|
|
The Traditional
Classification of Asiatic Races
A good
starting-point for tackling the taxonomy of principal boreal races of
Mongoloids was provided by Eickstedt’s classification of areal zones. It
reckoned with compartments for the Northern and Southern Mongolids, Palaeo-Europids, Indianids and two racial zones.
Dark inhabitants of the subtropical zone fell into the class of ‘brown
races’, while the rest of tribes residing in highlands defined the partition
of ‘mountainous races’. In addition, it applied the classificatory groupings
of Vedoids, Negritos, Tungids, Southern Asiatic races and Eastern Asiatic
varieties.
|
Braunrassengürtel:
Mediterranide, Grazilmediterranide, Eurafrikanide, Berberide, Orientalide,
Indide, Grazilindide, Nordindinide, Indobrachide, Pazifide, Polineside,
Mikroneside
|
Nordmongolide:
Tungide, Sinide, Nordsinide, Mittelsinide, Südsinide
|
|
Bergrassengürtel:
Alpinide, Westalpinide, Lappide, Dinaride,
Armenide, Turanide, Aralide, Pamiride
|
Südmongolide:
Palämongolide, Palaungide, Neside
|
|
Alteuropide:
Weddide, Wedda, Gondide, Malide, Toalide,
Ostweddide, Ainuide
|
Indianide:
Indianide
|
|
VEDOID: Gondid - Malid - Ceylonid – East Weddid
NEGRITO: Andamanid - Toalid -
Aetid – Semangid
SOUTH ASIA: Palaungid - Shanid -
Deuteromalaid - Protomalayid – Nepalid
EAST ASIA: North - Middle and South Sinid - Chosonid -
Coshu – Satsuma - Cipangid – Qiangid
TUNGIDS: Talgid - Kumid - Aralid - Pamirid - West Sibirid - East Sibirid - Eskimid –
Sakhalinid
|
Table
19. Eickstedt’s
subcategorisation of areal zones and racial groups
In
Biasutti’s subcategorisation
Mongoloids include Siberids, Tibetids, Eskimids, Tungids, Turanids, Sinids and
South Mongolids (Palaeo-Mongolids). A critical realistic view can,
however, acknowledge only independent racial varieties of Uralids, Ugrids,
Tungids and Turanids, other groups are mixed ‘mesoraces’ or heterogeneous
groupings. The worst blunder consists in classifying Sinids as Mongolids:
they only share some traits because their homeland lies in the intersection
of Mongolids in the north, Tungids in the northeast and the Negrito in the
south. The principal core of Asians is seen in Mongolids encompassing most
races of Central Asia, Siberian and the Far East. Unfortunately, they form one of the vaguest controversial categories
of current anthropology.
|
Uralo-Siberian
macrofamily: Palaeo-Siberian macrofamily,
Finno-Ugric macrofamily
Palaeo-Siberian
macrofamily: Chukotkan family, Kamchatkan family, Yukaghir family
Chukotkan
family: Alyutor, Chukchi, Kerek, Koryak
Kamchatkan
family: (Western) Itelmen, Eastern
Kamchadal
Yukaghir
family: Chuvan, Omok
Finno-Ugric macrofamily: Baltic group, Volga group, Permic group, Samoyedic, Ugric group, Hungarian
Baltic
Finnic group: Chud, Estonians, Finns, Izhorians, Karelians, Livonians,
Setos, Veps, Votes
Volga
group: Burtas, Mari, Merya, Meshchera, Mokshas, Mordvins, Murom,
Sami (Lapps)
Permic
group: Besermyan, Komi, Komi-Permyaks, Udmurts
Samoyedic
group: Enets, Nenets, Nganasan, Selkup
Sayan
Samoyedic: Kamassian, Koibal, Karagas, Motor, Soyot, Taigi
Ugric group:
Khanty, Mansi, Yugra
Hungarian
group: Székely, Csángó, Magyarab, Jász, Kun, Palóc
|
Table 20. The
traditional classification of Finno-Ugric
peoples
|
|
Uralic nations
live in isolated inhospitable ends of the Old World and their seats
can easily induce us to think that they played a marginal role in the
Eurasian ethnogeny. This impression is superficial and misleading because
they were heirs of Palaeolithic megafauna-hunters and launched several
worldwide colonisations. In the prehistoric past they conquered many continents
but had to search for new lands because they soon exterminated most species
of big mammals. Their ancestors were Palaeo-Mongolids akin to
Clactonians, Tayacians, Tabunians and Mousterians. Their hordes swept the
world in several waves culminating with the last revival in the Bronze Age
(from 3000 BC to 1200 BC). Its main bearers were the Megalithic Ogres in
western Eurasia and the Mycenaean Cyclopes
in the Balkans. About 6,000 BC the Old
World saw an amazing diaspora of their younger brothers
nicknamed as Neo-Mongolids. Their cultural identity was
discerned according to the spread of the western and eastern Combed Ware.
Fatal disasters in their
history came in the Mesolithic after the extinction of mammoths. Their
rarefication made big-mammal hunters retreat to the boreal regions of
northern Eurasia and later also to America. As their
makeshift they had to do with hunting the moose. In Europe, Siberia, Australia as well as in America their hunting
activities had detrimental effects, about 40 per cent of big-mammal species
were irrevocably extirpated. These conditions make us realise that the Finno-Ugric settlements in
northern Russia do not represent
original homelands but only isolated temporary refuges. As a result their
toponomastics has to cope with crossings of several migrations: the
Palaeolithic spread in civilised centres, the Mesolithic diffusion to the
northeast ends, the Neolithic pastoralist revolution and the triumphal return
to the south. Table 23
reconstructs their ethnogeny in schematic descendancy relations.
Mongolids =
Palaeo-Mongolids (diaspora 60,000 BC) + Neo-Mongolids (diaspora 6,000 BC)
Ugrids =
Palaeo-Mongolids → Ugrians,
Mansi, Khanty, Ingrians, Izhorians, Veps, Varangians
Neo-Mongolids = Western Uralids → Cheremis, Mari, Murom,
Merya, Estonians, Mordvins
Eastern
Uralids (eastern diaspora in the 6th mill. BC) → Mongolian Mergids, Ostyaks,
Chinese
Yuezhi,
Koreans, Japanese, Moro in the Philippines
Table 23. The
schematic plan of Mongolic and Finno-Ugric
subdivisions
Millennia of regional cohabitation
intermingled Finno-Ugric languages
into indistinguishable clusters. None of them is a pure extraction of
Proto-Uralic ethnicity, they are all amalgamated concoctions degenerated into
hybrid mixtures. Degeneration transformed independent tribal languages into
one chaotic blend. Their original layout can be reconstructed only by the
preparation of residual anomalous elements. The pure remains of prehistoric
traits have usually been retained only in irregular conjugations,
declinations and plural endings. Classic comparative linguistics wasted time
by questing for lexical similarities though its proper duty was to search for
structural irregularities.
URALIANS → k-Ugric + t-Uralian
+ i-Saamic + s-Permian+ l-Bulgarian
k-Ugrids
(Basco-Scythoids) →
Ingrian, Chudic, Vepsa (Vesi),
Varyags, Magyars, Xanty, Mansi
t-Uralian Uralids
(Sarmatids) → Finnish, Estonian, Mordvin,
Ostyaks, Murom, Merya, Meru
l-Bulgarian Pontids
(Tungids) → Upper
Mari, Lower Mari, Karelian, Bashkir, Volga Bolgars
i-Saamic Lappids → Lappish, Samoyedic,
Selkup, Nenets, Enets
s-Permian Gothids
(Corded Ware Nordids) →
Uglichi, Komi, Perm (← Barmia), Udmurt
Table 24. The
Uralic language family classified by plural endings
|
|
|
|
|
A Systematic Reclassification of Uralic Nations
|
Uralo-Siberians →
Palaeo-Siberians + Eteo-Ugrids + Eteo-Estonids
Eteo-Ugric cultures (dome-shaped
beehive dwellings, circular enclosures and huddles of huts, eventual
horizontal access corridors, Mongolic chums, Eskimo igloos, big-game
hunting, hunting moose,
burials in kurgans and mounds out of piles of stones, polygynous
exogamy, where each wife may
have her own hut; mummification rites with anointment and binding
the corpse into a long piece of
cloth; epi-Mousterian industry with
retouched leaf-shaped lance heads, globular
amphorae, bear cults)
Eteo-Ugric language type: k-plurals,
definite articles, dental stops and sonorants, fricatives β, γ,
θ, ð, χ
Eteo-Ugrids:
tall large-headed brachycephals, convex, hooked and aquiline noses, reddish
skin, red hair
Eteo-Ugric languages (with Ugric
ethnonyms in Ugr-, Chud-, Set-, Ves-, Mas-,
Mat- and k-plurals) →
→ Ingrian, Chudic, Vepsa (Vesi),
South Estonian (plurals in -q
/ʔ/), Varyags, Magyars, Yugra,
Khanty (plural Kantek), Mansi, Yugra tongues
Eteo-Estonic
cultures (the Narva Pit-Comb Ware culture, 6000 BC, egg-shaped round-bottomed pots,
four-pitch-roof marquee tents, winter bases with hillforts,
bastions, towers and rich crenellations,
moose-hunting, raw meat drying, marital exogamy, kidnapping brides,
lycanthropy, wolfine
totemism, impaling enemies on palisades)
Estono-Marids:
taller stature, large-headed brachycephaly, convex noses and other Ugroid
traits
Eteo-Estonic language type: t-plurals,
fortis-lenis consonantism, no voiced plosives, fortis initial stops
vs.
geminated intervocalic stops, locative cases, dental plosives and fortis
sonorants, perfect tenses
out of
analytic constructions with auxiliaries and past participles
Eteo-Estonic t-plurals: plural endings in -t,
Erzyans, autonymic plural Erzyat, Moksha, plural Mokshet
Eteo-Estonic languages and groups → Finnish, Estonian, Mordvin, Ostyak, Murom, Merya, Meru
Exo-Estonic culture: Eastern Comb
ware, Yunggimun culture (Japan, 10,000 BP),
Chulmun/Jeulmun
comb-patterned pottery (Korea, 8000 BC), the
eastern propagation of Estono-Marids
Exo-Estonic languages with t-plurals
→ Korean,
Mongolian, Japanese
|
Table 21. A new
systematic reclassification of Uralids and Ugrids
The
dominant role of Eteo-Uralic tribes (Ugrids and Estono-Marids) should not
overshadow a great number of subdominant ethnicities that were drowned in
their peripheral surrounding. They took over the main core of the Uralic
lexical word stock but retained a number of irregularities that betray
heterogeneous origin and distinguish them from alien neighbours.
|
Allo-Uralic subfamilies,
subdominant pseudo-Uralids and
non-Uralic tribes of heterogeneous origin that
were absorbed secondarily into the
Uralic macrofamily in the Siberian area
Plural typology: Finno-Ugric Uralians → k-Ugric + t-Uralian
+ i/e-Saamic + s-Permian+ l-Bulgarian
Allo-Uralians
→ s-Permian
(Gothids) + i/e-Saamic (Lappids) + l-Bulgarian
(Tungids)
Uralo-Gothic Udmurts (Uralised remains of
Gotho-Frisian Corded Ware absorbed in the Uralic area)
Komi-Permian
culture: the Fatyanovo-Balanovo culture
(3200 BC–2300 BC) with Corded Ware pottery
Komi-Permyaks →
Votic, Permian,
Udmurt/Otyak/Votyak, Yodzyak, Kudymkar and Inva dialects
Etymology: Russians called Udmurts Chud
Otyatskaya (чудь
отяцкая), Otyaks, Wotyaks or Votyaks
Gotho-Frisian s-plurals:
Udmurts, plural autonym Udmurt’jos, Удмуртъёс;
Komi, plural autonym
Komiyas, plurals in -ias, -ies, sp-/st-/sk-clusters, voiced-surd consonant
stop opposition, abundant
diphthongs and triphthongs in Karelian
and other mixed Uralic languages
Uralo-Langobardian Permyaks, agriculturalists dwelling in longhouses in the
style of half-timber
architecture, descent
from the Ananyino culture (c. 750 BC) with row burials (Reihengräber)
of
Langobardian type, influence and cultural affiliation with the Koban battle-axe culture in
Ingushetia,
Perm (from medieval
Barmia),
Permian plurals in -ez
Uralo-Lappids (Uralised remains of cremation cultures coming from the Anatolian and
Levantine Epi-
Gravettian or the Altaic Sayan
Mountains and China, probable
origin from Sinids in Southeast Asia)
Uralo-Lappic
language type: palatalisation,
abundant affricates, satemisation, Nenets-Enet
satem shift,
palatalisation k > sʲ, s > sʲ,
Nganasan, Selkup and Kamassian palatalisation k > ʃ
Samoyedic
etymology: Samoyedic does not mean ‘cannibal self-eater’ but
Saami+Gothic/Jutic
Uralo-Lappic
i/e-plural languages: →
Saamic/Lappish, Saami plurals in -k, -i, -e, Samoyedic
Selkup,
Nenets, Enets, plural form Entsi,
palatalised tʲ-plurals in Mordvin
Karelian Uralo-Tungids (Uralised remains of
Aurignacian Palaeolithic lacustrine nomadic fishers and
sedentary lake-dwellers, affiliated
with the Mediterranid Pontids settled north of the Black Sea,
Tungusic tepee tents retained in the lavvu
huts and Finnish tall A-shaped roofs)
Uralo-Karelian
language type: there is little evidence of Tungusic Evenk plurals in -l, today Karelians
use plurals in -t, Pontic
Bulgarians and Bashkirs apply composite plural in -lar, e.g. Bashkir ata
‘father’, pl. atalar ‘fathers’, composite plurals may be seen also in the Mari
ending -vlak
Uralo-Karelian languages → Karelian,
Olonets Karelian, Ludic, Upper Mari, Lower Mari, Bashkir
|
Table
22. The hypothetical
ethnogeny of eastern Uralic and Mongolic tribes
Extract from Pavel Bělíček: The
Differential Analysis of the Wordwide Human Varieties, Prague 2018, pp. 84-89
|
|
|
|
|
