V. G. MOISEEV
Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of the Russian Academy of Sciences

3 Universitetskaya Emb., Saint Petersburg, 199034, Russia

E-mail: vmoiseyev@mail.ru

Introduction

The problems of formation and subsequent evolution of carriers of a number of related cultures belonging to the so-called Scythian-Siberian ethno-cultural community are among the key issues for understanding the ethnic processes that took place in the steppe zone of Northern Eurasia during most of the first millennium BC. Unfortunately, only craniometry was actively used to solve these problems when studying paleoanthropological material of feature systems.

The aim of this work is to introduce and compare data on a number of population groups in Western and Southern Siberia of the Scythian period, which were studied by the author using the cranioscopic program proposed by A. G. Kozintsev (Kozintsev, 1988; Kozintsev, 1992). I would like to take this opportunity to thank T. A. Chikisheva, D. V. Pozdnyakov, and M. P. Rykun for the opportunity to work with the craniological collections of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Tomsk State University, as well as for their practical assistance.

Cranioscopic features of the studied groups

Four out of the six studied traits, namely ZI, ZSS, IPNSH, and NO, are significant for differentiating modern Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations (Table 1). Caucasians are characterized by low frequencies of ZI, ZSS, and NO and high frequencies of IPNSH; for Mongoloids, the opposite is true. Two features - KSS and PTU II-effectively distinguish the Ob-Ugric and Samoyedic groups, which are characterized by a combination of low frequency of KSS and high frequency of PTU P. Most of the studied groups of the Scythian time, when compared with the combined series representing Caucasians and Mongoloids, correspond to the frequencies of ZI, ZSS and IPNSH inherent in Caucasians (Fig. 1). Only the series from the so-called Tsar's mound Arzhan-2 demonstrates a steady shift in the "eastern" direction. At the same time, the average value of NO frequencies for the combined series, except for those buried in Arzhan-2, Pazyryk and Tagar (Kuznetsk Basin), exceeds this indicator for modern Mongoloids. Increased frequencies, although not as high as in this case, are also characteristic of a number of Bronze Age populations from the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Western and Southern Siberia (Gromov and Moiseev, 2004). Given this, and the absence of a noticeable "eastern" trend in other features among the Pazyryk and Tagar people of the Kuznetsk Basin, I believe that it is premature to talk about the significant participation of Mongoloid groups in the genesis of these populations. However, this feature can be considered as a consequence of the kinship relations of these groups with the Caucasoids of Southern Siberia of the Bronze Age. The assumption about the participation of Mongoloids in the formation of the group from Arzhan-2 has more grounds, since, as already noted, it demonstrates a stable "eastern" trend in almost all signs,

This work was supported by the Program of Fundamental research of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Ethno-cultural Interaction in Eurasia".

page 145

Table 1.

Frequencies of cranioscopic features in Scythian craniological series from Western and Southern Siberia, %

N n/a

Series

ZEE

KVSH

ZSS

CCGT II

IPNSH

but

1

Tagar culture (Kuznetsk basin)

4,0*(31)

19,9*(61)

11,9(42)

65,5 (29)

81,4(43)

63,2 (57)

2

Tagar culture (Askiz-2)

22,4*(51)

28,6(131)

14,7(75)

61,3(62)

74,0 (73)

37,7(114)

3

Kamen-2

14,6*(37)

21,2(108)

8,5(71)

75,0 (52)

64,6 (48)

35,7 (84)

4

Bystrovka-1-3

12,5(114)

23,1 (216)

10,7(150)

60,2 (88)

61,6(125)

34,6 (240)

5

Sargat culture

0,0 (77)

16,9(195)

7,8(115)

69,1 (55)

66,7(114)

37,9(198)

6

Pazyryk culture

11,5(114)

21,6(283)

11,1 (135)

50,5(107)

68,0(150)

57,4(197)

7

Arzhan-2

54,0*(29)

20,3 (36)

26,1 (23)

85,0 (20)

52,2 (23)

68,8 (32)

-----

Note. Here and further: ZI - occipital index, KVSH-sphenoid-maxillary suture, ZSS - posteroscullar suture, PSU II - type II suborbital pattern, IPNSH - index of the transverse palatine suture, NO-supraorbital openings. The total number of observations is shown in parentheses.

* Values calculated from the regression equation.

It is significant for the differentiation of modern Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations. However, it should be borne in mind that the extreme values of frequencies that characterize the series may be due to the small size of the group. It is also necessary to take into account possible kinship relations between individuals buried in this burial ground, which was the ancestral tomb of the top of the Early Scythian society.

The results obtained seem to be confirmed by craniometric data. According to the preliminary conclusion of T. A. Chikisheva, among

Figure 1. Frequencies of six cranioscopic features in the studied combined series from Europe and Asia, as well as in Ob Ugric and Samoyedic peoples. See Table 1 for the group numbers and service names.

page 146

The most homogeneous series of the Scythian period from the territory of Tuva is the series from the Arzhan-2 mound. The researcher notes the "eastern" deviation of the group in the angles of horizontal face profiling, which are larger than "typical for groups of mestizo Europoid-Mongoloid origin, but do not reach the values characteristic of representatives of known anthropological variants of northern continental Mongoloids" (Chikisheva, 2004, p.120).

The frequencies of EHF in the analyzed series are significantly higher than those typical for modern Ob-Ugric and Samoyedic groups. The lowest frequency of this trait corresponds to the combined series of the Sargat culture. The highest frequency of CCGT II is distinguished by the Arzhan-2 series. The latter, however, does not allow us to speak about a specifically "Uralic" shift in the Arzhan-2 series, since the frequency of EHF in it significantly exceeds the level characteristic of Ural-speaking populations. This combination - a high frequency of CCGT II and KVSH-corresponds to modern Central Asian populations. This combination of traits in these groups is combined with a pronounced "eastern" trend, which is demonstrated by the series from Arzhan-2.

Comparative analysis

As a comparative material, we used collected data from modern groups from Eastern Europe, Siberia, Central and Central Asia, as well as ancient series from Siberia and Central Asia of the Neolithic, Bronze and Early Iron epochs (Table 2). Statistical comparison was carried out using the methods of principal components and cluster analysis. In order to stabilize the variances, the feature frequencies were previously converted to radians.

The first principal component (I GC) accounts for 42 % of the total variance (Table 3, Figures 2, 3). It differentiates groups along the west-east axis. Most of the ancient Bronze Age groups are located at the "west pole"; the extreme position is occupied by the near-modern team series from Eastern Europe. At the "east pole" there are close to modern national teams from Central Asia and Eastern Siberia, while the extreme position is occupied by the series from Arzhan-2. The latter is not surprising, since this group, as shown above, occupies an extreme place in several initial features that are significant for differentiating Caucasian and Mongoloid populations.

2. Arrangement of groups in the space of GC I and II.

1 - Neolithic and Bronze Age; 2-Scythian time; 3-Hunnic time; 4-near-modern groups. MK - Minusinsk basin, KK-Kuznetsk basin, VO-upper Ob, SV - Scythian time, GW - Hun time.

3. Arrangement of groups in the space I and IV of the GC. Usl. obozn. see Figure 2 for an explanation of abbreviations.

page 147

Table 2. Information about the series used for multivariate analysis

N n/a

Series

Sources

Ancient Series

1

Neolithic of the Baikal region

Kozintsev, 1992

2

Afanasyevskaya culture

Gromov, 1997

3

Okunevskaya culture

The same thing

4

Krotovskaya culture (Sopka-2)

"

5

Andronovo culture (Minusinsk basin)

"

6

Andronovo culture (Kazakhstan)

"

7

Andronovo culture (Upper Ob)

"

8

Karasuk culture

"

9

Tatar culture (Minusinsk basin)

Kozintsev, 1992

10

Aimyrlyk (Scythian time)

Ibid

11

Aimyrlyk (Hun time)

"

12

Tatar culture (Kuznetsk basin)

See Table 1. in this article

13

Tatar culture (Askiz)

The same thing

14

Kamen-2

"

15

Bystrovka-1-3

"

16

Sargat culture

"

17

Pazyryk culture

"

18

Arzhan-2

"

Close-to-date summary series

19

Ugrians and Samoyeds

Kozintsev, 1992; Moiseev, 1999

20

Volga and Baltic Finns

The same thing

21

Turks of Western Siberia

Moiseev, 1999

22

Turks of Central Asia

Kozintsev, 1992

23

Turks of Altai and Khakassia

Kozintsev, 1992; Moiseev, 1999

24

Central Asian groups

Kozintsev, 1992

25

East Siberian groups

Ibid

26

Groups from Eastern Europe and the Caucasus

"

Table 3.

Correlation coefficients between the initial features and the values of the first four principal components

Sign

Main components

I

II

III

IV

ZEE

0,79

-0,36

0,33

0,06

KVSH

-0,49

-0,24

0,50

0,66

ZSS

0,87

0,13

-0,16

0,14

CCGT II

0,08

0,91

0,39

0,09

IPNSH

-0,70

0,11

-0,50

0,28

but

0,64

0,09

-0,41

0,55

Proper number

2,51

1,05

0,96

0,84

Share of total variability, %

41,8

17,5

16,1

14,0

I would like to emphasize once again that, although the estimate of the value of the "eastern" shift of the Arzhan-2 series cannot be considered sufficiently reliable due to the small number of the series, the fact of such a shift is not in doubt, especially since the group deviates in the "eastern" direction according to two systems of signs - cranioscopy and craniometry. Cranioscopically, the Arzhansky series is closest to the modern one

page 148

4. Results of clustering the Euclidean distance matrix.

This is reflected in the results of principal component analysis and cluster analysis (see Figures 2-4). Due to the small number of the series, the interpretation of this result should be approached cautiously, and since Arzhan-2 is a fully investigated monument, it will be possible to verify the conclusion obtained only with the help of other feature systems.

A pronounced "eastern" trend is also noted for the group of Scythian time from Aymyrlyk and carriers of the Pazyryk culture. However, the intermediate position of these series is not a valid reason for recognizing their mestizoism, since it may be a consequence of the preservation of protomorphic features. In this case, we should expect that the average position on the characteristics that distinguish between Caucasians and Mongoloids will be accompanied by "peculiar" combinations of other indicators; this is typical for Ural-speaking populations [Moiseev, 1999; Kozintsev, 2004].

This specific combination of features is described by GC II and IV (18 and 14 % of the total frequency-

page 149

3). Both vectors differentiate the Uralic groups from all others. At the same time, IIGC is almost completely determined by one trait - vocational school II, while in the differentiation of groups along the IV GC, the main role is played by KVSH and NO (see Table 3). The third GC does not carry any significant information. It separates the Tagars of the Kuznetsk Basin from all other groups, and the series of carriers of the Tatar culture accounts for about a quarter of the total range of the vector. If the Kuznetsk series is excluded from the analysis, this direction of variability completely disappears, while all other vectors retain or even increase their significance. The latter is true, in particular, for a vector similar to the IV GC in the previous analysis; now it becomes the third in value. Based on this, it can be assumed that isolation and related stochastic factors played an important role in the evolutionary history of the Tatar population of the Kuznetsk Basin. At the same time, this group does not show any significant differences in the level of Europeoid character from other Tatar series (the combined series from the Minusinsk basin and the series from Askiz).

As already noted, Ural-speaking populations are characterized by a combination of low frequencies of KVSH and high frequencies of PSU. With a sufficient number of cranioscopically "Ural" groups, this combination usually determines one of the first vectors. For the majority of ancient series, this combination is uncharacteristic; this is due to the absence of a significant inter-group correlation between the above features and, as a consequence, the allocation of two independent directions of variability, determined by KVSH and PSU II separately.

Meanwhile, one can speak confidently about the "Uralic" trend only if it manifests itself in both of these signs, as is observed, in particular, not only in modern Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic peoples, but also in the Turkic-speaking groups of Western Siberia, formed as a result of the assimilation of the Ural-speaking population by the Turks. The series from Arzhan-2 and the Tagar group from the Kuznetsk basin, characterized by a high frequency of CCGT II, show the "Ural" trend in GC II, but are at the opposite pole to the Uralians in GC IV. Therefore, there is no reason to talk about their kinship with the Uralians. The situation is similar in essence, but opposite in the ratio of the "Ural" trend in the II and IV CC for the Krotovskaya culture series from the Sopka-2 burial ground.

As for the Pazyryk people, they do not show any noticeable "Uralic" shift in any of the vectors under consideration (see Figures 2, 3). Therefore, if some Samoyedic or Ugric groups are included in the carriers of the Pazyryk culture (this is the scenario proposed by a group of Novosibirsk geneticists based on the study of the remains of an ancient Russian culture), then they should be able to mtDNA [Voevoda et al., 2003]), then they were probably insignificant in terms of specific gravity. The opinion that the carriers of the Pazyryk culture belong to Protosamodians (Molodin, 2003) is not confirmed by cranioscopic data. However, this does not close the topic of the involvement of protomorphic groups in the origin of the Pazyryk people, since the Uralians represent only one example of populations that have preserved protomorphic features in their phenotype (see, for example, Kozintsev, 2004). There are good reasons to believe that protomorphic groups, not necessarily similar to the Uralians and among themselves, lived on the territory of Siberia before the Bronze Age. The essential role of such groups in the composition of various ancient populations is now recognized by most anthropologists working with materials from Western and Southern Siberia (see fig. for example: [Chikingeva, 2003, p. 100-103]).

According to the results of an integration analysis of craniometric and cranioscopic data (Kozintsev, Gromov, and Moiseyev, 1999; Kozintsev, Gromov, and Moiseyev, 2003), protomorphic features were preserved in a number of Bronze Age groups (see Kozintsev, 2004). Among the series considered in this paper, representatives of the Okunevskaya and Krotovskaya cultures are characterized by such features. Both of these groups, showing pronounced cranioscopic specificity, form one of the" poles "of the second group of groups, opposite to the "Ural pole" (see Figure 2). This specificity does not allow us to interpret their "eastern" shift relative to other groups of the Bronze Age as a consequence of the process of mestizoization of Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations, since both Caucasoids and Mongoloids are considered to be the most diverse groups in the world. Mongoloids are characterized mainly by neutral values of this GC. The same neutral values are noted for Pazyryk residents. Therefore, even if the Pazyryk population included some component that preserved protomorphic features, which, in my opinion, is not excluded (this may be indicated by the relatively low frequency of PSU II), its role was not very great.

None of the other series of the Scythian period also shows any significant shift towards the Okunevites and Krotovites. This suggests that it was during the Scythian period that the ancient protomorphic groups of the autochthonous population of Southern Siberia finally dissolved into the numerically predominant groups of migrants, mainly of Western origin. So about-

page 150

At the same time, the Pazyryk people were based on ancient Caucasian groups of Southern Siberia. Minor manifestations of the "eastern" tendency are most likely explained by a small Mongoloid admixture, which was previously suggested by G. F. Debets [1948]. The participation of ancient protomorphic groups in the composition of Pazyryk people at this stage of the study is not reliably recorded.

In Western Siberia, the situation was different. The analysis revealed a steady deviation of two West Siberian series of the Scythian period - the Bolsherechenskaya (Kamenskaya) culture series from the Kamen-2 burial ground and the combined series from the Sargat culture burial grounds-in the direction of the Ural-speaking groups along both vectors (II and IV GC) marking the specificity of the Uralians. The significance of this result is that it concerns so far the only ancient series showing a distinct "Ural" trend. In terms of the "Ural" shift, both series surpass the combined group made up of Finnish-speaking populations close to the present. They are most similar in terms of the sum of indicators to this combined group and to the series from the burial ground of the Bolsherechenskaya (Kamenskaya) Bystrovka culture (see Fig. 4). All these groups, along with a pronounced "Ural" shift, are characterized by a fairly high level of Europeidness.

The same cannot be said for modern Asian Uralians-Ugrians and Samoyeds, who occupy a practically neutral position on the vector differentiating Caucasoids and Mongoloids (I GA) with a simultaneously higher level of specificity for II and IV GA. Based on the above, it can be assumed that the groups discussed in the Scythian period, along with the "Ural" ones, also included ancient Caucasian populations. The assumption of A. N. Bagashev [2000] that the source of the Caucasoid component in the Sargats was the Andronovites (Fedorovites) seems to be quite reasonable. The results indicating the presence of an Ancient Uralic component in the Sargat population are confirmed by the opinion of a number of researchers that the Sargat culture belongs to Protomadyars (Mogilnikov, 1983, 1994; Koryakova, 1988).

Conclusion

The analysis of cranioscopic features allows us to determine the main directions of inter-population relations of the population of Western and Southern Siberia in the Scythian period. The basis of the population of both territories was made up of ancient Caucasian populations of the Eneolithic and Bronze Ages. By this time, the assimilation of the autochthonous population of the steppe zone, which was characterized by protomorphic features, which was still quite noticeable in some groups of this era, in particular in the carriers of the Krotovo and Okunevskaya cultures, was probably mostly completed by the newcomer Caucasian tribes.

The beginning of a qualitative change in relations between the Central Asian groups and the Caucasian population of the Siberian steppe zone is indicated by the pronounced "eastern" shift of the group from Arzhan-2. Such a shift for earlier time was traced only in individual individuals, which means that the migration process was not yet widespread at that time - we could talk about the infiltration of small Mongoloid groups that were completely assimilated by Caucasian populations. The uniqueness of the cranioscopic characteristics of the Arzhan-2 series indicates that there was no fundamental change in the dynamics of interaction between ancient Europoid and Mongoloid populations in the Scythian period. The process of mass migration of Mongoloid groups of Central Asian origin occurred already in the subsequent Hunnic period.

In the forest-steppe zone of Western Siberia at that time, another direction of inter-population relations prevailed. The local taiga population was assimilated by the numerically predominant Caucasian populations, whose cranioscopic characteristics show similarities with the modern Ugric and Samoyedic groups.

List of literature

Bagashev A. N. Paleoanthropology of Western Siberia: Forest-steppe in the Early Iron Age. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2000, 374 p. (in Russian)

Voevoda M. I., Shulgina E. O., Nefedova M. V., Kulikov I. V., Damba L. D., Gubina M. A., Kobzev V. F., Romashchenko A. G. Paleogenetic studies of carriers of the Early Iron Age culture of Gorny Altai (Ukok plateau) / / Population of Gorny Altai in the era of the early Iron Age as an ethno-cultural phenomenon: Origin, genesis, and historical destinies (according to the data of archeology, anthropology, and genetics) / Ed. by V. I. Molodil. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2003, pp. 121-147.

Gromov A.V. Kranioskopicheskie osobennosti naseleniya okunevskoy kul'tury [Cranioscopic features of the population of Okunevskaya culture]. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 1997, pp. 294-300.

Gromov A.V., Moiseev V. G. Cranioscopy of the population of Western and Southern Siberia: Geography and chronology // Races and peoples. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2004, vol. 30, pp. 216-248.

page 151

Debets G. F. Paleoanthropologiya SSSR [Paleoanthropology of the USSR].

Kozintsev A. G. Ethnic cranioscopy: Racial variability of the skull sutures of a modern person. - L.: Nauka, 1988. - 168 p.

Kozintsev A. G. Kety, uraltsy, "americanoids": Integration of craniological data / / Paleoanthropology, ethnic anthropology, ethnogenesis: To the 75th anniversary of Ilya Iosifovich Gokhman / Ed.by A. G. Kozintsev. St. Petersburg: MAE RAS Publishing House, 2004, pp. 172-185.

Kozintsev A. G., Gromov A.V., Moiseev V. G. Novye dannye o sibirskikh "amerikanoidakh" [New data on Siberian "Americanoids"]. - 2003. - N 3 (15). - p. 149-154.

Koryakova L. N. Early Iron Age of the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia (Sargat culture). Sverdlovsk: Ural State University Publishing House, 1988, 241 p.

Mogilnikov V. A. On the ethnic composition of Western Siberian cultures in the Iron age // Etnokul'turnye protsessy v Zapadnoy Sibiri [Ethnocultural processes in Western Siberia]. Tomsk: Publishing House of the Tomsk State University, 1983, pp. 77-89.

Mogilnikov V. A. K probleme genezisa ugrskoy etnokul'turnoy obshchnosti [On the problem of the genesis of the Ugric ethno-cultural community]. - 1994. - N1. - p. 61-68.

Moiseev V. G. Origin of Ural-speaking peoples according to craniology data. Saint Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 1999, 133 p. (in Russian)

Moiseev, V. G., Experience in integrating four systems of anthropological features (craniometry, cranioscopy, odontology, and dermatoglyphics), in Paleoanthropology, Ethnic Anthropology, and Ethnogenesis: To the 75th Anniversary of Ilya Iosifovich Gokhman, ed. by A. G. Kozintsev. St. Petersburg: MAE RAS Publishing House, 2004, pp. 186-200.

Molodin V. I. Etnogenez, etnicheskaya istoriya i istoricheskie sudby nositelei pazyrykskoy kul'tury Gornogo Altay [Ethnogenesis, ethnic history and historical destinies of the Pazyryk culture bearers of Gorny Altai]. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2003, pp. 148-181.

Chikisheva T. A. Naselenie Gornogo Altay v epokhu rannego zheleznogo po dannym antropologii [The population of Gorny Altai in the era of the early Iron Age as an ethno-cultural phenomenon: Origin, genesis, historical destinies (according to archeology, anthropology, Genetics)]. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2003. - P. 63-120.

Chikisheva T. A. On the formation of the anthropological composition of early Tuva nomads // Ecology and demography of a person in the past and present, Moscow: Encyclopedia of Russian Villages, 2004, pp. 118-122.

Kozintsev A. G. Ethnic epigenetics: A new approach // Homo. - 1992. - Vol. 43, N 3. - P. 213 - 244.

Kozintsev A. G., Gromov A. V., Moiseyev V. G Collateral Relatives of American Indians Among the Bronze Age Populations of Siberia? // American J. of Physical Anthropology. - 1999. - Vol. 108. - P. 193 - 204.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 12.07.05.

page 152

Постоянный адрес данной публикации: