The Position of Ipiutak in Eskimo Culture —Reply
The greater part of Larsen's paper is a restatement of the Ipiutak theory rather than a reply to my two specific criticisms. I feel that this theory is based on a series of questionable assumptions rather than facts, but as Larsen properly insists on “sound scientific documentation and not mere...
| Published in: | American Antiquity |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
1954
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/276727 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0002731600013329 |
| Summary: | The greater part of Larsen's paper is a restatement of the Ipiutak theory rather than a reply to my two specific criticisms. I feel that this theory is based on a series of questionable assumptions rather than facts, but as Larsen properly insists on “sound scientific documentation and not mere statements” I will not attempt to discuss the theory as a whole in the space available here but refer to a recent publication which gives my views (Collins, 1954, pp. 78-85). The second half of Larsen's paper deals for the most part with the second of the two points I raised, the relationship of the Ipiutak and Old Bering Sea cultures. This is a crucial point for the Ipiutak theory, for if I am correct the type culture of the “palae-Eskimo” complex, from the evidence of both archaeology and radiocarbon dating, is later than cultures assigned to the “neo-Eskimo” complex and also more closely related to them than to other “palae-Eskimo” cultures. |
|---|