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.

COMPARATIVE STATISTICAL STUDIES ON THE PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY OF THE CARPATHIAN BASIN POPULATION BETWEEN THE 612

th CENTURIES A. D. I. INTRODUCTION Comparative research in physical anthropology often reveals series which may or may not be similar to varying extents. The documentation of such phenomena however, is not sufficient, especially vis à vis the gap between the development of physical anthropology and that of other, related disciplines. Studying merely the raw data in physical anthropology also does not solve the problem from a historic point of view, whether similarities in fact derive from dealing with the same population, and does not answer the question raised by highly different populations either. Similarly, simple description often fails to shed light on the history of human populations represented by a certain set of characteristics. Physical anthropology thus, definitely depends on the other disciplines like archaeology, history and linguistics, when general conclusions are to be drawn. Using the results from these related fields on the other hand, involves difficulties and quite a few pitfalls. No one can expect a physical anthropologist to be well informed on all the current achievements in other fields and to be adequately competent in all those disciplines. This latter however, would be indispensable when results from a number of fields are synthetized in a critical but constructive manner. Partially informed anthropologists may then misinterpret even their own data. In addition, considering the mostly scarce sources and inadequate methodologies any physical anthropologist should be discouraged from anything but the publication of raw data. At the same time, it is only the physical anthropologist who is equipped to exploit and prepare all the historical information carried by human osteological remains. This work has been compiled in the spirit of these worries. Special attention was paid to the exclusive use of conclusions drawn from the craniological material. It is also important to note, that some of these may be hypothetical in nature. The limited length of this study made the systematic comparison to other anthropological investigations impossible. Discussion of the historical background to relevant research in archaeology and history was also beyond the scope of this paper. Short historical references however, were included at the most necessary places in light of the recent opinions from the above-mentioned related disciplines. II. MATERIAL AND METHOD A) In 1970, samples from 16 Avar Period and 18 Árpád Period male skull series and a smaller number of female ones were used to draw historical conclusions about the two chronological groups in the time span and territory discussed by a study titled: "Comparative biometrical examinations in 6th

—12th century populations of the Middle Danubian Basin" (Éry 1970a). Fortunately, a more than 33 percent increase in the published data from the Carpathian Basin between 1970 and 1980 offered new perspectives. This considerable increase was particularly useful in terms of creating opportunities for distinguishing between regional groups within the craniological remains of conquering Hungarians (Éry 1978). This fact in and of itself, would have allowed repeated analysis. The availability of computerized statistical procedures on the other hand, allowed a far wider comparison, thus providing a more complex view. Taking advantage of this technical potential an attempt was made to review comparisons within and between the Avar Period, Period of the Hungarian Conquest and Period of the Árpád Dynasty. In addition to these data it was also possible to include further physical anthropological information concerning the origins or earlier habitation areas of these 6—12th century populations. This led to a better understanding of the direction and extent of anthropological factors which effected the characteristic of these groups in the Carpathian Basin. Naturally, the opportunities were limited for achieving these aims. First, sample size i. e. the evidence for cranial remains was not of sufficient quantity for the reliable reconstruction of all physical anthropological events during the history of the period under discussion. In addition, 89