Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 20. 1980 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1983)
Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Éry Kinga, K.: Comparative statistical studies on the physical anthropology of the Carpathian basin population between the 6–12th centuries A. D. p. 89–141.
Fig. 53: Hypothesized area in which the formation of three conquering groups may have taken place during the late phase of Iron Age On the other hand, another question is inevitably raised by this reasoning. Was the same region the habitation area of the population which included the predecessors of ancient Hungarians before the Iron Age? In other words, does this territory pertain to the Ugric Period ancestral home as well? These facts may be traced back only to the time of the Late Bronze Age in the territory where the Iron Age series come from. Unfortunately, no craniological data of sufficient number are available to date from other regions and earlier periods. The five Late Bronze Age samples subjected to analysis here are not similar to any of the conquering groups. At the same time the populations of the Timber grave and Andronovo cultures seem to have analogies which indicate their involvement in the physical anthropological makeup of populations which occupied the Eurasian region under discussion. The long term influence of the Ukrainian Timber grave culture could already be well demonstrated in the Middle Dnepr region's population from the 2—4th century A. D. Chernakhovian culture. This was well illustrated by Figure 31. Figures 54 and 55 however, offer additional information. It seems clear that populations of the Lower Volga region Timber grave culture and of the Andronovo culture from Kazakhstan were quite similar to each other from a craniological point of view. In addition, their influence may not only be observed in the Iron Age Tagar culture of the Minusinsk Basin but extended as far as the Lower Kama and Oka river regions, the Eastern Caucasus and the "western Slavic" populations of subsequent periods. support the theory that the ancient Hungarians left the Ugric language community around the 5th century В. C. and began to act as an independent ethnic complex. Perhaps this is why the physical anthropological i. e. craniological characteristics of the three (or four) groups dealt with in this study were already probably formed by the time the Hungarians became a historical factor. In trying to locate the ancestral home of the ancient Hungarians leads one to question the theories of Bartucz (1938), Ne me s к éri (1943) and Lipták (1951, 1962, 1967,1969,1970, 1975,1977) who identifield the Kama and Byelaya river regions as the place where this ethnic group was formed. When generalized distances for the three groups are calculated here the reconstruction of the place of origin seems to confirm the results obtained by Tóth who mentioned the same region in a number of this publications (1965, 1968, a, b, 1969, 1977 1980—81 etc) (with the exception of group C).( 13 ). In addition to the geographical determination, generalized distances also support the chronological boundaries of origin identified by Tóth. (13) Some differences occur between the results of this study and those obtained during the research work of T. Tóth. The source of these differences is the subdivision of material from the Period of the Hungarian Conquest in this paper. He dealt with the same material as a single body of data. In addition, the groups discussed here include several recently published specimens, chiefly the representatives of group C. These were not available when Tóth compiled his material which consisted of metric data gathered by D e b e с in 1964 from the territory of Hungary. 109
