Dr. T. Tóth szerk.: Studia historico-anthropologica (Anthropologia Hungarica 20. Budapest, 1988)
As WARD ," KIMBEL (1983) wrote in their classic paper this cluster of traits makes possible to distinguish two or three types among the Miocene hominids. The "Asian" form includes Ramapithecus, Sivapithecus indicus and recent Pongo, while Pro c onsul africanus from western Kenya, Australopithecus afarensis from the Hadar Formation of Ethiopia as well as recent African apes belong to the "African" type. According to the authors clearly "African" subnasal pattern occurs in a late Miocene hominoid specimen recovered at Rudabánya. A possible third group may cover some Australopithecus forms. In the Lufeng find P.A. 644 the oral fossa incisiva is narrow and is situated in the line of P 4 . The nasoalveolar clivus is long and has a curved surface between the prosthion and the anterior nasal spine. The nasal crest projects over the palatine process. Comparing it with the RUD-12 find, it can be seen that in the Rudabánya find the subnasal region is shorter than in the Lufeng one, the naseoalveolar clivus is ovoid and not elongated, the fossa incisiva is wide and is situated at the height of the canine, on the naseolaveolar clivus the anterior nasal spine emerges considerably over the plane of the palatine process. Summing up the results of these preliminary investigations, it may be stated that as regards its subnasal alveolar morphology, the Sivapithecus lufengensis skull (P.A. 644) of Lufeng belongs to the "Asian" type rather than to the "African" one. RUD-12 belongs to the "African" type and in this group it is similar first of all to Rangwapithecus vancouveringi (KNMSO 700) and Australopithecus afarensis (A. L. 199-1. and A. L. 200 la). VERTICAL SECTION OF THE MAXILLARY BONE The dome-like rise of the palatine was regarded as an important morphological difference between the two pongohominid taxa (Rudapithecus hungaricus and Bodvapithecus altipalatus) of Rudabánya described by KRETZOI (1974, 1975). As I have emphasized before (KORDOS 1987b) it was a mistake to distinguish a Rudapithecus species with a palatine of "low" position and a Bodvapithecus species with a palatine of "high" position among the Rudabánya finds. The height of the palate measured at the respective teeth in practically the same in both taxa, it has a low position at M^. This can be seen in both RUD-77 and RUD-12 and it can be reconstructed with great probability also in the type of "Bodvapithecus altipalatus" (RUD-7 find). As for the Lufeng finds this section was observable only in the male specimen (P.A. 644) in which, compared to the Rudabánya finds, the dome-like rise of the palatine is considerably higher (Fig. 6). An index is used here to denote it in figures. This index is obtained by dividing the distance between the lingual sides of both M^-s ("a" value) by the distance between this line and the palate, measured along a line perpendicular to the middle of the line ("b" value). The results are the following: Specimen "a" (mm) "b" index "a" (mm) (mm) Rudapithecus (RUD-12) 27 9 3.0 Rudapithecus (RUD-77) +31 + 12 2.6 S. lufengensis (P.A. 644) 43 22 2.0 S. indicus (GSP 15 000) 30 15 2.0 Australopithecus africanus (Taung) 26 11 • 2.4 Pongo (recent) 34 23 1.5 Pan (recent) 27 11 2.5 Gorilla (recent) 32 14 2.3 Homo sapiens (recent) 30 13 2.3 After this brief outline we may state that Rudapithecus (including "Bodvapithecus"), chimpanzee and modern man belong to a group with "low" palate. Recent gorilla, with its rising palate, together with Australopithecus africanus, occupies an intermediate position between the previous group and those forms which have definitely high palate (Sivapithecus indicus, S. lufengensis and recent orang- utang). Thus from evolutionary viewpoint in this respect the Rudabánya finds are nearer to chimpanzee and modern man than to the Sivapithecus indicus and Chinese lufengensis which have several characteristics in common with each other.
