Michael Kirokosyan, 8.11.2002 wrote:

Dear Michael,


Concerning your article on Himalayan primate.

Encounting by A.Tishkov, who had got three snapshots with the creature images, is a rare case, but not unique. Something like it already had happened, in Himalayas also. Otherwise, due to yours meticulous research it has resulted to further development. The study of the snapshots proves convincingly enough the existence of some unexplored primate. I am not an expert in photo technic and relative equipment, but nevertheless I suppose the difficulties you should to overcome.

There are two points in your material which have attracted my attention.

First: there are formations in your drawings, that you have determined presumably as "beams of light hair". I have verified the pictures and confirm that they are present, despite of its illegibility. So, the mistake is excluded, but what we have then? "Beams" of a hair? At the first glance I have taken these "formations" for horns! But it is absolutely clear that primates,our creature included, have no horns. But the beams look like very much. A straight illustration to the eastern devil (for example,look in "Leshy nicknamed as Ape" by D.Bayanov). As far as I remember the eyewitnesses never mentioned something resemblant. If I right, this is the most regrettable. It is impossible to prove that it "brushes", not "horns". If you show this images to any demonologist, he will tell you thanks and consider it as the certificate confirming existence of fiend. In any case these brushes are the most essential riddle, which should be taken to consideration and worthy efforts for its decision.

Second: In the conclusion you offer to name the primate "alamas" on the bases of the existing ethnic names. But why not yeti or any other word with the similar meaning, that is more widespread in Himalayas and Tibet?


Trachtengerts to Kirokosyan:

Your remarks on these light formations on the alamas head are natural. So as any "horns" or something like on a head of any primate are quite unnatural. I see them and can do nothing with it, it is the fact. Any kinds of topknots, whiskers and manes are found more often on monkeys. I hope that sometime these animals will be investigated and the explanation to this surprising fact found. Up to this time I consider these as "brushes" of the hair.

Now, why not yeti. This word has got too wide meaning last years. Yeti is name for variety of speculated animals, both large and small, in mountains of Nepal and the Tibet. Sometimes it even used for various hominoids through the territory of CIS that is so far from Himalayas. It is not adhered to any species to be applied in taxonomy. Any relevant neutral new word is necessary, and I have offered to name it as alamas.