Dr. T. Tóth szerk.: Paleoanthropological studies (Anthropologia Hungarica 8/1-2. Budapest, 1968)
connected with differences in quantity of the examined findings or with the dissimilar identification methods of the several authors. It may also he possihle that the differences as to the evaluation of the glabella by the these authors refer to the Mediterranean elements of the series examined here. It is known, for instance, that the process of gracilization during the Bronze Age was relatively intensified in the southern part of East Europe than in its northern zone (DEBETS, 1961a). It was noted above that the nasomalar angle of the female Beries significantly differs from the mean characterizing recent Europoids (145,3°). It is possible, however, that in the present case we have to do with the survival of the features of the aberrant archaic form which existed during the Neolithic Age in East Europe (?), (DEBETS, 1961b). This statement may find some corroboration in the fact that the nasomalar values of the female series (GOCHMAN , 1966; ZINYEVITSH, 1967; 143,4° and 145,0°, respectively) deriving from the Neolithic in Ukraine (Wassilyevka II, Dereivka), are similar to the respective values of the female series studied here. The male series of the findings originating from the Katakombnaya culture was compared 'with several different prehistorical series and it was found that the male group is very near to another Katakombnaya series from the Azov-area, and it also displays a great similarity to the male group of the Yamnaya culture and especially to that of the Andronovo culture in the Western Kazahstan (Table II, Figs. 1-8). It is also noteworthy that, according to the coordinated arithmetic values, the male group examined here stands in almost every case nearer to the Mesolithic series than to the Neolithic findings (Table II and Figs. 1-8). With regard to the type mosaic, the middle Bronze Age findings analysed here (9 males, 4 females) reflect divers type elements of the Europoide great race. Both the Protomediterranean and the „Andronovean" features are observable.Although, merely one-third of the material excavated by K.F.SMIRNOV is suitable for analysis, Proto-Europoide features predominate, as a whole, in the Investigated group of the population of the Katakombnaya culture. Within this general character-complex, however, there appears to be a certain heterogeneity, since Cro-Magnonian and Mediterranean elements as well as those of the Andronovo type are all observable in both the male and female groups. In spite of the fact that the approach, with reBpect to the mean values of the males, is nearer to the Mesolithic series of the Azov-area, some analogies are observable, in the female group, with certain Neolithic series in the Ukraine (Vassilyevka II, Dereivka). It is justly inferable therefore that, in the examined population fragment, the descendants of the autochthonous local Mesolithic Age had formed a substrate to which Neolithic groups have assimilated. The repeated Infiltration of southern groups of the Aeneolithic and Copper Ages is also possible. As far as the Andronovo element is in this respect concerned, it is possible that we have to do with the effects of a group arriving from Western Kazahstan, but one may also contend that these features had evolved by the action of the Ukrainian Cro-Magnonian and Proto-mediterranean factors,convergently with the formation of „Andronovo" complex of Kazahstan which, according to GHINSBOURG (1964), is the eastern or steppe variant of the Protoen^opoide type. As propounded by K.F. SMIRNOV (i960), the Azov-area or the valley of the Molotshnaya, respectively, had been rather densely populated during the Bronze Age. The partial heterogeneity within the main (Europoide) taxonomic unit may, in the opinion of the present author, be connected with the dense population (i.e. repeated infiltration) mentioned above.
