Dental Affinities of The Irmen People, Western Siberia

ARCHAEOLOGY,

ETHNOLOGY

& ANTHROPOLOGY

OF EURASIA

Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 41/3 (2013) 132–139

E-mail: [email protected]

© 2013, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.aeae.2014.03.017

132

Introduction

The Late Bronze Age Irmen culture dates to the 14th–10th centuries BC (Molodin et al., 2009: 72) It was distributed in the Omsk part of the Irtysh basin, the Baraba forest-steppe, Tomsk, Novosibirsk, and Barnaul-Biysk parts of the Ob basin, the Kuznetsk basin, and the Achinsk-Mariinsk forest-steppe. Based on artifacts and funerary rites, the Irmen sites fall in two territorial groups: southwestern (Omsk, Baraba, and Barnaul) and northeastern (Tomsk, Novosibirsk, and Kuznetsk) (Stepanenko, 2012: 11).

Archaeologists hold the view that the Irmen culture originated as a blend of Andronovo (Fedorovka) and autochthonous traditions (Chlenova, 1955; Troitskaya, 1974; Molodin, 1985; Matveyev, 1993; Zakh, 1997; and others). While this idea is plausible in general, some points need to be specified. These include the role of Karasuk and Lugovskaya traditions, affinities of the autochthonous component, reasons underlying

A.V. ZubovaInstitute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences,

Pr. Akademika Lavrentieva 17, Novosibirsk, 630090, RussiaE-mail: [email protected]

DENTAL AFFINITIES OF THE IRMEN PEOPLE, WESTERN SIBERIA

Dental features of the Late Bronze Age Irmen population of Western Siberia (14th–10th centuries BC) were studied on the basis of cranio-dental remains from 23 cemeteries in the Kuznetsk Basin, Baraba forest-steppe, the forest-steppe zone of the Altai, Tomsk and Novosibirsk areas of the Ob basin. The results suggest that the Irmen people originated in the Novosibirsk and Baraba areas from a mixture of Andronovo (Fedorovka) and autochthonous groups. Dental data are inconsistent with the idea that the Karasuk tribes might have taken part in this process. The Karasuk people clearly descended from the Okunevo people, as evidenced by the elevated frequencies of the Carabelli cusp and de ecting wrinkle. None of these traits is present in the Irmen people, who display dental gracility evidently introduced by Andronovo (Fedorovka) tribes.

Keywords: Western Siberia, Bronze Age, Irmen culture, Karasuk culture, Okunevo culture, Andronovo (Fedorovka) culture, dentition, dental nonmetrics.

differences between the Inya and Ob local variants, and the relationship between the Irmen and post-Andronovo cultures such as Korchazhka and Yelovka.

The present study addresses these issues on the basis of nonmetric dental traits of the people buried at Irmen cemeteries in the Kuznetsk Basin, Baraba forest-steppe, Novosibirsk and Tomsk parts of the Ob basin, and forest-steppe Altai.

Twenty three cemeteries were included in the study, and a total number of 167 individuals (males, females, and children were pooled): Baraba, 34; Kuznetsk, 78; Novosibirsk, 28; Altai, 15; and Tomsk, 12. Traits were scored according to A.A. Zubov’s system (Zubov, 2006) (Table 1) using the variation ranges of frequencies of key traits from the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age (Table 2).

Between-group comparison was carried out using the hierarchical cluster analysis based on Euclidean distance and the total linkage algorithm. Frequencies of seven traits were used for the statistical analysis: medial incisors shoveling (grades 2+3), Carabelli cusp (grades 2–5),

ANTHROPOLOGY

A.V. Zubova / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 41/3 (2013) 132–139 133

Table 1. Correspondence between A.A. Zubov’s system and C.G. Turner’s ASUDAS*

Table 2. Variation ranges of dental traits (Mesolithic – Bronze Age)

Traits Zubov’s system ASUDAS

I2 shoveling 0–1 / 2+3 0 / 1–7

Accessory distal cusp on 1 / C5 M1 – / + 0 / 1–5

Carabelli cusp on 1 0–1 / 2–5 0–1 / 2–7

Hypocone reduction (4–) 1 / cusp 4 M1 4, 3+, 3 / 4– 0–3, 5 / 4

Hypocone reduction (3, 3+) 1/ cusp 4 M1 4, 4– / 3, 3+ 4–5 / 0–3

Hypocone reduction (4–) 2 / cusp 4 M2 4, 3+, 3 / 4– 0–3, 5 / 4

Hypocone reduction (3, 3+) 2 / cusp 4 M2 4, 4– / 3, 3+ 4–5 / 0–3

1 shape (1–2) / P1 cusp 3–5 / 1–2 2–5 / 0–1

1 shape (4–5) / P1 cusp 1–3 / 4–5 0–1 / 2–5

2 shape (1–2) / P2 cusp 3–5 / 1–2 2–5 / 0–1

2 shape (4–5) / P2 cusp 1–3 / 4–5 0–1 / 2–5

6 M1 / t6 1 – / + 0 / 1–5

4 1 / hypoconulid M1 – / + 0 / 1–5

(+) 1 – / + – / +

( ) 1 – / + – / +

4 2 / hypoconulid M2 – / + 0 / 1–5

5 2 / hypoconulid M2 – / + 0 / 1–5

(Y) 2 / groove pattern – / + – / +

(+) 2 – / + – / +

( ) 2 – / + – / +

Protostylid 1 0–1 / 2–5 0–4 / 5–7

Tami M1 / cusp 7 1 – / + 0–1a / 2–4

Distal trigonid crest 1 – / + – / +

De ecting wrinkle 1 – / + 0–1 / 2–3

*Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System.

TraitsFrequencies, %

Very low Low Average High Very high

I1 shoveling grades 2+3 0–12.0 12.1–26.1 26.2–52.0 52.1–100 –

I2 shoveling grades 2+3 0–24.6 24.7–46.7 46.8–81.0 81.1–100 –

Carabelli cusp 1 grades 2–5 0–7.8 7.9–20.0 20.1–35.2 35.3–71.9 71.1 – x

Hypocone reduction 2 grades 3, 3+ pooled 0–18.0 18.1–30.8 30.9–44.9 45.0–60.0 60.1 – x

Six-cusped 1 – 0–4.9 5.0–10.0 10.1–24.1 24.2 – x

Four-cusped 1 0–6.6 6.7–12.5 12.6–22.9 23.0–40.5 40.6 – x

Four-cusped 2 0–29.3 29.4–66.7 66.8–82.1 82.2–91.5 91.5 – x

Tami – 0–3.9 4.0–8.9 9.0–15.5 15.6 – x

Distal trigonid crest 1 – 0–8.9 9.0–16.1 16.2–32.4 32.5 – x

De ecting wrinkle 1 – 0–9.1 9.2–22.2 22.3–48.9 49.0 – x

134 A.V. Zubova / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 41/3 (2013) 132–139

hypocone reduction on the upper second molars (grades 3 and 3+), six-cusped and four-cusped lower rst molars, distal trigonid crest and de ecting wrinkle on the lower rst molars. Normally the battery includes one more trait – four-cusped lower second molars, however, this was not used on this occasion because respective data for most Karasuk groups are unavailable.

Results

Baraba forest-steppe (Preobrazhenka-3, Abramovo-4, Sopka-2). Maxillary teeth show a moderate frequency of medial incisor shoveling, the absence of accessory distal cusps on molars, and an average occurrence of Carabelli cusp (Table 3). The latter trait displays considerable differences between the sexes. The frequency is quite high in males and comparatively low in females. In the pooled group, the rst molars are not reduced whereas the second molars are moderately reduced.

Mandibular teeth show an elevated occurrence of simple second premolars, an absence of six-cusped rst molars, and a high frequency of four-cusped rst molars. The second molars are mostly gracile, and only one case of the ve-cusped condition was observed. On the rst molars, the Y pattern is predominant, and on the second molars, the + pattern predominates. The frequency of distal trigonid crest is somewhat elevated, whilst that of the de ecting wrinkle is high. The former trait was observed only in males, the latter only in females. Two cases of protostylid on the rst molars and one case of tami were also observed.

Forest-steppe Altai (Novotroitskoye-1, Pilno, Blizhnie Yelbany-4, Plotinnaya-1). Among the maxillary teeth, a moderately elevated frequency of shoveling was observed on medial incisors, but none on lateral incisors (Table 3). Molars have no accessory cusps. The occurrence of slightly reduced rst molars is low. The reduction degree of the second molars is also low, and hypocone reduction grades 3 and 3+ were observed in less than 30 % of individuals.

On the mandibular teeth, the intermediate form (3) of the premolars is relatively frequent. Differentiated rst premolars and simple second premolars were not

observed. The percentage of six-cusped rst molars is moderately high. At the same time, the frequency of gracile rst molars is also high; in one case, an extremely gracile second molar (Y3 type) was observed. On the rst molars, the X and Y patterns are equally frequent whereas the + pattern is rarer. The protostylid and deflecting wrinkle were not observed, but the protostylid pit is quite frequent. The occurrtency of tami is relatively high and the distal trigonid crest is even more common.

Kuznetsk Basin (Zhuravlevo-1, 3, and 4, Zarechnoye-1, Tanay-2 and 7, Vaganovo-2). Upper

medial incisor shoveling is frequent, and the occurrence of lateral incisor shoveling is moderate, the Carabelli cusp and accessory distal cusps are rare, and hypocone reduction on the maxillary molars is moderate (Table 3). Fours-cusped lower rst molars are frequent whereas six-cusped ones are rare. Both the rst and second molars mostly demonstrate the Y pattern. Protostylid cusps are absent, and the occurrence of tami is relatively high. The de ecting wrinkle was not observed while the distal trigonid crest is rather common.

Tomsk area (Yelovskiy-2, Kamen-1). Dental remains from the Irmen cemeteries in the region are poorly preserved. No shoveling on maxillary medial incisors was observed, and the frequency of this trait on lateral incisors is low (Table 3). No accessory distal cusps on upper molars or Carabelli cusp were met. The hypocone reduction degree is quite low whereas the gracilization of mandibular rst molars is pronounced. The predominant pattern on maxillary first molars is Y whereas the X and + patterns occur with equal frequency. On the second molars, the + pattern is observed most often, followed by X pattern, Y being the rarest. Neither elements of the protostylid system nor tami nor the distal trigonid crest nor the de ecting wrinkle were recorded. Notably, the frequency of eastern traits in this group is the lowest of all.

Novosibirsk area (Milovanovo-1, Ordynskoye, Katkovo-3, Burmistrovo, Krokhalevka-13, Spirino-1, Sokolovo-Kolyvan). The maxi l lary dent i t ion demonstrates a moderate occurrence of shovel-shaped incisors and additional distal cusps, and a low occurrence of the Carabelli cusp (Table 3). The rst molars are not reduced, whereas the second molars are reduced to a considerable extent. Simple second premolars occur quite frequently.

Among the mandibular teeth, six-cusped rst molars are absent, whereas the occurrence of four-cusped molars is elevated. Both the + and Y patterns are moderately frequent on the first molars, and predominate on the second molars (their occurrence is nearly the same). In one instance, a protostylid was observed on the rst molars. Protostylid pits are much more common (26.3 % of individuals). In one individual the tami is present on the rst molars. The distal trigonid crest is relatively frequent,

whereas the de ecting wrinkle is absent.The pooled Irmen group is characterized by a

moderate frequency of shoveling, and a low occurrence of the Carabelli cusp, distal trigonid crest, six-cusped lower rst molars, and de ecting wrinkle. The reduction level

of the maxillary molars is average, and the mandibular molars are rather gracile.

Despite considerable variation, differences between local Irmen groups are lower than those between the Andronovo groups of the same territory. While the Andronovo population was subdivided into distinct


Table 3. Dental trait frequencies in Irmen groups

subpopulations exhibiting features of all the contrasting variants within the Western dental stock (Zubova, 2012), the northern Caucasoid tendency is virtually absent in all Irmen groups.

Next the Irmen populations were compared with other ancient groups of southwestern Siberia (Table 4), which were tentatively subdivided into three chronological subgroups. The rst subgroup includes pre-Andronovo samples: Neolithic (the Kuznetsk-Altai culture and Baraba Neolithic), Chalcolithic (Bolshemysskaya culture), and Early and Middle Bronze Age (Ust-Tartas, Odinovskoye,

Krotovo, Okunevo, Karakol, and Rostovka). The second subgroup consists of Andronovo (Fedorovka) samples and those from contemporaneous burial grounds continuing the local cultural tradition – late Krotovo from Baraba and those of the Cherno-Ozerye variant in the Omsk area (Cherno-Ozerye-1 and Borovyanka XVII). The third subgroup comprises series representing post-Andronovo cultures (Yelovka, Korchazhka, Pakhomovskaya, and Karasuk).

On the dendrogram (see Figure), several clusters are evident. The rst includes all Okunevo series, most

Note: n – number of individuals.

Traits Kuznetsk Basin Novosibirsk

areaBaraba forest-

steppeAltai forest-

steppe Tomsk area

N % n % n % n % n %

I1 shoveling (2+3) 70 57.06 14 35.70 5 40.00 4 50.00 4 0

I2 shoveling (2+3) 85 50.87 11 63.60 10 70.00 3 0 4 25.00

Accessory cusp 1 87 8.32 18 16.70 22 0 10 0 7 0

Carabelli cusp 1 (2–5) 134 15.60 20 10.00 22 27.30 9 0 8 0

Hypocone reduction 1 (4–) 137 9.54 25 4.00 22 0 11 18.20 8 0

Hypocone reduction 1 (3, 3+) 137 0.30 25 0 22 0 11 0 8 0

Hypocone reduction 2 (4–) 127 46.31 25 48.00 23 39.10 12 50.00 8 75.00

Hypocone reduction 2 (3, 3+) 2 127 41.28 25 48.00 23 30.40 12 25.00 8 12.50

1 shape (1–2) 126 73.20 20 95.00 19 68.40 5 60.00 6 66.70

1 shape (4–5) 106 14.14 20 0 19 10.50 5 0 6 16.70

2 shape (1–2) 99 15.28 20 60.00 20 35.00 6 0 5 20.00

2 shape (4–5) 99 76.16 20 0 20 40.00 6 66.70 5 80.00

6 1 123 4.54 25 4.00 17 0 10 10.00 8 0

4 1 123 26.65 25 24.00 17 23.50 10 50.00 8 37.50

(+) 1 (4–6) 110 23.51 21 28.60 15 13.30 9 11.10 5 20.00

( ) 1 (4–6) 107 2.31 21 23.80 15 20.00 9 11.10 5 20.00

4 2 116 87.56 24 91.70 21 95.20 9 77.80 7 100.00

5 2 116 12.44 24 4.20 21 4.80 9 11.10 7 0

(Y) 2 113 58.65 23 26.10 20 40.00 9 33.30 5 20.00

(+) 2 113 38.88 23 43.50 20 75.00 9 22.20 5 60.00

( ) 2 113 10.42 23 39.10 20 30.00 9 33.30 5 40.00

Protostylid 1 (2–5) 123 0.35 25 4.00 23 8.70 10 0 6 0

Tami M1 94 11.21 23 8.70 23 4.30 10 10.00 6 0

Distal trigonid crest 1 86 18.00 18 16.70 13 15.40 8 12.50 3 0

De ecting wrinkle 1 79 0 16 0 6 33.30 4 0 2 0


Table 4. Dental samples used for comparative analysis

Series Date Source

Kuznetsk-Altai culture (Lebedi-2, Vaskovo-4) 4th millennium BC Chikisheva, 2012

Same (Solontsy-5) Same Same

Same (Ust-Isha) “ Own data

Bolshemysskaya culture (Itkul, Nizhne-Tytkeskenskaya-1) “ Chikisheva, 2012

Neolithic, Baraba forest-steppe (Sopka-2, Protoka, Korchugan) 6th–5th millennia BC Same

Ust-Tartas culture (Sopka-2) 4th – early 3rd millennia BC “

Odinovskaya culture (Sopka-2) Early 3rd millennium BC “

Krotovo culture (Sopka-2) Late 3rd – early 2nd millennia BC “

Late Krotovo culture (Sopka-2) Early 2nd millennium BC “

Karakol culture Same “

Cemeteries near Okunevo, Omsk area Late 3rd – early 2nd millennia BC Own data

Okunevo culture (Chernovaya VIII) 17th–13th centuries BC Zubov, 1980

Same (Itkol-1) Same Own data

Same (Verkh-Askyz-1) “ Same

Same (Uibat-5) “ “

Rostovka Late 3rd – early 2nd millennia BC “

Cherno-Ozerye-1 Early 2nd millennium BC “

Borovyanka XVII Same “

Korchazhka culture, Kuznetsk Basin Late 2nd millennium BC “

Yelovka culture, Tomsk area Same “

Pakhomovka culture (Novo-Shadrino VII) “ “

Same (Baraba forest-steppe, pooled) “ “

Karasuk culture (pooled) “ Rykushina, 2007

Same (Yerba group) “ Same

Same (left-bank group) “ “

Same (right-bank group) “ “

Same (northern group) “ “

Same (southern group) “ “

Fedorovka culture, Minusinsk Basin Early 2nd millennium BC Rykushina, 1977

Same, forest-steppe Altai Same Zubova, 2012

Same, Novosibirsk area “ Same

Same (Baraba forest-steppe) “ “

Same (Kuznetsk Basin) “ “

Karasuk series, and those from the Omsk area (except Cherno-Ozerye-1). It does not include any Andronovo or Irmen samples. Within the second cluster there is a distinct subcluster consisting of Bronze Age groups from Baraba (all except Pakhomovskaya) and several

smaller subclusters which include all Andronovo and Irmen samples, Cherno-Ozerye-1, Yelovka, Korchazhka, Pakhomovskaya, and Baraba Neolithic.

The results suggest that Irmen and Karasuk are unrelated, and that there is no reason to suppose that either


Karasuk or pre-Karasuk populations in uenced the Irmen in any way. They are quite different in two important respects. Firstly, the Karasuk groups display a very high frequency of Carabelli cusp on the maxillary rst molars and of de ecting wrinkle on the mandibular rst molars. In modern groups, this combination is indicative of northern Caucasoid affinities. In Irmen groups, by contrast, the Carabelli cusp is much rarer whereas the de ecting wrinkle is present in one local group only.

Secondly, the Irmen people display a much higher frequency of four-cusped lower first molars – a trait suggestive of southern Caucasoid af nities. Therefore we can speak not only of an absence of parallels between Irmen and Karasuk but, also of their very different af nities.

To all appearances, the northern Caucasoid component of the Karasuk people stems from the Okunevo groups, all of which display high frequencies of both Carabelli cusp and the de ecting wrinkle (Table 5). The southern Caucasoid component in the Irmen people, on the

other hand, may be related to Andronovo (Fedorovka) populations, which were mostly characterized by unusually gracile molars (Zubova, 2012). Fedorovka af nities of Karasuk people are much less expressed, Okunevo af nities being predominant.

The nature of the relationships between the Fedorovka and Irmen series (see Figure) is consistent with the idea that the ancestors of the Irmen people were Fedorovka populations and certain autochthonous groups, and that the Irmen population likely originated in the Baraba forest-steppe and the Novosibirsk area rather than in the Kuznetsk Basin or the Altai steppe. In the dendrogram, three later populations are similar to the Korchazhka group, upholding the hypothesis that this group may be intermediate between Andronovo and Irmen. At the same time, the distribution of dental trait frequencies in the local Irmen groups and the position of those groups in the dendrogram indicate an absence of important differences between the Inya and Ob groups. Owing to the presence of the de ecting wrinkle, the most speci c series is that from

Dendrogram resulting from the clustering of southwestern Siberian groups on the basis of dental trait frequencies.

1 – Bolshemysskaya (Itkul, Nizhne-Tytkeskenskaya-1); 2 – Karakol; 3 – Krotovo; 4 – Lebedi-2, Vaskovo-4; 5 – Baraba Neolithic (Sopka-2, Protoka, Korchugan); 6 – Odinovskoye; 7 – Okunevo (Chernovaya VIII); 8 – Okunevo proper; 9 – Okunevo (Itkol-1); 10 – Okunevo (Verkh-Askyz-1); 11 – Okunevo (Uibat-5); 12 – Late Krotovo; 13 – Rostovka; 14 – Solontsy-5; 15 – Ust-Isha; 16 – Ust-Tartas; 17 – Cherno-Ozerye-1; 18 – Borovyanka-17; 19 – Irmen, Kuznetsk Basin; 20 – Korchazhka, Kuznetsk Basin; 21 – Yelovka, Tomsk area; 22 – Irmen, Tomsk area; 23 – Irmen, Novosibirsk area; 24 – Irmen, steppe Altai; 25 – Irmen, Baraba forest-steppe; 26 – Pakhomovka (Novo-Shadrino-7); 27 – Pakhomovka, Baraba forest-steppe; 28 – Karasuk (pooled group); 29 – Karasuk (Yerba group); 30 – Karasuk (left-bank Yenisei); 31 – Karasuk (right-bank Yenisei); 32 – Karasuk (northern group); 33 – Karasuk (southern group); 34 – Fedorovka, Altai; 35 – Fedorovka, Novosibirsk area; 36 – Fedorovka, Baraba forest-steppe;

37 – Fedorovka, Kuznetsk Basin; 38 – Fedorovka, Minusinsk Basin.


Table 5. Frequencies of dental traits in Irmen, Karasuk, and Okunevo groups of Western Siberia

Baraba. This, however, may be due to the distinctness of the Fedorovka population from which it originated.

Conclusions

Dental features of the Irmen people of Western Siberia suggest that this people originated mostly from a mixture of Andronovo (Fedorovka) and autochthonous populations of the Novosibirsk area and Baraba forest-steppe. In the Kuznetsk Basin and the Altai forest-steppe, the transformation of the Fedorovka traditions was caused by the Korchazhka culture.

The second important fact revealed by dental data is the absence of af nities between Irmen and Karasuk. The distribution of key dental markers suggests that the Karasuk people originated in situ (i.e. in the Minusinsk Basin) from the Okunevo people, who were likewise autochthonous, whereas the Fedorovka in uence on the Karasuk people was minor. The Irmen people, by contrast, display a trait combination (notably gracility) suggestive

of southern Caucasoid af nities. The same combination is found in the Fedorovka people and was evidently introduced by them. Features indicative of the local roots of Irmen in the Upper Ob basin and in the Baraba forest-steppe differ from those which are characteristic of the Okunev people of the Minusinsk Basin.

References

Chikisheva T.A. 2012Dinamika antropologicheskogo sostava naseleniya yuga

Zapadnoi Sibiri v epokhi neolita – rannego zheleza. Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN.

Chlenova N.L. 1955O kulturakh bronzovoi epokhi lesostepnoi polosy Zapadnoi

Sibiri. Sovetskaya arkheologiya, vol. 23: 38–57.Matveyev A.V. 1993Irmenskaya kultura v lesostepnom Priobye. Novosibirsk:

Izd. Novosib. Gos. Univ.Molodin V.I. 1985Baraba v epokhu bronzy. Novosibirsk: Nauka.

Groups

I1 sh

ovel

ing

(2+3

)

Car

abel

li cu

sp

1 (2

–5)

Hyp

ocon

e re

duct

ion

2 (3,

3+)

6 1

4 1

4 2

Dis

tal t

rigon

id c

rest

1

De

ect

ing

wrin

kle

1

Sou

rce

Irmen:

Kuznetsk Basin 57.06 15.60 41.28 4.54 26.65 87.56 18.00 0 This study

Tomsk area 0 0 12.50 0 37.50 100 0 0 Same

Novosibirsk area 36.36 12.50 55.00 0 21.05 100 14.29 0 “

Forest-steppe Altai 50.00 0 25.00 10.00 50.00 77.78 12.50 0 “

Karasuk, Minusinsk Basin:

Yerba group 100.00 54.20 18.20 3.70 7.40 … 6.30 30.80 Rykushina. 2007

Left-bank group 40.00 48.40 23.70 17.60 11.80 … 7.70 30.00 Same

Right-bank group 60.00 50.00 28.60 20.00 6.70 … 12.50 57.10 “

Northern group 35.70 46.20 33.70 5.20 8.60 … 7.10 15.80 “

Southern group 0 80.00 0 0 20.00 … 0 0 “

Karasuk, Minusinsk Basin, pooled 46.10 46.90 31.20 8.40 8.40 88.80 8.60 30.40 “

Okunevo, Minusinsk Basin:

Chernovaya VIII 59.40 24.30 58.32 17.64 2.94 31.35 30.00 52.38 Zubov. 1980

Verkh-Askyz-1 11.10 42.90 40.00 10.50 0 61.10 64.30 16.70 Own data

Uibat-5 42.90 55.60 88.90 12.50 0 42.86 33.30 33.30 Same

Itkol-1 75.00 70.00 38.46 0 0 0 50.00 0 “


Molodin V.I., Parzinger H., Krivonogov S.K., Kazansky A.Yu., Chemyakina M.A., Matasova G.G., Vasilyevskii A.N., Ovcharenko A.S., Grishin A.E., Ermakova N.V., Dergacheva M.I., Fedeneva I.N., Nekrasova O.A., Mylnikova L.N., Durakov I.A., Kobeleva L.S., Zubova A.V., Chikisheva T.A., Pozdnyakov D.V., Pilipenko A.S., Romaschenko A.G., Kulikov I.V., Kobzev V.F., Novikova O.I., Vasilyev S.K., Schneeweiss J., Privat K., Boldyrev V.V.. Drebuschak V.A., Drebuschak T.N., Derevianko E.I., Borodovsky A.P., Bourgarit D., 1. Reiche I., Kuzminykh S.V., Marchenko Zh.V. 2009Chicha – gorodische perekhodnogo ot bronzy k zhelezu

vremeni v Barabinskoi lesostepi, vol. 3. Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN.

Rykushina G.V. 1977Odontologicheskaya kharakteristika karasukskoi kultury.

Voprosy antropologii, iss. 57: 143–154.Rykushina G.V. 2007Paleoantropologiya karasukskoi kultury. Moscow: Staryi

sad.

Stepanenko D.V. 2012Pogrebalnyi obryad irmenskoi i pozdneirmenskoi kultur:

Opyt mnogomernogo statisticheskogo analiza. Cand. Sc. (History) Dissertation. Novosibirsk.

Troitskaya T.N. 1974Karasukskaya epokha v Novosibirskom Priobye. In Bron-

zovyi i zheleznyi vek Sibiri. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 32–46.Zakh V.A. 1997Epokha bronzy Prisalairya. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Zubov A.A. 1980Kharakteristika zubnoi sistemy v cherepnoi serii iz Oku-

nevskogo mogilnika. In Paleoantropologiya Sibiri. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 9–18.

Zubov A.A. 2006Metodicheskoe posobie po antropologicheskomu analizu

odontologicheskikh materialov. Moscow: Etno-Onlain.Zubova A.V. 2012Proiskhozhdeniye naseleniya andronovskoi (fedorovskoi)

kultury Zapadnoi Sibiri. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnogra i, No. 2: 70–78.

Received February 13, 2013.Received in revised form March 18, 2013.

Documents

Dental Affinities of The Irmen People, Western Siberia