Szekessy Vilmos (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 59. (Budapest 1967)
Tóth, T.: On the diagnostic significance of morphological characters I. (A methodological study)
The taxonomical value of the neurocranial index The view that some ethnic groups had in great numbers transmigrated from the area of Innermost Asia and the environs of the Lake Baikal into the Carpathian Basin at the time of the Avar Principality (VI—VIII c.) became rather widerspread in our home literature (BABTTJCZ 1929, 1950; LIPTÁK 1959; MALÁN 1956; NEMESKÉRI 1955b ; WENGER 1955). As can be established from a perusal of these studies, the brachy- and mesocrany—observable on the series of the great migrations—being evaluated as a Mongoloidé feature, the cranial index, in essence a number expressing a primary taxonomical pair of characteristics, had been employed to corroborate the argumentation of the specific view outlined above. For example, the most representative series from Alattyán (WENGER 1952) was considered, on the basis of the cranial index, to be most similar to the Öskü series. Despite this similarity in indices, Table I Numerical comparison of different craniological series (males) "—-—^Characteristic Series ~~ — Cranial index Nasomalar angle • Zygomaxillary angle* Nasalspine angle* Szebény I. , Tóth 1961 77.8 (25) 139 5 (20) 123. 4 (6) 29. 0 (3) Csákberény, Tóth 1962 a 77.8 (13) 137 5 (14) 124. 0 (12) 33. 5 (9) Dunaszekcső, Tóth 1963 78.9 (19) 138 8 (23) 125. 1 (21) 31. 3 (11) Ellend II., Tóth 1963 76.5 (16) 138. 7 (18) 126. 6 (17) 32. 9 (13) Szellő, Tóth 1963 78.9 (14) 140 9 (14) 126. 1 (15) 30. 4 (H) Előszállás, Wenger 1966 76.8 (24) 140. 8 (15) 126. 3 (13) 29. 6 (6) Jutas, Bartucz-Malán 1931 73.6* (7) 136. 0 (14) 122. 1 (14) 30. 3 (H) Öskü, Bartucz-Malán 1931 77.5* (8) 1407 (5) 124. 5 (5) 24. 0 (4) Mosonszentjános, Lipták 1959 76.4** (5) 143. 0 (5) 127. 8 (4) 22. 6 (3) Bpest, Népstadion, Lipták 1963 82. 1** (4) 146. 8 (4) 129. 6 (4) 21. 7 (4) Tiszaderzs, Lebzelter 1957 74. 3* (18) 138. 3 (17) 123. 1 (14) 31.0 (14) Alattyán, Wenger 1952, 1957 79.8 (96) 138. 6 (61) 126. 8 (55) 31. 0 (43) Váchartyán, Bátai 1952 78.8* (9) 145. 3 (10) 125. 8 (10) 25. 8 (7) Kecel I. , Lipták 1954 81. Ü (24) 138. 1 (30) 124. 9 (30) 34. 2 (26) Homokmégy-Halom, Lipták 1957 80.0 (32) 139. 6 (33) 126. 2 (29) 31.7 (25) Szentes-Kaján, Wenger 1955 80.7 (34) 138. 8 (31) 124. 9 (31) 30. 1 (13) Bayram-Ali, Sarmata-Hunnian Period (Trofimova, 1959) 75.8 (56) 136. 1 (54) 125. 5 (51) 34. 2 (44) Tadjiks Contemp. (Ismagulov 1963) 82.2 (53) 13 9. 8 (53) 127. 8 (53) 31.0 (48) Kirghizes Contemp. (Miklashevskaya 1959b) 83. 4 (43) 144. 9 (43) 136. 6 (42) 20. 9 (32) Kazahs Contemp. (Ismagulov 1963) 83.4 (119) 144. 3 (118) 134. 4 (119) 24. 9 (116) Vercholensk, Neolith, Cis-Baykal (Levin 1956) 77.0 (14) 144. 5 (13) 137. 3 (12) 21. 9 (10) Fofanovo, Neolith, Trans-Baykal (Gohman 1954) 78.5 (6) 150. 7 (7) 142. 0 (6) 22. 5 (4) Andronovo Cult. Kazahstan (Ismagulov 1965) 76.4 (14) 138. 1 (11) 127. 4 (12) 31. 4 (13) 'Calculated by S. Wenger (1966) Calculated by the author of the present paper, T.T. 'AU data of the 16th series of the Avar Period by the author, of the present paper, T. T.
