Cranial Deformity in the Pueblo Area

Author(s): G. von Bonin

Source: American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 39, No. 4, Part 1 (Oct. - Dec., 1937), pp.
720-721
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/662450 .
Accessed: 19/04/2011 10:33
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Blackwell Publishing and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to American Anthropologist.
http://www.jstor.org
DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE
CRANIAL DEFORMITY IN THE PUEBLO AREA
In the
January-March
issue of this
journal,
T. D. Stewart' has
pointed
out
certain
peculiarities
of the cranial deformation found in the skulls from the
Lowry
Ruins.2
According
to
him,
this deformation is of the
"lambdoid,"
not of the
"oc-
cipital" type.
Different from the
flattening
found in skulls from Pecos
Pueblo,
it
resembles
closely
that found in the Chaco
Canyon. Thus,
the cranial deformation
"fits in with the cultural evidence."
It is
always gratifying
to learn that one's
description
has enabled others inde-
pendently
to draw conclusions about matters
beyond
the
scope
of his
original
text.
For the
problem
foremost in the writer's mind was that of the racial affinities of
the
people inhabiting
the
Lowry
area. This he has tried to solve as best he could
by
"the more
spectacular
methods of the Pearsonian
school,"
to
quote
Stewart
once more.
Next to racial
affinities, however,
cranial deformation did
intrigue
the writer
and he discussed its mechanical
aspects
and its influence on the size of the brain
on
pp.
166-74. But
following
Stewart's
suggestions,
we find that the
flattening
of
the
Lowry
skulls
(as
stated in the
report,
all of them were
deformed,
but
only
five
were
sufficiently
well
preserved
for a detailed
examination)
does not
entirely
cor-
respond
to Hooton's
description
of "lambdoid ' deformation in his
report
on the
Pecos
Pueblo.3 Hooton in fact said: "In most instances ...
[it]
is
certainly
not
caused
by
artificial deformation. . . . It can be seen in
many
crania from
European
and
non-European peoples
of the
present day.
It is
especially
noticeable in the skulls
of Armenoids and Finns"
(p. 38).
Hooton further states that the flattened area
forms an
angle
of about
350-45'
with the Frankfurt
plane.
The deformation of the
Lowry
skulls
appeared
to the writer to
correspond
better to Hooton's
occipital
flattening.
A
comparison
of
Lowry
skull No.
47,619
with the Pecos Pueblo skulls
Nos.
59,911,
or
60,076
will make this clear. But since this
flattening
does not
affect the
occipital
bone as much as the
region
above
it,
and since the term "lamb-
doid deformation" had
already
been
used,
"obelionic
flattening" appeared
best to
differentiate the
Lowry type
from the true
occipital flattening
as
shown, e.g. by
Pecos Pueblo No.
60,320.
If the obelion is marked on the contours of the
Lowry
skulls,
it will be seen that it is closer to the center of the flattened area than the
lambda. With the few skulls at the writer's
disposal
he did not feel
justified
in
going
deeper
into an
analysis
of cranial deformation than he
actually
did. In
explaining
1
Different Types of
Cranial
Deformity
in the Pueblo Area
(American
Anthropologist,
Vol.
39, pp. 169-71, 1937).
2 Paul S.
Martin, Lowry
Ruin in Southwestern
Colorado; Masonry of Lowry
Ruin and
of
the
Southwest, by
Lawrence
Roys;
Skeletal Material
from
the
Lowry Area, by
Gerhardt von
Bonin
(Anthropological Series,
Field Museum of Natural
History,
Vol.
23,
No.
1, 1936).
a
E. A.
Hooton,
The Indians
of
Pecos
Pueblo,
A
Study of
Their Skeletal Remains
(New
Haven, 1930).
720
DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE 721
it
by
the action of a
cradleboard,
he did feel
uncomfortable, for,
as Stewart
rightly
remarks,
the obelion is "rather
high."
I am
grateful
to Dr Stewart for
having
called the attention of
anthropologists
to an
interesting point
which had
escaped my
notice. It should be
clearly
under-
stood, however,
that such
morphological
observations will shed no
light
on
problems
of racial
affinities,
nor can it be said that the various
types
of artificial
flattening
have been defined in an
entirely satisfactory way.
Obviously,
we are in need of further data and more detailed methods of
analysis.
The
promised report by
Stewart on the human remains from Chaco
Canyon
will be
eagerly
awaited. In the
meantime,
Dr Stewart deserves our
gratitude
for
having
shown how fruitful a
cooperation
between cultural and
physical anthropology
can be.
G. VON BONIN
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
CHICAGO,
ILLINOIS
MAMMOTH OR "STIFF-LEGGED BEAR"
In
consequence
of Dr W. D.
Strong's paper
on North American Traditions
Sug-
gesting
a
Knowledge of
the
Mammoth,'
Dr F. G.
Speck2
and Dr T. Michelson3 have
discussed other versions of the
myth'among
the
Montagnais, Naskapi, Cree, Ojibwa,
and Penobscot. Dr
Strong
considers the
Naskapi
monster
Katcheetohfiskw
as
reminiscent of the
mammoth,
because of his
elephantine size, large ears,
and man-
eating
tendencies. Drs
Speck
and Michelson cite versions
among
the
Naskapi, Cree,
and
Montagnais showing
that the monster was referable to the
Ursidae.
He is
described as a
"stiff-jointed
bear of
very large size, being man-eating,
and
having
a head and ears like a bear." Both
Speck
and Michelson
agree
that the monster
bear is
purely mythical,
and not reminiscent of the mammoth or mastodon. How-
ever,
the three writers do not
attempt
an
explanation
of the tale in terms of
aboriginal
beliefs.
In the course of field work4 last summer
among
the Penobscot Indians of
Maine,
the
underlying concept
of the whole series of
myths seemingly
became
apparent.
One of
my
Penobscot
informants,
Andrew
Dana,5
dictated his
grandfather's
version
of the
myth.
A
synopsis
of this is
given
in translation below.
The correct Penobscot term for the monster is Wa'skwekkehs
(called by my
in-
formant the "Great Hairless
Bear"),
which I have been unable to
annalyze
satis-
factorily.6
1
American
Anthropologist,
Vol.
36, pp.
81-84,
1934.
2
Ibid.,
Vol.
37, pp. 159-63,
1935.
3
Ibid.,
Vol.
38, pp. 141-43,
1936.
4
I am indebted to Professor Edward
Sapir
and Dr Morris Swadesh of Yale
University
for
encouragement
in this work.
5
His
knowledge
of Penobscot culture was obtained
largely
from his
grandfather,
Frank
Dana
(1845-1924),
a Penobscot of the old school.
I
Wa)skwekkehs
is the shortened form of
original *wa'skwekkehso;
the
dropping
of the
final vowel
being
the result of the
change
of an
appellative
into a
proper
or
personal
name.