Andy White Anthropology
  • Home
  • Research Interests
    • Complexity Science
    • Prehistoric Social Networks
    • Eastern Woodlands Prehistory
    • Ancient Giants
  • Blog
  • Work in Progress
    • The Kirk Project >
      • Kirk 3D Models list
      • Kirk 3D Models embedded
      • Kirk 2D images >
        • Indiana
        • Kentucky
        • Michigan
        • Ontario
      • Kirk Project Datasets
    • Computational Modeling >
      • FN3D_V3
    • Radiocarbon Compilation
    • Fake Hercules Swords
    • Wild Carolina >
      • Plants >
        • Mosses
        • Ferns
        • Conifers
        • Flowering Plants >
          • Grasses
          • Trees
          • Other Flowering Plants
      • Animals >
        • Birds
        • Mammals
        • Crustaceans
        • Insects
        • Arachnids
        • Millipedes and Centipedes
        • Reptiles and Amphibians
      • Fungi
  • Annotated Publications
    • Journal Articles
    • Technical Reports
    • Doctoral Dissertation
  • Bibliography
  • Data

The "Giant Skeletons" from Ellensburg, Washington: A Closer Look

12/9/2014

8 Comments

 
Picture
Newspaper reports of one or more “giant” skeletons discovered in 1912 in Ellensburg, Washington, are a common component of the case presented for the prehistoric existence of a “race” of large humans in North America.   An internet search on “Ellensburg giant skeleton” will return a number of mentions/discussions of the Ellensburg remains, many reproducing portions of an article from the November 8, 1912, edition of the Ada, Oklahoma, Evening News describing “Eleven skeletons of primitive men.”  Other accounts specify a single skeleton with “two rows of teeth.” In some reports the skeleton is reported to be 6’8”, in others 8’.

I have collected sixteen newspaper stories related to the Ellensburg skeleton(s).  I have transcribed them all and provided them here as a pdf document.  These accounts are interesting for what they can tell us about both the actual remains and how the story about the remains changed through time.  SPOILER ALERT:  It appears as if the Ellensburg remains consisted of, at most, two individuals (not eleven), the largest of which was probably no more than 6’2” in height.  A good case can be made that the individual simply had well-worn incisors rather than the “2 rows of teeth in the upper jaw” specified in some of the headlines.  The creation of an account that specified eleven individuals was probably the result of a transcription error that transformed the "11" in the dateline of the story into the quantify of skeletons specified in the first sentence.

The Stories

The sixteen published accounts of the Ellensburg remains that I have (there are certainly more, though I would guess that most are essentially the same as the accounts I have collected) can be attributed to three main “original” stories.  I will call these A, B, and C.

The “A” Story

The earliest account [286, A-1] that I have located appeared in the Morning Oregonian on May 11.  Given that the dateline of the story is May 10 and many shorter versions of the Ellensburg story were printed in different parts of the country on May 11, the Morning Oregonian story was probably derived or reprinted from an original May 10 story in some other newspaper in the area.  Whatever the original story was, it quoted a local scientist/educator (Dr. J. P. Munson) and provided his description of the teeth:

“The teeth in front are rounded down and the jaw bone, which, Dr. Munson states, is due to eating of uncooked foods and the crushing of hard substances.”

Although the section on Dr. Munson doesn’t mention the existence of “two rows of teeth,” such an anomaly is described in the headline (“2 ROWS OF TEETH IN UPPER JAW”) and in the first paragraph (“two rows of teeth in the front of his upper jaw”).

The story provides the length of the femur (20 inches) and an estimate of height based on that length (80 inches, or 6’8”).

A story similar to the relatively long story printed in the Morning Oregonian  was probably the ultimate source of most of the stories about Ellensburg that were printed on May 11 and throughout the following week.  These stories include short, satirical comments on the presence of extra teeth [434, A-3; 292, A-5], a summary version of the original story [315, A-4], and nearly identical versions of a five sentence story printed in Kansas City, KS [284, A-2], Ogden, UT [316, A-2], and San Francisco, CA [317, A-2].  This very short story presumably went out over the wire. 

Another version of the “A” story was printed in the Yakima Herald [436, A-6] on May 15.  This story contains some of the exact same language as the Morning Oregonian story, but includes some additional details: (1) the skeleton was unearthed on Thursday (May 9); (2) the person who made the height estimate of 6’8” is identified as Dr. B. J. Moss; and (3) the existence of multiple rows of teeth is discussed further:

“One of the skulls was unusually large, and in the upper jaw has two complete and distinct rows of teeth in front, each set being perfectly formed.  This was regarded as decidedly unusual by the normal school professor [Dr. Munson], who examined the skull closely.  He did not regard the two rows of teeth as a racial attribute, but rather as a freak of nature.”

The Yakima Herald story also states that Dr. Munson not only visited the spot to examine the bones, but apparently unearthed the remains of a second individual.

A significant error was introduced into the “A” story sometime in late May or early June.  For the first time (among the accounts I have collected), a story specifies the existence of not one or two skeletons, but 11:

“Eleven skeletons of primitive men, with foreheads sloping directly back from the eyes, and with two rows of teeth in the front of the upper jaw, have been uncovered in Craigshill, at Ellensburg, this state.”

That quote is from a June 8 story printed the Milwaukee Sentinel [318, A-8].  Note the similarities to the first paragraphs of earlier versions of the story:

“Ellensburg, Wash., May 11. –Skeletons believed to be those of pre-historic people were found today in a deep hill excavation.  The skulls showed practically no forehead, sloping sharply back from the eyesockets.  One skull contained a complete double row of teeth in the upper jaw.  One of the skeletons was six feet eight inches in height. The hill is being explored for other skeletons.” [316, A-2]

“Ellensburg.—A skeleton of a primitive man, with forehead sloping directly back from the eyes and with two rows of teeth in the front of his upper jaw, was uncovered here when contractors were excavating for an apartment house.” [314, A-7]

It is easy to see what probably happened here.  Somewhere along the way, there was a version of the story that began with something like “May 11. Skeletons of primitive men, with foreheads sloping . . .” Someone copied that version but, presumably accidentally, transformed the “11” in the date into the quantity “Eleven” at the beginning of the sentence.  And thus the one or two skeletons at Ellensburg proliferated into eleven.  This erroneous story was subsequently printed in  several more newspapers [A-9].

The “B” Story

The story I am calling the “B” story appeared in the Ellensburg Dawn on May 16, 1912 [319, B-1].  This would have been the first opportunity to write about the skeleton in this local newspaper, which was only published on Thursdays.  This story contains some of the same language seen in some of the “A” stories (e.g., “eating uncooked foods and the crushing of hard substances with the teeth”) but contains additional sections that were probably added by a local reporter.  This story reports that the remains were unearthed on Friday (May 10), which would be consistent the earlier story in the Morning Oregonian.

The “C” Story

The “C” story is a completely new story about Ellensburg.  The earliest version of the story I have [435, C-1], is from the Evening Herald (Klamath Falls, Oregon) of May 17.  This story describes observations of the Ellensburg remains made by L. L. Sharp, identified as “Chief of the General Land Office Field Division.”  Mr. Sharp estimates the individual to have been 8’ tall.  He describes the teeth:

“The jaw is remarkable, and contains many teeth, chief among which are the massive grinders. These are worn down, probably from the habit of the man eating nuts, grasses and other food in a rough state.”

A version of this story was printed on September 4 in the Morning Review (Spokane, WA).  That story specifies the source as the Portland Telegram.

Height: How Tall Was The Individual? 

Unlike many “giant” accounts, the Ellensburg stories provide a basis for evaluating the actual height of the living individual: the length of the femur.  In all cases where this information was provided, it was stated that the femur is 20 inches (50.8 cm) long.  In the stories where the femur length was provided, the height of the individual was estimated at six feet eight inches, or 80 inches (i.e., approximately four times the length of the femur).  In the May 15 story from the Yakima Herald (number 436 in my database), it is specified that the height estimate was made by a Dr. B. J. Moss using the conversion of height = 4x femur length.

A May 17 story in the Klamath Falls, Oregon, Evening Herald quotes a person named L. L. Sharp (identified as the “Chief of the General Land Office Field Division) as saying that the skeleton “indicated a man to my mind at least eight feet high.” No specific basis is given for this estimate.

If we assume that the femur measurement of 20 inches is accurate, it is possible to estimate the height of the individual using equations that are based on much more data than were available in the early 1900s.  Height estimates derived using various formulae range between 5’7” and 6’4”, with more recent formula returning the shortest height estimates.


Picture
The more recent formulae for estimated height based on the length of the femur were produced using much more thoughtful analysis and by incorporating data from many more individuals than the “four times the femur length” estimate generated by Dr. Moss.  It is reasonable to conclude that the original estimate of 6’8” (based on the femur length) was too high, as was the “to my mind” estimate of 8’ provided by L. L. Sharp. The actual height of the individual was probably closer to 6’ or less.

The Teeth

The newspaper accounts provide several pieces of information, sometimes apparently conflicting, about the teeth of the individual.  The headline of the earliest story (Morning Oregonian, May 11) reads “2 ROWS OF TEETH IN UPPER JAW,” while other stories make no mention of multiple rows of teeth.  The stories that quote Dr. J. P. Munson note that “The teeth in the front are worn almost down to the jaw bones . . . due to eating uncooked foods and crushing hard substances with the teeth.”  The articles quoting L. L. Sharp make no mention of “double rows of teeth” but do describe the “massive grinders” as “worn down, probably from the habit of the man eating nuts, grasses and other food in a rough state.”

One story [436] does elaborate on the description of the teeth:

“One of the skulls was unusually large, and in the upper jaw has two complete and distinct rows of teeth in front, each set being perfectly formed.  This was regarded as decidedly unusual by the normal school professor [Dr. Munson], who examined the skull closely.  He did not regard the two rows of teeth as a racial attribute, but rather as a freak of nature.”

There are two main possibilities here: (1) the skeleton actually did have multiple rows of teeth in the front of the upper jaw; or (2) the description of there being “two rows of teeth” was the result of confusion about a description of the worn front teeth as “double teeth.”  As I discussed in this post, teeth worn flat by grinding (as the teeth of the Ellensburg skeleton reportedly were) were often erroneously identified as “double teeth" (molars) no matter where they were in the mouth.  The phrase “double teeth all around” was commonly used in the nineteenth century to describe individuals with such a high degree of tooth wear that it appeared as if all of the teeth in the mouth were molars. 
Picture
As the Google Ngram above shows, the use of the term "double teeth" was in decline in the early 1900s.  It is easy (for me, anyway) to imagine how a description by one person of “double teeth in front” (meaning molar teeth in front) could be mistakenly “translated” into a newspaper headline of “two rows of teeth.”

Alternatively, it is possible that the individual really did have some extra anterior teeth (incisors and/or canines) in the upper jaw.  If that is true, does it mean the individual was part of a “race” of giants?  No.

Why the Giantologists Got It Wrong

A skeleton was accidentally discovered in Ellensburg, Washington, in May of 1912.  It was probably the remains of a relatively large individual (or else it wouldn’t have attracted much attention), but was not a “giant” unless we’re going to expand our definition of that term to include anyone over 6’ tall.  The individual may have had some “extra” anterior teeth, but more likely simply had a high degree of tooth wear on his entire dentition.  That was not unusual among prehistoric Native Americans.

The various accounts from Ellensburg, viewed separately, present a somewhat confusing and contradictory picture.  In this post, Bill Vieira (one of the stars of Search for the Lost Giants) even stated that the accounts from Ellensburg were of two completely different finds of skeletons!  When a larger number of stories about Ellensburg is considered together, it is easy to understand the discovery and to see where and why discrepancies in accounts arise and proliferate.  Perhaps giantologists should make a habit of looking more critically at the stories that constitute their “evidence” and attempting to understand their context.

Please let me know if I’ve gotten anything wrong of if you have access to any stories about Ellensburg other than those I have collected and discussed here. My analysis certainly predicts the existence of a few “missing links” in the chain.  It would be nice to gather more stories a get a more complete picture of the Ellensburg skeleton telephone game.

References

Dupertuis, C. Wesley, and John A. Hadden, Jr.  1951.  On the Reconstruction of Stature from Long Bones.  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 9:15-54.

Genoves, Santiago.  1967.  Proportionality of the Long Bones and their Relation to Stature among Mesoamericans.  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 26:67-78.

Pearson, K.  1899.  IV. Mathematical Contributions to the Theory of Evolution.  V. On the Reconstruction of the Stature of Prehistoric Races. Phil. Trans. Anthrop., n.s. 6:373-380.

Sciulli, Paul W., and Myra J. Giesen.  1993.  Brief Communication: An Update on Stature Estimation in Prehistoric Native Americans of Ohio.  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 92:395-399.

Steele, D. Gentry, and Thomas W. McKern.  1969. A Method for Assessment of Maximum Long Bone Length and Living Stature from Fragmentary Long Bones.  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 31:215-228.

Trotter, Mildred, and Goldine C. Gleser.  1958.  A Re-evaluation of Estimation of Stature Based on Measurements of Stature Taken During Life and of Long Bones After Death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 16:79-123.
8 Comments

    All views expressed in my blog posts are my own. The views of those that comment are their own. That's how it works.

    I reserve the right to take down comments that I deem to be defamatory or harassing. 

    Andy White

    Follow me on Twitter: @Andrew_A_White

    Email me: andy.white.zpm@gmail.com

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    Picture

    Sick of the woo?  Want to help keep honest and open dialogue about pseudo-archaeology on the internet? Please consider contributing to Woo War Two.
    Picture

    Follow updates on posts related to giants on the Modern Mythology of Giants page on Facebook.

    Archives

    January 2023
    January 2022
    November 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    March 2021
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    3D Models
    AAA
    Adena
    Afrocentrism
    Agent Based Modeling
    Agent-based Modeling
    Aircraft
    Alabama
    Aliens
    Ancient Artifact Preservation Society
    Androgynous Fish Gods
    ANTH 227
    ANTH 291
    ANTH 322
    Anthropology History
    Anunnaki
    Appalachia
    Archaeology
    Ardipithecus
    Art
    Atlantis
    Australia
    Australopithecines
    Aviation History
    Bigfoot
    Birds
    Boas
    Book Of Mormon
    Broad River Archaeological Field School
    Bronze Age
    Caribou
    Carolina Bays
    Ceramics
    China
    Clovis
    Complexity
    Copper Culture
    Cotton Mather
    COVID-19
    Creationism
    Croatia
    Crow
    Demography
    Denisovans
    Diffusionism
    DINAA
    Dinosaurs
    Dirt Dance Floor
    Double Rows Of Teeth
    Dragonflies
    Early Archaic
    Early Woodland
    Earthworks
    Eastern Woodlands
    Eastern Woodlands Household Archaeology Data Project
    Education
    Egypt
    Europe
    Evolution
    Ewhadp
    Fake Hercules Swords
    Fetal Head Molding
    Field School
    Film
    Florida
    Forbidden Archaeology
    Forbidden History
    Four Field Anthropology
    Four-field Anthropology
    France
    Genetics
    Genus Homo
    Geology
    Geometry
    Geophysics
    Georgia
    Giants
    Giants Of Olden Times
    Gigantism
    Gigantopithecus
    Graham Hancock
    Grand Valley State
    Great Lakes
    Hollow Earth
    Homo Erectus
    Hunter Gatherers
    Hunter-gatherers
    Illinois
    India
    Indiana
    Indonesia
    Iowa
    Iraq
    Israel
    Jim Vieira
    Jobs
    Kensington Rune Stone
    Kentucky
    Kirk Project
    Late Archaic
    Lemuria
    Lithic Raw Materials
    Lithics
    Lizard Man
    Lomekwi
    Lost Continents
    Mack
    Mammoths
    Mastodons
    Maya
    Megafauna
    Megaliths
    Mesolithic
    Michigan
    Middle Archaic
    Middle Pleistocene
    Middle Woodland
    Midwest
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Mississippian
    Missouri
    Modeling
    Morphometric
    Mound Builder Myth
    Mu
    Music
    Nazis
    Neandertals
    Near East
    Nephilim
    Nevada
    New Mexico
    Newspapers
    New York
    North Carolina
    Oahspe
    Oak Island
    Obstetrics
    Ohio
    Ohio Valley
    Oldowan
    Olmec
    Open Data
    Paleoindian
    Paleolithic
    Pilumgate
    Pleistocene
    Pliocene
    Pre Clovis
    Pre-Clovis
    Prehistoric Families
    Pseudo Science
    Pseudo-science
    Radiocarbon
    Reality Check
    Rome
    Russia
    SAA
    Sardinia
    SCIAA
    Science
    Scientific Racism
    Sculpture
    SEAC
    Search For The Lost Giants
    Sexual Dimorphism
    Sitchin
    Social Complexity
    Social Networks
    Solutrean Hypothesis
    South Africa
    South America
    South Carolina
    Southeast
    Stone Holes
    Subsistence
    Swordgate
    Teaching
    Technology
    Teeth
    Television
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Topper
    Travel
    Travel Diaries
    Vaccines
    Washington
    Whatzit
    White Supremacists
    Wisconsin
    Woo War Two
    World War I
    World War II
    Writing
    Younger Dryas

    RSS Feed

    Picture
Proudly powered by Weebly