Jump to content

Page:The Thule Culture and Its Position Within the Eskimo Culture.djvu/207

From Wikisource
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
VIII. Concluding Remarks.

In the foregoing I have confined myself entirely to the purely material culture, and to that part of it that is capable of being judged from the excavated objects. It has the advantage that the fundament which has been built upon is really composed of tangible objects, the interpretation of which may perhaps leave room for a small margin but the existence of which is a fact, which cannot be the subject of doubt. The theories to which this material has given rise could unquestionably be supported and amplified by making use of other branches: dress, methods of hunting and working, all the intellectual culture with its legends, music, religious beliefs, anthropology, language; these are matters about which an excavation only very exceptionally gives information and which therefore have only been mentioned incidentally now and then in the foregoing. It is true that one cannot know much about these things among the now disappeared Thule Eskimos; nevertheless, their occurrence and geographical spread nowadays can give information of value in this connection. An example of this kind is provided by the Tunit legends. Of other features which can support the conclusions which the archaeological material justify may be mentioned the spread east and west of the gut-skin coat and urine tanning, but their absence in the middle, a circumstance which Hatt[1] has clearly pointed out; bearskin clothing among the Sadlermiut, the Polar Eskimos and the people of the Tunit legends; the sharp separation between land and marine animals in the taboo rules in the central regions, but not in east and west; H. König's[2] proof of the spread of the singing contest in east and west but not among the central tribes; the occurrence of fist fighting among the Central Eskimos but not outside of their territory nor among the Sadlermiut; Thalbitzer's[3] proof of the conservatism of the Alaskan language in contrast to the Eastern Eskimo language, a conservatism which, as Birket-Smith[4] has shown, stretches right over to Hudson Bay. All this — and much more — are matters which are of great interest in the questions regarding

  1. 1916, p. 288.
  2. 1924, p. 262.
  3. 1904, p. 268.
  4. 1924, p. 199.