Racial reunion:
Western writings about the Ainu are pervaded by the notion that European man had, after centuries of exploration, after thousands of encounters with nothing but irreconcilable aliens, at long last discovered a race in whom true brotherhood was to be found: as one British captain declared, something like a strange drop of oil in the Ocean, being surrounded by Mongols yet not one of them. The Ainu’s simplicity and attunement with Nature were beatific; he was magnificent even in savagery: tall, lithe, straight and strong, with hair, beard, and moustaches never desecrated by the touch of the scissors ; with a high broad brow, dark eyes, straight nose and oval face, he was a far nobler creature than the Red Indian, who I had always fancied was the pride of wild men (Bickmore 1868).
For proponents of the Europoid or Caucasoid idea, White man and Ainu were shineshikpuikotcha utara, people of the same eyesocket (Batchelor 1905), and what the former took for familial resemblance produced not only a flurry of travelogues and anthropological treatises but also harsh critiques of Japanese policy and at least one marriage — Polish exile-anthropologist Bronisław Piłsudski fathered two sons with an Ainu woman on Russian Sakhalin (Siddle 1996: 78).
One can hardly fault them for their excitement. Even in the age of photography — after admixture with morphological Mongoloids had come to a head with expanding Japanese settlement — that little feeling in the amygdala was undeniable:
Left: The famous late chief MIYAMOTO, Shiraoi village, Iburi province ; Right: An old Ainu man, Anecha village, Hidaka province. (East-Hidaka) (Figs. 36 and 29, respectively, from Kodama 1970: 94 & 89)
Yet not all racial taxonomists settled on a Caucasoid identity; Kodama (1970: 263-268), surveying around two dozen theorists, reports four major alternatives: the Mongoloid theory, the Oceanic theory (arguing for affinities with assorted equatorial races — Australoids, Polynesians, and so on), the “Paläasiatisches Volk” theory, and the “Rasseninsel” theory. I attribute a large portion of the divergence in opinion to incomplete awareness of intra-Ainu variation, much of it geographically correlated (increasingly “Siberian” looks seem to have prevailed north of Hokkaido, probably due to assimilation of Nivkhs, Oroks, Kamchadals, etc., and their forebears). Cheboxarov’s 1951 designation of a Kurilean branch of the Australoid great race is not so laughable if we regard men like this chief, and the notion shared by Schrenck (1881), Kopernicki (1886), and Koganei (1893) of a branch of humanity distinct from all others comes frankly alive in faces like this one.
Parallels:
Alas for the romantics! Based on present genetic data (uniparental markers), which I very briefly reviewed here, the Ainu’s affinities to Caucasoids proper seem about as real as those of Melanesians to Sub-Saharan Africans. At least in the sense that the Ainu represent a vestige of pre-Mongoloid strata that were once much more widespread throughout East Eurasia, I would say that the Palae-asiatic theory has held up best. However, it bears repeating again that no autosomal nuclear studies concerning the Ainu have yet been conducted or — as far as I know — are currently in the works. Large-scale SNP analysis with good coverage of Ainu, Japonic speakers from Hokkaido to the Ryukyus, and other Eurasian populations (especially Siberians and island SE Asians) would settle things more conclusively, but we deal for now with the issue of a population whose closest living relations are all more or less Mongoloid but whose purer representatives deviate phenotypically from “classic” Mongoloids in a surprising number of ways.
Kodama, himself an advocate of the Caucasoid theory, bases his diagnosis on the following attributes of the full-blooded Ainu (265):
Enough, in short, to lead a run-of-the-mill forensic anthropologist astray. And there were other points of difference, some of which merely set the Ainu apart from the Japanese (but not necessarily southern Mongoloids) and others which charitable minds could well take as indicating especial connections with the opposite corner of Eurasia. A few of the more dramatic divides:
Kodama on sweat glands (82):
Naturally, next on body odor (Ibid.):
One recalls the semi-farcial image painted by Siddle (1996): The scientific research method involved was the placing of the nostrils close to the half-naked body of an Ainu in a room overheated by a roaring stove[,] one of a series of experiences with Ainu odour that led the researcher to muse that ‘it’s tough for those engaged in ethnology (jinshugaku)’.
On hair structure (91-92):
On the frequency of free (as opposed to attached) earlobes (97-98):
On the frequency of wet and dry earwax (99-100):
Sanctimonious devotees of The Mismeasure of Man are at this point likely to be in stitches, but, in reality, Ainu hair form and the particulars of their sweat glands coalesce rather meaningfully with their high incidence of sundadonty (not mentioned by Kodama — his work predates Christy Turner). Clearly, something interesting is afoot with EDAR.
In a sense, the concordance between European and Ainu amounts to a remarkable (but hardly singular*) episode in convergent evolution. As Razib Khan suggests here, there may be only a few basic human racial morphs which reoccur, whether by chance or adaptation
* — Alluring symmetry of marsupial versus placental wolf aside, Thylacinus/Vulpes might be an even closer pair: see Werdelin (1986) and Wroe and Milne (2007).
In the context of Eurasian prehistory, I will note, the Ainu start to seem much less anomalous. This post has gone on for longer than I was intending, so I’ll end that thought by remarking that the work of Peter Brown (1999) might be an interesting place to start. (But while you’re doing that, keep Kennewick Man and Luzia in the back of your mind too.)
Postscript:
Look to my earlier post for claims about the “European order” of Ainu cognition (including one suggestion of verbal parity with the Japanese but inferiority in mathematical reasoning). You’ll notice that I’ve limited the discussion above to matters of physical anthropology, which is not to say that there aren’t suggestive parallels between the folkways and material culture of the Ainu and those of a host of other peoples. There certainly are, from female facial tattoos to the sacral position of the bear. It’s just that homoplasy becomes an even more important consideration — Mbabaram word for dog and all that.
But let’s be fair — sometimes it is the little things that get us. Fitzhugh and Dubreuil (1999: 127):
Works Cited:
Note: Works referenced in Kodama (1970) are in blue; I have attempted to preserve his formatting. * indicates an irregularity (author and year referenced in text but not represented in Kodama’s bibliography); in all but one case I was able to track down the item in question or posit a plausible candidate.
Adachi, B.: Das Ohrenschmalz als Rassenmerkmal und der Rassengeruch (“Achselgeruch”) nebst dem Rassenunterschied der Schweissdrüsen. 2. Rassenkunde 6. 1937.
Batchelor, J. (1905). An Ainu-English-Japanese Dictionary (Including a Grammar of the Ainu Language.). Ginza, Tokyo: Methodist Publishing House.
Bickmore, A. S. (1868). The Ainos, or Hairy Men, of Saghalien and the Kurile Islands. The American Journal of Science and Arts, 2, 135, 361-377.
Brown, P. (1999). The first modern East Asians? Another look at Upper Cave 101, Liujiang and Minatogawa 1. In K. Omoto (Ed.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese (pp. 105–131). Kyoto, Japan: International Research Center for Japanese Studies.
Чебоксаров, Н.Н. “Основные принципы антропологических классификаций”, в кн.: “Происхождение человека и древнее расселение человечества”, М., 1951 (ТНЭ, н.с. т. 16).
Dubreuil, C., & Fitzhugh, W. W. (Eds.). (1999). Ainu: Spirit of a Northern People. Seattle: Univ. of Washington Press.
Kodama, S. (1970). Ainu: historical and anthropological studies. Hokkaido University School of Medicine.
* Koganei, Y.: Zinruigaku Kenkyu. (in Japanese). Most of Koganei’s papers in Japanese included. 1928
Kopernicki, I.: Czaszki Ainow wedlung nowych materialow etc. (Ainoschädel nach neuem Material etc.), Krakau, Quart, 1886, Ref. in Archiv f. Anthropologie, Bd. 24. 1897.
* Ohmori, S. (1938) not located.
* Schrenck, L. v. (1881). Die Völker des Amur-Landes. Reisen und Forschungen im Amur-Lande in den Jahren 1854-1856. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Shimode, T.: Morphological Studies of Head Hair in Ainu. Sapporo Medical Journal, Vol. 34, No. 4, 1968.
Siddle, R. (1996). Race, Resistance and the Ainu of Japan. Sheffield Centre for Japanese Studies/Routledge Series. New York: Taylor & Francis, Inc.
Ueda, T. and Kato, K.: Morphological Studies on the Palpebrae and Auricular Lobule in the Ainu and Japanese (in Japanese). Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Anthropological Society of Nippon and Japanese Society of Ethnology. 11th Session, 1956.
* Vernall, D. G. (1961). A study of the size and shape of cross sections of hair from four races of men. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 19, 345-350.
Werdelin, L. (1986). Comparison of Skull Shape in Marsupial and Placental Carnivores. Aust. J. Zool., 34(2), 109-117.
Wroe, S., & Milne, N. (2007). Convergence and remarkably consistent constraint in the evolution of carnivore skull shape. Evolution; International Journal of Organic Evolution, 61(5), 1251-1260.
It’s funny how Ainu are given attributes that are exactly the opposite of what they inherited from Jomon, who are short, broad-nosed and not straight-nosed, short-wide faced and rather Australian aboriginal-looking. The Ainu were also known for their shortness and compact bodies, not tall or lithe at all. That description you quoted from seems to come out of some European’s self-flattering delirium in looking at his “Ainu mirror”.
Purer Ainu do not look European, I don’t think, unless Australian aboriginals also look European, which some Euros did claim:
http://s6.zetaboards.com/man/single/?p=107267&t=8675568
Except the eyes, the “Caucasoid” features attributed to Ainu are rather from admixture with Siberians and Japanese. And often, the mixture just resulted in very stereotypically Southeast Asian-looking types:
http://s6.zetaboards.com/man/single/?p=8006055&t=8675568
You can read the rest of the thread to see the stereotypical, hysterical reaction of 1 Westerner, the blogger Maju, to the Ainu pics: anger at me for saying they don’t look European, attribution of the SE Asian and “Australoid”-looking Ainu to mixing with “flat-nosed” “Mongoloids”..
To clarify, the selection by Bickmore concerns one rather striking Sakhalin Ainu; he does continue, with evident disappointment: His fellows were less manly in their bearing and smaller ; and as far as dirt, mal-odour, and want of light permitted me to see, the women were ugly and little.
And yes, I’ve noticed that the present-day (internet) devotees of the Caucasoid theory rarely have anything to say about Ainu stature, but I’m not sure whether this is a deliberate omission so much as the fruit of ignorance. Kodama (1970: 148-149) gives some figures for males:
Among the values of the stature of the Hokkaido Ainu, that of the East Hidaka Ainu (158.7±0.24 cm) is the smallest and that of the Iburi Ainu (159.67±0.42 cm) is the largest. The value of the Sakhalin Ainu (160.26±0.51 cm) exceeds slightly that of the Hokkaido Ainu. The stature of the Akita Japanese (158.20±0.13 cm) is close to that of the East Hidaka Ainu, but the stature of the Kinai Japanese (164.7±0.10 cm) is larger than that of the Hokkaido Ainu and Sakhalin Ainu. According to Y. KOGANEI, who measured the Hokkaido Ainu about 75 years ago, the stature of the Ainu was 156.6 cm. The writer recognizes some increase of the Ainu stature in these years, following the general tendency of the increase of stature of the Japanese.
There is a common theory now that Ainu are likely connected to the pre-”Red-Indian” humans in the Americas. (“Kennewick Man”).
REN wrote: “the ‘Caucasoid’ features attributed to Ainu are rather from admixture with Siberians and Japanese.” This makes no sense. Neither Siberians nor Japanese(!) are “Caucasoid”, so how could they influence the Ainu to look “Caucasoid”?
They may not be “Caucasoid”, but nor can they be a Mongoloid people. “The Lapps of East-Asia”.
[...] Miscellaneous musings on the Ainu, I @ahnenkult. via race|hist|evo notes. [...]
Ainu are like white australoid race,which is why they look caucasian.Like the veddas who are australoid but have more resemblence to indians.Pure ainu or full blooded ainu are lighter skinned,have more body hair,their hair ranges from straight to very wavy,nose are straight to small broad.Their skin are generally reported to be light brown but this is due to the fact they labour on sea all day, old ainu man who are kept themselves indoors are found to be as white as any western man. There are even few east asians like chinese,koreans,siberians,japanese with very dark skin too.There not like australian aborgines who have black skin,very wide nose(much bigger nose),with less body hair.Some australian aborgines with straight hair could even pass for some people in india.
Those two photos were turned out to be faked. The famous late chief MIYAMOTO, Shiraoi village, Iburi province didn’t look like him at all.
cristobal, the reason is simple. Haplogroup C holders in Mongol have fair skins while the same ones in Austronesians have dark skins. Ainu were the first Asian dwellers. The northern settlers have got fair skins, while the southern settler have dark skins. They have nothing to do with whites at all.
Care to back this up? Are you claiming that they’ve been doctored, or that they depict non-Ainus? I’ve seen other photos of Miyamoto, at least, and from this basis don’t think it’s very credible that Kodama’s image depicts someone else.
Hi. Enjoyed this. Have spent years casually researching the Ainu. This is one of the few posts I’ve read concerning the Ainu which seems to genuinely strive to remain impartial. In light of recent genetic revelations, disappointingly, I find myself forced to accept the only hypothesis not yet dis-proven: symmetric evolution, to which you allude in your thylacinus/vulpes analogy. My only point of contention would be against Razib Khan’s assertion that “only a few basic racial morphs reoccur”. This is patently incorrect. I would list sources and examples if they weren’t so numerous and readily accessible. As far as most of the other comments you’ve received are concerned, I’m always amazed at the millions of people with no formal background in anthropology who feel qualified to explain the origins of humanity with theories based upon eugenics and witch voodoo. Anyway, most of what you wrote here correlates closely with my own conclusions about the origins of the Ainu.
This reminds me of a book called A Forbidden Land by Ernst Oppert published in 1880. It is one of the early first-person accounts of Korea published in the West. Oppert says that there are two races among the Koreans, Mongoloid and Caucasoid:
http://books.google.com/books?id=BNYMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PR23#v=onepage&q&f=false
They weren’t really Caucasoid of course. Just physical variation among different Koreans such as larger noses, etc.
Interestingly, Oppert was a Jewish trader who tried to blackmail the regent of Korea into removing trade barriers by stealing the remains of the regent’s father from their grave:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Oppert
This fits in with the general pattern of Jewish behavior which tries to promote and facilitate horizontal transmission:
http://wiki.majorityrights.com/evolution/horizontal_transmission
http://wiki.majorityrights.com/evolution/jewish_virulence
You’re an idiot Dale. You’re using a blog page about the origins of the Ainu to promote your views about Jews, and you’re using 130 year old eugenics texts to do it. You’re an embarrassment to the academic study of humanity. If you had any formal education in anthropology you would know that race does not exist in terms of definable clines such as “Mongoloid” and “Caucasoid”. These concepts are so outdated that I’m amazed you have access to a computer and you’re still using them. If you had any formal education at all you would have used correct grammar while writing your comment. If you had ever taken a high-school freshmen level course in expository writing you would know that anyone who references 130 year old texts in an effort to support their view has no education. Try using a 130 year old reference in a university level paper. I would give you an automatic “F”, before even reading your paper, simply because you were idiotic enough to use a 130 year old text, and believe that the theories therein were still relevant. Here’s my theory about race- I think the world should be separated into two race categories- those who are educated and those who pump our gas. Guess which race category you fall within?
CMC, from this message and your e-mail (both of which I apologize for overlooking during my hiatus), it appears you’re under a number of misapprehensions: a) that other people’s comments on my blog are to be taken as indications of what I believe; b) that it’s your place to demand that I delete this or retain that; c) that referencing anything older than your peculiar threshold of respectability (notwithstanding that they may be irreproducible first-hand accounts) is a hallmark of idiocy; and d) that an embarrassingly vulgar credentialism puts you in a position to gainsay anyone else’s intelligence. (Particularly ironic when you’ve claimed a travelogue to be an “eugenics text” and conflated the conception of human variation as principally clinal with the very notion of discrete races it hoped to supplant.)
I’ve taken a laissez-faire attitude towards commenting, and — regardless of your histrionics — that will remain so.
As for Dale’s remarks: it does seem sensible that the presence of a “pseudo-Caucasoid” look in Korea — which Oppert was hardly alone in noticing — reflects the persistence of minority Jomon-like elements in the adjoining Asian mainland as well as Japan. The notion that Baikal marked the easternmost extent of West Eurasian ancestry until Russian expansion in historic time has held up fairly well; at least, that’s what genomic studies of contemporary Asian peoples seem to indicate.
Perhaps it was his description of Oppert (who was, in fact, “a Jewish trader” from Germany) that set you off, but it’s hardly an act of calumny to characterize this man as a grave-robber-for-blackmail, as he himself was rather forthright about his intent: “to force the regent and his government to comply with the demand to open the country and sign accordingly treaties with foreign powers”.
Given how the Majority Rights wiki marshaled little evidence besides a Kevin MacDonald piece on U.S. immigration policy between 1881 and 1965, it’s certainly reasonable — let’s leave it at that — to be skeptical of the generality and historical consistency of the sociological trend Oppert’s actions supposedly exemplify. That said, your insistence that I shield you from “inappropriate” thoughts on the Internet will set you up for disappointment.
[...] only been analyzed for Y- and mtDNA, were a frequent mention. As my previous posts have probably made clear, the Ainu would have been my top choice, [...]
The direct ancestors of the Ainu, the Jomonese, were found to have mainly mtDNA N9b
and mtDNA N was found among Cro-Magnons.
So, I think the relation between European and Ainu has something to do with that maternal haplogroup.