740 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [86. 19841

saptens sapzens) be convinced by the author’s statement that our taxon “seems not to have changed physically, apart from the effects of such factors as diet and control of disease, since he emerged 30,000 to 35.000 years ago. During this time the tempo of cultural change was no longer restrained by the process of biological ad- justments” (p. 28). Nutritional or pathological factors alone do not explain biological diversity of anatomically modern sapzens, nor is the first known appearance of modern hominids in Europe at 30,000 to 35,000 years ago coincident with the dates of the emergence of other modern hominids in Southeast Asia, the Near East, and Africa. Here their antiquity may ex- tend to 60,000 or, perhaps, 90,000 years ago. Clark does not mention the Hadar fossils or the dating evidence from Ethiopia and East Africa, which extend the hominid fossil record to ca. 4 million years ago. The name of T . D. McCown is misspelled in Figure 5 (p . 21).

“Approaches to Archaeology” (chapter 3) is an excellent historical summary of antiquarian- ism, natural philosophy, and the cultural histor- ical approach. Among its highlights are the ac- count of the founding of the National Museum of Denmark, Edward Burnett Tylor’s and Lewis Henry Morgan’s construction of stages of human social evolution and their employment of the comparative method, and the contribu- tions of V. Gordon Childe to archeological in- terpretation. Secondary reference sources are frequently cited, although citations of original publications are discussed in this chapter.

“The Genesis of Cultural Diversity” (chapter 4 ) and “The Findings of Ethnography” (chapter 5) include surveys of cultural inventories and belief systems of various ancient and contem- porary populations. These overviews emphasize cultural diversity and varying tempos of culture change. The two chapters are prefatory to “High Culture in Hierarchical Societies” (chapter 6). which devotes particular attention to the urban cultures of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, and western Europe. There is no men- tion of Mesoamerican and South Asian Indus Valley (Harappan) civilizations.

Clark states in the final chapter, “Hominiza- tion and Dehumanization” (chapter 7), that “Men have not attained to human dignity by sharing a generalized culture, nor have they reached their peak of attainment by achieving the abstract status of being civilized. They have achieved humanity by sharing specific cultures and particular civilizations. The concept of values could only be entertained in terms of

specific cultural traditions” (p. 151). In advanc- ing this view that humanization of Homo sa- pzens was the outcome of diversity and inequal- ity, Clark is forced to admit that those societies based in western Europe and its outliers which gave birth to world community now threaten to homogenize and dehumanize the species. Ele- ments of Western culture that illustrate these trends toward reducing and ultimately eliminat- ing diversity are complemented by a parallel trend to “flatten social hierarchies.” This troubles the author, who concludes in the clos- ing pages, “Without a hierarchic structure, without a marked degree of inequality in con- sumption, the astonishing diversity of Chinese, Egyptian or Anglo-Saxon culture would never have developed. This is not a matter of specula- tion. We know what the culture of China, Egypt, or Britain was like before class societies developed in their lands” (p. 166). In short, prehistoric peasant populations were relatively egalitarian, highly illiterate, materially im- poverished, and dull, until civilization wrought greater cultural diversity and imposed hierar- chical class systems as its price. Clark offers no solution to the relentless march of homogeneity and dehumanization he envisions beyond an ad- monition for humankind to develop a keener sense of human identity, an awareness that is already most obvious to anthropologists and ar- cheologists, whose data and theories deserve greater attention by society at large.

This reflective work is enhanced by 56 black- and-white photographs and line drawings care- fully selected and esthetically pleasing. Few have appeared before in standard anthropology and archeology texts. Citations are arranged by chapters at the end of the book and precede a useful subject-author index. The volume has been handsomely printed and carefully proofed, hence it is an attractive addition to a well-stocked archeology library.

Avars and Ancient Hungarians. Pal Liptak. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado, 1983. 208 pp. $19.00 (cloth).

Gloria y’Edynak Boston University

This book presents a useful summary of Hungarian historical biological anthropology as it relates to ethnogenesis in the Hungarian Plain between the 4th and 13th centuries A.D. It

PHYSICAL 74 1

summarizes over 20 years of biological research by the author and 50 years of Hungarian research. It provides charts of individual data, mean data, taxonomic classifications (race and minor race), and maps of distribution of tax- onomic types, artificial cranial deformation, and probable paths of migration. Methodolog- ically, the book deals with the classic problem of distinguishing “taxa” (minor races, populations) within Europid and Mongolid great races. The ascertainment of minor races is based on quan- titative and qualitative measurements and pro- fessional judgment. Liptak’s discussions of Mongolid great races (p. 25) and turanid taxa (p. 139) are useful descriptions. A brief sum- mary of characteristics of 15 Europid minor races and 10 Mongolid and Mongoloid (Europo- Mongolid) minor races is given in Tables 1-1 and 1-2. I wish there were more extensive quan- titative and qualitative descriptions of these minor races in the supplementary material at the end of the book.

Hun Period (375-453 A.D.) and Pre-Avar Period (453-568 A.D.). Cemeteries from these periods have been assigned to several different groups, among them two Germanic tribes, Gepids and Longobards. The Gepids were com- posed of nordoid, turanoid, mediterranean, and cromagnon groups. They practiced a form of artificial cranial deformation called circular deformation. This practice is associated with the expansion of the Huns but is not really known among them specifically. The Longo- bards are composed of nordic. mediterranean, and cromagnon groups in this order. The tax- onomic characteristics of the ruling class of Huns are not well known. Written sources state that the Hun tribal confederacy included a large number of ethnic components. The Huns were horse-riding nomads referred to as Hiung- nu by the Chinese. Huns north and west of the Han dynasty came into Central Asia where they formed the White Hun Empire (Hephthalite).

Avar Period (568-800 or 850 A.D.). The Avars of the Carpathian basin are probably the Varchonites of the Hephthalite Empire. The Gepids and Longobards living in this region were assimilated into the Avar population. Avars included ethnically heterogeneous groups from Central Asia, Ukraine and southern Russia, and the Danubian Bulgars. Among the well-to-do graves are found Mongolid types. This group, which makes up approximately 16% of the population of this period, is asso- ciated with horse burials. Males and females often differ taxonomically within cemeteries.

The common people (who had fewer and plainer grave goods) are Europids. The late Avar Period shows more hybridization resulting in higher frequencies of Europo-Mongolids. In the Avar Period as a whole Liptak gives the following breakdown of minor races: hetero- geneous bracycephalic Europids. 27.2%; nor- doids, 20.8%; cromagnoids, 18.2%; mediter- r a e a n s , 15.4%; Mongolids and Europo- Mongolids, 16%; and archaic Europoids, 3.9%. The Avar Mongolid races are broken down into types: baikal (36%), sinid (Far East- ern), sayanic (low-faced, associated with early Avar nobility), and Central Asian. The author suggests the origin of Avar overlords is the trans- baikal region of south central Asia.

Conquering Hungarians and Arpadian Age (10th-13th century A.D.). The ancient home- land of the Hungarian horsemen-overlords is suggested to be the Kama-Byelaya region of present day Bashkiria. The overlord physical type is classified as turanid (south Siberian Europo-Mongolid). which is connected with the Turkish component of the Hungarian conquest and associated with rich grave goods, horse skull burials, and horse equipment. In addition, there are uralian (Europo-sibirid) and pamirian minor races. The Hungarian common people are very heterogeneous (in terms of including almost every Europid race) and practiced trepanation of the skull. Females in the same cemetery are not always of the same racial com- position. An overwhelming majority of the whole population is Europid (95%) with the following breakdown: nordoid, 31 %; mediter- ranean, 28%: cromagnon, 22%: brachycranes, l3%, and other Europids, 1.6%; Mongolids and Europo-Mongolids. 5%. The Hungarian overlord class is made up of 33% turanids, then pamirian, uralian (Europo-Mongolids), nor- doid, and mediterranean. The warrior-serf class and common people are made up of pamirian (specifically in the warrior-serf class), nordoid, and mediterranean groups. The turanid types are often found in separate single graves with horse skulls and rich burial goods. The Hungarians of conquest were probably accom- panied by Alans, Varangians, and Rus peoples.

The book shows that population taxonomy and historical anthropology are highly useful in complementing historical sources on the early and medieval population in the Carpathian basin. I am concerned about the replicability of the method and would prefer to see “taxons” defined by factor analysis. Scores of individuals would cluster along specific morphometric fac-

742 A M E R I C A N ’4 N7‘11K 0 POI. 0 C ; I . Y I‘ [ 86. 1984 I

tors, thereby defining the “taxon” or minor race. It would be useful to study the cemetery ,groups by sex within periods with discriminant analysis to see just how diiferent or overlapping the cemetery populations are in morphometric patterns. This method may produce results similar to those of Liptak’s method, but it would make i t easier to define taxa, quantitate differ- ence or similarity (distance) between groups, and offer replicability.

Biochemical Aspects of Evolutionary Biology. Mafthrw H . Nitecki, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982. ix + 324 pp. $17.00 (cloth).

Michael H . Crawford University of Kansas

This volume is based on the proceedings of the Fourth Annual Spring Systematics Sympo- sium, entitled “Biochemical Aspects of Evolu- tionary Biology,” held at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago on May 9, 1981. The contributors to this volume constitute an interdisciplinary melange that includes geneti- cists, systematists, paleontologists, biochemists, botanists, and anthropologists. The unifying theme of the book is molecular evolution and its application to evolutionary biology.

The introductory chapter, by Schopf (a self- professed paleontologst with some recent train- ing in the cloning of eukaryotic organisms), divides the contributions of this volume into two categories. He contrasts the historical or phylo- genetic approach with a population genetic view of evolution, the latter Schopf terms “equilibrium approaches.” Utilizing this dichotomy, three of the chapters are charac- terized as following a phylogenetic approach, but with an emphasis on the continuity of taxa through time. Three of the other chapters rely primarily on interpretations of a “modern equilibrium setting.” One chapter contains a blend of historical and ecological interpreta- tions. I t must be discomforting for Harpending and Ward to learn that their contribution is “at the opposite extreme from relying on historical, phylogenetic data” (p. 6 ) . In the field of anthro- pological genetics, Harpending is one of the strongest advocates of the “historical approach” to the genetic structure of populations.

Chapter 2, by Margulis. is a cogent review of some of the biochemical and ultrastructural

characteristics of living organisms that can be utilized in the development of higher taxonomic groupings. The traditional subdivision of the living world into prokaryotic and eukarvotic organisms was ammended in 1959 by Whittaker to include five kingdoms. Marplis’s examina- tion of the current chemical and structural evidence supports a modified version of Whit- taker’s taxonomy, containing one prokaryotic and four eukaryotic kingdoms.

The chemical composilions of various plant fossils, through the use of “organic geochemical techniques of analysis.” are examined in chapter 3 by Niklas. Instead of considering the evolution of specific molecules through time, he documents the various modifications in the bio- chemical pathways of evolving plants. Niklas utilizes a principal components analysis, based on classes of chemical compounds present in an assortment of plants, to establish evolutionary relationships, or phylogenies. Methodologically. this chapter contains taxonomic rlassificarorv procedures that have been commonly utilized in the evaluation of hominid taxonomy.

In contrast to other contributors to this volume, the authors of the next chapter focus on the genetic variation of local populations. They astutely paint out that there are no em- pirical or theoretical reasons to conclude that local population structure in human aggregates should have any effect on long-term molecular evolution. There is sufficient gene flow among human subdivisions that “the evolution of local biochemical differences and the evolution of species-wide characteristics are nearly un- coupled processes” (p. 215). This conclusion assumes a magnitude of gene flow sufficiently high to result in panmixis of the species over evolutionary time periods.

Harpending and Ward present a useful method for evaluating the relative roles of systematic (migration and selection) versus non- systematic (genetic drift) pressures on subdivid- ed populations. This method is based on the regression of mean per locus heterozygosity (H) on genetic distance from the centroid of gene frequency distribution (rii), They drmonstrate. in the appendix of this chapter, that in an island model the genetic distance and the relative heterozygosity should be linearly related if gene flow with populations outside the region is the same for each island. Those islands that experience the greatest amount of migration should exhibit the highest level of genetic variability and least deviation from the centroid of distribution. The most isolated islands in the