Dr. T. Tóth szerk.: Studia historico-anthropologica (Anthropologia Hungarica 18. Budapest, 1983)

Figure 3 shows that the local Hungarian groups are arranged rather compact in the centre of the correlation field. The east groups - Taktabáj (7), Szendrő (12) and Rozsály (21)are separated from this complex and stand near to a conventional zero-group. In the right upper part of Fig. 3 we see the Russians from VALDAI (22) and the Hungarians from Kisfalud (11) (west region of the country). The rest of the groups seem to form a united common complex, from which it is difficult to distinguish and then to join any kinds of groups. Only the Tisza groups Karcag (9), Jászapáti (4) and Mezőkövesd (6) can be closed. All of the other West and East groups are very near to each other. Let us now consider a method of the sum characteristic of the investigated groups.This is the method of the middle taxonomical distance by A.A. ZUBOV and I.M. ZOLOTAREVA (1980) for the estimation of the degree of the likeness and the difference of the ethnic groups. Using this method in our previous work (GLADKOVA, TÓTH, KONDIK, in press) we compared all of the 16 Hungarian groups including the groups from the region Göcsej with each other, and then each of them with the Mongoloid group Yakuts (GLADKOVA & MAKEEVA (1979). * In all 37 traits of finger and palm patterns were analysed. 5 traits were chosen, each was at least with a frequency from 50 % in every of the Hungarian groups present. In respect to these dermatoglyphical traits a significant difference was found between the Hungarian groups and Yakuts. These traits are as follows - interdigital pad III, tt' , tt' ', W and the ulnar type of the line C (4 + 5' + 5' ' +6+7). It was shown that almost between all the 16 Hungarian groups and Yakuts the middle taxonomical distance is higher than 1, i.e. statistically significant. On the basis of the middle taxonomical distance of the 16 Hungarian groups from Yakuts and from the sum Hungarian a graphic (Fig. 4) was constructed. The survey of this graphic shows that (as it is in Fig. 3) the northern groups Taktabáj and Szendrő are nearer to theYakuts than the other groups. It is also seen that within the Tisza groups Mezőkövesd (6), Jászapáti (4) and Gyöngyöstarján (10) are very close. The groups from the west region Kisfalud (11) and Becsvölgye (14) do the same. At the time we see that the West group Őrség (1) and the Tisza group Kunhegyes (3) are near. The graphic shows that the other west and east groups are also close. Thus our sum survey of Hungarian dermatoglyphical materials confirmed the results of the previous works done several years before and showed the extensive variability, dispersitv and crossing similarity between the different groups of Hungarians. But on the whole, our Hungarian samples concerning their dermatoglyphical traits are within the variation characteristic for South-Europoid peoples. Only in the North groups Taktabáj and Szendrő as well as in the North-East group Rozsály could be found some "mongoloid admixture". The somatological investigation carried out by T.A. TÓTH (1977) in the same regions has also shown the crossing analogies between the local groups. From this it is seen that on the territory of Hungary, in the Middle Danube Basin, the main factor of race genesis and the formation of morphological appearance of the inhabitants was the metisation which took place in different historical periods. *The "Middle Taxonomical Distance" was calculated by V. M. KONDIK.