Kaszab Zoltán (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 77. (Budapest 1985)

Gladkova, T. D. ; Tóth, T.: Additional data to the dermatoglyphics of Hungarians

Fig. 5. The arrangement of the studied groups according to eight finger and palm traits (see Fig. 1. for the names of the groups ; 27 = Russians) from which in the left and upwards in the side of the sum of the positive deviations 26 local Hungarian groups are. In the correlation field at first sight it may be seen that the territorial distribution of the Hungarian groups corresponds to the distribution of the single traits (GLADKOVA & TÓTH 1977). So, for example, the western group Himód (N 8) and the eastern Matolcs (N 20) are side by side; the south-western groups őrség (NI) and Milejszeg (N 2) are close to the group Kunhegyes (N 3) from the Middle Tisza region. But, on the whole, the all of the groups are localized rather compact. It is possible only to note that the north-eastern groups (Figs 1 and 5) Taktabáj (N 7) and Szendrő (N 12) and also the eastern group Rozsály (N 21) separate oneself in the side of some "Mongoloidity" of dermatoglyphical complex. The western group Kisfalud (N 11) and Kunmadaras (N 26) from the Middle Tisza group are far removed from the zero-group in the side of the positive deviations ("Caucasoid"). By way of conclusion, let us once again formulate that the whole of the 26 studied male Hungarian series showed in the dermatoglyphical patterns the same intergroup variability and a mosaic similarity with each other. Thus, it was difficult to determine the definite pattern of dermatoglyphical complex in the country. The dermatoglyphical data of the Hungarians vary within the limits of the Europoid peoples. These data agree well with Tóth's hypothesis that the taxonomical position of the Hungarians is closely connected with the different component of the Europoid race stock. References ASHIZAWA KUMI (1972): Repartition mondiale des dermatoglyphes palmaires. — L'Anthropologie 76(1-2): 97-133.