An Anthropogeographical Study of the Origin of the Eskimo Culture. 149 
state that the named linguists have not brought forward evidences of a closer 
relationship between Aleutian and Eskimo, and philology seems still to be in 
the same position in this matter. 
When BAHNSON, who usually relies on DALL and RINK, states that “the 
Aleuts have, in a far-off past, separated from the Eskimo and developed them- 
39 
selves independently on their islands,” it can in no circumstances be possible 
that such a separation has taken place after the Eskimo culture had come into 
existence. It would be absurd to believe that so decided a linguistic separation 
should have occurred between the inhabitants of the western and eastern parts 
of Aliaska, where, moreover, the closest contact existed between the two, and 
then that the Angmagsaliks and the Yuits, the Labradors and the Kadiaks 
should still speak almost the same language. In reality only two possibilities are 
left. Hither the Aleuts themselves have invented the kayak, harpoon, etc., 
independently of the Eskimo or their culture has been borrowed from their 
neighbours at a later period. When the latter migrated from the north along 
the coast of Alaska they encountered the Aleuts at some definite period, and 
communicated to them their peculiar culture. Consequently, one must surmise 
that the Aleuts stand in a similar relation to the South Alaskan Eskimo as the 
Coast Chukches do to the Asiatic Eskimo, and there can hardly be any doubt 
that the last-mentioned opinion will prove to be the only right one. 
This opinion is contradicted by the assertion that the oldest remains 
of the culture of the Aleuts have been proved to originate from an Eskimo 
culture. It is not difficult, however, to show that this assertion is incorrect. 
From the finds made in the numerous refuse-heaps from Alaska to Attu, 
investigated by Паш, it appears that the cultural remains are found in three 
layers, which are fairly distinctly separated, and correspond to three cultural 
periods : — 
I. The sea-coast period which is chiefly represented by Echinus-shells. 
II. The fishing period, in which fish bones form the principal feature. 
III. The hunting period, in which bones of mammals occur. 
At the transition to layer II sinkers for fishing-nets begin to appear, 
and probably the introduction of the fishing net is the principal difference in 
culture which corresponds with these two layers, after which testaceous ani- 
mals cease to be the chief article of food, and are of comparativaly minor im- 
portance in the daily fare, of which fish now becomes a highly important item. 
Therefore there is a sharp boundary between the Echinus-layer and the layer 
with fish bones, even if the use of testaceous animals as an article of food never 
wholly ceases at any point of time. Fish continues, however, to be the main con- 
stituent of food down to the present time, and so fish bones are not only pre- 
dominant in the layers of the fish period, but are also found in quantities in 
those of the hunting period. The latter layer was found wherever excavations 
were made. The layer varied in thickness in the different places, and many of 
the heaps contained this layer only, which Dart regarded as testimony of the 
population having increased in numbers. 
