Palla Ákos szerk.: Az Országos Orvostörténeti Könyvtár közleményei 30. (Budapest, 1964)

Dr. T. Tóth: The Principal Questions of Anthropological Taxonomy

great migrations this means, for example, that in the anthropological evaluation of the population of the Avar khaganate the delimitation of the individual Europoid or Mongoloid features applicable to racial groups is not the main task, but that of the Europoid and Mongoloid racial groups themselves, or rather the correct approximation of their proportions. Although the category of race is very important in anthropological systematics it forms only a part of it; if in classification we do not only consider the morphological similarity but study the period of the formation of the groups of characteristics, then the category of race becomes related only to the period of race genesis in human evolution. Naturally anthropogenesis is not less essentially an epochal part of anthropological systematics 2. Views about the systématisation of the fossilized Hominidae vary. Here not only the schemes of Weidenreich and Bonarelli, but also of Gremjackij, Nyesturh and Debets should be mentioned. In Weidenreich's view all the fossilised human findings (Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus and even the Neanderthalensis) may be regarded as belonging to the same species as Homo sapiens. Bonarelli finds it possible that the Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus, Africanthropus, Paleanthropus (Mauer, Gibraltar, Sacco Pastore), Siphanthropus (Rhodesia, Galilea) and Prothanthropus (the Neanderthalians) genera may be included in one and the same family. Here it should be noted that Homo sapiens constitutes a separate subfamily but at the same time he lists Australopithecus among the Hominidae (Roginskij-Levin, 1 955). In Gremjackij's scheme (1950) the neanderthaloid forms comprise a separate species, in Nyesturh's systématisation the differences among the Pithecanthropus, Paleoanthropus and Neoanthropus are equalised at the level of the subgenus (Nyessturh, 1941, 1960b; Roginskij Levin, 1955) wile to Debets (1948b) only the two subgenus indications may be found because only Homo sapiens forms a separate subgenus in comparison to the summarised similar systematic unit (subgenus) of the Archanthropic and Paleoanthropic stages.