Moments in Time Ősrégészeti Tanulmányok / Prehistoric Studies

Ősrégészeti Tanulmányok / Prehistoric Studies

Series Editors Alexandra Anders, Gábor Kalla, Viktória Kiss, Gabriella Kulcsár and Gábor V. Szabó Moments in Time Papers Presented to Pál Raczky on His 60th Birthday

Edited by Alexandra Anders and Gabriella Kulcsár

with Gábor Kalla, Viktória Kiss and Gábor V. Szabó

Ősrégészeti Társaság / Prehistoric Society Eötvös Loránd University L’Harmattan Budapest 2013 English and German text revised by László Bartosiewicz, Alice M. Choyke, Judith A. Rasson and Magdaléna Seleanu (English) Ulf Morche and Éva Pávai (German)

The publication of this volume was generously supported by Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Humanities Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien-Abteilung Ősrégészeti Társaság / Prehistoric Society Nóra ’97 Kft. Archeodata 1998 Bt. Ásatárs Kft.

ISBN 978-963-236-346-2 ISSN 2063-8930

Typography by Zsolt Gembela

Cover design Gábor Váczi and Zsolt Gembela

Printed in Hungary by Robinco Kft. Director: Péter Kecskeméthy Co n t e n t s

Editorial / A szerkesztők előszava...... 14

Publications of Pál Raczky ...... 16

Walter Meier-Arendt Pál Raczky zum 60. Geburtstag. Ein Vor- und Grußwort...... 27

The Early Neolithic — The First Moments

Krum Bacvarov Malak Preslavets Revisited: The Early Neolithic Burials...... 29

Eszter Bánffy On Neolithic Frontiers in the Carpathian Basin...... 35

Paolo Biagi – Elisabetta Starnini Pre-Balkan Platform Flint in the Early Neolithic Sites of the Carpathian Basin: Its Occurrence and Significance...... 47

Mihael Budja Potters and Pots in the Mesolithic–Neolithic Transformation in Southeastern Europe...... 61

Ivan Gatsov Lithic Assemblages from the Area of the North-Western Pontic from the 9th–7th Millennia...... 85

The Middle Neolithic — The Time of the LBK

Piroska Csengeri Figural Representations from the Initial Phase of the Alföld Linear Pottery Culture from Novajidrány (Hernád Valley, Northeast Hungary)...... 91

Ferenc Horváth – Florin Draşovean Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain at the Beginning of the Middle Neolithic (Satchinez–Alföld Linear Pottery–Esztár–Vinča)...... 113

Gábor Ilon The Transdanubian Linear Pottery Culture in County Vas: Recent Finds and Findings...... 133

Eva Lenneis Beobachtungen zu frühneolithischen Schlitzgruben...... 147 Contents

Tibor Marton LBK Households in Transdanubia: A Case Study...... 159

Zsolt Mester – Jacques Tixier Pot à lames: The Neolithic Blade Depot from Boldogkőváralja (Northeast Hungary)...... 173

Krisztián Oross Regional Traits in the LBK Architecture of Transdanubia...... 187

Tibor Paluch Maroslele-Panahát, Legelő: Data to the Middle Neolithic Anthropomorphic Vessel...... 203

Juraj Pavúk – Zdeněk Farkaš Beitrag zur Gliederung der älteren Linearkeramik ...... 213

Jörg Petrasch Standardisierung versus Individualität? Das Wesen der jungsteinzeitlichen Bestattungssitten...... 237

Katalin Sebők Two Ceramic-Covered Burials from the Middle Neolithic of the Carpathian Basin...... 249

Peter Stadler – Nadezdha Kotova The Early LBK Site at Brunn am Gebirge, Wolfholz (5670–5100 BC): Locally Established or Founded by Immigrants from the Starčevo Territory?...... 259

Gerhard Trnka Ein bemerkenswerter Klingenkern aus Szentgál-Radiolarit von Groß-Schollach im westlichen Niederösterreich ...... 277

Zsuzsanna M. Virág On the Anthropomorphic Representations of TLPC in Connection with Some Recent Finds from Budapest (Figurines and Vessels with Facial Representations)...... 289

The Late Neolithic — Polgár-Csőszhalom and Its World

Judit P. Barna A Miniature Anthropomorphic Vessel from the Early Lengyel Culture Site at Sormás-Török-földek in Southwestern Hungary...... 311

John Chapman From Varna to Brittany via Csőszhalom — Was There a “Varna Effect”? ...... 323

Alice M. Choyke – Zsuzsanna Tóth Practice Makes Perfect: Quartered Metapodial Awls in the Late Neolithic of Hungary...... 337

6 Contents

Małgorzata Kaczanowska – Janusz K. Kozłowski The Transition from the Neolithic to the Copper Age Lithic Industries in the Northern Carpathian Basin...... 353

Nándor Kalicz Siedlungsstruktur und Bestattungen mit Prestigeobjekten des Fundplatzes Tápé-Lebő (südliches Theißgebiet, Ungarn)...... 365

Katalin Kovács Late Neolithic Exchange Networks in the Carpathian Basin...... 385

Kitti Köhler Ergebnisse der anthropologischen Untersuchungen zweier spätneolithischer Bestattungen in Alsónyék...... 401

Johannes Müller – Robert Hofmann – Nils Müller-Scheeßel – Knut Rassmann Neolithische Arbeitsteilung: Spezialisierung in einem Tell um 4900 v. Chr...... 407

Zsuzsanna Siklósi Traces of Social Inequality and Ritual in the Late Neolithic of the Great Hungarian Plain...... 421

Krisztina Somogyi – Zsolt Gallina Besonderes anthropomorphes Gefäß der Lengyel-Kultur mit doppelter Gesichts- und Menschendarstellung in Alsónyék (SW-Ungarn)...... 437

Alasdair Whittle Enclosures in the Making: Knowledge, Creativity and Temporality...... 457

István Zalai-Gaál Totenhaltung als Indikator relativer Chronologie im transdanubischen Spätneolithikum?...... 467

Neolithic Spiritual Life

László Domboróczki Neolithic Cult Objects and Their Symbolism ...... 487

Gheorghe Lazarovici – Cornelia-Magda Lazarovici “Sacred house” and Their Importance for the Reconstruction of Architecture, Inner Furnishings and Spiritual Life...... 503

The Early Copper Age — Between Change and Tradition

Attila Gyucha – William A. Parkinson Archaeological “Cultures” and the Study of Social Interaction: The Emergence of the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár Culture...... 521

7 Contents

Svend Hansen Figurinen aus Stein und Bein in der südosteuropäischen Kupferzeit ...... 539

Judit Regenye Surviving Neolithic — The Early Copper Age in Transdanubia, North of Lake Balaton...... 557

Wolfram Schier An Antiquarian’s Grave? Early Tiszapolgár Burials in the Late Vinča Tell Site of Uivar (Romania) ...... 569

The Middle Copper Age — Time of Axes

Attila László – Sándor József Sztáncsuj Vessels with Handles with Discoid Attachments Discovered in the Ariuşd–Cucuteni Area and Some Problems in the Development and Chronology of the Ariuşd (Erősd) Culture in Southeastern Transylvania...... 579

Ildikó Szathmári Kupferhammeraxt mit Spuren eines Holzschaftrestes vom Donauufer bei Szentendre ...... 595

From the Late Copper Age to the Beginning of the Bronze Age — Transitions

Mária Bondár Utilitarian, Artistic, Ritual or Prestige Articles? The Possible Function of an Enigmatic Artefact ...... 605

Szilvia Fábián A Preliminary Analysis of Intrasite Patterns at Balatonkeresztúr-Réti-dűlő, a Late Copper Age Site on the Southern Shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary...... 613

László György Late Copper Age Animal Burials in the Carpathian Basin ...... 627

Gabriella Kulcsár Glimpses of the Third Millenium BC in the Carpathian Basin ...... 643

Vajk Szeverényi The Earliest Copper Shaft-Hole Axes in the Carpathian Basin: Interaction, Chronology and Transformations of Meaning ...... 661

The Early Bronze Age — The Rise of a New Age

János Dani – Viktória Kisjuhász Bestattungen der Makó-Kultur in Berettyóújfalu, Nagy Bócs-dűlő...... 671

8 Contents

Anna Endrődi Recent Data on the Settlement History and Contact System of the Bell Beaker–Csepel group...... 693

The Middle Bronze Age — Tells and Metals

Marietta Csányi – Judit Tárnoki A Dinner Set from a Bronze Age House in Level 2 of the Túrkeve-Terehalom Settlement...... 707

Klára P. Fischl – László Reményi Interpretation Possibilites of the Bronze Age Tell Sites in the Carpathian Basin...... 725

Szilvia Honti – Viktória Kiss The Bronze Hoard from Zalaszabar. New Data on the Study of the Tolnanémedi Horizon – Part 2...... 739

Magdolna Vicze Middle Bronze Age Households at Százhalombatta-Földvár...... 757

The Late Bronze Age — Rituals of Power

Judit Koós Spätbronzezeitliche Grube mit besonderer Bestimmung aus Oszlár-Nyárfaszög (Nordostungarn)...... 771

Gábor V. Szabó Late Bronze Age Stolen. New Data on the Illegal Acquisition and Trade of Bronze Age Artefacts in the Carpathian Basin...... 793

Gábor Váczi Burial of the Late Tumulus–Early Urnfield Period from the Vicinity of Nadap, Hungary...... 817

The Iron Age — End of the (Pre)history

István Fodor A Scythian Mirror from Hajdúnánás, Hungary...... 831

Miklós Szabó Lièvre celte de la puszta hongroise...... 839

9 Contents

Interdisciplinary Archaeology

László Bartosiewicz – Erika Gál – Zsófia Eszter Kovács Domesticating Mathematics: Taxonomic Diversity in Archaeozoological Assemblages...... 853

Katalin T. Biró More on “How Much?”...... 863

Zoltán Czajlik – András Bödőcs The Effectiveness of Aerial Archaeological Research — An Approach from the GIS Perspective...... 873

Ferenc Gyulai Archaeobotanical Research of the Neolithic Sites in the Polgár Area...... 885

Pál Sümegi – Sándor Gulyás – Gergő Persaits The Geoarchaeological Evolution of the Loess-Covered Alluvial Island of Polgár and Its Role in Shaping Human Settlement Strategies...... 901

Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann Significant Biostatistical Connections between Late Neolithic Ethnic Groups from the Carpathian Basin and Bronze Age Populations from Territories beyond the Carpathians...... 913

10 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain at the Beginning of the Middle Neolithic (Satchinez–Alföld Linear Pottery–Esztár–Vincˇa)

Móra Ferenc Museum Ferenc Horváth H-6720 Szeged, Roosevelt tér 1–3. [email protected]

Museum of Banat Florin Draşovean Ro-300002 Timişoara, Piaţa Huniade 1 [email protected]

The Neolithic settlement on the outskirts of Satchinez in south-western Romania was discovered in 1987, during the field survey conducted on the left bank of the Pământ Alb Stream. The findings of the excavation begun in 1989 (Trench SI) were published in 1993. The investigation of the site was continued in 1990 by the excavation of another area (Trench SII) whose finds are still unpublished. The find assemblages unearthed during the 1989 campaign indicated a cultural fermentation in Phase A2 of the Vinča culture in the north-eastern Banat which affected the Starčevo–Criş and Körös communities then occupying the area and played a major role in the transition from the Early to the Middle Neolithic. In addition to elements characteristic of the Vinča A culture, the pottery finds from Satchinez comprised also elements of the Alföld Linear Pottery, while the finds from Pit 5 included also the fragment of a small face pot of the Esztár group. The publication of the finds from Satchinez is vital for a better understanding of the contacts between the Alföld Plain and the Banat during the Middle Neolithic, not least because Esztár pottery has been recovered from a Vinča context at this site for the first time. The publication of the Esztár finds from Banat also provided an excellent oppor- tunity for reviewing the connections between the Alföld Linear Pottery, the Esztár group and the Vinča culture. The cultural and chronological correlations, as well as the evidence from Satchinez indicate that the terminus ante quem for the appearance of Esztár pottery was the Vinča A3 period.

A délkelet-romániai Satchinez (Temeskenéz) határában levő újkőkori település terepbejárás során került elő a Pământ Alb (Fehér-földi) patak völgyének balparti teraszán 1987-ben. A leletmentő ásatás 1989-ben indult (SI-felület), melynek eredményei 1993-ban kerültek közlésre. 1990-ben egy további felülettel bővült a kutatás (SII), melynek ered- ményei azonban máig közöletlenek maradtak. Az 1989-es ásatás alapján megállapíthattuk, hogy az ÉK-Bánságban a Vinča-kultúra A2 periódusában egy olyan megtelepedés jött létre, amely a területen élő Starčevo–Criş- és Körös-közösségek hatására döntő hatást gyakorolt a korai és a középső neolitikum közötti átfejlődés folyamatára. A satchinezi kerámialeletek között a jellegzetes Vinča A jellegek mellett feltűnnek az AVK itt idegennek számító elemei is. Az 5. sz. gödörben pedig az Esztár-csoporthoz tartozó arcos edény töredéke került elő. A satchinezi ásatás leletanyagának közlése kulcsfontosságú az Alföld és a Bánság középső újkőkor eleji kulturális és időrendi összefüggései szempontjából, mivel ez az első eset, amikor esztári kerámia Vinča-környezetben került elő. Ezért helyesnek láttuk, hogy a bánsági Esztár-leletek közlése alkalmával a korábban megfogalmazottak összefo- glalásával és újabb szempontok felvetésével foglalkozzunk az AVK–Esztár–Vinča összefüggések vizsgálatával. A kul- turális és időrendi fogódzók összefüggései és a satchinezi ásatás adatainak egybevetésével a szerzők az esztári kerá- mia megjelenésének terminus ante quem-jét a Vinča A3 időszakban jelölik meg.

Mo m e n t s in Ti m e – Bu d a p e s t 2013 113 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

The Neolithic settlement of Satchinez/Temeskenéz small face pot of the Esztár group (Draşovean (County Timiş, south-western Romania) was dis- 1993, Pl. I. 9). covered in 1987 during field surveys in the valley The site and its finds, as well as their interpreta- of the Pământ Alb/Fehérföldi Stream. The settle- tion, elicited attention in the archaeological com- ment is located on the stream’s left bank, on a ter- munity owing to the historical implications of the race extending to the former village pond, now role these communities played in the transforma- dried out. tion of Early Neolithic society in the northern Ba- The archaeological investigation of the site, be- nat and the southern part of the Great Hungarian gun as a rescue excavation, commenced in 1989 Plain, and owing to the discovery of a painted Esz- with the excavation of Trench SI. The material tár pottery fragment in this cultural milieu. brought to light during the first campaign was More recent comments on the discoveries at published in 1993 (Draşovean 1993). In 1990, Satchinez discoveries include the ones made by the research was continued by the excavation of another area (Trench SII); however, the discoveries made during that campaign are still unpublished. The find assemblages unearthed during the 1989 campaign indicated a cultural fermentation in Phase A2 of the Vinča culture in the northern Banat which affected the Starče- vo–Criş and Körös communities in the area and played a major role in the profound transformations that took place in this geographical area during the transition from the Early to the Middle Neolithic. The examina- tion of the material revealed that in addition to elements charac- Fig. 1. Satchinez, Pit 5 — coarse pottery teristic of the Vinča A culture, the finds also included elements alien to this culture, which, however, occurred on settlements of the early Linear Pottery in Trans- danubia and the Alföld Plain1 as a result of the same ethno-cultural processes which led to the almost simultaneous emergence of the Linear Pottery civiliza- tions in those areas (Draşovean 1993, 33, 40, 42). The finds from Pit 5 of the Satchinez settlement included also the fragment of a

1 The term “Alföld Plain” is here used in the geographical sense: the southern Al föld marks the Bačka/Bácska and Banat/ Bánát region, while middle and northern Alföld the Great Hungarian Plain. Fig. 2. Satchinez, Pit 5 — incised pottery

114 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

Cornelia Magda and Gheorghe Lazarovici (La- bution of the former, Pit 5a can be chronologically zarovici–Lazarovici 2006, 148) who re-exam- assigned to the beginning of the Late Neolithic. ined the finds and their stratigraphic context. They Lazarovici’s opinion contrasted sharply with argued that several different Neolithic occupations our stratigraphic observations and with the con- can be distinguished at the site, one dating to the clusions we reached at that time. We therefore de- Vinča A phase (Pit 5), one characterised by mate- cided to re-examine the already published materi- rial typical for the Vinča B2 horizon (Pit 4), and al and data, and complement it with the evidence one which can be assigned to the Vinča B2/C1 from the 1990 excavation, unpublished as yet, in phase or the period of the Foeni/Fény migration order to clarify this issue. (Pit 5a). In his view, the Esztár import could be When the finds from the site were first pub- associated with Pit 5a, which intersected Pit 5, the lished, it was noted that although Satchinez is a implication being that owing to the cultural attri- stratified site, only one layer dates from the Ne- olithic, namely the occupation layer at the base of the accu- mulated deposits. This lowermost layer is ca. 0.20 m thick (Draşovean 1993, 25). Six pits could be assigned to this layer: three of these were investigated in 1989 (Pits 4, 5 and 5a), while the other three in 1990 (Pits 8, 9, 10). The archaeological -ma terial brought to light from the Neolithic layer and from the six pits is relatively uniform and will be described briefly in the following. The coarse pottery was made from clay tempered with sand and ground chaff, occasionally also with ground sherds and Fig. 3. Satchinez, Pit 5 — carinated ware pebbles. Most vessels were fired to a brown colour, with a few to a yellowish or brick red colour. Most vessels in this category are decorated with finger impressions on and under the rim, notching on the rim, vertical, di- agonal or horizontal channelled barbotine, and finger impressed cordons on the upper half of the vessels (Fig. 1, Fig. 12. 1–2). The incised lines decorating this type of pottery are arranged either diagonally or running parallel to each other (Fig. 8. 6), or into meander or spiral designs filled with short stabs (Fig. 2. 1–6). Some incised lines are en- crusted with a white chalky sub- Fig. 4. Satchinez, Pit 5 — red slipped ware stance.

115 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

some biconical vessels is decorated with incisions made by burnishing the surface of the clay. The fine pottery was made from finely levigated, well-fired clay. The vessel surface was carefully burnished, giving it a metal- lic sheen. Fine wares were fired a grey, greyish-black or black colour. Owing to the firing technique, the upper part of some vessels is black or greyish-black, while the lower part is grey or, more rarely, dark red or brown (Fig. 2). The stems of goblets were slipped before firing to a dark red colour and were carefully bur- Fig. 5. Satchinez, Pit 5 — vessels of decorated with triangular fields filled with stabs nished (Fig. 4, Fig. 5. 5, Fig. 9. 4, Fig. 12. 6, Fig. 14, top, Fig. 17. 4–5). Goblets are biconical with a tall stem and an emphatically concave base. The pottery in this category is dominated by biconical and simple shallow vessels. The decoration of the fine ware comprised fine fluting arranged diagonally on the upper part of biconical vessels (Fig. 3. 4–6, Fig. 9. 2, Fig. 14. 4, Fig. 17. 2), and fluting and burnished lines arranged diagonally or in a chevron pattern (Fig. 3. 1, 3–4, 6–7, 9, Fig. 9. 3). Only one fragment, recovered from Pit 5, is decorated on the interior with parallel bands ar- Fig. 6. Satchinez, Pit 5 — bowl frag- Fig. 7. Satchinez, Pit 5 — fragment of the ranged in a V form made by bur- ment with pattern burnished motifs Esztár face pot nishing the vessel surface (Fig. 6). Found in Pit 5 was the frag- Semi-fine pottery, less numerous than the ment of a human figurine Draşovean( 1993, Pl. coarse pottery, was tempered with fine sand, but VI. 5). Two other human figurines (Fig. 16. 1–2) occasionally also with organic matter and ground come from the occupation layer. sherds. The vessel surface is burnished and the ves- The archaeological material from the six pits sels were fired to a blackish-grey or grey colour. and the occupation layer of the Satchinez settle- Most vessels in this category are biconical (Fig. 8. ment, as well as the available radiocarbon dates, 4, Fig. 9. 1, Fig. 11. 3, Fig. 17. 2–3, Fig. 18. 4–5) and enable the precise dating and unequivocal cul- shallow conical vessels (Fig. 5, Fig. 18. 2–3). The tural attribution of the site. At the same time, the most frequent decorations are incised zig-zagging imports discovered in two pits (Pits 5 and 10) and lines forming triangular fields filled with short the evidence from eastern Hungary enable addi- stabs under the rim (Fig. 5. 1–3, Fig. 18. 3), spirals tional conclusions regarding a possible correla- filled with stabs (Fig. 2. 4, Fig. 5. 5–6), and incised tion between the Vinča A phase and the Esztár meanders (Fig. 17. 7, Fig. 19). The upper part of group.

116 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

The fabric, the firing and burnishing of the vessel surfac- es and the pottery wares them- selves share countless similarities with the ceramic material from the Vinča A settlements at Gornea/Felsőlupkó (Lazaro- vici 1975, 13–14; 1977, 72, 106, 112; 1981, 173) and Liubcova/Al- sólupkó (Luca 1998, 37–38). Al- though black topped pottery had not been found at the time when the Satchinez material was first published, Pit 10 yielded several fragments of biconical vessels with a black upper and dark red lower part of the type also found at Gornea (Lazarovici 1977, 57) and Liubcova (Luca 1998, Fig. 8. Satchinez, Pit 5a — selection of diagnostic pottery 38) dating from the Vinča A2– A3 phase. A3 phase (Lazarovici 1977, 58; Draşovean– The most frequent shapes are biconical deep Fota 2003), or the Proto-Vinča period (Horváth bowls, whose best counterparts are known from 2006b, Pl. I. 4, Pl. II. 5). Gornea and Liubcova, from the Vinča A2 phase Various formal elements of the goblets allow (Lazarovici 1977, 57; 1979, 112–113; Luca 1998, their precise dating and cultural attribution. Their 41), although parallels can also be quoted from stems are tall, with a red painted, markedly con- assemblages influenced by the early Vinča cul- cave base, resembling the pieces found in Vinča A ture, assigned to the so-called Proto-Vinča pe- cultural contexts (Lazarovici 1977, 58; 1979, 113; riod (Horváth 2006b, Pl. I. 1; Oross 2007, 505). Luca 1998, 38). In addition to these deep bowls, the biconical ves- The decorative motifs on the pottery from sels from Pit 4 (Draşovean 1993, Pl. I. 4) and Satchinez are particularly important both for dat- Pit 10 are best matched by pieces from the Vinča ing and for establishing the role played by com-

Fig. 9. Satchinez, Pit 4 — fine pottery and ALP imports Fig. 10. Satchinez, Pit 4 — fragment of an ALP vessel

117 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

Pl. V. 36; Lazarovici 1977, 57, 59, Pl. LV. 18, Pl. XLIII. 2; 1979, 113, Pl. XIV H/33), as well as on early Linear Pottery vessels (Trogmayer 1964, Fig. 6. 5; Makkay 1978, Pl. XVII. 19; Ka- licz 1979, Pl. 8. 1; Pavúk 1980, Fig. 42. 2; Kaufmann 1981, Fig. 4. 5) of the Starčevo–Criş IIIB– IVA–Vinča A1–A2–early Linear Pottery chronological horizon. In the early Transdanubian Lin- ear Pottery (TLP), these decorations are associated with spiral and meandering designs (Ka- licz–Makkay 1972, Fig. 3. 9; 1979, Pl. 8. 1; Makkay 1978, Pl. XI. 4a–c, Pl. XVII. 13, 18). The Fig. 11. Satchinez, Pit 9 — selection of diagnostic pottery finds incisions below the vessel rim resemble those of the Starčevo– Criş IV (Lazarovici 1980, Fig. 2. 6; 1981, Fig. 8. 5; 1983, 25 and Fig. 1. 6), Vinča A2 (Lazarovici 1977, Pl. LII. 1), Szatmár II (Ka- licz 1983, Fig. 7. 7, 9, Fig. 9. 2, 4, 7–9, Fig. 10. 4–5, Fig. 11. 8, 11, 13, 16, 19) and Pişcolt I (Lazaro- vici 1983, Fig. 9. 1). A fragment from a conical vessel with a burnished incision under the rim found in Pit 5 is similar to a decorative motif found in Szatmár II (early Alföld Linear Pottery) and Pişcolt I contexts (Kalicz– Makkay 1977, Pl. 5. 3, 9, 10, 16, Pl. 11. 2–6, 8–11, 12, 14–16, Pl. 168. 1; Raczky 1983, Fig. 18. 6). Analogies with similar cultural levels (Kalicz–Makkay 1977, Fig. 12. Satchinez, Pit 10 — diagnostic coarse and fine pottery Pl. 22. 4, 16; Korek 1977, Fig. 15. 1–2, Fig. 22. 1–2, 4, 9, 22; La- munities of this type in the emergence of certain zarovici 1983, Fig. 2. 11, Fig. 3. 14, Fig. 4. 7; La- cultures in the Alföld Plain. Thus, parallel di- zarovici– Németi 1983, Pl. VII. 3) are also sug- agonal stabs on coarse pottery can be found on gested by the wavy lines decorating a vessel foot Starčevo–Criş pottery (Dimitrijević 1974, Pl. XI. (Fig. 10). 6, Pl. XIX. 12, 14–16; Lazarovici 1975, Pl. V. 12; The fine pottery is decorated with fluting, pat- 1981, Fig. 5. 1–3, 9, Pl. 7. 6, Pl. 8. 5; 1984, Fig. 6. tern burnishing and burnished incisions. While 7, Fig. 8. 2, 4), Körös (Kutzián 1944, Pl. VI. 11, the first two decorative elements, associated with Pl. XIII. 11, Pl. XVIII. 9, Pl. XXVIII. 5, Pl. XL. 11; manufacturing techniques and vessel form, have Trogmayer 1964, Fig. 12. 1; Raczky 1976, Fig. 4. analogies only in the Vinča A phase (Vasić 1936, 2, Fig. 9. 3, Fig. 13. 6), and Vinča A (Vasić 1936, Tab. IV. 20–21, Tab. VIII. 30b; Lazarovici 1975,

118 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

13–14 and Fig. VI. 4, 7, 13; 1977, 57–59, 61; 1979, 111, 113, 114), burnished incisions, highly characteristic of Satchinez decorations, can be linked to polychromy and to Paradimi (Zaharia 1964, 25 and Fig. 5. 1–2; Nica 1977, Fig. 11. 4–6; Bakalakis-Sakelariou 1981, Pl. 50. 1, Pl. 57. 3, Pl. 59. 1–4, Pl. 60. 9). Another element linking the pottery to the Bal- kans and to polychromy is grey burnished pottery, another com- mon type of Satchinez fine pottery. These decorative elements (burnished incisions and grey pottery) are also known from Fig. 13. Satchinez, Pit 10 — imported Esztár cup the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, e.g., from Pit 3 of Maroslele-Pana and from Ószentiván VIII (Trogmayer 1964, 85; Horváth 2006a), dated to the Vinča A2–A3 chronological horizon. The analogies presented above clearly demonstrate that the Neo lithic settlement features uncovered at Satchinez can be assigned to Phase A of the Vinča culture. Within this time frame, certain finer chronological distinctions can be drawn among these complexes even at the current state of research. Pits 5 and 4 can be assigned to Phase A2 of the Vinča culture, while Pits 5a, 8, 9 and 10 all contain later elements, assign- Fig. 14. Satchinez, Pit 8 — diagnostic coarse and fine pottery ing them to the Vinča A3 phase. This later date is also confirmed by the Linear Pottery elements from Pits 8 (Fig. 15) and 10 (Fig. 14. 5), as well as from the occupation layer (Fig. 17. 6, Fig. 18. 1), which have much in com- mon with the finds of the Banat Culture and the Alföld Linear Pottery culture (ALP) from the northern Banat and the southern part of the Great Hungar- ian Plain (Draşovean 1989; Fig. 15. Satchinez, Pit 8 — frag- Fig. 16. Satchinez, Pit 5 — fragments of human 2006a; 2006b; Lazarovici 1991, ment of an ALP vessel figurines

119 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

regarding the archaeological features, all the find assemblages brought to light at Satchinez date back to no later than Phase A of the Vinča culture. Moreo- ver, there are no elements what- soever either in the material from the occupation layer, from Pit 5a, or from any other feature that would suggest a different chronological and cultural attribution, more specifically, the Vinča B2/C1 phase or the Foeni group proposed by C.-M. and Gh. Lazarovici, seeing that the latter’s genetic affiliation (Draşovean 2002, 61–62; 2004; 2006a; 2006b) and characteris- Fig. 17. Satchinez — diagnostic pottery from the occupation layer tic elements (Draşovean 1997) clearly distinguish it not only from the early phase of the Vinča culture, but also from all the cultural complexes which evolved in this geographical area during the Late Neolithic (Draşovean 1994; 1996). In conclusion, even if the Esz-tár import discovered in 1989 had not originated from Pit 5, but from Pit 5a, a hypothesis which cannot be rejected out of hand, the fact that the latter can also be assigned to the Vinča A phase, perhaps to Phase A3, does not significantly influence the synchronism proposed by us almost two decades ago. This seems to be confirmed Fig. 18. Satchinez — diagnostic pottery from the occupation layer by the fact that Pit 10, excavated in 1990, yielded another Esztár Fig. 15. 2, 4) assigned to the Vinča A3 cultural ho- import, also in association with Vinča A3 materi- rizon. The linear ornamental motifs used by the als. The find in question is a globular vessel with Neolithic communities living in these regions curvilinear motifs painted in black, only partially reflect a changing world, an interaction between preserved (Fig. 13), which supports the synchro- the old Vinča culture and the autochthonous nism presented above and confirms the Vinča A3 Starčevo–Criş/Körös communities of the north- chronological level as a terminus ante quem for ern Banat and the southern part of the Great Hun- the earliest appearance of the Esztár group. garian Plain, a process which eventually led to the The publication of the entire find material birth of the Banat culture and the ALP culture. from Satchinez is of vital importance for a bet- Consequently, despite certain chronological ter understanding of the Middle Neolithic con- distinctions which can be made at the moment tacts between the southern, and the middle and

120 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain... northern areas of the Alföld Plain (the area between the Körös and Maros rivers), seeing that it represents the first Esztár imports from the Vinča distribution. The regions discussed here comprise the area south of the River Maros to the line of the Danube and the foot of the Transylvanian Alps in Rumania, Serbia, Hungary and the vast area of the Great Hungarian Plain, reaching as far as the Northern Mountain Range in eastern Slo- vakia. The northern Banat variant of the Vinča complex occupied the regions south of the River Maros, while different variants of the Alföld Lin- ear Pottery and the Esztár group were distributed north of the river. Several studies have been devoted to the con- Fig. 19. Satchinez — diagnostic pottery from the occupation nections between the two regions and cultural layer complexes, most using the traditional, typological and typo-chronological approach. Early studies clusters (Figs 20–21).2 Even more important is that by Gordon V. Childe, Ferenc Tompa, János Ban- our studies called attention to certain parallelisms ner, Sándor Gallus, Friedrich Holste, Vladimir rather than strict theoretical sequences, i.e. the as- Milojčić, Fritz Schachermeyr, Ida Kutzián, Bogdan sumed succession of archaeological-chronological Brukner and others focused on the contacts be- units within the chronological framework of the tween the Alföld Plain and South-East Europe. Middle Neolithic in the Great Hungarian Plain. The pioneering and more detailed analyses of con- A number of problems nonetheless remained tacts between the Alföld Linear Pottery and the unresolved when attempting to synchronise neigh- neighbouring areas have been mainly performed bouring sites, cultural complexes and cultural by Hungarian, Rumanian and Serbian archaeolo- periods; it also became clear that despite its cur- gists (Lazarovici 1976, 1979; Kalicz–Makkay rent accuracy, radiocarbon dating is unsuitable 1977; Garašanin 1989; but cp. also Chapman for excluding a wide range of variability in possi- 1981; Parzinger 1993). Later studies were con- ble synchronisms exactly because of the significant cerned with establishing more precise correlations overlaps between the time ranges of the calibrated between the different chronological-developmen- dates. Also, the preciseness of a relative chronology tal periods of the ALP and the Vinča complex based on typological cross-dating always depends (Raczky 1986; 1988; 1992). on the reliable identification of imported and trad- Aside from the traditional typological ap- ed commodities, as well as on the excavation meth- proach, the new advances in radiocarbon dating ods applied. These problems have been discussed held out the promise of a method enabling a more in detail regarding the ALP–Esztár–Vinča interre- reliable and precise determination of the chrono- lationships (Horváth 1994, 103–106; Horváth– logical dimension of the connections (G. Szénász- Hertelendi 1994, 115–116), as well as regarding ky 1983; Horváth 1991; Hertelendi–Horváth contacts between the Esztár group and the Banat 1992; Horváth–Hertelendi 1994; Hertelendi (Horváth 1996, 128–134), which have stirred lit- et al. 1998). Despite later critiques (Strobel 1997, tle attention until now. The conclusions presented 79, note 172; Domboróczki 2003, 21–22; Oross in these studies, complemented with the new evi- 2007, 579–581), these initial efforts represented the first attempts towards establishing a broad ra- 2 Following Pál Raczky’s critical comments on Ferenc Horváth’s diocarbon chronology for the Carpathian Basin. candidate’s thesis, the cited date clusters (Horváth–Hertelendi While some of the criticism levelled at our analy- 1994, 122–129) were group calibrated by Ede Hertelendi in 1996 sis of the radiocarbon dates was certainly justified, in the Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of it must also be borne in mind that the interpreta- Sciences (Debrecen). Although the dates were quoted during the public debate, they are first published here. The base of the idea for tion of the dates was modified after the analyses using these clusters was the visible grouping of certain radiocar- were repeated using group calibration and date bon dates within the Neolithic time sequence.

121 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean dence on the dating and connections of the Esztár painted pottery, are as follows: (1) Only settlements of the Körös culture can be found in the later core distribution of the Esztár group prior to its appearance between the southern part of the Nyírség and the Körös Valley (the greater part of Körösköz, Sárrét, Hegyköz, Réz- alja, Hajdúság and Hortobágy regions). During the over ten years that have elapsed since the publication of the above studies, new Körös settlements have been discovered in the core distribution, confirming our earlier hypothesis (Hajdú–Nagy 2000, 33–35; Dani et al. 2006, 5–7). (2) Independent ALP 1 (Szat- már II, Rétközberencs-Parom domb type) and ALP 2 sites (classical, Hortobágy-Faluvég halom type) or sites of the assumed later ALP periods are not known from within the Esztár core distribution. The typical incised (or, better said, grooved) ALP traits mixed with Esztár- type finds appear in the contact zones, principally on the western and the northern/north-eastern fringes of the Esztár distribution (Fig. 22). (3) The occurrence of this type of ALP pottery in relation to the Esztár core distribution sug- gests that the two neighbouring populations only interacted in Fig. 20. The group calibrations of date clusters for the Körös, early ALP, and early the contact zones, and most ALP Vinča cultures (unpublished, after Ede Hertelendi) pottery finds are imports in the Esztár area. The latter is confirmed by the obser- Makkay 1977, 189–215). No changes could be not- vation that the incision technique employed by the ed in the distribution of the sites yielding pottery ALP and Szakálhát cultures are absent in the Esz- of this type during the ALP 2 and 3 periods. tár group (Goldman–G. Szénászky 1998, 118). (4) The chronological implications of the evi- Most of the import ALP wares have been assigned dence presented in the above are the following: in to the ALP 2 (classical, Hortobágy-Faluvéghalom) the ALP 1 (Szatmár II) period, the surviving Körös or ALP 3 phase (the assumed later phase and the communities populated the later Esztár areas. Few Szarvas-Érpart type) on typological grounds in of the known Körös sites from this area can be dat- the overwhelming majority of the cases (Kalicz– ed with accuracy within the Körös sequence. The

122 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

Fig. 21. The calibration curves of the group calibrated data (unpublished, after Ede Hertelendi)

Szentpéterszeg-Körtvélyes (Kalicz 1982, 213–214) What is certain is that the appearance of Esztár and Csökmő-Tordai zsilip sites can be assigned to painted pottery in the main area of its distribution the late Körös period (Hajdú–Nagy 2000, 33–35). can be correlated with the ALP 2 period. This cor- Little is known about the date of Berettyóújfalu- relation seems to be supported by both the radio- Nagy Bócs-dűlő site (Dani et al. 2006, 5–7). One carbon dates (Horváth–Hertelendi 1994, 124– notable exception is the Furta-Csátó site, which 125) and the import Esztár ceramics in classical can be dated to the latest, proto-Vinča period, re- ALP 2 assemblages from the valley of the Triple garded as contemporaneous with the ALP 1 in the Körös river (Makkay 1982, 61; 2007, 99). southern contact zone (Makkay–Starnini 2008, (5) While there has been a welcome rise in the Figs 324–339). There are no late Körös sites north number of Esztár sites during the past decade (Bi- of Szentpéterszeg up to the Méhtelek distribution. harkeresztes, Hajdúszoboszló, Ebes, Berettyóúj- The scanty traces of Körös sites contemporane- falu, Hajdúböszörmény, Debrecen, etc.), with the ous with ALP 1 (Szatmár II) are restricted to the total number now over sixty, little is known about southern areas of the Esztár distribution. The Esz the internal periodisation of the Esztár phenome- tár and the ALP 1 distribution complement each non. The stratigraphy of the Mezőgyán-Püski Hill other exactly, this being the reason for assuming site indicates the existence of at least two Esztár that the appearance of the Esztár population may developmental periods. The lower layer yielded be dated as early as the ALP 1 period. purely Esztár material, the next layer a later Esztár Currently, there is no irrefutable stratigraphic assemblage containing Szakálhát pottery, while evidence for either the former or the latter assump- the uppermost layer could be assigned to the Tisza tions. Recently uncovered mixed ALP 1–Esztár as- culture. Sadly, the find material in question has semblages (such as the one from Balmazújváros- not been published in detail to date (Goldman– Darucsorda kút, Site 1 and similar find materials) G. Szénászky 1994, 226). must be treated with caution until primary strati- (6) A similar situation can be noted regard- graphic evidence of similar — theoretically pos- ing the distribution of the late Körös and earliest sible — contexts is discovered (Mester 2009). Szakálhát cultures in the area between the valleys

123 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean of the Körös and Maros rivers on the Romanian division; however, the archaeological units (Szakál- side. Following the Early Neolithic, the known hát and Esztár) assigned to Phase 4 (Raczky’s classi- sites can be assigned to the early Szakálhát cul- cal ALP phase) appear already in Phase 3 as shown ture (Vărşand/Gyulavarsánd, Sântana/Újszentanna, by the assemblages from sites such as Berettyó Arad–Grădişte/Arad–Vár, Păuliş/Ópaulis). There szentmárton-Morotva and Békés-Déló. Seeing that is nothing to support the distribution maps on the Szakálhát finds from Békés-Déló hardly repre- which the northernmost boundary of the Vinča sent the culture’s earliest appearance, Raczky’s ALP culture is drawn at the line of the River Someş/ 4 would be contemporaneous only with (or repre- Szamos (Raczky–Anders 2003, Fig. 1) and that sented by) the latest Szakálhát period (Tisza I, the of the Banat culture at the line of the Criş/Körös culture’s formative period), the latest Esztár and the Valley (Lazarovici–Lazarovici 2006, Fig. IIIb. Bükk III groups. Moreover, it is debatable whether 1, Fig. IIIg. 1). However, it is still unclear whether the former two can be regarded as integral parts of the ALP sites of the Szarvas-Érpart type were dis- the ALP in view of their partly different genetics tributed continuously to the line of the Crişul Alb/ and material culture. Fehér-Körös valley after the latest Körös period on These chronological schemes synchronised the the Rumanian side, or whether the earliest Szakál- first half of the ALP (Phases 1–2, Szatmár II, and hát was wedged in-between the north-western early, i.e. classical periods) with Vinča A (Vinča– variant of the early Vinča culture and the Esztár Tordos I), and the second half (ALP 3, i.e. the later group. phase, and ALP 4, the latest local groups such as The relative chronological synchronisation of Szarvas-Érpart, Szilmeg, Bükk, Tiszadob, Sza- the ALP sequence and the sub-phases of the Banat kálhát and Esztár) with Vinča B (Vinča–Tordos complexes poses several difficulties. The generally II) (Kalicz–Makkay 1977, 94, 100–111; Raczky accepted internal periodisations conceal several 1988, 29; 1989, 235). This fourfold chronological contradictions with regard to both the ALP com- scheme formed the basis for later syntheses, which plex and the north-western Banat variant of the divided the ALP II into two further sub-phases, Vinča culture. ALP IIa and IIb, based on the analysis of the char- Regarding the ALP, for example, the sub-di- acteristic traits of decorative motifs and pottery vision following the Szatmár II period proposed forms (Strobel 1997, 9–98). by Nándor Kalicz and János Makkay, namely “an More recently yet another scheme has been early and a later phase, and the local groups” of proposed to divide the ALP 1 (Szatmár II) into the ALP (Kalicz–Makkay 1977) are used differ- three further sub-phases (Kalicz–S. Koós 2000, ently in the text and on Map 3 and in Table 3, the 69), meaning that the number of ALP sub-phases latter two featuring an “intermediate phase” with- increased to seven, and in this respect it resem- out any description of its traits. Moreover, no dif- bled the most complicated sub-periodisation of the ferences can be discerned between the traits of the Vinča A and B phases (Schier 1991, Fig. 146). The proposed early and late phases, whose assemblages main problem with these sub-divisions is that they are discussed without any mention of the differ- are based on the typological analysis of pottery as- ences between them (Kalicz–Makkay 1977, 30– semblages from a pit or a house, pottery seriation, 37). In the chronological framework proposed in or the analysis of the characteristic traits of decora- 1977 and Makkay’s later scheme (made up of four tive motifs and pottery forms. While these analy- developmental periods: Szatmár II, early, classical, ses can contribute to test or to increase the accura- and the different groups), Szatmár II was contem- cy of the chronological time-range of assemblages, poraneous with late Körös and the beginning of it cannot be a substitute for the evidence provided Proto-Vinča (Kalicz–Makkay 1977, 94, Tabelle by stratigraphic sequences. These sub-divisions 2 between pages 94–95; Makkay 1982, 54). therefore remain theoretical categories which are Another, slightly differing version suggested by rarely filled with meaningful content, reflected by Pál Paczky — which otherwise follows Makkay’s the lack of a description of the typological charac- fourfold division (ALP 1–4 periods: Makkay 1982, teristics of the assemblages assigned to the differ- 54) — has correctly correlated the Szatmár II as- ent chronological phases (cp. Kovács 2007, 35). semblages with ALP 1 period. The other sub-peri- The main problem in the correlation of the dif- ods in this scheme (ALP 2–4) follow the fourfold ferent ALP developmental phases with those of

124 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain... the north-western or north-eastern variants of the Vinča complex south of the River Maros is the uncertain date of the ALP imports. It cannot be established whether the significant number of ALP potsherds found on Vinča sites in Hungary (Ószen- tiván VIII, Tiszasziget, Deszk A) Romania (Satchinez, Freidorf/ Szabadfalu IV, Freidorf-Hladnik, Fratelia/Újtesöld, Gornea) and the Serbian Banat (Crna Bara/ Feketetó, Čoka/Csóka, Bečej/ Óbecse-Gradište), and the finds from Vinča-Belo Brdo and Ban- jica south of the Danube repre- sent Phase 2 or 3 of the ALP. At some sites, the presence of the Szarvas-Érpart type could be de- termined (Ószentiván VIII, Frei- dorf I, Crna Bara), but not even so much at other sites (Horváth– Hertelendi 1994, 116). The early appearance of the Esztár and ALP assemblages at Satchinez in Vinča A2–A3 contexts (Draşovean 1993, 42), however, challenges the chronological position of the Esztár Fig. 22. The north-eastern Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain in the first half of phenomenon, generally assigned the Middle Neolithic to the ALP 3 and 4, which is correlated with Vinča B. In view of these contexts and horizons of the Szarvas-Érpart type identified by in the light of the regional distribution of the ALP György Goldman at Békés-Déló and Gerla-Kász- and the Esztár group, the appearance of the latter mán (Goldman 1983, 26) can be correlated with. can now be confidently synchronised with ALP 2 The appearance of the Banat culture in the Ro- (described as early in Kalicz–Makkay 1977: and manian Banat and that of the Bucovaţ group in as classical in Makkay 1982). A personal exami- the Bega/Béga Valley would suggest that Vinča A3 nation of the ALP imports found at Satchinez in- can be regarded as a terminus ante quem for the dicated that they can be assigned to this period. Satchinez type Vinča A sites. Romanian research The difficulties in the more precise attribution defined the chronological position of Satchin- of single ALP pottery fragments found on Vinča ez immediately before the Banat I culture in the sites has been mentioned in the above; the only ex- time-span and material culture of Vinča A2 pe- ceptions are the Szarvas-Érpart type motifs iden- riod (Draşovean 1993, 42, 47; Lazarovici–La- tified in a few cases. Similarly to the Esztár group, zarovici 2006, 211, 675). the Szarvas-Érpart type was until now assigned to However, no such terminus ante quem can be the two latest ALP periods. The late dating of the established in the Hungarian and Serbian Banat Szarvas-Érpart type — and the internal periodi- owing to the lack of independent early and clas- sation of the quoted sites — most certainly needs sical Szakálhát sites on the one hand, and the lack to be revised. Another issue is which of the ALP of characteristic Vinča B1 sites on the other. It is IIa–b and III sub-phases the two chronological possible that the Vinča A settlements south of the

125 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

Fig. 23. A selection of the archaic wares of Esztár assemblages — 1–13, 15–16: Berettyószentmárton-Morotva, 14. Biharkeresz- tes (after Hajdú–Nagy 2000)

River Maros survived into the B1 period with a gion, using the label early Vinča or Vinča–Tordos more or less unaltered material culture, this being in most cases. the reason that Serbian research does not draw a The stratigraphy of the Vinča-Belo Brdo site distinction of this type (Vinča A and B) in this re- provides a possible solution to this problem: the

126 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain... late Szakálhát face pots came to light at a depth of straight line from south to north in the Vinča A 7.4 m, conforming to the Vinča B1 period accord- and B1 periods (Horváth 2006a, 315, Fig. 3. 4–8). ing to all the chronological schemes (Milojčić: B1, A black topped fragment from a red slipped, Berciu: B1, Lazarovici: B1, Schier: B1b; cp. Schier black painted vessel from Feature 8 of the Biharke- 1996, Fig. 146). This stratigraphical context indi- resztes-Kis Szárcsás dűlő site (Hajdú–Nagy 2000, cates that the ALP imports found in the deeper Fig. 8) provides additional chronological proof levels at Vinča-Belo Brdo can be assigned to the for an earlier dating of certain Esztár assemblag- Vinča A phase and it also explains the assignation es (Fig. 23. 14). As Vladimir Milojčić aptly noted, of the Szakálhát imports to Vinča B1–2 in the Ser- this technique has no antecedents in the Danube bian Banat (Crna Bara, Novi Bečej/Törökbecse- region. Widely used during the Vinča A period, Matejsky Brod, Banatska Subotica/Krassószom- black-topped wares, which had their origins in the bat-Cerovica, Iđoš/Tiszahegyes-Gradište, Sajan/ south, disappeared at the onset of the next period Szaján-Kremenjak). (Milojčić 1949, 268, 294). Black-topped pottery at Esztár pottery has not been analysed in de- Gornea in the Lower Danube Basin in the Vinča tail to date. The assemblage best available for the A1 period accounted for 30% of the fine ware. This study of its associations remains the one from Be- proportion decreased to 10% in Vinča A2 and to rettyóújfalu-Szentmárton-Morotva (Sz. Máthé 1.5% in Vinča A3 assemblages (Lazarovici 1977, 1979, 35–56).3 Of the three pits excavated at the 55, 57, 60). Milojčić’s observation is supported site, Pit A and especially Pit C contained archaic by the gradual decline of black-topped pottery at finds (published only partly). These archaic traits Gornea and its virtual disappearance by the end are the short, incised or grooved decorations on of the Vinča A period. the vessel body or the low pedestal (Fig. 23. 1–5; The record from the Upper Mureş/Maros and Sz. Máthé 1979, Pl. VII, top right), semi-barbo- Morava Valley variants of the Vinča complex far- tine (oblique or horizontal Schlickwurf) cover- ther east and south indicates that the black-topped ing coarse pots (Fig. 23. 6–8, 10–11), rims deco- technique is typical during the Vinča A period rated with impressions (Fig. 23. 8), short, oblique and that a variant of this technique apparently or vertical double ribs (Fig. 23. 9), small, shallow survived into the Vinča A–B transition and the cup with thickened foot and traces of black paint- beginning of Vinča B, although its proportion and ing, the monochrome, incarnadine or crimson quality decreased (Garašanin–Garašanin 1979, (purple-red) slip applied before firing (Fig. 23. 69, 71, 73, 77; Florescu 2007, 32). The ceramics 12–13), horizontal rib handles set inside the ves- from the latter period, however, were not made by sels (Sz. Máthé 1979, Pl. IX, middle), vertical and the genuine black-topped technique. After person- oblique black or, rarely, white painted linear (or ally examining variants of the black-topped tech- pearled) design on lustrous purple-red slip, occur- nique, John Chapman noted that “Black-topped ring in late Körös–Starčevo, Vinča A and ALP 1 wares are the products of experiments in surface contexts (Horváth 1996, 132). treatment. Such experiments are consistent with The fragment of a biconical vessel with con- the innovative character of late Starčevo and earli- stricted mouth and a lug handle provides a chron- est Vinča potters” (Chapman 1981, 36). Bearing ological anchor (Fig. 23. 15–16). Similar lug han- in mind the period during which this firing tech- dles have been found at Kosovo and in southern nique was popular, the black-topped vessel frag- Morava at sites contemporaneous with late Vinča A ment from Biharkeresztes (Hajdú–Nagy 2000, (Anza IVa–b sites of Anzabegovo) and with Vinča Figs 1, 4, 6) can be put at the end of the Vinča A B1 (Zelenikovo II-Angelci) (Gimbutas 1976, period or the Vinča A–B transition. The other 130–131, Fig. 80; Sanev 2006, 155, Fig. IIa. 3, Fig. published pottery sherds (rim decorated with im- IIIb. 8, 13–15). A variant of this handle type with pressions, short incised lines, vertical ribs, spout- truncated terminal spread from the Skopje region ed vessel) make this site one of the earliest Esztár to the northernmost Szakálhát distribution in a settlements. Returning briefly to radiocarbon dating, the first question is how the earliest Esztár and Satch- 3 Debrecen, Déri Múzeum, inv. nos 79.2.41, 79.3.24, 79.3.20, 79.3.49, 79.3.15, 79.6.7, 79.5.62, 79.3.30, 79.10.1, 79.2.1, 79.2.12, inez dates (Berettyóújfalu-Szilhalom: Bln 2580, 79.2.36. 5579; Satchinez: Deb 2579) relate to the Vinča A

127 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean period. The earliest dates for Esztár fall into Clus- date and defined it as nearer to Chapman’s opinion ter V, as defined in an earlier study Horváth ( – based on uncalibrated dates (4260/4240 bc), dat- Hertelendi 1994, 122–128) which, according to ing the beginning of the Vinča B1a period between the group calibration, falls between 5380–5220 5180/5040–5130/5040 cal BC (Schier 1995, 330, cal BC, predating the Vinča A settlements both at Abb. 149). The dates for the Banat II period fully Tiszasziget (Bln 1631) and Satchinez (Deb 2579). correspond to Vinča B1 (Lazarovici 2006, 282). It The Esztár dates are also earlier than the ones for follows from the above that the dates of Clusters V the ALP sites at Tiszavasvári-Keresztfal (Bln 505) and VI, containing the earliest dates for Esztár and and Tarnabod-Templomföld (Bln 123), the ear- Satchinez, fall into the time-span of Vinča A, well liest Szakálhát dates from the lowermost level of before the earliest dates representing the Vinča B1 the Tápé-Lebő A tell settlement (Deb 1366), and period. The combined dates of Cluster VII, con- the earliest dates from Battyonya-Parázstanya taining one sample from Ószentiván VIII/e-Pit 4 (Bln 1967). The latter dates, however, fall between (Bln 477), however, overlaps partly with Vinča A 5290–5110 cal BC, part of Cluster VI (Horváth– and partly with Vinča B. Hertelendi 1994, 122–128). In spite of the problems concerning the inter- The second question is whether it is possible nal periodisation of Esztár pottery and the defini- to determine the onset of the Vinča B period with tion of its typo-chronological position relative to an accuracy of at least fifty years? Since the first Vinča A type assemblages, the radiocarbon chro- analysis (Chapman 1981, 17–32), new series of ra- nology would suggest that the appearance of this diocarbon dates have become available. Wolfram pottery can be dated to the period corresponding Schier and Roland Gläser defined the end of Vinča to Vinča A. A detailed correlation between the A and the beginning of the Vinča B period around sub-phases of the ALP and Vinča A can only be 5200 cal BC at Vinča-Belo Brdo (Gläser 1991, 177; established in the light of reliable stratigraphic ob- Schier 1991, Fig. 12). W. Schier later modified this servations.

References

Bakalakis, G.–Sakelariou, A. 1981: Paradimi. Mainz am Rhein. Chapman, J. 1981: The Vinča culture of South-East Europe. Studies in chronology, economy and society I–II. British Archaeological Reports–International Series 117, Oxford. Dani, J.–Szilágyi, K.–Szelekovszky, M.–Czifra, Sz.–Kisjuhász, V. 2006: Előzetes jelentés a Berettyóújfalu, Nagy Bócs-dűlő lelőhelyen 2004–2005 során végzett régészeti feltárásról – Preliminary report of the excavations preceding investment at the Berettyóújfalu, Nagy Bócs-dűlő site in 2004–2005. Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon 2005 – Archaeological Investigations in Hungary 2005, Budapest 2006, 5–31. Dimitrijević, S. 1974: Problem stupnjevanja starčevačke kulture s posebnim obzirom na doprinos južnopanonskih nalazišta rješavanju ovog problema. Materijali Saveza Arheoloških Društava Jugoslavije 10 (1974) 59–122. Domboróczki, L. 2003: Radiocarbon data from neolithic archaeological sites in Heves County (North-Eastern Hungary). Agria 39 (2003) 5–71. Draşovean, F. 1989: Observaţii pe marginea unor materiale inedited privind raporturile dintre culturile Starčevo– Criş, Vinča A şi lumea liniară din nordul Banatului. Apulum 26 (1989) 9–48. Draşovean, F. 1993: Aşezarea neolitică de la Satchinez (jud. Timiş) – The neolithic settlement from Satchinez (Timiş county). Analele Banatului 2 (1993) 25–48. Draşovean, F. 1994: Die Stufe Vinča C im Banat. Germania 72 (1994) 409–425. Draşovean, F. 1996: Cultura Vinča, faza târzie în Banat. Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica 1, Timişoara. Draşovean, F. 1997: Die Petreşti-Kultur im Banat. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 72 (1997) 54–80. Draşovean, F. 2002: Neolithic settlements from Hunedoara-“Cimitirul Reformat” and “Grădina Castelului” and a position concerning some opinions regarding the neo-eneolithic facts from the south-west of Transylvania. Patrimonium Banaticum 1 (2002) 43–76.

128 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

Draşovean, F. 2004: Transylvania and the Banat in the Late Neolithic. The origins of the Petreşti culture. Antaeus 27 (2004) 27–36. Draşovean, F. 2006a: Nordgriechenland und der mittlere Donauraum zum Ende des 6. und Beginns des 5. Jahrtausends v. Chr. In: Tasić, N.–Grozdanov, C. (eds): Homage to Milutin Garašanin. SASA Special Editions, Belgrade 2006, 267–276. Draşovean, F. 2006b: The Starčevo–Criş and Vinča transition in northern Banat. In: Brukner, B.–Vorgić, B. (eds): Current problems of the transition period from the Starčevo to the Vinča Culture. Zrenjanin 2006, 93–109. Draşovean, F.–Fota, A. 2003: Noi descoperiri arheologice pe teritoriul satului Cruceni (com. Foeni, jud. Timiş) – Nouvelles découvertes archéologiques sur le territoire du village Cruceni. Patrimonium Banaticum 2 (2003) 55–67. Florescu, C. 2007: Vinča culture. In: Ciuta, B.–Florescu, C.–Gligor, M.–Mazăre, P.–Şuteu, C.–Varvara, S.: A history lesson – Pottery manufacturing 8000 years ago. Exhibition catalog. Alba Iulia 2007, 30–41. Garašanin, M. 1989: Beziehungen der Vinča-Gruppe zum Neolithikum der Ungarischen Tiefebene (Vinča, Szakálhát, Theiss). In: Bökönyi, S. (ed.): Neolithic of Southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern Connections. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 2, Budapest 1989, 59–64. Garašanin, D.–Garašanin, M. 1979: Supska „Stublina“ – Vorgeschichtliche Ansiedlung der Vinča-Gruppe. Belgrade. Gimbutas, M. 1976: Neolithic Macedonia. As reflected by excavation at Anza, Southeast Yougoslavia. Monumenta Archaeologica 1, Los Angeles. Gläser, R. 1991: Bemerkungen zur absoluten Datierung des Beginns der westlichen Linienbandkeramik. Banatica 11 (1991) 53–64. Goldman, Gy. 1983: Az alföldi vonaldíszes kerámia fiatal szakaszának leletei Békés megyében – Funde der jungen Phase der Linienbandkeramik des Alföld im Komitat Békés. Archaeologiai Értesítő 110 (1983) 24–34. Goldman, Gy.–G. Szénászky, J. 1994: Die neolithische Esztár-Gruppe in Ostungarn – A kelet-magyarországi Esztár csoport. Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve 36 (1994) 226–230. Goldman, Gy.–G. Szénászky, J. 1998: Problems of the transition from Middle to Late Neolithic in the South- East Hungarian Plain. In: Draşovean, F. (ed.): The Late Neolithic of the Middle Danube region. Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica 15, Timişoara 1998, 117–122. Hajdú, Zs.–Nagy, E. Gy. 2000: Újabb neolit leletek Hajdú-Bihar megyéből – Recent Neolithic Findings from Hajdú- Bihar County. In: Hajdú, Zs.–Nagy, E. Gy. (eds): „Biharország” neolitikuma. Válogatás a környék újkőkori leleteiből – Neoliticul în judeţele Bihor ši Hajdú-Bihar – Neolithic of “Bihar-Area”. Debrecen–Oradea 2000, 33–39. Hertelendi, E.–Horváth, F. 1992: Radiocarbon Chronology of Late Neolithic Settlements in the Tisza–Maros Region, Hungary. Radiocarbon 34 (1992) 859–866. Hertelendi, E.–Svingor, É.–Raczky, P.–Horváth, F.–Futó, I.–Bartosiewicz, L.–Molnár, M. 1998: Radiocarbon chronology of the Neolithic and time span of tell settlements in eastern Hungary based on calibrated radiocarbon dates. In: Költő, L.–Bartosiewicz, L. (eds): Archaeometrical research in Hungary II. Budapest–Kaposvár–Veszprém 1998, 61–69. Horváth, F. 1991: Vinča culture and its connections with the South-East Hungarian Neolithic: a comparison of traditional and 14C chronology. Banatica 11 (1991) 259–273. Horváth, F. 1994: Az alföldi vonaldíszes kerámia első önálló települése a Tisza–Maros szögében: Hódmezővásárhely- Tére fok – The first independent settlement of the Alföld Linear Pottery culture in the Tisza–Maros Region: Hódmezővásárhely-Tére fok. In: Lőrinczy, G. (Hrsg.): „A kőkortól a középkorig”. Tanulmányok Trogmayer Ottó 60. születésnapjára – Von der Steinzeit bis zum Mittelalter. Studien zum 60. Geburtstag von Ottó Trogmayer. Szeged 1994, 95–111. Horváth, F. 1996: Similarities and differences in the cultural changes and interrelations during the early and middle Neolithic of the Southern Alföld in comparison with the middle Tisza-region in Hungary. In: Drašovean, F. (ed.): The Vinča culture, its role and cultural connections. Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica 2, Timişoara 1996, 125–140. Horváth, F. 2006a: Comments on the Connections between the Vinča Complex and the Carpathian Basin. In: Tasić, N.–Grozdanov, C. (eds): Homage to Milutin Garašanin. SASA Special Editions: Belgrade 2006, 309–324. Horváth, F. 2006b: A contribution to the question of cultural changes at the turn of Early and Middle Neolithic in the Tisza–Maros region. In: Brukner, B.–Vorgić, B. (eds): Current problems of the transition period from the Starčevo to the Vinča Culture. Zrenjanin 2006, 111–133. Horváth, F.–Hertelendi, E. 1994: Contribution to the 14C based absolute chronology of the Early and Middle Neolithic Tisza region – Megjegyzések a Tisza vidék korai és középső neolitikumának 14C alapú abszolút kronológiájához. Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve 36 (1994) 111–133.

129 Ferenc Horváth – Florin Dras¸ovean

Kalicz, N. 1979: Funde der ältesten phase der Linienbandkeramik in Südtransdanubien. Mitteilungen des Archäologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 8–9 (1979) 13–46. Kalicz, N. 1982: Ausgrabungen in Berettyóújfalu-Herpály und in Szentpéterszeg-Körtvélyes. Mitteilungen des Archäologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10–11 (1980–1981 [1982]) 211– 214. Kalicz, N. 1983: Die Körös-Starčevo-Kulturen und ihre Beziehungen zur Linearbandkeramik. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 52 (1983), 91–130. Kalicz, N.–Makkay, J. 1972: Südliche Einflüsse im frühen und mittleren Neolithikum Transdanubien. Alba Regia 12 (1972) 93–105. Kalicz, N.–Makkay, J. 1977: Die Linienbandkeramik in der Großen Ungarischen Tiefebene. Studia Archaeologica 7, Budapest. Kalicz, N.–S. Koós, J. 2000: Település a legkorábbi újkőkori sírokkal Északkelet-Magyarországról – Eine Siedlung mit ältestneolithischen Gräbern in Nordostungarn. Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve 39 (2000) 45–76. Kaufmann, D. 1981: Neue Funde der ältesten Linienbandkeramik von Eisleben, Kreis Wanzleben. Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte 1, Berlin 1981, 129–143. Korek, J. 1977: Die frühe und mittlere Phase der Neolithikums auf der Theissrücken. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 29 (1977) 3–17. Kovács, K. 2007: A tiszaszőlős-aszóparti középső neolitikus település legkorábbi időszakának vizsgálata a kronológiai és a kulturális kapcsolatok tükrében – The earliest occupation period of the Middle Neolithic settlement at Tiszaszőlős-Aszópart in the light of its chronological and cultural connections. Ősrégészeti Levelek/Prehistoric Newsletter 8–9 (2006–2007 [2007]) 19–38. Kutzián, I. 1944: A Körös kultúra – The Körös culture. Dissertationes Pannonicae Ser. II. 23, Budapest. Lazarovici, C.-M.–Lazarovici, Gh. 2006: Architectura neoliticului şi epocii cuprului din România I. Neoliticul. Iaşi. Lazarovici, Gh. 1975: Unele probleme ale ceramicii neoliticului din Banat. Banatica 3 (1975) 7–24. Lazarovici, Gh. 1976: Fragen der neolithischen Keramik in Banat. Archaeologica Austriaca 13 (1976) 203–234. Lazarovici, Gh. 1977: Gornea. Preistorie. Reşiţa. Lazarovici, Gh. 1979: Neoliticul Banatului. Bibliotheca Musei Napocensis 4, Cluj-Napoca. Lazarovici, Gh. 1980: Cîteva probleme privind sfîrșitul neoliticului timpuriu din nord-vestul României – Einige Fragen zum Ende des Frühneolithikums aus Nord-West-Rumänien. Acta Musei Napocensis 17 (1980) 13–30. Lazarovici, Gh. 1981: Die Periodisierung der Vinča-Kultur in Rumänien. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 56 (1981) 169–196. Lazarovici, Gh. 1983: Die Vinča-Kultur und ihre Beziehungen zur Linienbandkeramik. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 52 (1983) 131–176. Lazarovici, Gh. 1984: Neoliticul timpuriu în România – Das Frühneolithikum in Rumänien. Acta Musei Porolissensis 8 (1984) 49–104. Lazarovici, Gh. 1991: Freidorf-ob. I, Hladnik (jud. Timiş). In: Lazarovici, Gh.–Draşovean, F. (eds): Cultura Vinca în România. Timişoara 1991, 46–48. Lazarovici, Gh.–Németi, J. 1983: Neoliticul dezvolata din Nord-vestul României (Sălajul, Sătmarul Clujul). Acta Musei Porolissensis 8 (1983) 69–92. Luca, S. A. 1998: Liubcova-Orniţa. Monografie arheologică. Târgovişte. Makkay, J. 1978: Excavation at Bicske. I: The Early Neolithic – The earliest Linear band Ceramic. Alba Regia 16 (1978) 9–60. Makkay, J. 1982: A magyarországi neolitikum kutatásának új eredményei. Az időrend és a népi azonosítás kérdései [New results in the Research of the Neolithic in Hungary. Questions of the Chronology and Identity]. Budapest. Makkay, J.–Starnini, E. 2008: The excavations of Early Neolithic sites of the Körös culture in the Körös valley, Hungary: The final report. Vol. II–III. Budapest. Sz. Máthé, M. 1979: Újkőkori település Berettyószentmárton-Morotva lelőhelyen – Neusteinzeitliche Siedlung im Fundgebiet Berettyószentmárton-Morotva. Déri Múzeum Évkönyve 1978 [1979] 35–56. Mester, P. 2009: Balmazújváros-Darucsorda-kút 1. számú lelőhely középső újkőkori leletanyagának feldolgozása [Evaluation of the Middle Neolithic finds from site 1 in Balmazújváros-Darucsorda-kút]. BA Dissertation. Manuscript. Szeged. Milojčić, V. 1949: South-Eastern elements in the prehistoric civilization of Serbia. Annual of the British School at Athens 44 (1949) 258–306. Nica, M. 1977: Nouvelles données sur la néolithique ancien d’Oltenie. Dacia 21 (1979) 1–51.

130 Remarks on the Connections between the Banat and the Great Hungarian Plain...

Oross, K. 2007: The pottery from Ecsegfalva 23. In: Whittle, A. (ed.): The Early Neolithic of the Great Hungarian Plain. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 21, Budapest 2007, 491–620. Parzinger, H. 1993: Studien zur Chronologie und Kulturgeschichte der Jungstein-, Kupfer- und Frühbronzezeit zwischen Karpaten und Mittleren Taurus. Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 52, Mainz am Rhein. Pavúk, J. 1980: Ältere Linearkeramik in der Slowakei. Slovenská Archeológia 28 (1980) 7–90. Raczky P. 1976: A Körös kultúra leletei Tiszajenőn – Funde der Körös-Kultur in Tiszejenő. Archaeologiai Értsítő 103 (1976) 171–189. Raczky P. 1983: A korai neolitikumból a középső neolitikumba való átmenet kérdései a Közép- és Felső- Tiszavidéken – Questions of transition between the Early and Middle Neolithic in the Middle and Upper Tisza Region. Archaeologiai Értesítő 110 (1983) 161–194. Raczky P. 1986: Megjegyzések az „alföldi vonaldíszes kerámia” kialakulásának kérdéséhez. In: Németh, P. (ed.): Régészeti tanulmányok Kelet-Magyarországról. Folklór és Etnográfia 24 (1986) 25–67. Raczky P. 1988: A Tisza-vidék kulturális és kronológiai kapcsolatai a Balkánnal és az Égeikummal a neolitikum, rézkor időszakában. Újabb kutatási eredmények és problémák [The cultural and chronological connections of the Tisza region with the Balkans and Aegean at the time of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic. Recent research results and problems]. Szolnok. Raczky, P. 1989: Chronological Framework of the Early and Middle Neolithic in the Tisza Region. In: Bökönyi, S. (ed.): Neolithic of Southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern Connections. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 2, Budapest 1989, 233–251. Raczky, P. 1992: The neolithic of the Great Hungarian Plain and the Vinča complex. Balcanica 23 (1992) 147–165. Raczky, P.–Anders, A. 2003: The internal relations of the Alföld Linear Pottery culture in Hungary and the characteristics of human representation. In: Jerem, E.–Raczky, P. (Hrsg.): Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nándor Kalicz zum 75. Geburstag. Budapest 2003, 155–182. Sanev, V. 2006: The Anzabegovo-Vršnik Group and the Problems of the Late Neolithic in Eastern Macedonia. In: Brukner, B.–Vorgić, B. (eds): Current problems of the transition period from the Starčevo to the Vinča Culture. Zrenjanin 2006, 147–163. Schier, W. 1991: Untersuchungen von Vinča-Belo-Brdo. Banatica 11 (1991) 133–140. Schier, W. 1995: Vinča-Studien. Tradition und Innovation in Spätneolithikum des zentralen Balkanraumes am Beispiel der Gefäßkeramik aus Vinča-Belo Brdo. Habilitationsschrift. Fakultät für Orientalistik und Altertumswissenschaft der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. Schier, W. 1996: The relative and absolute Chronology of Vinča: new evidence from the type site. In: Draşovean, F. (ed.): The Vinča culture, its role and cultural connections. Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica 2, Timişoara 1996, 141–162. Strobel, M. 1997: Ein Beitrag zur Gliederung der östlichen Linearbandkeramik. Versuch einer Merkmalsanalyse. Saarbrücker Studien und Materialen zur Altertumskunde 4–5 (1995–1996 [1997]) 9–98. G. Szénászky, J. 1983: A Délkelet-Alföld neolitikumának néhány időrendi kérdéséről – Über die chronologischen Fragen des Neolithikums im südöstlichen Alföld. Archaeologiai Értesítő 110 (1983) 243–246. Trogmayer, O. 1964: Remarks to the chronology of the Körös group. Archaeologiai Értesítő 91 (1964) 67–86. Vasić, M. 1936: Preistorijska Vinča. IV. Beograd. Zaharia, E. 1964: Considerations sur la civilization de Criş à la lumière des son dates de Leţ. Dacia N. S. 6 (1964) 5–52.

131