasia in the Mesolithic is presented with the accompaniment of numbers. The lecture concludes with a comparison between Paleolithic and Mesolithic art, the latter form called monotonous. Professor Alexeev concludes class with "another famous dog story".

    Geomorphology of Eurasia (not to include western Europe)

    Alexeev continues: the Mesolithic period begins 11/10,000 BC and is a time of changing environmental conditions and cultural traditions. Among scholars, this is a period of great discussion i.e. some scholars perceive the Mesolithic as a time of great importance in the development of technology and adaptive processes and view it as a special historical period vs those scholars who see no significance to the Mesolithic as a special period.

    The Mesolithic is a time of great biosphere changes. 18,000- 11,000 BC (pre Mesolithic) is a strong period of glaciation with an ice sheet extending from Scandinavia to the Baltic down to the parallel at which Moscow is geographically located. In 10,000 BC, glaciation begins to recede and to recede fast. Following the reduction of glaciation is a time of great climatic change. The warmer, drier climate produces many lakes and swamps while the number of large mammals decrease. In 9-8,000 BC the climate is similar to that of today although more humid. While the Paleolithic people lived in cold conditions, the Mesolithic people exist in a favorable climate. The Mesolithic environment is similar to the modern. Large mammals decrease in number and new smaller animals begin to appear requiring new technologies for hunting.

    The northern zone of Eurasia is composed of tundra and taiga (leafy and conifer forests), swamps, and lakes. The southern zone consists of drier areas in the Black Sea area and Ural Steppe zone; these areas are semi desert. Paleolithic hunters pursued mammoth, wild horse, bison, wild cattle, and rhinoceros. As these forms become extinct the only food for Mesolithic hunters to pursue is deer, elk, wild pig, rodents, birds, and fish. Thus, new game now requires new tools and a new technology needs to be developed to hunt the new species.

    New Technologies

    A new tool kit made from flint is developed by the Mesolithic hunters. These tools are small and dainty and usually made from flint but also made from bone. This contrasts to the large tools of the Paleolithic period. Also, a bow begins to be used and many bows have been found in Mesolithic sites.

    Fishing hooks have been found made of bone. These are thin and dainty. Many archaeologists believe the Mesolithic people used nets for fishing; however, nets are not preserved in the archaeological record. For larger sized fish, harpoons are used. Many harpoons have been found in swamps and lakes and are well preserved. Their length ranges from 5-6 cm and larger.

    A definite geographical distribution of areas for hunting and areas for fishing can be established. Hunting in the Mesolithic period occurs in the Dnieper, Don, and Volga River Valleys. These valleys then had the same geomorphology as now. Hunting also occurs in the Caucasus and in Central Asia. Whereas hunting takes place in northern areas, fishing occurs in areas to the south.

    Hunting in the Mesolithic is similar to hunting in the Paleolithic although microlithization is greater in the Mesolithic as is the use of flint. Microlithic blades are used as the first knives and microlithic pieces are placed in bone.

    Little is known about the Mesolithic period in Siberia but from the sites known, the material is different from material found in Europe. In Siberia microlithic usage is great; however, large tools resembling the Upper Paleolithic, even Mousterian, have also been preserved. Thus in Siberia, tools from the Upper Paleolithic exist alongside Mesolithic microliths.

    More Upper Paleolithic sites have been discovered in Soviet Eurasia than Mesolithic sites. Scholars think the Mesolithic population was either reduced or that the Upper Paleolithic traditions lasted longer. Local differentiations of stone and bone tools is great, but Professor Alexeev prefers not to speak of these cultures because specifics are not needed now. All areas of Soviet Eurasia can be determined by the degree of microlithization with the greatest microlithization in the Caucasus. The presence of bone is more common in Eastern Europe than in the Caucasus and Central Asia.

    In review we have the presence of bone in Eastern Europe, the presence of microliths and the sporadic usage of bone in Central Asia and the Caucasus, and the presence of microliths plus the preservation of large tool assemblages resembling Upper Paleolithic, even Mousterian, in Siberia. Possibly more large animals were present in Siberia such as the mammoth, wolf, rhinoceros, and reindeer. These animals became extinct in Europe by the end of the Paleolithic.

    These new technologies are produced in three great mesolithic provinces: 1) Eastern European Province with microlithic tools and extensive usage of bone; 2) Central Asia and Caucasus Province with the greatest presence of microlithic tools and small usage of bone; and 3) Siberian Province with the presence of microlithic tools as well as the preservation of large Paleolithic tools; however, there is no evidence of complex tools during the Mesolithic. Complex tools are found in the Neolithic period (Mesolithic in Siberia is not well known).

    Agriculture and Domestication

    The Mesolithic is a period of agriculture and domestication of animals. From the Iranian Plateau there have been found bones of domesticated sheep and seeds of cultivated plants; however, there is no existence of a productive economy.

    There have been many hypotheses regarding the domestication in Eurasia but the only study that can be confirmed is the domestication of a Paleolithic dog from a site in western Germany in the Rhine Valley (Oberkassel).

    Oberkassel, located in the Rhine Valley of western Germany, was excavated many years ago but the remains were studied only five years ago. The site produces the burials of two adults with Paleolithic implements, but the important find is half a jaw, the mandible, of a dog. Two molar teeth are in tact; the second molar larger than the first. This is a true sign of domestication typical for all breeds. The mandible dates to 12,000 BC.

    Alimov Cave is located in the Crimea and excavated 18-20 years ago by the Russian archaeologist, Demetri Alexandrovich Krainov 1. This site produces a sequence of layers from the Mesolithic period containing the bones of goat and pig. Krainov argues that the bones belong to domesticated forms and that pig and goat are first domesticated in the Crimea. Repeated studies by other scholars do not confirm Krainov's conclusion; the evidence isn't considered objective. Therefore, the only evidence of domestication in Eurasia is that of the dog from Oberkassel.

    Cemeteries and the Study of Race

    In the Upper Paleolithic, burials are usually single in number and found in caves and open air sites; the only cemetery found is that at Sungir 2. The presence of cemeteries usually is attributed only to the Mesolithic period. Also, during the Mesolithic, cemeteries are found in northern Africa, France, one in Germany, and in the Dnieper Valley in Russia.

    The skeletal remains from these Mesolithic cemeteries are flexed, not straight. This is the first archaeological confirmation of self consciousness; of man's awareness of his difference from other groups of living things.

    In the Mesolithic period, populations in European Russia exhibit the same physical traits as did the Paleolithic populations i.e. tall, thick bones, broad face, long hair, well developed nasal bones. Cromagnon 3, named after a cave in France, is a famous burial with the preserved skeleton of Upper Paleolithic man. The term "Cromagnon" refers to Upper Paleolithic people, but there are local variations. The Mesolithic people of eastern Europe are definitely descendants of Upper Paleolithic populations i.e. massive bones, tall, broad face, and well developed nasal bones. However, from Kostenki 4 the skeletal remains depict Mongoloid features similar to remains from Choukoutien and Eastern Asia.

    Afontova Gora II is located in Siberia and is the only site in Siberia to produce Upper Paleolithic remains. The find is a small piece of a child's skull, the central face and forehead, revealing a less developed nasal bone as contrasted to a strongly developed nasal bone for Europoids. This weak nasal bone is typical for Mongoloids.

    Thus the Mesolithic populations in European Russia are tall, thick boned, broad face, long hair, and well developed nasal bones.


    Attempts have been made to determine the longevity of early man. Henri Vallois 5, a Frenchman, upon examining twelve Zinjanthropus and Neandertal remains has determined the average lifespan to be 21.2 years. This low longevity rate could account for a slow rate of population increase. Valois projects the Upper Paleolithic population in France at 60,000, in Europe at 400-500,000, and in Siberia at 300,000. The people in Siberia had a more complicated social and economic system.

    Professor Alexeev disagrees with these figures and thinks that there were no more than 50,000 people for the whole territory of Europe with population figures for eastern Europe at 20-25,000. He thinks that one generation in the Mesolithic was not greater than 25-30,000.

    The Upper Paleolithic extends from 38/40,000-12,000 BC for a duration of 26/28,000 years with a longevity of appromixately 21 years equals 1,350 generations in Upper Paleolithic. The Mesolithic period ends 5/4,000 BC and lasted for 7/8,000 years with a longevity rate at 26/28 years equals 260/270 generations of Mesolithic people. This longer longevity rate means that the Mesolithic people could produce more offspring (however, the death rate, especially the child death rate is great). The projections are 50/60,000 population for eastern Europe and a little higher for Siberia. At the end of the Mesolithic, this figure increases twice.

    For the Mesolithic period fewer sites have been found in comparison to the large number of sites for the Paleolithic. Many sites have been lost by changes in river courses.

    Mesolithic Art

    The rich art of the Paleolithic is replaced by a Mesolithic art that is quite different. Upper Paleolithic cave art depicts colored drawings and expressive features of animals which appear to come alive upon the cave walls. A full range of color is used. Mesolithic art in contrast is monotonous, is schematic; no realistic figures are present and only the color red is used. This form is also found in north Africa and the northern Mediterranean. Neolithic art is also schematic.

    Another "Famous Dog Story"

    With a hint of glee in his eyes, Alexeev relates the following story: whenever his American friends visit him in his flat in Moscow, they sometimes like to speak in English. His dog, who is always at his side, remains in the room when the conversation is in Russian. But when his friends speak in English ... the dog leaves the room.

    Back (Chapter IV: Upper Paleolithic in Afro Eurasia)

    Next (Chapter VI: Neolithic in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter V

    1 For Dmitrii Aleksandrovich Krainov I find six listings from HOLLIS on-line but none appear to address Alimov Cave; however, a publication on the Volga River Valley and Oka River Valley might be a promising source:

    1972. "Drevneishaia istoriia Volgo-Okskogo mezhdurech'ia. Fat'ianovskaia kul'tura" published in Moskva: Nauka.[back]

    2 Sungir was described above in Lecture 3. References for Sungir are:

    1978. "Sungir': verkhnepaleoliticheskaia stoianka" by O.N. Bader; pugliched in Moskva: Nauka.

    1984. "Sungir': antropologischeskoe issledovanie" edited by A.A. Zubov; published in Moskva: Nauka.[back]

    3 For the kw Cromagnon search in HOLLIS, I found only one publication:

    1994. "Homo erectus, Neandertaler und Cromagnon: kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchungun zu Theorien der Entwicklung des modernen Menschen" by Sebastian J. Heiss. Published in Frankfurt; New York: P. Lang.

    According to Arutiunov, current opinion regarding Homo erectus, Nendertaler, and Cromagnon is as follows: Erectus is still very much ape like; Neandertaler is Sapiens but with some beast like features; and Cromagnon is quite like us.

    I agree that if we search for differences among the three groups, the above divisions apply. However, if instead of differences, we examine similarities, we shall see a strong resemblance among the groups. When I visited the Nairobi Museum in Kenya, I saw a cast of what was labelled Kenyapithacus. This creature had a skull which measured no longer than 3 cm.; yet I had no doubt that it looked like me - an uncanny feeling![back]

    4 Kostenki was discussed in lecture 3. Reconstruction of the skeletal remains produces a strong adult with a combination of morphological features. Most informing is a strong development around the nose that is not typical for Europoid but similar to east African populations; however, Negroid nasal bones are flat while these from Kostenki IV are strong.
    In this reference to Kostenki, Alexeev claims the skeletal remains have Mongoloid features. Therefore, the remains from Kostenki must have a combination of morphological features. Of importance is that Alexeev mentions Mongoloid features similar to remains from Choukoutien. Weidenreich's 1935? preliminary report is on the Sinanthropus population of Choukoutien. Thus at Kostenki is found a Europoid with some Negroid and some Mongoloid features. Arutiunov comments that the Upper Cave at Kostenki contains remains quite like modern humans.[back]

    5 The following publication by Henri Vallois and Hallam Movius is listed in HOLLIS:

    1952. "Catalogue des hommes fossiles, edite au nom de la "Commission pour l'Homme fossile de l'Union paleontologique internationale" by Henri V. Vallois and Hallam L. Movius; published in Alger.

    Chapter VI: Neolithic in Eurasia
    [Lecture 6 Delivered on 10 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This the sixth lecture in the series concentrates on the Neolithic period in Eurasia. In the (then) Soviet Union, the first Neolithic sites date to 4,000 BC which is later than dates from the Near East. Professor Alexeev begins the Neolithic with a discussion of Chokh Cave in the Caucasus, a site producing stone tools with the presence of domesticated goat and wheat. In discussing animal domestication, Alexeev describes the Dromedary (Arabian) and Bactrian camel as two different species which could mate; he dates the Dromedary to the second millennium BC and the Bactrian to the first millennium BC. with the proviso that the Bactrian bones were from cemeteries so possibly their domestication could have been earlier. The Przewalskii horse, now nearly extinct, is described and the origin of the domestic horse is placed not in Mongolia but in the Steppe area of Russia, specifically referencing bone remains from Vasilievka. Wild donkey, called Kulan, are still found in Turkmenistan where domesticated donkey remains have been discovered; they date to the second millennium BC.

    Domestication of plants in the Tigris Euphrates region is thought to have dated to the tenth millennium BC for grasses and ninth millennium BC for sheep; however, Alexeev dates both to no earlier than the ninth millennium BC, but states that the first usage of domesticated plants and animals took place in the Neolithic. In concluding this lecture Alexeev mentions how one can separate domestic species found in the archaeological record from non domesticated. Class ends with an American rejoinder to Alexeev's "famous dog story".

    A Neolithic Site in Eurasia

    As per Alexeev, ???Chokh Cave 1 is located in the Dagestan Mountain area in the northern Caucasus and was excavated by ??? H. Amirhanov 2. The altitude for the site is 7-800 meters above sea level with the cave located 30 meters above the road. The climate is dry and arid. Houses in this area are similar to those that have been found at high altitudes in the Caucasus in the Middle Ages i.e. they are made of stone and abut each other without an intermediate area between. There is both a Neolithic and Mesolithic area of houses. As well, a surrounding wall has been found; possibly to pen domesticated animals.

    Chokh Cave has been occupied for 3,500-4,000 years with only short interruptions of vacancy. Stratification of the cave shows no break in the transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic. The layers are one inch thick for the Mesolithic and one inch thick for the Neolithic. The layers do not differ, only the implements found in the layers differ. Tools found are made of stone in an oval shape. Professor Alexeev interprets these tools as grinders for seeds and therefore indicators of agriculture . In the Caucasus there is an absence of good flint, therefore many different kinds of stones are used as tools. At Chokh Cave a tradition of microliths is preserved in the Neolithic layer but microliths are also found in the Mesolithic layer. Bone is seldom used for tools in the Caucasus, but here in the Mesolithic layer one has been found with two holes; possibly the handle of a spear. Also, small bone arrowheads have been discovered. Several clay vessels have been found in the Neolithic layer as well as pieces of pottery.

    In the cave, remains of goat have been discovered, the breed of which differs from that now bred in the northern Caucasus. This means that goat has evolved into a different species . Evidence of wheat has also been found and the strain is typical of what presently grows in the area i.e. a hearty strain that grows in mountainous areas and requires little water. Small wheat fields can still be seen.

    Domestication of Camel, Horse, and Donkey

    Camel typical for central Eurasia are of two types: Dromedary (Arabian) and Bactrian. The Dromedary camel has one hump, is small, very fast (some can run as fast as a horse) and can carry 120-140 kilos for many days. Dromedary camels are found in north Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, India, and the mountains of Iran but they are known only as a domesticated animal i.e. have not been found in the wild state.

    The Bactrian camel has two humps, is larger, stronger, and slower than the Dromedary and can carry 200-250 kilos for many days. The Bactrian camel is shorter-legged and more ponderous than the Dromedary and grows an enormously long and thick winter coat which is shed in blanket-like masses in spring. The Bactrian camel continues to be used throughout Central Asia and is also found in the Altai Mountain area of Mongolia and in Uzbekistan. In these areas Bactrian camel is found in its domesticated conditions but also exists in a wild state in some Central Asian deserts. In the wild, Bactrian camel has a smaller hump than the domesticate and the long hair doesn't occupy nearly so much of the body mass. The color of the wild species is more rufous and the ears and muzzle are shorter.

    Camels have been of great importance in ancient times and they are referred to in written sources. The Dromedary (Arabian) species is mentioned in Scripture where 1,000 camels are said to have formed part of the wealth of Patriarch Job. Camels also formed part of the gift Pharaoh gave to Abraham.

    Dromedary and Bactrian camel are considered two different species; however they can mate. The offspring of the Dromedary/Bactrian camel are called Nar and are used in Central Asia where the Dromedary and Bactrian lines come geographically closest. The domestication of each species was a separate process.

    In the Arabian Peninsula, the domestication of Bactrian camel occurs in the second millennium BC. This is the Bronze epoch but in these desert areas Neolithic traditions still are preserved. There is speculation that the Dromedary camel developed at an earlier date i.e. in the fourth millennium BC, but this cannot be confirmed by the bone remains which date to the second millennium BC.

    In Central Asia and the East, the Bactrian camel is domesticated at a later date. Bones from Outer Mongolia date to 1,000 BC but they are from cemeteries so possibly their domestication is earlier; perhaps second millennium or earlier. The domestication of the camel changed the life processes of the early people. It allowed for trade and exchange and provided relationships between different tribes.

    The wild horse is found in eastern Mongolia and is known to have lived in the Gobi Desert. Legends about wild horses have been known from Chinese sources, but it wasn't until 1868 when Przewalskii killed one and brought the skin and skull to Europe that a true specimen was able to be observed. Thus a new species was fixed and named the Przewalskii horse. This species lived in Mongolia until the 1960's; now the species is extinct in the wild and only found in zoos. It was believed that all modern forms of horse are derived from the Przewalskii horse but it is more likely that another form of the wild horse survived in northern Eurasian areas until the beginning of the 19th century. The Tarpan horse of the Russian Steppes, now extinct, is somewhat similar to the Przewalskii horse, however, chromosome numbers differ. The Tarpan also could have been a form of the modern horse.

    In Europe, wild horses are abundant in the Neolithic. From archaeological bone remains and from graphic representations, the wild horse is small in size and heavy in build with a large head and a rough shaggy mane and tail like the recently extinct Tarpans or the Mongolian wild pony (Przewalskii's horse).

    There is an absence of the horse from Egyptian monuments prior to the beginning of the 18th century BC and nothing older in Old Semitic (Mesopotamian) literature . In literary sources there is no reference to the horse as being indigenous to Arabia prior to the beginning of the fifth century AD; however, there are many references in pre-Islamic poetry.

    Many scholars agree that the original source of the finest equine blood is Africa, still the home of the largest variety of wild Equidae. Then the horse passed into Europe and at an early time began to be blended with the indigenous Celtic species. After Europe the horse passed into Western Asia i.e. the indigenous Mongolian species or Przewalskii's horse. Not until a later period did the horse reach Arabia.

    According to Alexeev, the origin of the domestic horse could be in Africa or Mongolia, but from research conducted 10-15 years ago, the domestication of the horse appears to have been in the Steppe areas of Russia.

    Vasilievka, a Neolithic site in the mid Dnieper Valley, was excavated 10-15 years ago and reveals several skulls of horses. The report was first published in Russian journals and then in European journals. Specialists agree that the finds from Vasilievka are examples of the domesticated horse. The site dates to the fourth millennium BC. The domesticated horse (and camel) were not used for meat, milk, or wool but rather for loading and riding. The first horse was used as a loader animal for transport. An early relief in Iraq which dates to the third millennium BC, depicts the horse as a loading animal.

    Remains of the domesticated horse only have been found at Vasilievka. That the horse might have been domesticated at the end of the Paleolithic is an "old idea". The horse was not used for riding because the wild horse is dangerous; the only use was as a loading animal.

    The horse is depicted in Upper Paleolithic cave paintings and in stone and bone sculpting from a number of caves in France and Spain. In pictures of the horse, a bridle is represented; however some scholars claim the bridle is an anatomical trait . Some scholars believe the horse was used for meat. In many different areas, specific breeds of horse like the thoroughbred are found.

    Donkey replaced the horse in southern areas of Eurasia which were very mountainous. The donkey is used from China to Spain; in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Scholars agree that the wild species which preceded the domestic donkey was the Kulan which now is found in southeast Turkmenia but lived at an earlier time in Iran and Afghanistan. The time of domestication is unknown but Richard Meadow has discovered domesticated donkey in Turkmenia dating to the second millennium BC.

    Domestication of Plants

    Tools specific to agriculture have been found in northern Arabia in the same location where sheep and goat were domesticated. Alexeev thinks that perhaps agriculture dates 1,000 years before the domestication of animals. These tools specific to agriculture were used to cut wild plants. Sickles have been found in the Nile Valley dating to the twelfth millennium BC and in Iraq dating to the tenth millennium BC; however, there are no traces of domesticated crops. The sickles, therefore, were used for collecting wild plants. In the Tigris Euphrates Valley there is a date of the tenth millennium BC for grasses and a date of the ninth millennium BC for sheep with a hypothesis that real agriculture did not originate until the ninth millennium BC and preceded the domestication of animals . Now scholars believe that both are contiguous and present in the Near East not later than 9,000 BC.

    The first usage of domesticated plants and animals is limited and took place not in the Mesolithic but in the Neolithic. In the Neolithic there is a broad usage of cultivated plants and animals in many regions of the old world, not only in the Near East. In China, wheat and rice appear at a later date than the domesticates of the Near East. In Tibet, rice appears in the eighth millennium BC and pig appears in the fourth millennium BC. The Mesolithic ends in 5,000 BC.

    Signs of Domestication

    The signs of domestication in plants and animals are rather specific. In plants the size of grain differs; domesticated seeds are large while wild seeds are diminished in size. Also the protein content as measured by the amount of sugar differs; a low sugar content is found in domesticated plants and a high content in cultivated plants. In the mountains of Tibet, in a closed valley, there are plants with a high sugar content which are used to feed cattle. Marco Polo from northern China in the twelfth century wrote of such an extraordinary vegetation. Likely these grasses have a high sugar content.

    In animals, domestication produces exterior differences rather than morphological. For goat and sheep its the thickness of horns. In pigs it's the thickness of tusks. Taking a cross section of horn or bone there is an interior channel which contains hemoglobin. More hemoglobin is needed for more activity i.e. the wild horse. Likewise, domesticated forms don't move as fast so they need less hemoglobin. Therefore for the domestic forms of sheep, goat, and horse, the interior channel is narrow and the bone tissue thick. For dog, domestication is indicated by the presence of an enlarged second molar.

    Neolithic Conclusions

    The Neolithic begins when the Mesolithic ends. General agreement places the end of the Mesolithic at 5,000 BC. In the Soviet Union, the Neolithic begins later than in the Near East. In the Soviet Union, the first sites date to 4,000 BC. The Bronze Age in the Soviet Union dates to 3,000 BC (the second half). During the Neolithic in the Soviet Union, there is a productive economy in the south while in the north there is still a dependency on hunting, fishing, and gathering. During the Neolithic, there are a variety of different cultures in the Soviet Union; however, many tribes continue to preserve their Mesolithic culture.

    An American Rejoinder to Alexeev's "Famous Dog Story"
    [It is the end of class sometime in July, 1991]

    Student: Professor Alexeev, I also have a dog.

    Alexeev: (with amusement) Yes. Yes.

    Student: My dog is very huge (height gestured with right hand). Whenever I take him for a walk, he walks me. One evening as I was seated in my chair reading, my dog was seated on the floor at my feet.

    Alexeev: (with pride) My dog sits on the bed!

    Student: My daughter enters the room and I instruct her to have a seat and to speak to the dog in Russian. She speaks to the dog in Russian and guess what he does?

    Class: He leaves the room!

    Student: No. No. The dog sits up and then walks over to where my daughter is sitting, places his head in her lap, and looks up at her with huge puppy dog eyes.

    Alexeev: (very excitedly) See! See! The dog understands the beauty of the Russian language.

    [At this time Alexeev begins speaking in Russian while dramatically gesturing with his arms. He then speaks in English, but without the same enthusiasm. As Alexeev walks from the blackboard to his desk, the student raises her hand]

    Student: Oh Professor! I'm sorry. I forget to mention. My daughter was eating a piece of chocolate.

    Alexeev: Humph. Humph.

    [The end of class]

    [Lecture 7 delivered 15 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    Lecture 7 is a continuation of the Neolithic period in Eurasia. The Natufian Culture in the eastern Mediterranean is presented as a special Neolithic Culture with the presence of agriculture and some domestic animals but without pottery. Instead, stone vessels are used. Jericho, possibly one of the earliest settlements excavated, dates to the eighth millennium BC. Professor Alexeev recognizes the Natufian Culture in the eastern Mediterranean, but states that a Neolithic Period without ceramics is present elsewhere as well. Kathleen Kenyon, leader of the Jericho expedition, claims stone walls at the site indicate the existence of a town. Ofer Bar Yosef sees the wall as the remains of an ancient dam.

    The Tripolie Culture, located in the Ukraine in the Black Sea area, is a production economy of husbandry and agriculture which leads to the development of tools. Ceramics, although present, are not painted or decorated. Settlement patterns are in the arrangement of small houses surrounding a large shelter, likely to house animals. The common house form, the tholos, is made of clay brick, and serves both as a house and a grave. The site of Geoksyr in Turkmenistan is a settlement (there are no skeletons buried between tholoses) containing several tholoses.

    Burial practices from Siberia are simple, in soil, and seldom marked; no houses have been found. Paleodemography for the Neolithic is the subject with which Professor Alexeev ends this lecture; if numbers from this section are applied to the previous section on paleodemography in Chapter 5, demographics for the Soviet territory during the Neolithic can be extrapolated.

    Natufian Culture

    Alexeev continues: the Natufian Culture 3 is located in the eastern Mediterranean in Lebanon and Israel. In the Upper Paleolithic/ Mesolithic transition, this special culture begins to grow and continues its Upper Paleolithic traditions of hunting, fishing, and gathering with fishing being the most importance source of food. The presence of goat has been found in the Carmel Mountains. The Natufian Culture is of advanced development and has created stone vessels of multidimensional size; some are greater than one meter while others are very small. In the New World, stone vessels are found in addition to pottery. Here in the eastern Mediterranean, stone vessels are of great importance while ceramics are not present until the mid Neolithic (the use of pottery leads to a different preparation of meat and grain). As to an explanation of why pottery is not present, possibly there is no explanation or perhaps the stone tradition is so strong it overshadows the need for pottery. A Neolithic period without ceramics is present in the eastern Mediterranean but is also present in other areas as well 4.

    At the site of Jericho, excavated in the 1950's by an English expedition led by Dr. Kathleen Kenyon 5, a large site, possibly a town, extends for 10-15 hectares. This settlement dates to the eighth millennium BC and indicates the presence of agriculture and some animals. Kenyon considers this settlement to be a town based on the existence of stone walls. However, Ofer Bar Yosef formerly of Jerusalem University and now at Harvard believes these walls are the remains of an ancient dam constructed to create a lake for animals and for irrigation.

    Neolithic Ceramics & Tools

    Professor Hans-Georg Bandi 6 at Bern University claims all important technological developments begin with ceramics. With ceramics food can be transported in prepared form; ceramic vessels can be used for the preservation of water, meat, fish, cereals, vegetables, and fruits. Alexeev states that ceramics are also used as a "canvas" upon which the artist drew designs. The presence of ceramics changed everyday life.

    In the Neolithic period the previous tool making technology of working flints and stones is continued but the flints now exhibit a more sophisticated technique. For bone the same form is preserved and no achievements have been made. The number of bone tools begin to decline because flint is more sophisticated.

    Tripolie Culture

    The Tripolie Culture (Cucuteni-Trypillia) 7 is located in southern Ukraine in the Black Sea area, in Moldavia, and partly in Romania. The term "Tripolie" is the name of the village where the first culture was discovered by archaeologist P. Hvoiko. This is a culture of a combined production economy of husbandry and agriculture which leads to the development of tools. The Tripolie Culture exists from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age from the Soviet Union to the west coast of the Sea of Azov. Bones of oxen have been discovered with the remains of a plow. The first plows were made of bone; possibly stones were tied to the plow to make it heavy. The presence of a plow in the archaeological record cannot appear before the presence of domesticated animals. Tripolie ceramics are quite good and well ornamented with spirals etc.

    [Southwestern Ukraine is mountainous; the southern Ukrainian Steppes are monotonous. For the Neolithic people of northern Russia, new forms of activity lead to new housing types and settlements. Many populations live on the previous modes of development (i.e. housing types) until the end of the Neolithic Period and continue as farmers. They have ceramics but the ceramics are bad ceramics i.e. they are not painted and are decorated with primitive ornaments such as diagonal lines or, as in Siberia, with an array of dots. No evidence of houses have been found. Possibly these Neolithic people of northern Russia lived in the same type of hut as did the Upper Paleolithic people and possibly their huts were not as well constructed as those in Upper Paleolithic times. There is an absence of bone from the great animals, so possibly wood was used in construction; wood preserves badly.

    In contrast to the Neolithic people of northern Russia, peoples in the southern areas of the Caucasus and Central Asia create a pottery that is decorated and painted. Painted pottery is also found in Arabia, the Middle East, China, Central Asia, and the Balkan Peninsula. In the 1920's and 1930's the existence of painted and patterned pottery indicated, to scholars, strong genetic relationships of people in a given area i.e. same pottery indicates same ethnography. Now we know people were very different i.e. the same pottery designs do not indicate the same ethnographic populations. Possibly there was a great diffusion from one center or a tradition appearing in different independent centers. Ornamentation of circles as a design on pottery appears in one area (southern Ukraine, Moldavia, and somewhat in Romania i.e. area of Tripolie Culture) and clustered right and left square angles appear in the Caucasus and in Central Asia.

    The Tripolie Culture constructed houses of wood but they also used clay brick. This use of clay brick is an invention of the Neolithic Period. There is no use of this house type today. The Tripolie people were agriculturalists but they also had a strong usage of animals. They were not strong herders, but rather used animals in agriculture and herded cows, sheep, and pig. The presence of pig is well known in the Neolithic Period because they are ecologically adaptive. There is no indication of horse; only a small number of horse bones have been found and there is no indication that the horse had been domesticated.

    Settlement patterns for the Tripolie Culture are in the form of small houses arranged in a circle around the largest of the houses. This great house likely sheltered the animals. These settlements are located in the mountainous areas where the ancient people had their agricultural fields. This location is convenient and useful; all time needed could be spent in the field. Vegetables and fruits are among the crops that are cultivated; there is no indication of wheat. The Tripolie people continued to gather wild plants; the number of cultivated plants is not great. This tradition of gathering is preserved through the Neolithic and into the Middle Ages.

    In the Caucasus 8 in the pre Neolithic, both caves and stone houses are used as primitive dwellings. In the Neolithic, there are houses made of clay bricks. These are approximately eight feet in height and are called "tholos". The tholos is also used as a grave. As graves, each contain 5-20 bodies. The "living tholos" i.e. house is distributed in Iran and in Turkmenistan and other mountain areas of Central Asia. They are never found on the Arabian Peninsula. These are areas of the same cultural tradition.

    In the northern areas of Russia, people are buried in soil fifty centimeters deep. In some cases stone markers indicate graves, in other cases there are no visible markers. In the Tripolie Culture cemeteries are located not far from the village i.e. between the village and the fields. Graves are marked by stones. In the Neolithic Period because of a population increase, single graves are an exception. Graves range from 30/40 burials to several hundred. In the Early Neolithic, graves do not exceed 30-40; there are only two cases where graves contained more. The Tripolie settlements are replicated as cemeteries. In distinguishing a living tholos from a cemetery tholos, the living tholos has a larger area and in cemeteries there are no skeletal remains between tholoses.

    Geoksyr is located on the border of Iran and Turkmenistan in a desert area. The vegetation is sparse and the only rich time is in spring. At Geoksyr there is a hill with a surface height of 11-12 meters and several tholos with the diameter of 4-5 meters. There are single skeletons buried between the tholos. Thus Geoksyr is a settlement and not a cemetery.

    Neolithic in Siberia

    In southern Siberia, nothing definite is known regarding housing but much is known pertaining to cemeteries. There are no local differences in cemeteries. The graves are simple, in soil, and very seldom are marked. Southern Siberia differs from the north area and shows a similarity to Mongolia and southern China. There is much jade which is used both for art and for small implements such as arrows. Southern Siberia is similar to the north in economic development; however, the only evidence comes from cemeteries. Little is known about the social forms of life of the Neolithic people. Some scholars claim a matrilineal social form based on the presence of female figurines and from ethnographic data. Others claim a patrilineal social form because husbandry and agriculture require lots of labor; labor by men. As per Alexeev: "the New Archaeologist Lewis Binford 9 should believe not only in fact; he should consider the subtleties about fact.
    Neolithic Populations

    The average life expectancy during the Neolithic is 30-35 years, more often 32-35. From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic there is a small increase of 3-5 years. The mortality of children continues to be high. This is based on no actual objective facts for calculations, but rather only on previous considerations. Russian Europe in the Mesolithic is 25-50,000 and Siberia in the 16th century is 300,000, the same as North America before the whites appeared. In Siberia the economy in the 16th century was the same as in the Neolithic. Thus there are 500,000 people in the Soviet territory 10 but this number is an example of a preliminary nonobjective conclusion.

    [Lecture 8 delivered 17 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This eighth lecture completes the Neolithic period in Eurasia with a discussion of the "dolmen" type burial practice in the Caucasus. Neolithic art is presented as an incorporation of Upper Paleolithic (realistic) with Mesolithic (schematic) and the geographic areas of the Ukraine, the Caucasus, and Central Asia are emphasized. Neolithic rock art with a focus on animal drawings and sculptings in bone, stone, and clay depicting people of Mongoloid and Europoid ethnography are highlighted. Professor Alexeev concludes the discussion of the Neolithic Period with a brief discussion of V. Gordon Childe and his theory of the "Neolithic Revolution".

    The remaining portion of this lecture introduces the Bronze Age in Eurasia. The Bronze Age begins 1,500 years later than in the Near East while in northern Siberia, the Neolithic tradition continues during the Bronze and Iron Ages and lasts until the 16-17 century. The concept of a new age, the Eneolithic, which exists between the Neolithic and Bronze Age is presented and reflects one of Alexeev's intellectual tools i.e. the examination of borders or the restructuring of time frames. Bronze is examined as an alloy of copper with different additions, each addition reflecting a different migratory group in the European and Asiatic Steppe region.

    The Pit Grave Culture is presented as the group which replaces the Tripolie Culture in the Ukrainian Steppe in the mid third millennium BC. and the "kurgan" type burial structure is described. Geographically, kurgans have been found from Romania to the Steppe areas of the Ukraine. Morphologically, the Pit Grave people are tall with a broad face and a strong superstructure in the region of the forehead i.e. Europoid without a Mongoloid mixture.

    The Afanasyevo Culture appears several centuries later than the Pit Grave in a small area in the Upper Yenissei River Valley. Physically the Afanasyevo resemble the Pit Grave i.e. Europoid without a Mongoloid mixture.

    Recently "Soviet" archaeological exploration and study has been conducted in Mongolia. Results from Mongolia are similar to the results discovered by Chinese archaeologists excavating in eastern Turkistan and the Xingjiang Province of China 11.

    The language for both the Pit Grave and Afanasyevo is Indo-European. Origins of the Indo-European language is a tricky problem; Russian scholars Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov and Tamaz Valerianovich Gamkrelidze think the Indo-European language formed in Turkey. Colin Renfrew, a Cambridge University scholar, also argues for Turkey as the homeland of the Indo-European in the eighth millennium BC and links its spread with the diffusion of agriculture. Professor Alexeev disagrees with Renfrew because 1) there is no evidence for such an early language and 2) agriculture was invented in the Near East. Alexeev argues: "likely the origins of language are polycentric".

    Neolithic Burials

    Dolmen 12, typical burials for England, are large vertical stones supporting a horizontal slab. Dolmen are located in a wide area extending from Spain to Japan including Denmark, Europe, France, Germany, Switzerland, and South Korea. Similarly, in the Caucasus such large stones are used as graves. In the Caucasus a small house (grave) is made of large stones with a hole in the center of one stone. Some of these graves are very large i.e. 2 meters by 1/1.5 meters while others are quite small. The height is usually 2 meters. In this type of structure, many skeletal remains have been found; individuals are not separately buried. Dolmen are erected in the northern Caucasus probably because stone is plentiful in these mountain areas.

    Stonehenge, located in England is a "kromlech" with stones arranged in a circle. Most people believe Stonehenge was an astronomic observatory to mark the occurrences of solstices etc.13.

    Neolithic Art

    In the Upper Paleolithic, art is rich with realistic figures of animals and people, especially female figurines. In the Mesolithic, the art is a schematization of drawings. In the Neolithic there is a return to the old traditions of the Upper Paleolithic i.e. to realistic drawings, as well as preserving some schematization from the Mesolithic. Different areas produce different forms and styles.

    Ceramics are also used as works of art. In southern European Russia north of the Black Sea (Ukraine), the Tripolie Culture uses a simple ornamentation, the circle. In the Caucasus and Central Asia the main design consists of clustered right angles, but circles are present in both locales. In some cases, ceramics are used to depict animal designs as well as for depicting human faces. From the Far East comes a human face, possibly a mask, known as the Siberian Nefertite. Clay, not only used for pots, is also is used for sculpture. In the Upper Paleolithic, only one clay figurine of a human has been found, but in the Neolithic Period clay is used widely to depict animals, human faces, and male and female figurines. These male and female figurines are similar to those from the Near East; circles are used to decorate the female figurines and triangles are used to decorate male figurines. Female fertility figurines are also typical for Turkey and are located from Iraq to Central Asia and from the Caucasus to Turkey. In the Tripolie Culture, the female figurines are also decorated; however, this culture is not closely related to the Near East, but rather to the Balkan and central European Cultures. Some scholars think the northern Black Sea area has been influenced by the culture of Turkey. There is still speculation.

    Rock Art, a tradition found in mountain areas, begins in the Neolithic and continues to the Middle Ages. Many Neolithic rock art drawings are covered by other drawings. The most typical animal depicted is the elk (moose); however, this animal was not the one most hunted. Bones of elk have been found but they are not numerous. Possibly elk have an importance in Neolithic religion. In Central Asia and the Caucasus, the most common drawings are of wild mountain sheep and wild goat.

    Sculptures in the Neolithic period are made of bone, as is true of sculptures in the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic; however, in the Neolithic they are also made from stone and clay. One sculpting depicts a Mongoloid face (see Martinov's Ancient Art of Northern Asia 14) while others depict typical European faces. Flat pieces of bone, commonly used for harpoons, is also used for the sculpting of a horse. Both realistic and schematic motifs are mixed.

    Pieces of sculptures from southern European Russia are similar to the Tripolie Culture and date to the same period. Reconstruction of skeletal remains from southern European Russia around the Black Sea depict Europoid features.

    Neolithic Revolution

    V. Gordon Childe in his book The Dawn of Civilization 15 develops a theory he calls "The Neolithic Revolution". Earlier, he published a booklet in the second World War entitled "How Labour Governs; A Study of Workers' Representation in Australia" 16. Childe's career lasted from the 1920's to the 1960's during which he remained a consistent Marxist.

    "The Neolithic Revolution" has become an accepted theory and details a transition to a production economy, an increase in population, an increase in labor, an increase in the longevity of life, and a transition to a higher development.

    Childe's 10 criteria for the Neolithic Revolution are as follows:

    A dense population which is more populated than any previous settlement;

    Enough surplus production to support a specialized craft class and other non producers of food;

    Taxes which are paid by the primary producers;

    Monumental architecture;

    Formation of a ruling class;

    A system of writing or recording of administrative functions;

    Calendrics; arithmetic and geometry;

    Artistic craftsmen;

    Foreign trade in luxury goods;

    Establishment of a political entity which guarantees security.

    Adapting Childe's attributes of state formation which were based on the teachings of Marx and Lenin, I have devised the following non Marxist, non Communistic, and non totalitarian factors based on a free market democratic form of republic:

    Class stratification based on control of information, education, wealth, and ideology;

    Economy based on redistribution or on redistribution in conjunction with personal gain;

    An ideology (either economic or religion) with which a state holds people in awe;

    Force, either coercive and backed with military might, or ideological and backed by priestly control of the supernatural;

    Agriculture and metallurgy as technological uses of basic resources;

    Trade for the purpose of acquiring necessary resources and luxury goods, as well as for maintenance of peace and preservation of a market for indigenously produced goods;

    A system which records credit and debit for the state as well as for the individual;

    Products of efflorescence to include writing, monumental architecture, art, warfare, computers, and other forms of global communication and "high" technology;

    Presence of a merchant class either representing the state or operating for personal gain;

    A permanent locale usually consisting of a major city or town, lesser villages, and colonies which provide necessary resources; this geographic attribute currently has undergone a remarkably sudden change and now approaches what might be referred to as a global state.

    The presence, over time, of a natural movement between a beneficent state where individual freedoms are preserved and a coercive state which is backed by force and centralization; this movement can flow in the opposite direction - form a strong centralization to decentralization.

    Back (Chapter V: Mesolithic in Eurasia)

    Next (Chapter VII: Mesolithic in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter VI

    1 More research is needed on Chokh Cave.[back]

    2 H. Amirhanov needs to be researched further.

    This is not a scientific conclusion. The presence of grinders without the presence of seeds simply indicates the presence of grinders, not the presence of agriculture.

    Not necessarily! The presence of a different species could indicate transhumance i.e. the new species arrived from elsewhere.

    Arutiunov confirms this statement commenting that in the 18th century BC it was the Hyksos who invaded Egypt and brought along their horses. The Behistun relief is at Persepolis.

    Arutiunov confirms that the horse was domesticated in the 4th millennium BC or possibly even earlier; but not later.

    Arutiunov also thinks the bridle is an anatomic feature.

    According to Arutiunov, the Kulan is a wild species of donkey; however, the Nubian wild ass is a more probable ancestor of the domestic ass.

    A good reference by Richard Meadow regarding the domestication of the donkey is:

    1986. "Equids in the ancient world" by Richard Meadow; published in Wiesbaden: Reichert.

    Arutiunov comments that the completion of domestication took at least 1,000 years.[back]

    3 Two recent studies of the Natufian Culture are:

    c1991. "The Natufian culture in the Levant" edited by Ofer Bar-Yosef & Francois Valla; published in Ann Arbor, Mich.: International Monographs in Prehistory.

    1995. "Natufian chipped lithic assemblage: from Sunakh near Petra, southern Jordan" by Charlott Hoffmann Pedersen; published in Copenhagen: Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Near Eastern Studies.

    Arutiunov dates the Natufian Culture ca 10-8 millennia BC.[back]

    4 Arutiunov states that a Neolithic without pottery is present in South America and north Africa.[back]

    5 For Kenyon at Jericho there are two relevant texts:

    1957. "Digging up Jericho: The Results of the Jericho excavations, 1952-1956" published in New York: Praeger.

    1984? "Excavations at Jericho, 1960-1983" with contributions by Elizabeth Crowfoot et al.; published in London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.[back]

    6 Although none of the texts listed in HOLLIS specifically reference ceramics, the following texts might prove informative:

    1947. "Die Schweiz zur Rentierzeit, Kulturgeschichte der Rentierjager am Ende der Eiszeit" by Hans-Georg Bandi: publication information: Frauenfeld, Huber.

    A recent festschrift commemorating Bandi's birthday is: 1985. "Jagen und Sammeln: Festschrift fur Hans-Georg Bandi zum 65. Geburtstag (3. September 1985): gewidmet von den Mitarbeitern des Bernischen Historischen Museums, des Seminars fur Urgeschichte der Universitat Bern, sowie von Freunden und Fachkollegen im In- und Ausland" herausgegeben von Rudolf Fellmann, Georg Germann und Karl Zimmermann; published in Bern: Stampfli & Cie.[back]

    7 For additional information on the Tripolie (Cucuteni-Trypillia) Culture see Lecture 12. The following four references are listed in HOLLIS regarding the Tripolie Culture:

    1979. "Arta culturii Cucuteni" by Vladimir Dumitrescu; published in Cucuresti: "Meridiane".

    1984. "Formarea si clasificarea grupelor de stil Ab si B ale ceramicii pictate Cucuteni-Tripolie" by Anton Nitu; published in Iasi: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania.

    1984. "The Cucuteni-Tripolye culture: a study in technology and the origins of complex society" by Linda Ellis; published in Oxford, England: B.A.R.

    1989. "Rannii etap tripol-skoi sul'tury na territorii Ukrainy" by Vladimir G. Zbenovich; published in Kiev: Nauk. Dumka.

    Arutiunov dates the Tripolie Culture to ca 4-3 millennia BC. He also confirms that the geographical extent of the Tripolie Culture is South Ukraine, Moldavia, and partly Romania. The Tripolie people, as per Arutiunov, lived in houses constructed both of wood and clay.[back]

    8 The culture located in southern Caucasus or Georgia is called the Trialeti Culture.[back]

    9 Lewis Binford has two recent publications:

    1983. "Working at Archaeology" published in New York: Academic Press.

    1989. "Debating Archaeology" published in San Diego: Academic Press. [back]

    10 From the Lecture 5 section on paleodemography, we have: "projections are 50/60,000 population for eastern Europe and a little higher for Siberia. At the end of the Mesolithic, this figure increases twice". Thus if we assume populations in Siberia were 60/65,000 with one increase at 120/130,000 and a second increase at 240/260,000 then a Neolithic population of 300,000, the same as the 16th century population is not out of line.[back]

    11 V. Mair's recent excavations in Xingjiang reveal the presence of ";Caucasian" or what Alexeev would call Europoid.[back]

    12 Two recent publications on Dolmen include: 1990. "Dolmen: architecture preistoriche in Europa" by Mirella Cipolloni Samop; published in Roma; De Luca edizioni d'arte.

    1993. "Les dolmens: societes neolithiques et pratiques funeraires: les sepultures collectives d'Europe occidentale" by Claude Masset; published in Paris: Editions Errance.[back]

    13 Arutiunov comments that Druids are purely Celtic and modern Druids claim Stonehenge for their rituals but Stonehenge was definitely pre-Celtic.[back]

    14 Anatolii Ivanovich Martynov's text is entitled:

    1991. "The Ancient Art of Northern Asia"; translated into English by Demitri B. Shimkin and Edith M. Shimkin and published in Urbana by the University of Illinois Press.[back]

    15 Full bibliographic reference for Childe's text is:

    1973. "The dawn of European civilization" by V. Gordon Childe; 6th edition revised; published in Frogmore, Herfordshire: Paladin.[back]

    16 Reference for this booklet (pamphlet) is:

    1923. "How labour governs; a study of workers; representation in Australia" by V.G. Childe; published in London: The Labour publishing company limited.

    1964. "How labour governs: a study of Australia"; by V. Gordon Childe; edited and with a forward by F.B. Smith; published in Melbourne: Melbourne University Press and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    COMMENT: Alexeev mentions this pamphlet to illustrate that in 1923 Childe's interest were Marxist i.e. labor and workers. Usually American scholars refer to Childe as someone who began his career as a non Marxist only to become deeply influenced by the Russian Revolution and the ideology of Lenin.

    Chapter VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia
    [Lecture 8 delivered 17 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This eighth lecture completes the Neolithic period in Eurasia with a discussion of the "dolmen" type burial practice in the Caucasus. Neolithic art is presented as an incorporation of Upper Paleolithic (realistic) with Mesolithic (schematic) and the geographic areas of the Ukraine, the Caucasus, and Central Asia are emphasized. Neolithic rock art with a focus on animal drawings and sculptings in bone, stone, and clay depicting people of Mongoloid and Europoid ethnography are highlighted. Professor Alexeev concludes the discussion of the Neolithic Period with a brief discussion of V. Gordon Childe and his theory of the "Neolithic Revolution".

    The remaining portion of this lecture introduces the Bronze Age in Eurasia. The Bronze Age begins 1,500 years later than in the Near East while in northern Siberia, the Neolithic tradition continues during the Bronze and Iron Ages and lasts until the 16-17 century. The concept of a new age, the Eneolithic, which exists between the Neolithic and Bronze Age is presented and reflects one of Alexeev's intellectual tools i.e. the examination of borders or the restructuring of time frames. Bronze is examined as an alloy of copper with different additions, each addition reflecting a different migratory group in the European and Asiatic Steppe region.

    The Pit Grave Culture is presented as the group which replaces the Tripolie Culture in the Ukrainian Steppe in the mid third millennium BC. and the "kurgan" type burial structure is described. Geographically, kurgans have been found from Romania to the Steppe areas of the Ukraine. Morphologically, the Pit Grave people are tall with a broad face and a strong superstructure in the region of the forehead i.e. Europoid without a Mongoloid mixture.

    The Afanasyevo Culture appears several centuries later than the Pit Grave in a small area in the Upper Yenissei River Valley. Physically the Afanasyevo resemble the Pit Grave i.e. Europoid without a Mongoloid mixture.

    Recently "Soviet" archaeological exploration and study has been conducted in Mongolia. Results from Mongolia are similar to the results discovered by Chinese archaeologists excavating in eastern Turkistan and the Xingjiang Province of China 1.

    The language for both the Pit Grave and Afanasyevo is Indo-European. Origins of the Indo-European language is a tricky problem; Russian scholars Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov and Tamaz Valerianovich Gamkrelidze think the Indo-European language formed in Turkey. Colin Renfrew, a Cambridge University scholar, also argues for Turkey as the homeland of the Indo-European in the eighth millennium BC and links its spread with the diffusion of agriculture. Professor Alexeev disagrees with Renfrew because 1) there is no evidence for such an early language and 2) agriculture was invented in the Near East. Alexeev argues: "likely the origins of language are polycentric".

    Alexeev's Introduction

    The transition from the end of the Neolithic to the Bronze Age shows different dates for different geographical areas. In the Near East, populations begin to use copper and bronze in the fourth millennium BC. This is also true for the Nile Valley. But in Central Asia and the southern territories of Eurasia, the Neolithic lasts until the end of the third millennium BC. The end of the Neolithic is 1,500 years later in Eurasia than in the Near East. In northern Siberia the Neolithic tradition continues during the Bronze and Iron Age and survives until the 16-17 century when the territory is invaded by the Russians.

    The transition to copper and bronze takes place in local areas of Russia and south Siberia and is a slow process, not a sudden invention. The use of bronze is not a continuous process in either the Near East or in Central Asia. In eastern Eurasia the cultures using bronze are located in the Caucasus and in Central Asia possibly because these areas continue to be influenced from the Near East. The Bronze Age in the Caucasus and Central Asia begins at the end of the third millennium 2.

    Eneolithic Age

    The Eneolithic Age is the time period between the Neolithic and the Bronze Age. Some scholars disregard this intermediate period while others see the Eneolithic as a special period when traditions of Neolithic development are present and when bronze tools are being prepared in small numbers. During the Eneolithic, many objects still are worked in flint.

    Bronze is an artificial alloy of copper with some additions such as arsenic and tin. Different cultures have different additions. Chemical and microscopic studies of bronze allow talk regarding genetic relationships among cultures (there are massive migrations of populations across the European and Asiatic Steppes from west to east during this period).

    Pit Grave Culture

    The Pit Grave Culture is located in the southern Russian Steppe area (Ukraine) and replaces the Tripolie Culture in the mid third millennium BC. Its roots are in the Neolithic and continue to the beginning of the second millennium BC. We have no knowledge of housing or settlement patterns, only graves have been found. These graves reveal a new tradition of burial, the burial mound.

    These mounds or kurgans (a Turkic word) are made of stone in mountainous areas and made of soil in flat areas. Today kurgans are found both singly and in groups. The height of kurgans vary. In southern Russia and southern Siberia, these kurgans are never more than 10 meters high, usually averaging 2-4 meters. A circle of kurgans may be as great as one hectare. In the middle of a kurgan are usually one or two burials but the number can be as great as fifteen to twenty. Different objects and tools are found in the graves. Bronze is known but is very rare. Scholars think this is the beginning of bronze usage. Also present in kurgans are bones of domestic pig and horse (no sheep). Some scholars think the Pit Grave Culture did not know agriculture. There is also the absence of permanent sites; scholars are not sure about settlements, the size and types of houses etc.

    Geographically kurgans have been found from Romania to the Steppe areas of southern Russia to the Volga with some findings in Kirghizistan. Now more than 2,000 kurgans have been excavated many of which contain only pottery. Pit Grave pottery has a rounded bottom, an indication that their settlement isn't permanent (likely the pots were suspended on a frame over the fire). The ceramics are not painted and are of poor decoration. A series of dots either cover the full surface or are found only alone the rim.

    The population of the Pit Grave Culture is large and demonstrates a strong economy and strong relationships with surrounding cultures. The Pit Grave Culture has influenced other cultures in the Caucasus and eastern Turkey. In the west, the Pit Grave Culture has influenced peoples in Bulgaria, central Europe, and Romania. The Pit Grave are a people without Mongoloid mixture. Physically they are more similar to Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic than to Neolithic i.e. they are tall with a broad face and a strong superstructure in the region of the forehead. Some scholars think the Pit Grave are descendants of Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic peoples whereas the Neolithic peoples are invaders from the south.

    Afanasyevo Culture

    The Afanasyevo Culture appears two to three centuries later than the Pit Grave i.e. mid to late third millennium BC. They are related to the Pit Grave and are located in a small area in the Upper Yenissei River Valley. Scholars know nothing about their housing or economy because only kurgans have been found (this is similar to Pit Grave). Actually not many kurgans have been discovered so the bronze objects are few; only twenty bronze objects in total have been found. Also only a small number of bones of domesticated animals, of sheep, pig, and horse, have been uncovered. There has been no trace of seeds; likely the Afanasyevo had no agriculture and were nomadic like the Pit Grave Culture.

    Physical traits of the Afanasyevo are similar to the Pit Grave i.e. a people without a Mongoloid mixture and more similar to Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic than to Neolithic in that they are tall with a broad face and a strong superstructure in the region of the forehead.


    During the past thirteen years, the area of study in Eurasia has been extended south. Some kurgans have been found on the border with Mongolia and some in southwestern Mongolia. Chinese archaeologists excavating in east Turkistan and Xingjiang Province 3 have found that these kurgans contain the same type of animal bone and physical traits found in the Soviet Union. In the original area, different kurgans have been found in one cemetery; in Mongolia there are only single kurgans.

    At the second part of the third millennium BC to the first century of the second millennium BC, European populations were distributed throughout the Steppe zone to central Mongolia; a great migration. Siberia was inhabited by Mongoloids in the Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic. European populations began to appear in Siberia in the early Bronze Age. The only real explanation for such a massive migration is the strong economic development of the Pit Grave people with many animals, a good supply of food, and large populations.

    Populations for the Pit Grave people are not known. Preliminary figures indicate 6-8,000 population for the Black Sea area based on the presence of 2,000 kurgans. This culture lasts for 1500 years with three generations for each 100 years, therefore there are 45 generations with about 200 kurgans per generation. These figures seem small.


    The language for both the Pit Grave and Afanasyevo Cultures is Indo-European. This Indo-European Language family is common for Russia, Iran, South Asia 4, and India (except for southern India); it occupies a hugh area. In both linguistic and archaeological literature there has been a problem with the homeland of the Indo-European Language. The most common hypothesis is that Indo-European formed in the area of the eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea, some in the Balkans, some in Turkey, and some in the Russian Steppes.

    Russian scholars Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov and Tamaz Valerianovich Gamkrelidze 5 hypothesize that the Indo-European language formed in Turkey. Their hypothesis is supported by Colin Renfrew 6. Most specialists think Indo-European formed in the steppe and mountain zone of the Balkan Peninsula and in southern Russia. Some think there was a great movement from west to east of a people all of whom spoke one language.

    There is documentation from eastern Turkistan dating to the first millennium BC written in the Tokharian language, a derivative of Indo-European (also known as the Yueh Chih language). In Central Asia, possibly western Mongolia, there is an area inhabited by one large group, the Tokharians.

    Colin Renfrew argues that Indo-European originated in Turkey in the eighth millennium BC with the invention of agriculture. Alexeev disagrees. There is no evidence for such an early language and likely agriculture was invented in the Near East. Most scholars think Indo-European was formed in the transition from the Neolithic to the Bronze era.

    [Lecture 9 delivered 22 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    In studying the Bronze Age, the mass migrations which took place in Eurasia are of utmost importance. In this the ninth lecture, Professor Alexeev presents a recent ethnic map of the three great language families and examines the geographical areas of Central Asia, Siberia, and the Caucasus in terms of their ethnic composition.

    According to Alexeev, the three great language families include Indo-European, Finno-Ugric, and Turkic. Indo-European profiles with seven sub-families: Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, Latin/Roman, Armenian, Greek, and Indo-Iranian and covers the largest portion of Eurasia from the Iberian Peninsula across the northern Mediterranean to European Russia [Alexeev does not include the Indo European families of Celtic (western Europe) and Illyric (Albanian) because he only was referencing the former Soviet Union]. Finno-Ugric covers a territory from Scandinavia to Siberia to a far off place in Hungary. Alexeev includes the Nenet = Nenetic here as a subgroup of Finno-Ugric but in the following lecture mentions that he made a gross error [Nenetic (Samodic) and Finno-Ugric are subfamilies of the Uralic family; Finno-Ugric further divides into Finnic and Ugric branches]. Turkic is a complicated language and is found in pockets in the Caucasus, the Volga Valley, Central Asia including Xingjiang, southern and central Siberia, and in Turkey.

    To Alexeev's information I have added ethnographic data from HOLLIS (and in a few instances from "Britannica"). To both the Alexeev and HOLLIS language families and people, Arutiunov has made detailed commentary which I in turn have incorporated into the text.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Slavic

    Alexeev comments that ethnic interpretations and the ethnic phase of the Bronze Age are of great importance. In Eastern Europe in the sixteenth century, Slavic populations are distributed from Eastern Europe to Siberia and Slavic is the main population of Russia. Slavic populations are also in Ukraine, Belarus (White Russia), Poland, Czechoslovakia, and the northern Balkans (Yugoslavia).

    The Russian language is spoken on the eastern plain, Ukrainian is spoken in southwest European Russia, and White Russian is spoken in Belarus. In Poland there is only one language, Polish, while in Czechoslovakia there are two, Czech and Slovak. The Slavic language is a sub-family of Indo-European.

    Slavic (sub-family) - as per Alexeev

    White Russian or Belarusian

    HOLLIS divides Slavic languages into three divisions: southern, eastern, and western. For the southern Slavic group HOLLIS includes Bulgarian, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, and Slovenian. For the eastern Slavic group: Belarusian, Russian, and Ukrainian. For the western Slavic group: Czech, Kashubian, Lechitic, Polabian, Slovak, and Sorbian. For the sub-heading Lechitic, HOLLIS lists Kashubian, Polabian, and Polish languages, and the Slovincian dialect.

    For the Polish language HOLLIS has 1,884 entries; for the extinct Solvincian dialect HOLLIS has 2 entries. Thus, it seems appropriate that the Polish language, along with the other major Slavic sub families, be listed as major headings.

    According to Arutiunov, ancient Bulgarian until the time of Jenghiz-Khan (13 century) was spoken in the Volga-Bulgarian area and partly in the northern Caucasus. It was a Turkic language. Bulgarian was also spoken by the founding royal dynasty of modern Bulgaria and their clan, but was soon assimilated by the local Slavic population. Until the XIIIth century there were two Bulgarias; one on the Volga and the other on the Danube. Thus, as per Arutiunov, the Bulgarian language was Turkic; the Turkic language was then assimilated by the Slavic populations and thus became Indo-European.

    Additional information on Slavs: in an area extending along the Baltic coast west of Rugen Island to the Vistula River are the sea coast provinces of Pomerania (as per Arutiunov, Obodrite-Polabian was the extinct language of Pomerania). Czechs are native peoples of Bohemia, Moravia, and/or Silesia (Silesia is an ancient region in central Europe partly in Prussia and partly in Poland). Polabians are Slavic people dwelling in the basin of the Elbe and on the Baltic coast of Germany; Slovaks are people living in eastern Czechoslovakia, and, as per Arutiunov, the Sorbians are a Slavic people occupying eastern Germany, near Dresden, who maintain a costume and speak two dialects: Upper Lausitz and Lower Lausitz. Kashubian, Polabian, and Slovincian are Polish languages.

    Slavic Language - as per HOLLIS with comments in Bold Face by Arutiunov.

    Southern Slavic
    Bulgarian - there are 2 Bulgarias
    Slovenian - language of Slovenia
    Eastern Slavic
    Western Slavic
    Kashubian - Polish
    Lechitic - an artificial name; a Polish dialect
    Kashubian - dialect of Polish along with Mazurian
    Polabian - extinct
    Polish languages
    Slovincian dialect -minor Polish dialect
    Polabian - extinct Polish language
    Sorbian - in eastern Germany

    Slavs - as per HOLLIS with comments in Bold Face by Arutiunov

    Southern Slavs
    Yugoslavs Ukrainians(Serbs, Montenegrins, Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes)Ukrainians
    Eastern Slavs
    Drygavichy Slavic People - ancestors of Belarussian
    Krivichi Slavic People - ancestors of northern Russian
    Western Slavs
    Obodrites - practically the same as Polabian Slavs
    Polabian Slavs
    Veletians - probably the same as Venedi


    To resolve the Slavic subfamily of Indo European language, I join the Alexeev listing and modifications by Arutiunov with the HOLLIS listings which also include modifications by Arutiunov. HOLLIS treats all languages, both extinct and contemporary as well as numerous dialects, as of equal stature. Alexeev, on the other hand, separates archaic and contemporary languages and does not include minor dialects. I think that when one deals with diachronic and synchronic relationships, a separate treatment of archaic and contemporary languages and the deletion of minor dialects best enables the student to comprehend the complex picture. Arutiunov also advises to separate the language from the people.

    Thus in the following several chapters, I have attempted to resolve the major world language families by combining information from Alexeev, HOLLIS, and Arutiunov. I have listed languages and ethnic groups separately and have removed extinct languages as well as minor dialects from the two listings. However, I must state boldly that to establish a definitive structure for language or ethnic groups is a futile task simply because both groups are fluid and are in a constant state of flux.

    Slavic Languages

    Eastern Slavic
    Western Slavic
    Sorbian (Wend)
    Southern Slavic
    Serbo-Croatian 7

    [Obodrites, Polabian Slavs, Veletians, and Venedi are all extinct. So too are the Drygavichy Slavic People and Krivichi Slavic People]

    Slavic People (resolved as of spring, 1996)

    Eastern Slavs
    Western Slavs
    Sorbians (Wends) 8
    Southern Slavs
    Serbs, Montenegrins, Croats, and Bosnians
    And all the Slavic people who have dispersed throughout Europe, Central Asia, Africa, Australia, Russia, North America, Central America, South America etc.

    [Yugoslavia is no longer a centralized country; the Yugoslavians have assumed their former ethnic identity]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Baltic

    Alexeev states that in eastern Europe there are other sub-families in addition to Slavic. In the area of the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Finland is the Baltic sub-family consisting of three languages: 1) Latvian; 2) Lithuanian; and 3) East Prussian. East Prussian becomes extinct at the end of the seventeenth century.

    Baltic (sub-family) - as per Alexeev

    East Prussian - extinct

    Baltic Languages - as per HOLLIS with comments in Bold Face by Arutiunov

    Prussian - extinct
    Balto Slavic linguistic unity - this is ancestor to all Baltic languages on one Hand and to all Slavic on the other.

    Balts Indo European People - as per HOLLIS with comments in Bold Face by Arutiunov

    Jacwiez - Jatwiagi is a subdivision of Lithuanians
    Prussians Baltic People 9


    The Baltic sub family in eastern Europe is easily resolved with Alexeev, Arutiunov, and HOLLIS concurring.

    Baltic Languages


    [Prussian is extinct]

    Balts Indo European People

    And all the Baltic people who have dispersed throughout Europe, Central Asia, Africa, Australia, Russia, North America, Central America, South America etc.

    [The Prussian people have assimilated since Prussia is no longer a country]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Germanic

    According to Alexeev, the German language is a sub-family of Indo-European. Until the late seventeenth century there were no German populations in Russia. However, Alexeev did not detail the Germanic language family.

    Germanic Language (sub-family) - as per HOLLIS with Bold Face by Arutiunov

    Old English - extinct
    Frisian 10
    Gothic - extinct
    Low German
    Scandinavian (ancestor to Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, and Icelandic)

    Germanic Peoples - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Alemanni Germanic People - extinct
    Bajuwarii Germanic People - extinct
    Bastarnae Germanic People - extinct
    Batavi Germanic People - extinct
    Chauci Germanic People - extinct
    Cimbri Germanic People - extinct
    Franks - extinct
    Gepidae Germanic People - extinct
    Goths - extinct
    Jutes - extinct
    Lombards - extinct
    Lygii Germanic People - extinct
    Quadi Germanic People - extinct
    Saxons - extinct
    Suevi Germanic People - extinct
    Ubii Germanic People - extinct
    Vandals - extinct

    This section on the Germanic sub family of the Indo European is most interesting. Alexeev did not detail the Germanic language family. HOLLIS lists the Germanic people, but they are all extinct. Arutiunov claims the Germanic people as known by Tacitus or Julius Caesar i.e. Allemani, Burgundi, Sicambri etc. have been extinct for some time having been transformed into the French or modern Germans. But, as per Arutiunov, there are Germanic peoples of today like the Germans, Dutch, Swedes, Afrikaaners, etc. as well as those Jews who still speak Yiddish who must be considered as Germanic since the criteria for being labelled Germanic is only a linguistic alignment. The English and Americans are also Germanic people since English is one of the Germanic languages. Thus, according to Arutiunov, we must differentiate between modern Germanic people, Germanic people of the medieval era, and the Germanic people of the Roman authors [note: the Germanic people of the medieval era and of ancient Rome will both be treated as extinct].


    Germanic Languages


    [Extinct German languages include: Old English, Gothic, Low German]

    Germanic People of today

    And all the German people who have dispersed throughout Europe, Central Asia, Africa, Australia, Russia, North America, Central America, South America etc.

    [Ancient Germanic people now extinct include the Alemanni, Bajuwarii, Bastarnae, Batavi, Chauci, Cimbri, Franks, Gepidae, Goths, Jutes, Lombards, Lygii, Quadi, Saxons, Suevi, Ubii, Vandals, Burgundi, and Sicambri]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Latin/Roman

    The northern and eastern coasts of the Mediterranean are encircled by the romantic languages i.e. Romania. These include Spanish, Portuguese, Galician, Catalan, French, Italian, Romanian (with dialect of Moldavian), and local Rumanche dialects in Switzerland.

    Latin/Roman (sub-family) - as per Alexeev with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Spanish (plus Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese)
    French (with Languedoc and Provencal)
    Romanian (with Moldavian dialect)
    local dialects in Switzerland (Reto-Romanian or Rumanche)
    Moldavian (a dialect of Romanian)

    Romance Languages (sub-family) - modified from HOLLIS with additions in Bold Face by Arutiunov.

    Spanish Language (including Catalan and Ladino Languages)
    French Language (including Languedoc and Provencal)
    Italic Language (including Faliscan language, Latin language[extinct], and Venetic language [likely extinct])
    Romanian Language (including Moldavian dialect)
    Dacian Language (extinct; it was Illyric, not Romance)

    Latin/Roman people - modified from HOLLIS



    Latin/Roman (Romance) Languages

    French (with Languedoc and Provencal)
    Galician 11
    Rumanche (or Reto-Romanian in Switzerland)
    Romanian (and Moldovian dialect)

    [Extinct Romance Languages include Latin, Faliscan, Oscan, ???Venetic]

    Latin/Roman People

    French (with Languedoc and Provencal)
    Romanian (and Moldovian dialect)
    And all the Latin/Roman people who have dispersed throughout Europe, Central Asia, Africa, Australia, Russia, North America, Central America, South America etc.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Armenian

    Before World War I, Armenia had occupied a great area in eastern Turkey. Then one million Armenians were killed by the Turks. Armenian is a complicated language in origin and is thought of as a special language with correlations to some extinct Near East language. Armenian vocabulary differs from the vocabulary of other Indo-European languages. Linguistic research in the last 30-40 years places Armenian 12 in the Indo-European group but in a special case as an isolated language forming a specific sub-group. HOLLIS also lists Armenian as an Indo-European language and the Armenians as an Indo-European people. Of interest is the dispersal of Armenian people: from the Arab countries to Uruguay including Argentina, Central Asia, Australia, Azerbaidjan, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria ... Turkey, Uruguay etc. a true diaspora. HOLLIS has a separate category for the "Armenian Question" relating it to the Armenian massacres of 1894, 1896, 1909, 1915, and 1923 and highlights recent human rights violations in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan (see below, the Caucasus). HOLLIS relates the Armenian language to the Khayasa language. Arutiunov confirms that Khayasa was a small ancient kingdom located at the confluence of the Euphrates and Murat Rivers.

    Armenian (sub-family) - as per Alexeev


    Armenian Language - as per HOLLIS


    Armenian People - as per HOLLIS

    [dispersed throughout the world]


    Armenian Isolated Language


    Armenian People

    [modern Armenian people are dispersed throughout the world]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Greek

    According to Alexeev, some linguists see Greek 13 in relationship to the Romance Language sub-family but this is not a realistic interpretation. HOLLIS lists four dialects for Greek: Aeolic Greek, Attic Greek, Doric Greek, and Ionic Greek. As per Arutiunov: "Greek is of course not Romance. And the Mediterranean Race extends from Spain to Greece".

    Greek (sub-family) - as per Alexeev


    Greek Language family - as per HOLLIS

    [dialects of Aeolic, Attic, Doric, and Ionic]

    Greek People - as per HOLLIS

    [HOLLIS lists Greek as belonging to the Mediterranean Race along with Latin; this is not correct]


    Greek Language family


    Greek People

    [modern Greek people are dispersed throughout the world]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Indo-European - Indo-Iranian (Iranian, Indo Aryan, and Nuristani)

    The Indo-Iranian sub family of Indo-European is divided into three main branches: Iranian, Indo-Aryan, and Nuristani 14. As per Alexeev, the Iranian branch of the Indo-Iranian subfamily of the Indo-European language consists of Osset (Ossetic), Tadjik, Pamir, and Kurd (Kurdic). Ossetic is spoken in southern Russia and in the Caucasus. Tadjik which is nearly similar to Farsi in Iran is spoken in Tadjikistan. The Parmir language is spoken in the Parmir Mountains area and Kurdish is spoken in northern Iraq, Afghanistan, south Caucasus, Turkmenistan, eastern Turkey, and somewhat in Iran and Syria.

    Iranian (sub-family) - as per Alexeev


    HOLLIS lists 14 additional sub-families for the Iranian language: Avestan, Baluchi, Dari, Ephthalite, Gilaki, Hazara, Old Persian, Persian, Pushto (Pashto), Talysh, Tat, Wakhi, Yaghnobi, and Yueh Chih. [Arutiunov states that Yueh Chi and Ephthalite are probably the same and might be Tokharic but are not Iranian 15 ] HOLLIS, as listed above, includes Yueh Chi and Ephthalite as members of the Iranian language family. As per Arutiunov, Dari, Modern Persian, and Tadjik are three slightly different standards of one language, Farsi.

    Iranian languages in more detail: Avestan is one of the two ancient languages comprising Old Iranian and that in which the sacred books of the Zoroastrian religion were written and as an ancient language is extinct; Baluchi is spoken by an Indo-Iranian people of the Irano-Afghan type in Baluchistan; and Dari is the literary language still used in Afghanistan. The Ephthalites were a member of the western branch of the Yueh Chih Tokharians who ruled Western Turkistan and northwestern India in the fifth and sixth centuries AD (also called the White Huns) and spoke a Tokharian language; Gilaki was spoken by a forest people of northern Persia inhabiting the southwestern shore of the Caspian Sea; Hazara is the language spoken by the Hazaras, a Mongoloid people of Afghanistan; and Old Persian is the other language composing Old Iranian and known from cuneiform inscriptions from the sixth and fifth century BC but is now extinct.

    Persian is one of the ancient Iranian people who under Cyrus became the dominant people in Asia; today the people of Iran (Persia) speak Farsi. Parthian is an ancient language spoken by inhabitants of Parthia, an ancient country located southeast of the Caspian Sea. Pashto (Pushtu or Pushto) is the Iranian language of the Pathan people (Pathans, a Hindi word, refers to an Iranian people living in Afghanistan and in colonies scattered throughout Pakistan and India) and the chief vernacular language of eastern Afghanistan, northern Baluchistan, and the northwestern frontier province of Pakistan. The Tajiks are dispersed among populations of Afghanistan and Turkistan and speak Tajiki, a veriety of modern Persian. Talysh are a people of the region around Lenkoran, Azerbaijan who speak a dialect related to Talishi. The Tat are an agricultural people living in scattered groups throughout Transcaucasia and possibly allied to the Tajiks; they speak a Tat language. The Wakhi are an Indo-European people living on the northern slope of the Hindu Kush who speak Wakhi and Wama. The Yueh Chih (Tokharian) were people of advanced culture dwelling in Central Asia during the ?first millennium AD until overrun by the Uighurs [the Uighurs were a Turkic people from Mongolia who spoke a Turkic language]. The Yueh Chih spoke a Tokharian language, a branch of the Indo European language.

    Iranian Language - modified from HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Avestan (extinct)
    Dari (variety of modern Persian)
    Ephthalite (might be Tokharic, not Iranian; they likely are the same as the Yueh Chih and were replaced by the Uighurs)
    Farsi (includes modern Persian, Dari, and Tajik)
    Gilaki (???extinct)
    Old Persian (extinct)
    Parthian (extinct)
    Persian (the standard of Iran is called Farsi)
    Pashto (Pushtu or Pushto; spoken by the Pathan people)
    Tajik (variety of Modern Persian)
    Wakhi (Wama and other Kafir languages of Nuristan)
    Yaghnobi (relic of ancient Sogdian) 16
    Yueh Chih (might be Tokharic, not Iranian; the Yueh Chih were replaced by Uighurs)

    HOLLIS lists the following Iranian People : Alani, Indo Iranians (Indo Aryans & Iranians), Indo Scythians (Saka & Yueh Chih), Kurds, Ossetes, Parthians, Pushtuns, Saka, Sarmatians, Scythians, Tajiks.

    Iranian people in more detail: the Alani (see lecture 14) are an Iranian people who migrated from Central Asia to the northern Caucasus. The Ossetes who today still live in the central Caucasus are related to the Alani (Alans).

    The Indo Iranians consist of the Indo Aryans whom HOLLIS relates to the Parya Indic People and the Iranians. The Indo Scythians are related to the Saka, a nomadic people of the steppelands north of the Iranian plateau, and to the Yueh Chih (also known as Tocharian) a people in Central Asia (Xingjang) during the ?first millennium AD until overrun by Uighurs. [According to Arutiunov: "the Indo Scythians are Saka who migrated to India; Saka are the eastern Scythians. Western Scythians were succeeded by Sarmatians, later Alans, and finally Ossetes; they are all descendants of each other"] The Kurds are a pastoral and agricultural people inhabiting a large mountainous plateau region in adjoining parts of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria as well as in Armenia and Azerbaijan. [As per Arutiunov: "In religion in Armenia, the Kurds are Zoroastrian; in Azerbaijan they are Muslim. The Ossetes likely immigrated from the Eurasian Steppes to the central Caucasus and are descendants of the Alani (Alans)"]

    Parthia is an ancient country to the south east of the Caspian Sea. Parthians are inhabitants of the ancient country of Parthia and many historical references describe the Parthians as warriors on horseback armed with bow and arrow. Pushtun (Pushtu/Pashto) is the Iranian language of the Pathan people, an Iranian people living in Afghanistan and in colonies scattered throughout Pakistan and India; it is the chief vernacular of eastern Afghanistan, northwest frontier province of Pakistan, and northern Baluchistan. The Saka, as listed above, are nomadic people of the steppelands north of the Iranian plateau. Sarmatia is an ancient region north of the Black Sea; the language of the Sarmatians was likely Iranian; the Sarmatians were succeeded by the Alans. The term Sarmatia has on occassion been used to reference "Russia". Scythia is an ancient country lying partly north and northeast of the Black Sea and partly east of the Aral Sea. The origins and dispersal of the Scythians have occupied historians from Herodotus to contemporary scholars (see lecture 14). The Tajiks are Iranian people speaking an Iranian language who are dispersed among the populations of Afghanistan and Turkistan including Tajikistan.

    Iranian People - modified from HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Alani - are descendants of Sarmatian (and were replaced by the Ossetes; thus Alani are extinct)
    Indo Iranians
    Indo Aryans 17
    (Parya Indic People 18) - a small group; they are the only Indo-Aryan people in the former USSR
    Indo Scythians
    Saka (eastern Scythians; extinct)
    Yueh Chih (not Iranian; extinct)
    Ossetes (successors of Alans, deriving from Sarmates)
    Parthians (extinct)
    Pushtuns (language of the Pathans)
    Saka (eastern Scythians; extinct)
    Sarmatians (partly successors to Scythians; extinct)
    Scythians (extinct)
    Pathans (who speak Pushtun)

    Alexeev did not detail the Indo Aryan branch of the Indo Iranian language. The Indo Aryan branch of the Indo Iranian subfamily of Indo European language, as per HOLLIS, includes Dardic, Palic, Prakrit, Sanskrit, and Vedic.

    The Dardic people or Dards were a stocky, broad shouldered moderately fair people living in the upper valley of the Indus and spoke Dardic. The complex of languages spoken by the Dards included Shina, Khowar, Kafiri, Kashmiri, and Kohistani. Palic is an Indic language found in the Buddhist canon and used as the liturgical and scholarly language of Hinayana Buddhism. Prakrit is a catch all category including any or all of the ancient Indic languages or dialects other than Sanskrit. Sanskrit, meaning cultivated or refined, is the ancient classical language of India and of Hinduism. Vedic is the language that the Vedas, the most ancient and sacred writing of the Hindus, is written.

    According to Arutiunov, Sanskrit and Vedic are very closed; only Sanskrit is the written standard, Vedic is not. Vedic is older than Sanskrit. Palic is one of the Prakrits (in medieval India there were several Prakrits). Kashmiri is one of the Dardic group.

    Indo Aryan Languages - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Dardic [also listed under Nuiristani]
    Kashmiri 19
    Phalura 20
    Torwali 21
    Wotapuri Katarqalai
    Palic (is one of the Prakrits) 22
    Sanskrit (the written standard)
    Manipravalam language Malayalam

    Indo Aryan Languages - other sources including standard dictionary and Parpola 23

    Indo Aryan Languages - other sources including standard dictionary and Parpola

    Dardic (from Parpola) 24; however we do not know if extinct languages and/or dialects are included.

    Sina (or Shina)

    Indo Aryan People 25 - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face

    Parya Indic people 26 - wrong!

    Indo Aryan People - as per standard dictionary


    The Nuristani branch of the Indo Iranian subfamily of the Indo European language family was not detailed by Alexeev. HOLLIS lists Nuristani as a subgroup of Indo Iranian along with Indo Aryan and Iranian. As per Arutiunov, Nuristan (land of light) was formerly Kafiristan and was renamed after being forcefully converted to Islam around the 1890's. As per HOLLIS, Nuristan encompasses Afghanistan and the Chitral district of Pakistan (Kafiristan region of Pakistan) 27. HOLLIS equates Nuristani with Dardic 28, with Bashgali 29, and with the Kafiri languages 30 (Bashgali, Dardic, and Nuristani are languages of Afghanistan). A Kafir 31 is defined as a member of a group of southern African Bantu speaking people; a south African of negroid ancestory. The term, however, usually is used disparingly. A "caffer" is defined as one who is not a Muslim, again used disparingly. There also appears to be a relationship between the Bashgali and Kafir languages 32 and the Kafir and Xhosa languages 33. HOLLIS relates the Kafir language to the Bantu Afrikaans language 34; however, Arutiunov says this is nonsense:

    "Nuristani used to be called Kafirs, i.e. 'infidels'. Bantu were called the same by Arabs, hence 'caffres'. Bashgali has nothing in common with Bantu. There are descendants of Black African slaves in India but they have not preserved their language". [and when I ran the listings for Bantu in HOLLIS, neither Bashgali nor Kafir appeared]

    As per Arutiunov, Bashgali, Wakhi, and Wama are all Nuristani (Kafiristani) languages. However, HOLLIS relates the Wakhi to the Ghalchah languages (Wakhi and Sarikoli) 35, HOLLIS relates the Ghalchah languages to the Pamir languages, and for the Pamir languages, HOLLIS includes: Munji language and Yazghulami language and 7 dialects. For Wama, HOLLIS relates the Akurio Indians of Surinam (South America) 36 and the Wamakua African people (Makua African people) 37. Thus, that Wakhi and Wama are Nuristani languages cannot be substantiated by HOLLIS.

    Nuristani Languages - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Dardic [also listed as Indo Aryan]
    Kafiri (Xhosa, Bantu, Zulu of Africa; the languages of Afghanistan, of the Hindu Kush of Afghanistan, and of the Kafir region of Pakistan)
    Bashgali - Bashgali, Wakhi, and Wama are all among the Nuristani (Kafiristani)languages.

    Kafir or Nuristani Languages - as per Parpola


    HOLLIS has no listing for the Nuristani people. However, Nuristani is spoken in Afghanistan along with Bashgali, Brahui, Dardic, Dari, Munji, Turkmen, Uighur, Wotapuri Katarquali, and Yazghulami. HOLLIS does have a listing for the Kafiristani people and includes: Kafirs African people (Xhosa, Zulu), Kafirs Afghanistan people, Kafirs of the Hindu Kush, and the Kafir region of Pakistan.

    Nuristani People (Kafiristani) - as per HOLLIS [includes people of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Xhosa, Bantu, and Zulu of Africa] (Arutiunov claims this is wrong)


    [To assume that languages and people can be fully resolved is a precept of structuralism. Languages disappear when people become assimilated into different cultures. Ethnic identity when void of religious identity changes to embrace the new geography.

    However, when religious identity becomes of paramount concern, then the ethnic identity takes on a religious identity and fuses into one. As well, many people speak more than one language and many embrace a new language and forget the original]

    Indo-Iranian Languages

    Iranian Languages (RESOLVED
    Farsi (includes modern Persian, Dari, Tajik)
    Pashto (Pushtu or Pushto)

    [Extinct languages: Avestan, Gilaki, Old Persian, Parthian, Yueh Chih (Ephthalite)]

    Indo Aryan Languages (UNRESOLVED)
    Dardic (including Kashmiri, Phalura, Torwali, Wotapuri Katarqalai, Shina, Khowar, Kafiri, Kohistani, Kalasa, Dameli, Gawar-bati, Sumasti, Pasai, Baskarik, Maiya, Tirahi, Dumaki)
    Palic ??? is a Prakrit

    Nuristani [Kafiristani] Languages (UNRESOLVED)
    Bashgali ???
    Kafiri (Xhosa, Bantu, Zulu of Africa; the languages of Afghanistan, of the Hindu Kush of Afghanistan, and of the Kafir region of Pakistan)
    Wakhi ???
    Wama ???
    Kati ???
    Tregami ???
    Prasun ???
    Askun ???

    Indo Iranian People

    Iranian People (UNRESOLVED)

    Indo Aryan People (UNRESOLVED)
    Parya Indic
    Other ???

    Nuristani People (IN CONFUSION) [includes people of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Xhosa, Bantu, and Zulu of Africa]

    Indo European Languages and People in Eurasia

    Since Alexeev only detailed Indo European language families in the former Soviet Union, I have turned to the HOLLIS listings and "Britannica" for the languages and people of Eurasia. Commentary by Arutiunov is in Bold Face. HOLLIS lists the following Indo European Languages: Albanian, Anatolian, Armenian, Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Greek, Illyrian, Indo Iranian, Italic, Macedonian, Phrygian, Proto Indo European, Slavic, Thracian, Tokharian, and Venetic.

    The Albanian language is spoken by the Albanians and is a branch of the Indo European that contains only Albanian. However, Arutiunov does not agree claiming that Albanian is the last remnant of Illyric.

    HOLLIS lists the following Anatolian languages: Caria, Hittite, Hurrian, Luwian, Lycian, Lydian, Palaic, Phrygian, and Urartian. Arutiunov's comments are in Bold Face. Further information: Caria, a word derived from Latin and Greek, is an ancient division of Asia Minor and populated by the Carian people. Several recent publications reference Carian inscriptions in Sakkara, Egypt and Buhen, Sudan. Hittite is a word from the Hebrew. The language of the Hittites is Indo European or Indo Hittite and is known from cuneiform texts from Bogazkoy in central Asia Minor. These texts are both pictographic and phonetic. Recent research has related Hittite inscriptions with the Luwian language and with the Yazilikaya site in Turkey. HOLLIS relates the Luwian and Palaic languages to Hittite.

    Continuing with the Anatolian languages ... Hurrians are an ancient non Semitic people of northern Mesopotamia, Syria, and eastern Asia Minor circa ?1500 BC and possibly identical with the Horites (the Horites are an ancient people of the biblical period prior to Abraham that inhabited the Dead Sea region of the eastern Mediterranean). Recent research relates the Hurrian and Akkadian languages (according to Arutiunov this is wrong. The Hurria and Akkadian are not related) and relates both to the ancient city of Nuzi in Iraq. Luwian (Luian) is the Anatolian language of the Luwi who live in Luya. This language is known from quotations in Hittite documents and from ancient scripts from Crete and Cyprus. Recent research connects the Luwian language to Hittite hieroglyphs, and relate Luwian inscriptions from the Yazilikaya site in Turkey and to the Hittite religion .

    Lycia, a word derived from the Greek, is an ancient district in southern Asia Minor. Lycian is an Anatolian language known from a small body of inscriptions from southwestern Asia Minor dating to the ?fifth-fourth centuries AD. Recent researches show Greek inscriptions in Lycia, Greek inscriptions in Turkey, and Lycian inscriptions in Turkey.

    Lydia is an ancient country in western Asia minor and Lydian, a word derived from the Greek, is an Anatolian language known from a small body of inscriptions dating from the ?fourth century BC or earlier. Lydian inscriptions are related to the goddess Cybele and to idols and images of Turkey.

    Palaic is an Anatolian language known from quotations in Hittite documents. Hollis relates the Palaic language with both the Luwian and Hittite languages. Phrygia is an ancient country in west central Asia Minor and the language of the Phrygians is assumed to be Indo European. The Urartian language known from cuneiform inscriptions and is related to Hurrian According to Arutiunov, this is true but they both are related to Dagestanic, not Anatolian).

    Anatolian Languages as per HOLLIS with comments by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Hurrian (certainly non Indo European)
    Phrygian (this language is little known and might be either Armenian or Illyric; is not Anatolian)
    Urartian (non Indo European; is related to Dagestanic, not Anatolian)

    The Armenian and Baltic languages are discussed above.

    For Celtic languages HOLLIS includes:

    Proto Celtic

    The Germanic and Greek languages are detailed above.

    The Illyrian language is the language of Illyria, an ancient country on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea and is poorly attested and not certainly classified. According to HOLLIS, the Illyrian languages include the Messapian and Venetic language. The Venetic language is spoken by the Veneti Italic people also known as the Venetians who settled in the Aegean Islands of Greece and Turkey, in Greece, Slovenia, and Italy. As per Arutiunov, the only remnant of Illyrian is Albanian.

    The Indo Iranian languages are detailed above.

    The Italic languages and dialects according to HOLLIS are related to the Faliscan, Latin, and Venetic languages and have a grammar comparable to Armenian and Etruscan. However, Arutiunov claims that this information regarding Venetic languages is wrong. Also, according to HOLLIS, the ancient city of Italica is is Spain, likely Seville. However, as per Arutiunov, this information regarding the ancient city of Italica is doubtful 38.

    Ancient Macedonia, a region in the central Balkan Peninsula, was occupied by Macedonians whose language is generally assumed to be Indo European. The modern Macedonian people speak a Slavic language. As per Arutiunov, Old Macedonian was Illyric; New Macedonian is Slavic.

    Phrygians speak one of the Anatolian languages (as per Arutiunov, Phrygian is extinct and the Phrygians spoke Armenian rather than Anatolian).

    The Proto Indo European language is a theoretical construct which attempts to locate an origin for Indo European. Some scholars trace its origin to the Nostratic Mega Language Family 39 and others see a relationship between the Indo European vocabulary and Old Chinese. Arutiunov claims this is wrong. [NOTE: The publication on Indo European vocabulary in Old Chinese is detailed in the endnote] 40. Perhaps the best definitive study on the reconstruction of a Proto-language is by Tamaz Gamqrelize 41.

    The Slavic language is detailed above.

    Thracian, the language of Thrace in the eastern Balkans, is generally assumed to be Indo European. Thraco-Illyrian is generally related to Thracian, Albanian, and Illyrian while Thraco Phrygian is a catch all catagory for the Balkan and Asia Minor languages which do not fit in other catagories. HOLLIS relates the Thracian language to Dacian.

    The Tokharian language is synonymous with Yueh Cheh. HOLLIS relates the Yueh Chih to the Ephthalites or Hunas in India and the Kushans in Afghanistan (Bactria). The Tokharian (Yueh Chih) have been regarded as the "first" Indo-Europeans with their homeland in China.

    The Venetic language is spoken by the Veneti Italic people also known as the Venetians who settled in the Aegean Islands of Greece and Turkey, as well as in Greece, Slovenia, and Italy. A dialect of the Venetic language is spoken by a people in the Rio Grande Do Sol area of Brazil (Arutiunov claims that this information regarding the Venetic language is a confusion).

    Indo European Languages in Eurasia - as per HOLLIS with comments by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Hurrian (certainly not Indo European)
    Phrygian (not Anatolian)
    Urartian (not Indo European and not Anatolian; is related to Dagestanic)
    Indo Iranian
    Phrygian (extinct; and the Phrygians spoke Armenian not Anatolian)

    Alexeev does not separate the Indo European People from the Indo European language; as well, he only lists Indo European in the former Soviet Union. Thus I will defer to the HOLLIS listing for Indo European People with commentary by Arutiunov in Bold Face. For Indo Europeans (peoples), HOLLIS lists: Albanian, Armenian, Balts, Celts, Germanic, Hittites, Illyrians, Indo Iranians, Latin people, Luwian, Slavs, Thracians, and Tokhari.

    The Albanian people live on the western littoral of the Balkan Peninsula in an area of an extremely complex mountain system enabling many groups to exist, even today, in an isolated fashion. One group, the Ghegs, are known as the "giant" north Albanian mountain people.

    The Armenians are detailed above.

    The Balts Indo European People (Baltic People) are detailed above.

    The Celts are an early Indo European people of pre Roman Europe who ranged from the British Isles and Spain to Asia Minor (as per Arutiunov, the Celts migrated to Asia Minor but are not native to it) and in part were absorbed into the Roman Empire as Britons, Gauls, Boii, Galatians, or Celtiberians. HOLLIS also relates Celts to the Boii, Britons, and Gauls but in addition also to the Carvetii, Cenomani Celtic People, the Druids, the Helvetii Celtic People, the Picts, and the Welsh.

    Germanic people are detailed above.

    The Hittites, a word from the Hebrew, were the aboriginal population of the kingdom of Khatti in eastern Asia Minor. Physical characteristics include a sloping forehead and large aquiline nose as preserved in the Hittite and Egyptian reliefs. The Hittite Empire of the second millennium BC rivaled that of the Babylonians and Egyptians. Current research on the Hittites relate the Hittites to the ancient city of Zippalanda and to recent excavations in Turkey. The Hittites are also related to the Aegean civilization 42.

    Illyrians lived in an ancient country on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea; the term is derived from Greek and Latin. Illyria is populated by the Illyrians whom HOLLIS relates to the Venetic Italic people of the Venetian Republic or Venice, Italy (this relationship according to Arutiunov is not correct).

    The Indo Iranians are the Iranians, the Indo Aryans, and the Nuristani and are detailed above.

    HOLLIS relates the Latin peoples to Africa, the Black Sea region, and to America. It is here that the controversial elements of race arise. Mostly from older publications, topics such as Mediterranean race, Teutonic race, Anglo-Saxon superiority and international competition in terms of trade and war are listed. In the international competition category, earlier publications i.e. 1899 are concerned with the superiority of peoples; recent publications deal with agriculture and technology on a global basis.

    Luwian or Luian or Luwi are an ancient people who lived on the southern coast of Asia Minor in and around Luya. The Luwian populations also existed in Lycia and Cilicia Aspera during the Hellenistic period and in Crete at a similar time period. The Luwian religion is related to that of the Hurrian (however, the Luwian and Hurri languages are not related, according to Arutiunov) 43.

    Thrace (Thracians), a Greek word, is a region of the eastern Balkan Peninsula (Thracians were probably part of Illyric, as per Arutiunov). Thraco-Illyrian is generally related to Thracian, Albanian, and Illyrian. HOLLIS relates the Thracians to areas of Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, and the Black Sea lowlands of the Ukraine as well as to Denmark, Egypt, eastern Europe, and Moldova (as per Arutiunov, Moldova yes! The rest [Denmark, Egypt, eastern Europe] is dubious). Recent archaeology in the Sveshtari region of Bulgaria reveals a Thracian tomb near the village of Sveshtari, and a recent congress examined Thracians as related to the Mycenaean civilization 44.

    The Tokhari (Tochari) are also known as the Yueh Chih (see above) and are a member of a people of advanced culture dwelling in Central Asia during the ?first millennium AD until overrun by Uighurs. HOLLIS relates the Yueh Chih to the Ephthalites and the Kushans. The Ephthalites are the Hunas (Safeta Hunas/White Huns) in India and the Kushans are in Afghanistan (Bactria). The Tokharian (Yueh Chih) have been regarded as the "first" Indo-Europeans with their homeland in China 45.

    Indo European people in Eurasia - as per HOLLIS with comments by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Albanians - the only remnant of Illyric.
    Balts (Indo European People) - this is to distinguish from the Baltic Finns
    Germanic Peoples
    Hittites - extinct
    Illyrians - the only remnant is Albanian; the rest is extinct
    Indo Iranians
    Latin Peoples
    Luwians - extinct
    Thracians - extinct; were probably Illyric
    Tokhari - extinct


    Indo European Language in Eurasia

    Indo Iranian
    Proto Indo European (a theoretical construct and easily can be deleted)

    [Extinct Indo European Languages: Carian, Hittite, Hurrian, Luwian, Lycia, Lydia, Palaic, Phrygian, Urartian, Illyrian, Thracian, Tocharian, ???Venetic]

    Indo European People in Eurasia

    Balts (Indo European People)
    Germanic People (Germans)
    Indo Iranian (Iranians, Indo Aryans, Nuristani)
    ??? HOLLIS does not list the Macedonian people but does list the Macedonian language]

    [Extinct Indo European People include Hittite, Illyrian, Luwian, Thracian, Tokhari]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Finno Ugric

    A second great family is that of Finno Ugric 46. Alexeev lists the following sub groups of the Finno Ugric sub family: Ugric group = Mansi, Khant (Khantic), and Hungarian; Finnic group = Lapp (Lappic), Nenet (Nenetic) [to be changed from Finno Ugric to Samodic (obsolete Samoyedic) in lecture 10], East Finnic, and extinct Estonian. Alexeev also divides Finno-Ugric into the two sub families of Finnic and Ugric.

    According to Alexeev, Finnic is a sub-family of Finno Ugric and is widely distributed. In Finland on the coast of the Barentz Sea and in eastern Norway and Sweden, Lapps live. The forerunners of the Laps played an important role in Russia. East of Finland in an area in northern Siberia live the Nenet (Netic) people. In the Upper Volga Basin east of Moscow are several different groups who speak the East Finnic language [HOLLIS does not list an East Finnic language]. Estonian belongs to the Finnic subfamily of Finno-Ugric. In the seventeenth century the Estonians separated from the Finnic of Finland. Writing Estonian is very difficult.

    Alexeev lists the Ugric as a subfamily that is geographically distributed in two areas in the Soviet Union and in one area in Hungary. In the Soviet Union in the Ob Valley of Western Siberia, Mansi is spoken. Khanty (Khantic) is spoken north of the Mansi area in northern central Siberia. Hungarian is spoken in Hungary which is quite far from both Mansi and Khanty. [HOLLIS has no listing for Ugric and instead references Hungarian]

    HOLLIS lists two languages for the category Finno Ugric languages: Finnic and Hungarian. For Finnic languages, HOLLIS lists the following related headings: Baltic Finnic, Lapp, Mari, Mordvin, and Permic. For Baltic Finnic Languages, a sub category of Finnic languages, HOLLIS lists = Estonian, Finnish, Ingrian, Karelian, Livonian, and Veps. For Permic languages, another sub category of Finnic languages, HOLLIS lists = Komi language and Udmurt language. For the Hungarian language HOLLIS doesn't list any related headings although dialects for Hungary are listed by geographic regions include Moldavia, Oberwart Austria Bezirk, Ormansag, and Transylvania (Romania), Szamos Valley, Szamoshat, Szeged, and Ukraine.

    Arutiunov also divides the Finno Ugric subfamily into two groups: Finnic group and Ugric group. For the Finnic group, Arutiunov establishes four divisions: Western (Baltic) consisting of Finnish, Estonian, Karelian, Ingrian, and Vote; Eastern (Permian) consisting of Komi-Zyrian; Komi-Permian, and Udmurt; the Southern (Volgaic) consisting of Mordvian (Erzia and Moksha dialects), and Mari (Meadow and Highland dialects); and Northern consisting of Lapp (Saami). For Ugric, Arutiunov includes: Mansi, Khanti, and Hungarian.

    Since Alexeev did not separate language and people, I will list Finno Ugrians people, as per HOLLIS, with comments by Arutiunov in Bold Face. Finno Ugrians: the Bulgars Turkic People or Bulgarians [Arutiunov states that Turkic is not Finno Ugric], Estonians, Finns, Hungarians, Karelians, Khanty, Komi, Livonians, Mansi, Mari, Mordvins, Permians, Sami European People (Lapps), Udmurts, Veps, and Votes people.

    The Bulgars Turkic People speak Bulgarian with different dialects spoken in Bulgaria in Boboshtice, Ikhtiman, Silistrenski Okrug, Sofia, and Tihomir as well as in Macedonia, Pontikia, Greece, Romania, Russia, and Thrace. [According to Arutiunov, Turkic Bulgars were Turkic, not Finno Ugric; they were assimilated by Slavs on the Danube; the dialects listed above are of Slavic Bulgarians]. Modern Bulgarians speak a Slavic language.

    The Estonians speak Estonian, the Finns speak Finnish (with perhaps the greatest number of dialects), the Hungarians speak Hungarian, the Karelians speak the Karelian language, the Khanty speak the Khanty language (with 4 dialects), and the Komi speak the Komi language.

    The Livonians, from a small area in Latvia, speak the Livonian language, the Mansi of the Ob Valley in Siberia and the Tavda Valley in Russia speak the Mansi language, the Mari speak the Mari language, and the Mordvins speak the Mordvin language with dialects of Erzya and Moksha. The Permians speak the Permian (Permic) languages [consisting of 1) Udmurt, 2) Komi-Zyrian, and 3) Komi-Permian as per Arutiunov], and the Sami European People speak a Lapp language. The Udmurts speak the Udmurt language in the Vyatka River region, the Veps speak the Veps language, and the Votes people speak a Vote language.

    That in some instances a different language exists in each valley is perhaps well illustrated by the Finnish language with dialects in Finland including: Anjala, Hameen Laani, Helsinki, IItti, Jaala, Jyvaskyla, Kainuu, Karkku, Kemi, Kiihtelysvaara, Kuusamo, Kymen Laani, Kymenlaakso, Lahti, Lapin Laani, Mikkelin Laani, Nurmijarvi Uudenmaan Laani, Lolun Laani, Pohjanmaa, Pohjois Karjala, Pori, Satakunta, Savo, Somero, Suomussalmi, Tammela, Tampere, Tornio, Turku, Turun Ja Porin Laani, Tyrvaa, Utsjoki, Uudenmaan Laani, Vaasan Laani, Vaskevesi, Viljakkala, and Virrat; with dialects in Russia including Karelian Isthmus, Kurgolovo Peninsula, Ladoga Lake Region, Leningradskaia Oblast, and Olonets; with dialects in Sweden including Norrbotten and Vottangi; and with dialects in the Torne River Valley of Sweden and Finland.

    Finno Ugric Language Family - as per Alexeev with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face

    Ugric Group
    Khant (Khantic)
    Finnic Group
    Lapp (Lappic) - Lapp/Saami
    Nenet (Nenetic) *
    East Finnic - Finnish

    * to be changed by Alexeev from Finno Ugric to Samodic (obsolete Samoyedic)in Lecture 10

    Finno Ugric Language - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Finnic (sub-family)
    Baltic Finnic
    Hungarian (sub-family) - along with Khanty and Mansi form the Ugric group of the Finno Ugric sub family

    Finno Ugric Sub Family of Uralic Family - as per Arutiunov

    Finnic group
    Western (Baltic)
    Eastern (Permian)
    Southern (Volgaic)
    Mordvian (Erzia and Moksha dialects)
    Mari (Meadow and Highland dialects)
    Lapp (Saami)
    Ugric group

    Languages spoken by the Finno Ugric People as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face

    Bulgarian - Turkic Bulgars were Turkic, not Finno Ugric; they were assimilated by Slavs on the Danube;
    Komi - a Permian language
    Permian (Permic) - consists of Komi and Udmurt
    Udmurt - a Permian language
    Veps (Vepsians)
    Votiak (old name for Udmurts)
    Vote (spoken by Votes in the Baltic area; nearly extinct)

    Finno Ugrians People - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.

    Bulgars Turkic People (Bulgarians) - Turkic is not Finno Ugric
    Sami (Saami) European People (Lapps)


    In comparing the HOLLIS listings for the Finno Ugric languages with the listings by Alexeev (as modified by Arutiunov), the following comparisons can be made. HOLLIS lists the Bulgars Turkic people as Finno Ugric and lists Bulgarian in the following regions: Boboshtice, Ikhtiman, Silistrenski, Okrug, Sofia, Tihomir as well as areas in Macedonia, Pontikia, Greece, Romania, Russia, and Thrace. Arutiunov, however, states that the Turkic Bulgars were Turkic, not Finno Ugric, that they were assimilated by the Slavs on the Danube, and that the dialects listed above are Slavic 47.

    HOLLIS divides Finno Ugric: Finnic and Hungarian whereas the Russians have created the heading "Ugric" which encompasses Hungarian, Khanty, and Mansi. HOLLIS relates Khanty to Tungus 48 and relates Mansi 49 to Hungarian and Magyars (Hungarians, Palocs, Szeklers). Two groups listed by HOLLIS but not included by the Russians are Livonians 50 and Veps 51. Livonian is a district in Latvia and the Veps are a Finnish people of Russia.

    Finno Ugric Language

    Bulgarian ???
    Permian (Permic)
    Veps (Vepsians)

    [no extinct Finno Ugric languages]

    Finno Ugrians People

    Bulgars Turkic People (Bulgarians) ???
    Saami European People (Lapps)

    [no extinct Finno Ugric people]

    Languages in the Caucasus

    In the Caucasus the mountains are greater than five kilometers high. There are some individual language families but Professor Alexeev will only speak of the great families. Armenian 52 will be excluded because of its complexity. According to Alexeev, Kartvelian 53 is spoken in the western Caucasus. Kartli is the name of an ancient kingdom in the first century AD. Georgian is spoken in Georgia proper and Megrelian (Mingrelian) is spoken in western Georgia. Svanian is spoken in the central mountain region north of the Megrelian area. Georgian, Megrelian, and Svanian belong to the Kartic = Kartvelian Family. HOLLIS adds the Laz language to the Kartvelian group. Arutiunov comments that Laz and Megrelian are two dialects of a single language arbitrarily called Zanic.

    Information on language families in the Caucasus, as per Alexeev, is quite brief; information from HOLLIS on languages in the Caucasus is quite disjointed; confusion surrounds the usage of the terms: Abhazian, Abazian, Abazin, Abhazho-Abazian, Abaza, Abkhazians, Abkhaziia, and Abkhaz. Thus for the authoratative voice on languages and people of the Caucasus, I will defer to Arutiunov:

    "The North Causasian family stretches from the Black Sea Coast along the Caucasus Mountain Range (north slopes mostly) to the Caspian Sea. The North Caucasian Family is divided into two sub families: Abkhazo-Adigian and Nakh-Dagestanian. The Abkhazo-Adigian sub family consists of Adigian (two literary standards: Adigian proper in the Republic of Adigea and Kabardin-Circassian in theRepublics of Karachai-Circassia and Kabardin-Balkaria), Abkhazian (spoken in Abkhazia), Abazin (closely resembling Abkhazian; spoken in small pockets in Karachai-Circassia), and Ubykh (Peh), nearly extinct, spoken in an area between Abkhazian and Adigian."

    "There are more than thirty Nakh-Dagestani languages. Hurritic and Urartian also belonged to this group. Circassian (Cherkessi) is a Russian term; Adyge (Adigi) is self-denomination".

    Alexeev mentions that the Ubykhian people also belong to the Abkhazo-Adigian but live in eastern Turkey; Arutiunov comments that the Ubykhians emigrated from Abkhazia in the 1860's and by now have shifted to Turkish.

    Arutiunov continues:

    "There is a Middle Eastern or Near Eastern racial type claimed by M. Abdushelishvili and recognized generally by Alexeev. This type includes Jews of Palestine, Armenians, Lowland Caucasians, and its more massive Caucasionic variation of Caucasian highlanders. Linguistically Kartic = Southern Caucasian family".

    According to HOLLIS: Circassians are related to the Adygei and are geographically identified with the Adygeiskaia Avtonomnaia Oblast Russia. HOLLIS further relates the Circassians to Europe, Israel, and Jordan. In a keyword listing for a publication on the Adygi 54, Hollis lists Karachay Turkic people and Balkar Turkic people as well as Circassians and Caucasus. A listing on the Circassian languages retrieves the related headings of "Adygei language" and "Kabardian language".

    Alexeev continues: in drawing this ethnic map, we have the Adigian people on the Black Sea coast. Inland, and directly east, in a small area we have Balkarian (Balkar) 55 and a small pocket of Karachaian (Karachay) 56 both of which are to the north of the Svanians (both Balkarian and Karachaian belong to the Turkic family). To the east of the Svanians are the Ossets (from the Iranian sub-family); to the east of the Ossets is the Nakhs family 57; and to the east of the Nakhs and bordering the Caspian Sea are the Dagestanian people. The Dagestan language family contains some languages which only are spoken in one village 58. Comprising the Nakhs family are the Chechenian and Ingushian 59. [HOLLIS adds the Bats (Batsbi) language to Chechen and Ingush languages related to the Nakhs language; Arutiunov concurs with HOLLIS]

    As per Alexeev, four families that don't correspond to any other are located in an area in Azerbaijan which is directly south of the Dagestanian people. The Azerbaijan language belongs to the Turkic family (as do Balkarian and Karachaian).

    Alexeev does not list a Caucasian language family because he claims that there is no such thing; that the evidence does not substantiate one. HOLLIS has the following listing for Caucasian Languages 60: Abazin, Abkhaz, Abkhazo Adyghian, Bats, Chechen, Daghestan, Georgian, Ingush, Kartvelian, Nakh, Nakho Daghestan, Tapanta dialect, and Ubykh. Arutiunov comments: "Americans also should abandon as utterly incorrect, politically and scientifically, a usage of Caucasian as designating the 'white' or Europoid race. Caucasians are either native inhabitants of the Caucasus area (including Armenians, Azeris, Ossetians and other Turkic and Indo European speakers) or, linguistically, the people who speak Caucasian languages. However, if we adhere to a linguistic definition i.e. people who speak Caucasian languages, then the above must be excluded and the term would cover only Georgians or Kartwelic, Abkhazo-Adyghean and Nakh-Daghestanic. Racially or physically, the term Caucasionic should instead be used. This term was introduced by the Georgian antrhropologist M. Abdushelishvili 61".

    LANGUAGE FAMILIES IN THE CAUCASUS - As per Alexeev with additions in Bold Face by Arutiunov




    Abazian (and Abkhazian)




    (some of these languages only are spoken in one village; there are 29 languages as per Arutiunov)


    Iranian sub-family


    Kypchak sub-family
    Oguz sub-family

    CAUCASIAN LANGUAGES - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold type

    Abkhazo Adyghian - is sub-family of all 4 above
    Bats - Batsbi belongs to Nakh
    Chechen - along with Ingush belongs to Nakh
    Dargwa (and Kaitag and Kubachi dialects)
    Ginukh dialect - delete
    Kubachi dialect - delete
    Bezhti (and Gunzeb dialect)
    Tsez (Dido)
    Khvarshi (and Ginukh dialect)
    Udi - in northern Azerbaijan
    Khinalug - in northern Azerbaijan
    Kryz, Djek, Gaputl, and Budug (Shahdag languages in northern Azerbaijan)
    Georgian - same as Kartvelian
    Ingush - delete
    Kartvelian - same as Georgian
    Nakh - includes Batsbi, Chechen, Ingush
    Nakho Daghestan - includes Nakh and Daghestani
    Tapanta dialect - of Abaza
    Ubykh - emigrated from Abkazia and now speak Turkish

    Caucasian People as per HOLLIS (HOLLIS has no listing for Caucasian People; rather the listing for Caucasians retrieves "Caucasian Race" and includes: Indo Europeans, Mediterranean Race, Semites, Teutonic Race, Whites, and Working Class Whites)


    For Caucasian Languages, Arutiunov's directions are, for the most part, followed. Dialects are eliminated, as is true for all the language families listed above. The Caucasian People, other than referring to those people who live in the Caucasus, will be eliminated and recommendation will be made to those in the Harvard Library System that the entries for Caucasian Race need attention - HOLLIS's listing for Caucasian Race includes a mixture of race, language, and class and for the most part is pejorative.

    Caucasian Languages

    Abkhazo Adyghian sub family
    Nakho Daghestan sub family
    Tsez (Dido)
    Udi - in northern Azerbaijan
    Khinalug - in northern Azerbaijan
    Shadag - in northern Azerbaijan including Kryz, Djek, Gaputl, and Budug
    Kartvelian (Georgian) sub family

    [No extinct languages in the Caucasus]

    Caucasian People - a geographic term relating to those people who live in the Caucasus:

    Tsez (Dido)

    [no extinct people in the Caucasus]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Turkic

    According to Alexeev, the Turkic language family is one of the most complicated of families. Turkic occupies a great area in Eurasia yet it does not form a continuous area i.e. there are no common borders.

    HOLLIS lists Turkic languages in Central Asia, China (Xingjiang Uighur Autonomous region), Caucasus, Khurasan Province in Iran, Siberia, and Volga Valley. HOLLIS lists the following Turkic languages: Azerbaijani, Bashkir, Bulgaro Turkic, Chagatai, Chuvash, Gagauz, Kara Kalpak, Kazakh, Khakass, Khalaj, Nogai, Oghuz, Turkic languages northwest, Turkic languages southeast, and Turkic languages southwest. For the Turkic languages northwest, HOLLIS lists: Bashkir, Cara Kalpak, Kazakh, Kuman, Kyrgyz, Nogai, and Tatar. For the Turkic languages southeast, Hollis lists: Chagatai, Khorezmian Turkic, Salar, Uighur, and Uzbek. For the Turkic languages southwest, HOLLIS lists: Azerbaijani, Gagauz, Oghuz, Turkish, and Turkmen. Arutiunov comments that the northwest = Kypchak group; southwest = Oghuz group; southeast = Karluk group; and northeast = Altain, Khakass, Touvinian, Shor, and Yakut.

    As per Alexeev, in the Caucasus is the Azerbaijan language family located in several areas. HOLLIS lists an Azerbaijani language with dialects in Shaki, Azerbaijan; the Dmanisi region of the Georgia republic; and Tabriz, Iran. Alexeev states that Balkarian and Karachaian are sub-families of Azerbaijan.

    HOLLIS lists Balkarian as Balkar Turkic people and Karachian as Karachay Turkic people. HOLLIS lists the Lezgian languages as related to Azerbaijani and relates the Balkar Turkic people and Karachay Turkic peoople with the Kabardian language (related to Adygei) and to the Circassian languages.

    Arutiunov states that the above information from HOLLIS, beginning with the fourth sentence is absolutely wrong! He continues:

    "Karachai and Balkar are in the Kypchak group and Azerbaijani is in the Oguz group. Karachai and Circassians live in the Carachai-Circassian Republic; Balkars and Kabardins live in the Kabardin-Balkarian Republic. This is the political and geographical distribution. However, Karachai and Balkar are very close Turkic languages. Circassian and Kabardin are close dialects of Adigian language. Adigian and Turkic are NOT mutually related".

    HOLLIS relates the Circassian languages to the Adygei language and the Kabardian language 62. Of importance is that for the Balkar Turkic people, HOLLIS also includes a recent publication on civil rights infractions and crimes against minorities 63.

    As per Alexeev, Turkic is also located in the Upper Volga Valley where East Finnic is distributed. South of the East Finnic groups are two sub families speaking Turkic: the Chuvashian [Chuvash] and the Bashkirian [Bashkir]. The Tatarian [Tatar] language is also located in the Volga Valley. Tatar language dialects, according to HOLLIS, are located in China (Manchou), Crimea, and the Russia Federation in ten different locales.

    Alexeev continues: in Central Asia there are five groups who speak Turkic located in four geographical areas. Turkmenian [Turkmen] is spoken in the western part of Central Asia (in Turkmenistan), Uzbeian [Uzbek] is spoken in the desert area near the Aral Sea i.e. in Uzbekistan. Uzbek, according to HOLLIS, is also spoken in Afghanistan, the Aral Sea region of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, Khorezm, Namangan, Shakhrisyabz, Tajikistan, and nine different locations in Uzbekistan], Kara-Kalpakian [Kara-Kalpak] is the northern population of Uzbekistan, Kirgiz = Kirgizian [Kyrgyz] (are in Kirghizistan), and Kazakh or Kazah [Kazakh] (in Kazahkstan) i.e. spoken along the borders of China.

    Alexeev continues: Turkic is also spoken in eastern Siberia both in the mountains and flats. Altai-Kizi is spoken in the Altai and to the east in the Yenissei Valley is Khakassian [a republic in Siberia, as per Arutiunov]. In eastern Siberia in the Lena Valley, Yakutian is spoken. In the Tanno-Tuva region in the mountain area on the Yenisei River, Tuvinian (in Tuva) is spoken. Tuvinian is classic Mongolian. [Arutiunov comments: "this is wrong; Tuvinian is Turkic; Mongolian is Mongolic"] In western Siberia, in the south areas, a west Siberian Tatarian language is spoken. This language is also spoken in the Volga Valley (along with Chuvashian and Bashkirian).

    As per Alexeev: in Turkey, classic Turkish is spoken. [For the Turkish language, HOLLIS lists dialects in Central Asia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria (Turgovishtki Okrug and Vidin), Cyprus, Gaziantep, Turkey, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Vevsehir, Uzbekistan, and twelve different geographic locations in Turkey, and Yugoslavia (Prizren Serbia)]. Alexeev concludes: Classic Turkish is similar to Azerbaijan. Turkmens also live in eastern Iran and Afghanistan. Some Turkic groups live in western Mongolia.

    TURKIC (FAMILY) - as per Alexeev with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face

    (In Caucasus)

    Oguz group
    Azerbaijani (only Azerbaijani; others are Turkish, Gagauz, and Turkmen)
    Kypchak or Kuman group
    Balkarian (Balkar)
    Karachaian (Karachai)

    (In Volga Valley)

    Kypchak group
    Chuvashian (Chuvash) ???
    Bashkirian (Bashkir)
    Tatarian (Tatar)
    Volga Tatars
    Siberian Tatars
    Mishars (east of Moscow)

    (In Central Asia)

    Oguz group
    Turkmenian (Turkmen)
    Karluk group
    Uzbekian (Uzbek)
    Kypchak group
    Kara-Kalpakian (Kara-Kalpak)
    Kirgizian (Kyrgyz)

    (In Siberia)

    Siberian group
    Altai-Kizi (Altaian)
    Jakutian (Yakut)
    Tatarian - delete; replace with Tuvinian

    (In Turkey)

    Oguz group
    Classic Turkish

    Turkic Languages - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Type

    Azerbaijani - listed in Oguz
    Bashkir - listed in Kypchak
    Bulgaro Turkic - the Bulgars Turkic people are extinct
    Chagatai - listed in Karluk
    Chuvash ???
    Gagauz - listed in Oguz
    Kara Kalpak - listed in Kypchak
    Kazakh - listed in Kypchak
    Khakass - listed in the Siberian group
    Nogai - listed in Kypchak
    Oghuz - a group, not a language
    Turkic languages northwest (Kypchak)
    Kara Kalpak
    Kuman (Karachai, Balkar, Kumik)
    Turkic languages southeast (Karluk)
    Khorezmian Turkic language (dialect of Uzbek)
    Salar - in China
    Uighur - in China
    Turkic languages southwest (Oguz)
    Turkish - delete
    Turkmen - delete
    Turkic languages northeast (Siberian)

    Turkic People - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Type

    Afshar Turkic - close to Azerbaijani; in Iran
    Altai Turkic - Altaian
    Balkar Turkic
    Bashkir Turkic
    Bulgars Turkic - extinct
    Chuvash Turkic
    Huns - extinct
    Kara Kalpaks Turkic
    Karachay Turkic
    Karapapaks Turkic - close to Turkmen; in Iran
    Kipchak Turkic
    Kumyk Turkic (Kumik)
    Nogai Turkic
    Oghuz Turkic
    Pecheneg Turkic - extinct
    Qashqai - in Iran and Afghanistan (?)
    Tatars 64
    Teleut Turkic - Altaian
    Uighur Turkic
    Yakut Turkic
    Yuruks Turkic - dialect of Turkish


    The Turkic language family, as per Alexeev, and the Turkic language as per HOLLIS exhibited a direct relationship, and with Arutiunov adding the finer points, the Turkic language appears to be reaching a point of resolution. Likewise for the Turkic people. However, it again should be emphasized that both language and people are fluid; languages become extinct and people become assimilated into different geographic, religious, and political groups.

    Turkic languages in Eurasia

    Oguz group - southwest
    Kypchak (Kuman) group - northwest
    Kara Kalpak
    Kuman (Karachai, Balkar, Kumik)
    Kyrgyz (Kirgiz)
    Karluk group - southeast
    Salar (in China)
    Uighur (in China)
    Siberian group - northeast

    Turkic people in Eurasia

    Afshar Turkic (close to Azerbaijani)
    Altai Turkic (in Altai region of Siberia)
    Azerbaijanis (in Caucasus)
    Balkar Turkic (in Caucasus)
    Bashkir Turkic (in Volga Valley)
    Chuvash Turkic (in Volga Valley)
    Kara Kalpaks Turkic (in Central Asia)
    Karachay Turkic (in Caucasus)
    Karapapaks Turkic (close to Turkmen)
    Kazakhs (in Central Asia)
    Kipchak Turkic (in Caucasus, Central Asia, and Volga Valley)
    Kumyk (Kumik) Turkic (in Caucasus)
    Kyrgyz (in Central Asia)
    Nogai Turkic (in Caucasus)
    Oghuz Turkic (In Caucasus, Central Asia, Turkey)
    Tatars (in Volga Valley)
    Turkmens (in Central Asia)
    Turks (in Turkey)
    Tuvinians (in Siberia)
    Uighur Turkic (in China)
    Uzbeks (in Central Asia)
    Yakut Turkic (in Siberia)

    [Extinct Turkic people: Bulgars Turkic, Huns, Pecheneg Turkic][Extinct Turkic people: Bulgars Turkic, Huns, Pecheneg Turkic]

    The origin of the Turkic people is most difficult. Professor Alexeev feels that the origin of Turkic should be dated no earlier than the first millennium BC. Colin Renfrew 65 dates the origins of the Turkic people at 8-7 millennium BC and relates their origins to the origins of agriculture. According to Alexeev, there is no evidence at such an early period. This has been checked out by two Russians: Ivanov and Gamkrelidze 66. According to Alexeev, Renfrew's dating suggests a strong feeling of racism.

    Carlton Coon authored several books on racism 67; his work has been criticized by many people. Frederick Hulse 68 is another scholar who describes racial types. The Revolution of 1917 stopped racism in the USSR. Racism reappeared in 1949 when Stalin eliminated western influences. According to Arutiunov, what Stalin attempted to do, as was done in Tsarist time, was to channel the discontent of the masses against the Jews and some other minorities. Stalin toyed with a Russian chauvinist feeling to elicit more political support.

    [This is the end of Lecture 9]

    Lecture 10 can be found on the Downloads page

    Back (Chapter VI: Neolithic in Eurasia)

    Next Chapter VII - Part II: Bronze Age in Eurasia - (Lecture 11 and 12)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter VII

    1 V. Mair's recent excavations in Xingjiang reveal the presence of "Caucasian" or what Alexeev would call Europoid.[back]

    2 V. Arutiunov says that the Bronze Age in the Caucasus and Central Asia begins in the fourth (Early Bronze) millennium.[back]

    3 COMMENT: Turkistan is the area of Central Asian Turkic speaking Islamic nations i.e. the 5 former Soviet Republics (including Turkmenistan) and Xingjiang.[back]

    4 South Asia is the area once known as British India including Pakistan, Nepal, Ceylon etc.[back]

    5 Russian scholars Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov and Tamaz Valerianovich Gamkrelidze published:

    1984. "Indoevropeiskii iazyk i indoevropeitsy: rekonstruktsiia i istoriko-tipologicheskii analiz praiazyka i protokul'tury"; published in Tbilisi: Izd-vo Tbilisskogo Universiteta.

    This text was translated into English in by Johanna Nichols:

    1995. "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: a reconstruction and historical analysis of a Proto-language and a Proto-culture"; edited by Werner Winter with a preface by Roman Jakobson; published in Berlin; New York: M. de Gruyter.[back]

    6 Colin Renfrew's text is: 1987. "Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins" published in London by J. Cape.[back]

    7 Serbo-Croatian is spoken by the Serbs, Montenegrins, Croats, and Bosnians.[back]

    8 Wends (Sorbians) are a Slavic people who occupied eastern Germany during the early medieval period and now are surviving along the middle and upper Spree River.[back]

    9 The East Prussian language became extinct in the late seventeenth century. The country of Prussia no longer exists. Therefore, the Prussian people must have assimilated.[back]

    10 Frisian is a Germanic language of the Frisian people who occupy principally the Netherlands province of Friesland and the Frisian islands in the North Sea.[back]

    11 Dictionary definitions for Galician are:

    1) [Galicia, region and ancient kingdom of northwest Spain]; a native or inhabitant of Spanish Galicia; the language of the Galicians.

    2) Of or relating to Galicia, a division of Spain north of Portugal; of or relating to the Galician language.

    3) [Galicia, former Austrian crownland in east central Europe]; of or relating to Galicia, a former province of the Austro-Hungarian empire now a region of southwestern Poland and western area of the (then) USSR.

    4) A native or inhabitant of the former Austrian crownland of Galicia; a Galician Jew of Poland; a speaker of one of the several Yiddish dialects among eastern European Jews.[back]

    12 A fairly recent publication which relates Armenian to Anatolian and Indo-Aryan languages is:

    1976. "Indoevropeiskie iazyki: khetto-luviiskie iazyki, armianskii iazyk, indoariiskie iazyki" by M.S. Androvov; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    According to Arutiunov, Armenian and Anatolian were geographically continuous about 4 thousand years ago and mutually influenced.[back]

    13 HOLLIS lists Greek as belonging to the Mediterranean Race along with Latin. Maybe to Homer there was a Mediterranean race; however this concept is now archaic. Further, the notion of a Black Race is likewise obsolete. For the past several years, I have observed large populations of African American people in the DC area, and physically they are all unique. And although they unite themselves under the banner "Black", the pigmentation of skin runs the entire gamut from light to dark. At the "Million Man March" (actually 760,000 + 20% as per Farouk El Baz) all physical characteristics, from gracile to robustus, were represented. [back]

    14 Alexeev only mentions the Iranian subgroup of the Indo European language. HOLLIS lists three groups: Iranian, Indo Aryan, and Nuristani. Arutiunov confirms that Nuristani is somewhat intermediate between Iranian and Indo Aryan.[back]

    15 Proceedings from a recent congress on the Tokharian language:

    1994. "Tocharisch: Akten der Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellischaft Berlin, September 1990 / herausgegeben von Bernfried Schlerath" sponsored by the Indogermanische Gesellschaft; published in Reykjavik: Malvisindastofnun Haskola Islands.[back]

    16 A publication relating the Sogdian language to Old Turkic and Uighur languages is:

    1989. "Ulmas obidalar: Uzbekiston khalqlarining qadimgi ezma edgorliklari buiicha tadqiqotlar" by M. Ishoqov et al.; published in Toshkent: Uzbekiston SSR "Fan" nashrieti.[back]

    17 For the Indo Aryans, HOLLIS references three recent texts published in India:

    1992. "The problem of Aryan origins from an Indian point of view" by K.D. Sethna; published in New Delhi: Aditya Prakasana.

    1993. "Aryan invasion of India: the myth and the truth" by Navaratna S. Rajaram; published in New Delhi: Voice of India.

    1993. "The Aryans, a modern myth" by Paramesh Choudhury; published in New Delhi: Eastern Publishers' Distributor.[back]

    18 The only publication on the Parya Indic People listed in HOLLIS is:

    1963. "Indiiskii dialekt gruppy par'ia (Gissarskaia dolina): materialy i issledovaniia" by I.M. Oranskii; published in Moskva.

    According to Arutiunov, the Parya Indic People are a small group, northernmost of all Indo Aryan people, and the only Indo Aryans in the former USSR.[back]

    19 A recent publication on the Kashmiri language is:

    1987. "A descriptive study of Kashmiri" by Roopkrishen, Bhat; published in Delhi: Amar Prakashan.[back]

    20The only listing in HOLLIS for the Phalura language is:

    "Die Sprache von Sau in Ostafghanistan. Betirage zur Kenntnis des cardischen Phalura" by Georg Buddruss; published in Munchen: Kitzinger in Kommission. [back]

    21 The only publication on the Torwali language listed in HOLLIS is:

    1929. "Torwali: an account of a Dardic language of the Swat Kohistan" by Sir George A. Grierson ... based on materials collected in Torwal by Sir Aurel Stein ... with a note by Sir Aurel Stein on Torwal and its people and a map; published in London: Royal Asiatic society.[back]

    22 For Palic, HOLLIS references:

    1972. [Bible, N.T. Acts. Palikur] Atos: na lingua Palikur; published in Brasilia: Libraria Crista Unida.

    1990. "Beda palic sie slowa" by Karolina Turkiewicz-Suchanowska; published in Krakow: Miniatura.[back]

    23 The text by Parpola is:

    1994. "Deciphering the Indus Script" by A. Parpola; published in Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.[back]

    24 Dardic languages, according to Parpola are spoken in the mountain regions of the northwest from the Hindu Kush to Kashmir.[back]

    25 Two recent publications on Indo Aryans:

    1992. "The problem of Aryan origins from an Indian point of view" by Kaikhushru Dhunjibhay Sethna; published in New Delhi: Aditya Prakasana.

    1995. "The Aryan hoax, that dupes the Indians" by Paramesa Caudhuri; publiched in Calcutta: P. Choudhury.[back]

    26 The only listing for Parya Indic people in HOLLIS is:

    1963. "Indiiskii dialekt gruppy par'ia (Gissarskaia dolina): materialy i issledovianiia" by Iosif Mikhailovich Oranskii; published in Moskva.[back]

    27 In HOLLIS, a su search for "Nuristan" retrieved:

    1975. "Chitral and Kafiristan: a personal study" by Mohammad Afzal Khan; published in Peshawar: Ferozsons with keywords: "Kafiristan (Afghanistan)", Chitral District (Pakistan), and Nuristan (Afghanistan).

    And a su search for "Kafir" retrieved:

    1979. "Nuristan" by Lennart Edelbery and Schuyler Jones; published in Graz: Akadem. Druck- u. Verlagsanst.[back]

    28 HOLLIS relates the Nuristani language with Dardic and lists the following two publications on Nuristani languages:

    1983. "The Dardic and Nuristani languages" by Dzohoi Iosifovna Edelman; translated from the Russian by E.H. Tsipan; edited by N.A. Dvoryankov; published in Moscow: "Nauka" pub. House, Central Dept. of Oriental Literature.

    1984. "Nuristani buildings" by Lennart Edelberg; Pub. info: Aarhus Jysk arkaeologisk selskab. [keywords include "dwellings--Afghanistan--Nuristan" and "Nuristan (Afghanistan)--description and travel"] [back]

    29 For Nuristani languages, HOLLIS cites: [retrieves related heading: Bashgali language].[back]

    30 HOLLIS shows a direct relationship between Kafiri languages and Nuristani languages. For the entry "Kafiri languages", HOLLIS references: Kafiri Languages [retrieves: Nuristani languages].
    Also, HOLLIS relates Kafirs to Xhosa, Bantu, and Zulu in Africa, and mentions the Kafirs of Afghanistan (Hindu Kush), and the Kafir region of Pakistan.[back]

    31 A definitive study of Kafirs is:

    c1986. "The religion of the Kafirs: the pre-Islamic heritage of Afghan Nuristan" by Karl Jettmar; translated from the German by Adam Nayyar; with contributions from Schuyler Jones and Max Klimburg; published in Warminster, Wiltshire, England: Aris & Phillips.[back]

    32 The following publications are listed for the Bashgali language:

    1902. "Notes on the Bashgali (Kafir) language: compiled by J. Davidson: published in Calcutta: The Asiatic Society.

    1986. "Bashgali dictionary: an analysis of Cononel J. Davidson's notes on the Bashgali language: by Sten Konow; published in Delhi, India: Gian Pub. House.[back]

    33 A recent publication on the Xhosa language:

    1992. "IBhibliyografi yolwimi olusisiXhosa ukuya kutshokunyaka we-1990 / ihlanganiswe ngu M.A. Peters no C.P. Bothma; ihlelwe ngu G.T. Sirayi [Bibliography of the Xhosa language to the year 1990 / compiled by M.A. Peters and C.P. Bothma; Xhosa text edited by G.T. Sirayi; published in Pretoria: State Library. [back]

    34 In HOLLIS, a search for Kafir revealed the heading "Kafir language Bantu --Foreign words and phrases --Afrikaans language" with the citation:

    1948. "Afrikaanse woords in Xhosa, intreerede uitgespreeek in Pietermaritzburg op Mei 1948 by Gabriel Stefanus Nienaber; publlished in Pietermaritzbury: Natalse Universiteitskollege.[back]

    35 In HOLLIS, a kw search for Wakhi retrieved:

    1876. "On the Ghalchah languages (Wakhi and Sarikoli);published in Calcutta, printed by C.B. Lewis.

    Recent publications on the Wakhi include:

    1976. "IAzyki Vostochnogo Gindukusha" by A.L. Griunberg; published in Moskva: Nauka.

    ?1985. "Wahki language" by Ali Haqiqat; published in Hunza, Pakistan: Wakhi Culture Association.[back]

    36 The HOLLIS reference for Wama retrieves Akurio Indians of Surinam:

    1977. "The Akuriyo of Suriman: a case of emergence from isolation" by Peter Kloos: published in Copenhagen: International Secretariat of IWGIA.[back]

    37 For Makua, HOLLIS lists:

    1982. "The Muslim Zanzibaris of South Africa: the religious expression of a minority group, descendants of freed slaves" by G.C. Oosthuizen; published in Durban, South Africa: Research Institute, Dept. of Science of Religion, University of Durban-Westville. [back]

    38 For Italica the ancient city:

    1978. "Mosaicos romanos de Italica" by Antonio Blanco Freijeiro; published in Madrid: Instituto Espanol de Arqueologia "Rodrigo Caro" del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones d' ecas.

    1980. "Traianeum de Italica" by Pilar Leon Alonso; published in Sevilla: Monte de Piedad y Caja de Ahorros de Sevilla.[back]

    39 For a relationship between Proto Indo European and Nostratic see:

    1994. "The Nostratic macrofamily: a study in distant linguistic relationship" by Allan R. Bomhard; published in Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.[back]

    40 On the Chinese connection:

    1988. "Indo European vocabulary in Old Chinese: a new thesis on the emergence of Chinese language and civilization in the late Neolithic Age" by Tsung-Tung Chang; published in Philadelphia, PA: Dept. of Oriental Studies.[back]

    41 The Indo European Proto language:

    1995. "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: a reconstruction and historical analysis of a Proto language and a proto culture" by Tamaz Gamqrelize with a preface by Roman Jakobson; published in Berlin; New York: M. de Gruyter.[back]

    42 On Hittites and the ancient city of Zippalanda:

    1994. "Zippalanda: ein Kultzentrum im hethitischen Kleinasien" by Maciej Popko; published in Heidelberg: Universitatsverlag.

    On excavations in Turkey:

    1986. "L'Anatolia hittita: repertori archeologici ed epigrafici" by Massimiliano Marazzi; published in Roma: Dipartimento di scienze storiche archeologiche e anthropologiche dell'antichita, Universita degli studi di Roma "La Sapienza".

    On Hittites and the Achaeans:

    1960. "Achaeans and Hittites" by George Leonard Huxley; published in Oxford.[back]

    43 On Luwian religion see:

    1974. "Hurritische und luwische Riten aus Kizzuwatna" by Volkert Haas; published in Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker.[back]

    44 On archaeology in Bulgaria:

    1986. "The Thracian tomb near the village of Sveshtari" by Alexander Fol et al.; published in Sofia: Svyat Publishers.

    On Thracians and the Mycenaean civilization:

    1989. "Thracians and Mycenaeans: proceedings of the Fourth Interlational Congress of Thracology, Rotterdam, 24-26 September 1984" edited by Jan G.P. Best and Nanny M.W. De Vries; published in Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill.[back]

    45 On the Tocharians and the Yueh-Chih:

    1987. "On the 'first' Indo Europeans: the Tokharian-Yuezhi and their Chinese homeland" by A.K. Narain; published in Bloomington, Ind: Indiana University, Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.[back]

    46 Nenets are not Finno Ugric; they are Samodic (obsolete Samoyedic); see lecture 10.[back]

    47 This situtation creates an interesting problem: at which point in the assimilation process does an individual cease being a Turkic Bulgar (Finno Ugric as per HOLLIS; Turkic as per Arutiunov) and become a Slav (Indo European as per HOLLIS and Arutiunov)?.[back]

    48 On the relationship between Khanty and Tungis:

    1975. "Tungusische Lehnworter des Ostjakischen" by Istvan Futaky: published in Wiesbaden: In Kommission bei Harrassowitz.

    Another significant publication on the Khanty and Mansi:

    1955. "The Ostyak (Khanty) and the Vogul (Mansi)" by Indiana University. Graduate Program in Uralic and Asian Studies: published in New Haven: Human Relations Area Files. [back]

    49 On Mansi and Magyars:

    1954. "Hungarian and Vogul mythology: by Geza Roheim; published in Locust Valley, NY: J.J. Augustin.[back]

    50 A recent publication on Livonians is:

    1988. "Liniesu apgerbs 10.-13. gs." by Anna Zarina; published in Riga: "Zinatne". [Keywords are Livonians--Antiquities; excavations (Archaeology)--Latvia][back]

    51 A publication on Veps:

    1955. "The Vepsians" by Indiana University. Graduate Program in Uralic and Asian studies; published in New Haven: Human Relations Area Files.[back]

    52 Alexeev claims that Armenia is a complex language and therefore excludes it from discussion; HOLLIS profiles Armenian in a fashion similar to most other languages, has 511 entries, and relates Armenian to Anatolian and Indo-Aryan.
    Arutiunov comments that Armenian, Anatolian, and Indo Aryan have split from early Indo European more or less in the same area, but linguistically are not too closely related.[back]

    53 HOLLIS concurs with Alexeev that Georgian, Mingrelian, and Svan are Kartvelian Languages, but also adds the Laz language.

    A recent publication on the Laz language is:

    1994. "Xalzuri sibrzne" by semdgenelebi R. Serozia and O. Memisise"; published in Tbilisi: Almanaxi "Mtsgemsi".

    Arutiunov comments that Kartvelian is the same as Georgian.[back]

    54 The publication on the Adygi is entitled:

    1974. "Adygi, balkartsy i karachaevtsy v izvestiiakh evropeiskikh avtorov XIII-XIX vv." by V.K. Gardanov;published in Nal'chik: "El'brus".[back]

    55 For Balkarian, HOLLIS retrieves Balkar Turkic People and lists the following recent publications:

    1991. "Drevnie verovaniia balkartsev i karachaevtsev: kratkii ocherk" by Makhti Chimaevich Dzhurtubaev; published in Nal'chik: El'brus.

    1992. "Narodnve traditsii kabardintsev i balkartsev" by A.I. Musukaev and A.I. Pershits; published in Nal'chik: A.I. Musukaev, A.I. Pershits.

    1992. "Balkariia: istoricheskii ocherk" by Misost Kuchukovich Abaev; published in Nal'chik: El'brus.

    1993. "Karachaevtsy i balkartsy - drevnii narod Kavkaza" by E.P. Alekseeva; published in Moskva: "Briz".

    1994. "Repressirovannye narody: istoriia i sovremennost': tezisy dokladov i soobshchenii 5-i Vserossiiskoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii 6-7 marta 1994 g., posviashchennoi 50-letiuu deportatsii balkarskogo naroda" by redkollegiia S.I. Akieva; published in Nal'chik.[back]

    56 The Karachay Turkic people speak a Karachay Balkar language. A recent archaeological publication on the site Karachay-Cherkessia is:

    1992. "Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Karachaevo-Cherkesii" by E.P. Alekseeva; published in Moskva: "Nauka".[back]

    57 For the Nakh languages which are a subcategory of Caucasian languages, HOLLIS lists Nakh language as being related to Bats, Chechen, and Ingush; Arutiunov comments that the Nakh language includes Bats (Batsbi), Chechen, and Ingush.[back]

    58 HOLLIS lists 7 languages and 2 dialects for the Dagestanian people; Arutiunov comments that there are 29 languages for the Dagestan people.[back]

    59 The Chechen people speak the Chechen language and live in Chechenia. These people continue to seek their independence and have proven to be a serious embarassment for Boris Yeltzen and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Recent publications on the Chechens are:

    1995. "Chechnya" by the United States Central Intelligence Agency; published in Washington, DC: CIA.

    1995. "Usloviia soderzhaniia zaderzhannykh v zone vooruzhennogo konflikta v Chechenskoi Respublike; Obrashchenie s zaderzhannymi: Doklad Nabliudatel'noi missii pravozashchitnykh obshchestvennykh organizatsii v zone vooruzhennogo konflitka v Chechne" by sostaviteli O. Orlov, A. Cherkasov, and S. Sirotkin; published in Moskva: "Memorial".

    The Ingush people speak the Ingush language and live in Ingushetia, Russia.[back]

    60 A recent publication on the Caucasian language is:

    1992. "Caucasian perspectives" edited by George Hewitt; published in Munchen: Lincom Europa.[back]

    61 A recent article by M.E. Abdushelishvili is:

    1984. "Craniotemy of the Caucasus in the Feudal Period"; in "Current Anthropology"; 25:4 (August-October); pp. 505-509.[back]

    62 The following publications on the Balkar Turkic People, the Karachay Turkic people, and Karachay Cherkessia (Russia) are:

    1974. "Adygi, balkantsy i karachaevtsy v izvestiiakh evropeiskikh avtorov XIII-XIX vv" by V.K. Gardanova; published Nal'chik: "El'brus"

    c1990. "Etnokul'turnaia situatsiia v Karachaevo-Cherkesskoi Avtonomnoi Oblasti" by S.A. Arutiunov, IA.S. Smirnova, and G.A. Sergeeva; published in Moskva: Institut etnologii i antropologii AN SSSR.

    1993. "Karachaevtsy i balkartsy - drevnii narod kavkaza" by E.P. Alekseeva; published in Moskva: "Briz".[back]

    63 On civil rights infractions against minorities i.e. the Balkar Turkic people:

    1994. "Repressirovannye narody: istoriia i sovremennost': tezisy dokladov i soobshchenii 5-i Vserossiiskoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii 6-7 marta 1994 g., posviaschchennoi 50-letiiu deportatsii balkarskogo naroda" by S.I. Akieva; published in Nal'chik.[back]

    64 HOLLIS lists the following Tatar groups (tribes): Crimean Tatars, Jou Jan Tatar Tribe, Kazan Tatars, Kyzyl Tatars, Manchus, and Mishar Tatars.[back]

    65 Colin Renfrew's publication:

    1987. "Archaeology and Language: the puzzle of Indo-European Origins" published in London: J. Cape.[back]

    66 These two Russians are Tamaz Valerianovich Gamkrelidze and Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov. The first publication is in Russian and entitled:

    1984. "Indoevropeiskii iazyk i indoevropeitsy: rekonstruktsiia i istoriko-tipologicheskii analiz praiazyka i protokul'tury" and is published in Tbilisi: Izd-vo Tbilisskogo universiteta.

    The English version by Johanna Nichols and edited by Werner Winter is entitled:

    1995. "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: reconstruction and historical analysis of a Proto-language and a Proto-culture" with a preface by Roman Jakobson; published in Berlin; New York: M. De Gruyter.[back]

    67 Carleton Coon's texts on race are numerous:

    1930. "The Races of Europe"; published in New York: The Macmillan Company.

    1935. "Sources From Which Linguistic Map of North America Was Compiled" compiled with Frederick Johnson and Clyde Kluckhohn; published in Cambridge, Mass.: The Museum.

    1936. "The Racial Characteristics of Syrians and Armenians" based upon data collected by W.B. Cline, C.S. Coon, J.M. Andrews, and W.C. Dupertuis, by Carl C. Seltzer: published in Cambridge, Mass: The Museum.

    1950. "The Mountains of Giants: A Racial and Cultural Study of the North Albanian Mountain Ghegs"; published in Cambridge, Mass: The Museum.

    1950. "Races: A Study of the Problems of Race Formation in Man"; with Stanley M. Garn and Joseph B. Birdsell; published in Springfield, Ill.: C.C. Thomas.

    1965. "The Living Races of Man" with Edward E. Hunt, Jr; published in New York: Knopf.

    1971. "The Origin of Races"; published in New York: Knopf.

    1982. "Racial Adaptations"; published in Chicago: Nelson-Hall.[back]

    68 Frederick Hulse has two relevant works:

    1939. "Migration and Environment: A Study of the Physical Characteristics of the Japanese Immigrants to Hawaii and the Effects of Environment on their Descendants"; authored by Harry Shapiro with the field assistance of Frederick Hulse; published in London: Oxford University Press.

    1963. "The Human Species; An Introduction to Physical Anthropology"; published in New York: Random House.[back]

    VII (continued)


    [Lecture 10 Delivered 25 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    Lecture ten is a continuation of ethnic interpretations in Eurasia during the Bronze Age. Professor Alexeev introduces the concept of super language families and identifies: the Uralic Super Family and the Altaic Super Family. The lecture begins with a discussion of the Samoyedian Family and clarification of the family to which the Nenets belong. Alexeev tells us to return to the previous lecture and make an important change because he has in fact made a gross error. We are told to remove the Nenet = Nenetic group from the Finnic sub-family of Finno Ugric and place it within the Samoyedian Family. Thus Samoyedian with its three sub-families of Nganassan, Entsi, and Nenetic is an independent family and a member, along with Finno-Ugric, of the Uralic Super Family; Nenetic is not a member of the Finnic sub-family as had previously been stated.
    A second super family is the Altaic. Altaic is composed of both Turkic and Mongolian. The Japanese and Korean languages still have not been appropriately placed; Japanese doesn't relate either to Mongolian or Turkic, and Korean is similar to Altaic but doesn't relate to one particular family.

    As per Arutiunov, the Nostratic family tree profiles as such:

    "Finnic (Baltic, Permic, Volgaic) and Ugric (Hungarian, Mansi, Khanty) are subgroups of Finno Ugric, one of the three branches of the Uralic language family. In addition to Finno Ugric, the Uralic group consists of Samodic (Samoyedic) and Yukaghir (Yukaghir is still a rather hypothetical branch). Samodic subdivides into Northern Samodic (Nenets, Entsi, Nganassan) and southern Samodic (Selkup and some other extinct languages).
    Altaic, consisting of more or less established divisions of Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic (with Manchu), and the still rather hypothetical groups of Korean and Japanese unites with Uralic to form the Uralo Altaic group (still rather hypothetical) which along with Dravidic form the Eastern branch of the Nostratic family (this eastern branch of Nostratic is also hypothetical). As well, the hypothetical western branch of the Nostratic family consists of three groups: Indo-European, Semite-Khamitic, and ?Kartic (Georgian). Thus the hypothetical western branch (Indo European, Semite Khamitic, Kartic) and the hypothetical Eastern group (Uralo Altaic and Dravidic) form the hypothetical Nostratic Mega Language Family".

    As per Alexeev:

    "In Siberia in a vast area extending from the Lena River Valley southeast to the Amur River Valley and to the Tatar Strait is the Tunguso-Manjurian Family with its seven sub-families. On the Chukot Peninsula extending to Canada, Alaska, and Greenland are the Kamchata and Eskoaleutian families.
    Four isolated families which do not relate to any other are located in Siberia and on Hokaido Island, Japan. The Nivhs, Kets, and Yukaghirs are in Siberia and the Ainu who were originally from Siberia lived on Hokaido which belonged to Japan until after World War II when the territory was given to the USSR. The final Ainu migrated to Japan in the 1950's.
    In concluding this substantive lecture on linguistics, Alexeev introduces the concept of mega family, most specifically the Nostratic Mega Family as pioneered by Nikoli Marr and ?W. Pedersen".

    What I have attempted to do in recording this lecture is to present the Alexeev information with substantive comments by Arutiunov as contrasted with the information gleaned from HOLLIS. For some of the ethnic groups I am able to resolve a listing of languages and the people; for others I am unable to reach a resolution.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Samoyedian

    As per Alexeev, located in northern European Russia, western Siberia, and the Taymyr Peninsula (Taymyr is located between the Yenissei and Khatanga Rivers and borders on the Arctic Ocean) is
    the Samoyedian Family i composed of three sub-families: 1) the Nganasanian, 2) the Ensier, and 3) the Nenetic (Nenets). The Nganasanians ii are a small population of 1,000. The Ensier iii people live in the lower Yenissei River Valley. The Nenetic people number 30,000 - 35,000 iv. Samoyedic was first thought to be related to Finno-Ugric, but this is old information. Now the Samoyedian is thought of as an independent family enclosed in the super family, Uralic.
    HOLLIS relates the Samoyedic languages to Nganasan, Selkup, and Ural Altaic languages; for the heading "Ural Altaic" HOLLIS lists: Altaic, Samoyedic, Tokharian, and Uralic. HOLLIS lists the Samoyeds (people) as consisting of the Entsy, Nentsy, Nganasani, Selkups, and Tuvinians.
    In creating the above Nostratic family tree, Arutiunov divides Samodic into North Samodic consisting of Nenets, Entsy, and Nganassan and South Samodic consisting of Selkup and some extinct dialects. As per Arutiunov, Tuvinians are Turkic;
    however, some of them might have been Samodic speaking not so long ago. Tuvinian shows some traces of Samodic and some late Mongolian influence.

    Samoedian Family - as per Alexeev
    1. Nganasanian
    2. Ensier (Entsy)
    3. Nenetic (Nentsy)

    Samoyedic Languages - as per HOLLIS with comments by Arutiunov in Bold Face
    1. Nganasan
    2. Selkup
    3. Ural Altaic
    a. Altaic
    b. Samoyedic
    c. Tokharian - is Indo European
    d. Uralic

    Samodic Languages - as per Arutiunov 1. North Samodic
    a. Entsy
    b. Nenets
    c. Nganassan
    2. South Samodic
    a. Selkup
    b. other extinct languages

    Samoyeds (Samodic) People - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face
    1. Entsy
    2. Nentsy (Nenets)
    3. Nganasani (Nganassan)
    4. Selkups
    5. Tuvinians - Tuvinians are now Turkic; some might have been Samodic speaking not so long ago; Tuvinian shows some traces of Samodic and some late Mongolian influence


    Samodic (Samoyedic) Language
    1. North Samodic
    a. Entsy
    b. Nenets
    c. Nganassan
    2. South Samodic
    a. Selkup

    [Extinct Samodic languages: ???]

    Samodic (Samoyedic) People
    1. Entsy
    2. Nentsy (Nenets)
    3. Nganasani (Nganassan)
    4. Selkups

    Ethnic Interpretations: Ural-Altaic

    Alexeev claims that some scholars are trying to unify Uralic and Altai but that this theory is not supported. HOLLIS, on the other hand, lists Ural Altaic languages: Altaic, Samoyedic, Uralic, and Tokharian (Yueh Chih). HOLLIS lists Uralic languages: Finno Ugric, Proto Uralic, Samoyedic, and Yukaghir. And HOLLIS lists Altaic languages: Korean, Manchu (JuChen), Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu (Evenki), and Turkic.
    For the Ural Altaic people, HOLLIS lists: Pan Turanianism (Turanians = Ural Altaic people) and Uralic people. For Uralic peoples HOLLIS lists Finno Ugrians and Samoyeds. HOLLIS has no listing for the Altaic people. It should be noted that HOLLIS also lists Tokharian (Yueh Chih) as an Indo European language and an Indo European people. Arutiunov also shows a unification of Uralic and Altaic = Uralo-Altaic; however, he calls the unification still rather hypothetical.

    Ural Altaic Languages - as per HOLLIS with additions in Bold Face by Arutiunov
    1. Altaic languages v
    a. Korean and Japanese
    b. Manchu (JuChen)
    c. Mongolian
    d. Tungus-Manchu (Evenki)
    e. Turkic
    2. Samoyedic (Samodic; subdivision of Uralic)
    3. Uralic
    a. Finno Ugric
    b. Proto Uralic - major heading to include Finno Ugric, Samoyedic, Yukaghir
    c. Samoyedic - Samodic
    d. Yukaghir
    4. Tokharian (Yueh Chih) - Tokharian is Indo European; and is extinct

    Ural Altaic People - as per HOLLIS
    1. Pan Turanianism (Turanians) vi
    2. Uralic people (Finno Ugrians and Samoyeds)


    Ural Altaic Language
    1. Altaic
    a. Korean
    b. Japanese
    c. Mongolic
    d. Tungus - Manchu (Evenki)
    e. Turkic
    2. Uralic
    a. Finno Ugric
    b. Samodic
    c. Yukaghir
    3. Tokharian (Yueh Chih) ??? vii

    Ural Altaic People [HOLLIS has no listing for Altaic People]
    1. Uralic (Finno Ugrians, Samoyeds, Yukaghir)
    2. Altaic (Korean, Japanese, Mongolic, Tungus- Manchu [Evenki], Turkic)

    Ethnic Interpretations: Mongolian

    According to Alexeev, located on the coast of Lake Baikal and the surrounding Siberian regions is the Mongolian Family of Buriat = Buriatic people. They leave a literary tradition rich in arts, ballads and songs, drama, epic poetry, fiction, and folk literature and folk songs. Some Buriats live in Mongolia.
    As per Alexeev, Mongols live in Outer Mongolia and northern China (Inner Mongolia). Outer Mongolian population is 1.5 million. In Inner Mongolia the population numbers 9-11 million. According to HOLLIS, Mongols also live in Afghanistan, Central Asia, Azerbaijan, Caucasus, China, Manchuria, Europe, Hungary, Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Poland, Russia, and Turkey. However, according to Arutiunov:

    "the Mongols were in the above places as conquerors in the time of Jenghiz-Khan (13th century) but disappeared (assimilated or retreated). Now there is one pocket in Afghanistan (Mogols), one west of the Volga delta (Kalmucks), and some in western and southern China but basically they are the Mongols of Inner and Outer Mongolia and the Buriats of the Lake Baikal area".

    According to HOLLIS, the Mongols include the Buriats, Hazaras, Huns, Kalmyks, Khitan Chinese People, Mongour Chinese People, Oirats, Ordos Mongolian Tribe, Tanawalis Pakistani People, and the Tartars. Arutiunov comments that the Mogols are Mongol speaking; the Hazaras are culturally similar nomads, but speak Tadjik.

    From HOLLIS, the Mongolian Language includes: Buriat, Dagur, Eastern Yuku, Kalmyk, Khitan, Mongolian, Mongour, Oirat, Pao An, and Tung Hsiang; Arutiunov concurs with HOLLIS.

    Mongol Language - as per HOLLIS
    1. Buriat
    2. Dagur (HOLLIS also lists Solon, a dialect of Dagur, under Tungus-Manchu)
    3. Eastern Yuku
    4. Kalmyk
    5. Khitan
    6. Mongolian
    7. Mongour
    8. Oirat
    9. Pao An
    10. Tung Hsiang

    Mongol People - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face.
    1. Buriats
    2. Hazaras - they speak Tadjik
    3. Huns
    4. Kalmyks
    5. Khitan Chinese People
    6. Mongour Chinese People
    7. Oirats
    8. Ordos Mongolian Tribe
    9. Tanawalis Pakistani People - delete viii
    10. Tartars - delete ix


    Mongol Language (NOT RESOLVED)
    1. Buriat
    2. Dagur ???
    3. Eastern Yuku ???
    4. Kalmyk
    5. Khitan
    6. Mongolian
    7. Mongour
    8. Oirat
    9. Pao An ???
    10. Tung Hsiang ???

    Mongol People (NOT RESOLVED)
    1. Buriats
    2. Huns ???
    3. Kalmyks (Kalmucks)
    4. Kitan Chinese People
    5. Mongour Chinese People
    6. Oirats
    7. Ordos Mongolian Tribe
    8. Tanawalis Pakistani People ???
    9. Tartars ???

    Ethnic Interpretations: Korean and Japanese

    As per Alexeev: "on Korea is a special language similar to Altaic but it cannot be related to one particular family". HOLLIS lists eleven dialects and a subject category of "Korean Language influence on Japanese". HOLLIS also lists Korean as a sub group of Altaic.
    Alexeev continues: "on the Japanese Islands, the Japanese language cannot be related either to Mongolian or Turkic yet shows a strong relationship to northern Siberia". Arutiunov adds that there are 7 main dialects of Japanese and many local sub dialects. HOLLIS lists the Ryukyuan language as the only language related to Japanese and does not include Japanese as a sub group of the Altaic language family x. Ryukyu is an island chain and includes Okinawa. Arutiunov comments: "the Ryukyan language is closely related to Japanese; the Korean relation is hypothetical".
    Alexeev: "supposedly the Mongolian and Turkic languages are related in that they share a common origin called Altaic, a super family". That Mongolian and Turkic are sub groups of the Altaic language is also confirmed in HOLLIS: "the homeland of Altaic is southwestern Siberia and Mongolia".
    Alexeev continues: "in the areas of eastern Asia and southern Siberia, scholars are looking for a Japanese and a Korean language, but they cannot date it. Currently Japanese scholars remain interested in southern Siberia, Lake Baikal area, the Altai, and Upper Yenissei Valley. Turkic and Mongolian languages are studied in Japanese Universities and are as strong as these language studies in universities in Germany, Russia, and the United States. Korean = Altaic is a weaker relationship than Japanese = Altaic".
    HOLLIS, however, includes Korean as a major subdivision of Altaic along with Manchu, Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu, and Turkic. HOLLIS does not include Japanese as an Altaic language.

    Altaic Languages - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face
    a. Korean and Japanese
    b. Manchu (JuChen)
    c. Mongolian
    d. Tungus-Manchu (Evenki)
    e. Turkic

    Ethnic Interpretations: Tunguso-Manjurian (Tungus-Manchu)

    As per Alexeev, "in central Siberia and the Chukot Peninsula the land is high but the landscape is flat and covered by forest. Here live the Evenks people xi who speak Evenkian. Evenks people or Evenki are also referred to as Tungus. They are a Mongolian people, these Evenki Asian people, and are related to Manchu. They are found in eastern Siberia in the Yenissei River region and the Amur River basin. Many are still nomadic groups. With a population of 40,000, they are the main population of eastern Siberia and live in small tribes, each with its own dialect".
    HOLLIS lists Tungus Manchu as synonymous with Evenki. Arutiunov adds that Tungus = Evenki and that Manchu-Tungus [also listed in HOLLIS as = Tungus-Manchu] is a branch of Altaic.
    Alexeev continues: "on the coast of the Okhotsk Sea are the Evens people. They are a small group who speak Evenian. In an area extending from the Tatar Strait (a body of water which separates Sakhelon Island from Russia) to the Amur River Valley which is the border between Manchuria and Russia, to areas in northern China are the Ulchian, Nanaitsy, Udegeian, and Orochon families. From south to north along the Amur River are the Udegeian, the Nanaitsy, and Ulchian. To the west of the Amur Valley are the Orochon. In northern China i.e. Manchuria are the Manjurian people.

    HOLLIS lists Orochon (Orochee) as a dialect related to the Nanai (Goldi) language of the Tungus-Manchu family (Evenki) and the Altaic Super Family.
    As per Alexeev, "in American literature, the name Evenks is called Tungus = Tungusian xii. In Russian literature the name Evenks is preserved. The above peoples belong to the Tunguso-Manjurian (Tungus-Manchu) family. The Manjurian people or Manchu are located in Manchuria and are related to the Tungus. Originally the Manchu were nomadic until they conquered China and established the Manchu Dynasty in 1644".

    (in Lena Valley)
    Tunguso-Manjurian Family - as per Alexeev
    1. Evenks
    2. Evens
    3. Udegeian (??? Ju Chen)
    4. Nanaitsy (Nanai or Goldi)
    5. Ulchian (??? Olcha)
    6. Orochon
    7. Manjurian (Manchu)

    Tungus-Manchu Language - as per HOLLIS
    1. Even
    2. Evenki (Tungus)
    3. Ju Chen
    4. Manchu (same as Ju Chen)
    5. Nanai
    6. Negidal
    7. Olcha
    8. Orochon
    9. Orok (Orokolo)
    10. Sibo
    11. Solon - a dialect of the Dagur language
    12. Dagur xiii

    Tungus-Manchu People xiv - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face
    1. Evenki (Tunguses)
    a. Ilu Manchurian people
    b. Ju Chen Manchurian people
    c. Mokhe Asian people
    d. Oroch Asian people
    e. Sushen Manchurian people
    f. Negidals (north of Amur) xv
    g. Uilta (Orok) on Sakhalin
    2. Evens (no listing in HOLLIS)
    3. Ju Chen Manchurian people
    4. Manchu (same as Nanai Asian people)
    5. Nanai (Goldi) Asian people
    6. Olcha Asian people
    7. Orochon (Orochee) - dialect of Nanai
    8. Orok (Orokaiva) Papua New Guinea people
    9. Sibo Chinese people
    10. Solon


    Tungus-Manchu Language (UNRESOLVED)
    1. Even
    2. Evenki (Tungus)
    3. Ju Chen
    4. Manchu (same as Ju Chen)
    5. Nanai
    6. Negidal
    7. Olcha
    8. Orochon
    9. Orok (Orokolo; ??? same as Uilta)
    10. Sibo
    11. Solon ???
    12. Dagur ???

    Tungus-Manchu People (UNRESOLVED)
    1. Tunguses (Evenki)
    a. Ilu Manchurian people ???
    b. Ju Chen Manchurian people
    c. Mokhe Asian people ???
    d. Oroch Asian people
    e. Sushen Manchurian people ???
    f. Negidals (north of Amur)
    g. Uilta (Orok) on Sakhalon
    2. Evens ???
    3. Ju Chen Manchurian people (same as Manchu)
    4. Manchu (same as Nanai [Goldi] Asian people)
    5. Olcha Asian people
    6. Orok (Orokaiva) Papua New Guinea people ??? 7. Sibo Chinese people
    Ethnic Interpretation: Kamchadal and Eskoaleutian (Eskaleut)

    The Chukchi people are located on the Chukot Peninsula. The Chukchi, also known as Chukchee, Chookchie, Chukcie etc., are a Siberian Americanoid people allied to the Itelmen and Koryak xvi people [both Alexeev and Arutiunov mention the Itelmen; HOLLIS has no listing]. The Koryak are an Americanoid people of northern Siberia who speak several dialects closely related to the Luorawetlan language xvii. As per Arutiunov: "there are 7 dialects of sedentary fishermen and 1 of nomadic reindeer breeders. The latter serves as a lingua franca for the rest". The Kamchadal xviii are Paleo Asiatic people of the central Kamchatka Peninsula who are chiefly hunters and fishers. Luorawetlan is the language of the Chukchi; the Koryak, Itelmen, and Kamchadal peoples speak languages closely related to Luorawetlan. The language of the Chukchi exhibits significant differentiation in pronunciation between men and women.
    On the Chukot Peninsula and also in northern Canada, Alaska, and Greenland are the Eskimo people. Eskimo is a name applied by the Algonquins to the tribes located north of them. According to Arutiunov: "the Eskimos call themselves Inuit (North Alaska to Greenland) and Yupik (Siberia and West Alaska). The Eskimo dialects are geographically based".
    According to HOLLIS the dialects include Alaska, Kodiak Island (Alaska), Franklin Northwest Territories of Canada, Greenland, Ammassakik District (Greenland), Newfoundland - Labrador, Baffin Island, Cumberland Peninsula (Northwest Territories), Igloolik Northwest Territories, Nouveau Quebec (Quebec Province), Ungava Peninsula (Quebec Province), Chaplino (Russia), and Chukot Peninsula (Russia).
    The Hyperboreans xix are an Arctic people such as the Chukchi and Koryak of northeastern Asia and the Eskimo (Inuit and Yupik) of Siberia, Alaska, and Greenland. According to HOLLIS, the Hyperborean language includes Ainu, Aleut, Chukchi, Eskimo, Gilyak, Kamchadel, Koryak, and Yukaghir.
    As per Alexeev, "scholars once thought the Chukchi and Eskimo peoples spoke different languages. It was Franz Boas xx and the American Jesup expedition across the Bering Sea who discovered that the Chukchi and Eskimo languages are related (the last volume of the expedition is published in the 1970's by Brill publishers xxi)". However, and of utmost importance, Arutiunov states: "the Chukchi and Eskimo (Inuit and Yupik) are related physically but not linguistically".
    Alexeev continues: "Boas also worked with the Eskimo and Athapaskan so with evidence from the Athapaskans and the people of the Kamchatka Peninsula (the Kamchatals), he then found that the Eskimo language is related to Aleutian". Arutiunov confirms that Eskimo is related to Aleutian but adds: "Eskimo, Athapaskan, and Kamchatal are in no ways related to each other".

    Kamchadal Family - as per Alexeev
    1. Itelmen (no listing in HOLLIS)
    2. Chukchi
    3. Koryak

    Eskaleutian Family - as per Alexeev
    1. Eskimo
    2. Aleutian

    Hyperborean Language - as per HOLLIS with additions by Arutiunov in Bold Face
    [Hyperborean is an obsolete term; there is no Hyperborean language family xxii]
    1. Chukchi - N.E. Paleoasiatic
    2. Eskimo - Eskaleut
    3. Aleut - Eskaleut
    4. Kamchadal - N.E. Paleoasiatic
    5. Ainu - recently connected with Altaic
    6. Gilyak - isolated
    7. Koryak - N.E. Paleoasiatic
    8. Yukaghir - Uralic xxiii

    Northeast Paleoasiatic Language - as per Arutiunov
    1. Chukchi
    2. Kamchadal
    3. Koryak

    Eskaleut Language - as per Arutiunov
    1. Eskimo
    2. Aleut

    Arctic People (Hyperborean) - as per HOLLIS
    1. Chukchi
    2. Eskimos
    3. Evenki Asian People - TUNGUS-MANCHU
    4. Kamchadals
    5. Kets - ???
    6. Khanty - FINNO UGRIC
    7. Komi - FINNO UGRIC
    8. Koryaks
    9. Mansi - FINNO UGRIC
    10. Sami European People - FINNO UGRIC
    11. Samoyeds - URALIC
    12. Yakut Turkic People - TURKIC
    13. Yukaghir - URALIC


    Both Alexeev and Arutiunov show that the Chukchi and Eskimo
    languages are not related. Arutiunov also claims that the Hyperborean language and people is an obsolete term. And based on the above listing of Arctic people in HOLLIS, most groups fit into other language categories. Thus before deferring to the Russians that Chukchi and Eskimo are NOT related, I wish to examine the linguistic evidence in search of similarities in vocabulary, word order, phonemes, morphemes, grammatical construction, etc.
    Until further research is completed on the Paleoasiatic and Eskaleut languages and people, this section remains unfinished.

    Ethnic Interpretation: Isolated Languages

    As per Alexeev: "there are three isolated languages in Siberia and one in Japan on Hokaido Island, an island located south of Sakhalin and north of Honshu, the major archipelago of Japan. In the Amur River Valley of Siberia to the east of the Ulchian people are the Nivkhs xxiv who speak Nivkhian. Nivkhian differs from Mongolian. The Nivhs are fishermen and their language is not related to any other. This is an independent development of language. The Tatar Strait area is very flat with no geographical barriers, therefore the isolation of the Nivhian is unexplainable".
    Alexeev continues: "in the Yenissei River Valley in western Siberia is a second isolated language called Ketian = Kets xxv. This group is very small and numbers 1,000. Their economy is based on fishing in lakes. There is some similarity between Ketian and the Tibet language of central China. There are 100-120 words that are similar".
    Alexeev continues: "the third isolated language group is in northeastern Siberia where the Yukaghirs xxvi speak Yukaghirian. The Yukaghirs were once a strong ethnic component in the formation of Siberia. Now only the old people speak this language". According to Arutiunov, the Yukaghirs live in the basin of the Kolyma River.
    Alexeev continues: "the isolated language family in Japan on the western portion Hokaido Island and southern Sakhalin Island is that which is spoken by the Ainu people xxvii. These people were originally from Siberia and migrated to Japan. Sakhalin Island belonged to Japan until after World War II when the territory was given to the USSR. The final Ainu migrated back to Japan in the 1950's. The Ainu people are very homogenous with no Mongoloid characteristics. They have a well developed nasal region and look like Europoids. This is a strange genetic make-up and a language that cannot be put into any family. The more languages are studied, the more difficult the study becomes".

    Isolated Language Families - as per Alexeev
    1. Nivkhs = Nivkhian
    2. Kets = Ketian
    3. Yukaghir = Yukaghirian xxviii
    4. Ainu xxix


    Alexeev saw the Nivkhs, Kets, Yukagirs, and Ainu as isolated language families. HOLLIS on the other hand relates the Nivkhs to the Gilyaks and relates the Kets to the Yenisseians. HOLLIS then lists the Gilyaks, Yenisseians, Yukaghirs, and Ainu as members of the Arctic (Hyperborean) people who speak a Hyperborean language; however, Arutiunov claims that Hyperborean is obsolete.
    Thus, these four isolated languages presently are undergoing revision and likely will be resolved before the end of the decade.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Mega Language Families

    In 1913, linguist Nikolai Marr xxx from Georgia saw a resemblance between Georgian and Arabic (Semitic family). [According to Arutiunov, Hebrew and Arabic comprise Semitic; according to HOLLIS, Semitic = Akkadian, Arabic, Eblaite, and Northwest Semitic]. This was the first attempt to demonstrate ancient relationships between ancient families. In 1922 a German scholar, W. Pedersen, made the first attempt at a linguistic reconstruction which supports a Nostratic Mega Family. His argument received limited support xxxi.
    The Dravidian Family xxxii is composed of many different languages and four of these languages have a strong literary tradition. In southern India there are several hundred Dravidian languages which are very separated and do not correspond to the Indo-European Aryan branch. A book published in 1975 discusses the similarity between Dravidian and one language in Iran
    [Arutiunov says this language in Iran was the ancient language of Elamic which became extinct by the time of Christ] xxxiii.

    Dravidian Languages - as per HOLLIS
    1. Brahui
    2. Gadaba
    3. Gondi
    4. Irula
    5. Kannada
    6. Kolami
    7. Koraga
    8. Kurukh
    9. Malayalam
    10. Parji
    11. Pengo
    12. Tamil
    13. Telugu
    14. Toda
    15. Tulu

    Dravidian People - as per HOLLIS

    [HOLLIS does not list Dravidians. Rather the term Dravidian retrieves the related heading: Crete Greece Civilization--Dravidian influences; Senegal Civilization--Dravidian influences; and Thailand Civilization-- Dravidian influences]

    As per Alexeev, "in southern Iran at the end of the 3-2 millennium BC was an ancient kingdom called Elam xxxiv. Elamic cities produced tablets. In a publication last year by
    S. Kerman xxxv is a linguistic analysis of the Elamic language showing a relationship to Dravidian. In the Indus Valley in the second millennium BC at Mohenjo Daro etc. the people spoke Dravidian. Thus Pedersen's Mega family of Nostratic contains Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, and Kartvelian (from the Caucasus). This was a theory early for its time.

    Nostratic Mega Family - as per Alexeev based on Pedersen
    1. Indo-European
    2. Semitic
    3. Kartvelian
    4. Dravidian

    Soviet linguist V.M. Illich-Svitych xxxvi creates a comparative vocabulary of the Nostratic family. To Indo-European, Semitic, Dravidian, and Kartvelian he adds Uralo-Altaic and the isolated family Yukagirian. He also encompasses northern Africa and to Semitic he adds Cushit (a language related to Semitic)". Professor Alexeev has his doubts about Illich-Svitych's mega theory because it brings race into language.

    Nostratic Mega Family - as per Alexeev based on Illich-Svitych
    1. Indo-European
    2. Semitic
    3. Kartvelian
    4. Dravidian
    5. Uralo-Altaic
    6. Yukaghirian
    7. Semitic (Cushitic)

    According to Alexeev, "linguists who defend the Nostratic theory think it existed 10,000-15,000 years ago. Possibly the first people who spoke Nostratic were the Natufians or the first agriculturalists in Iran. But there is no vocabulary for agriculture or domestication; there are only words for wild species".
    Thus the Nostratics were Upper Paleolithic hunters and Illich-Svitych thinks the Nostratic homeland was in a broad territory in Central Asia.
    As per Alexeev, "the next step is to show a genetic relationship between languages. N. Nikolaev xxxvii, a specialist in languages of the Caucasus, and S.A. Starostin xxxviii, a Chinese specialist, developed the concept of the Euroasiatic Language Family". Note: HOLLIS has no listing for the Euroasiatic language or people.
    According to Alexeev: "the Chinese group of languages include Vietnamese, Tibet, etc., a great group. The Abhazo-Adigian are from the Caucasus and the Kets are an isolated family from the Yenissei River Valley in western Siberia. Therefore somewhere between the Caucasus and China lived a mega family of Caucasus and Chinese languages. This language existed possibly in the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic; however, no clear time is given. What we do know is that at this time there were two mega families" xxxix.
    According to HOLLIS, the following are China--languages: A Chang, Black Hmong, Blang, Eastern Yuku, Evenki, Hmong, Hmong Njua, Khitan, Lahu, Li, Lushai, Maonan, Miao Yao, Mongour, Mulao, Nanai, Naxi, Oirat, Pai Language China, Pu I, Salar, Sui, Tulung, Tung, Tungus Manchu, Uighur, White Hmong Dialect, Yao Language Southeastern Asia, Yay, Yellow Uighur, and Yi. [Arutiunov comments that there are many more languages of different families]

    Ethnic Interpretations: Tai Languages; Austronesian Languages

    As per Alexeev: "in North Viet Nam there are the Tai languages xl. The Tai languages were once thought to be Chinese but now are thought to be independent" xli.
    Tai languages, according to HOLLIS, consist of Ahom, Chuang, Lao, Maonan, Mulao, Proto Austro Thai, Pu I, Saek, Shan, Sino Tibetan, Thai, Tho, Tung, and Yay [Arutiunov claims that there are many more Tai languages].
    On the islands in southeast Asia are the Austronesian languages xlii; as per HOLLIS there are eight Austronesian languages:

    Austronesian Languages - as per HOLLIS
    1. Karike Wakasihu
    2. Melanesian
    3. Oceanic
    4. Polynesian
    5. Proto Austro Thai
    6. Proto Austronesian
    7. Proto Oceanic
    8. Taiwan

    Austroasiaic Languages - as per HOLLIS
    1. Cham
    2. Khasi
    3. Mon Khmer
    4. Munda
    5. Muong
    6. Palaung
    7. Rade
    8. Sino Tibetan
    9. Vietnamese
    10. Wa

    According to Arutiunov: "Cham and Rade are Austronesian along with Malay etc. Mon Khmer includes Khasi, Palaung, Wa and many others. Austroasiatic languages, distantly related to Tai and Austronesian are spoken in Cambodia (Khmer), Highland Laos (Lao-Tueng), and pockets in India (Khasi, Munda)".

    Ethnic Interpretations: Athapaskan and Uralian

    According to Alexeev, "Professor Joseph Greenberg xliii, a linguist on African and American languages, believes American languages show no relationship to Siberian languages with one exception: the Athapaskan. The Athapaskan language is located in an area of southern Alaska as well as an area south of Alaska.

    Athapaskan Languages - as per HOLLIS
    1. Apache
    2. Chilula
    3. Chipewyan
    4. Hupa
    5. Kato
    6. Mattole
    7. Tinne

    Athapaskan Indians - as per HOLLIS and confirmed by Arutiunov
    1. Apache
    2. Bearlake
    3. Carrier
    4. Chetco
    5. Chilcotin
    6. Chilula
    7. Chipewyan
    8. Denaina
    9. Eyak
    10. Hupa
    11. Ingalik
    12. Kato
    13. Kawchottine
    14. Kiowa Apache
    15. Koyukon
    16. Kutchin
    17. Navajo
    18. Sarsi
    19. Sekani
    20. Slave
    21. Tagish
    22. Tanana
    23. Thlingchadinne
    24. Tinne
    25. Tolowa
    26. Tsattine
    27. Umpqua
    28. Wailaki

    Athapaskan is combined in the Na-Dene language. Athapasks differ biologically from other North and South American chronologies in that they are more Mongoloid".

    Na-Dene Language - as per HOLLIS and confirmed by Arutiunov
    1. Athapaskan
    2. Haida
    3. Tlingit

    As per Alexeev: Morris Swadesh xliv shows a similarity of Uralian from western and central Siberia with Athapaskan. This hypothesis is supported by Joseph Greenberg xlv. Therefore one of the later waves of migration shows connections with Siberian populations. A comparative study shows 50-75 common terms".


    Thus, if we accept the Swadesh and Greenberg conclusion that Athapaskan and Uralic are similar, then we can begin to construct the Nostratic Mega Family.

    Nostratic Mega Family (in the process of being constructed)
    1. Indo-European
    2. Semitic
    3. Kartvelian
    4. Dravidian
    5. Uralo-Altaic (including Athapaskan)
    6. Yukaghirian (connected to Uralic)
    7. Semitic (Cushitic)
    8. Euroasiatic
    9. Austronesian
    10. Ainu (recently connected to Altaic) 11. Kets isolated family
    12. Nivkhs isolated family
    13. Paleoasiatic/Eskaleut (in process of being resolved) xlvi


    As per Alexeev, "In Current Anthropology 1988 or 1989 there is an article by Greenberg and Cavalli-Sforza, a geneticist, regarding genetic distances xlvii. Alexeev also mentions that Cavalli-Sforza along with Albert Ammerman have a book entitled "The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe" by Princeton University Press, 1984".
    Professor Alexeev would have been interested in a recent publication by Cavalli-Sforza et al. entitled "The History and Geography of Human Genes" xlviii. The authors attempt to list all ethnic groups in the world that were indiginous circa 1492 and locate a genetic signature for each group. The authors seem most interested in ethnic groups that are for the most part endogamous. The authors also promote the establishment of a "genetic bank" and call for voluntary contribution from the different ethnic groups identified.

    Chapter VII (continued): Bronze Age in Eurasia
    [Lecture 11 Delivered 29 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This lecture begins when a classmate, in response to the previous lecture, asks: "What has happened to my race. Have I become extinct?" Professor Alexeev says with a smile: "That is because you are not Caucasian, you are Slavic". Alexeev then makes a statement as to why the Caucasian language and/or race is no longer recognized.

    Alexeev continues the lecture with ethnic interpretations for Celtic, Basque, and Albanian and presents the extinct languages of Illyrian, Thracian, Linear A and B, Etruscan, and Lapp. The final ethnic interpretation is that of the Aryans and Dravidians in India.

    The major emphasis of Lecture 11 is the Bronze Age Cultures of the Battle Axe Peoples, the Global Amphora Peoples, and the Albashevo Peoples. The Battle Axe Culture is distributed throughout Germany, southern Sweden, and Poland as well as the Baltics. The Global Amphora Culture is distributed in areas south of the Battle Axe Culture and also in the Czech Republic. The Global Amphora Culture migrated to the upper Volga River valley in central European Russia. Two variants of the Global Amphora Culture in the upper Volga River valley near Moscow are the Fatianovo Culture and the Balanovo Culture. The Albashevo Culture developed a little later than the Fatianovo Culture in an area close to Moscow. The Albashevo Culture belongs to the second millennium BC.

    From the steppe zone of southern Russia, Alexeev introduces three cultures known only from their burial mounds: the Pit Grave Culture, the Catacomb Culture, and the Timber Grave Culture. The lecture concludes with a brief mention of three bronze making areas, and only three, which include the Caucasus, Southern Mongolia, and Southern Ural/Central Asia.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Caucasian

    According to Alexeev, the Caucasian Language Family is no longer recognized because population studies do not confirm the existence of this family; rather, scholars, especially Russian scholars, base categories on individual traits; each race is characterized by a range of variations. Thus, all races are mixed in origin with each demonstrating variations.

    HOLLIS, on the other hand, lists 138 entries for "Caucasian" and under the heading "race" lists: the Black race, the Caucasian race, and the Mongoloid race. Arutiunov cautions: "never mix race and language. There is a Caucasionic racial type. And there is a North Caucasian language family. They only partly overlap". For the term "Caucasian race" HOLLIS lists Indo Europeans, Mediterranean race, Semites, Teutonic race, Whites, and Working Class Whites. Arutiunov comments that this mixture of race, class, and language is nonsense!

    HOLLIS continues: the Indo Europeans are composed of Albanians, Armenians, Balts Indo European people, Celts, Germanic peoples, Hittites, Illyrians, Indo Iranians, Latin peoples, Luwians, Slavs, Thracians, and Tokhari.

    For the Mediterranean race HOLLIS includes: Greek and Latin people and for the Semites, HOLLIS lists: Akkadians, Ammonites Semitic people, Arabs, Canaanites, Jews, and Phoenicians. Arutiunov adds "Ethiopians" "and some others" to the Semite list. HOLLIS lists the Teutonic race as composed of the Anglo Saxon race and the Germanic peoples; Arutiunov comments: "Nonsense mixture". HOLLIS relates Whites to Caucasian race, Wasps Persons, White Men, White Women, and Working Class Whites. Arutiunov again comments: "Nonsense mixture".

    The 1996 Canadian census lists 10 categories for racial origin plus an 11th entitled "other". These categories include: White, Chinese, South Asian, Black, Arab/West Asia, Fillipino, Southeast Asian, Latin American, Japanese, and Korean. Canadian anthropologist Bruce Trigger will check off the white box but finds the question "grotesque". Other Canadians will check the "other" box and list Canadian.

    Arutiunov cautions: "never confuse race and language. Preferably different words should be employed for ethnicity and language on one hand and for "race" on the other. Haitians are black (though some are only light brown) and speak a kind of French which is Indo-European. Jews are white (though some are nearly black, like Falasha) and speak a number of languages some of which are Indo-European like Yiddish, and some are in other groups ..."

    After spending the past five years researching "race", it is my present belief that this concept is simply a pejorative term used by those who have a particular agenda be it White Supremacists, Neo Nazis, or members of the Nation of Islam, the KKK, the Aryan Nation etc. "Race" thus becomes a means whereby one group can include or exclude another. I am in total agreement with Alexeev when he says "each race is characterized by a range of variations; all races thus are mixed in origin".

    Each of us, therefore, is an ethnic mosaic. We are composed of a range of genetic variables; our ethnicity is determined not only by our outward appearance or our genetic composition, but also by who we wish to be. When, not so long ago, our world was divided into specific factions, race was an applicable issue. Thus Africa became the homeland for Blacks; Mongols lived in Asia etc. It was during this period that Alexeev wrote "Geografia Chelovecheskikh Ras" (geography of human races) in which he listed three great races: Mongoloid, Europoid, and Africanoid.

    Arutiunov claims: " race is based on biology. He cites Alexeev's three great races, and claims that he recognizes a fourth (Australoids), and the famous Georgian anthropologist named Abdushelishvili recognizes a fifth (Americanoid). He thus recognizes four races of the first order and subdivides these great races into local races i.e. Europoids are xanthochromic (blond, Nordic) and melanochroic (brunettes, Southern Europoids). These local races are then subdivided into second order local races etc.".

    It is this structuralist view of race to which I am unabashedly opposed. Why should anyone take a population of human beings, draw three circles, and then crayon in with black, yellow, and white. Instead, if we consider ourselves a genetic mosaic of physical types who are available in a wide variety of hues ranging from ebony to lily, then this mosaic becomes understandable. Our geographic homeland is of a global nature and our belief system or two or three traces back not to Mohammed, not to Jesus or Abraham, not to Confucius, not to Akenaton, not to a pantheon of gods and goddesses, but to a point in time when homo sapiens, possibly even Neandertal, discovered an awareness of self and the ability to communicate this realization.

    It is this mosaic that Alexeev communicated in his discussions of race and this awareness of self when he discussed paleolithic man and his artifacts. Possibly Arutiunov should also try on this mosaic cloak; he would then discover that he is Armenian, Russian, Georgian, Ukrainian, Hungarian, Italian, German, and likely Jewish - i.e. a mongrol like the rest of us.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Celtic

    In England, the northern areas speak English while the southern areas speak Celtic 1. Ireland also speaks Celtic. The Irish feel they are not an English speaking people and continue to fight for human, cultural, and linguistic rights. In southern Ireland, Gaelic is taught in the schools. Gaelics are the Celtic highlanders of Scotland. As well, they are Celtic, especially the Gaelic speaking inhabitants of Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man.

    Spain in fifth century BC was occupied by tribes distinguished as Iberi, Celtiberi, and Celts. These had no cohesion together and unless temporarily united against some foreign foe, were at war with one another. Supposedly tribes in the south in Baetica had laws, poetry, and literature but none of the above has been preserved. All that remains are inscriptions, legends on coins, and marks on monuments in alphabets slightly differing.

    In Brittany, an area in northeastern France, Celtic was spoken. Brittany was known as Armorica until the influx of Celts from Britain. Of Brittany before the coming of the Romans little is known. The only traces left are by the primitive populations and the megalithic dolmens, menhirs, and cromlechs which are found today in great number. In 56 BC the Romans destroyed the fleet of the Veneti, and in 52 BC the inhabitants of Armorica joined the great insurrection of the Gauls against Caesar, but were subdued by him in 51 BC. Roman civilization was then established for several centuries in Brittany. A Breton is a native of Brittany, France and speaks Celtic. Breton became extinct in the first century of the first millennium BC.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Basque

    On the continent in Basque, an area between Spain and France, Baskian is spoken. Basques are a pre Aryan people and their language is supposedly related to Caucasic, Berber, Etruscan, and/or Iberian. However, according to Arutiunov, Etruscan (alongside with Hurri-Urartic) is probably Caucasic. So Basque may be related to it and to Caucasic in general. But Iber is related to Berber, and Berber is one of Semito-Khamitic, and has nothing in common with Basque.

    The Basque people inhabit the three Basque provinces of northeastern Spain comprised of Alava, Biscay, and Guipuzcoa, Navarre in Spain, and Bayonne and Mauleon in France. The Basque language is referred to as "Eskuara" meaning clear speaking. This language is absolutely isolated from other European tongues although the grammar is similar to the Magyar and Finnic languages. Basque has no graphic system of its own and uses the Roman characters in either Spanish or French.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Albanian

    Before Indo-European was distributed throughout Europe, the area was covered by extinct languages which now also are extinct in Siberia. On the Balkan Peninsula, Albanian was and is still spoken in Albania. Albanian is a very specific language and not related to Greek. Albania is a portion of the Turkish empire extending along the western littoral of the Balkan Peninsula from Montenegro to Greece. It is one of the least known regions in Europe. The Albanians are apparently the most ancient peoples in southeastern Europe. There is no history of their arrival in the Balkan Peninsula but there are a large number of Slavonic local names.

    The mountain system, especially in the northern region is extremely complex allowing populations to preserve their peculiar characteristics, language, and traditions. While other populations of the Balkans were either hellenized or latinized or absorbed by Slavonic immigrations, the Albanians have remained unaffected by foreign influences.

    The great majority of the Albanians are Moslems. Education is almost non-existent; the vast majority of the population, both Moslem and Christian, are illiterate. The Albanian language is the only surviving representation of the Thraco-Illyrian group of languages and analysis of Albanian is difficult due to the absence of literary monuments. Albanian is a branch of the Indo-European language containing only Albanian.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Extinct Languages - Illyrian & Thracian

    The northern sector of the Balkans was occupied by the Illyrians, a group not well known, but what is known is that they were not Celtic; according to Arutiunov they were ancestors to Albanians. The Illyrians lived in Illyria, a country on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea. This region comprises the modern states of Dalmatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro, with the southern half of Croatia-Slavonia, part of western Serbia, Novibazar, and the extreme north of Albania. Because the inhabitants of Illyria never attained political unity, the landward boundaries were never clearly defined. They spoke some form of Indo-European but it has not been definitely classified. The Thracian language is related to Illyrian, but linguists cannot read or understand Thracian thus they don't know how it is related. To my question: "when does a language become extinct", Arutiunov answers "when a mother no longer speaks it to her child".

    Ethnic Interpretations: Extinct Languages - Linear A and B

    The southern Balkan Peninsula is occupied by Greeks. Linguists have distinguished two types of Greek inscriptions: Linear A and Linear B. Linear A was unread until now. It is thought to be a specific language and not related to Indo-European; thus as per Arutiunov, "it was not Greek"! Linear B was studied and interpreted by Michael Ventris 2 in the late 1940's. He determined that Linear B was Indo-European and preceded Greek; likely it was an archaic Greek.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Extinct Languages - Etruscan

    As per Alexeev, "in Italy several languages preceded Latin. In the boot area was a language linguists still have not identified (Arutiunov has no idea what it might be) but several of the place names do not sound Indo-European. The Etruscan language existed in an area north of Rome. Etruria, an ancient district of Italy which in early times appears to have included the whole of northern Italy from the Tiber to the Alps, was by the end of the fifth century considerably reduced in size. The authentic history of Etruria is very meager and consists of stories of its relations with Carthage, Greece, and Rome.

    The origins of the Etruscans will likely never be determined, but by their own tradition is is possible they came out of Lydia. Herodotus and Strabo tell of Lydians landing at the mouth of the Po and crossing the Apennines into Etruria. Thus it seems certain that although the earliest immigrants may have come down from the north, they were joined by a migration from the east before they had developed a civilization of their own. It is this double population that became the Etruscans as we know them by their works.

    To date the origins of the Etruscan civilization is quite difficult; however, we know that a great migration from Greece to Italy occurred circa 1000 BC and from the imported Greek objects found in tombs, this date seems appropriate. The religion of the Etruscans consisted of worshipping various divinities. They believed in frequent sacrifice thus indicating a belief in good and bad with bad more predominant. Storms, earthquakes, the birth of deformities etc. gave evidence of evil powers which could be appeased only by human sacrifice. Their pantheon of gods and goddesses was somewhat similar to the Greeks but also had an indigenous component. Along with the pantheon was an extremely detailed hierarchy of divine powers which resulted in a large and powerful priesthood who became so famous that they were sent for from distant lands to interpret the sacrifices and oracles. A large stone has been discovered with the Etruscan language on one side, and the Greek translation on the other side. However, Etruscan texts still cannot be read. Etruscan was not Indo-European. According to Arutiunov, most probably Etruscan was related to Hurri-Urartic and migrated from Asia Minor.

    Ethnic Interpretations - Lapp (Saami)

    The Scandinavian Peninsula was not the home of the Germanic language. Lapps are located here as well as along the coast of the White Sea. According to Alexeev, Lapps speak Finno-Ugric.

    Lappland covers in Norway the division of Finmarken and the higher inland parts of Tromso and Nordland. In Russia it is the territory of the western part of Archangel as far as the White Sea and the northern part of the Finnish district of Uleabory. In Sweden it is the inland and northern parts of the old province of Norrland.

    The Lapps call their country Same and themselves Samelots. These names are almost identical with the terms used by the Finns for their country and people. Lapp is almost certainly a nickname imposed by foreigners.

    In Sweden and Finland the Lapps are usually divided into fisher, mountain, and forest Lapps. The principal colony of the fisher Lapps has its summer quarters on the Stora-Lule Lake. They have good boats and nets, and in addition to catching and drying fish, they shoot wild fowl and gather eggs. When he has acquired some money, it is not unusual for the Fisher to settle down and reclaim a bit of land.

    The mountain Lapp has his autumn residence on the borders of the forest district and it is here that he erects his "njalla", a storehouse raised high above ground by one or more piles. Early in November he wanders south or east into the forest land, and in the winter may visit such places as Jokkmokk and Arjepluog, but even Upsala or Stockholm. At the beginning of May he returns to his "njalla" and as soon as the weather grows warm he moves his herds to the mountains and throughout the summer pastures them and prepares his cheese. By autumn he is back at his "njalla' killing surplus reindeer bulls and curing meat for the winter.

    The forest Lapp differs from the mountain Lapp by the narrower limits in which he pursues his nomadic life. He never wanders outside a certain district in which he possesses hereditary rights and maintains a series of campgrounds which he visits in regular rotation.

    In Norway there are the sea Lapps, river Lapps, and mountain Lapps. The first two are settled, the third is nomadic. The sea Lapps are indistinguishable from other coast dwellers. Their food consists of cooked fish. The river Lapps breed cattle, attempt a little agriculture and entrust their reindeer to the care of the mountain Lapps. The Russian Lapps are for the most part fishers. They maintain a semi nomadic life; very few are settlers in the Russian villages.

    Linguistically the Lapps belong to the Finno-Ugric group; the similarity of their speech to Finnish is evident though it is broken up into very distinct and even mutually unintelligible dialects. The Lapp language was reduced to writing by the missionaries but very little has been printed in this tongue except schoolbooks and religious works. A number of popular tales and songs have been transcribed. Perhaps Lapps were the ancient inhabitants of this area before being replaced by Indo-Europeans. Professor Alexeev believes the distribution of the Indo-European language in Europe was a long process with very local variations composed of invaders of other ethnic groups.

    Ethnic Interpretations: Aryans and Dravidians

    According to Alexeev: "in India there is a very complicated relationship between Aryans 3 as migrators from the north who were tall and light skinned and the pre Aryan (Dravidic) who were dark skinned with wavy hair. This relationship is reflected in the social stratification of India" 4.

    Arutiunov comments:

    "Aryans were taller, lighter, more straight haired. Local pre-Aryan (mostly Dravidic)) people were darker, shorter, more wavy-haired; but neverless both were basically Europoids. Dravidian is a language, not a race; thus Dravidians are people who speak Dravidic languages. Mostly they are rather dark, but some groups have a fairly light skin. Dravidoids is a racial (or physical) notion; they are dark but not necessarily wavy haired. Veddoids is also a physical notion; they are moderately dark, wavy haired, and are between Europoids and Australoids. Thus short, dark, and wavy haired are Veddoids. Dravidoids are rather tall; Aryans were typical Europoids: they were tall, light-skinned (though by no means blonde), and mostly straight-haired. The modern populations of India are a mixture of all three, in different proportions. The Aryan invasion came from the northwest and west about 15th century BC.In India there are four varnas (literally colors) each of which is divided into many local castes. Brahman = priests; Kshatriyas = warriors (today landlords and rich peasants); Vaishya = initially agriculturalists but today mostly merchants; and zhudra = low castes (craftsmen etc.) The outcasts (untouchables) are the fifth, the lower stratum, and the sixth stratum consists of tribals. The Brahmans are the lightest in skin color; the outcasts and tribals are the darkest".

    Alexeev concludes: "Although Brahmans belong to different religious cults even today they know to which social group they belong. A Brahman can be invited to give food to members of the other castes, but a Brahman cannot be invited to the house of lower caste members to take food".

    The Battle Axe Culture

    The Battle Axe Culture 5 is distributed throughout Germany, southern Sweden, and Poland as well as in the Baltics. These populations are agriculturalists and raise cows, pigs, and sheep; no horses (bones of horses have been found in excavations but have not proved to be domestic). The Battle Axe people are fishermen and warriors; their axes are made of bronze and stone. Evidence taken from cemeteries and small setlements show that these people are distributed from central Europe northeast to the Baltics in the beginning of the second millennium BC (possibly the last century of the third millennium BC). The Battle Axe Culture lived along lakes and also live on the territory of Estonia (where Finno Ugric was spoken). The Baltics are covered with the Battle Axe Culture but other Neolithic settlements also are present. All archaeologists agree that the Battle Axe Culture came from the west.

    The Global Amphora Culture

    The Global Amphora Culture is also distributed throughout Germany, southern Sweden, and Poland only in areas to the south of the Battle Axe Culture. While the Battle Axe Culture occupied coastal areas of Germany and Poland, the Global Amphora Culture occupied the forest areas of central Germany and central Poland.

    The Global Amphora Culture is also found in the Czech Republic and is contiguous with the Battle Axe Culture; however, in comparison, The Global Amphora Culture has a different agricultural base. In the villages, animals were kept domesticated, and hunting and fishing were practiced. Vessels from the Global Amphora Culture have a rounded bottom.

    While the Battle Axe Culture remained distributed throughout central Europe to the Baltics, the Global Amphora Culture migrated to central European Russia and the Upper Volga Valley. Two variants of the Global Amphora Culture in the Moscow area are the Fatianovo Culture and the Balanovo Culture. The Fatianovo Culture is located in the upper valley of the Volga River, to the the east of Moscow, and the Balanovo Culture is located in the upper valley of the Volga River to the east and south of the Fatianovo.

    Marija Gimbutas 6 views the language of the Battle Axe Culture and the Global Amphora Culture as Baltic ahd therefore calls them a Baltic population. Professor Alexeev disagrees and says this contradicts known facts of the early periods of development of the Indo-European languages. The known facts are: in the third millennium BC from a proto Indo-European language emerged the two languages known as Germanic and Baltic/Slavic. These three sub families of Baltic, Germanic, and Slavic are now independent but they had a common origin of proto Indo-European. However, when the Battle Axe Culture and the Global Amphora Culture were formed, Baltic and Slavic languages were not formed. Therefore the Battle Axe Culture and the Global Amphora Culture spoke an intermediate language somewhere between Baltic and Slavic. The German language was concentrated in western Europe and the Balto-Slavic language was concentrated in eastern Europe. From west to east there is good archaeological evidence that central Europe was covered by a Germanic language which had formed earlier. In the Baltic area, the population spoke one proto Germanic language which was linguistically related to the western areas. Thus, Proto Germanic was spoken in the Baltic area before the split into Germanic and Balto-Slavic.

    Bronze articles from the Global Amphora Culture are the same as that from the Battle Axe Culture. However, preservation of Neolithic traditions are strong in the northern area with a continued use of polished stone tools; bronze objects are rare. In these northern areas are forests with great numbers of rivers and lakes; here are domestic animals and weak agriculture. The Neolithic traditions were strong until the distribution of iron i.e. the majority of tools were made of stone.

    The Albashevo Culture

    The Albashevo Culture is located five or six kilometers from Moscow in flat areas in an intermediate zone between the forest and steppe. The Albashevo Culture did not use bronze; they used copper. This culture is the only culture to use copper exclusively. The Albashevo Culture developed a little later than the Fatianovo Culture and dates to the second millennium BC. These people lived in ways similar to other populations, but we have uncovered no settlements; only cemeteries. Archaeologists also have no linguistic characteristics for the Albashevo Culture. Alexeev says this culture should be discussed further.

    The Pit Grave Culture

    From the intermediate zone between the forest and steppe, we move to the steppe zone where monuments of the Pit Grave Culture are found. In this southeren Russian steppe area, Pit Grave burial mounds have been located but no settlements have been found. The Pit Grave people buried their dead in oval shaped pits. Some metal has also been found in the graves. The Pit Grave people were nomadic and wandered great distances with large herds of domestic animals. Only small agriculture was practiced.

    The Catacomb Grave Culture

    The Catacomb Grave Culture is also known only from their graves; no settlements have been found. The Catacomb Grave Culture buried their dead in a reverse L shaped earthen grave. These graves are rich in metal when compared to the Pit Grave Culture, but not as rich as the Battle Axe Culture and/or the Global Amphora Culture. The Catacomb Grave Culture was nomadic and their amphoric vessels were with flattened bottoms. No language is known for these people, but possibly the Catacomb Grave People like their ancestors the Pit Grave People spoke Iranian. The Catacomb Grave Culture dates to the first part of the second millennium BC.

    The Timber Grave Culture

    The Timber Grave Culture dates to the second part of the second millennium BC and are a nomadic people known from their burials. This Culture buried their dead in the same type pit as did the Pit Grave Culture; however the Timber Grave People placed the dead in a wooden log cuffin. The burials of the Timber Grave Culture contained metal as rich as the Catacomb Grave Culture, but not as rich as the Battle Axe Culture or the Global Amphora Culture. The language of the Timber Grave Culture was possibly Iranian. Professor Alexeev believes that these three cultures: the Pit Grave, the Catacomb, and the Timber Grave are biologically related.

    Three Bronze Making Areas

    There are only three geographic areas in which bronze is made. Bronze is an alloy of copper and usually tin although other additives have been used. The three areas are: the Caucasus, the East (China), and Central Asia 7 . In the northern areas, bronze is brought in from the south. Bronze is also brought from southern Mongolia. This is a period of extensive trade; from Greece at the third millennium BC the types of knives found are from China and are the same as those found in Turkey.

    In Bactria, the Bronze Age dates to the first century of the fourth millennium BC. However, in the Soviet Union, The Bronze Age dates to the last century of the fourth millennium BC or the first century of the third millennium.

    [Lecture 12 delivered 31 July 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    Lecture twelve opens with a discussion of the Tripolie (Cucuteni-Trypillia) Culture, an ancient culture in European Russia, archaeologically located in Romania and Ukraine. The Tripolie Peoples are agriculturalists and morphologically are short in stature with a narrow face and delicate body. This is in contrast to the nomadic groups i.e. Pit Grave Culture, Catacomb Grave Culture, and Timber Grave Culture who are tall with a broad face. Alexeev thinks that both the Tripolie Culture and the nomadic groups spoke an ancient Iranian language.

    Alexeev then moves from European Russia to the Caucasus and presents the Kura-Araxes Culture which dates to the end of the third millennium/beginning of second millennium BC. The Kura-Araxes Culture is agriculturalist raising wheat, vegetables, and fruits in ample supply for the entire region. They also breed sheep, goat, donkey, and perhaps horse. Numerous settlements have been located in the Caucasus revealing houses made of brick in a beehive shape (toloses). This house type (tolos) is also seen in Central Asia, the Near East, and eastern Turkey. Rich bronze objects and extraordinary pottery in complicated designs have been uncovered. Because of the bronze objects and special pottery, archaeologists thought the origin of the Kura Araxes Culture was in the Near East, in eastern Turkey; but this determination was made without skeletal evidence. Then in 1988 a cemetery in Armenia revealed the presence of both the Near East type and individuals of the northern populations such as the Pit Grave Culture.

    A second culture in the Caucasus is that of the Trialeti People located in western Georgia and existing in the first century of the second half of the second millennium BC. Kurgans (burial mounds) were excavated revealing rich pottery with new pottery forms and a broad usage of gold. The gold is similar to that found in Iran and Iraq and some archaeologists see the Trialeti Culture as the second wave of diffusion of Near East populations; however since no burial mounds have been uncovered in Georgia or Armenia, Alexeev concludes that the Trialeti Culture is similar to the Kura-Araxes Culture.

    From the Caucasus, Alexeev moves to Central Asia to the sites of Namazga-Tepe, Altyn-Depe, and Geoksyr in Turkmenistan, and Sapallitepa and Jarkutan in Uzbekistan and discusses the current work of American, French, and Russian archaeologists in this area. It is Alexeev's belief that migrations from Tepe Hessar in eastern Iran to the sites in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan cannot be substantiated because of major differences in population size (Tepe Hessar is huge while Sapallitepa is quite small) and major differences in skeletal size i.e. the people from Sapallitepa are much larger morphologically than the other groups and have broad faces. Alexeev says the monuments in Central Asia are similar to those in southern European Russia.

    From Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan Alexeev moves to Kazakhstan, the largest of the Central Asian republics, and presents the Andronovo and Afanasyevo Cultures. The Andronovo Culture was nomadic but there were islands of agriculture. Alexeev dates this culture to the eighteenth to fourteenth centuries of the second millennium BC and sees the Andronovo Culture as the eastward movement of the Pit Grave Culture. The Andronovo Culture is known only from cemeteries; no settlements have been found. Alexeev claims the origin of the Andronovo is western Kazhakstan not northwestern Mongolia.

    The Afanasyevo Culture is located in the Upper Yenissei Valley in the second part of the third millennium to the first century of the second millennium BC. This culture was replaced by the Andronovo Culture. And the Pit Grave Culture was replaced by the Afanasyevo Culture. Likely these cultures spoke ancient Iranian. And so ends a very detailed lecture.

    Tripolie Culture

    As per Alexeev, the Tripolie Culture [Cucuteni-Trypillia] 8 develops in the Ukraine; however, it is difficult to date the disappearance of Tripolie settlements and cemeteries since some exist until the mid second millennium BC. Arutiunov dates the beginnings of the Tripolie Culture to the early third, maybe late fourth millennium.

    The Tripolie Culture develops with agriculture. This is different from other cultures which were nomadic and without settled populations i.e. Pit Grave Culture, Catacomb Culture, and Timber Grave Culture (Alexeev gives an ecological structure to the cultures discussed so far. The Battle Axe Culture lived in coastal areas, The Global Amphora Culture were forest people, the Albashevo Culture lived in an intermediate area between forest and steppe, and the Pit Grave, Catacomb Grave, and the Timber Grave peoples were nomads of the steppes). Since "decoration of ceramics" and "forms of implements" are used to determine different cultures, it can be said that the Tripolie Culture developed with slow changes in the cultural phase.

    As per Alexeev, there is a great genetic difference between the Tripolie people and those of the steppe areas (i.e. The Pit Grave Culture etc. who are tall, broad face, and looked like the Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic of the same area). The Tripolie people are short, narrow in face, with a delicate body. They look like populations in the Mid East and Mediterranean area. When was this complex of morphological features formed? Not later than the Mesolithic. The broad face is indicative of the northern European while the narrow face is the forerunner of the eastern Mediterranean people (Alexeev is saying that the Tripolie Culture archaeologically found in Romania and Ukraine is the forerunner of the Mediterranean peoples). The people of the Tripolie Culture are not related to the northern area; they are more related to areas in the Near East and Mediterranean.

    Scholars have no idea what language the Tripolie people spoke. Also, what language did the Pit Grave et. al. speak? Some scholars think the Pit Grave Culture et. al. spoke an ancient Iranian language, but they can't judge and argue objectively. The same is true for the Tripolie people. Alexeev continues: "perhaps they spoke one of the northern Indo-European languages of the north area. This needs to be discussed further".

    The Kura-Araxes Culture

    According to Alexeev, in the Caucasus, the populations are difficult to assess geomorphologically. The are not related to European Russia because mountainous terrain separates European Russia from the Caucasus. But at the same time we cannot say that the Caucasus are linguistically connected with the southern areas. The great mountains and narrow valleys made movement arduous and all relationships were difficult to be realized. But during the Bronze era, the Caucasus was not isolated and did relate to the north and south areas.

    At the end of the third millennium/beginning of the second millennium there is a most important culture in Trans-Caucasia called the Kura-Araxes Culture 9. This culture is named for two rivers: the Araxes on the territory of Armenia and the Kura on the territory of Georgia. Both rivers drain into the Caspian Sea. The Kura is located to the north of the Araxes Valley. This culture gives much interesting material and brings to discussion a number of questions.

    The Kura-Araxes Culture differs from those in the steppe; it is also unlike the Tripolie Culture. This culture is agriculturalist even though the valleys are narrow. The crops grown were wheat, many vegetables, and many fruits. The food supply was ample for the entire region. Sheep, goat, donkey, and perhaps horse were bred in the area. Because an archaeologist needs many bones to determine each stage of domestication and because only a limited number of bones have been found, there is no real confirmation of domestication.

    The number of settlements in the Caucasus is great - great hills have been excavated measuring several square hectares. The houses, similar to those of the Paleolithic period, are like toloses (beehives) and are made of brick i.e. the same Eneolithic and Neolithic tradition is preserved. This house type is also seen in Central Asia and in a number of places in the Near East. These monumental structures are also found in eastern Turkey. Turkish archaeologists believe the origin of the Kura/Araxes culture is in eastern Anatolia.

    Rich bronze objects have been uncovered, although not numerous, and the pottery is fantastic; (it is preserved in museums in Turkey, Georgia, and Armenia). The pots are of many complicated forms i.e. a fusion of four half circles elaborately decorated with different figurines. The rich bronze and fantastic pottery leads to the conclusion that the Kura-Araxes Culture is similar to the Near East which was the leader in both civilizations and first cultures. Therefore the homeland of Kura-Araxes should be in eastern Turkey. This idea continued until 1988 even though no cemetery had been found in Turkey and no bodies were buried in the intermediate area between the toloses (this would have indicated a settlement). In 1988 the first cemetery of the Kura Araxes Culture was found in northern Armenia. The skeletal evidence was examined and demonstrates features typical of the Near East complex as well as many individuals like the northern populations of the Pit Grave Culture i.e. the northern range of Europoid rather than the southern (this statement is quite important: "the northern range of Europoid rather than the southern" in that it implies a broad range for Europoid with the northern element being larger morphologically and the southern complex similar to types from the Near East). Therefore, the Kura-Araxes population was mixed. Scholars can conclude that the origin of the Kura-Araxes Culture is in Turkey but they must emphasize that northern elements are present; this is a culture in the intermediate position between the Near East and the steppe (a mixed genetic population is true of all early cultures). Thus during the Bronze Age, the Caucasus was open in both directions and was occupied by a mixed population. Settlements of the Kura-Araxes have been searched for in the northern regions of the main Caucasus mountain chain, but the search has proved unsuccessful.

    The Trialeti Culture

    As per Alexeev, the Trialeti Culture 10 is located in the Caucasus in western Georgia. In the first century of the second half of the second millennium BC (fourteen/thirteen century BC), the Trialeti Culture replaces the Kura-Araxes Culture. Great kurgans (burial mounds) had been discovered at the end of the nineteenth century but were not excavated until the late 1960's. Professor Boris A. Kuftin excavated these mounds and published a book in 1941 11. Kuftin was not taken prisoner during the Stalin era, but rather was exiled to Tbilisi, Georgia. Material from this excavation is in the Georgia Museum, but is not available to scholars because publications are local and do not reach the major libraries.

    Kuftin's excavations reveal rich pottery with new pottery forms, bronze, and a broad usage of gold for decoration, tools, and figures of animals and people. This Trialeti Culture demonstrates a difference in both ceramics and in burial grounds from other cultures. The ceramics reveal new forms and the cemeteries contain small flat kurgans, each with many skeletal remains. However, the kurgans were few in number and the preservation of skeletal remains was poor.

    Kuftin tries to demonstrate that the Trialeti Culture was the second wave of diffusion of Near East populations into the Caucasus. Some scholars agree with Kuftin. The gold found in the kurgans is similar to that of Iran, and the Tigris Euphrates Valley of Iraq; however, no other burial mounds have been uncovered in Georgia or Armenia. Professor Alexeev concludes that the Trialeti Culture is similar to the Kura-Araxes Culture.

    Central Asia Bronze Age

    As per Alexeev, Namazga-Tepe (tepe = hill) is located 100/120 kilometers from Ashkhabad, Turkmenistan on the border with Iran, south east of the Caspian Sea. This territory was closed to foreigners for many years; however, recent excavations here have made the basis for a chronological approach for Central Asia.

    After World War II, Kuftin was invited to Central Asia because scholars had not located any monuments; no one knew that tepes were monuments. In 1949 Kuftin drove around Turkmenistan and chose the greatest tepe he could find. This turned out to be a huge settlement 2 1/2 kilometers long and 1/2 kilometer wide. What Kuftin had discovered was a Bronze Age town (Altyn Depe). Kuftin chose the highest point and then took a cross section of the tepe to a depth of 30 meters establishing a scale for all layers of the Bronze Age, both neolithic and aneolithic. Ceramics were collected from the different layers which allowed for the beginning of a sequence and chronology. Although this study was conducted forty-two years ago, it is still the most impressive done in Central Asia.

    One year after the sequencing had begun, Kuftin accidently died. His work was continued by Vadim Mikhailovich Masson whose publication gives us our knowledge of a Central Asian Bronze Age sequence. Masson's book Altyn-Depe 12 was translated into English by Henry N. Michael in 1988. Alexeev claims that this publication is not good because it is descriptive (I disagree with Alexeev. I think Masson's work is that of an exemplary scholar).

    To the east of Altyn Tepe is a group of tepes located in the desert on the northern Iranian border. The central tepe of the group is called Geoksyr 13. In the Aneolithic Period, the area between the houses was filled with dead bodies. This indicates a settlement and not a cemetery. Because desert areas shift, the present area is 20 kilometers to the west of the original group. Archaeologists think the settlements were abandoned because of the lack of water. As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" Geoksyr mound is the remains of an aeneolithic settlement (4th - early 3rd century BC) and is located in southern Turkmenia 20 km east of the city of Tedzhen. Geoksyr, a settlement of cultivators, was excavated between 1955 and 1965 by V.I. Sarianidi and revealed adobe multiroom houses and group burial chambers. Ceramics found were with dichromatic paintings and female terracotta figurines were numerous. Geoksyr typifies the culture of the eastern Anau group of tribes that displays connections with Elam and Mesopotamia.

    In Uzbekistan south from Samarkand and close to the border with Afghanistan is Sapallitepa 14. Sapallitepa existed two to three centuries from the beginning of the second millennium. Twenty to thirty kilometers north of Sapallitepa is Jarkutan. Jarkutan continued the Sapallitepa tradition and existed until the middle of the second millennium i.e. fourteenth to thirteenth century BC. (Pottery fragments from Central Asia are painted and exist in a geographically great area from the time periods of the Aneolithic to the end of the Bronze Age. The pottery of the Kura-Arazes and Tripolie is black).

    The Russian, French, and American archaeologists working in Central Asia for the last few years have arrived at the following conclusions. There are many agricultural settlements in northeastern Iran. Among them is Tepe Hessar located on the southeastern coast of the Caspian Sea. In the second half of the third millennium BC, peoples migrated from Tepe Hessar to Namazga-Tepe to the Geoksyr group. They lived there half a thousand years and then the group at Geoksyr disappeared. Scholars think that Sapallitepa was settled in the first part of the second millennium BC (eighteenth to seventeenth centuries) and the people then migrated to Jarkutan.

    Alexeev disagrees with the hypothesis that peoples migrated from Tepe Hessar to Namazga Tepe to the Geoksyr Group then to Sapallitepa and then to Jarkutan. First there is a difference in population size. Tepe Hessar is a huge settlement; at the Geoksyr Group there are seventeen tepes with only Geoksyr being large; the others are very small. Sapallitepa has a size of thirty to forty meters wide and twice as long; therefore the population at Sapallitepa is very small. Jarkutan is two to three times larger than Namazga Depe. According to Arutiunov, Namazga-Depe is large; it was a fortified settlement, several hundred meters long.

    Alexeev then questions why the migrations produced settlements of different sizes? He cites physical anthropological investigations that cannot support the idea that the four groups (not including Jarkutan) are related. The people at Sapallitepa are five to seven centimeters taller than the other groups who average 158-162 centimeters. The people at Sapallitepa are much larger morphologically than the other groups (not including Jarkutan) and are more similar to those from areas with broad faces. One could guess that the food supply is better at Sapallitepa; however, all areas have the same landscape, they supported agriculture and husbandry, and the people had good herds but with limited amounts of water.

    The movement of people cannot be supported by one migration from southwest to northeast. Relations were much more complicated. Now archaeologists from the Peabody Museum at Harvard University are trying to support Kuftin and Masson's observations. This work is now in progress. Professor Lamberg-Karlovsky has taken samples and Dr. Fred Hiebert has taken measurements 15. In Central Asia, the monuments are like those found in the southern part of European Russia.

    Andronovo Culture

    According to Alexeev, the Andronovo Culture occupied a territory in Kazakhstan extending from the Volga River to the Altai Mountains to the southern Yenissei Valley. This culture was a nomadic economy of horse, sheep, and cow with islands of agriculture in some places and was concentrated on the coasts of small rivers. S.A. Teploukhov published two articles on the Andronovo Culture before being killed in prison at the age of 33/34 years. Teplouhov proposed a chronological sequence of cultures in the Upper Yenissei Valley that has remained unchanged until now.

    The Andronovo Culture, as per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" dates to the middle and 2nd half of the II millennium BC. In the west, this culture came into contact with a culture characterized by the use of notched logs in construction. The settlements are both semisubterranean and ground level dwellings. Burial grounds are common; cremation sites are rare. Burial sites are marked by round low embankments and sometimes by stone barriers. The grave goods consist of flint arrowheads, bronze tools and weapons, beads of copper and paste, and belled gold and copper earrings. Ceramics are for the most part flat-bottomed.

    Alexeev continues: the Andronovo Culture is possibly the eastward movement of the Pit Grave Culture. The Andronovo Culture dates at the eighteenth to fourteenth centuries of the second millennium BC. We know of this culture only from kurgans which are classic in form i.e. not very large and three to four meters in height. No settlements have been found for this culture; possibly there is one in Kazhakstan but it is poorly preserved [Note: this reference to lack of settlements is contrary to the information from the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia"; to my knowledge, Soviet scholars did not focus on settlement archaeology].

    In the kurgans bones of animals, bronze objects, and ceramics have been found. Pots from the Andronovo Culture have a flattened bottom. The more recent (i.e. closer to the final stage of the Bronze Age) the kurgan, the flatter the bottom. Designs on the pots are variations of the meander; this sign is common in India and thought to be Indo-European. Nothing definite is known about the origins of the Andronovo culture; possibly somewhere in western Kazhakstan. Professor Alexeev sees no argument to support the point of view that the origins of the Andronovo Culture was in an area of northwestern Mongolia.

    The Afanasyevo Culture

    As per Alexeev, the Afanasyevo Culture 16 was located in the Upper Yenissei Valley in the second part of third millennium to the first century of second millennium BC. Afanasyevo Culture pottery has rounded bottoms. The Afanasyevo Culture was replaced by the Andronovo Culture during the Eneolithic Period.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" the Afanasievo Culture existed in southern Siberia in the Minusinsk Basin and in the Altai from the mid III - beginning II mil BC and were contemporary with the Pit Culture and Catacomb Culture. These tribes were of the Paleo-European type. Both settlements and burial grounds have been preserved. The burial grounds are marked on the surface by circles made of stone slabs. They were later replaced by burial mounds which also had stone circles. Single and multiple burials, but rarely twin burials, have been found and there is no indication of inequality of possessions.

    The Afanasievo were cattle breeders and likely agriculturalists. Tools were made of stone although gold, silver, and copper metalworking were known. Ceramics were egg shaped, flat-bottomed, and round bottomed vessels. Images of hawks and masked human figures preserved on burial slabs resemble masks incised on the Stelae of the Karasuk Culture.

    As per Alexeev: thus the Pit Grave Culture was replaced by the Afanasyevo Culture which in turn was replaced by the Andronovo Culture. Likely these cultures spoke an ancient Iranian language. In the Caucasus, the Kura-Araxes Culture was replaced by the Trialeti; both spoke an ancient Iranian language.

    [Lecture 13 delivered 5 August 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This the next to last lecture in the Alexeev series is accompanied by slides and is extremely detailed. Three new cultures from the Bronze Age are introduced and the Iron Age comes into being with the Scythians and Greeks. Because so much information has been presented with the slides, I have incorporated this material into the basic lecture.

    The first Bronze Age culture presented is that of the Karasuk. This culture exists in the last century of the second millennium BC in the steppe zone extending from the Volga River to Siberia. The economy of the Karasuk Culture is husbandry with small traces of agriculture. Pottery is with a rounded bottom and is decorated with diagonal lines and dots; bronze knives are shaped with an angle between the handle and blade; and burials are placed close together and covered with pieces of flat stone. The pottery is similar to that discovered in Inner Mongolia and the interior of China; bronze knives are similar to those from northeastern China; and the burials are similar to those found in northeastern China. Skeletal evidence indicates that the Karasuk Culture is Europoid.

    For the Okunev Culture we have very little information. This culture is from a village in the upper Yenissei Valley and is not distributed over a broad area. The pottery of the Okunev Culture is similar to the Andronovo Culture and the bronzes are more like the Andronovo Culture than the Karasuk Culture. Burials of the Okunev Culture are similar to the Karasuk with stones covering the coffin; however, these stones are engraved in a fashion similar to independent stones found in the upper Yenissei Valley. These independent stones are on occasion located close to kurgans and at other times found independently. These stones are very large; some are carved with realistic faces; some with rays on their heads; some are dressed in the female costumes worn by modern Turkic tribes.

    The Turbino Culture is located in the central and southern Urals. Only burials have been found; no settlements. Exceptional bronze tools and weapons have been uncovered but the pottery is very miserable. Bone, either human or animal, has not been preserved. In northeastern Russia and western Siberia, similar tools have been found but with a variation in the ceramics. Turbino is a Culture Province.

    In Eurasia, bronze is produced in three areas by two/three cultures 17. The two cultures are the Turbino and the Kura-Araxes (and Trialeti which replaces the Kura-Araxes) . One area is the central and southern Urals (Turbino), the second area is the Caucasus (Kura-Araxes and Trialeti), and the third area is China. Bronzes in the Caucasus is made of copper with arsenic; in the Urals the bronze is with copper and tin; and in China bronze is copper with lead and tin. Bronze from the Caucasus has the same arsenic percentage as bronze from Turkey.

    Alexeev dates the Iron Age from the beginning of the eighth century BC until present and places the Scythian Culture in the Iron Age. From Greek, Near East, and Chinese sources we learn that with the Scythians came iron. Alexeev raises the possibility that the Scythians, or as he calls them the Scythes, might have been a single tribe in the Altai area of Siberia.

    Greek colonies dating from the fifth century BC have been located around the Black Sea in an area from the Crimea to the Caucasus as well as in the town of Anapa (in the Caucasus) on the territory of Asia. Most of the information on the Greek Colonies is presented with the use of slides and the presentation begins without any difficulty; however four or five slides into the lecture, a problem develops with the projector. Alexeev continues pushing the forward button but nothing happens. Wishing to assist in this difficult situation, I offer my help, walk over to the projector and begin moving the release lever on the carousel to remove the tray. Professor Alexeev unexpectedly slaps my hand, says "NO", and then rings for the audio-visual technician who responds immediately. The technician walks over to the machine, moves the release lever on the carousel, removes the slide tray, and then removes the problem slide. "The slide is too thick" says the teckie; "Humph, Humph, Humph" says Alexeev.

    The Karasuk Culture

    As per Alexeev, the Karasuk Culture extends from the Volga to southern Siberia with its origin in the last century of the second millennium BC. Archaeologist S.A. Teploukhov 18, who conducted his investigations in the Upper Yenissei Valley and in the Altai, has discovered that the economy of this steppe region of southern Siberia is husbandry with small traces of agriculture. In the kurgans, the goods found differ from the other cultures so far mentioned. In a text by S. Kiselev 19, the author states that the Karasuk Culture is created by invaders from northern China based on the forms of pottery and the typology of bronze objects. An analysis of the Karasuk Culture pottery reveals that vessels are short, wide, and have rounded bottoms which is similar to Afanasyevo Culture pottery in that both cultures have pottery with rounded bottoms; however the Afanasyevo Culture pottery is high and narrow. The Karasuk pottery differs from the Andronovo Culture pottery in that the Andronovo pottery has a flat bottom. This short, wide, rounded bottom pot is also found in Inner Mongolia and interior China. In the steppe area of Eurasia, pots have flattened bottoms. The Karasuk pottery is simply decorated with diagonal lines and dots.

    An analysis of bronzes from the Karasuk Culture reveals that they are like the bronzes from northeastern China. Knives with an angle between the handle and the blade are found in central and northern China; therefore, it is assumed that this culture has been brought in by tribes from China and Inner Mongolia. Alexeev comments that these invaders replaced the Andronovo Culture without any genetic involvement 20.

    The Karasuk Culture, in southern Siberia, is only known from the excavations of kurgans. These kurgans are 40-50 centimeters to surface level. Burials are in coffins covered with flat stone pieces (lined up in tile fashion). Burials are close to each other. These burials are also found in northeastern China. Some excavations have been found with both Karasuk and Afanasyevo Cultures but as with the Andronovo Culture there is no genetic involvement.

    Alexeev concludes that the Karasuk are influenced by the Andronovo and somewhat by the Afanasyevo. That the Karasuk Culture was originally inhabitants from northeast China cannot be confirmed because there is no trace of Mongoloid from China. Rather, the Karasuk are Europoid like the Afanasyevo and Andronovo; however, the Karasuk do differ from both the Afanasyevo and Andronovo.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" the Karasuk Culture exists from the end of the II millennium to the beginning of the I millennium BC in the mountains of southern Siberia, in Kazakhstan, and along the upper Ob River. Burial mounds have been found and some mounds have more than 100 graves. Burials are in stone chests under a low mound with small quadrangular enclosures made of small upright stone slabs. The Karasuk tribes engage in stock raising and their bronze articles are decorated with geometric designs. They make clay vessels and woolen fabrics, have knowledge of farming, and sculpture representations of animals. These tribes are associated with ancient populations of northern China, Mongolia, Cisbaikal, and Transbaikal regions, western Siberia, and Middle Asia.

    Soviet Scholar L. Vasiliev thinks these bronze objects developed in Siberia and moved to China; however there is no strong center of development in Siberia. There is a strong center in China 21.

    The Turbino Culture

    Alexeev continues: in the central Urals in the Kama River Valley where the Kama River flows into the Volga River is the Turbino Culture. Turbino is a cemetery excavated in the 1950's and 1960's by O.N. Bader 22, a German born in Russia. He discovers many independent burials located close to each other. Spearheads, bracelets, and small flint tools are found, but no bone, either human or animal. Is this the result of the soil conditions, i.e. that the soil does not allow preservation?

    The Turbino Culture also produces excellent bronze tools and military weapons; however, the pottery is very miserable. Was it pottery that was meant to be destroyed? In a later time period there are great areas east and west of the Turbino Culture which produces the same rich bronze material.

    In northeast Russia and western Siberia there is a great area with tools similar to Turbino but with variations in ceramics. This is not just one culture, it is the Turbino Culture Province. Alexeev's question: why is Turbino located north of other cultures without cultural correspondence?

    As per Alexeev, there are two bronze producing cultures in the former Soviet Union but three bronze producing areas. The two cultures are 1) in the Caucasus and 2) in the central Urals (including some south Ural) 23. These bronzes differ in chemical content. In the Caucasus the bronzes are made with copper and arsenic. This is also true for bronzes from the Near East. In the central Urals the bronzes are made with copper and tin. Tin has also been discovered in the Near East. This produces a complicated picture. In the southern area (the steppe area), bronzes are of Caucasus origin except the Karasuk Culture where the origin is northern China. The bronzes from the southern area] are with arsenic. In the northern area, the bronze is with tin. However, in several places in the southern steppe zone, the bronze is with tin but we don't know if it is from the Urals or from the Near East. In southern Siberia we don't know the content of the bronzes; more study from excavations and the laboratory regarding the chemical structures on the contents of the micro elements is needed. Thus bronze with arsenic is located in the southern areas and comes from the Caucasus and the Near East. Bronze with tin is located in the northern areas and comes from the Turbino Province of the Urals. In the Caucasus, bronze is similar to bronze from Turkey. The arsenic percentage is the same. Archaeologist E. Chernykh 24 has developed the concept of Circum Pontic Province (Black Sea) in discussing bronze metallurgy.

    As modified from Alexeev: thus the two bronze producing cultures are the Turbino in the Urals, and Kura-Araxes and Trialeti in the Caucasus (Trialeti replaces the Kura-Araxes); the three bronze producing areas are the Urals, the Caucasus, and China.

    Okunev Culture

    Alexeev doesn't date the Okunev Culture. Arutiunov dates the Karasuk at the end of the 2nd and early 1st millennium BC and dates the Okunev at about 15-14 c. BC. The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" dates the Karasuk at the end of the 2nd and beginning of the 1st millennium BC; and dates the Okunev at the first half of the 2nd millennium BC.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia", the Okunev Culture is named after the Okunev settlement in southern Khakassia and refers to a Bronze Age culture in southern Siberia. The first burial was excavated by S.A. Teploukhov in 1928. The Okunev replaced the Afanasyevo and preceded the Andronovo Culture.

    Karasuk: II mil (end) - I mil (beg)
    1100 - 900

    Andronovo: II mil (mid to second half)
    1500 - 1100

    Okunev: II mil (first half)
    1900 - 1500

    Okunev (as per Arutiunov):
    15-14 c.
    1400 - 1300

    Afanaseyevo: III mil (mid) - II mil (beg)
    2500 - 1900

    As per "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" burial structures of the Okunev Culture are small, rectangular surface enclosures made of stone slabs placed vertically into the ground. The skeletons are on their backs with legs bent at the knees. Stone statues with human faces and images of birds and beasts engraved on bone plaques or hammered out on stone slabs are also discovered. There is no significant indication of property and social stratification.

    As per the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" the similarity between objects from Okunev and objects found in sites in the vicinity of the mid Ob River and Lake Baikal region suggests the Okunev came to southern Siberia from northern taiga regions.

    Alexeev continues: with the end of the Bronze Age we see a new development in mental activity. From the Okunev Culture we have the cover of a coffin with stones that have been engraved. These stones are the same as individual stones from the Upper Yenissei Valley. These stones stand erect; sometime they are located close to kurgans and sometime they stand independently. These stones are very large i.e. 3.5 meters high with the weight of three ton. Some of the stones have realistic faces while others are without faces. Some represent females dressed in attire common to costumes of modern Turkic tribes. Some of these stones are fertility figures with a great stomach while others have rays surrounding the head 25. Possibly all are images of female goddesses in Okunev society. Today, in the northern areas of Siberia, some art objects are still made in the Neolithic style i.e. in bone and wood.

    Thus this new mental activity in Asia, Mongolia, and southern Siberia includes flat rocks with engravings and sophisticated ceramics with ornamental motifs. Sculpture ranges from abstract to realistic and stone is enriched for art with ornamental artifacts. Elsewhere i.e. eastern Spain, western France, in Switzerland, and England stone is used as a visible calendar to record astronomical events (i.e.Stonehenge) but in Russia these stones are used to create art.

    Back (Chapter VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia - Lectures 7 and 8)

    Next (Chapter VIII - Iron Age in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter VII - (Part II)

    1 HOLLIS has very few current listings for Celtic. Perhaps the following source will prove useful:

    1985. "Settlement and society: aspects of West European prehistory in the first millennium BC" edited by T.C. Champion and J.V.S. Megaw; Leicester: Leicester University Press.[back]

    2 The definitive text by Michael Ventris on Linear B inscriptions is:

    1958. "The decipherment of linear B" by John Chadwick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[back]

    3 Several recent publications on Aryans include:

    1988. "Facets of Aryan Culture" by Bahadur Chand Chhabra; Delhi: Sundeep Prakashan.

    1990? "Aryans in South India" by P.P. Narayanan Nambudiri; New Delhi: Inter-India Publications.

    1991. "Aryans in the Rigveda" by F.B.J. Kuiper; Amsterdam; Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.

    older significant publications include:

    1934. "Aryan and Semite; with particular reference to Nazi racial dogmas. Addresses delivered before the Judaeans and the Jewish academy of arts and sciences, March 4th, 1934 in New York City by Prof. Franz Boas, Dr. Maurice Fishberg, Prof. Ellsworth Huntington, and Max J. Kohler, presiding" by Franz Boas; Cincinnati: B'nai B'rith.

    1934? "Aryans and non-Aryans" by Franz Boas; New York: Information and Services Associates.[back]

    4 Two current publications on Aryans in India:

    1992. "Aryan invasion of India: the myth and the truth" by Navaratna Srinivasa Rajaram; New Delhi: Voice of India.

    1993. "The Aryans, a modern myth" by Paramesa Caudhuri; New Delhi: Eastern Publishers; Distributor.[back]

    5 HOLLIS lists the following for the Battle Axe Culture:

    1982. "An assessment of the Scanian Battle-Axe tradition: towards a social perspective" by Christopher Tilley; published in Lund: CWK Gleerup.[back]

    6 Gimbutas's publication on Baltic populations is:

    1965. "Bronze age cultures in central and eastern Europe"; the Hague: Mouton.[back]

    7 This statement regarding the three bronze producing areas being the Caucasus, Central Asia, and China appears to contradict information presented in Lecture 13 where Alexeev identifies the three bronse producing areas as the Caucasus, China, and the Urals. It should be noted that southern Ural and Central Asia are adjacent and not separated by any physical barriers. Ural/ Central Asia was a large bronze producing area.[back]

    8 For the Tripolie Culture in the Ukraine and Romania, the following references are listed in HOLLIS:

    1979. "Arta culturii Cucuteni" by Vladimir Dumitrescu; published in Cucuresti: "Meridiane".

    1984. "Formarea si clasificarea grupelor de stil Ab si B ale ceramicii pictate Cucuteni-Tripolie" by Anton Nitu; published in Iasi: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania.

    1984. "The Cucuteni-Tripolye culture: a study in technology and the origins of complex society" by Linda Ellis; published in Oxford, England: B.A.R.

    1989. "Rannii etap tripol'skoi kul'tury na territorii Ukrainy" by Vladimir G. Zbenovich; published in Kiev: Nauk. dumka.[back]

    9 HOLLIS lists only one reference for the Kura-Araxes Culture:

    1992. "South Asian archaeology studies" edited by G. Possehl; published in New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Pub. Co.HOLLIS lists the following publications on the Trialeti:[back]

    10 HOLLIS lists the following publications on the Trialeti:

    1969. "Arkheologicheskie raskopki v Trialeti; k istorii gruzinskikh plemen vo II tysiacheletti do n.e." [Archaeological excavation in Trialeti; on the history of Georgian tribes in the second millennium BC] by O.M. Dzhaparidze; published in Tbilisi: "Metsniereba".

    1972. "Trialetis porgansli xslesris periodizatia ga benepisi" by E. Gogaze; published in Tbilisi: "Metsniereba"

    1974. "Pamiatniki Trialeti epokhi rannei i srednei bronzy; rackopki 1936-1940, 1947-1948 gg." by L.G. Zhorzhikashvili and E.M. Gogaze; published in Tbilisi: "Metsniereba".[back]

    11 Kuftin's book is entitled:

    1941. "Archaeological excavations in Trialeti ...";published in Tbilisi.[back]

    12 V.M. Masson's text:

    1988. "Altyn-Depe"; translation by Henry N. Michael; published in Philadelphia by the University of Pennsylvania Museum.[back]

    13 The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" references:

    1964. "Sredniaia Aziia i Drevnii Vostok" by V.M. Masson; published in Moscow-Leningrad.

    1965. "Pamiatniki pozdnego eneolita Iugo-Vostochnoi Turkmenii" by V.I. Sarianidi; published in Moscow.[back]

    14 HOLLIS has two listings for Sapallitepa in Uzbekistan:

    1973. "Sapallitepa" by A.A. Askarov; published in Tashkent: FAN.

    1977. "Drevnezemledel'cheskaia kul'tura epokhi bronzy iuga Uzbekistana" by A.A. Askarov; published in Tashkent: FAN.[back]

    15 A recent publication by Fredrik Hiebert on Central Asia is entitled:

    1994. "Origins of the Bronze Age Oasis Civilization in Central Asia"; American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin #42; Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University.[back]

    16 The "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" references:

    1951. "Drevniaia Istoriia Iuzhnoi Sibiri" by S.V. Kiselev; published in Moscow [second edition].[back]

    17 As per Alexeev, "in the (former) Soviet Union, bronze is produced in three areas by two cultures". This statement is problematic. The two cultures are the Turbino and the Kura-Araxes (as well as the Trialeti as confirmed by Arutiunov). The three areas are the southern Urals, Caucasus, and China".
    As per Arutiunov, "this does not imply that bronze in China was not produced in China. Bronze was imported from China, but the Chinese culture was not imported".
    Additional information from personal communication with G. Katrinka Reinhardt: "bronzes in the Caucasus are made with an arsenic alloy; in the Urals they are made with an alloy of tin; and in China bronzes are made with an alloy of both lead and tin".[back]

    18 Teploukhov also excavated the Okunev Culture in 1928.[back]

    19 According to HOLLIS, the following reference is the only 1951 publication for S.V. Kiselev.

    1951. "Drevniaia istoriia IUzhnoi Sibiri"; published in Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR.

    The above reference is also mentioned in the "Great Soviet Encyclopedia" for the Karasuk Culture along with:

    1970. "Tsentral'naia Aziia: Karasukskaia problema" by E.A. Novgorodova; published in Moscow.[back]

    20 The meaning of no genetic involvement is very interesting. That the Karasuk Culture possibly has a China/Mongolia origin is suggested by the pottery with rounded bottoms and the bronze knives with an angle between the handle and the blade. But what Alexeev is alluding to is "no evidence" of Mongoloid morphology. Why? A preliminary answer: because peoples from China/ Mongolia did not have a Mongolian morphology; rather, they were what Alexeev has referenced as Europoid. Another possible answer: because "race" cannot be identified in the archaeological record.
    I posed the following question to Arutiunov: "You comment that people in Mongolia could be Europoid, but hardly in China. Why not? V. Mair found Europoids in Xingjiang. Also, if Alexeev (me too) finds little difference between Homo Sapiens and Neandertal, then he surely would find very little difference between Europoid and whatever "race" there was in China i.e. Mongoloid".
    To the above question Arutiunov answers: "Certainly there is a difference between Sapiens and Neandertal and between Europoids and Mongoloids. However, there are also mixed or transitional forms. In China proper there could be only occasional Europoid intermixing, on a small scale. But north and west of the Great Wall, and long before its construction, Europoids might prevail in many epochs".
    I continue questioning Arutiunov: "Alexeev also mentioned a population of mixed Europoid and Mongolian. Does this mean that there were some graves with Europoid and some with Mongoloid or that the skeletal remains had traces of both Europoid and Mongoloid. If the later is correct, how can anyone determine which portion of the remains belongs to which group?"
    To the above question, Arutiunov says that this means both. "There is usually no difficulty to determine which type is prevailing in a mixed population. It rarely happens fifty-fifty". Another question: "are the Karasuk and Andronovo ethnographically similar"? Arutiunov answers: "No, they definitely are different".
    A final question asked of Arutiunov: "Alexeev clearly states that the Karasuk are Europoid like the Andronovo and Afanasyevo. You state they definitely are different. Why? Is the answer because any two humans are both alike as well as different. Genetically speaking, my daughter and I should profile as similar; however, since my husband and I profile as genetically dissimilar, my daughter can also profile as genetically dissimilar to me".[back]

    21 Dates for early China from the Sackler Gallery, Washington, DC are Shang: 1700 - 1050 BC; western Zhou:1050 - 771 BC. This statement i.e. "that there is no strong center of metallurgical development in Siberia" doesn't appear to be accurate. Chernykh, see below, mentions a center of copper production in the Minusinsk Basin.[back]

    22 A publication by Otto N. Bader specifically referencing the Kama Valley is:

    1958. "Na zare istorii Prikam'ia" by Otto Nikolaevich Bader; publishing info: Perm, Permskow knizhnoe izd-vo.

    A second publication by Bader referencing Bronze Age in the Ural Mountains region is entitled:

    1964. "Drevneishie metallurgi Priural'ia"; Moskva: Nauka.[back]

    23 In the Urals, the culture being referred to is the Turbino which produces excellent bronze tools and military weapons.
    Elsewhere, Alexeev mentions two cultures in the Caucasus: the Kura-Araxes and the Trialeti. Arutiunov confirms that both cultures produced bronzes. Arutiunov has also confirms that arsenic is present in the Caucasus.[back]

    24 The recent publication by E.N. Chernykh is:

    1992. "Ancient metallurgy in the USSR: the early metal age"; translated by Sarah Wright; New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chernykh claims the first metal using culture was the Afanasevo in the Altai dating to the first half of the third millennium BC. However, the Afanasevo only made beads, mostly of copper. The Okunev, on the other hand, used tin bronzes. The Okunev were situated in a zone of rich copper deposits in the Minusinsk Basin.[back]

    25 This image of a figure with rays surrounding the head also appears in ancient Egypt during the reign of Akenatun (1356-1339 BC), the pharaoh associated with the solar cult.[back]

    Back (Chapter VII: Bronze Age in Eurasia - Lectures 7 and 8)

    Next (Chapter VIII - Iron Age in Eurasia)

    Back to Table of Contents

    Chapter VIII - Iron Age in Eurasia
    [Lecture 13 (continued) delivered 5 August 1991]

    The Scythian Culture

    Alexeev continues: the Iron Age begins in the eighth century BC and continues until the present. The early Iron Age period is between the eighth century BC and the fourth/fifth century AD. Now we have written information from Greece, the Near East, and China allowing us to glean ethnic links. From Greek and Near East sources we find that in the southern steppe zone and European Russia at the second century, the Scythians were replaced by Sarmatians. Greek sources have preserved Scythian and Sarmatian words and place names. Both tribes spoke Iranian languages.

    The Greek sources, however, are contradictory. Some say the Scythians were from the northern Black Sea area; others say they were military campaigns in the Caucasus and Central Asia for the purpose of prospecting for gold. Possibly the Scythians were a single tribe in the mountain area of central Siberia. Archaeological sources and remotely sensed imagery show a great area of Scythian kurgans at the junction of the border with southwestern Mongolia 1. The material from here is similar to material from the Caucasus. From these kurgans near Mongolia, in very high altitudes, wood and blankets have been preserved. This is the Altai region of Siberia. Recent excavations in the summer of 1993 produced a female corpse frozen in permafrost 2. "The Lady" will be submitted for DNA testing and for more answers regarding the origins of the Pazyryk Culture on the Eurasian steppes. Information on the Pazyryk Culture of the Minusinsk Basin in Siberia can be found in Frozen Tombs of Siberia by S.I. Rudenko 3.

    Greek Colonies

    The ancient Greeks colonized in coastal areas around the Black Sea from the first age of the great Greek Culture until the end of the first century BC. Three Greek Colonies: Olvia, Bospor, and Anapa 4 have been excavated. Olvia is located in the western section of the north coast of the Black Sea. Oliva has been excavated from the early 1900's to present day. In the territory of the Black and Azov Seas from eastern Crimea to the western Caucasus is a system of Greek towns called Bospor. Bospor was a small independent kingdom on the Balkan Peninsula. Anapa is a Greek town situated in the western sector of the central Caucasus; Anapa is therefor located on the territory of Asia.

    Numerous artifacts have come from these excavations. A monumental stone entrance to a tomb is similar to the entrance to Mycinean burials in southern Greece. A figure of a Greek goddess has been discovered with snakes on her head and holes in her hair. Also uncovered is a statue of a chariot with four horses, a statue of Pluto the god of water, a garnet finger ring, a statue of iron which likely was covered with a thin layer of copper, shackles (fetters) made of iron and used on arrested people, and typical Greek vases from the mid second millennium BC. A recent discovery dating to the fourth century is a statue of Pericles.

    From a Scythian kurgan comes a dagger and a gold hammer thought to be worked by Greeks. Scythians left only kurgans except for one town in the Dnieper Valley (the Kamenka Tribe is not common with other Scythian tribes; possibly it is the tribe of a town). Thus Scythians and Greeks were in a definite cultural relationships for many Greek objects have been found in Scythian kurgans.

    Greek temples, as recorded in photographs, are an important archive because many of the temples were destroyed during the last hundred years so that the stones could be used for modern construction. Alexeev ends this lecture with a slide of a Greek arch which I think is perhaps the most significant technological achievement by the ancient Greeks. Other early civilizations perfected the corbeled arch which is a relatively simple construction in which both sides of the arch gradually merge; the stability of one stone being determined by that which is placed on top. However, the true arch is a delicate problem. The only way to achieve stability is with the keystone which applies a downward force so that the arch can achieve height. This physical concept is similar to the construction of a kite. A kite without a tail will not fly; it is the downward force of the tail that allows the kite to soar.

    [Lecture 14 delivered 7 August 1991]

    Overview by Geraldine Reinhardt

    This is the last lecture in the Summer of 1991 series on Soviet archaeology delivered at Harvard University by the prominent physical anthropologist Valery P. Alexeev of Moscow. Alexeev begins this lecture with a discussion of six kingdoms in Eurasia during the Iron Age: Vani, Merv, Bactria, Pazyryk Scythians, Huns, and Russia.

    The Kingdom of Vani is located in the Caucasus in Georgia and exists from the seventh/sixth century BC to the first century AD. Greek inscriptions are carved on tombstones and the architecture is similar to that of Greece. Both iron and bronze metals are used, but bronze is considered more valuable.

    From the Caucasus we move to Central Asia and Alexeev briefly mentions Merv and Bactria. The Kingdom of Merv is located in Central Asia in Turkmenistan. The capital of the Kingdom is also called Merv and is heavily fortified. Numerous seals are found that depict scenes from Iranian mythology and a sculpture uncovered is of a Greek wearing a helmet. Bactria, a Kingdom in Afghanistan, has its capital on the coast of the Amu Darya River. This site continues to be excavated by the French.

    The final two Iron Age Kingdoms are located in Siberia. The Pazyryk Scythian Kingdom is located in the eastern part of the Altai Mountains. These great kurgans have produced rich material, so rich that some think this must be the early development of a small kingdom. The Huns Kingdom is located around Lake Baikal and in Mongolia; its people practice small agriculture, have domestic animals, and live in aesthetic places. The great wall of China was constructed to deter the Huns. In the fourth - fifth century AD, the Huns migrate to Central Asia, the northern Caucasus, western Europe, and Italy. The Huns occupy the steppes until the sixteenth/seventeenth century.

    Another migration from Central Asia to the Caucasus is by the Alans (Alani) people. The Alans are Iranian people who did not remain in the Caucasus but moved to western Asia, crossed Italy, France, southern Spain and the north coast of Africa. Today there remains one Iranian group in the Caucasus called the Ossets who are descendants of the Alans.

    Another migration Alexeev discusses is that of the Slavs. Slavs are located in the eastern section of what is now the Republic of Czech, in southern Poland, and in eastern Ukraine. The Slavs begin to move in a northeasterly direction peopling European Russia.

    The final kingdom presented is the kingdom of Russia. The beginnings of the Russian kingdom dates to the ninth century AD and is geographically located in the Dnieper Valley where present day Kiev is situated.

    Alexeev mentions two additional migrations, that of Jenghiz Khan in the beginning of the thirteenth century and in the seventeenth century a migration of Russians to Siberia, Alaska, and the west coast of California in the United States. Thus completes the major migrations in Eurasia.

    Alexeev ends the lecture with slides, information from which is included in the text. The final slide, indeed symbolic, is of an ancient seal in the shape of a cross. The seal is of silver and covered with gold.

    Class ends one hour early. Alexeev gathers his map and briefcase and ... he leaves the room! My classmates and I stare at each other with perplexity. We have been informed that our final examination will be a two hour oral conducted at 102 Quincy House. Each of us will be given one or two questions at the beginning of the exam, we will have a brief time to talk among ourselves and share information, and then we will be examined individually. We also have been told that we can bring whatever information we need to the exam.

    Kingdom of Vani

    As per Alexeev, the Kingdom of Vani 5 is in existence in the seventh/sixth century BC and lasts until the first century AD. This kingdom is located in Georgia close to the Black Sea; Vani is also the name of a town. This kingdom is influenced by Greece but it also has its native cultural traditions 6. Linguists do not know which languages were spoken [Arutiunov says the language most probably was early Zanic]; however, inscriptions on gravestones are in Greek. This site has been excavated for thirty years revealing a great square with architecture similar to Greece. The Vani people are metal users. Iron is used for tools, with an occasional implement made of bronze; bronze is considered very valuable. Thus in the early Iron Age there is a mixing of a new tradition of iron with the old tradition of bronze.

    Kingdom of Merv

    The Kingdom of Merv 7 is located in Central Asia south- east of the Caspian Sea in the geographic area known as Turkmenistan. Merv is both an oasis and a town situated on the southern edge of the Kara-kum desert. The great mountain chains of the Hindu-Kush and the Paropamisus that extend from the Caspian to the Pamirs are interrupted 180 miles south of Merv. Near this gap and flowing northwards in parallel courses are the rivers Tejend and Murghab. These rivers lose themselves in the Kara-kum desert. Thus Merv becomes a watch tower over the entrance into Afghanistan in the northwest and a stepping stone between Persia and Bokhara/Samarkand.

    Merv is inhabited by Turkomans of the Tekke tribe. The oasis is irrigated by an elaborate system of canals stemming from the Murghab River. The oasis is known for its fertility and produces wheat, millet, barley, melons, rice, and cotton. As well, silk worms are bred. The Turkomans herd horses, camels, sheep, cattle, asses, and mules and are superior silversmiths and carpet weavers (their carpets are finer than the Persian). Summer heat is very oppressive and a gentle breeze fills the air with clouds of fine dust obscuring visibility.

    In Hindu, Farsi, and Arab tradition, Merv is regarded as the ancient Paradise, the cradle of the Aryan families. As "Mouru", Merv is mentioned in the Zend-Avesta and under the name Margu it occurs in the Behistun inscriptions of Darius where it is referred to as one of the satrapies of ancient Persia. It afterwards becomes Margiana, a province of the Graeco-Syrian, Parthian, and Persian Kingdoms. In the fifth century during the rule of the Persian Sassanian dynasty, Merv is the seat of a Christian archbishopric of the Nestorian Church. In 646 Merv is occupied by the caliph Othman and becomes the capital of Khorasan. In the middle of the eleventh century Merv is overrun by the Turkish tribes of the Ghuzz from beyond the Oxus. In 1221 Tule, son of Jenghiz Khan and chief of the Mongols, butchers most of the inhabitants. From this time forward Merv begins to decline.

    On the death of the grandson of Jenghiz Khan in 1380, Merv is included in the possessions of Tamerlane, Mongol prince of Samarkand. Merv is occupied for a brief time by the Uzbegs but remains in the hands of Persia until 1787 when it is captured by the emir of Bokhara and is razed to the ground by the Bokharians. With the destruction of the irrigation system, Merv is converted into a wasteland. The Oasis is occupied by the Russians in 1883.

    The ruins of Merv consist of the Bairam Ali Khan "kalah" (citadel) built by a son of Tamerlane and destroyed by the Bokharians and another "kalah", a walled enclosure, called Abdullah Khan. North is the old capital of the Seljuks, the Sultan Kalah, which is destroyed by the Mongols in 1219. The most significant feature is the burial mosque of Sultan Sanjar. East of this capital is Giaur Kalah, the Merv of the Nestorian era and the capital of Arab princes. North of Giaur Kalah are the ruins of Iskender Kalah, likely the capital of the Seleucid dynasty.

    From Merv comes the sculpture of a Greek male wearing a helmet. Excavations also have revealed a great number of clay seals possibly used as signs of property. Other seals depict animals, in particular a fantastic figure with a mammal's body and the head of a bird. This creature is typical of Iranian mythology and is called Senvurv-Paskudge 8. Two main principles in ancient Iranian religion are the Ormuzd (god) and Arman (devil); the former representing good and Arman bringing evil. The Senvurv-Paskudge is used to bring Ormuzd. These seals are located in many places. Other seals depicting mythological animals are also found; one seal depicts a seated figure with a staff in hand. There are no letters on this seal.

    Kingdom of Bactria

    Bactria 9 is located in Afghanistan. Bactria or Bactriana is the ancient name of the country between the mountain range of the Hindu Kush and the Amu Darya (Oxus) River. The capital city is Balkh. The country is mountainous, the climate moderate, water is abundant, and the land is fertile.

    Bactria is the homeland to one of the Iranian tribes. It is here that the prophet Zoroaster preaches and gathers his disciples; his religion spreads from here to the western parts of Iran. The language in which "Avesta" the holy book of Zoroastrianism is written is often referred to as "old Bactrian".

    Bactria is also regarded as the cradle of the Indo-European people based on the theory that the nations of Europe immigrated from Asia and that the Aryan languages (Indian and Iranian) are prototypes for the Indo-European. In opposition to this theory is another which states that the Aryans came from Europe, lived in the eastern part of Iran as one people, and then divided into Indians and Iranians. Currently, archaeological evidence seems to support the former.

    The "Avesta" locates its heroes and myths in eastern Iran and transforms the old gods who fight with the great snake into kings of Iran who fight with the Turanians. The Avesta also details the conflict between the peasants of Iran and the nomads of Turan (Turkistan). Turan is the region north of the Oxus and is peopled by those of Ural-Altaic stock who as nomads displace and/or assimilate earlier populations (i.e. Iranians and others). These people are also known as Turkic or Tartaric; Tartars are of Turkic origin such as Kazan Tatars and are members of one of the numerous Turkic peoples originating in Manchuria and Mongolia and now found mainly in the Tatar republic of the former USSR, the northern Caucasus, Crimea, and sections of Siberia.

    At no time did a great Bactrian empire exist; the Bactrians have always been ruled by petty local kings. Bactria is subjugated by Cyrus and becomes one of the satrapies of the Persian empire. When Alexander defeats Darius III, the satrap of Bactria tries to organize a resistance movement but to no avail. Bactria is conquered by Alexander without much difficulty. Bactria then becomes a province of the Macedonian empire and comes under the rule of the Seleucis, king of Asia. The Macedonians, especially Seleucis I and his son Antiochus I, founded many Greek towns in eastern Iran and for some time the Greek language becomes dominant. Due to the many difficulties presented to the Seleucid kings including the attacks by Ptolemy II, Diodotus, a satrap of Bactria, declares independence c 255 BC and Diodotus conquers Sogdiana and establishes the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom. Diodotus and his successors are able to contend with the attacks by the Seleucids. Finally, when Antiochus III is defeated by the Romans in 190 BC, the Bactrian king Euthydemus and his son Demetrius cross the Hindu Kush and begin the conquest of eastern Iran and the Indus valley. A great Greek empire has arisen in the far East. Soon many usurpers arise in many of the Bactrian provinces undermining the efforts of the Greeks to maintain a centralized control. The weakness of the Graeco-Bactrian kingdoms is shown by their complete overthrow.

    In the west the Arsacid empire has risen and Mithradates I and Phraates II begin to conquer areas to the west, especially Areia (Herat). In the west a new group of Mongolian tribes called Scythians by the Greeks appear. The most important of these Scythian tribes is the Tochari (also known as the Yueh-Chi of the Chinese). In 159 BC, according to Chinese sources, the Tochari enter Sogdiana, in 139 BC they conquer Bactria, and during the next generation they end Greek rule in eastern Iran. Only in India do the Greek conquerors, Menander and Apollodotus, maintain themselves for a while longer.

    In the middle of the first century BC, eastern Iran and western India belong to the Indo-Scythian empire. The ruling dynasty is the Kushan (Kushana). The most famous of the Kushan kings was Kanishka the protector of Buddhism. The principal seat of the Tochari and Kushan dynasty is in Bactria, but they also maintain eastern Afghanistan and Baluchistan while the western regions of Areia (Herat), Seistan, and part of the Helmund valley are conquered by the Arsacids. In the third century AD the Kushan dynasty begins to decay and in 320 AD the Gupta empire is founded in India. Thus the Kushanas are reduced to eastern Iran where they have to fight against the Sassanids. In the fifth century a new people come from the east, the Ephthalites (Huns), who conquer Bactria c 450 AD. The Ephthalites are followed by the Turks who appear in 560 AD and subjugate the country north of the Oxus. Most of the Kushan and Tochari principalities are overthrown by the Ephthalites. When the Sassanian empire is overthrown by the Arabs, the conquerors move eastward and subjugate Bactria and the entirity of Iran to the banks of the Jaxartes. The entire region thus is under control of the rule of the caliph and of Islam.

    The capital is located in northern Bactria on the coast of the Amu Darya River which marks the border between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan. The capital is possibly in the town of Ai-Hanum, a site excavated in the early 1920's by M.I. Rostovtsev (Rostovzeff) 10 of Harvard University. Today the site continues to be excavated by the French.

    Scythian Kingdom of Pazyryk

    The Kingdom of Pazyryk is located in the eastern section of the Altai Mountains close to the border of Mongolia 11. This kingdom has great kurgans with such rich material that many believe that it had to have been the first step in the political organization of a small kingdom. This is likely a Scythian kingdom.

    The burial ground at Kuturguntas, located 2,090 m above sea level, is located in a small mountain valley where the rivers Ak-Alaka, Kara-Bulak, and Ak-Kil merge. Kuturguntas is being excavated by the Russian archaeologist, N. Polos'mak 12 and contains five kurgans dating to Scythian times.

    The burial ground of Ak-Alaka, also excavated by Polos'mak, contains six kurgans and one funeral complex consisting of seven stone rings arranged one adjacent to another. Each ring consists of seven stones. These rings form a chain which ends in the southwest in a structure of small stones arranged in a radial fashion with a diameter of 5 m. To the northeast are two "Balbals" (gravestones) of grey-black flagstone. The interment at Ak-Alaka produces two larchwood coffins containing the "frozen" remains of a 45 year old male of the European type and a 16 year old female, also of the European type.

    The interment at Kuturguntas also produces a female corpse preserved in permafrost. Known as "The Lady", she has been submitted for DNA testing. This excavation has been the subject of a documentary filmed by The National Geographic Society and first televised by The Society in 1994. "The Lady" is also a feature article in the Society's journal, October 1994. It is hopeful that the DNA test results will answer significant questions concerning the origins of the Pazyryk Culture on the Eurasian steppes.

    Kingdom of Huns

    Located in Mongolia and around Lake Baikal is the Huns Kingdom 13. This kingdom is known from both it graves and settlements. The Huns Kingdom has domestic animals, practices small agriculture, and its people live in aesthetic places. Because the Huns are so rich and strong, they pose a serious danger to China. China constructs the Great Wall to serve as protection against the Huns.

    The Hsiung-nu (early Huns), according to Chinese chronicles, battle the Chinese in the Ordos area of Inner Mongolia. This occurs at the close of the Zhou (Chou) in the third century BC i.e. the eastern Zhou Dynasty ends in 221 BC giving way to the Qin and Han Dynasties.

    The Hsia dynasty is the first of the dynasties at 2205-1766 BC according to Li Chi (record of rites); Mo Ti; Lu Pu-wei; and Shu Ching (book of history). These are the earliest historical references [As per Arutiunov, the Hsia dynasty is legendary and precedes the Shang]. After this time there are fragmentary accounts of wars and migrations until the close of the Zhou Dynasty 2000 years later when the nomadic tribes in the Ordos are the Hsiung Nu. HOLLIS relates Huns to Hsiung-nu and Arutiunov confirms that the initial Huns are Hsiung-Nu.

    In 771 BC the Quanrong Tribes from the Ordos force the Zhou to move their capital eastward from Shaanxi to Luoyang. This marks the decline of centralization and the rise of regional power i.e. a large number of feudal states. During the Shang and western Zhou, the northern tribes are agricultural. During the eastern Zhou, the tribes practice husbandry and decorated their artifacts with zoomorphic motifs.

    Shang: 1700 - 1050 BC

    Western Zhou: 1050 - 771 BC

    Eastern Zhou: 771 BC - 221 BC

    Qin and Han: 221 BC - AD 220

    The term "Huns" applies to at least four different people: those under the leadership of Attila who invade the East Roman empire from about 372 - 453 AD; the Hungarians (Magyars); the White Huns (Ephthalites) who trouble the Persian empire from c 420 - 557 AD; and the Hunas 14 who invade India during the same period. The Huns appear in Europe at the end of the fourth century and the Ephthalites and Hunas in western Asia about fifty years later. Likely some defeat in China had sent them westward some time earlier. One group push their way through the mountains into Afghanistan and India, as the Yueh-Chi have done before them. Another group moves westward and settles in the northern end of the Caspian Sea and the southern section of the Ural Mountains. It is from here that the Huns under leadership by Attila invade Europe.

    The physical characteristics of the Huns is very variable since they continually increase their number by adding slaves, women, and mercenaries. The language of the Magyars is Finno-Ugric and most nearly allies with the speech of the Ostiaks now found east of the Urals [HOLLIS relates the Ostiaks of the Ob with the Khanty; and the Ostiaks of the Yenissei with the Kets]. The warlike temper of the Huns has led many scholars to regard them as Turks.

    HOLLIS lists Yueh-Chih (Yue-Chi) and relates Yueh-Chih to both the Ephthalites (White Huns) and Kushans (Kushans in Afghanistan and India). HOLLIS relates Tokhari with the Yueh-Chih and the Tokharian language with the Yueh-Chih language 15.

    Backtracking, HOLLIS relates Indo-Scythians with Yueh-Chih and Saka. Hollis relates Saka with the ancient city of Khotan (in Chinese Turkestan) 16 and relates the Saka Language with the Khotanese language. HOLLIS also categorizes Khotan China, Khotan Saka language, and Khotan Sinkiang (Xingjiang) 17.

    Backtracking again, HOLLIS relates Scythians to the Alani and Indo Scythians (the Alani or Alans are synonymous with the eastern Sarmatians and the Ossets in the Caucasus).

    As per Arutiunov: "very often similar names are applied to slightly or totally different people. Huns of Attila are probably a separate part of Hsiung-Nu (Khunnu) of northern China. White Huns (Ephthalites) and Hunas are probably interacting; they speak either Tokharic or Scythian. Huns of Attila and Hsiung-Nu are probably Turkic at the core, but their league of tribes certainly include other tribes who speak Uranian, Ugric, south Samodic, maybe Ket and other languages. Physically there are both Mongoloids and Europoids among them. The Saka definitely speak Scythian (North Iranian), the component "SK" is determinant in all Scythian ethnonyms. Ostiaks are Khanty par excellence but Selkups are often called Ostiak-Samoyeds, and Kets are called Yenissei-Ostiaks. Please do not mix identically sounding names of Khotan Indians of Hsiunguiang (Xingjiang) and Khotana Indians of Alaska".

    In the fourth - fifth century AD, the Huns migrate to Central Asia, the northern Caucasus, western Europe, and to Italy. This is the first of the migrations in the Christian era. Following this first migration, there are two or three other migrations from southern Siberia and eastern Russia. These peoples occupy the steppes and live there until the sixteenth/seventeenth century.

    Alans People

    As per Alexeev, there is one migration of Iranian people from Central Asia to the northern Caucasus. These Iranian people are called the Alans (Alani) People 18. The Alans are the easternmost division of the Sarmatians and are Iranian nomads with some Altaic admixture. From north of the Caspian and spreading into the steppes of Russia, the Alans make incursions into the Danubian and Caucasian provinces of the Roman empire. The Alans are cut into two sections by the Huns: the western group joins the Germanic nations in their invasion of southern Europe, and following the fortunes of the Vandals, disappear in North Africa; the eastern section is dispersed on the steppes until late medieval times and by invading hordes are forced into the Caucasus where they remain as the Ossetes. At one time partially Christianized by Byzantine missionaries, they almost relapse into heathenism, but under Russian influence return to Christianity.

    The Sarmatae (Sarmatians) 19 are a people whom Herodotus locates on the eastern boundary of Scythia beyond the Don. He says they are not pure Scythians but are descended from young Scythian men and Amazons, speak an impure dialect, and allow their women to take part in war. Later writers call some of them "woman-ruled Sarmatae". Hippocrates clasifies them as Scythian. The barbarian names occurring in the inscriptions of Olbia, Tanais, and Panticapaeum are likely Sarmatian. By the third century BC the Sarmatae appear to have supplanted the Scyths in the plains of south Russia where they remain dominant until the Gothic and Hunnish invasions. Their chief divisions are the Phoxolani, the Iazyges, and the Alani. The term Sarmatia is applied by later writers to what is now Russia, including that which older authorities called Scythia. The term Scythia is then transferred to regions farther east.

    Even today there is one group of Iranian people in the Caucasus called the Ossetes 20. Most of the Alans People did not stay in the Caucasus; rather, they moved to western Asia, crossed into Italy, France, and southern Spain, and the north west coast of Africa. Thus, as per Arutiunov, "the Alans (Alani) were first displaced by Huns in the 4-6 centuries AD and later in the 13-14 century AD. The Alani were later diplaced by Mongols in the 13-14 century AD".

    Slav People

    According to Alexeev, the Slavs are located in the eastern part of the Czech Republic, southern Poland, and western Ukraine in the Karplash Mountains; they are the most numerous people in Europe. Also they are the Russians of Eurasia and many have migrated to the United States.

    Geographically and linguistically the Slavs are divided into three groups: Eastern, North-Western, and Southern. The Eastern group is comprised of Russians and extends from the East European plain to the Urals (Finnish and Tatar tribes are only a small proportion of the population). Further east the Slavs are located in central Siberia and in narrow bands along the rivers to the Pacific. To the west, the Ruthenians of Galicia form a wedge between the Poles and Magyars.

    The North-Western group includes the Poles, Kashubes, High and Low Sorbs, Czechs, and Moravians. In the north of Hungary, are the Slovaks who are related to the Ruthenians and Poles but most closely akin to the Moravians. As well are the now teutonized Slavs of central Germany. Historically the North-Western group has been surrounded by Germans.

    The southern Slavs: Slovenes, Serbo-Croats, and Bulgarians are seperated from the main body by the Germans of Austria and the Magyars both of whom occupy soil once Slavonic. Also Slavic are the Rumanians of Transylvania and the Lower Danube. Their southern boundary is very poorly defined with various nationalities being closely intermingled. To the south west the Slavs march with the Albanians and to the south east with the Turks. Along the Aegean coasts they have Greeks as neighbors. Geographically, the eastern half of the Balkan Peninsula is occupied by the Bulgarians and the western half by the Serbo-Croats. The Serbo-Croats are the most divided of the Slavs having three religions and three alphabets. The Serbs and Bosnians are mostly Orthodox and use the Cyrillic alphabet but include many Moslim people. Croats are Roman Catholic and use the Latin alphabet; the Dalmatians are also Roman Catholic but use the ancient Glagolitic script for their Slavonic liturgy.

    Linguistically the southern Slavs are not sharply divided; however the political boundaries are clearly marked: the kingdom of Serbia; the kingdom of Montenegro; the Turkish provinces of Old Serbia and Novibazar; Bosnia and Herzegovina; the coastline and islands of Istria and Dalmatia; the kingdom of Croatia; and outlying colonies in Hungary and in Italy. In the extreme northwest of the peninsula, in Carniola, in southern Styria and Carinthia, and in Italy in the province of Udine and the Vale of Resia live the Slovenes who are much divided dialectically.

    Between the Slovenes and the Croats there are transition dialects and in c. 1840 there is an attempt to establish a common literary language called Illyrian. In Macedonia and along the border are varieties of Bulgarian some of which are similar to Serbian. Akin to the Macedonians are the Slavs who once occupied the whole of Greece and left traces in place names. Akin to the Slovenes are the inhabitants of Austria and southwest Hungary before the intrusion of the Germans and Magyars.

    When the Slavs formed one people, they settled to the northeast of the Carpathians in the basins of the Vistula, Pripet, and Upper Dniester. To the north, their nearest relatives are the Baltic peoples: Prussians, Lithuanians, and Letts. To the east are the Finns. To the southeast are the Iranian population of the steppes of Scythia. To the southwest and on the other side of the Carpathians are various Thracian tribes. To the northwest are the Germans. Between the Germans and the Thracians the Slavs seem to have some contact with the Celts, but their first contact in this area is with the Illyrians, Greeks, and Italians.

    There is no evidence that the Slavs make any considerable migration from their first home in the region of the Carpathians until the first century AD. Their first Transcarpathian seat is, in fact, remote from the Mediterranean peoples. Herodotus possibly mentions the Slavs a people whose home is on the upper waters of the Dniester. Other classical writers including Strabo tell us nothing of eastern Europe beyond the immediate area of the Euxine.

    The sudden appearance of names for the Slavs in sixth century writers means that at this time the Slavs become familiar with the Graeco-Roman world. The gradual spread of the Slavs is masked by the huge migrations of Goths. Ptolemy identifies the Slavs as being subservient to the Goths and occupying the same territories. This domination of the Slavs by the Goths may explain the large number of Germanic loan words common to all the Slavonic languages including: "King, penny, house, loaf, earring".

    The Huns succeed the Goths as masters of central Europe and when the Hunnish power wanes, the eastern Goths and Gepidae move southwards and westwards, and the Lombards and Heruli follow in their tracks. In this early half of the first century AD, the whereabouts of the Slavs are difficult to ascertain due to the ethnocentricity of the historians. German writers deny the possibility of the Slavs having forced German tribes to leave their homes and assume that the riches of southern Europe attracted the Germans and that they willingly gave up the northern plains. Most Slavonic authors have also taken the same view and preserve this idealistic picture of the peaceful, kindly, and democratic Slavs who contrast so well with the savage Germans.

    The Slavonic languages belong to the Indo-European family. Within this family they are closely related to the Baltic group: Old Prussian, Lithuanian, and Lettish. The Balto-Slavs have much in common with the northerly or German group and with the easterly or Aryan group. The Aryans likewise split into two divisions, Iranian and Indian. The Iranians as Sarmatians remain in contact with the Slavs until after the Christian era and the southeastern or Thracian group (Armenian) and the Illyrian (Albanian) share common linguistic specializations not present in other European groups.

    The Baltic group and the Slavs are separated by the marshes of White Russia and do not have much communication until the Slavs begin to spread. After the Aryans move eastwards, Slavonic is left in contact with Thracian. On the other side, the Germans, neighbors to the Balto-Slavs, never cease to influence them and give them loan words and receive a few in return. In 6-7 centuries, they begin to move to the northeast, peopling European Russia.

    Russian Kingdom and Mongol Conquests of Eurasia

    As per Alexeev, the Russian Kingdom begins in the tenth century AD in the Dneiper Valley where Kiev, the capital of the Ukraine is located. Archaeology in Kiev reveals that the area is inhabited in the mid first millennium BC; however, Bzyantine and Greek sources and Russian writers of the twelvth century inform us that a kingdom is not established until the tenth century. When Kiev is actually established, there remain several different independent kingdoms in the southern part of European Russia.

    In the beginning of the thirteenth century there are still migrations, possibly conquests, from western Europe. A conquest by the Mongol troops of Jenghiz Khan occurs in the thirteenth century AD. Mongols are one of the main ethnographic divisions of Asiatic peoples; however, the early history of the Mongols is very obscure. From Chinese histories of the seventh century AD, the original Mongol campgrounds are located along the banks of the Kerulen, Upper Nonni, and Argun rivers. As to the origins of the Mongols people, legends are created when history is lacking and legend has it that they sprang from a blue wolf. This origin plus the authority given to Budantsar, from whom Yesukai, father of Jenghiz Khan, was eighth in descent, paves the way for the great Mongol conqueror, Jenghiz Khan. When Jenghiz Khan is laid to rest in 1227 he leaves to his sons an empire that extends from the China Sea to the banks of the Dnieper.

    To the family of his deceased eldest son Juji, Jenghiz Khan leaves the country from Kayalik and Khwarizm to the borders of Bulgar and Saksin; to his eldest surviving son, Jagatai, he gives the territory from the borders of the Uighur country to Bokkara; to Tule his youngest son, he leaves the home country of the Mongols, the care of the imperial encampment, and the state archives. As chief khan (khakan) he places his second surviving son Ogotai as ruler over the entire region. True to Mongol tradition, when Ogotai ascends to the throne he distributes presents from his father's treasures to his peoples and in his father's honor he sacrifices forty maidens and numerous horses.

    Chief khan Ogotai, following the lead of his father, gathers a large army and marches southwards into China to complete the ruin of the Kin or "Golden" dynasty. The Kin dynasty falls in 1234 after ruling over the northern portion of China for more than a century.

    Continuing his exploits, Ogotai focuses his attention on the kingdom of Khwarizm which his father had captured from Jelal ed-din, after driving him into India. Apparently Jelal ed-din had returned to Khwarizm with the support of the sultan of Delhi. With force, power, and might Ogotai descends upon Khwarizm, forces Jelal ed-din into the Kurdish Mountains and establishes his sovereignty over Khwarizm.

    Without a moments delay, Ogotai and his army pushes still farther westward and with little opposition overruns the districts of Diarbekr, Mesopotamia, Erbil, and Kelat and then marches upon Azerbaijan. At the same time Ogotai dispaches three armies each in a different direction. One he directs against Korea, another against the Sung dynasty which rules over the provinces of China south of the Yangtsze Kiang, and the third is sent westward into eastern Europe.

    The campaign against eastern Europe is executed with savage cruelty. This force is commanded by Batu, the son of Juji, Ogotai's deceased elder brother. The army captures Bolgari, the capital city of the Bulgars, and pushes on over the Volga to the "beautiful city" of Ryazan where the inhabitants and the city are ravaged in a most cruel way. The horrors of Ryazan are repeated at Kozelsk and Kiev ("the mother of cities") as Batu continues his "carnival of death". The army then splits into two divisions. One goes to Pest, Hungary which Batu takes with the same savage bloodshed as before, and on Christmas Day 1241 crosses the Danube on the ice and takes Esztergom by assault. The second division plunders Poland. While Batu's army is laying waste to the country, they recieve the announcement of the death of Ogotai and a summons for Batu to return to Mongolia.

    Succeeding Ogotai to the throne is his son Kuyuk about whom little is known except that he reigns for only seven years, two of his ministers are Christians, and a Christian chapel stands before his tent. Upon the death of Kuyuk dissentions between the houses of Ogotai and Jagatai break out into an open war and after the short and disputed reigns of Kaidu and Chapai, grandsons of Ogotai, the lordship passed away forever from the house of Ogotai and goes not to the house of Jagatai but to that of Tule.

    On 1 July 1251 Mangu, eldest son of Tule is elected khakan and among his subjects are Christians, Mahommedans, and Buddhists. Two years later his court in Karakorum is visited by Rubruquis and other Christian monks who are hospitably received. The description of the Khakan's palace as given by Rubruquis is much different from the tent-living life of Mangu's forefathers:

    "surrounded by brick walls...its southern side had three doors. Its central hall was like a church ... here the court sat on great occasions. In front of the throne was placed a silver tree, having at its base four lions, from whose mouths there spouted fine refreshment into four silver basins. At the top of the tree a silver angel sounded a trumpet when the reservoirs that supplied the four fountains wanted replenishing".

    Shortly after his ascension to the throne, Mangu receives word that dissensions have broken out in the province of Persia. Mangu dispatches an army under command of his brother Hulagu to punish the Ismailites (Assassins). Marching by Samarkand and Karshi, crossing the Oxus and advancing by way of Balkh, Hulagu and his troops enter Kohistan. The terror of the Mongol name causes the chief of the Assassins, Rukneddin Gurshah II, to present offers of submission including the dismantling of fifty of the fortresses in Kohistan. Once the country has been left to the mercy of the invaders, Hulagu and his men exterminate every man, woman, and child.

    Hulagu then marches across the snowy mountains in the direction of Bagdad to attack the last Abbasid caliph and his Seljuk protectors. Hulagu arrives at Bagdad and demands surrender. When this is refused he lay seige to the walls. Finding resistance hopeless, the caliph surrenders and opens the gates to his enemies. Hulagu lays siege to Bagdad and then with much strength and energy moves onward into Syria.

    Hulagu storms and sacks Aleppo, Damascus surrenders, and while plans are being made to attack Jerusalem and return it to the Christians, Hulagu receives news of Mangu's death. Hulagu leaves at once for Mongolia and places Kitboga in command of the Mongol forces in Syria.

    Hulagu is now recognized as ruler of all the conquered provinces. He assumes the title of ilkhan although acknowledging the khakan as supreme lord. This title is borne by his successors who rule over Persia for about a century.

    While Hulagu is conquering western Asia, Mangu and his next brother Kublai are conquering areas in southern China. Southward they avance into Tong-king and westward they cross the frontier into Tibet. Mangu and Kublai's campaign differs greatly from that of Hulagu. All indiscriminate massacres are forbidden and the inhabitants of captured cities are treated with humanity. While continuing the war in the province of Szech'uen, Mangu is taken ill with dysentery which proves fatal. His body is carried back to Mongolia and in pursuance of the custom of slaughtering every one encountered on the way, 20,000 persons are put to the sword.

    At Shang-tu, Kublai is elected khakan and for thirty-five years he sits on the Mongol throne. Kublai Khan dies in 1294 and is succeeded by his son Timur Khan (Uldsheitu Khan or Chinese Yuen-cheng). Uldsheitu is able to heal the division which has seperated the families of Ogotai and Jagatai from that of the ruling khakan. Uldsheitu is succeeded by his nephew Khaissan whose reign is very brief. His successor is his nephew Buyantu (Chinese Yen-tsung) who was a man of considerable culture. Bunyantu among other things rescues the inscription-bearing "stone drums" from decay and ruin and places them in the temple of Confucius in Peking. These drums date to the Zhou Dynasty, first millennium BC.

    After a reign of nine years, Buyantu is succeeded by his son Gegen (Chinese Ying-tsung) who is killed by the knife of an assassin. Yissun Timur (Chinese Tai-ting-ti) is the next sovereign who devotes himself to the administration of his empire. He divides China, which until this time has been apportioned into twelve provinces, into eighteen provinces and rearranges the system of state granaries. His court is visited by Friar Odoric who presents this description:

    "Its basement was raised about two paces from the ground, and within there were twenty-four columns of gold, and all the walls were hung with skins of red leather, said to be the finest in the world. In the midst of the palace was a great jar more than two paces in height, made of the certain precious stone called merdacas (jade)...When the Khakan sat on his throne the queen was on his left hand, and a step lower two others of his women, while at the bottom of the steps stood the other ladies of his family. All those who were married wore upon their heads the foot of a man ... and at the top of the foot there were certain cranes' feathers, the whole foot being set with great pearls, so that if there were in the whole world any fine and large pearls they were to be found in the decoration of those ladies".

    The following years see great natural and political devastation. Floods, earthquakes, and in many parts of the empire, revolts occur. Under various leaders, the rebels capture a number of cities in the provinces of Kiang-nan and Honan, and take possession of Hang-chow, the capital of the Sung emperors. At the same time pirates ravage the coasts and eliminate imperial vessels from the sea.

    In 1355 Chu Yuen-chang, a Buddhist priest, became so outraged with the misery of his countrymen that he throws off his vestments and enrolls in the rebel army. His military genius is soon recognized, he is given position of leader, and with his crudely trained troups he overcomes the trained legions of the Mongol emperor. Toghon Timur Khan is unable to deter the rebels and when they capture Peking, Toghon Timur hastily flees to the shores of the Donon-nor in Mongolia. In 1368 the ex-Buddhist priest ascends the throne as the first sovereign of the Ming dynasty. He is called Hung-wu.

    The Ordos desert of Inner Mongolia is one of the first regions of conquest by Jenghiz Khan; during his rule, a tribe of Mongols (Tartars) moved into this area from the north. They are called the Ordos Mongols. Chinese sources refer to this area as Honan or south of the river.

    The Tatars are inhabitants of the Russian empire and are chiefly Moslem and of Turkish origin. The majority in European Russia are remnants of the Mongol invasion of the thirteenth century. Those who inhabit Siberia are descendents of the Turkish population of the Ural-Altaic region mixed to some extent with Finnish, Samoyedic, and Mongol peoples. The name is derived from that of the Ta-ta Mongols who in the fifth century inhabited the northeastern Gobi and after subjugation by the Khitans in the ninth century migrate southward and form the Mongol empire under Jenghiz Khan.

    Under the leadership of Jenghiz Khan's grandson, Batu, the Mongols move westward driving with them many of the Turkish Ural-Altaians toward the plains of Russia. The ethnographical features of the present Tatar inhabitants of European Russia as well as their language show that they contain no admixture of Mongolian blood, but belong to the Turkish branch of the Ural-Altaic stock. Thus only Batu, his warriors and a limited number of his followers were Mongols; the great bulk of the thirteenth century invaders are Turks.

    Thus the name Tatars is originally applied to both the Turkish and Mongol peoples who invaded Europe in the thirteenth century and gradually extend to the Turkish people who mix with the Mongols or Finns in Siberia. In a more restricted sense, the term refers to Mahommedan Turkish-speaking tribes, especially in Russia, who never form part of the Seljuk or Ottoman Empire, but make independent settlements and remained cut off from the politics and civilization of the rest of the Mahommedan world.

    The term "Turk" ("Turkish") is used in three ways: political, linguistic, and ethnological. Politically the term refers to a subject of the sultan of Turkey. The term is not used in speaking of Christians. Linguistically the term references a well established division of the Ural-Altaic languages and their speakers. Ethnographically the use of the term is difficult because it is not easy to differentiate the Turks by physique or customs from other tribes such as Mongolians or Manchus. However, until fairly recently the following practical distinction could be made between Turks and Mongols: Turks speak Turkish languages, are Moslems by religion, live in the western part of Eurasia and fall within the Arabic and to some extent European sphere of influence while Mongols speak Mongolian languages, are Buddhists by religion, live in the eastern half of Eurasia and fall within the Chinese influence.

    Finally a great migration in the seventeenth century distributes Russians on Siberian territory, in Alaska, and the west coast of the United States to California. There are some traces of Russian Culture in California and on the Commander Islands (the Commander Islands consist of Bering Island and Copper [Medny] Island).

    Aleuts live on the Aleutian Islands, Pribiloff Island, and the tip of the Alaska Peninsula. They are brought to the Commander Islands by Russians. Today there are about 600 people; most of the Aleuts in America have Russian names and practice an Orthodox religion.

    Excavations at Novgorod 21, located on the Volhov River, have been conducted for forty years and reveal an eleventh century town. From Novgorod comea the first written documents made on "beresta", the skin of a birch tree. "Beresta" is used as paper; pens are made of bone. More than four hundred documents have been found, many of personal correspondence. The language is quite similar to Russian and can be translated without any special training. Houses are large and constructed of logs. Ovens have been preserved and the streets are covered with wooden logs. The town also contains a church with a great dome. As per Alexeev, from Novgorod comes an ancient seal in the shape of a cross. Many seals have been found made of bone, but this cross is made of silver and covered with gold.

    Back - Chapter VII: Part II: Bronze Age in Eurasia - (Lectures 11 thru 13)

    Next Chapter IX: Celebration and Conclusion

    Back to Table of Contents

    Notes for Chapter VIII - Iron Age in Eurasia

    1 These kurgans belong to the Pazyryk Culture and recently have been investigated by N. Polosmak (see lecture 14, Scythian Kingdom of Pazyryk).[back]

    2 A recent publication on Polosmak's excavations on the Ukok (Utok) Plateau in the Berteck Basin of the Altai:

    1994. "Siberian Mummy Unearthed" by Natalya Polosmak in "National Geographic: 186. October. [back]

    3 The text in question is:

    1970. "Frozen tombs of Siberia" by Sergei Ivanovich Rudenko; published in Berkeley (1st English edition).

    1970. "[Kul'tura naseleniia Gornago Altaia v skifskoe vremia. English] Frozen tombs of Siberia; the Pazyryk burials of Iron Age horsemen" by Sergei I. Rudenko; translated and with a preface by M.W. Thompson; published in Berkeley: University of California Press (1st edition with author's revisions).[back]

    4 On the archaeology of Anapa:

    1991. "Grecheskaia kolonizatsiia Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza" by E.M. Alekseeva; published in Moskva: "Nauka".[back]

    5 A recent publication on Vani (Colchide) is:

    1990. "Le Pont-Euxin par les grecs: sources ecrites et archeologie. Symposium de Vani (Colchide), septembre-octobre 1987" by Otar Lordkipanidze et Pierre Leveque; ed. par Tea Khartchilave et Evelyne Geny; Paris: Diffusion les Belles Lettres.[back]

    6 I questioned Arutiunov whether Vani was an independent kingdom or a Greek colony. He replied that Vani was independent; however there were Greek colonies on the seashore, the descendants of whom still live north of Batumi.[back]

    7 The following publications are relevent to Merv:

    1883. "The Merv Oasis: travels and adventures east of the Caspian during the years 1879-80-81, including five months' residence among the Tekkes of Merv" by Edmond O'Donovan; New York: G.P. Putnam's sons.

    1888. "Voyage a Merv. Les Russes dans l'Asie Centrale", by Edgar Boulangier; Paris: Hachette.

    1960. "Prisoedinenie Merva k Rossii" by Mikhail N. Tikhomirov; Moskva: Izd-vo vostochnoi lit-ry.

    1990. "Merv v drevnei i srednevekovoi istorii Vostoka: tezisy dokladov nauchnogo simpoziuma; M.A. Annanepesov, V.M. Masson, and E.A. Muradova.[back]

    8 Arutiunov identifies the terms Senvurv-Paskudge, Ormuzd, Ormuzd-Ahura-Mazda, and Arman as gods in ancient Iran (reference Zoroastrianism, Mazdeism, Avesta; Arman is also spelled Ahriman).[back]

    9 The following texts on Bactria should be of interest:

    1985. "Bactrian gold; from the excavations of the Tillya-tepe Necropolis in northern Afghanistan" by Victor Sarianidi; Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers.

    1988. "Bactria: an ancient oasis civilization from the sands of Afghanistan" edited by Giancarlo Ligabue, Sandro Salvatori; Lamberg-Karlovsky et al.; Venezia: Erizzo.

    1988. "Alexander the Great and Bactria: the formation of a Greek frontier in central Asia" by Frank L. Holt; Leiden; New York: Brill.

    1990. "Analysis of reasonings in archaeology: the case of Graeco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek numismatics"; translated from the French by Osmund Bopearachchi; Delhi; New York: Oxford University Press.[back]

    10 A publication by Michael Ivanovitch Rostovzeff specifically referencing Bactria cannot be located at this time. However, the following publications should prove useful:

    1926-1928. "A history of the ancient world" by M. Rostovtzeff; published in Oxford: The Clarendon Press.

    1929. "Le centre de lAsie, la Russie, la Chine et le style animal" by M.I.Rostovzeff; published in Prague: Seminarium Kondakovianum.

    1932. "Caravan cities" by M. Rostovtzeff; translated by D. and T. Talbot Rice; published in Oxford: The Clarendon Press.

    1993. "Skythien und der Bosporus, Band II: wiederentdeckte Kapitel und Verwandtes" by M.I. Rostovzeff; published in Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.[back]

    11 American scholars working with the Russians at Altai Pazyryk include C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and his associate Fredrik Hiebert from Harvard University.

    Recent publications include:

    1991. "The search for the Scythians in the USSR" by C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky in "Symbols", June 1991; pp.14-18.

    1992. "Pazyryk chronology and early horse nomads reconsidered" by Fredrik Hiebert in "Bulletin of the Asia Institute", vol. 6; pp. 117-129.[back]

    12 Recent publications by Polos'mak include:

    1991. "Un nouveau kourgane a 'tombe gelee' de l'Altai (rapport preliminaire)" in "AAs 46, pp. 5-13.

    1992. "Excavations of a Rich Burial of the Pazyryk culture" in "Altaica 1", ppl 35-42.

    n.d. "Excavations of kurgans at Ak Alaka and Kuturguntas" translated from the Russian by Raisa Tarasova; edited by Geraldine Reinhardt.[back]

    13 Several publications on the Huns are important:

    1939. "The early empires of Central Asia: a study of the Scythians and the Huns and the part they played in world history, with special reference to Chinese sources" by William Montgomery McGovern; Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    1969. "Die Kultur der Hsiung-nu und die Hugelgraber von Noin Ulas" by S.I. Rudenko; Bonn: Habelt.

    1973. "The world of the Huns; studies in their history and culture" by Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen; edited by Max Knight; Berkeley: University of California Press.

    1990. "Ancient chinese and ordos bronzes" by Jessica Rawson and Emma Bunker; published in Hong Kong: Oriental Ceramics Society of Hong Kong.

    1993. "Tsui hou i ko Hsiung-nu" by Kao Chien-chun; Pei-ching: Tso chia chu pan she: Ching hsiao Hsin hua shu tien Pei-ching fa hsing so [on the Hsiung-nu].

    1993. "Hsia Shang shih yen chiu" by Ting Su chuan; published in Tai-pei hsien: I wen yin shu kkuan, Min kuo 82.

    Recommendations by Arutiunov:

    1960. "Khunnu" by Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev; published in Moskva.

    1993. "Khunnu: stepnaia trilogiia" by L.N. Gumilev: Sankt-Peterbury: Taim-aut: KOMPASS.[back]

    14 A publication on the Hunas from HOLLIS:

    1973. "The political history of the Hunas in India" by Atreyi Biswas; published in Hew Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.[back]

    15 Two significant publications on the Tokharian/Yueh-chih are:

    1987. "On the 'first' Indo-Europeans: the Tokharian-Yuezhi and their Chinese homeland" by A.K. Narain; published in Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University, Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.

    1994. "Guanyu tuhuoluoren de qiyuan he qiantu wenti = On the problem of the origins and migrations of the Tocharians" by Xu Wenkan (Hsu, Wen-kan); published in Philadelphia, PA, USA: University of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies.[back]

    16 A publication on the Sakas in the ancient city of Khotan is:

    1982. "The culture of the Sakas in ancient Iranian Khotan" by Harold W. Bailey; published in Delmar, NY: Caravan Books.[back]

    17 A re-issue of Aurel Stein's archaeological work in the Sinkiang Uighur Autonomous Region of China is:

    1981. "Ancient Khotan: detailed report of archaeological explorations in Chinese Turkestan: carried out and described under the orders of H.M. Indian government" by M. Aurel Stein; published in New Delhi: Cosmo.[back]

    18 HOLLIS lists one publication in English for the Alans People but numerous publications on the Alani presence in Hungary and Russia. HOLLIS also relates the Alani to the Jazyge and Roxolani:

    1973. "A history of the Alans in the West; from their first appearance in the sources of classical antiquity through the early Middle Ages" by Bernard S. Bachrach; Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.[back]

    19 A definitive text on the Sarmatians is:

    1970. "The Sarmatians" by Tadeusz Sulimirski; published in New York: Praeger.[back]

    20 HOLLIS also relates the Alani to the Ossetes. A recent history of the Ossetes:

    1992. "Sotsial'naia sushchnost' religioznykh verovanii osetin" by Batyrbek Khamatkanovich Bidzhelov; published in Vladikavkaz: Ir.[back]

    21 Recent publications on the archaeology of Novgorod are:

    1990. "Novgorodskoe (Riurikovo) gorodishche" by E.N. Nosov; published in Leningrad: "Nauka", Leningradskoe otd-nie.

    1992. "The archaeology of Novgorod, Russia: recent results from the town and its Hinterland" edited by Mark A. Brisbane; translated by Katharine Judelson; published in Lincoln: Society for Medieval Archaeology.[back]

    Back - Chapter VII: Part II: Bronze Age in Eurasia - (Lectures 11 thru 13)

    Next Chapter IX: Celebration and Conclusion

    Back to Table of Contents

    Chapter IX
    Celebration and Conclusion

    At a particular time between the last lecture and the final exam, the Russian Coup occurred, almost as though it carefully had been planned. Professor Lamberg-Karlovsky was in Moscow while Alexeev was in Cambridge; Alexeev was in telephone communication with his wife, Tatiana, also in Moscow. He has a television set up at 102 Quincy House and was able to keep his wife informed of the US news coverage of the coup; she apparently was receiving very little information.

    As I recall Alexeev's story . . . Tatiana was first to suspect that something was not right. While driving past the Kremlin, she noticed tanks lined up behind the walls. Rushing back to her Moscow apartment, she immediately telephoned Alexeev in Cambridge and both of them knew they must devise a plan to get LK out of the Soviet Union, and quickly! Tatiana was successful in locating a car, driver, and the back road to the airport. Knowing that time was of the essence, she and the driver loaded LK and baggage into the car, calmly yet carefully drove through Red Square, and proceeded to the airport road just as the tanks were beginning to assemble. "The sight of these tanks is so palpable" commented LK upon viewing them from the rear window as the car and its passengers sped on to the airport. American dollars helped book LK passage on the last flight from the Soviet Union. Tatiana, on the tarmac, waved good bye to her husband's American colleague, and LK wished Tat'ya hope and courage as his flight took off on the eve of an ominous historical event.

    Back in Cambridge ... I had heard of the coup on late night television news and continued to follow the events in Moscow throughout the night. As well, a severe hurricane was being predicted for the Boston area and a hurricane alert was in effect. At a decent hour in the early morning I telephoned Alexeev and we chatted briefly. He first informed me that LK had landed safely in Boston, then he said he was greatly concerned for his wife's safety, and that although he was expected to be strong and brave, at the present moment he was very frightened. I asked him if the impending hurricane also alarmed him; he said that he'd lived through many hurricanes.

    On the day of our oral exam, everyone was jubilant; the coup had been successful, Communism was dead, and the hopes that Democracy carries with it were shouted about in Moscow and 102 Quincy House. After the exam, Alexeev asked all of us to join him for coffee and conversation. We sat around his long table taking our coffee in institution style cups; Alexeev took his in a china cup with saucer. And we made plans to celebrate independence and the rebirth of Russia.

    The date was set; celebration was to begin on Saturday at 3 p.m. And so it did! We picked Alexeev up at Quincy House and drove to Boston, to the waterfront, past the Old State House, to Faneuil Hall and to Durgin Park, one of the oldest restaurants in Boston.

    The setting was perfect. We dined alongside strangers at long tables, clatter from the kitchen was not silenced, and scurrilous waitresses barked our orders as we selected from a menu of New England favorites. I have forgotten what we ordered, but not what we helped order for Alexeev. We found for him the largest tenderloin I have ever seen, potatoes french fried, and baked beans, corn bread, etc. We toasted "nasdrovya"; Alexeev corrected us: "a vasa drovya" and strangers in the dining room began toasting as well. By the time Indian pudding and coffee had arrived, the dining room had become roaringly boisterous and Alexeev was fielding questions not only from us but from strangers as well. One female New Englander grabbed my arm and said: "Ask the professor where are the Kennedys and Rockefellers in Russia". Alexeev's answer: "In the black market".

    After dinner, we strolled through Quincy Market, not the usual stroll, but rather we'd walk a short while and then Alexeev would stop and begin lecturing about an assortment of things such as the environment, Chernobyl, the economy, the black market, Russian bread etc while small crowds would stop and listen. We took Alexeev to "Sharper Image" to show him all the important gadgets he now could purchase such as a solid gold razor, a lounge chair with a built-in stereo system, an electronic mouse detractor etc. We walked through the Busta Monte gallery where paper mache figures sold for $5,000 - $10,000, and we passed a luggage shop where Alexeev pointed out a globe and checked to see if the portrayal of Eurasia was accurate; it was not.

    Nightfall arrived too quickly. We hurried to the automobile and then drove by the Boston Tea Party ship and toured the North End with its narrow cobbled streets filled with happy tourists. We passed the Old North Church: "listen my children and you shall hear of the midnight ride of Paul Revere. On the eighteenth of April in '75, hardly a man is now alive who remembers that famous day and year". We then drove by the Paul Revere House and down Hanover Street which was still dressed with festive lights; remnants of a previous Italian festival.

    We followed the Charles River back to Cambridge and to Quincy House. "You will come in and join me for a drink" said Alexeev. We replied that we would. And we chatted and talked about many places and things. We heard about a tribal king in New Guinea who served caterpillars for dinner. Do you know how to eat a caterpillar? Delicately one by one. We heard about eating whale and dolphin - they both taste fishy! And Alexeev gave us tips for survival in the field: always write notes when waiting for the vehicle; don't sit and stare! He showed us his notes in progress; they were written with a strong hand and were tiny in character, carefully formed, and written without leaving margins, either top/bottom or left/right. He also showed us a scar from Viet Nam - it was close to his eye and was gotten from a tree branch that had bounced back as he fought the jungle bush.

    We talked about archaeologists: "he wrote about us but never met us; I do not agree with his work, but it is important; such presence; he's a racist; she's an old lady". And when we looked at our watches it was one o'clock in the morning. The weather was quite pleasant at this hour and Alexeev walked us to the car. We wanted to talk about our projects; could we call on Monday; when was he returning to Moscow?

    We call on Monday but no one answered.

    Perhaps the most interesting aspect of editing the Alexeev lectures has been the emergence of the beginnings of a treatise on "race". I find it necessary to point out that in my country, the study of a particular "race" has not been deemed politically correct for anyone other than a member of that "race". For example, the only people who legitimately can study the Black or African-American groups and their history are members of that group. And being a member is determined by skin color, African heritage, and affirmative action classification; to these people, "race" matters. This also holds true for gender studies. Women somehow have been deemed the only people qualified to partake in Women Studies; however, women as a "race" has been acknowledged as early as the late 1500's by E. Spenser in "Faerie Queene". A similar phenomenon is operational in Jewish Studies. HOLLIS no longer recognizes the heading "Jewish race"; the term Jewish identity instead has been substituted. However, a kw command for Jewish race" retrieves 104 items. And what of the Mongoloid "race"? HOLLIS has recently added Mongoloid to the category of "race" and to date the heading contains six references, five of which have been published since 1992. Recent archaeological evidence presented by Victor Mair label mummies discovered in the Xingjiang region of China as belonging to the "Caucasian race"; however, as per Alexeev and Arutiunov, there is no evidence to suggest a "Caucasian race". And I've been searching the archaeological record for skeletal evidence which clearly denotes Mongolian, and I still have been unable to find any. Alexeev did mention the Cranial Index which places a numerical designation on the breadth of the skull in comparison to its length i.e. brachycrans and dolicocrans, however this evidence is no longer considered scientifically reliable because the range is so great. As well, there is no guarantee that the "evidence" is completely under the control of biological inheritance; variations can be due to short term response to environmental changes.

    What then is a "race"? Alexeev, in his earlier work divided the "races" of world into three great groups: Europoid or white, Mongoloid or yellow, and Equatorial or black Africans, Negritos of Andamans and other southeast Asian islands, Papuans, Australians etc. Arutiunov, on the other hand, sees four "races" of the first order: Mongoloid, Europoid, Africanoid, and Australoid. HOLLIS has no difficulty with "race" and lists a Caucasian race, a Black race, and a Mongolian race.

    Since I needed further information on "race", I decide to consult the _Oxford English Dictionary_ for the etymology of the word. The following are different meanings for the word "race": [The first entry on race is ON (Norw. and Sw. dial), running, race, rush (of water), course, channel, row, series = OE of obscure etym. orig. a northern word, coming into general use about the middle of the 16th c.]

    The act of running; a run;
    Onward movement of a thing, as the heavenly bodies, a vehicle etc., running or rush of water;
    As a portion of time or space;
    The act of running, riding, sailing, etc. in competition ;
    In combined forms: race-boat, -colt, driver, -dust, fund, -ground, list, -manager, mare, -meeting, -nag, night, record, report, -rider, -riding, -runner, -time, -week, -winner.

    [The second listing for race is with an etymology of obscure origin]

    I. A group of persons, animals, or plants, connected by common descent or origin;

    [In the widest sense the term includes all descendants from the original stock, but may also be limited to a single line of descent or to the group as it exists at a particular period]

    1a. The offspring or posterity of a person; a set of children or descendants; 1570 FOXE "A & Ml' II. 1841 Thus was the outward race stocke of Abraham after flesh refused. 1606 SHAKS. "Ant. & Cl". 111 xiii. 107 Haue I..Forborne the getting of a lawfull Race, And by a Iem of women. 1667 MILTON "P.L." x. 385 High proof ye now have givln to be the Race Of Satan. 1728 POPE "Dunc.11 1. 70 How Tragedy and Comedy embrace, How Farce and Epic get a jumbled race.

    1b. Breeding, the production of offspring; 1607 TOPSELL "Four-f Beasts" 234 It behooveth therefore that the mares appointed for race be well compacted, of a decent quality. 1653 GREAVES "Seraglio" 141 He hath also stables of stallions for race.

    1c. A generation; 1549-62 STERNHOLD & H. "Ps.11 cii. II.1 Thy reembrance euer doth abide from race to race. 1727-41 CHAMBERS "Cycl.11 s.v. In several orders of knighthood the candidates must prove a nobility of four races or descents.

    2a. A limited group of persons descended from a common ancestor; a house, family, kindred; 1600 WYNNE "Hist. Gwydir Family" 33 Some affirme ievan ap Meredith to be the elder brother, and soe doth all the race that are of him contend. 1734 MRS. DELANY "Autobiog. &: Corr." I.431 Lady Weymouth's person bears away the bell, even from the Marlborough race. 1833 TENNYSON "Sisters" 1. We were two daughters of one race.

    2b. A tribe, nation or people, regarded as of common stock; 1600 WYNNE "Hist. Gwydir Family" 20 Llewelyn of Gruffith last Prince of Wales of the British race. 1667 MILTON "P.L." 1.780 That Pigmeean Race Beyone the Indian Mount. 1715 POPE "Iliad" iv. 51 Troy's whole race thou wouldst confound. 1726-46 THOMSON "Winte--" 499 A mighty people come! A race of heroes!

    2c. A group of several tribes or peoples, regarded as forming a distinct ethnical stock. 1842 PRICHARD "Nat. Hist. Man" 150 No two races of Men can be more strongly contrasted than were the ancient Egyptian and the SyroArabian races. 1868 KINGSLEY "Heroes" Pref. 10 They were all different tribes and peoples of the one great Hellen race. 1883 GREEN "Conq. Eng.11 54 Courage..was a heritage of the whole German race.

    2d. One of the great divisions of mankind, having certain physical peculiarities in common. [The term is often used imprecisely; even among anthropologists there is no generally accepted classification or terminology]

    1774 GOLDSM. "Nat. Hist., Animals xxxiii Thesecond great variety in the human species seems to be that of the Tartar race. 1839 "Penny Cyc. XIV 361/2 Considerable differences occur in the general stature of the several races of mankind. 1861 HULME tr. "Moquin-Tandon" l.v. 27 Blumenbach proposed to establish five races: lst, the Caucasian; 2nd, the Mongolian; 3rd, the Ethiopian; 4th, the American; Sth, the Malay. 1936 "Nature" 18 Apr. 636/2 The races or types into which the anthropologist groups the varieties of Homo Sapiens are ideal types. 1959 "New Biol. XXIX 69 From the U.N.E.S.C.O. statement we can define race, as a division of man, the members of which, though individually varying, are characterized as a group by certain inherited physical features as having a common origin. 1971 R.M. & F.M. KEESING "New Perspectives in Cultural Anthropol.11 51 It is at this point that the term 'race' becomes relevant. Though in popular usage it is emotionally charged and imprecise, it has a straightforward and important meaning in evolutionary biology. A race is a geographically separated, hence genetically somewhat distinctive, population within a species.

    3a. A breed or stock of animals; a particular variety of a species,

    3b. A stud or herd (of horses);

    3c. A genus, species, kind of animals.

    4. A genus, species, or variety of plants.

    5. One of the great divisions of living creatures:

    a. Mankind. In early use always the human race, the race of men or mankind, etc. 1580 SIDNEY "Ps." XXI. X. From among the human race [thou shalt] Roote out their generation. 1607 "Timon" IV. L.40 His hate may grow To the whole race of Mankinde. 1667 MILTON "P.L." II. 348 The happy seat Of som new Race callld Man. 1781 COWPER "Charity" 22 That every tribe..Might feel themselves allied to all the race. 1850 TENNYSON "In Mem.11 vi. One writes .. That 'Loss is common to the race. 1871 MORLEY "Voltaire" 2. It was one of the cardinal liberations of the growing race.

    b. A class or kind of beings other than men or animals;

    c. one of the chief classes of animals (as beasts, birds, fishes, insects, etc.)

    6. Without article:

    a. Denoting the stock, family, class, etc. to which a person, animal, or plant belongs, chiefly in phr. of (noble, etc.) race; 1559 SACKVILLE "Induct. Mirr. Mag. vi Som were Dukes, and came of regall race. 1590 SPENSER "F.Q." 1.x.8 Una..Whom well she know to spring from hevenly race. 1611 SHAKS. "Wint. T." IV.iv.95 [Al bud of Nobler race. 1660 STANLEY "Hist. Philos.11 IX. 362/1 Who, in Race, and Honour, and Wealth, excelled all the rest of the Citizens. 1703 POPE "Thebais 1. 685 A fate..unworthy those of race divine! 1754 GRAY "Progr. Poesy 105 Two Coursers of ethereal race. 1873 DIXON "Two Queens" I.l.i.5 His ablest servants were of oriental race.

    b. The fact or condition of belonging to a particular people or ethnical stock; the qualities etc. resulting from this; 1849 MACAULAY "Hist. Eng. i.I.16 In no country has the enmity or race farther than in England 1856 EMERSON "Eng. traits, Race Wks". (Bohn) II.21 Race in the negro is of appalling importance. 1890 "Spectator" 25 Jan. They are separated by language, by degree of civilization, and by the indefinable aggregate of inherent differences which we call 'race'.

    7. Natural or inherited disosition; 1603 SHAKS. "Meas,. for M." II. iv. 160 Now i giue my sensuall race, the reine.

    II. A group or class of persons, animals, or things, having some common feature or features.

    8a. A set or class of persons; 1500-20 DUNBAR "Poems" xxvi. 50 Bakbyttaris of sindry racis. 1568 ASCHAM "Scholem" i. 66 His onely example had breed such a rase of worthie learned ientlemen, as this Realme neuer yet did affourde. 1580 SIDNEY "Ps.11 XII. i Evln the race of good men are decaild. 1821 LAMB "Eliall Ser.i, "The Two Races of Men", The men who borrow, and the men who lend. 1875 JOWETT "Plato" (ed.2) V. 56 There arose a new race of poets..who made pleasure the only criterion of excellence.

    8b. One of the sexes; 1590 SPENCER "F.Q." III. v. 52 In gentle Ladies breste and bounteous race of woman kind. 1711 STEELE "Spect.11 No. 113 She is beautiful beyond the Race of Women. 1725 POPE "Odyss.11 XI. 349 Three gallant sons..but of the softer race, One nymph alone.

    8c. The line or succession of persons holding an office.

    9a. A set, class, or kind of animals, plants, or things; 1590 SPENCER "F.Q.@' II. xii. i Seagulles..And Cormoyraunts, with birds of ravenous race. 1823 SCOTT "Peverill, XXV (motto), Amidst the faded race of fallen leaves.

    9b. One of the three 'kingdoms, of nature; 1697 DRYDEN "Virg. Georg. IV. 224 Of all the Race of Animals, alone The Bees have common Cities of their own. 1707 "Curiosities in Husb. & Gard." 184 All the offsprings that are producld in the Race of Vegetables and in the Race of Animals. IBID. 227 They can..extract from Water Minerals, Vegetables, and Animals, and give new Creatures to these three Races of Nature.

    10a. A particular class of wine, or the characteristic flavour of this, supposed to be due to the soil; 1520 WHTTINTON "Vulg. (1527) 15 This is a cup of good romney, and drynketh well of the rase. 1645 HOWELL IlLett.11 370 One cannot pass a day's journey but he will find a differing race of wine.

    10b. Of speech, writing, etc.: a peculiar and characteristic style or manner, esp. liveliness, sprightliness, piquancy. 1680-90 TEMPLE "Ess., Learning Wks" I. 166 I think the Epistles of Phalaris to have more Race, more Spirit, more Force of Wit and Genius, than any others I have ever seen, wither ancient or modern. 1831 MACAULAY "Ess., Boswell (1860) I. 369 We know no production of the human mind which has so much of what may be called the race, so much of the peculiar flavour of the soil from which it sprang. 1875 McCosh "Scot. Philos. xxxi. 247 His conversation had a race and flavour peculiarly its own.

    lla. Now found in almost unlimited attrib. and Comb uses: caused by, based on, of or pertaining to race, as raceaversion, -blood, -brood, -characteristic, -conflict, culture, -difference, discrimination, -distinction, division, equality, -experience, -feeling, -hatred, heritage, -history, -improvement, -inheritance, instinct, law, line, -maintenance, -mixture, -name, patriarch, -poem, -portrait, prejedice, pride, problem, quarrel, -question, relationship, -skull, solidarity, superiority, -survival, tension, -type, war, racebegotten, -conscious, -hating, -maintaining, perpetuating, proud, -wide.

    1897 MARK TWAIN "Following Equat.11 xxi. 207 It must have been race-aversion that put upon them a good deal of the low-rate intellectural reputation which they bear. 1880 A.W. TOURGEE "Invis. Empire" xii. 513 Any one who asked the support of colored men as against a Democratic nominee was precipitating a race-conflict. 1927 "Observer 5 June Frenchmen are not so raceconscious as either Englishmen or Americans. 1977 P. JOHNSON '!Enemies of Societyil viii. 106 now frequently employed by the more race-conscious black. but only among themselves. 1917 "Cases Argued U.S. Supreme Court: Lawyers' Ed.,, (1918) 155/2 Plaintiff is not in a position to raise the issue of race discrimination, not being himself a negro. 1974 "Race" XV. 462 The present race divisions are projected into the past as though they were always a feature of South African society. 1890 0. WILDE 1119th Cent." Sept. 443 The imagination is the result of heredity. It is simply concentrated race-experience. 1888 KIPLING "City of Dreadful Night" (1891) A casual reference ... There is a race-feeling, to be explained away. 1944 S.HUXLEY "On Living in Revolution" 'IL69 The actual physical kinship, which is frequently claimed a 'race feeling', must be fictitious. 1882 "Times" 15 Mar. The furious race-hatred that has been raging over the South. 1935 "Economist" 27 July 175/2 The new excesses are confined to the special domains of class hatred, race hatred and hatred of religion. 1907 W. JAMES "Some Probl. Philos". i. 4 Philosophy, thus become a raceheritage, forms in its totality a monstrously unwieldy mass of learning. 1901 W. JAMES "Let." 3 Mar. (1920) II. 141 Empire anyhow is half crime by necessity of Nature, and to see a country like the United States.. perversely rushing to wallow in the mire of it, shows how strong these ancient race instincts be. 1978 G. Greene "Human Factor" II.i.62 "I fell in love." "Yes, so I see. With an African girf..You broke their race laws". 1935 HUXLEY & HADDON "We Europeans" ix. 278 From what has been said, it will be clear that 'racemixture, has in the past been beneficial. 1890 0. WILDE 1119th Cent." Sept. 457 Criticism will annihilate raceprejudices, by insisting upon the unity of the human mind in the variety of its forms. 1973 A. DUNDES "Mother Wit" 2/1 The relationship between folklore and race pride..corresponds to the relationship between folklore and nationalism in the nineteenth century. 1889 "Boston Jrnlll. 26 Dec. 2/4 Time only can solve the race-question in the South. 1920 L. STODDARD "Rising Tide of Color" xi. 293 She [Japan] should not allow her immigration to be treated as a race-question. 1908 R.S. Baker "Following Colour Line" x. 217 I have found a sharper feeling and a bitterer discussion of race relationships among the Negroes of the North than among those of the South. 1864 W.D. WHITNEY "Ann. Rep. Board of Regents Smithsonian Inst.11 1863 113 The kind and amount of modification which external circumstances can introduce into a race-tvpe is yet undetermined. 1892 KIPLING "Lett. of Travel" (1920) 30 Seven million negroes..their race-type unevolved.

  2. #2
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, September 5th, 2008 @ 06:36 AM
    United States United States
    California California
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    Thanked in
    16 Posts

    Post Re: The Alekseev Manuscript

    It is amazing how independent Russian science is. Alekseev doesn't follow the party line in many ways. He finds evidence for sapiens as well as Neanderthal using Mousterian culture. He also finds evidence for sapiens around 60-50,000 years ago. Also, he has found open-air sites for Neanderthal and they were not in river valleys but more open. This evidence and the northern position of these Neanderthal sites and remains seems to run against the view that Neanderthals were marginal in northern lands of ice age Europe.

Similar Threads

  1. The Ambras Manuscript [Hans Talhoffer]
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Literature & Book Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017, 05:42 AM
  2. The Voynich Manuscript
    By Blutwölfin in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Monday, December 5th, 2016, 04:44 AM
  3. German Minnesang in the Hague Song Manuscript
    By Frans_Jozef in forum Folk Art & Culture
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 31st, 2007, 02:56 PM
  4. Archimedes' Manuscript: The Book that could have changed the world
    By Frans_Jozef in forum Alternative Sciences
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Tuesday, February 1st, 2005, 05:52 PM
  5. Czech Cultural Inferiority and the Forgery of the Königinhof Manuscript
    By FadeTheButcher in forum Cultural & Linguistic Anthropology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sunday, January 11th, 2004, 11:40 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts