13 ответов в этой теме

[Skalagrim]

ANTHROPOLOGICAL AND POPULATION GENETIC CHARACTERISATION OF THE
ESTONIANS

(WITH RETROSPECT TO BAER’S OBSERVATIONS)

Leiu Heapost* & Mart Viikmaa**



∗ Department of Archaeology, Institute of History, Rььtli str. 6, EE–10130 Tallinn, Estonia
∗∗ Institute of General and Molecular Pathology, Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of Tartu, Ьlikooli str. 18, EE–
50090 Tartu, Estonia

Вложенные файлы

•  10Heapost.pdf   1,06 МБ   16 Скачано

[Skalagrim]

Baer’s observations
In his doctoral dissertation Morbis inter Esthonos Endemicis (1814) Karl Ernst von Baer presented
anthropological observations about the Estonians. Baer notes first of all that the Estonians belong to the
peoples of Finnic origin as they are very close to the Finns who live in Finland, and there is a certain similarity
between Estonians, Lapps, Mordvinians, Cheremissians and other tribes of Finnic origin (Baer, 1976:22).
Further Baer describes the body-build and mentality of the Estonians, trying to find a connection between
these two characters. He writes that the body of Estonians is rather racy than skinny. Most of the Estonians are
of medium stature; the face is mostly quite bloated, indolent, without peculiar features, and pale. Hair is mostly
blond, often white in childhood; black hair with darkish complexion also occurs. The physical strength is quite
average, temperament, in general, phlegmatic with a slight inclination to melancholy. That might be the reason
why their body is not particularly receptive to diseases and as concerns their mind, it only rarely loses its usual
nature. In the proper sense of the word, only very few of the Estonians are melancholic – those whom he noted
above as the ones with black hair. As a matter of fact, they are short of stature, but with a firmer and stronger
frame. They are more serious, obstinate and reserved than the majority, who are phlegmatic. While the face of
the latter expresses dullness, the expression of melancholics is that of concealed indignation. There is a great
difference, however, between the Estonians living in the northern part of the country and those in the environs
of Dorpat (Tartu). The latter exceed the former by the stature and their face which expresses frankness is more
easily understandable than that of their fellow countrymen living in the vicinity of Reval (Tallinn); their face is
not bloated, they are a little more active, not so slow, and more friendly towards the people of another class
(Baer, 1976:29–30).
Further on it appears that this characterisation applies to Estonian males. Women are of quite a different
kind. Baer writes that the national characterisation given above can scarcely be attributed to Estonian girls.
They are more vivacious, impetuous, more cheerful and singing while working, the thing that men particularly
do not do. Their hair is more yellowish than that of men and none of them has black hair (Baer, 1976:30).
These descriptions, of course, reveal the difficulties, which a German-born researcher came across in
communication with Estonians. It is also clear that these characteristics are based on comparatively limited
estimations and not on measurements or other kind of statistical evaluations. But we would like to point out
Baerґs sharp-sighted observations indicating that there are various anthropological types among the Estonians,
while substantial regional differences also occur.

[Skalagrim]

Diversity of the anthropological types of Estonians
After Baer, in the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, several studies dealing with the
anthropology of Estonians were published, but these comprised few data, often of confined local character.
An extensive study of the anthropological characteristics of Estonians began in the 1920–30s. From that
time general anthropological variability, also craniological, odontological, dermatoglyphic and genetic traits
have been studied. A pioneer in this sphere was Juhan Aul, who carried out solid anthropological
measurements all over Estonia. He measured altogether over 50,000 Estonians (adults, children, teenagers),
and for comparison also local non-Estonians – Germans, Swedes, Russians – and representatives of
neighbouring peoples. In his profound monograph “Àíòðîïîëîãèÿ ýñòîíöåâ” (Àóëü 1964), based on the
measurements of over 15,000 Estonian young men, he presents numerous body and head measurements, also
the colour of hair and eyes, i.e. somatological traits. A number of tables and maps on the distribution of the
traits by parishes and counties have been added.
According to somatometric traits, Estonians can be characterised as people of high stature and,
correspondingly, with large measurements of the head and face. Regional differences between Estonians are
determined by somatometric traits. J. Aul distinguished two main anthropological types among the Estonians –
the West-Baltic and the East-Baltic type. Both types are purely Europoid according to J. Aul´s estimation.
They are characterised by light eyes and fair hair. The most important differences between the two types are
following: the West-Baltic type is very high of stature, comparatively dolichocephalic, with a narrower and
higher face. The East-Baltic type has somewhat shorter stature; it is more brachycephalic, with a comparatively
wider and lower face. Both types are spread all over Estonia (Fig. 1), but the West-Baltic type predominates in
West Estonia, in the northern part of Pärnu county, in the western part of Harju county, also in some adjacent 99
to them parishes of Järva and Viljandi counties, while the main distribution area of the East-Baltic type is East
Estonia from one side and some places in South-West Estonia from the other side. That type is also common in
the neighbouring areas east of Estonia. The territories of the distribution of the East- and West-Baltic types are
not isolated from one another; large overlapping areas connect them. J. Aul points out the originality of the
Estonians comparing the West-Baltic type with the Skandinavian type of the Atlanto-Baltic race and the
Estonian East-Baltic type with a more eastern variant even. The cephalic index of the Skandinavian type is
smaller than that of the Estonian West-Baltic type. Differences in the head breadth and the shape of face are
especially noticeable; the Skandinavian type has considerably smaller head, face and mandibula breadths than
western Estonians; the face is also a little lower. The Estonian East-Baltic type has somewhat higher stature
than the more eastern form of that. The East-Baltic type in South-East Estonia (especially in Petseri district)
slightly differs also from the northern variant in Estonia (Àóëü 1964:349). In his work J. Aul indicates a large
distribution area of the East-Baltic type extending in north and south, but especially in east direction, failing to
specify the exact borders and the centre of this area.

[Skalagrim]

Indexes of Mongoloidness and Pigmentation
Karin Mark has studied somatological traits of the Estonians and other Finno-Ugric peoples in many
aspects. As great anthropological variety is typical of Finno-Ugric peoples and among them there occur
variants of traits common to eastern peoples (so-called Mongoloid addition), K. Mark has profoundly studied
also those traits which clearly indicate the differences between Europoid and Mongoloid great races. She has
derived and introduced the indexes of Mongoloidness and Pigmentation. The first of them is based on eight
somatoscopic primary traits (as beard growth, cheekbone prominence, direction of eye-slit, etc.). Differences in
the distribution of these traits between Estonian regions are not great and sometimes they even show an
opposite trend. Altogether they still give a clear east-west tendency. Index of Mongoloidness (MI) shows the
position of a group or a region on the scale of Mongoloidness in comparison with the other Finno-Ugric
peoples and its neighbours.
The mean value of MI of the Estonians is 24.8. The smallest MI value has been recorded in West Estonia
(22.0), followed by the West Islands and North Estonia (23.7), then South-West (24.7), and South-East and
North-East (about 26) Estonia (Mark, 1994:51).


Fig. 1. Anthropological types in Estonia (from Mark, 1994:8): 1 – strong
predominance of East-Baltic type; 2 – predominance of East-Baltic type; 3 – nearly
even distribution of East- and West-Baltic types; 4 – predominance of West-Baltic
type; 5 – strong predominance of West-Baltic type.

[Skalagrim]

According to K. Mark the population of West Estonia is almost entirely Europoid.The Mongoloid addition, which is obviously connected with the East-Baltic
anthropological type, becomes more noticeable when proceeding to the east. The lowest MI value among other
peoples studied was recorded among Finnish Swedes (10.1), followed by western Finns (16.3) and the
Russians of Volga districts (18.1). According to the increase of MI value the compared Finno-Ugric peoples
can be set in order as follows: Mordvinians-Erza (21.6), Izhorians (26.1), Karelians (28.0), eastern Finns
(29.5), Vepses (30.1), Mordvinians-Moksha (32.8), Komis (about 36), Lapps (46.6), Maris (48.3), Khants and
Mansi (about 85). It is interesting to note that the difference between the western and eastern Finns is
comparatively great, while respective differences in Estonia are quite trifling. The positions of the Estonians
and some other Baltic Finns and Finnish Swedes on the scale of Mongoloidness are shown in Figure 2.


Fig. 2. Index of Mongoloidness (MI) in Baltic Finns and Finnish Swedes (from
Mark, 1994:65). 1 – Finnish Swedes, 2 – western Finns, 3 – eastern Finns, 4 –
western Estonians, 5 – northeastern Estonians, 6 – southeastern Estonians, 7 –
Izhorians, 8 – Karelians, 9 – Vepses.


Fig. 3. Index of Pigmentation (PI) in Baltic Finns and Finnish Swedes from Mark,
1994:68). Numeration as in Fig. 2.

[Skalagrim]

The colour of eyes and hair are the pigmentation traits of interest. These traits vary quite largely among
Estonians, but light colours are still predominant. In his capital work J. Aul (Àóëü 1964:34) states that for the
average degree of the lightness of eye colour only very few peoples can compete with the Estonians. The hair
colour of Estonians is comparatively even lighter. K. Mark also made use of the so-called Pigmentation index
(PI) in which hair and eye colours are summarised. A value of PI from 0 to 20 indicates a very light
pigmentation on the scale of Northern and Eastern Europe; values from 20 to 40 indicate light pigmentation,
values 40 to 60 indicate medium pigmentation, etc. According to PI the populations of the West Islands, the
Setu and the southwest region are of a bit darker pigmentation (PI 22.3–23.4) and the value of it indicates light
pigmentation. In the other regions pigmentation is very light, especially in North-East, Central, and North
Estonia (PI 12.6–13.8) (Mark, 1994:53). In comparison with the neighbouring peoples, the very light
pigmentation of Estonians is especially conspicuous. Of the peoples of the Baltic states the Latvians and
Lithuanians have a slightly darker pigmentation of eyes and a noticeably darker hair pigmentation than the
Estonians (PI, accordingly, 22.5, 25.8 and 17.8). All the Balto-Finnic peoples and also Finnish Swedes have
light or even very light pigmentation. Among them the lightest pigmentation have northeast Estonians (PI
11.2), eastern Finns (15.0) and west Estonians (17.8); southeast Estonians have a slightly darker pigmentation
(20.0), then follow Izhorians (22.5), western Finns (22.5), Finnish Swedes (25.8), Karelians (26.0) and Vepses
(34.4) (Mark, 1994:67; Fig. 3).
K. Mark has examined the MI and PI values on a correlation field (Fig. 4). It appears that there is no
positive correlation between the values of these two indexes: most of the groups with larger values of MI
belong to the lightest ones as concerns PI (as Central and North-East Estonia). The same phenomenon appears
in Finland and also among some other Finno-Ugric peoples. On the basis of that K. Mark assumes that a strong
depigmentation process has already taken place in the groups having Mongoloid admixture. Thus, the most
depigmented are northeast Estonians and eastern Finns, but they are not the most Europoid (with the lowest
value of MI) populations (to which belong the Finnish Swedes and western Finns). Comparatively close to
Baltic Finns by their light pigmentation are Mordvinians-Erza and Komi-Zyrians (PI 34.9 and 36.6) while
Mordvinians-Erza (MI 21.6) like western Finns are more Europoid than Estonians.


Fig. 4. Correlation of indexes of Mongoloidness (MI) and Pigmentation (PI) in
Estonian regions.

[Skalagrim]

Somatometrical traits. Stature
According to somatometrical traits the closest to Estonians are Finns, followed by Mordvinians-Erza,
Karelians, Trans-Carpathian Hungarians, Mordvinians-Moksha, Izhorians, Komi-Zyrians and Vepses. It
appears that the Mordvinians, Komi-Zyrians and Trans-Carpathian Hungarians do not generally differ from the
Estonians more than eastern Balto-Finnic peoples, but the differences observed are based on different
combinations of traits. Other Finno-Ugric peoples differ more from the Estonians.
From all the somatometrical traits the stature is most studied. The Estonians is one of the tallest peoples in
Eurasia. So, for example, the tallest men born in the middle of the 19th century and recruited for the Russian
Army came from Kurland (average stature 167 cm), from Livonia and Estonia (166.7 cm) (Анучин 1889).
According to J. Aul 66.6 % of the Estonian men belong to the category of tall or very tall men (proceeding
from Martinґs well-known classification of body height, according to which the body height of men is
estimated as follows: below 150 cm – very short stature, 150 to 159 cm – short stature, 160 to 169 cm – high
stature, and over 180 cm – very high stature). The tallest men in Estonia lived on Muhu Island, in Lддnemaa,
northern Pдrnumaa and in Saaremaa, the shortest men – in northern Tartumaa, southern Vхrumaa and
especially in Setumaa. Comparing the Estonians with kinsmen and neighbouring peoples, J. Aul established
that Estonians belonged to the tallest people, and only Livonians, Swedes and Norwegians turned out to be a
little taller (Ауль 1964:46).
Besides genetic factors, the human stature also depends on the environmental factors. In the course of time
the body height has gone through quite big changes according to the secular trend. An increase of the height in
time can be observed in all the regions of Estonia through all the generations studied. For decades the tallest
men came from Lддnemaa. During a period of five decades (1800–1849) the stature increased on an average by
2.7 cm (from 166.4 cm to 169.1 cm) in Lддnemaa. During the same period the average body height of men
born in Harjumaa increased by 3.2 cm (from 165.5 to 168.7 cm). The number of short men is bigger in
Jдrvamaa and Virumaa. The men born in these regions in 1800–1809 had an average height of 164.3 cm
(Aarma, 1987:127). Regional differences remained regardless of the secular trend. These differences can be
connected with anthropological types (West- and East-Baltic types). The tempo of stature increase has
changed. The secular trend has accelerated especially since the 1920s. The average height of the Estonian men
in the 1930s was 172.03 cm, varying from 174.2 cm on Muhu Island to 170.1 cm in Petserimaa (Ауль
1964:49). In the 1970s the average height was 173.3 cm (on West-Estonian Islands and mainland – 175–176
cm, in East Estonia it was smaller – 171 cm in the Setu group) (Mark, 1994:87). Good examples of an increase
in stature are those of Saaremaa and Muhumaa. According to the 1992 records the body height of 18–60 years
old men on Muhu Island and in western Saaremaa (Lьmanda district) varied as follows: in the group of 35–60
years old men – 177 cm, and in the group of 18–34 years old men – 180 cm (Heapost, 1997).

[Skalagrim]

Odontological traits
Anthropological odontology deals with varying traits of teeth. Odontological traits are racial peculiarities,
divided into so-called ”eastern” and ”western” traits. The distribution frequency of eastern traits increases in
east direction and attains its maximum in Mongoloid populations; the frequency of western traits increases in
west direction. Complexes of traits characterising different odontological types have been established (Зубов
1979). The types established mainly in East European (former SU) regions are: the southern gracile
odontological type in the Caucasus; the Central European type occurring mainly in Lithuania, Byelorussia, the
Ukraine, in Central and Southern Russia; the northern gracile type, which is mainly spread among Finno-Ugric
peoples, but also occurs among Latvians and northern Russians; and the North European relic type, which is
also typical of Finno-Ugrians, but has been recorded among eastern Latvians, too.
Galina Sarap (1994) has studied the distribution of odontological traits and odontological types among
Estonians. According to her studies one can find the following odontological types on the territory of Estonia:
1) The Central European type on western islands and in West Estonia, and in some parts of northern, eastern
and southern Estonia. This type is characterised by a low frequency of eastern traits and a high frequency of
western traits, and by strong reduction of lower molars. It is a Baltic variant of the Central European
odontological type. The majority of Lithuanians, western Latvians, Russians from Central Russia and some
groups of Swedes are representatives of the classical form of that type. 2) The northern gracile type is spread in
central and northeast parts of Estonia, and in some parts of North, South-West and South-East Estonia. The
type is characterised by a high frequency of eastern and western features occurring in parallel, and a strong
reduction of lower molars. That type is common among southwestern and northwestern Finns, Karelians and
Maris. 3) The influence of the North European relic type is noticeable in North, East and South Estonia. In a
pure form, this type occurs among northeastern Finns, Lapps and Komis, in a mixed form also among eastern
Latvians. A peculiarity of this type lies in the coexistence of western features in a moderate frequency, and of
some typical eastern features in a high frequency.
A conspicuous peculiarity of the northern gracile type is well expressed in the quantity of ISC (Index of the
Specific Combination). Usually, ISC does not exceed 150 (neither in Europoids nor in Mongoloids), but it is
always larger among the representatives of the northern gracile type, attaining the value 200–300 and even
higher.
The regional distribution of ISC indicator in Estonia is rather interesting (Sarap, 1994:232). North-East
Estonia is especially prominent with ISC (502). Very high values of ISC (300–500) also occur in several South
Estonian groups. Somewhat lower, but yet comparatively high values of ISC (220–290) have been recorded in
Central Estonia. In all these regions, in G. Sarapґs opinion, predominates the northern gracile type, however,
with an addition of other types. Especially low are ISC values in the dialect regions of the West Islands, of
West Estonia and East Estonia (accordingly, 72, 91 and 81). The two former regions correspond to the
distribution area of the Central European type, whereas in the latter, besides the Central European
odontological type, there is also a certain influence of the North European relic type observed. So the
odontological data also show a considerable heterogeneity of Estonians, in which typical Finno-Ugrian and
some westward complexes of traits have been mixed.
The Estonian odontological complexes have been compared with those of the Baltic states, Finland and
other neighbouring territories using the traditional selection of eastern and western odontological traits.
According to that Estonians are mostly close to Latvians, Lithuanians, Trans-Carpathian Hungarians, western
Swedes and northern Russians. In general, the Central European odontological type dominates in all of them.
Northeast Estonians are situated close to northwest and southwest Finns. In these groups predominates the
northern gracile type. The Estonian regions (East and South-East Estonia) influenced by the North European
relic type are situated comparatively close to the other Estonian regions, but have a somewhat peculiar
inclination towards the classical representatives of the North European relic type, the Lapps, and the other
104
ethnic groups influenced by the North European relic type – eastern Latvians, southeastern Finns, Karelians
and Vepses.
In Latvia, according to R. Gravere (Гравере 1987), mainly the same odontological types are represented
which occur in Estonia – the Central European and the northern gracile type. Besides those, the North
European relic type is also found in eastern Latvia, mainly on the territory of the East-Baltic anthropological
type and it seems to be connected with the Balto-Finnic substratum. The northern gracile type is spread on a
quite wide territory in Latvia, also on the territory of the narrow-faced variant of the West-Baltic
anthropological type. That covers districts once inhabited by Livonians and South Estonians, extending in
places far off in southern direction. The occurrence of the northern gracile type traits among other peoples is a
clear evidence that in these regions Finnic peoples have mixed with the other ethnic groups. Such a situation
occurs in northwestern provinces of Russia. The distribution of odontological types in North-East Europe is
illustrated in Figure 5


Fig. 5. Odontological types of peoples in North-East Europe.
1 – Central European type, 2 – North European relic type, 3 – Central European
type with the component of North European relic, 4 – Northern gracile type, 5 –
North European relic type with the component of northern gracile complex, 6 –
odontological complex with all 3 odontological types.

[Skalagrim]

Craniological data
Racial dualism of the Estonians is also observable in paleoanthropological material, first of all, on the basis
of craniological studies. The investigations of the Estonian paleopopulations and the distribution of
anthropological types in Estonia using the craniological material have mainly been carried out by K. Mark
(1956; 1965). According to K. Mark, two main clearly distinguishable craniological types have been
established among the Estonian cranial samples (Fig. 6). One type is characterised by very large
measurements, massive, with long, narrow and high dolichocran skulls, with a high face and narrow nose. That
type occurred almost everywhere in Estonia in the pit graves of the 11th–13th centuries – in West and North
Estonia (at Martna, Haimre, Küti, Tammiku) and also in Tartu district (Õvi, Lahepera). The Karja sample from
Saaremaa (Mark, 1965) as well as the Viiraküla sample from Muhu Island (Heapost, 1997) also belongs to that
type. The other type is mesocranic, more gracile, with a broader, lower and slightly flattened face. That type is
spread in East Estonia (as indicate the skulls from Jõuga mounds in North-East Estonia, the skull samples from
South-East Estonia – Otepää, Makita and others from the 11th–15th centuries and later) (Mark, 1965; Heapost,
1993). Both these types are Europoid. Deciding by the long bones the first type was high of stature (about 172
cm) and the other of a little shorter stature (about 167–168 cm) (Mark, 1962:178; Heapost, 1993:247). It can be
said that the modern anthropological types in Estonia were established in the Medieval time already. Their
roots can be found in the Estonian Neolithic.


Fig. 6. Craniological types from Medieval times in Estonia (from Mark, 1965).
Above: A dolichocran male skull from North Estonia, 13th century (Küti). Below:
A mesocran male skull from North-East Estonia, 12th-14th centuries (Jõuga).

The cluster analysis of the Estonian cranial samples once more assures us of the presence of these types
among the Estonian paleopopulation (Heapost, 1995, 1996). Two clusters are formed. The Neolithic sample of
Boat-Axe Culture in Estonia also belongs into the dolichocran skull cluster. The sample of Neolithic Comb-
Ware Culture from Eastern Estonia belongs to mesomorphic, mesocran cranial samples. Features of both types
Fig. 6. Craniological types from Medieval times in Estonia (from Mark, 1965).
Above: A dolichocran male skull from North Estonia, 13th century (Küti). Below:
A mesocran male skull from North-East Estonia, 12th-14th centuries (Jõuga).
105
can be found simultaneously in one or another sample. According to the complex of features some series stay
in-between the two cranial types. Estonian cranial samples have been compared with those of the neighbouring
areas belonging to different periods of time (from the Medieval time to the Mesolithic). A large variety of
cranial samples has been compared. Most of these samples belong to the mesocran anthropological type with
some local variations, and all the cranial samples from North-West Russia used for comparison, form
completely mixed clusters with Finno-Ugric samples. The anthropological type which is represented by East
Estonian cranial samples was spread in Finland and Karelia, in the Novgorod and Pskov regions, and in Tihvin
district, on a large territory in Latvia, partly in Lithuania, in some areas of the Volga-Oka and the Volga-Kama
already as early as in the 3rd–9th centuries A. D. Evidently, these population groups were closely related.
Apparently, that anthropological type in one or another variant is connected with the ancient substratum
population of the East Baltic on a wide territory of North and East Europe.
People close to the dolichocran type of the populations of Medieval Estonia (particularly in West and North
Estonia) also lived in some southern Baltic areas. That dolichocran anthropological type could already be
found among the carriers of Boat Axe Culture in Neolithic Estonia and among the Mesolithic inhabitants of
Zvejnieki in Latvia near the border of Estonia. That anthropological type is also represented by the carriers of
Fatyanovo culture in the Volga district, and by the Kivutkalns population of the Bronze Age in Latvia. Features
or complexes of features characteristic of the two main anthropological types occur in one or another form in
several cranial samples observed.
Thus, the anthropological types spread in Estonia were common over a wide territory and for a long time.
Forms similar to the Medieval cranial samples of Estonia can be traced back to the local Bronze Age, the
Neolithic and the Mesolithic.

[Skalagrim]

Population genetic data
Our genetic data are based on seven blood group systems (AB0, Duffy, Kell, Lewis, MN, P, and Rhesus)
and the trait of phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) tasting (altogether 24 alleles). Leiu Heapost collected the material
from 39 localities in different regions of Estonia (Heapost, 1994:112). All the individuals examined were
indigenous Estonians, whose grandparents and parents had been born in the same locality. The local samples
were joined into seven regional groups more or less according to main dialectal areas (Murumets, 1982, 1983).
Differences in gene frequencies between regional populations are valued by the chisquared method. The
degree of the genetic diversity of the groups is determined by the method of genetic distances (Cavalli–Sforza
& Edwards, 1967). The grouping of populations on the basis of those distances is carried out by using cluster
analysis.
Data for international comparisons were taken from literature: for Finns and Finnish Swedes from
Nevanlinna (1973), for Karelians from Y. V. Shneider (Øíåéäåð 1991), for Komis from A. V. Érikson & R. R.
Frants (Ýðèêñîí è Ôðàíòñ 1982), for Latvians from L. Heapost (1994), J. Kariks et al. (1966), and R. R. Race et
al. (1948), for Lithuanians from R. G. Harvey et al. (1983), for Maris from A. V. Érikson (Ýðèêñîí et al. 1979),
for Russians from M. A. Umnova et al. (1968), and for Vepses from L. Heapost (1994).
The data on gene frequencies for Estonians are given in M. Viikmaa and L. Heapost (1996:131). It appears
that there are relatively great differences between regional subgroups, especially in Duffy, Lewis and Rhesus
systems. Our genetic data are in good agreement with the anthropological investigations suggesting that the
greatest differences in Estonia can be found between the subpopulations of the western and eastern regions: the
genetic distance between these groups is about 3.5 times bigger than that between the northern and southern
ones.
The results of grouping of some local populations on the basis of genetic distances are shown in Figure 7.
As a rule most samples are clustered very well into bigger regional groups with their nearest neighbours.
However, there exist two exceptions. First, the sample of Muhu Island is clearly different from the other West
Island (Saaremaa and Hiiumaa) samples, being clustered together with the northeast group. Secondly, the
sample of the West-Võru dialect area (the Antsla sample) stands relatively far from the other southeast groups.
At the same time, the Setu sample is closely related to most of the South-East and East Estonian groups.
As a next step, we considered the clustering of regional populations with one another. The regions regarded
coincide with the main dialectal regions. The genetic differences between all the regions are statistically
significant, with the exception of the East group, which is very similar to the groups of southern regions. As
demonstrated by the dendrogram of genetic distances (Fig. 8), the central, southwest, east and southeast
regions are very tightly connected. The West Islands, North-East and West Estonia are standing separately.


Figure 7


Fig. 8. Grouping of Estonian main regional populations based on cluster
analysis of genetic distance matrix (from Viikmaa & Heapost, 1996:132).

[Skalagrim]

Next we compared some regional populations of Estonians with the neighbouring and some Finno-Ugric
peoples (Fig. 9). The populations were grouped into two main clusters. The Estonian samples were joined
together in one cluster with the two Finno-Ugric populations of Vepses and Karelians. The second cluster
consisted of the Finno-Ugric populations of Komis and Maris (both standing alone), and Finns, as well as the
Finnish Swedes, Lithuanians, Latvians, and Russians. Thus the Finno-Ugric linguistic group is clearly not a
genetic unit.


Fig. 9. Grouping of Estonian regional populations with some neighbouring
and other Finno-Ugric peoples based on cluster analysis of genetic distance
matrix (from Viikmaa & Heapost, 1996:133). Lithuan – Lithuanians, Latvian
– Latvians, Russ – Russians, N–E – North-East Estonia, Veps – Vepses,
Karel – Karelians, S–W – South-West Estonia, S–E – South-East Estonia,
W–I – West Estonia with West Islands.

The genetic distances of the whole Estonian population to other peoples (Table 1) suggest that the
Estonians are most closely related to their nearest neighbours – the Russians and Latvians. In addition, the
Vepses and Karelians are very close to the Estonians; the Finns come only after them. On the given
dendrogram (Fig. 9) the Russians and Latvians fall into the second cluster because they have other more
closely related populations than the Estonians – the Lithuanians, Finns and Finnish Swedes.
There is an interesting difference between the genetic structure of the Estonian population and that of the
Indo-European neighbours. It lies in the simultaneous presence of gene frequencies of different types. Namely,
some gene frequencies (AB0*A2, AB0*B, RH*cde, RH*CDE, PTC*t) are characteristic of more eastern
peoples, whereas the others (Fy, Kell, Lu, RH*Cde) show frequencies of a more western type.

[Skalagrim]

Conclusions
All the types of study presented in this paper reveal a remarkable heterogeneity of the Estonians. In general,
the differences are more impressive in western-eastern direction than in northern-southern direction. Some
Fig. 9. Grouping of Estonian regional populations with some neighbouring
and other Finno-Ugric peoples based on cluster analysis of genetic distance
matrix (from Viikmaa & Heapost, 1996:133). Lithuan – Lithuanians, Latvian
– Latvians, Russ – Russians, N–E – North-East Estonia, Veps – Vepses,
Karel – Karelians, S–W – South-West Estonia, S–E – South-East Estonia,
W–I – West Estonia with West Islands.
107
subgroups of Estonians, especially in the northeast and southeast show peculiarities characteristic of some
more eastern Finno-Ugric peoples, whereas the western groups (especially in the West-Estonian mainland) are
more strongly associated to the Indo-European neighbours. All that suggests that the Estonians have a complex
origin, indicating relations to the Finno-Ugric stem on the one hand, and to the Indo-European peoples on the
other hand.
Some combinations of traits and gene frequencies characteristic of Estonians and many other Finno-Ugric
populations showing simultaneously “eastern” and “western” frequencies (for example, negative correlation of
indexes of Mongoloidness and Pigmentation, the northern gracile odontological type, and some gene
frequencies) cannot be explained only by the assumption of Mongoloid admixture to the Caucasoid
populations. We suppose that the antagonistic frequencies of different traits are tracks of the original genetic
structure of the Finno-Ugric ancestor population, which were not clearly differentiated in Mongoloid-
Caucasoid directions.

[Skalagrim]

REFERENCES
Aarma, L. 1987. Põhja–Eesti meeste pikkus. Tallinn. 191 lk.
Baer, K. E. v. 1976. Eestlaste endeemilistest haigustest. (Translated by Ü. Torpats from original Morbis inter Esthonos
endemicis, 1814). – Loomingu Raamatukogu, 33. Tallinn: Perioodika.
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Edwards, A. W. F. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. – Evolution,
32: 550–570.
108
Harvey, R. G., Tills, D., Warlow, A., Kopec, A. C., Domaniewska–Sobczak, K., Suter, D., Lord, J. M. 1983. Genetic
affinities of the Balts. A study of blood groups, serum proteins and enzymes of Lithuanians in the United Kingdom. –
Man (N. S.), 18: 535–552.
Heapost, L. 1993. Makita kalmistu antropoloogiline aines. – Muinasaja teadus, 2: 233–248.
Heapost, L. 1994. Populatsioonigeneetilised tunnused eestlastel. In: Mark, K., Heapost, L., Sarap, G. Eestlaste
antropoloogia seoses etnogeneesi küsimustega. Tallinn: TA Kirjastus, 110–196.
Heapost, L. 1995. On craniology of South-East Estonian population in XIXVIII cc. – Papers on anthropology VI. Tartu:
Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, 57–69.
Heapost, L. 1996. A comparative characterization of Estonian cranial samples of the II Millennium a.d. – Congressus
Octavus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum. Pars VII. Jyväskylä, 278–282.
Heapost, L. 1997. Saarlaste antropoloogiast. – Saaremaa (in print).
Kariks, J., Bradley, M., Walsh, R. J. 1966. The blood groups of Latvians resident in Australia. – Vox Sanguinis, 11: 699–
704.
Mark, K. 1956. Eesti rahva etnilise ajaloo küsimusi paleoantropoloogia valgusel. In: Eesti rahva etnilisest ajaloost.
Tallinn, 191–211.
Mark, K. 1962. Kaberla kalmistu antropoloogiline aines. In: Muistsed kalmed ja aarded. Arheoloogiline kogumik II.
Tallinn, 169–180.
Mark, K. 1965. Ida-Eesti 11.–18. sajandi rahvastiku antropoloogia. In: Slaaviläänemeresoome suhete ajaloost. Artiklite
kogumik. Tallinn, 150–204.
Mark, K. 1994. Eestlaste somatoloogia. In: Mark, K., Heapost, L., Sarap, G. Eestlaste antropoloogia seoses etnogeneesi
küsimustega. Tallinn: TA Kirjastus, 15–109.
Murumets, S. 1982. Eesti keeleala murdelisest liigendusest “Väikese murdesõnastiku põhjal”. I. – Keel ja Kirjandus, 1:
11–17.
Murumets, S. 1983. Eesti keeleala murdelisest liigendusest “Väikese murdesõnastiku põhjal”. II. – Keel ja Kirjandus, 11:
615–623.
Nevanlinna, H. R. 1973. Suomen väestörakenne. Geneettinen ja genealoginen tutkimus. Vammala: Vammalan Kirjapaino
OY.
Race, R. R., Sanger, R., Lawler, S. D., Keetch, D. V. 1948. Blood groups of Latvians A1A2B0, MN and Rh. – Ann.
Eugenics, 14: 134–138.
Sarap, G. 1994. Eestlaste odontoloogilise kompleksi omapära. In: Mark, K., Heapost, L., Sarap, G. Eestlaste
antropoloogia seoses etnogeneesi küsimustega. Tallinn: TA Kirjastus, 197–240.
Umnova, M. A., Prokop, O., Piskunov, T. M., Samusova, G. S., Ishalovskaya, T. A., Prozorovskaya, G. P. 1968.
Blood group distribution among the Moscow population. In: 7th Int. Congr. Anthrop. Ethnol. Sci., Moscow, 496–500.
Viikmaa, M. & Heapost, L. 1996. Genetic differentiation of Estonians. – Proc. Estonian Acad. Sci. Biol., 46(4): 128–136.
Àíó÷èí Ä. Í. 1889. Î ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîì ðàñïðåäåëåíèè ðîñòà ìóæñêîãî íàñåëåíèÿ Ðîññèè (ïî äàííûì î âñåîáùåé âîéíñêîé ïîâèííîñòè â
èìïåðèè çà 1874–1883). – Çàïèñêè Èìïåðàòîðñêîãî Ðóññêîãî Ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîãî Îáùåñòâà ïî îòä. ñòàòèñòèêè, 7(1). 184 ñòð.
Àóëü Þ. 1964. Àíòðîïîëîãèÿ ýñòîíöåâ. – TRÜ Toimetised, 158. Tartu. 387 ñòð.
Ãðàâåðå Ð. Ó. 1987. Ýòíè÷åñêàÿ îäîíòîëîãèÿ ëàòûøåé. Ðèãà: Çíàòíå. 240 ñòð.
Çóáîâ À. À. 1979. Ýòíè÷åñêàÿ îäîíòîëîãèÿ. Ìîñêâà. 255 ñòð.
Øíåéäåð Þ. Â. 1991. Ãåíåòè÷åñêàÿ ïîëèìîðôèçì â ïîïóëÿöèè êàðåëîâ. – Ãåíåòèêà, 27: 1460–1466.
Ýðèêñîí À. Â., Çîëîòàðåâà È. Ì., Êîçèíöåâ À. Ã., Øåâ÷åíêî À. Â., Ýñêîëà Ì. Ð., Êèðüÿðèíòà Ì., Ïàðòàíåí Ê., Ôåëüìàí Äæ.
1979. Ãåíåòè÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ìàðèéöåâ (÷åðåìèñîâ). In: Íîâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïî àíòðîïîëîãèè ìàðèéöåâ. Ìîñêâà: Íàóêà,
7–39.
Ýðèêñîí À. Â., Ôðàíòñ Ð. Ð. 1982. Èññëåäîâàíèÿ ãðóïï êðîâè ó êîìèçûðÿí â ÑÑÑÐ. In: Ôèííîóãîðñêèé ñáîðíèê (àíòðîïîëîãèÿ,
àðõåîëîãèÿ, ýòíîãðàôèÿ). Ìîñêâà: Íàóêà, 191–206.

[Volgost]

Спасибо!