Late Copper Age Patterns of Settlement and Material Culture on the Great Hungarian Plain Timothy A

Home , Biharugra, Doboz, Ecsegfalva, Ezero culture, Neolithic Europe, Prehistoric Europe

Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2011 Places, Pots, and Kurgans: Late Copper Age Patterns of Settlement and Material Culture on the Great Hungarian Plain Timothy A. Parsons

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

PLACES, POTS, AND KURGANS: LATE COPPER AGE PATTERNS OF SETTLEMENT

AND MATERIAL CULTURE ON THE GREAT HUNGARIAN PLAIN

TIMOTHY A. PARSONS

A dissertation submitted to the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2011

The members of the committee approve the dissertation of Timothy A. Parsons defended on November 17, 2010.

______William A. Parkinson Professor Directing Dissertation

______Lynne Schepartz Co-Chair/Committee Member

______Daniel Pullen University Representative

______Joseph Hellweg Committee Member

Approved:

______Glen Doran, Chair, Department of Anthropology

______Joseph Travis, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members. ii

iii

Dedicated to my family and friends. Life is grand, love is real, and beauty is everywhere.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My interest in issues of migration and material culture started in 2004 on the Körös Regional Archaeological Project, when, while driving along a two-lane road on a lazy Sunday morning with Bill Parkinson, he pointed out the numerous small burial mounds along the road to Gyula in Békés County, and he said, “Timmy, you should do kurgans!” This led me into the works of Andrew Sherratt and David Anthony, whose perspectives on social, economic, and migratory change greatly influenced my thinking and research trajectory in planning an archaeological study of the Late Copper Age on the Hungarian Plain. Though kurgans aren’t the only focus of this work, they were the beginning. And, I hope that this dissertation makes a modest contribution to understanding them. Faculty, friends, and family members have helped me complete this dissertation. It is an impossible and unthinkable task to fit so many acknowledgements onto this regrettably short space, and I apologize in advance for forgetting anyone who has contributed to this project along the way. That said, at the very least I can do my best to highlight the individuals whose encouragement and support have helped me so much over the years. The faculty of this department has my utmost respect. In the most challenging of times, they have steadfastly remained dedicated to the remaining graduate students. For this, we all owe a debt of gratitude. Thank you to my committee members, Lynne Schepartz, Joseph Hellweg, and Daniel Pullen. They have all been supportive and helpful during the production of my dissertation. Mike Galaty in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Millsaps College became my undergraduate advisor in the spring of 1999 and gave me my first opportunities at archaeological field experience, in addition to challenging me in numerous classroom settings during my four years in Jackson, Mississippi. He taught me how to use a trowel, dig a shovel test, draw profile and plan maps, use GPS and total station equipment, and introduced me in both theory and practice to petrographic ceramic analysis. Most importantly, Mike taught me not to limit myself to one dogmatic way of approaching solutions to archaeological problems, and to be a “jack-of-all-trades” when it comes to theoretical and methodological considerations. He is a great teacher, and I hope he keeps educating and encouraging young anthropologists and archaeologists for years to come. The discipline will be better for it.

Bill Parkinson has been a strong and supportive advisor and mentor to me throughout my graduate career. He provided me with both the firm guidance and great freedom to pursue the work presented here. In addition to his unbounded archaeological knowledge, Bill successfully saw me through the administrative, cultural, linguistic, and economic challenges of conducting research in a foreign country. It is his faith in my ability to “just get it done” that gave me the confidence to dive into the world of Hungarian archaeology. Billy was once described to me as a “real archaeologist.” His students and colleagues all know that this is true – and we don’t need the Indiana Jones ringtone to be sure of it. I can’t thank Attila Gyucha, formerly of the Kulturális Örökségvédelmi Szakszolgálat and now with the Hungarian National Museum, enough. I stayed at his home, ate his food, drank his vodka, and took much more of his time than I deserved. He introduced me to important people, prepared and submitted permit applications, and supplied every bit of his support that he could without once complaining (at least to me), all while working day and night to finish his own dissertation. He is a dedicated colleague, a talented researcher, and above all, he is a good friend. Paul Duffy let me tag along with him around Békés County as a wet-behind-the-ears graduate student. He taught me how to use GIS, and how to quickly and effectively collect sites. Paul was ceaselessly supportive of this research, and is a great (but tough) example to follow. He also taught me how to get cars out of the mud equipped only with a tractor, the assistance of two farmers, and pink twine. Gábor “Baxi” Bácsmegi made sure that my project was never without the supplies and knowledge necessary to succeed. Baxi provided the positive attitude and optimism that I sometimes lacked, and encouraged me to stop and smell the roses. His mother and stepfather welcomed me warmly into their home, and I will always cherish the time spent around fires in the backyard cooking sausages and drinking beer. My time in Hungary would not have been the same without Baxi, and it certainly would not have been as fun. Over the years, many participants in Billy and Attila’s Körös Regional Archaeological Project served as sounding boards and sources of advice and information. In no particular order they are Meg Morris, Rod Salisbury, Hanneke Hoekman-Sites, Daniel Sosna, Rick Yerkes, Sam Duwe, Nisha Patel, Julia Giblin, Smiti Nathan, Walt Warner, Abby Smith, Amy Nicodemus, Michelle Markovics, and of course Billy, Attila, Paul and Baxi. Meg provided invaluable GIS

vi help, and Rod helped me hash out site collection methodology as we visited sites in the Skoda in the summer of 2009. The many people who made my time in Hungary brilliant and made the country one of my favorite places are too many to mention, and I regret that I’ve forgotten or never knew the names many people who helped me. Again in no particular order, I thank Dori Kékegyi, Gergő Bóka, Ottó Fogas, Ferenc Horváth, Pál Megyesi, Veronika Csik, the Csóti family, and the women who run the Arany Oroszlán Panzió in Békéscsaba and provided me with many morning cappuchinos and many evening Sopronis. I also thank all the farmers who allowed a foreigner speaking poor Hungarian to tromp through their fields. Archaeology is everywhere in Békés County, and farmers are used to archaeologists walking along with their faces toward the ground. An archaeologist in a baseball cap with a funny accent tethered with twine to a pin flag walking in circles is a somewhat less common sight. Nonetheless, I was consistently met with inquiring minds and friendly (if bemused) faces. I give special thanks to Attila Krieter and his colleagues at the Kulturális Örökségvédelmi Szakszolgálat in Budapest. Attila taught me how to thin section ceramics and allowed me access to his lab and equipment despite his busy schedule. Director Imre Szátmári, Anita Vári, Adrienn Szanda, and the staff of the Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum in Békéscsaba were helpful and friendly in the summer of 2009, and welcomed me into their museum to analyze and photograph ceramics. Virginia Carr, Alex Parsons, Annalee Shum, and Nicole DeFrancisco flew long distances to photograph ceramics, collect sites, wash and label artifacts, sort lots, and endure more than a few rainy, cold, and occasionally snowy days. Rumor has it that they also ate a lot of good food, met great people, and had a pretty good time – and enjoyed a great number of British soaps on cable. I thank them very much. Adam Kereki deserves thanks for his support and encouragement. I thank the Eisele Foundation and the National Science Foundation for their financial support (Dissertation Improvement Grant Award Number BCS-0910071), especially program administrator John Yellen and the anonymous reviewers that provided thoughtful and constructive criticisms of my research plans. My colleagues at the National Park Service Southeast Archeological Center deserve thanks both for their continuous support of, and dedicated, good-natured belligerence toward my

vii specialization in European prehistory and dissertation research in Hungary. A great deal of this dissertation was written while on Section 106 and 110 compliance projects and ARPA investigations in hotel rooms in Lake City and Jacksonville, Florida, Natchez, Mississippi, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Murray, Kentucky, as well as in hotel locations all along the Gulf Coast (Mobile, Alabama, Ocean Springs and Pascagoula, Mississippi, and Perdido Key in Pensacola, Florida) while deployed on resource advising assignments during the BP Gulf of Mexico oil spill incident. Many thanks to Dr. William Parker in the Florida State University Department of Geology for allowing me access to both his laboratory and a petrographic microscope. My fellow graduate students and friends in the Anthropology Department deserve thanks for the support and encouragement that only good friends can give. Thank you to Alex Parsons, Katie O’Donnell, Dan Seinfeld, Cyndi Bellacero, Josh Englehart, Guy and Ivy Hepp, Hanneke Hoekman-Sites, Michelle Markovics, Sarah Moore, Ian Pawn, Collete Berbesque, Julie Byrd, Ryan Duggins, Geoff Thomas, and all of my friends in Tallahassee. Extra special thanks to Shannon Tucker and Malinda Carlisle, who made sure I was registered for hours and safe in the embrace of bureaucratic morass when I was too far away or too absent-minded to take care of it myself. Aaron Head, Brandi Head, David Morreale, and Alison Morreale are all fine human beings. Aaron and Brandi wouldn’t have let me quit had I tried, while David and Ali encouraged me to take the first step and get started. David, especially, taught me that we grow our wings as we fall. Thanks for being alive. My family, especially my parents Paul and Carmen Parsons, has always encouraged me to relentlessly pursue my goals. My father still serves as my paradigm of persistence and stubbornness. Despite great adversity, he solders on through the nonsense of life and reminds me that there is always another challenge to overcome and project to embrace. We could all learn a lesson from my dad, and we would all be better people for it. Most of all, I thank my wife. Alex is an inspiration to me, and has never let me fall into the trap of frustration and discouragement that often accompanies work on dissertations. I can only hope to live up to her example, and she is more than I deserve.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ...... xiii List of Figures ...... xv Abstract ...... xix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 The Research Agenda ...... 1 Archaeological Models ...... 2 Research Questions ...... 5 Overview of Methods ...... 6 Settlement Pattern Analysis ...... 6 Current Archaeological Data ...... 7 Ceramic Analysis ...... 7 Overview of Results and Implications ...... 9 Structure of the Dissertation ...... 11 CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ...... 14 Migration and Archaeology: Beyond the Normative Approach ...... 15 Migration as an Explanation: Sufficient Models for Material Culture Change? ...... 20 Interaction Spheres, Egalitarianism, and Social Change ...... 22 Beyond Migration: Interaction Spheres and the Spread of Material Culture ...... 22 Social Trajectory, Interaction, and Change ...... 24 Models for the Emergence of Ranked Societies ...... 24 Approaching Migration, Archaeology, and Regional Models of Material Culture Change 27 Migration as an Explanation for the Appearance of Homogeneous Material Cultures24 Clovis in North America ...... 27 The Archaic North American Borderlands ...... 28 The European Magdalenian ...... 29 The Neolithization of Europe ...... 30 The Iron Age Celtic Migrations ...... 32 Migration, Materially Homogeneous Material Cultures, and Social Change ...... 32 Summary ...... 33 CHAPTER THREE: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL, GEOGRAPHIC, AND GEOLOGICAL SETTING ...... 34 Introduction ...... 34 The Geographic and Geological Setting of the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 34 The Geological Setting of the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 34 The Geological Setting of the Körös-Berretyó Region ...... 37 General Soil and Environmental Characteristics ...... 39 The Archaeological Setting ...... 39 The Neolithic ...... 40 The Late Neolithic Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex ...... 40 The Copper Age ...... 43 The Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár Culture ...... 43

The Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr Culture ...... 45 The Late Copper Age Boleráz-Baden Culture ...... 46 The Late Copper Age Kurgan Culture ...... 52 The Early and Middle Bronze Age ...... 53 The Developmental Trajectory of the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 54 Invasion vs. Economy: A Tale of Two Models on the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 57 The Invasion/Migration Hypothesis ...... 57 The Environmental/Economic Model ...... 59 Baden Pots with Local Roots? Defining the Late Copper Age on the Plain ...... 60 Summary ...... 61 CHAPTER FOUR: THEORETICAL EXPECTATIONS AND RESEARCH DESIGN ...... 62 Introduction ...... 62 Temporal and Geographic Scales of Analysis ...... 62 Analyzing Social Change through Settlement Patterns and Regional Analysis ...... 64 Previous Regional Analysis Projects on the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 69 A Problem with Regional Studies, and how to Approach it in the Future ...... 73 Social Change, Ceramics, and Technology ...... 74 A Technological Approach to Ceramic Analysis ...... 76 Macroscopic Analysis ...... 76 Microscopic Analysis ...... 78 Interpretive Framework ...... 82 Spatial Analysis: Observing Nucleation, Dispersal, and Association through Time . 83 Ceramic Analysis: Measuring and Observing Technological Change through Time 85 Summary ...... 87 CHAPTER FIVE: METHODOLOGY ...... 88 Introduction ...... 88 Selection of the Study Area ...... 88 Geographic and Archaeological Location ...... 89 Foundation of Recent and Previous Research in the Region ...... 89 Availability of Materials ...... 90 Spatial Analysis ...... 91 Fieldwork and Site Revisits ...... 93 Overview of Site Revisits and Collection ...... 93 Site Selection ...... 94 Site Collection ...... 95 Description and Documentation of Finds ...... 97 Ceramic Coding ...... 98 Other Materials ...... 98 Photography ...... 98 Current Location of the Material ...... 99 Ceramic Analysis ...... 99 Macroscopic Ceramic Analysis ...... 99 Microscopic Ceramic Analysis ...... 100 Summary ...... 101

CHAPTER SIX: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND ASSEMBLAGES ...... 104 Introduction ...... 104 MRT (Hungarian Archaeological Topography) Sites ...... 104 Sites Revisited During Fieldwork ...... 105 Sites Collected and Intensively Surveyed During Fieldwork ...... 106 Békés 26 ...... 107 Békés 178 ...... 108 Bélmegyer 82 ...... 108 Biharugra 33 ...... 109 Bucsa 13 ...... 110 Füzesgyarmat 97 ...... 111 Gerla 64 ...... 111 Körösladány 21 ...... 112 Mezőberény 34 ...... 113 Szeghalom 80 ...... 114 Tarhos 67 ...... 115 Previously Excavated Sites ...... 116 Doboz Homokgödöri Tablá ...... 116 Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya ...... 116 Summary ...... 117 CHAPTER SEVEN: RESULTS OF THE SPATIAL ANALYSIS ...... 134 Introduction ...... 134 A Reassessment of Settlement in the Körös River Study Area ...... 136 Average Nearest Neighbor and Density Analysis ...... 138 A Reevaluation of Late Copper Age Settlement Location in the Körös Region ...... 145 Discussion and Conclusions of the Settlement Pattern Research ...... 148 Summary ...... 151 CHAPTER EIGHT: RESULTS OF CERAMIC ANALYSIS ...... 152 Introduction ...... 152 Description of Variables ...... 153 Results of the Macroscopic Analysis ...... 154 Diachronic Ceramic Variability: Middle Copper Age vs. Late Copper Age ...... 154 Spatial Ceramic Variability: Late Copper Age Inter-site Variability in the Study Region ...... 157 Inter-Regional Variability of Baden Ceramics from the Körös and Maros Regions 158 Conclusions and Interpretations of the Macroscopic Ceramic Data ...... 163 Results of the Petrographic Analysis ...... 164 General Petrographic Characteristics ...... 165 Diachronic Petrographic Variability ...... 169 The Middle Copper Age ...... 169 The Late Copper Age ...... 171 The Early Bronze Age ...... 175 The Middle Bronze Age ...... 178 Summary of Diachronic Variability ...... 182

Spatial Variability in Late Copper Age Ceramics ...... 185 Petrographic Variability in the Körös Region ...... 185 Inter-regional Petrographic Variability ...... 187 Discussion of the Petrographic Data ...... 189 Summary ...... 190 CHAPTER NINE: DISCUSSION ...... 191 Introduction ...... 191 Modeling Change on the Great Hungarian Plain ...... 192 Kurgan Builders, Migration, and the Late Copper Age ...... 192 Discussion of the spatial results ...... 192 Discussion of the ceramic results ...... 197 A Revisited and Expanded Model of Late Copper Age Settlement and Economy .. 199 Kurgans and cultural context ...... 201 Archaeological and modern examples of emulation ...... 202 Summary ...... 204 Long-term Population and Economic Continuity on the Great Hungarian Plain ..... 205 Implications for Anthropological Models of Homogeneous Material Cultures ...... 209 Summary ...... 211 CHAPTER TEN: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS ...... 212 Conclusions ...... 212 Future Research ...... 214

APPENDIX A: SITE COLLECTION SUMMARIES ...... 217 APPENDIX B: PETROGRAPHIC DATA ...... 230 WORKS CITED ...... 237

xii

LIST OF TABLES

4.1 Table depicting the interpretive framework for data sets utilized in this research ...... 83

6.1 Summary of analyzed ceramics from the MRT collection and Doboz H. tábla by site and cultural period ...... 129

6.2 Summary of analyzed ceramics from the collected sites and Hódmezővásárhely by site and cultural period ...... 130

6.3 Summary of sites described in MRT volumes as containing Late Copper Age surface material ...... 130

6.4 Summary of sites collected during the fall 2009 field season, as described in the MRT volumes ...... 133

7.1 All nearest neighbor calculations for the three analytical regions in the Körös study region, organized by cultural phase ...... 141

7.2 Average nearest neighbor calculations for Early Copper Age, Middle Copper Age, and Late Copper Age archaeological sites in the Körös study region ...... 142

8.1 Sorting of visible inclusions in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed ...... 155

8.2 Kneading of raw material (clay) in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed ...... 155

8.3 Texture of a fresh break in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed...... 155

8.4 Firing characteristics in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed ...... 155

8.5 Firing characteristics in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed ...... 159

8.6 Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed ...... 159

8.7 Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from Hódmezővásárhely- Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the Maros River watershed and Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region ...... 159

8.8 Firing characteristics in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Maros region and from the Körös region ...... 162

xiii

8.9 Summary statistics of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age petrographic point counts from sites in the Körös study region ...... 170

8.10 Summary statistics of Late Copper Age point counts from the Körös and Maros regions. 189

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

3.1 The Carpathian Basin ...... 35

3.2 Rivers in the Körös-Berettyó study region after 19th century regulation ...... 37

3.3 Prehistoric hydrology of the Körös region ...... 38

3.4 The Late Neolithic Tisza-Hérpály-Csőszhalom complex ...... 42

3.5 Extent of the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture ...... 44

3.6 Extent of the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr culture ...... 46

3.7 Approximate extent of the Late Copper Age Baden culture ...... 48

4.1 The Körös River basin study area, including modern cities and MRT parish boundaries as discussed in the text ...... 64

5.1 The Körös River basin study area, including modern cities and MRT parish boundaries ... 89

5.2 Systematic “dog-leash” collection unit site collection strategy ...... 96

5.3 Coding sheet for quantitative ceramic petrography ...... 102

5.4 Coding sheet for qualitative ceramic petrography ...... 103

6.1 Sites recorded in the MRT revisited during the fall 2009 field season ...... 105

6.2 Sites systematically collected during the fall 2009 field season ...... 106

6.3 Transects and surface find locations at the site of Békés 26 ...... 118

6.4 Transects and surface find locations at the site of Békés 178 ...... 119

6.5 Collection units at the site of Bélmegyer 82 ...... 120

6.6 Collection units at the site of Biharugra 33 ...... 121

6.7 Transects and surface find locations at the site of Bucsa 13 ...... 122

6.8 Transects and surface find locations at the site of Füzesgyarmat 97 ...... 123

6.9 Collection unit locations at the site of Gerla 64...... 124

6.10 Transects and surface find locations at the site of Körösladány 21 ...... 125

6.11 Collection unit locations at the site of Mezőberény 34 ...... 126

6.12 Collection unit locations at the site of Szeghalom 80 ...... 127

6.13 Collection unit locations at the site of Tarhos 67 ...... 128

7.1 Andrew Sherratt’s Dévaványa Plain study region in northern Békés County (outlined in red), in contrast with the present study area ...... 135

7.2 Kurgan locations overlaid with kernel density map of kurgans per square kilometer ...... 136

7.3 Late Neolithic, Early Copper Age, Middle Copper Age, and Late Copper Age sites in the Sherratt study area ...... 137

7.4 The three average nearest neighbor analytical zones in the study region ...... 138

7.5 The Körös study region and all Early, Middle, and Late Copper Age sites ...... 139

7.6 Early and Middle Copper Age site distribution in Sherratt’s study region ...... 143

7.7 Kurgan locations overlaying a map of kurgan density to illustrate kurgan “clusters,” and Late Copper Age site distribution in Sherratt’s study region ...... 144

7.8 Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr site distribution ...... 145

7.9 Kurgans, density of kurgans per square kilometer, and Late Copper Age site distribution in the Körös River study region ...... 146

7.10 Late Copper Age sites located within kurgan clusters near Körösújfalu ...... 147

7.11: Late Copper Age sites in close association with kurgans south of Gyomaendrőd ...... 148

7.12 Kurgan clusters near a concentration of Late Copper Age sites near Bélmegyer ...... 149

8.1 Firing conditions of Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics ...... 157

8.2 Firing condition of Late Copper Age ceramics from sites in the Körös Region ...... 160

8.3 Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from sites in Körös Region ... 160

8.4 Kneading in Late Copper Age Ceramics conditions from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region ...... 161

8.5 Paste texture in Late Copper Age ceramics from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region ...... 161

xvi

8.6 Comparison of Late Copper Age ceramic firing conditions from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region ...... 163

8.7 Late Copper Age from Tarhos 67 ...... 165

8.8 Early Bronze Age from Békés 26 ...... 166

8.9 Neolithic from Gerla 64 ...... 167

8.10 Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80 ...... 167

8.11 Middle Copper Age from Szeghalom 80 ...... 171

8.12 Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramic paste composition .... 172

8.13 Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramic body composition .... 172

8.14 Middle Copper Age from Szeghalom 168 ...... 173

8.15 Late Copper Age from Tarhos 67 ...... 174

8.16 Late Copper Age from Mezőgyán 2 ...... 174

8.17 Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80 ...... 175

8.18 Ternary plot of Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age paste composition ...... 176

8.19 Ternary plot of Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age body composition ...... 176

8.20 Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80 ...... 177

8.21 Middle Bronze Age from Békés 26 ...... 178

8.22 Middle Bronze Age from Békés 178 ...... 179

8.23 Ternary plot of Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze Age paste composition ...... 180

8.24 Ternary plot of Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze age body composition ...... 180

8.25 Middle Bronze Age from Békés 26 ...... 181

8.26 Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age paste compositional variability ...... 183

8.27 Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age body compositional variability ...... 183

xvii

8.28 Body composition of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age ceramic samples ...... 184

8.29 Percentage of temper and sand observed in point counted Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age ceramic samples ...... 184

8.30 Ternary plot of Late Copper Age paste compositional variability in the Körös Region .... 186

8.31 Ternary plot of Late Copper Age body compositional variability in the Körös Region .... 186

8.32 Ternary plot of average paste composition of Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region and from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., ...... 188

8.33 Ternary plot of average body composition of Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region and from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., ...... 188

9.1 Monument to a modern Hungarian political movement placed atop a kurgan in Békés County ...... 201

xviii

ABSTRACT

This dissertation examines how patterns of regional homogeneity in material culture develop on the local level. Archaeologists have long been concerned with how large, materially homogeneous culture groups develop over large regions relatively quickly. Often, this phenomenon has been associated with migration. In many cases, such as the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) group in Europe and Clovis in North America, migration models are the best explanation. However, in other cases such as the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture on the Great Hungarian Plain, local models of indigenous better fit the patterns of settlement and material culture. This project focuses on changes at the beginning of the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain at around 3,500 B.C. At this time, the relatively homogeneous Baden culture became the dominant material culture group on the Plain. Two models of changes are tested here: 1) that the Late Copper Age Baden culture developed out of local populations’ intensified involvement in an interregional interaction sphere; and 2) change occurred through migration or migrations onto the plain or a diffusion of material culture and other behaviors that drastically affected settlement and social organization. In this vein, the presumably intrusive kurgan burial tumuli that appeared in the region at about this time are of special interest. These models are tested in two primary ways: 1) a multi-scalar settlement spatial analysis of known archaeological sites; and 2) macroscopic and petrographic ceramic analysis aimed at identifying technological and manufacturing changes over time that might point to either the arrival of new people in the region (migration) or diachronic population continuity. Insufficient evidence exists to support a migration catalyzing the social and settlement changes observed at the beginning of the Late Copper Age. Although a migration scenario cannot be ruled out definitively, settlement pattern analysis supports a model of internal social trajectories leading to the changes, while macroscopic and petrographic ceramic analyses do not reveal any changes in technological preparation or manufacturing methods indicating the arrival of new people or pottery technologies in the region. Ultimately, the results of this research suggest that even dramatic shifts in material culture and incorporation into wider material culture groups can occur in times of population continuity through a combination of social and economic processes.

xix

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION The Research Agenda This study addresses anthropological and archaeological questions about why societies at certain times throughout human history exhibit material culture similarities over very large geographic regions. Archaeologists have long been concerned with how and why cultures change, and with how material culture traits spread and sometimes become ubiquitous across a large region. The subject has roots in the earliest days of anthropology and has been an ongoing topic of discussion and debate. Boas (1889, 1940), in the absence of a framework for cross- cultural comparison, considered diffusion and migration as the primary methods by which material culture spread and by which regionally homogeneous material cultures developed. Much later, Steward’s (1955) multilinear evolution allowed for change from within. That is, different populations could independently develop parallel features, without the necessity of diffusion or migration. Both models leave something to be desired. Migration and diffusion models are unsatisfying as they leave little leeway for independent cultural development, while models of indigenous change often fail to account for remarkable material culture similarity over large geographic areas. This dichotomy set the theoretical stage for the two competing models addressed in this study: the necessity of migration for sudden, widespread material culture change, or the possibility of change emerging from within a population. The competing models of migration and continuity are best tested through the collection and analysis of archaeological data. Archaeological research is unique in that data can be analyzed quickly over large geographic areas, and across long periods of time. Such a regional approach is key to identifying markers of migration in the archaeological record. As Binford (1980) stated, subtleties in material culture – such as form, design, and manufacture – can reveal evidence of migration not necessarily observable through other lines of evidence. These slight differences marking migration in the archaeological record may also mark other human behaviors on the landscape. For example, Stark (1988) argued that social boundaries can be subtly marked by small technological and manufacturing indicators, and that even subconscious technological choices can indicate conservative social boundaries. The operational sequences that create these indicators are surprisingly resistant to change (Leroi-Gourhan 1993:305, 319),

1 and can remain reflected in material culture despite the long-term flow of personnel across boundaries (Barth 1969). The development of widespread, materially homogeneous cultures in relatively short amounts of time has long intrigued archaeologists. Examples exist throughout prehistory and in multiple locations throughout the world. Clovis in North America, Linearbandkeramik (LBK) in Europe, the Körös-Starčevo-Criş culture of the northern Balkans, and the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture on the Great Hungarian Plain are all examples of material culture horizons that are homogeneous over wide geographic areas. Often –as with Clovis and Körös – this phenomenon is associated with social processes such as migration and diffusion. On the other hand, in cases like the Tiszapolgár, indigenous change provides a better explanation. This research addresses how such wide-ranging transitions play out at multiple analytical scales and, ultimately, on the local level. This concern is driven by the question, “how do local populations react, adapt, and change in response to the development and local adoption of regional-scale material culture systems?” I seek to answer this question by investigating how local populations on the Hungarian Plain became incorporated into the wider Baden material culture at the beginning of the Late Copper Age (ca. 3,500 B.C.). In the past, researchers have proposed two general models for explaining this change: 1) large-scale migration and diffusion from outside the region (Anthony 1990; Gimbutas 1977); and 2) local change driven by patterns of regional social and economic integration and organization (Sherratt 1997a, 1997b). The Middle and Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain provides an excellent test case for an anthropological discussion of migration and population continuity, as the periods in question have been the focus of a migration/invasion controversy for decades. Additionally the study of subtle material culture differences is possible through the examination of previously collected materials and through systematic site surface collection. As such, it is possible to identify local markers of manufacture that have persisted despite the region’s incorporation into a geographically large, homogeneous material culture group, if such markers exist.

Archaeological Models The fundamental way in which people organized their settlements on a regional scale, buried their dead, and interacted socially changed dramatically during the Late Copper Age (3,500-3,000 B.C.) on the Great Hungarian Plain (Anthony 1990; Childe 1930; Gimbutas 1979,

1997). During previous phases of the Copper Age, the eastern Hungarian cultural landscape consisted of a largely homogeneous material culture assemblage that nonetheless varied greatly from those of their contemporary neighbors in Transdanubia and across the Carpathian Mountains to the north and northeast. During the latter part of the Copper Age, the expansive Baden material culture group, which extended throughout northern Serbia, southern Poland, southern Germany, and parts of Switzerland, became ubiquitous on the Hungarian Plain. Gimbutas (1977) and Makkay (1986) suggested that the process of trans-regional homogenization might have been influenced by the arrival of migratory kurgan (burial mound) builders from the Eurasian steppe. At about the time of the beginning of the Late Copper Age, thousands of kurgan burial tumuli in the style of Yamnaya tumuli of the Steppe (e.g., earthen mound covering a burial chamber containing a body in the supine position with raised knees) appeared on the eastern Hungarian Plain, and Gimbutas (1963, 1979) argued for the kurgan builders’ influence on not only material culture change, but also a fundamental set of shifts in religion and language as the first speakers of the Indo-European language family entered the continent. Anthony (1990) agreed that migration should not be ruled out as a possibility. Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) and Parkinson (2006) stressed the importance of structured, diachronic change in the region. They argued that local patterns of settlement nucleation and diffusion resulted from social leveling mechanisms and various levels of economic interaction with populations outside of the Plain. However, Anthony, Sherratt, Parkinson, and Gyucha (2010) all suggested that one prime mover was likely insufficient to explain the changes on the Plain at the end of the Copper Age. The homogeneity and ubiquity of Baden during this time period complicate the problem of Baden origins on the Plain and the role that the “Kurgan Culture” (Gimbutas 1977) might have played in its appearance. This research examines how local populations on the Great Hungarian Plain were affected by incorporation into the wider Baden material culture complex. The research goals include: 1) to identify changes in Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age ceramic manufacturing technology that may indicate the presence of an outside population’s influence on manufacture; 2) to specify how settlement patterns changed during the period of time leading up to Baden; and 3) to use ceramic and settlement data to understand how populations on the Hungarian Plain reacted to Baden influence. It is hoped that anthropologists

3 and archaeologists facing similar situations throughout the world can use the methods and framework presented here. In order to test the competing models introduced above, this study examines settlement patterns at multiple scales, focusing on the wider Körös River basin study area. This study area composes the western two-thirds of Békés County in southeastern Hungary. The goal is to determine if micro-regional patterns mirror those on the scale of the entire study area, and on the Hungarian Plain generally, by declining in number and density toward the end of the Copper Age. Such a pattern will mirror Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) observation of a decline in site number and size at the scales of the entire Hungarian Plain, and a smaller study area in northern Békés County. This project also examines less visible and conservative local indicators of continuity and change – specifically, ceramic manufacturing technology – that would have been less susceptible to change over time (see Lemmonier 1992). Although ceramic form may have changed as Baden became prominent, subtle macroscopic and microscopic characteristics (such as paste constituency, firing method, level of kneading, and presence, size, and frequency of specific mineral inclusions) would likely have remained the same if no migration and replacement scenario took place. On the Great Hungarian Plain, the two competing models to be tested are best described as 1) a model of indigenous change; and 2) a model of migratory change. Under the indigenous change model, the Late Copper Age Baden culture on the Plain developed out of an intensified involvement of local populations in an interregional interaction sphere. Under the migration model, a series of migrations onto the Plain beginning as early as the Middle Copper Age drastically affected both material culture and settlement patterns. These models are probabilistic, and it is entirely possible that a combination of local development and migratory populations contributed to culture change on the Plain at this time. The primary variables employed in this study to test the models are 1) settlement patterns over time; and 2) ceramic manufacturing techniques and technology over time. In order to understand how these variables differ at varying geographic resolutions, each will be observed at multiple scales – e.g., the site level, the micro-region, and the regional level.

Research Questions Based on previous research, there are two models for social change at the end of the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain: 1) a migratory population of pastoralists from the east arrived on the Plain sometime around 3,500 B.C., catalyzing social change and fundamentally altering the linguistic, cultural, burial, and settlement characteristics of the Hungarian Plain; and 2) change at the end of the Copper Age was part of an indigenous long-term cyclical process of integration and regional differentiation, greatly influenced by advances in transportation technology (see Anthony 2007). The following research questions are used as a guiding framework for understanding if Baden on the Hungarian Plain developed out of local populations’ intensified involvement in an interregional interaction sphere, or through a series of migrations onto the Plain.

1) Do the sudden changes in material culture on the Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age represent a demic migration into the region, or the adoption of a regional style by indigenous populations? If a demic migration onto the Plain drastically affecting populations in the region occurred during this time period, then both the technological and design elements of ceramic manufacture should reflect this change. However, if no migration occurred or if the arrival of kurgan builders was an epiphenomenal occurrence, then elements of ceramic manufacture should remain the same throughout the Copper Age and into the Bronze Age, despite changes in form and decoration. Such continuity might involve similarities in paste constituency, similar firing characteristics (e.g., level of reduction/oxidization), and similar patterns of mineral inclusions and void space ratios. If such similarities between ceramics of different periods in the Copper Age are observed, it will support a model of long-term developmental processes affecting change in the Late Copper Age.

2) Why do social groups choose to do things in a similar manner over wide geographic areas, and how do local groups change their behavior when incorporated into regionally homogeneous material culture groups? This question is relevant to addressing both of the competing models presented above, simply because changes in material culture are often the most easily observable variables in the archaeological record. However, other relevant patterns must also be addressed. For example, long-term trajectories in shifting settlement patterns have been observed

5 throughout the Neolithic, Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age on the scale of the Hungarian Plain (Sherratt 1997a, 1997b); however, few studies have addressed how these settlement patterns changed at the local level. Do they reflect wider regional trends, or is there local variability?

Overview of Methods The research methods employed in this study consist of two analytical components: 1) settlement pattern analysis at multiple resolutions (the level of the Hungarian Plain, the Körös River basin, Sherratt’s [1997a, 1997b] previous study area, and micro-levels within Békés County), and 2) petrographic and macroscopic analysis of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age ceramics from the Hungarian Archaeological Topography surveys (MRT, see Chapter 4, pages 69-70) and from recent systematic collection in the Körös River study area. Along with prehistoric settlement, paleoenvironmental, and topographic data already available, data collected as part of this project include information gathered during site revisits and systematic collection throughout the Körös region and Békés County. Each of the models for social change being tested here has discrete patterning that is observable archaeologically (see Table 4.1). These models are not mutually exclusive. Some patterns of material culture and settlement change may be best interpreted as resulting from the effects of migration and long term, patterned internal change. Settlement Pattern Analysis. Since the 1970s, archaeologists have been concerned with systematizing different aspects of archaeological spatial analysis, including settlement analysis, site system analyses, regional studies, territorial analyses, locational analyses, catchment area studies, distribution mapping, density studies, and ultimately the integration of these types of information into single large databases (Clarke 1977; Galaty 2005). Each of these forms of spatial study can be used at particular scales and in particular contexts to answer specific archaeological questions (Clarke 1972a:47, 1977). This study is concerned with multiple scales of analysis, and one of the questions framing the research is: how do settlement patterns, or changes in settlement patterns over time, serve as an indicator of social change? Parkinson’s (2006) and Gyucha’s (Gyucha et al. 2004; Gyucha 2010) research has reaffirmed continuity between the Neolithic, Early Copper Age, and Middle Copper Age on the eastern Great Hungarian Plain. They have noted, along with others (see Bankoff and Winter 1990; Sherratt 1997a, 1997b), a break in this continuity between the Bodrogkeresztúr (Middle

Copper Age) and Boleráz/Baden (Late Copper Age) periods based primarily on differences in ceramic form and decoration. Stark (1998a:1, 1998b) argued that social groups and their boundaries are marked by observable patterns in the archaeological record, meaning that such breaks in ceramic continuity could indicate a different social group (e.g., different people) in the region. Therefore, a study of formal variation in settlement type, location, and degree of nucleation or dispersal is useful in determining the degree of continuity or change in the region. Current archaeological data. Unlike most of Europe, the Körös River basin of the eastern Great Hungarian Plain has three decades of archaeological survey available for spatial analysis, encompassing an area of over 3,000 km2 (Escedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998). This multi-volume effort – the Hungarian Archaeological Topography, or MRT, provides an advantage over the regional study of prehistoric societies elsewhere. As such, the survey data for most of Békés County serves as the largest analytical scale for the original research presented in this dissertation. Almost 600 presumably invasive kurgan burial mounds are recorded in the published MRT volumes for the study area, along with 70 Middle Copper Age sites, and 105 Late Copper Age sites. This provides a statistically significant sampling universe in terms of qualitative settlement pattern analysis, nearest neighbor analysis, and density analysis. The principle units of analysis, in addition to relevant geographic and cartographic data (rivers, modern cities, etc.) include settlement data on Early, Middle, and Late Copper Age sites, kurgan burial mound locations, as well as locations of Late Neolithic, and Early and Middle Bronze Age archaeological sites. The specific spatial methodology employed in this research project is described completely in Chapter Five. Ceramic Analysis. In addition to MRT materials, 11 Late Copper Age sites (single- component and multi-component) were systematically collected in the Körös region of Békés County, in order to obtain more ceramic samples of various time periods throughout the region, and to field-test the accuracy of the MRT survey data. Additionally, ceramics from the excavated Late Copper Age site of Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá in the Körös region were included not only to augment the sample, but also to serve as a chronological and stylistic control. Samples from the excavated site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the adjacent Maros River watershed were analyzed as a counterpoint to the Körös region samples, and to

7 account for any possible intra-regional variability not ascribable to the effects of migration or invasion. To address the research questions and the testable models, ceramics were analyzed and coded macroscopically according to a battery of descriptive variables (see Chapter Five). The relative frequencies of these variables, and how they change diachronically and according to archaeological culture, illustrate how attributes of preparation and manufacture changed over time. A sub-sample of these materials was then selected for microscopic petrographic analysis. Using Whitbread’s (1995) and Stoltman’s (1989) methodologies, ceramic fabrics were classified qualitatively and quantitatively based on frequency and size of natural mineral inclusions, intentionally added tempering materials, void space characteristics, and other variables of the ceramic paste and body. Each sample was thin-sectioned, and point counting was conducted with a polarizing microscope under both plane-polarized light and under crossed polars. A mechanical click-stop stage was utilized for precise counting at 2mm intervals. Multiple transects per slide were counted, and point counting was performed blind in order to ensure objectivity. Following Stoltman’s (1989) methodology for point count analysis, the proportions of matrix, temper, and sand were calculated for a vessel’s clay body and matrix, silt, and sand for a vessel’s paste. These proportions, when tri-graphed, allow different ceramic fabrics to be delineated and compared, and illustrate changes in paste and body over time. Whitbread’s (1995) and Stoltman’s (1989) methods of ceramic analysis allow for qualitative, quantitative, macroscopic, and microscopic description of change over time. Indeed, a recent dissertation by Kreiter (2005) illustrated the utility of using petrographic methods to analyze technological change in Early and Middle Bronze Age ceramics from Transdanubia. Change in finishing surface treatments and/or design and decoration are to be expected, since these characteristics often change on a generational basis. However, culturally embedded techniques for preparation and manufacture tend to be conservative and resistant to change (Lemmonier 1992; Michelaki 1999). Therefore, if distinctive changes in the manufacturing process of paste composition are observed over time, and especially if they correspond temporally with the drastic form and decoration changes at the end of the Middle Copper Age and beginning of the Late Copper Age, it would indicate the possibility of an outside cultural influence. In conjunction with settlement data indicating the culmination of a long-term

8 organizational trajectory, the results of a detailed ceramic analysis could support either an internal process of change, or migration and diffusion leading up to the Early Bronze Age.

Overview of Results and Implications The results of the spatial and ceramic analyses do not support a model of settlement and material culture change, and material culture homogenization, catalyzed by a prime-mover event such as migration. Conversely, nothing emerging from the analyses rules out a migration of kurgan-building pastoralists onto the Great Hungarian Plain at 3,500 B.C.; however, the impact of such a migration on the indigenous populations and their developmental and economic trajectories appears to have been minimal. The spatial analysis supports the conclusions of Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) analysis of settlement patterns on the Dévaványa Plain in northern Békés County, Hungary. At county-level resolution, kurgans and Late Copper Age archaeological sites appear to exist in a complementary distribution accross the landscape. However, at a higher resolution in multiple locations throughout study region, kurgans and Late Copper Age sites are quite close to one another. This indicates that a model employing a strategy of avoidance between two populations cannot be safely assumed, or at the very least that kurgans and Late Copper Age settlements were not constructed or utilized contemporaneously. Furthermore, the results presented in this dissertation concur with Sherratt’s model of a continuing dispersal and perhaps depopulation during the Middle and Late Copper Age. As in the Dévaványa Plain study region, Middle and Late Copper Age settlement occurs less frequently, at lower density, and more ephemerally than in previous and subsequent periods. This supports a model of a long-term social and settlement involving cycles of population nucleation and dispersal rather than a sudden migration event leading to population and settlement changes. Similarly, the macroscopic and petrographic ceramic analyses support a model of indigenous change rather than a sudden shift that one would expect under a migration model. Macroscopic analysis indicates similar ceramic preparation and manufacturing techniques over space within and beyond the study region during the Late Copper Age, and diachronically within the study region. Petrographic analysis reveales the same pattern, as well as a moderated, long- term shift in the intentional addition of grog temper to the ceramic paste. Such patterns of long- term, measured change do not support a migration hypothesis for the social, settlement, and

9 material culture changes witnessed in the latter half of the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. The results of this study speak to more than just regional and local issues of material culture and economic change. Most importantly, this dissertation argues that migration scenarios, the spread of interaction spheres, and models of economic interaction and integration, when applied individually, often fail to satisfactorally account for the development of regionally homogeneous material cultures. In the case of the Great Hungarian Plain at the end of the Copper Age, a complex interaction of factors created the cultural tapestry visible in the archaeological record. A modest migration of kurgan builders into the region might account for the appearance of burial tumuli across the landscape, as the migrants were quickly incorporated into the indigenous economic and social structures. Kurgans quickly became dominant features and landmarks in the region, and their emulation and reuse throughout later periods is testament to their importance through time. At about the same time, the Baden ceramic tradition become prevelent on the Hungarian Plain. This occurred as economic ties with populations beyond the Carpathian Mountains solidified after several centuries of settlement intensification on the margins of the Plain, near access to trade routes and raw material sources. The Hungarian Plain at the end of the Copper Age is a place and time demonstrative of what occurs when interaction spheres converge and overlap, in terms of both material culture and settlement. Although the addition of kurgans to the fabric of culture on the Plain contributed to the region’s uniqueness, Baden material culture appeared on the Plain primarily as the result of integration into a wider economic structure. It was the economic ties developed by the end of the Late Copper Age allowed for intensified acquisition and use of bronze and metal objects. This contributed to a return to settlement nucleation and tell-centered economy and settlement on the Plain during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, and untimately the appearance of institutionalized hierarchy as higher value items moved through the economic network. The regional material culture homogeneity observed on the Great Hungarian Plain should therefore be viewed as an indicator of economic integration rather than as evidence of change catalyzed by migration or invasion. The implications of these results will hopefully shape future research into the Late Copper Age in the Carpathian Basin. Most importantly, it is suggested that the process of material culture homogenization and incorporation into the wider Baden material culture horizon

10 during this time period was not the result of a demic migration and resulting population replacement or demographic shift. Second, it is indicated that dramatic changes in material culture and incorporation into geographically wider material and economic horizons can occur swiftly, but concurrently with long-term indigenous social and economic trajectories. Finally, the implications for the prehistory of the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plain are wide ranging, but boil down to the indication of a long-term process of population nucleation and dispersal cycles from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age shaping social trajectories and economic interaction, eventually culminating in a settlement nucleation and return to a tell-centered economy and settlement system during the Middle Bronze Age. The Late Copper Age period of dispersal and settlement intensification at the margins of the Plain played a key role in this diachronic process.

Structure of the Dissertation The purpose of this dissertation is to clearly and succinctly describe unresolved questions in the prehistory of the Great Hungarian Plain, address them through rigorous analysis, and draw supportable, but testable, conclusions from the results. Ultimately, the results speak to the larger anthropological issues of migration, diffusion, and large-scale regional material culture homogenization. Given the range of material covered in the study, this dissertation is organized in a straightforward, traditional manner in order to present the anthropological and archaeological background, theoretical expectations, research design and methodology, and results of the study as clearly and logically as possible. In this chapter, I provide a brief outline and summary of the argument that follows. Chapter Two presents the theoretical expectations underpinning the research, focusing on issues related to the development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups. I frame the phenomenon of regionally homogeneous material culture in the context of migration models, which are the framework that this research study tests most directly. I also discuss issues of migration and the development of regionally homogeneous material culture in a cross-cultural and anthropological context by summarizing the theoretical bases of migration, diffusion, and indigenous development models as explanations for change in settlement patterns and material culture. Overviews of other anthropological models for the development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups are also presented, including

11 interaction spheres and the theoretical links between the appearance of materially homogeneous regional cultures and the development of institutionalized hierarchy. Chapter Three provides the relevant background to the prehistory of the Great Hungarian Plain. I place the region into its archaeological context, and integrate the theoretical foundation presented in Chapter Two into the specific archaeological context of the Plain. Geographic and geological summaries of the Plain and the Körös River watershed study area are also provided. A period-by-period archaeological overview of social development and change is provided, with a detailed focus on Early and Middle Copper Age trends toward local and regional style groups, followed by the Late Copper Age incorporation of the Plain into the wider Baden material culture group. Chapter Four establishes the methodological links between the archaeological and anthropological concepts introduced in Chapter Two and the archaeological test case of this dissertation (the material culture and settlement changes at the beginning of the Late Copper Age). I present the methodological principles that guided the research design and provide an interpretive framework for the results of the study. The second half of the chapter explicitly discusses historical approaches to social change through ceramic analysis, and how technological analysis of ceramics has developed over the last century. Chapter Five discusses the analytical methods used as part of this study to examine changes in settlement patterns between the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age in the Körös River study region, the field methods used for site visitations, mapping, measurement, and systematic surface collection, and macroscopic and microscopic ceramic analysis. The specific methodologies pertinent to ceramic analysis and ceramic petrography are outlined, and the selection criteria and preparation of ceramic samples is discussed. Chapter Six contains descriptions of the different sources of ceramic material analyzed as part of the research project and provides descriptions and maps of all visited and collected archaeological sites. The results of the spatial analysis of prehistoric site distribution in the Körös River study area are presented in Chapter Seven, and compare, contrast, and combine the recently collected data with Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) data. Chapter Eight presents the results of both the macroscopic and petrographic ceramic analyses and discusses the patterns of variability

12 identified over time between the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age and variability over space at different geographic resolutions. The discussion in Chapter Nine addresses the implications of the results presented in Chapters Seven and Eight and for the regionally specific archaeological models presented in Chapter Three. Furthermore, the implications of the results for wider anthropological theories of the development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups and their local signatures are discussed, as are the potential roles of migration, diffusion, invasion, and indigenous development in the appearance of such ubiquitous culture groups. Chapter Ten concludes the dissertation, and future research directions for the topic, region, and time period under study are discussed.

CHAPTER TWO THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Introduction Throughout prehistory there are numerous examples of ceramic types that appear relatively quickly and are remarkably homogeneous across a macro-regional landscape. Cultural activities such as agriculture, animal domestication, and settlement patterns also have been shown to appear suddenly across large areas. This phenomenon of regional homogenization is by no means monolithic, however, and occurs as part of a variety of processes and at different scales (e.g., continentally, regionally, or sub-regionally). Over the last century, archaeologists have investigated material culture and cultural homogenization in many locations employing various explanatory models. The application of such models, and their archaeological correlates, is especially appropriate in an archaeological setting such as the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plain, where settlement and material culture shifts occurred dramatically and sometimes quite suddenly. In this chapter, I frame the phenomenon of regionally homogeneous material culture in the context of migration models. These have served as a primary explanation for the appearance of homogeneous material cultures, and it is migration that this dissertation most explicitly aims to test. I discuss issues of migration and the development of regionally homogeneous material culture in a cross-cultural and anthropological context. I first summarize the theoretical underpinnings of migration, diffusion, and indigenous development models for explaining changes in settlement patterns and material culture. This foundation is necessary for understanding the role that migration may have played in prehistory, as people or populations moved from one region to another carrying both material and ideological templates for things such as pottery, settlement structure, households, and religion. An event of this nature would have caused fundamental social change throughout an arrival region, and can account for both material culture change and the rapid expansion of elements of material culture such as pottery decoration and form. I also present overviews of two other anthropological processes and their archaeological correlates that have been used to explain the appearance and development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups. First, I discuss the paradigm of interaction spheres, framed in the contexts of the appearance of the Hopewell elite material culture in North America

14 and in the development of lowland Maya culture in Mesoamerica. This paradigm has implications not just for the interpretation of migration models, but also for the development and application of migration and diffusion models, as well as the appearance, development, and spread of institutionalized hierarchy. I subsequently provide several archaeological and historical case studies from around the world in order to illustrate various explanations and models for migration and material culture homogenization. In addition to regionally homogeneous material cultures, migration and diffusion models have been linked to the appearance of institutionalized hierarchy in some areas of the world. This is true of the late prehistoric period on the Hungarian Plain, when the lengthy trend of egalitarian chiefdom level societies gave way to an institutionalized hierarchical social system during the Bronze Age, that some have linked temporally to the arrival of migratory populations during the Late Copper Age (see Gimbutas 1977, 1979, 1980; Sherratt 1997b). As such, I provide a background of social development and temporal durability of egalitarian societies, since the application of these anthropological principles in this dissertation relates directly to societies prior to, and on the cusp of, the development of institutionalized hierarchy. I close with a summary discussion of how the topics discussed in this chapter provide a solid theoretical foundation for the archaeological background in Chapter Three, and the research presented in subsequent chapters.

Migration and Archaeology: Beyond the Normative Approach Migration has long been used as an explanation for the appearance of new material cultures across regions, both occupied and previously unoccupied. It also has been one of the primary models for explaining material culture change in Central and Eastern Europe as a whole, and specifically the Great Hungarian Plain, at least since the early 20th century (Childe 1950, 1959). In terms of this dissertation project, migration is one of several possibilities put forth by researchers in various contexts to explain the settlement and material culture changes observed at the end of the Middle Copper Age and beginning of the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain (Anthony 1990; Gimbutas 1963, 1977; Sherratt 1997a, 1997b). The question “what causes migrations?” is perhaps one of the most vexing that researchers face on this subject. Anthony (1990:898) stated that the causes of migratory movements are often so complex that in many cases the proximate causes of migrations can no

15 longer be identified by what remains in the archaeological record, and that finding an explicit cause for a migration should not be the primary focus for archaeologists. Nevertheless, numerous models for identifying the ultimate causes of migration have been discussed over the last century. Negative push and positive pull factors at both the point of origin and the destination are often cited as causes for migration, and resource supply and demand in both locations can be included in models that attempt to explain migratory behavior. Lee (1966) stated that migration is most likely to occur when there are negative stresses (such as warfare) in the home region and positive pulls (such as an abundance of natural resources) in the destination region. Lewis (1982) suggested that the push factors most often associated with long-distance migration are primarily economic. Specifically, differences in economic opportunities (such as trade or agricultural production) between regions are a predictable antecedent to migratory movement. Kearney (1986) addressed a specific situation in which the push/pull model may be applicable. Migration may occur, he suggested, when a dominant population exploits a dependent population. In this case, the consequences of travel would, in almost all circumstances, be fewer than remaining in the home region. However, reliable data to perform in-depth analysis addressing all of these factors is often unavailable to archaeologists. The early models of social change in central and eastern Europe were firmly rooted in the normative theory of the day. This approach eschewed much in the way of linking method and theory, and instead relied on what has become known in simple terms as “pots equals people”; or, more descriptively, that objects recovered from the archaeological record directly reflect the behavior and culture of the people that created them. Spatial and temporal divisions of material culture were the primary means of determining cultural boundaries and change; therefore, any similarities in material culture over space or time implied a cultural relationship or cultural homogeneity. This perspective was summarized well by Willey and Phillips (1958:18) In strictly archaeological terms, the locality is a geographical space small enough to permit the working assumption of complete cultural homogeneity at any given time.

In an excellent criticism of the normative approach, Binford (1965:204) summarized how anthropologists and archaeologists of the time approached the issues of formal variation in material culture, material culture homogeneity, social boundaries, and migration and diffusion:

Spatial discontinuities in the distribution of similar formal characteristics are perceived as either the result of (1) natural barriers to social intercourse, or (2) the presence of a value system which provides a conservative psychological matrix that inhibits the acceptance of foreign traits, or (3) the migration or intrusion into the area of new peoples who disrupt the previous pattern of social intercourse.

In essence, any model of culture change from a normative perspective usually requires an external catalyst, be it the removal of natural barriers (usually by technological advancement), the adoption of a new value system, or the arrival of a foreign population. Unfortunately, these kinds of changes are often difficult to directly observe in the archaeological record. Caldwell (1958:1) overcame this problem by suggesting that, “other things being equal, changes in material culture through time and space will tend to be regular,” thus implying that any sudden or dramatic change in observable material culture indicates an invasion, migration, or other process that cannot be directly observed in the archaeological record. Although the above perspectives were straightforward and logical, a problem with these early and mid-20th century approaches to diffusion and migration was, itself, the normative approach to model building and a lack of integration between method and theory (Anthony 1990). Archaeological evidence for migration hypotheses was often elusive (Parkinson 2006b), and usually relied on the assumption that any new patterns in the settlement system of a region or sudden change in material culture indicated migration or invasion rather than indigenous development or the result of some other social process or trajectory. Binford criticized the normative approach and addressed the need to integrate method and theory when dealing with migration and diffusion models. He stated that the influences and relationships that composed the vocabulary of migration studies were analytically inadequate and lacked a methodology amenable to testable hypotheses. Binford instead insisted that archaeologists must adopt a “multivariate” approach to the study of change, rejecting “assumptions about units or the natural ‘packages’ in which culture occurs” (1965:204). These “natural packages” could include any number of artifacts commonly found in association with one another in a specific region, but in Central and Eastern Europe this concept can be most directly applied to ceramic types that are often used to construct a timeframe for culture change and population arrivals. Although migration models on the Great Hungarian Plain, for example, have hardly ignored ceramic variability, one of the primary lines of evidence for migration in the region’s

17 archaeological record has traditionally been the rather sudden, widespread appearance of kurgan burial tumuli around the end of the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr period and the appearance of the Late Copper Age Baden complex. Gimbutas (1963) most directly suggested this link, and it has remained a model for change in the region for decades. Recent criticisms of such normative models, however, have suggested that a more rigorous archaeological approach to migration should rely less on potentially diffused cultural elements – such as kurgan burial tumuli – and more on changes in observable characteristics of material culture (see Anthony 1990; Binford 1965). Anthony (1990) addressed the need outlined by Binford for an integration of method and theory in migration studies. A problem with earlier perspectives on migration and diffusion was that, rather than being incorporated into models of change and social evolution, migration was viewed as an external phenomenon that was a catalyst of, but not a part of, culture change. Anthony provided several reasons why migration models have been unsatisfactory for explaining culture change. First, migration is often incorrectly characterized as a one-way event. For example, Rouse (1958, 1986) described migration as a linear process by which a migrating population invades an inhabited territory and through violence or assimilation establishes permanent residence. According to Anthony, this kind of event is extremely rare. He agreed with Gmelch (1980) who described migration as a two-way process involving return migrations and the exchange of information between individuals in the frontier and home areas. As such, this “counterstream” of return migration should have archaeological and material consequences in the homeland (Lee 1966). Anthony then addressed the issue that many previous and contemporary researchers (e.g., Rouse 1958, 1986) have ignored modern migration studies or taken the perspective that modern migrations are irrelevant to the study of prehistoric migration. Anthony stated that both archaeologists and others interested in the study of migration have no reason to assume that migrations in prehistory operated differently from recent and modern migrations (1990:898). Indeed, for over a century researchers (see Ravenstein 1885, 1889) have observed regular, repeated patterns in recent migrations with consequences for material culture that could be of great interest to archaeologists modeling the process of prehistoric migrations. Most significantly, though, Anthony (1990:898, 1992:174) illustrated the need to examine structure before cause in regards to prehistoric migration. He stated:

Proximate causes of prehistoric migrations are probably lost forever – we can only hope to identify structural conditions that made migration more or less likely to occur. In addition, one cannot begin an analysis of migration by attempting to identify the archaeological signature of a migration event. It is only after the structure of the migration process is understood that appropriate methods can be identified or developed to detect its archaeological signature (1992:174).

Under this premise, Anthony constructed the most plausible reexamination of Marija Gimbutas’ migration model of the Yamnaya (a Eurasian Steppe culture group largely defined by the construction of burial tumuli, or kurgans) into the Great Hungarian Plain since Andrew Sherratt’s treatments in the previous decade (Sherratt 1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b). Implicitly, Anthony refuted Gimbutas’ Kurgan invasion model into the Plain, and her contention that the invasion of warlike horse-riders from the Pontic Steppe effectively ended the Copper Age cultures in the region (see Anthony 1990; Gimbutas 1970, 1977). Though he noted the coincidal disruption of cultural trajectories and the appearance of kurgan burial tumuli at about 3,500 B.C. on the Hungarian Plain, he explicitly stated that the nature of the interaction between intrusive kurgan builders and the local population remains largely un-discussed and almost entirely misunderstood, given the lack of archaeological evidence for interaction between the groups (1990:908). Anthony’s measured approach to the consideration and archaeological study of migration is not without its critics, however. Chapman and Dolukhanov (1992) took issue with Anthony’s premise that archaeologists often focus on the wrong questions regarding migration, especially Anthony’s contention that archaeologists should identify the structure of a migration before they try to identify its cause (Anthony 1992:174; Chapman and Dolukhanov 1992:170). The identification of a migratory process would, of course, be ideal, but our knowledge of the structure of prehistoric migrations is limited in the same sense as all archaeological research – the majority of evidence has degraded or disappeared over time. Only very rarely do archaeologists encounter a situation where the form of a migration, society, village, or hunting encampment is accessible at the outset of research. Interestingly, the expansion of the Yamnaya kurgan burial tradition and their appearance on the Hungarian Plain may be one of the best examples of visible migration structure. Ironically, though, an in-depth chronological understanding of how and when the kurgans came to be across the landscape is still lacking, preventing a detailed understanding of the impact of

19 kurgan builders on the Plain. Without an understanding how the kurgans appeared across the landscape, an understanding of the structure of the migration is precluded. Until the time and resources can be devoted to understanding the development of the kurgans over time and space, the precise nature of their builders’ effect on social organization across Europe will remain misunderstood. And, the effect of the migration on the kurgan builders and on indigenous populations will remain unclear. To apply this perspective widely, the understanding of a migration’s structure and progression may well be one of the most complex cultural events to approach archaeologically. Even when clear evidence of a migration is present – as in the kurgan example – parsing the structure of a migration from its social and cultural effects is difficult given the ever-present limitations of time and resources.

Migration as an Explanation: Sufficient Models for Material Culture Change? The spread of different forms of material culture, and often the development of large- scale regional homogeneity, tie each of the following case studies together. As shown by the brief summaries and critiques of migration models above, migration as a solid explanation for the appearance of new personnel in a previously unoccupied region, the spread of domesticated plants and animals, or the appearance of a new material culture tradition or artifact type in a region remains a debated topic in archaeology. In all cases presented here, a debate has ensued regarding the indigenous or foreign nature of dramatic changes observed in the archaeological record, and whether or not a migration scenario satisfactorily accounts for these changes. Though bolstered by archaeological evidence, migration models in and of themselves are rarely sufficient for explaining such changes, as they tend to minimize or altogether ignore the contribution of indigenous populations to the development of (or integration into) wider material culture complexes. For example, Anthony (1986) soundly criticized Gimbutas for the blurring of variability in the Yamnaya horizon (which Gimbutas called Kurgan I-II in her 1970 publication). Nonetheless, he emphasized that migration must be dealt with effectively, since they are known historically, and should be carefully modeled rather than used as a simple explanatory mechanism. Anthony’s (1992:174) basic theoretical premise, that uniformitarian models are necessary to understand the archaeological record, applies as much to hypotheses of migration as to any other archaeological problem. Uniformitarian models of migration are possible, though difficult,

20 to create. Migration’s tendency to be a patterned, structured behavior that reacts to localized patterns both in the home region and the region of destination makes it difficult to both recognize and model accurately. As such, archaeologists must identify and understand the structure of a migration before the creation or identification of methods to detect its archaeological structure. An underlying principle of this perspective is that cultures do not migrate – people migrate in defined subgroups with specific goals (Anthony 1990, 1992). One can therefore hypothetically observe the structured, patterned movement of these groups in the archaeological record. Long distance migration, for example, should result in the development of long-distance networks set up in order to gather information regarding scattered resources of the type exploited by the migratory population along the migration route and at the destination. These networks would form along migration streams, or essentially established migratory highways. These streams should result in artifact distributions that follow a specific line of movement. Unfortunately, these streams would still be ephemeral and therefore difficult to observe archaeologically. In the destination region, change and innovation may lead to a sort of founders effect, resulting in rapid stylistic change from what may have initially been a restricted pool of variability (Anthony 1990). The heart of this approach to migration is a relatively simple idea that contradicts many earlier approaches to the topic: migration is a process, not an event. As the migration process unfolds, it creates its own unique patterns and dynamics. There is no doubt that Anthony’s approach to the study of migration in the archaeological record provides archaeologists with a new and innovative framework for the study of migration and culture change. However, there are practical problems with Anthony’s framework, some of which he addressed himself (see Chapman and Dolukhanov 1992). For example, for one to understand the structure of a migration one must rely on a combination of two lines of evidence: the archaeological record as it is, which is often inadequate for understanding the structure and causes of migration, and historical or ethno-historical records that may have little or no relationship to the migration under study. However, in the case of Eastern Europe – where migration models have never been fully eclipsed – new approaches to old migration ideas can provide insight to the processes that underlie social and cultural change.

Interaction Spheres, Egalitarianism, and Social Change Though the research presented in this dissertation is primarily concerned with testing the development of regionally homogeneous material cultures within the contexts of migration and indigenous development models, it should be recognized that social and economic interaction often play a direct role in material culture and settlement changes. Especially deserving of consideration in this dissertation are the incorporation of an indigenous population into a wider material culture group through involvement in spheres of interaction and exchange, and a discussion of how interaction models have been applied to their archaeological correlates to explain the transition from egalitarian to hierarchical social organization. According to the models presented below, the emergence of social complexity is a gruadual process, with interaction solidifying economic and social relationships, leading to the appearance of regionally homogeneous material culture areas.

Beyond Migration: Interaction Spheres and the Spread of Material Culture Caldwell (1966) initially developed the concept of the interaction sphere in order to deal with the wide geographic distribution of the North American Hopewell complex, which consisted of a regionally homogeneous complex of elite material culture. The Hopewell complex crosscut the traditionally defined culture area boundaries, including discernable archaeological cultures delineated by non-elite material culture (such as pottery and stone tools) (Freidel 1979). In contrast to other models of the homogeneous elite Hopewell material culture, Caldwell (1964:141) interpreted interaction between diverse sociocultural and sociopolitical groups as both beneficial and as formative in the development of elite institutions and an overarching institutionalized hierarchy amongst the participating groups. Under the interaction sphere model, the development of large-scale, homogeneous elite social institutions is caused by a network of information and exchange among participating elites, rather than by localized conditions as modeled under the culture area paradigm. Binford enthusiastically approved of this approach to cultural development and change in the early 1970s (1972:204). Freidel summarized the interaction sphere paradigm by stating: Theoretically, the interaction sphere concept envisions the initial emergence of elites as a means of distributing scarce and vital resources between local areas. In contrast to [cultural ecological models], the interaction sphere postulates that the initial economic monopolization by elites was over the distribution of raw materials and finished products rather than over the actual means of production

(such as arable land). In short, this concept postulates that elite institutions arose largely through the interaction of local communities rather than as an adaptation by them to local conditions (1979:50).

Freidel (1979) used the concept of the interaction sphere to explain the origin and evolution of lowland Maya civilization in Mesoamerica. He expressed skepticism of previous models of Maya development based upon the culture area concept that presumed that sociocultural innovation occurred as a localized response to local natural and social conditions. Rather, much like Caldwell (1964), Freidel sought to emphasize interaction and exchange between groups of elites across large geographic regions. These regional networks would have developed from small-scale local networks and ultimately through down-the-line long-distance exchange networks (Freidel 1979; Renfrew 1975). Blanton (1976), working from Caldwell (1964), stated that the development of an extended interaction sphere requires only a degree of sedentism amongst the participating groups, and Flannery and Schoenwetter (1970) stressed the importance of economic interdependence between the participants. However, Freidel (1979:51) suggested that these criteria are not sufficient conditions for the development of interaction spheres, and that a systemic change in the use of nonlocal materials involving their use as prestige items is the crucial element. So, although Caldwell initially conceptualized the interaction sphere model as more ideological than economic, the model has been utilized successfully as a framework for both economy and political economies. More recently, other researchers have operationalized the interaction sphere concept in different contexts around the world to explain cultural change and to link such changes to the development of hierarchical social organization and the appearance of state level societies (Trigger 1989:331). In Mesopotamia, civilization was modeled as a large zone in which many cultures influenced each other’s development through political and social interaction (see Alden 1982; Kohl 1978; Lamberg-Karlovsky 1975). Renfrew and Shennan (1982), Cherry (1984), and Renfrew and Cherry (1986) have discussed “peer-polity interaction” in the Aegean region of prehistoric Europe. Recently, the peer-polity model has been expanded to include models of interaction between smaller polities and larger, established primary states (Parkinson and Galaty 2007). Blanton et al. (1981) and Trigger (1989:331) have suggested that the development of a singular region cannot be understood without considering the developmental trajectories of its

23 neighbors. Flannery (2002) adopted this perspective. He proposed a model by which extended households developed in competition with one another in the social context of large villages and competition over natural resources.

Social Trajectory, Interaction, and Change In addition to migration, material culture changes, and shifts in settlement patterns, sudden breaks in continuity can also be explained through social and economic models focusing on social complexity and factors like hereditary inequality, division of labor, subsistence, trade, wealth, and other aspects of economy. Speaking generally, archaeologists have tended to model such changes on a linear scale ranging from less socially complex egalitarian societies to more complex, hierarchical and ranked state-level societies. However, in some regions, prehistoric societies did not progress according to such models. The prehistory of the Great Hungarian Plain, and of Central and Eastern Europe, for example, is exceptional for the temporal durability exhibited by tribal societies during the Neolithic, Copper Age, and Bronze Age. In contrast to other parts of the Old World, such as the Eastern Mediterranean where institutionalized hereditary inequality and ascribed ranking emerged during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, the cyclical nature of settlement variability on the Great Hungarian Plain suggests that basically egalitarian societies existed in the region until well into the Bronze Age (Galaty and Parkinson 1999). By that time, socially stratified states had emerged throughout the Eastern Mediterranean (Renfrew 1975).

The Emergence of Ranked Societies and Ranking’s Relationship to Regional Homogeneity Implicit in the migration model of Gimbutas (1977, 1980) is the arrival of Indo-European populations on the Hungarian Plain. Essentially, she considered the migratory arrival of Indo- European peoples to be the catalyst that destroyed the cyclical social structure of “Old Europe” on the Plain and installed the patriarchal hierarchy that she considered typical of later periods. Importantly, Gimbutas considered the whole of the regionally homogeneous Baden culture to embody Indo-European characteristics, including the social and political structures that contributed to the development of institutionalized inequality on the Great Hungarian Plain (Gimbutas 1977, 1980). As such, an overview of theoretical perspectives on the emergence of ranked society and its signature in the archaeological record is useful. It is presented below in an effort to clarify possible processes present on the prehistoric Hungarian Plain.

The emergence of ranked societies is a topic widely considered in archaeology since the social evolutionists of the late 19th century first proposed levels of human civilization (e.g., Morgan 1877; Tylor 1871). Since that time, archaeologists have worked primarily from two perspectives in attempting to understand and describe the development of social inequality:

1. Social anthropological models that focus on how an egalitarian system changes into a non- egalitarian system, either suddenly or over time. These models describe how societies move from a “created equal” social reality to one where certain individuals are born into exclusive social ranks. 2. Archaeological models, built upon social anthropological models, that draw upon data collected from the archaeological contexts to determine where a society fits in a developmental model, or try to describe what a certain level of development (e.g., band, tribe, chiefdom) should look like archaeologically.

After the advent of the New Archaeology in the 1950s and 1960s and the subsequent development of processualist archaeological theory and methodological approaches, numerous models for the development of inequality were proposed. Ultimately, all of these models were built upon the “levels of integration” initially proposed by Steward (1955) and developed further by others. Freid (1967) wrote that inequality developed as the result of unequal access to roles and resources, and that it was ultimately concerned with political organization. He therefore divided social organization into three main categories:

1. Egalitarian societies, which have as many roles to fill as there are individuals. 2. Ranked societies, which may contain achieved and ascribed positions, with limited access to certain social roles. 3. Stratified societies, where an entire subsection of society has no ability to participate in certain roles. Although they were also concerned with the hierarchical roles of individuals in societies, Sahlins and Service (Sahlins and Service 1960; Service 1971) were more concerned with functional organization. They differentiated non-egalitarian chiefdoms from egalitarian tribes based on the level of centralized coordination of economic, religious, and social activities. They assigned these organizational characteristics to specific social integration levels, creating the

25 well-known scale of bands, tribes, chiefdoms, and states that has remained a popular framework for archaeologists concerned with levels of social integration as well as the development of institutionalized hierarchy. Though useful, all of these models are problematic in that they do not account for variability at levels of social integration geographically or diachronically. Along with their tendency to pigeonhole societies into one of several normalist categories, the models fail to describe how a society moves from one level to another on the scale. Regardless of these shortcomings, such models retain utility in cross-cultural comparative studies (as the authors intended), though they remain troublesome for archaeologists concerned with development over the long-term. More recent models (Clark and Blake 1994; Hayden 1995) emphasized human agency as a tool in social change, and have described Service’s “tribe” and “chiefdom” levels of social integration as “transegalitarian” societies. That is, they are neither egalitarian nor politically stratified. This term seems particularly appropriate for the Great Hungarian Plain in the Neolithic and Copper Age (Bogucki 1999), as the roots of inequality had been present on the Plain and in the region for quite some time. Full development of ranked societies may have been held in check by the cycles of population nucleation and dispersal (Parkinson 2002), which often serve as markers between culture periods on the Plain throughout this period. Parkinson and Guycha (Parkinson 2002:8; Parkinson and Gyucha 2007), Gyucha et al. (2004), and Fowles (2002) argued that, in order to understand the long-term nature of change in egailitarian and transegalitarian societies and to model integration over the long-term, archaeologists should focus on segmentation in tribal systems. Essentially, Parkinson and Gyucha suggested that it is most productive to envision different economic, environmental, and social mechanisms that encourage fusion among tribal societies at some times, and fission at others. This speaks to the concept of tribal disunity, and the idea that tribes remained segmented with clear social boundaries because they were always fissioning (Morgan 1885; Parkinson 2002:8). Parkinson stated:

While some tribal societies certainly do exhibit clear boundaries, others appear as smears across the archaeological landscape, with few discernible internal or external boundaries. The segmented nature of tribal systems, combined with their tendency to fission and fuse given different social and environmental conditions,

results in a social picture that assumes discreet boundaries at only isolated moments in time (2002:8).

Such an approach to understanding the behavior of tribal societies over the long-term allows archaeologists to speak on how non-ranked, egalitarian societies such as those that existed on the Great Hungarian Plain from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age maintained tribal structures long after contemporary and comparable societies in other parts of the world developed political and social ranking and institutionalized hierarchy, up to, and including, the emergence of state level societies.

Approaching Migration, Archaeology, and Regional Models of Material Culture Change The linking of material culture to specific populations – especially migratory ones – is difficult archaeologically, and as such more general anthropological models are relied upon to bridge the gaps between migration, models of cultural change, and the archaeological evidence.

Migration as an Explanation for the Appearance of Homogeneous Regional Cultures Despite the fact that direct archaeological evidence supporting migration explanations is usually elusive, research across space and time has often attempted – with varying degrees of success – to apply migration models to explain instances of new materials or products appearing in a region. What follows are summaries of several scenarios at varying spatial scales where migration has been used as a framework for explaining archaeological evidence. These archaeological and historical examples are included in order to provide specific outcomes of the anthropological processes presented above. Clovis in North America. Clovis finds in North America represent the first clear evidence of late Pleistocene people on the continent around 11,500 years ago (Anderson 1990, Haynes 2002:52). Sites with characteristic fluted points have been discovered across the continent, from Central America to the Maritime Provinces of Canada on the Northeast Atlantic coast. Although the highly contested issue of Clovis vs. pre-Clovis, and the possibility of human occupation in North America prior to the appearance of the Clovis assemblage, is far beyond the scope of this dissertation, what is pertinent is the relatively rapid appearance of a materially homogeneous culture across a large geographic area.

Numerous general models have been proposed for the migration of Beringian groups into North America. Typically, these have considered north-south migrations in single or multi-wave events either internally or along the Pacific Coast, ultimately culminating in Clovis either as they initially entered North America or after a period of change within the continent (Barton et al. 2004; Faught 2008; Goebel et al. 2008; Madsen 2004). Other researchers, drawing on discoveries of pre-Clovis assemblages and their interpretations, have argued for a purely in situ spread of Clovis based on diversity in pre-Clovis assemblages (see Adovasio et al. 1983). Under this model, it is presumed that the Clovis assemblage and characteristic fluting technique developed within North America and spread organically as other groups rapidly adopted the tool making tradition. Recently, Faught (2008) argued that Clovis might have spread throughout North America as a ménage of human groups, possibly migrating onto the continent via different routes, arrived in seperate regions almost contemporaneously. He cited as evidence a large number of Clovis radiocarbon dates from across both North and South America, with the earliest populations having appeared just before and after 12,000 years ago in four different regions almost simultaneously. Ultimately, he argued that there is no clear north-south migratory trajectory, and indeed, no clear trajectory is discernable at all based on the analyzed radiocarbon dates. This interpretation dovetails well with Anthony’s (1990) insistence that archaeologists must integrate method and theory in order to understand migration as a patterned human behavior, often with multiple points of origin and destinations. The Archaic North American Borderlands. At the regional scale in North America, the spread of various cultigens to the North American Desert Borderlands during the Archaic Period (3,000-1,500 B.C.) serves as an example of a previously unknown technology appearing relatively rapidly across a region. The “Desert Borderlands,” as described by Minnis (1992), consist of the Mogollon Highlands and the Colorado Plateau to the northern border of the Sonoran Desert of the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Western North America was beyond the area of natural distribution of classic Mesoamerican domesticates such as maize and beans. Maize had to be brought from its subtropical origins to a more temperate climate, where it eventually became the cornerstone of a field crop subsistence system (Bogucki 1999). Some archaeologists (Berry 1992; Matson 1991) have argued for a northward migration of peoples from Mesoamerica, using the appearance of maize in the region of the Desert

Borderlands as evidence for human movement. As part of a migration model, new arrivals from the south would have brought with them their agricultural technology, and with it social and settlement changes that often accompany agricultural development – such as sedentism and large field crop systems, that appear to have developed at around the same time as the appearance of Mesoamerican domesticates. However, arguments for the indigenous adoption of maize, squash, and beans, and the contention that the spread of cultigens can spread across long distances without the direct migration of people are also compelling (see Minnis 1992; Wills 1995). Minnis (1992) noted that Mesoamerican domesticates appear to have been integrated effortlessly into the preexisting subsistence structure of the Archaic people of the region. He characterized the period between the first appearance of maize and the emergence of communities fully based on agricultural subsistence as a time of “casual agriculture,” when a semi-reliance on domesticates was a low cost and low effort way in which to increase economic stability. Sedentism would have developed slowly as a logical extension of the incipient agricultural system, rather than suddenly as the migration models imply. This scenario does not imply or require migration, and it suggests that the inherent social organization in the region was maintained rather than fundamentally changed; in this model, casual agriculture simply complemented rather than co- opted the system already in place. Willis (1992, 1995) also noted increased sedentism following the initial adoption of maize and other domesticates. He similarly suggested that a desire for predictability and control of subsistence systems – rather than an influx of new personnel into the region – led to a gradual shift in settlement and economic system. The European Magdalenian. In Europe, the migration concept has also been widely used to explain the appearance of new material cultures and, presumably, the arrival of new populations on the continent. For example, the arrival of new personnel is a logical framework for explaining the dramatic increase in Magdalenian settlement in regards to an expansion of settlement to the north and east of Europe over time (Jochim et al. 1999; Otte 1998). In the terminal period of the last glacial maximum in France, Magdalenian site numbers increased nearly four-fold, and the number of open-air sites (as opposed to rock shelter sites) increased dramatically. It appears that the dispersal of peoples into this region began before 15,000 B.P., just as climatic conditions began to improve in the northern latitudes of Europe. Numerous small, seasonal camps that exploited seasonal reindeer migration patterns appeared. By the

Bölling warm period (around 13,000 B.P.) just before the last glacial maximum, sites begin to appear further north. After the glacial maximum between 13,000 and 11,000 B.P., the Magdalenian had spread throughout much of continental Europe, and occupation was year-round (Jochim 2002). In this case, improving environmental and climatic conditions opened a niche and afforded Paleolithic populations the opportunity to expand into a previously unoccupied region, possibly following faunal resources as they migrated into recently habitable areas. The Neolithization of Europe. The Neolithic period is Europe is typically described as the period when farming first replaced hunting and foraging as the primary method of subsistence. The period is also often described by other specific characteristics, such as permanent settlements and structures, the first widespread creation and use of pottery, and the first domestication of various animal species. Throughout southeastern and central Europe, a common set of subsistence, settlement, and material culture attributes existed at this time, making the period an excellent case study for the examination of migration and the appearance of regionally homogeneous cultural and social characteristics. Numerous models have been proposed and debated regarding the first appearance of agriculture in Europe. Childe (1958a, 1958b) established the tradition of diffusionist arguments to explain the transition from hunting and foraging subsistence strategies to agricultural ones. Many models have evolved from Childe’s original assumptions, perhaps most notably Renfrew’s (1987) assertion that the spread of framing from Anatolia to Europe accompanied the spread of the Indo-European language family. Geneticits researching modern European populations have in part substantiated this model (Ammerman and Cavailli-Sforza 1984; van Andel and Runnels 1995). However, data regarding the spread of the Indo-European language family widely across the European continent are still contested (see Forster and Renfrew 2006), and other researchers (Anthony 2007; Kristiansen 2005) have supported a much later entrance of the Indo-European family to the continent based on both archaeological and linguistic evidence. Many archaeologists have also emphasized the importance of indigenous Mesolithic developments of farming in Europe (see Chapman 1994), while Bogucki (1996) took a more inclusive approach by insisting that no single method or mechanism can explain the appearance and development of the Neolithic in Europe. Regardless of the plurality of mechanisms for the spread of the Neolithic in Europe, a rapid increase in site number can be observed in Greece around 7,000 B.C. that corresponds to

30 the first definite appearance of agriculture on the European continent (Whittle 1996:22-23, 40- 41). Based on radiocarbon evidence, a Neolithic presence existed in Macedonia and Crete from ca. 7,000 B.C. and in Thessaly by 6,500 B.C. Sites like Karanovo in Bulgaria existed by 6,000 B.C., and there is an early Neolithic presence in Hungary on the Great Hungarian Plain, in another area with comparatively little Mesolithic human occupation. However, the period of time immediately preceding the Neolithic on the Hungarian Plain still requires much more research to clarify the relationship between the Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic (Kertéz 1996; Makkay 1996). It is difficult to imagine a scenario where a migration explanation is more fitting than the spread of the Neolithic package into Europe, at least in terms of the spread of agriculture from western Anatolia into Greece and north to the Carpathian Basin. Aside from the first appearance of ceramics at Neolithic sites in Europe, nearly all Neolithic European sites contain plants and animals first domesticated in the Levantine region of the Near East, including barley, emmer, einkorn, lentil, pigs, goats, and sheep. Furthermore, recent genetic data suggests that no independent domestication of animals took place in Neolithic Europe (Bellwood 2004:68-69). Renfrew (1987) initially characterized this process as a “wave of advance” by demic diffusion from Anatolia into southern and central/eastern Europe, creating a spread of Neolithic settlements engaged in agricultural subsistence and the production of domesticated animals. Renfrew tied his migration model directly to the spread of the Proto-Indo-European language family (PIE), which led to criticisms from those supporting a much later entrance of PIE concurrent with the arrival of kurgan builders from the Pontic Steppe (see Anthony 1990; Kristiansen 2005). Renfrew later revised his position on the arrival of PIE in Europe, and suggested that migratory populations from Anatolia into Europe around 7,000 BC spoke an even more ancient version of PIE (2003). However, the wave of advance migration scenario remained relatively unchanged. Recent publications have followed Bogucki’s (1996) lead by de-emphasizing migration as the single explanation for the appearance of agriculture and domesticated animals in Europe. Séfériadès (2007), for example, emphasized the indigenous adoption of Neolithic lifeways. He suggested that the Aegean area was densely populated in the Mesolithic, and that the diffusionist understanding of the region prior to the Neolithic is shaped by a lack of exploration and research into the region’s Mesolithic roots. Though the issue remains unsettled and open to discussion, it

31 serves as an excellent example of how the discussion of how material cultures spread and become dominant in a region or continent is still framed within paradigms of migration and indigenous development. The Iron Age Celtic Migrations. During the Iron Age, the period of the great Celtic migrations is documented in texts by Greek and Roman authors (Kristiansen 1998; Moscati et al. 1991). They describe movements of peoples (called Celts by the Greeks and Gauls by Romans) from north of the Alps. As might be expected, much discussion and debate has taken place regarding the authenticity of the written accounts, and whether or not archaeological evidence supports these accounts (Wells 2002). Roman tradition describes migration of the Gauls southward across the Alps into Italy between the 6th and 4th centuries B.C. According to some historic sources, Gauls passed through the alpine passes and descended into the Po River plain. Some remained in the Po region as agriculturalists, while others continued southward, ultimately defeating a Roman army in 387 B.C. (Frey 1995; Wells 2002). The archaeological evidence in Italy supports the idea of movements from the north of the Alps into Italy. However, migrations on the scale described by Classical writers are not supported (Frey 1995). Archaeological evidence for the migrations includes new burial practices at this time along the Adriatic coast of Italy, and the presence and style of certain grave goods that suggest connections with eastern France and southern Germany. One problem has been that the texts of Classical writers typically describe large scale, one-way migrations. This is problematic, as there is no historical evidence, textural or otherwise, to suggest the true scale of the migrations. Anthony (1990, 1992) and others have recently indicated that return migration is a common and perhaps necessary part of large-scale migrations. The combination of archaeological and historical evidence of settlement in the Po valley and archaeological evidence contained in graves supports the idea that return migration and continued contact with the homeland through maintained economic ties is an important and perhaps necessary part of human migration.

Migration, Regionally Homogeneous Material Cultures, and Social Change The mosaic of anthropological models and their archaeological correlates for explaining the development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups presented here is complex, both in terms of theoretical approaches and the models developed to explain archaeological

32 phenomena. However, each of the models and theoretical perspectives presented above – migration and diffusion, interaction spheres, and the development of hierarchical social structure, are intertwined both anthropologically and theoretically. It is fitting, then, that the research presented in this dissertation draws upon all of the material presented in this chapter in order to frame the discussion in the following chapters. To conclude this chapter, it is important to consider the multiple models described above as contributing factors to the development of regionally homogeneous material cultures. Even more, it is imperative to recognize them as not mutually exclusive. Indeed, these models often reference one another even unintentionally – migration has been said to usher in the appearance of hierarchy (see Gimbutas 1970), and interaction spheres have contributed to the appearance of institutionalized hierarchy (see Sherratt 1997a, 1997b) as well as the development of state level society (see Renfrew and Shennan 1982; Renfrew and Cherry 1986). It is perhaps ineffective to discuss one without incorporating other models into the fold, and it is the aim of the remainder of this volume to present research that cohesively integrates these multiple theoretical paradigms.

Summary This chapter has outlined the general anthropological theoretical considerations underpinning the archaeological research in subsequent chapters that focuses more specifically on issues of material culture homogenization, migration, interaction spheres, and social evolution on the eastern Great Hungarian Plain. The chapter has discussed various models used by archaeologists to explain migration and the formation of homogeneous regional material cultures, and provided descriptions and case studies to illustrate these models and place them in their proper theoretical contexts. Chapter Three will apply these theoretical underpinnings to the archaeological background of the Great Hungarian Plain, paying special attention to how models of migration, diffusion, indigenous development, and settlement and material culture change have contributed to our understanding of the region’s prehistory.

CHAPTER THREE THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL, GEOGRAPHIC, AND GEOLOGICAL SETTING Introduction In this chapter, I provide the relevant background to the prehistory of the Great Hungarian Plain by placing the region into its archaeological context and integrating the theoretical foundation presented in Chapter Two into the specific archaeological context of the Plain. I also provide a geographic and geological summary of the Plain in general and of the Körös River watershed study area more specifically. The chapter begins with a geographic, geological, and geomorphological overview of the study region, and a summary discussion of how ecological conditions affected prehistoric settlement patterns in the area. I continue with a period-by-period overview of social development and change and settlement organization, beginning with the material culture and settlement organization shifts of the Late Neolithic/Early Copper Age transition. I then provide a more detailed description of Early and Middle Copper Age trends toward local and regional homogenization in terms of settlement and material culture. This is followed by a discussion of the Plain’s Late Copper Age incorporation into a much wider material culture group and economic system. I conclude with a brief description of the region’s trend toward regional differentiation during the Bronze Age. I pay special attention to and describe in more detail the development of the Late Copper Age Baden culture in a wider European context, and then discuss practical limitations of characterizing Baden development in the Körös region as compared to other areas in central and eastern Europe and the Balkans.

The Geographical and Geological Setting of the Great Hungarian Plain The Geological Setting of the Great Hungarian Plain The geographical, geological, and geomorphological setting of the Great Hungarian Plain, and its relationship to prehistoric settlement, has been analyzed and described in depth in several other publications (see Frolking, unpublished manuscript; Gyucha 2010; Parkinson 1999, 2002; Sherratt 1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b). As such, only an overview will be provided here in order to provide a general understanding of how the local geology and hydrology developed

Tisza River Tisza River River Danube Körös-Berettyó River System Carpathian Transdanubia Mountains

Great Hungarian Plain

100 km

Figure 3.1. The Carpathian Basin. Map used with permission of Dr. László Zentai, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.

and subsequently influenced prehistoric settlement and changes over time in the Körös Basin study region. The modern country of Hungary and the Carpathian Basin are bisected by the Danube River. This forms two generalized and distinct landscapes in the Basin (see Figure 3.1). To the west, the area known as Transdanubia (Dunantúl) is characterized by hills and mountains. East of the Danube, the Great and Little Plains (Nagy and Kis Alföld, respectively), are characterized by flat, alluvial Quaternary deposits. During the Pliocene, up to 3,000 meters of sandy-clay sediments were deposited as the Pannonian Sea, an inland body of water that once covered the entirety of the Carpathian Basin, subsided, to form a series of freshwater lakes and eventually rivers that continued to deposit more sediment above the Pannonian deposits. Moreover, the rivers that became the Danube and Tisza incised and filled the Carpathian Basin with fluvial sediment eroded from the uplands surrounding the Nagy and Kis Alföld (Pécsi 1964). Ultimately, the landscape encountered by prehistoric inhabitants of the Great Hungarian Plain – and indeed, modern people as well – was an essentially flat landscape dominated by alluvial clay

35 and loess with seasonal flooding, slow-moving and temporary waterways. It is a land entirely devoid of naturally occurring stone. To the west of the Körös region lies a sandy interfluve between the Tisza and Danube Rivers (the Duna-Tisza Köze). This feature of the Great Hungarian Plain was formed as the alluvial fan of the Danube was blown southeast, forming a series of dunes stretching to the Tisza floodplain (Parkinson 2006b:97; Sherratt 1997a:274). This interfluvial area remained relatively unoccupied for much of prehistory. This created a geographic and social boundary between the Great Hungarian Plain to the east and Transdanubia to the west. However, by the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr period on the Plain this region was settled. This settlement may indicate a widening economic and social reach of the eastern Plain’s people, and increased contact with the Transdanubian Lengyel culture (Makkay 2007). A series of alluvial fans, formed by smaller streams as they flowed from the mountains to the Tisza during the Pleistocene and Holocene, separates the Tisza floodplain from the northern mountains (see Sherratt 1997a:275, figure 11.3). The northeastern Nyirség Pleistocene alluvial fan and the southeastern Maros alluvial fan formed in the Pleistocene and Holocene when a series of braided rivers deposited thick layers of sand and sandy gravel in the region (Nádor et al. 2005; Parkinson 1999:97). Parkinson and others (Pécsi and Sárfalvi 1964; Pécsi 1970; Gyucha 2010) summarized the Körös-Berettyó region – an area of the study region in this research project – that lies between these Pleistocene formations, as dominated by the Tisza River and its thick fluviatile sediments. In prehistory, the Körös Region was dominated by the Tisza, Berettyó, and Körös Rivers. These rivers were responsible for regional inundations throughout much of the Holocene. Prior to the river system’s regulation in the 19th century, this part of the country was a complex series of swamps and oxbows interspersed with slightly higher areas of relief composed of alluvial silts and clays, and pockets of redeposited loess.

Berretyó River

Sebes -Körös R.

Hármas-Körös R.

Kettős –Körös R.

Figure 3.2. Rivers in the Körös-Berettyó study region after 19th century regulation.

The Geological Setting of the Körös-Berretyó Region The Körös River valley in the Tisza drainage (also called the Körös-Berettyó region), consists of four separate channels (The Berettyó, Sebes Körös, Fekete Körös, and Feher Körös). The four rivers ultimately converge approximately 20 kilometers west of Vésztő to form the Hármas-Körös (Triple Körös) River that flows into the Tisza near the modern city of Szeged. This portion of the Tisza drainage was similarly drained and canalized in the 19th century (see Figure 3.2). The triangular depression drained by the Körös and Berettyó Rivers is a region of extremely low relief, and is generally defined by three Pleistocene loess fans to the north, west, and south (Sherratt 1997b:295-296, figures 11.10-13). It must be noted that this slope is not noticeable at the micro level, as it

Figure 3.3. Prehistoric hydrology of the Körös region (recreated after Gyucha 2010).

changes in elevation only approximately 20 meters over 90 kilometers (Sherratt 1997b:295, figure 11.11). Given the lack of slope in the region, much of the Körös basin consists of poorly drained floodplain and backswamp with a tangle of discontinuous levee-like soil features (Frolking, n.d.; Pécsi 1970; Sherratt 1983, 1997b). Prior to the regulation and canalization of the rivers in the Körös drainage in the 19th century, seasonal flooding left much of the region inundated for large periods of the year rendering it unsuitable for permanent habitation (see Figure 3.3). Settlements throughout prehistory, therefore, were limited to islands of higher ground within the Körös depression, and to the tops of natural levees formed by alluvial materials deposited by the spring and summer floods. Sherratt (1997b:297) stated that occasional exceptional flooding reached even the highest levels of Holocene deposition, so that occupants of the

38 area sought the highest elevations available, even when the additional elevation offered even less than a meter of extra protection. Perhaps due to the frequent course changes as late as the 18th and 19th centuries, it had previously been accepted that rivers in the Körös-Berettyó drainage frequently changed beds in prehistory, in addition to flooding seasonally. Recent geomorphological research in the region by Frolking (n.d.) and Gyucha (2010), however, suggest that the river channels were remarkably stable for the vast majority of the Holocene, travelling only three meters per 100 years with no meanders or cutoffs in some areas.

General Soil and Environmental Characteristics Parkinson (1999:98; 2006b) described the soil formation in the Great Hungarian Plain as very slow due to the frequent flooding of rivers in the Tisza and Körös drainages. Sherratt (1997a:276-277) also described the soils and vegetation of the Great Hungarian Plain in more detail. Although presently devoted to industrial agriculture, including the production of sunflower, wheat, barley, corn, and rice, as well as the continuing tradition of stockbreeding (Pécsi and Sárfalvi 1964), the region is technically the westernmost extension of the Eurasian Steppes. Most of the Plain is naturally classified as forest steppe, though large areas are likely to have remained unforested during the Holocene. In wet areas and depressions as are common in the Körös region, however, riparian forests are likely to have been characteristic (Pécsi and Jakucs 1971). A synthesis of pollen core data (Gyulai 1993) that built upon the work of Szujkó-Lacza (1991) suggested that the early Neolithic was characterized by mixed oak forests on loess soils. After 5,000 B.C. at the Neolithic/Early Copper Age transition, a general cooling trend ushered in a period of beech dominance, culminating in the creation of large deciduous forests as well as parkland steppe areas toward the later phases of the Copper Age. This steppe was gradually replaced during an extended cool period with a mixture of beech and oak forests during the Bronze Age (Gyulai 1993:13-18; Parkinson 1999:99).

The Archaeological Setting The prehistory of Central and Eastern Europe is exceptional for the temporal durability exhibited by egalitarian tribal societies during the Neolithic, Copper Age, and Bronze Age. In

39 contrast to other parts of the Old World, such as the Eastern Mediterranean, where institutionalized hereditary inequality and scribed ranking emerged during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, the cycling and fission/fusion nature of settlement variability on the Great Hungarian Plain suggests that basically egalitarian societies existed in the region until well into the Bronze Age (Galaty and Parkinson 1999; Makkay 1982). By that time, socially stratified states had emerged throughout the Eastern Mediterranean (Renfrew 1975). On the Hungarian Plain, the process of cycling is most observable in the nucleation into centralized tell-based society and economy in the Middle/Late Neolithic and Middle Bronze Age and the dispersal into less centralized systems during the Early Copper Age. Although this pattern was the dominant one on the Plain during this time period, another trajectory appears to have taken hold in the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr period and culminated in the Late Copper Age Baden phase in what Sherratt (1984, 1997b) characterized as an abandonment of the central Hungarian Plain and an emerging focus on settlement at the margins of the Plain near access points to raw material sources and trade routes that provided prestige goods. This process may have played a more fundamental role in leading to institutionalized and hereditary inequality in the region in the second half of the Bronze Age than diffusion or migration. The following sections explore long-term and short-term trajectories of change on the Hungarian Plain from the Neolithic to the Middle Bronze Age.

The Neolithic The Neolithic period on the Great Hungarian Plain is characterized by a trend toward an increase in regional differentiation in ceramic styles, settlement patterning, and resource exploitation. The trend began with the earliest arrival of farmers on the Plain in the Early Neolithic – the Körös Culture (see Bökönyi 1988; Comşa 1974; Kalicz and Makkay 1977; Kertész 1996; Kutzián 1944; Makkay 1996; Tringham 1971:91-96). It continued in the Middle Neolithic with the distinction of Dunatúl Vonaldiszes Kerámia (DVK) in Transdanubia and Alföldi Vonaldiszes Kerámia (AVK) on the Plain (Bognár-Kutzián 1966; Kalicz and Makkay 1977; Kosse 1979; Makkay 1982), and culminated in the highly differentiated Tisza-Herpály- Csőszhalom complex in the Late Neolithic (Parkinson and Galaty 2007). The Late Neolithic Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex. The trend of regional differentiation that began with the subdivision of the Carpathian Basin into two discreet cultural

40 complexes – the AVK on the Plain and the DVK in Transdanubia – continued into the Middle Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain with ceramic culture groups such as Szakálhát, Esztár, and Tiszadob. This general trend ultimately resulted in the division of the region into three discreet groups during the Late Neolithic. Known as the Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex, it is roughly contemporary with Lengyel I-II in Transdanubia and the Petreşi culture in Romania (Bognár-Kutzián 1966; Kalicz and Raczky 1987a; Sherratt 1997a; Parkinson 2006a). Traditionally, the three ‘cultures’ are differentiated through distinctive ceramic assemblages, but differences in settlement patterns and other material culture have also been observed: Decorated Tisza fineware, with its intricate incised, textile-like patterns is characteristic of the southern area and shows continuity from the Szakálhát group. The northern part of the Plain – with the exception of the mountain fringes, where settlement was abandoned – was occupied by the Herpály-Csőszhalom group, with painted finewares. This replaced the multitude of smaller groups of the northern edge of the Plain, and is found in the former Esztár area. Small differences in the color-combinations distinguish Herpály from Csőszhalom, but together they differ from Tisza not only in their pottery but also in their settlement-pattern and in the occurrence of small numbers of simple copper objects, for instance at Herpály. Since both these groups shared a common set of domestic pottery, the sharp frontier between Tisza and Herpály finewares may indicate a genuine social boundary… (Sherratt 1987a:280-281).

Additionally, researchers noted that true tells – which were likely founded near the end of the Middle Neolithic Szakálhát phase – occur more frequently in the southern area of the Plain and are associated with the Tisza group in the Late Neolithic (Kalicz and Raczky 1987a; Makkay 1982; Sherratt 1987a; Parkinson 2006). This settlement pattern consisted of the occupation of the large tells up to six hectares in area associated with large horizontal settlements of up to 11 hectares, and numerous outlying flat sites. Together these constituted three basic settlement types: genuine tell settlements, tell-like settlements with a more modest height and occupation duration, and single layer horizontal (flat) settlements (Kalicz and Raczky 1987a:15; Parkinson 2006). These site types are often found in close spatial association with one another, and seem to indicate a social and settlement pattern focused around occupation of tell sites at this time (Kalicz and Raczky 1987a:17; Parkinson 2006; Sherratt 1987a:280). The subdivision of the Plain into three distinct groups during the Late Neolithic appears to have happened gradually, and Kalicz and Raczky (1984:131) argued that the Herpály and Csőszhalom complexes did not develop directly from local Middle Neolithic groups, but from a

Csőszhalom

Tisza Herpály

100 km

Figure 3.4. The Late Neolithic Tisza-Hérpály-Csőszhalom complex. Map used with permission of Dr. László Zentai, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.

“remarkably uniform” Tisza culture that occupied the Hungarian Plain at the beginning of the Late Neolithic. Besides the clear settlement differentiation that occurred during the period, Parkinson (1999:111) noted “the various differences between the three groups extended to other aspects of social organization as well…more subtle patterns in subsistence patterns, and settlement organization are beginning to further distinguish one from the other” (Figure 3.4). In additional to dramatic shifts in settlement form and pattern of distribution, ceramic manufacture also underwent many changes during the Late Neolithic:

One conspicuous feature of this period is a basic change in pottery technology as compared to preceding periods. Chaff was no longer used for tempering, and the qualitative differences between coarser and finer wares practically disappeared…The new pottery forms making their appearance in this period include various amphora-shaped vessels and high pedestalled bowls (Kalicz and Raczky 1987a:19).

Although the shift in pottery manufacturing techniques is associated with all three cultures of the Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex, Kalicz and Raczky (1987a:20) also identified differences in pottery design and ornamentation that are culturally diagnostic between the three groups. Parkinson (1999:112) summarized these differences: Tisza ceramics are characterized by deeply-incised meandric patterns on unpolished, usually open-mouthed vessels. The incised meanders normally occur in decorative panels, and the vessels are normally fired to a pale orange or bright- red color. In contrast to ceramics of the Herpály and Csőszhalom groups, which are typically painted with various colors, Tisza ceramics are painted only occasionally with wide black bands.

This overall trend toward regional differentiation came to a halt around 4,500 B.C., at the beginning of the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain.

The Copper Age The Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár Culture. In stark contrast to the trend of discrete cultural differentiation throughout the Neolithic, the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture (ca. 4,500-4,000 B.C.) exhibited a return to pottery and settlement types that were homogeneous across the Great Hungarian Plain (Bognár-Kutzián 1966; Parkinson 2006b). The Tiszapolgár area extended across the entire Plain, south into the Banat of northern Serbia, into the foothills of Romanian Transylvania, and north into the mountains of southern Slovakia. The area of Tiszapolgár distribution roughly corresponded to the previous Late Neolithic Tisza-Herpály- Csőszhalom complex; however, the Tiszapolgár occupation extended to higher elevations in the east and the north (Parkinson 1999:126) (see Figure 3.5). Since Bognár-Kutzián’s (1963, 1972) analysis, most researchers have considered the Tiszapolgár to be a direct extension of their Late Neolithic predecessors on the Plain. The fact that the Early Copper Age population on the Plain is considered an extension of Neolithic forebears is especially interesting given the dramatic changes in house form, settlement type, and settlement location that occurred during the transition between the Late Neolithic and Early Copper Age. The nucleated settlement pattern of large tell sites surrounded by flat sites of various sizes predominant in the Late Neolithic was replaced by less nucleated, more evenly dispersed settlement (Bognár-Kutzián 1972; Makkay 1982; Parkinson 2006b). Additionally, houses in the Early Copper Age were much smaller than those in the Late Neolithic, possibly indicating a trend toward dispersal of residential or family groups (Makkey 1982; Parkinson 2002, 2006b).

100 km

Figure 3.5. Extent of the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture. Map used with permission of Dr. László Zentai, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.

The long-distance trade networks that may have been associated with regional differentiation in the Late Neolithic developed into networks bringing copper, gold, and chert onto the Plain (Sherratt 1987a, 1987b). Additionally, the intramural burials common throughout the Neolithic period were largely replaced by burial in highly organized, extensive cemeteries such as Tiszapolgár-Basatanya (Bognár-Kutzián 1963). In contrast to the three distinct ceramic groups of the Late Neolithic, Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár pottery is essentially homogeneous across the entire Plain. The vessels of this period are often decorated with lugs and knobs that themselves are sometimes pierced or semi- pierced (Bognár-Kutzián 1963; Parkinson 2006). Mcroscopic as well as a macroscopic homogeneity is indicated by petrographic analysis of vessel fragments from this period (Parsons 2005); however, trace element analysis revealed regional variability in paste composition, and non-locally produced pottery was present at some sites (Hoekman-Sites et. al 2007). Therefore, it appears that pottery was locally produced and widely exchanged, suggesting a high degree of

44 interaction and low boundary maintenance that concurs with the results of Parkinson’s (2006a) stylistic analysis of Tiszapolgár ceramics in the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plain. The Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr Culture. During the Middle Copper Age (ca. 4,000-3,500 B.C.) the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár pattern continued on the eastern Hungarian Plain. As such, Bodrogkeresztúr is considered a direct temporal extension of the Tiszapolgár. Parkinson (2006) and others (e.g., Sherratt 1997a, 1997b) have noted that continuity between the periods is supported by continuous use of settlement sites (e.g., Vésztő-Mágor) and cemeteries (e.g., Tiszapolgár-Basatanya), and by the considerable overlap of radiocarbon dates in some areas (Bognár-Kutzián 1972; Forenbaher 1993; Makkay 2007). As a result, the break between Tiszapolgár and Bodrogkeresztúr is rather arbitrary and is marked by minor changes in ceramic form and decoration, especially the development of closed vessel types referred to as “milk jars” and incised square decorations with bands. Other Tiszapolgár decorative characteristics continued into the Bodrogkeresztúr period (Bognár-Kutzián 1963, 1972). Settlement organization during the Bodrogkeresztúr period remained largely unchanged from the Early Copper Age. Habitations were small and dispersed, although fewer sites existed in total. Sherratt (1997b) argued for a depopulation of the central Plain during this period based on the decrease in number of sites from the previous period and the ephemeral nature of Bodrogkeresztúr sites in the area. Others have noted finds that seem to contradict Sherratt’s position. Makkay (2007) described a multi-component Middle Copper Age site featuring what might have been a subterranean pit-house – a feature previously unobserved at any other Bodrogkeresztúr sites. Such dwellings are associated with the Yamnaya culture of the Eurasian steppe, which presumably constructed the pit-grave kurgans throughout the plain beginning in the Middle Copper Age (Ecsedy 1979; Makkay 1986). Makkay (1983) also discussed an anomalous settlement (Szarvas 38) that contained a large roundel resembling those at Late Neolithic and Early Lengyel sites west of the Danube River (ca. 4,700-4,000 B.C.). This may indicate a link between the Bodrogkeresztúr culture on the eastern Hungarian Plain and various Transdanubian cultures (for example, the Balaton-Lasinja culture). This is supported by the presence of Bodrogkeresztúr sites in the previously uninhabited area between the Danube and Tisza Rivers

Bodrogkeresztúr

100 km

Figure 3.6. Extent of the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr culture. Map used with permission of Dr. László Zentai, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.

(Sherratt 1987a, 1987b) (Figure 3.6). Ultimately, such evidence supports an argument for intensifying interaction between the people of the Plain and those outside of it as the Copper Age progressed, or at the very least it suggests a higher level of social or economic integration across the region at this time. The Late Copper Age Boleráz-Baden Culture. The Late Copper Age on the eastern Hungarian Plain marked a change in how cultures interacted within and outside of the Plain. It is around 3,500 B.C. that an apparent discontinuity appears in the archaeological record in Eastern Europe. Anthropomorphic clay figurines disappear, many large settlements were abandoned, and thousands of burial mounds appear across the landscape (Milisauskas and Kruk 2002:247). Additionally, three large homogeneous “style groups” appeared across Europe at this time: the Corded Ware, Globular Amphora, and Baden groups. The people of the Hungarian Plain became incorporated into the Baden group, a large material culture sphere that involved much of Central and Eastern Europe beginning around 3,500 B.C. Boleráz (early Baden) and Baden sites occur throughout Hungary, Austria, southern Slovakia, and western Romania. This represents a 46 regional material culture homogeneity not seen in the region since the Neolithic Alföld Linear Pottery culture (AVK), if even then (Figure 3.7). Comparisons between Boleráz and Baden, and contemporary southeastern European cultures (especially in the Balkans) have long appeared in literature. Banner (1956) first presented Baden finds from the culture’s central region of distribution, while Kalicz (1958) first assigned Baden to the Late Copper Age, immediately following the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr phase. Kalicz (1963) proposed a link between Baden and Troy based on ceramic similarities and cross-dating in the absence of radiometric dates, but admitted that such an interpretation is faulty in light of radiocarbon evidence (Kalicz 2001). Němejcová-Pavuková (1984) proposed a polygenetic scenario of Baden development. Under this model, Boleráz- Baden would have developed out of the Copper Age Lengyel culture of Transdanubia, with elements of the Early Bronze Age Bulgarian Ezero culture and the Cernavoda III/Coţofeni group. Design elements of these Balkan ceramic cultures (said to mimic bronze pots, see below) are especially visible in Baden ceramic form. Němejcová-Pavuková’s analyses were based almost entirely on selected elements of pottery styles that, while compelling, ignore a wider range of variability in both Boleráz/Baden and comparative assemblages (see Němejcová-Pavuková 1981, 1983; Sochacki 1985). Unfortunately, Němejcová-Pavuková’s research was conducted without rigorous chronological control, as well into the later 20th century (and indeed, until the present day) very little, if any, radiocarbon data were available for the period and cultures in question. Indeed, contemporaneous researchers compared similar data and reached different conclusions (see Geogiev et al. 1979, who placed the development of Baden much earlier than Kalicz or Němejcová-Pavuková, and not contemporary with the Ezero culture in Bulgaria). Sochacki (1980a, 1984), rather than arguing for a patterned, diffusionist development of Baden, suggested that parallels between Baden and southeastern European complexes were less pronounced than presumed by other researchers. He extensively discussed the development of Baden in the Balkans, and the subdivision of Baden into numerous cultural phases based on ceramic typology. He concluded that Baden, Cernavoda III, and Ezero were roughly contemporary and developed as the result of economic interaction with common outside entities, potentially from Anatolia (as Kalicz [1963] had earlier suggested). Thus, rather than drawing a

100 km

Figure 3.7. Approximate extent of the Late Copper Age Baden culture. After Horváth 2008 and Sherratt 1997a, 1997b. Map used with permission of Dr. Zentai László, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.

direct link between Cernavoda III, Ezero, and Baden, he suggested a scenario of parallel evolution. In response to, and in stark contrast to, this position, as recently as 1998 Němejcová- Pavuková focused on establishing a chronological link between Cernavoda III and Boleráz, and Roman and Diamandi (2001) pointed out that Boleráz pottery of essentially one style was used along nearly the entire course of the Danube, while regional differential between Baden assemblages developed later and have more limited distributions. Ultimately, the question arises of whether the early Boleráz-Cernavoda III pottery and the later Baden pottery represent two separate cultures, or different phases of the same group (Furholt 2008; Roman and Diamandi 2001). Research has since focused on discerning the archaeological reality of a Baden “culture,” and recent emphasis has been placed on the identification of regional differentiation and

48 expression within the wider Baden horizon (Furholt 2008). The traditional concept of a Baden culture has been called into question, and the model that the pottery style associated with Baden equates to a distinct social group and a homogeneous culture is in doubt. Furholt (2008) soundly rejected the concept of a unified Baden culture, and instead drew upon a wide range of evidence to suggest that Baden was actually a diverse assemblage of regionalized groups unified by similarities in ceramic form and decoration. In terms of other elements of material culture, little congruence exists between other archaeologically recovered materials and Baden pottery. Kaczanowka (1982/1983) and Pelisiak (1991) have shown a lack of geographic uniformity in Baden flint industries. Human figurines are often mentioned as characteristic finds associated with Baden pottery on the Hungarian Plain and in southwestern Slovakia (Kalicz 2002; Novotný 1981), while animal figurines are more common in the Austrian region (Furholt 2008; Pavelčík 1982, 1992; Ruttkay 1995:154). Furholt also discussed examples of regional variability in burial customs associated with Baden pottery (see Sachße 2005), and significant regional variability in faunal assemblages (see Benecke 1994:89). Ultimately, Furholt suggested that Baden pottery has no equivalency with other cultural practices, and that Baden pottery itself – though certainly similar throughout the region – exhibits striking variability: The so-called Baden culture does not embrace a consistent cultural package, and even if expressed by pottery along has been shown here to be a course approximation of a number of ceramic subsystems. What is more, fine and courseware pottery show different developments. In the early phase (3,650-3,350 B.C.) course fabrics are regionally diverse and local in their context and meaning. The earliest fine wares, the Boleráz wares, have their first use in Austria (and the adjacent region), but then spread over a short time span to north and west mixing with other cultural attributes (2001:627).

A great deal has been written over the last 30 years in regards to the development of the Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden material cultures and their relationships to Cernavoda III and other Bronze Age groups in Bulgaria and the Balkans. As has been presented above, the relationship between Baden and contemporary cultures, and sub-groups within the Baden tradition, remains debated after more than 30 years of discussion. This topic alone is worthy of a dissertation, and as such a complete treatment of the related literature is beyond the scope of the current project’s focus on the appearance and development of Baden on the eastern Great Hungarian Plain. Only a brief review of this literature has been presented here. However, it should be noted that the precise relationship between Boleráz/Baden and cultures to the south

49 remains unclear, and the precise cultural origins of the Late Copper Age Boleráz/Baden complex remain a topic of discussion. Banner (1956) presented the first treatment of the Late Copper Age Baden culture on the Hungarian Plain, and produced a map of sites that was published in his monograph Die Peceler Kultur. As Sherratt (1997a:291) pointed out, however, lowland eastern Hungary, including the Körös-Berretyó drainage, has a notable gap in coverage. Roman and Németi (1978) filled in some of this conspicuous gap, while the publication of the Hungarian Archaeological Topography series (Escedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) provided a much more complete picture of Late Copper Age occupation in the southeastern Plain. In terms of animal use, Bökönyi (1974) suggested an increasing emphasis on cattle in upland valleys and a preponderance of sheep in the lowlands; however, excavated evidence from the Körös region is still lacking, and a sufficient characterization of animal use is not possible at this time. Interestingly, the trend toward settlement dispersal that began during the latest phase of the Neolithic and continued into the Early and Middle Copper Age (Gyucha 2010; Parkinson 2006b; Sherratt 1997b) appears to have continued into the Late Copper Age despite widespread material culture change. Many fewer Late Copper Age sites exist in the study region in the center of the Plain, and the very few excavations in the Körös region consisted only of a few pits (Megyesi 1982, 1983, personal communication 2009). Indeed, data from the surface survey and collection of Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden sites in the region are consistent with this pattern (see Chapter Five), and lend support to Sherratt (1997b) and Gyucha (2010), who saw widespread dispersal and perhaps depopulation of the central Hungarian Plain at this time, despite a continued involvement in import and the external trade. Settlement locations suggest increased penetration into the upland regions surrounding the Hungarian Plain, as well as the previously mentioned region between the Danube and Tisza Rivers. The Maros Fan (Maros River watershed) just to the south of the Körös watershed study area remained almost completely bereft of settlement during this time, in spite of a slightly increased settlement density in the Tisza-Danube interfluve. A lack of settlement in the Maros region – which had no active river channels at this point in the Holocene (Sherratt 1983, 1997a) – may indicate that while settlement and population density had been on the decline, access to the active transport waterways of the Körös region and, thus, raw and finished materials from the

50 margins of the Plain and further afield, may have remained an important aspect of Late Copper Age society. Boleráz and Baden ceramic design in the Körös Region exhibits characteristics quite different from Early and Middle Copper Age types, though the differentiation between Boleráz and Baden on the Hungarian Plain is largely based on the presence or absence of certain decoration and design features rather than rigorous chronological or stratigraphic evidence. Baden ceramics are characterized by handled jugs and cups, which stylistically suggest affinities with Bulgaria, northern Greece, and the Aegean region (Banner 1956; Kalicz 1963). The people of the Baden period, therefore, may have been more closely linked with neighboring archaeological cultures than in previous times (Whittle 1996). Late Copper Age ceramics on the Hungarian Plain are often burnished and decorated with incised stacked chevron and incised obtuse and acute cross-hatching not seen in Early or Middle Copper Age assemblages. Additionally, these incised patterns are often observed in concert with linear and rectilinear patterns of punctuations, and occasionally with pinched rims or linear impressions across rims. The appearance of wheeled vehicles in Europe occurred around this time, and likely represents a major socioeconomic development (Bakker et al. 1999; Maran 2001, 2004). Clay wagon models belonging to the Baden culture have been found at Budakalász and Szigetszentmárton (Banner 1956; Kalicz 1976). Such technological developments would have facilitated easier transportation and movement of goods (Anthony 1995; 2007), implies the use of traction/draft animals, and could help account for the rapid development of large, relatively homogeneous material culture groups across Europe. Despite the list of discontinuities in the archaeological record at the onset of the Late Copper Age, some characteristics, in addition to the continuing trend of settlement on the margins of the Plain indicate a measure of continuity between Boleráz, Baden, and earlier culture phases of the Copper Age. One such practice, the tradition of placing the dead in large, formal cemeteries, continued at places such as Alsónémedi in Pest County (see Bökönyi 1951; Korek 1951; Némeskeri 1951). However, no such cemeteries have up to this point been discovered in southeastern Hungary, and Sherratt described most known Baden cemeteries as “quite small” (1997b:309). He did not rule out the possibility that some of the smaller find spots studied

51 during his Szeghalom survey on the Dévaványa Plain are in fact cemeteries, but no evidence has been collected to substantiate this. Unfortunately, the vast majority of research on the Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden culture group in Hungary has taken place to the west of the Körös basin study region, primarily in Transdanubia. It is here where radiocarbon dates firmly illustrate the existence of the Proto- Boleráz, Boleráz, Early Classical Baden, and Classical Baden (see Horváth et al. 2008). Such rigorous chronological control in the southeastern Plain is not yet possible given the lack of investigated sites and radiocarbon samples gathered from stratigraphically controlled excavations. Despite the lack of excavated and dated materials in the region, evidence further afield has noted regional variability in Late Copper Age Baden assemblages (see Furholt 2008, as discussed above), making this period in a relatively restricted geographic area an excellent test case for modeling the development and adoption of geographically extensive material cultures. The Late Copper Age Kurgan Culture. The most unusual features of the Late Copper Age landscape are the numerous pit-grave kurgans (mounded tumuli) that dot the flat landscape of the Great Hungarian Plain (see Ecsedy 1979). Burials under the kurgans are laid in the supine position with the knees raised, are often covered with red ochre, and are sometimes found with the remains of textiles and a wooden cover or container. Although usually sparse, grave goods include pottery resembling that of the Yamnaya of the Russian Steppe. This has led some to support a migratory explanation for their appearance on the Plain (Gimbutas 1963, 1977, 1979, 1980). Importantly, Anthony (1986) noted that no Yamnaya horizon homeland truly exists, contrary to Gimbutas’ eastern origins hypothesis. He contended that the so-called kurgan hypothesis is disputed by stratigraphic evidence and a lack of supporting radiometric dates. Rather, he suggested that the “homeland” is a broad region of steppe environment stretching from the Dnieper to the Volga, likely based on arguments put forth by Merpert (1968, 1974) and Mallory (1989), who envisioned the Yamnaya as a collection of widespread cultural traits rather than a single ethnic group. The kurgan tumulus burials – the hallmark of the Yamnaya – may have served as clan territorial markers under this model (Anthony 1986:297). Although some stratigraphic data exist (Ecsedy 1973, 1979: 47-52, 1981), the exact chronological relationships between kurgans and the Baden and Bodrogkeresztúr cultures remains unclear. Sherratt (1997b:310) noted, however, that the distribution of kurgans in the Körös River basin is spatially distinct from that of Baden sites. On this evidence, he suggested

52 that the kurgan builders were an intrusive pastoral group from the east that intentionally placed their mortuary structures in areas unoccupied by Baden agriculturalists. Since the majority of Late Copper Age sites in this region consist only of a few pits (see Megyesi 1982, 1983), it is difficult to assess the relationship between Baden sites and kurgan pit burials. Therefore, the impetus of social change on the Plain associated with the Baden culture requires further clarification (see O’Shea 1996). As an alternative to a migratory explanation for the Yamnaya appearance east of the Hungarian Plain, Telegin (1973) suggested that kurgans developed directly from the earlier Copper Age Stredni Stog culture already present in the region north of the Black Sea. Although the immediate origins of the Yamnaya culture are complicated and remain disputed (Anthony 1986), for the purposes of this research it suffices to say that the Stredni Stog and other cultures further to the east were the predecessors of Yamnaya groups. Such a large territory (over 3,000 kilometers from west to east) could be considered a Yamnaya cultural-historical area rather than a single archaeological culture (Mallory 1989; Merpert 1968, 1974). Gimbutas (1965, 1977, 1980) followed this in her later publications, describing the “kurgan culture” not as a cultural unit, but rather as a collection of cultural traits unified by a common symbolic burial tradition. Anthony (1986) specifically spoke out against a specific Yamnaya homeland or point of origin, though he soundly criticized Gimbutas’ interpretations of culture change and migration on the Eurasian steppe. The existence of a homeland for migrating kurgan builders has been debated, though most researchers currently accept the idea of a migration onto the Hungarian Plain at the end of the Middle or beginning of the Late Copper Age. A much smaller migration at the end of the Early Copper Age represented by the Marodécse-type graves – although considered unrelated to the migrations of kurgan-builders – is also recognized (Ecsedy 1981:78-79). Some (see Kulcsár 2003:141; O’Shea 1996:361) have suggested that a migration onto the Plain occurred at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. Regardless of the chronology, the extent to which the arrival of the kurgan people affected life and material culture for the indigenous people of the Plain remains uncertain. The Early and Middle Bronze Age (ca. 3,000-1,600 B.C.). During the Early Bronze Age, a trend toward regional differentiation had once again emerged as the procurement of raw and finished bronze materials from outside the Plain became increasingly important. O’Shea (1996)

53 argued that the existing social order of the Copper Age disintegrated and smaller, regional culture groups developed during the Bronze Age as manufacture and control of valuable items became specialized. In the Körös region of the Plain, this correlates with the Makó, Nyírség, and Ottomány cultures. Although the overall settlement pattern footprint remained similar to that of the Late Copper Age, Sherratt (1997b) noted another increased settlement focus on the margins of the Great Hungarian Plain and a return to the occupation of tell sites in key central locations on the landscape. He attributed this to an increased focus on procuring raw materials for bronze production from the mineral-rich foothills of the Carpathians, and escalated trade for finished goods throughout the Plain. In economic terms, this is a logical conclusion to the long-term trend of increasing focus on the edges of the Plain as the production, use, and ownership of bronze and other metals became more important. The beginning of the Bronze Age in Hungary is linked to sudden and dramatic cultural changes following the decline of the Baden complex at the end of the Copper Age (see Kulcsár 2003:141). Settlement patterns exhibited a return to the use of central tell sites in key locations across the landscape (Sherratt 1997b), and Bóna (1965) and O’Shea (1996:361) suggested that a migration of the kurgan-builders of the Pitváros group might account for the notable change in material culture. These changes included not only the widespread trade of raw and finished bronze items (Sherratt 1997a), but also distinct changes in ceramic form and decoration, and potentially manufacturing techniques (Kulcsár 2003:141-142).

The Developmental Trajectory of the Great Hungarian Plain Clearly, the developmental trajectory of the Great Hungarian Plain does not fit easily into any of the models summarized in the previous chapter. A primary factor affecting social development in the region involved a long-term pattern of nucleation and dispersal beginning in the Middle and Late Neolithic, and extending into the Early and Middle Bronze Age. It culminated with the appearance of ranked societies on the Great Hungarian Plain – much later than in many other parts of the world. Why did it take so long for ranked societies to emerge on the Hungarian Plain? Why did ranking appear when it did, and what trajectory or trajectories led to its appearance? The question of why the development of ranked societies on the Great Hungarian Plain lagged in comparison to other places in Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean is not a question

54 best approached from a single line of evidence. However, it can be argued that the late development of ranking can be attributed to two primary factors: 1. The cyclical nature of tribal society and settlement variability on the Plain 2. The relative geographic isolation afforded by the Carpathian Basin and the Hungarian Plain’s lack of valuable raw resources. Parkinson (2002, 2006a) described the nature of social integration and interaction on the Hungarian Plain during the Copper Age as “tribal.” Although the term is loaded with the baggage of decades of discussion (see Sahlins and Service 1960; Service 1971), Parkinson’s primary concern was with the inherently flexible, pre-existing social structure inherent in tribal society that allows for fission/fusion type cycling over long periods of time. On a small scale, Parkinson and colleagues (Parkinson et al. 2004:118) and Gyucha et al. (2004) discussed this process through analysis of spatial segregation of craft activities at the site of Vésztő-Bikeri on the eastern Plain. The segregated activity areas in different structures suggest that the Early Copper Age village functioned as an “integrated economic unit.” The high density, multi-family households and sites of the Late Neolithic diffused at the end of the Neolithic and beginning of the Copper Age. An individual household would have branched off from the wider settlement, becoming a seperate settlement and functioning as a discreet economic unit. The ability for villages to disperse into smaller, more independent settlements would have restricted household competition, effectively prohibiting the development of institutionalized hierarchy during the Late Neolithic and into the Copper Age. As illustrated by the Hungarian Archaeological Topography surveys (Escedy 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998), later by Sherratt (1997a, 1997b), and discussed in even greater detail by Parkinson (1999, 2002), a clear pattern of increases and decreases in site number and size occurred between the Middle/Late Neolithic and Middle Bronze Age on the eastern Great Hungarian Plain. As previously noted elsewhere, this has often been interpreted as a process or cycle of population nucleation and dispersal in the region. Parkinson (1999, 2002) noted a correlation between regional material culture differentiation and degree of integration (e.g., nucleated or dispersed settlement structure). In periods of greater nucleation, such as the Late Neolithic period with a tell-centered settlement system, material culture expressed more regional differentiation as seen in ceramic design and decoration and house construction. On the

55 other hand, in periods characterized by dispersal, such as the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár phase, material culture was more homogeneous over a wider geographical area. The Late Copper Age Baden phase falls rather neatly into Parkinson’s and Makkay’s models of nucleation, dispersal, and material culture regional homogeneity and differentiation. At least on the Central Plain and in the Körös Region, the dispersal that originated in the Early Copper Age continued into the Late Copper Age, and the distribution of Baden sites in the Great Hungarian Plain as a whole indicates the growing importance of the areas on the edges of the Plain (Banner 1956; Roman and Németi 1978). This is especially true of intermontane valleys, resource-rich areas that then supported a substantial population in contrast to earlier periods (Sherratt 1997a:291). The pattern established by 3,500 B.C. in the Late Copper Age largely continued for the next thousand years, and the general pattern of the Early Bronze Age on the Plain follows from Baden – with a settlement focus near the edges of the Plain, as opposed to dense settlement in the central Plain or Körös Region. Moreover, many researchers (see Bóna 1975; O’Shea 1978; Sherratt 1997b) have noted the significant role of trade in explaining settlement near major rivers and on the edges of the Plain during the Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age. Sherratt (1997a:291) argued that the Tisza and Maros Rivers took on an especially important role at this time, due to their potential for long-distance trade by canoe. O’Shea (1978, 1996) noted imported items such as copper ornaments and shell beads in the Bronze Age graves of the Maros Region, indicating that the procurement of finished foreign materials increased in importance and in volume over this time period. Although the importance of trade and economy cannot be overlooked, the possibility must be considered that a migratory population of kurgan builders appeared on the Hungarian Plain and in the Körös Region sometime around 3,500 B.C. This population often has been associated with the material changes witnessed at the beginning of the Late Copper Age, and with the economic changes that followed during the Early and Middle Bronze Age (Anthony 1990; Gimbutas 1977, 1980; Milisauskas and Kruk 1989, 2002:247). So, while this burgeoning economic pattern and pattern of nucleation and dispersal may have respectively contributed to and hindered the development of regional political systems with a tributary economy, craft specialization, and institutionalized hierarchy on the Plain (Earle 2002; O’Shea 1996), the considered.

Invasion vs. Economy: A Tale of Two Models on the Great Hungarian Plain The migration discussion within archaeology has shaped interpretations of the archaeological record throughout the world, and the eastern Great Hungarian Plain is no exception in this regard. Indeed, two primary models have served as lenses through which to observe the Neolithic, Copper Age, and Bronze Age on the Plain and the Körös River study region. Divided roughly into invasion/migration and economic/environmental models, the two perspectives are associated most strongly with the archaeologists Marija Gimbutas and Andrew Sherratt, respectively. As the heart of this research, these models frame the research questions approached in this dissertation and, as such, deserve specific treatment and criticism here. The models of Gimbutas (1970, 1977, 1979) and Sherratt (1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b) have been two of the primary frameworks for interpreting change on the prehistoric Great Hungarian Plain for years. Both Sherratt and Gimbutas, speaking generally, painted a picture of long-term diachronic change punctuated by “prime-mover” type events for the Neolithic and Copper Age. This process eventually contributed to the appearance of institutionalized social inequality at the beginning of the Bronze Age at around 3,000 B.C. These models are in many ways exclusive of one another, though they both have much to offer in terms of understanding prehistoric social change on the Plain. I suggest here that the relatively sudden, prime-mover events are actually part of the long-term trajectory that began in the Neolithic period. The nature of the change became easier to observe in the archaeological record near the end of the Copper Age, at which time the regional Baden material culture group became the dominant presence on the Hungarian Plain. The following sections explore each of the models in turn, and present support and criticism for portions of each.

The Invasion/Migration Hypothesis Gimbutas’ (1963, 1970, 1977, 1979) continental-scale model for social change on the Great Hungarian Plain focused primarily on the sudden appearance of thousands of homogeneous burial mounds in the region during the Middle Copper Age, around 3,500 B.C. It can be summarized as follows: 1. Yamnaya pastoralists (referred to as “kurgan people”) from the Pontic Steppe arrived on the Hungarian Plain around 3,500 B.C.

2. The kurgan peoples’ entrance marked the arrival of the Indo-European language, culture, and religion in Europe. 3. The arrival brought about sudden, drastic culture change, with the Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden culture complexes becoming completely “Indo-Europeanized,” thus marking the end of “Old Europe.” Gimbutas used several lines of evidence to support her hypothesis. First, and most striking, are the kurgan burial mounds themselves. They are essentially identical in construction and contents to Yamnaya kurgans to the east. They consist of a mound of earth containing a supine skeleton with legs slightly raised, with the body usually oriented on an east-west axis (Escedy 1979; Gazdapusztai 1967; Gimbutas 1977). Additionally, their distribution across the eastern portion of Europe and into western Europe look, essentially, like what one would expect from a migration (Anthony 1990, see above). Under Gimbutas’ model, this arrival of mound builders would have ushered in a higher level of chiefly complexity that was shaped during the Boleráz and Baden periods of the Late Copper Age and fully realized in the Early and Middle Bronze Age. In terms of the Great Hungarian Plain during the Middle and Late Copper Age (ca. 4,000- 3,000 B.C.), a migratory population is most clearly observed in the kurgan burial mounds that dot the landscape of the Körös region (Escedy 1979). As described in more detail in the archaeological background section, kurgans on the eastern Hungarian Plain are essentially identical to Yamnaya burials on the Eurasian Steppe, and one can observe a “stream” of kurgan burials stretching from the Steppe near the Dneiper River west into the Hungarian Plain. Indeed, these kurgans may be the most solid archaeological evidence for migration in the region. However, it remains unclear exactly how the kurgans developed across the landscape despite the many kurgans that have been systematically excavated in the last half-century. Until an in-depth program involving the chronological characterization of these mounds over a very wide geographic region is undertaken, the questions of the spread of the so-called kurgan people will remain unanswered. Additionally, until a more solid kurgan chronology is developed for the Körös region and the Hungarian Plain more generally, their assignment to particular indigenous cultural phases remains unclear.

The Environmental/Economic Model Sherratt’s model differs from that of Gimbutas in many ways, most noticeably in his multi-scalar, regional approach. Primarily, Sherratt analyzed settlement patterns on the scale of the Great Hungarian Plain in order to observe general patterns of settlement development, and then analyzed a much smaller micro-region – a part of the MRT survey on the Dévaványa Plain near the towns of Szeghalom and Dévaványa – to comment more specifically on those general trends (1984, 1997b). Sherratt emphasized “a considerable measure of continuity” from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age (Sherratt 1997b:292). To generalize, his model can be distilled into several main points regarding settlement patterns: 1. Rivers, waterways, and seasonal flooding helped shape settlement patterns throughout the Neolithic and Copper Age. Sites in all periods tended to occur either on raised “islands” amid areas of predictable seasonal flooding, or atop natural riverbank levees. 2. During the Bodrogkeresztúr Period in the Middle Copper Age (ca. 3,900-3,500 B.C.), the Plain underwent depopulation; fewer Middle Copper Age sites existed than earlier Tiszapolgár Early Copper Age sites, and they occured in previously unoccupied areas of the Plain. Parts of the eastern Plain are subsequently reoccupied in the Late Copper Age. 3. Middle/Late Copper Age kurgan burial mounds are spatially complementary with Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden settlements, possibly indicating an intentional avoidance of specific areas occupied by migratory pastoralist groups. Sherratt used a large-scale, eastern Hungarian Plain site distribution map to argue for a depopulation event in the central Plain during the Middle Copper Age (1997b:308). This depopulation – due to local environmental factors and a shifting emphasis on the importance of goods and raw materials from outside of the Plain – may have made room for the pastoral kurgan builders to move into the now less densely occupied Körös River basin. He supported this hypothesis with data from the Szeghalom survey in northern Békés County. Sherratt’s two analytical resolutions were a weakness in his otherwise extensive analysis. His wider scale, on the level of the entire Hungarian Plain, and his smaller scale, a small portion of northern Békés County in the southeastern Plain, provide us with a wealth of settlement and

59 interpreted economic information. However, a more moderate scale at the county level would provide intermediate level data, and an information bridge between Sherratt’s two scales to either bolster his conclusions or provide a more detailed interpretation. This level of analysis is included in the current research. Sherratt’s model will be tested and discussed more extensively in Chapter Six.

Baden Pots with Local Roots? Defining the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain On the eastern Great Hungarian Plain, including the Körös region, the Baden material culture complex and the people who created it remain even less understood in terms of their development and external relationships than in other regions that have seen years of research and many publications contributing to the discussion. However, given the homogeneity seen in the Boleráz phase over a large geographic scale and the regional variability noted in Baden assemblages over the same area in Eastern and Central Europe, the eastern Great Hungarian Plain provides an excellent test case for characterizing the development of Baden as a local phenomenon or one catalyzed by the movement of personnel from one region to another. One potentially confounding problem of studying the Late Copper Age in the Körös region, however, is the lack of systematically and stratigraphically excavated sites. As previously mentioned, almost all of the Baden excavations from the eastern Plain have consisted only of a few pits, and are typically considered intrusive features at other sites (see Megyesi 1983). With very few exceptions, the Late Copper Age material from the Körös region available for study comes from surface contexts. The lack of chronological control makes establishment of a Late Copper Age ceramic typology, as has been done in other regions, virtually impossible. Additionally, the distinction between Boleráz and Baden material – which has been solidly demonstrated in Transdanubia and in areas beyond Hungary (Furholt 2008; Horváth et al. 2008) – has not been established in the Körös region. Many stylistic elements between Boleráz and Baden are shared, and the combination of a lack of chronological control and inconsistent description of surface finds in the MRT series (Ecsedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) makes the establishment of a similar typology on the Plain difficult. However, that is not to say that approaching the topic of Late Copper Age Development on the Plain is impossible. Although the establishment of a definite ceramic typology may have to wait for further investigation and radiocarbon data, a portion of this research project

60 approaches the problem by grouping all Late Copper Age materials, and comparing them with previous periods in order to identify differences in manufacturing technology that may indicate an internal or migratory nature of the material culture shift.

Summary This chapter has presented the geographic, geological, geomorphological, and archaeological background to the prehistory of the eastern Great Hungarian Plain. It has presented information regarding the appearance of the Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden complexes that will form the backdrop for the research presented in the following chapters. By presenting an archaeological background beyond the Late Copper Age focus of this dissertation, I have placed the Baden material culture complex into a wider context, which is an important and necessary requirement for both conducting and understanding the research presented in subsequent chapters. Additionally, this chapter has integrated the wider anthropological considerations presented in Chapter Two with the specific archaeological context of the prehistoric Great Hungarian Plain.

CHAPTER FOUR THEORETICAL EXPECTATIONS AND RESEARCH DESIGN Introduction In this chapter I provide the methodological links between the archaeological and anthropological concepts discussed in Chapter Two and the archaeological case of interest in this dissertation – the social, settlement, and material culture changes that took place at the end of the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain (see Chapter Three). This chapter explains the methodological principles that have guided the current research design, and presents the interpretive framework by which the results are judged. First, I discuss why the temporal and geographic scales of analysis used in this research project are appropriate for investigating the research questions. I then provide an overview of regional analysis research and previous regional analysis on the Great Hungarian Plain, and how these projects have shaped the research in this volume. In the second half of the chapter, I discuss how archaeologists have approached social change through ceramic analysis, and how ceramic research design developed and changed over the last century. I first discuss traditional approaches to ceramic analysis, primarily in terms of pottery form and decoration. I then discuss the technological approach to ceramic analysis employed in this dissertation, and describe how both macroscopic and macroscopic analyses developed and how they have been utilized in other archaeological projects. Special attention is given to petrographic ceramic analysis, as petrographic research is particularly suited for approaching questions of technological and production variability over space and time. In this vein, I then outline the interpretive frameworks for testing the models in Chapter Three against the results of the present research.

Temporal and Geographic Scales of Analysis Both temporal and geographic scales of analysis must be considered when modeling long-term prehistoric social, settlement, and geographic change. Although the Late Copper Age (corresponding to the Boleráz and Baden material culture traditions) lasted roughly 500 years on the Great Hungarian Plain, placing this period of time within its proper context requires the consideration of periods that preceded and came after it. So, although the primary questions associated with the research at hand are concerned with the Late Copper Age, a methodological

62 approach considering the Neolithic, Early and Middle Copper Age, and Early and Middle Bronze Age is useful and necessary for understanding the development of the Late Copper Age in the region. Additionally, a wider geographic scope is required for assessing the unique nature of the changes in the study region, or for observing regional settlement changes that took place during this time. Although for decades a distinction has been made between two primary components of the Late Copper Age in the region – Boleráz and Baden – this distinction is based primarily on the presence or absence of particular ceramic designs, and has yet to be solidly demonstrated chronologically in the study region. Even more, the Boleráz-Baden classification scheme is used inconsistently in the Körös region, with different archaeologists placing similar or identical design elements into different periods (see Escedy et al. 1981; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998). Since the majority of the material analyzed as part of the present investigation was collected from surface contexts, and is therefore not rigorously chronologically controlled, Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden material will be treated as a single temporal unit that lasted approximately 500 years, from ca. 3,500 B.C. to ca. 3,000 B.C. The most obvious geographic scale of analysis for understanding changes at the end of the Copper Age in the Carpathian Basin is the Great Hungarian Plain in its entirety. Generally speaking, the Plain is a geomorphic and topographic unit approximately 50,000 square kilometers in area. Some researchers, especially Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) have used the entire Plain as an analytical unit in terms of generalized material culture distribution. Indeed, part of the site distribution spatial analysis in the present research discusses large-scale patterns at this analytical scale. However, the intensive analysis of such a large area precludes the present investigation; such an analysis is far beyond the scope of this project. Even more, such a large scale analysis would prevent the detailed analysis of sub-regional and local areas that will aid in modeling the changes that took place during the Late Copper Age on a local level (for example, analysis on sub-regional and local scales allows one to ask questions relating to how the area became incorporated into the wider Baden archaeological and anthropological homogeneous material culture group; see Chapter Two and Chapter Three). Additionally, it is important to assess detailed local information such as soil type and river location when conducting a site spatial analysis. This kind of specific local data would be unmanageable over an area as large as the entire Hungarian Plain. A more restrictive geographic scale of analysis is a more manageable

MRT Volume 8

MRT Volume 6

MRT Volume 10

Figure 4.1. The Körös River basin study area, including modern cities and MRT parish boundaries as discussed in the text. Located in southeastern Békés County, Hungary (inset). sample, and allows local data to be contextualized within the general area of the Great Hungarian Plain. For the purposes of the present study, the geographic unit of analysis (the study area) consists of a roughly 3,000 square kilometer area in the Körös River valley drainage in Békés County (Figure 4.1).

Analyzing Social Change through Settlement Patterns and Regional Analysis Regional settlement pattern research has a rich history in many parts of the world (for recent review articles and multiple examples see Billman 1999; Galaty 2005). However, it was only as late as the second half of the 20th century that an emphasis was placed on creating a more detailed and systematic study of spatial patterning (Hodder and Orton 1976). After initially adopting some forms of spatial analysis from geography and plant ecology (see Haggett 1966),

64 archaeologists such as Hodder and Orton (1976) and Clarke (1972, 1977) recognized the need for a more rigorous approach. Although site distribution maps were often employed and usually quite useful, such visual methods of analysis can often seem uncritical and unreliable (Hodder and Orton 1976). In the present study region on the southeastern Hungarian Plain, this is beginning to come to light. For example, Sherratt (1997b:310) noted that Late Copper Age kurgans and Baden sites are geographically exclusive. Although this is true in a very general sense, it now appears that this is not always the case at high geographical resolutions (see Chapter Six). Much of modern regional analysis stems from Binford’s (1964) influential article, “A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design.” Binford argued that the task of isolating and studying processes of cultural and social change is best approached regionally and through sampling techniques at multiple scales. He drew ideologically from Steward (1960) and White (1959) in saying that artifacts, over geographic areas, can be classified into distinct groups. Then an archaeological typology can be developed in terms of artifact form and complexity. One can then make the jump from the static artifacts to culture types, getting at the form, organization, and complexity of a society based on the geographic distribution of complexity and form in a society’s material culture. Such groupings based on technology and design can be used to define regions of analysis. Hodder and Orton (1976) similarly emphasized the need for rigorous, systematic analysis of patterns across an archaeological landscape and discussed the difficulty of inferring process from form. They suggested a greater emphasis on reorganizing the process – or signature – that led to the creation of an archaeological distribution. Subsequently, Anthony (1986, 1990) once again emphasized the importance of identifying the signatures of archaeological phenomena in regards to migration patterns (see Chapter Three). It could be inferred that he intentionally chose to address an element of Hodder and Orton’s argument that receives little attention: when dealing with social and material culture change, archaeologists often rely on invasion and migration hypotheses regardless of the difficulty of demonstrating such a process archaeologically (1976:3). Similarly, Clarke (1977) suggested that elements such as raw materials, artifacts, features, structures, sites, and routes should be used in conjunction to identify archaeological signatures. Clarke characterized regional archaeology as concerned with not only the retrieval of information from archaeological spatial relationships, but with the study of the flow and

65 integration of activities within and between structures, sites, and resources spaces on scales ranging from the inter-site level to the large-scale geographic level of analysis. Many years after his initial article on the subject, Binford (1982) once again approached the topic of why the region is the most appropriate unit of analysis for understanding variability in the archaeological record. He emphasized that the explanation is relatively straightforward: different assemblages at different site-types do not necessarily indicate the presence of multiple archaeological cultures. Behaviors at various locations utilized for discrete purposes can vary seasonally, annually, or at other temporal scales, thereby leaving distinct assemblages and patterns that at first glance may appear to have been created by different peoples or cultures. By associating region with material culture, Binford (1982) essentially defined a “region” as coterminous with the geographic extent of a cultural system. However, Haggett (1966) noted much earlier that most researchers have tended to use ad hoc geographical divisions to meet specific research needs or to address specific questions. Indeed, Foley (1981) stated that numerous factors come into play when identifying proper regions at different analytical scales in the archaeological record. These facts include topography, environmental productivity, climate, habitat, and cultural characteristics such as a group’s particular diet and subsistence strategy (1981:4). Although Foley primarily oriented his methodology toward highly mobile, hunter- gatherer societies, his factors for identifying appropriate regional boundaries remain important for the regional study of any society or material culture, including the present study. In terms of variability within material culture regions, Stark (1998b:3, see 1998a) stated that “a primary goal in studying formal variation across space is to identify social groups, whose boundaries are marked by distinctive patterns in the archaeological record”. However even the identification of formal variation within a material culture group is problematic. For example, within the Late Copper Age Baden material culture group on the Great Hungarian Plain, formal variation across space – even between large regions – is not extensively documented, and as discussed above even chronological variability between formative and later phases of the Late Copper Age can be called into question when closely scrutinized. This is what Wandsnider (1988) called the “methodological double bind”; that is, in order to measure something we have to know what it is like, but in order to know what it is like we must measure it. One way in which to overcome this problem is to conduct detailed analyses of technological aspects of material culture, such as production or preparation methods, in order to identify subtle regional

66 or temporal similarities or differences (Lemmonier 1992; Stark 1998a, 1998b). Since technological characteristics are often conservative (as opposed to design and form, which can change drastically over fairly short periods of time by comparison), technological similarities may indicate cultural affiliations or anthropological processes not always visible in the archaeological record, such as migration or invasion. These concepts will be discussed in more detail below, in the section dealing with ceramic analysis methodology. Hodges (1987) addressed the most important element of regional spatial analysis in his discussion of space through time. He stated that archaeological methodologies must take into account the proper scales at which particular research questions should be approached. Essentially, in order to move beyond spatial patterns of settlement, production, and distribution to modeling the events that created such a pattern, one must examine a space diachronically at several scales of analysis. Such an approach accounts for the problem that patterns that hold true in a certain area at a certain scale may not hold true in the same area at a different scale, or in a different area at the same scale. If any particular lesson from decades of discussion of regional analysis should be specifically applied to the Great Hungarian Plain, it is that a diachronic, multi- scalar analysis is absolutely necessary in order to accurately observe patterned variability in settlement location over hundreds and thousands of years. For several decades, archaeologists working in eastern Europe in the field of regional analysis have refined the gamut of regional analysis methodologies. Galaty (2005:291) has recently argued that that “steady investments in the technology, methods, and theory of regional archaeological analysis and surface survey have stimulated advances in the study of settlement patterns and settlement pattern change through time in many parts of Europe.” He also noted a challenge in that Europe is difficult to define in terms of archaeological method and theory due to the wide variety of research questions being asked in various regions, as well as the different theoretical and methodological approaches taken by archaeologists in different countries across the continent. However, the rich nature of settlement studies in Europe – especially in areas such as Britain, Denmark, and Greece – also means that numerous methodological innovations have advanced regional studies in Europe over the last several decades and have contributed to the advance of archaeological science as a whole. At the beginning of the 20th century, many European archaeologists focused on defining the material characteristics of the artifacts within the boundaries of their own countries and

67 functioned within a patriotic or nationalistic framework, with a priority of constructing a particular culture history to suit individual home countries (Trigger 1989). It was from within this context that settlement archaeology first developed (Galaty 2005), especially by the Germans who aimed to establish the German people as the original Europeans (Chapman 1997; Trigger 1989). Later in the century, archaeologists like V. Gordon Childe (1930, 1958b) continued to build on earlier culture history frameworks, and used careful studies of material culture in order to map culture groups and trace their interactions (Galaty 2005; Sherratt 1997a). By the middle of the 20th century, European archaeologists began to develop explicitly regional approaches to the past. The primary data collection method for these initial regional scale projects was via surface survey (Galaty 2005). Most of these projects, many of them in Greece, focused on topographically interesting areas based on the kind of sites under investigation and the kind of research questions being asked (Cherry 2003). The University of Minnesota Messenia Expedition (UMME) is an example of this kind of extensive topographic survey (McDonald and Rapp 1972). Later surveys, like the Pylos Regional Archaeological Project (PRAP) in Messenia and the Mallakastra Regional Archaeological Project (MRAP) in Albania were intensive surveys with the goal of surveying wide swaths of land of variable topography. In doing so, these studies attempt to eliminate the sampling bias inherent in extensive, more topographically selective surveys (Davis 1998, 2008). In recent years, archaeologists working in Europe have focused on landscape studies that treat the entire regional landscape as if “it were one large, ever-changing artifact” (Galaty 2005:296). Under this approach, the landscape concept unifies many variables of regional analysis, including ecological, social, and geographic considerations. These studies suggested that settlements are only one component of a wider landscape that consists of any number of geographic and geological elements such as water bodies and forests. Although the landscape study approach explicitly brings together ecological, social, and geographic approaches, it should be remembered that such methodologies are not truly limited to the last two decades. As discussed below, large-scale surface surveys in Hungary led to Sherratt’s (1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b) detailed analysis of Neolithic and Copper Age settlements on the Great Hungarian Plain. Although not specifically presented as a landscape study, the project did consist of all of the necessary elements of the landscape-oriented approach.

A question raised in regards to the effectiveness of regional settlement analysis is whether data collected for projects typically focused on relatively small, well-bounded landscapes have utility in addressing general, comparative questions about human behavior in the past (Galaty 2005). Some scholars have especially been concerned with the scale of many European projects, suggesting that settlement data at these small scales are not useful for understanding patterns of political, social, and cultural change (Blanton 2001, Cherry 2003). I disagree, and suggest that multi-scalar regional analysis projects concerned with settlement patterns has, in fact, been highly successful in identifying and modeling past social and cultural change in prehistoric Europe. As evidence, I present below an overview of several regional studies that have contributed to the understanding of prehistory on the Great Hungarian Plain.

Previous Regional Analysis Projects on the Great Hungarian Plain Unlike most of Europe, the Körös River drainage in Hungary has three decades of archaeological survey available for spatial analysis, encompassing an area of over 3,000 km2 (Escedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998). Beginning in the 1960s the Institute of Archaeology of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, in collaboration with archaeologists at regional museums across Hungary, began conducting extensive field-walking survey projects in order to identify all of the archaeological sites across the landscape. What emerged from these projects was a multi-volume effort – the Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája (MRT). Each MRT volume combines all known documentation (at the time) of known sites and private collections within parishes (administrative districts below the county level). Each volume corresponds to several of the administrative districts within the county. Each parish was intensely surface surveyed with the goal of identifying all of the unknown and previously discovered sites in the area. To date, ten volumes have been published. Of these ten, volumes 6, 8, and 10 correspond to the study area relevant to this dissertation. Each MRT volume documents the location of all previously known sites and sites located as part of the survey. All areas free of impassable obstructions were surveyed with the aid of 1:10,000 scale topographic maps. Field walkers walked transects at 15-20 meter intervals. The eastern Hungarian Plain is ideal for this kind of research, as the surface geomorphology of the region has remained relatively stable since the Neolithic period or the beginning of the Holocene (ca. 10,000 years ago). Additionally, most of the region is under intensive industrial agriculture

69 with large, open, plowed areas well suited to the surface identification of archaeological sites (Parkinson 1999, 2006b). When a new site was identified, site size was roughly estimated based on the surface scatter of artifacts, and a non-systematic collection of diagnostic sherds was conducted in order to determine which period or periods was represented. The sample sizes were intentionally kept small so as not to affects the results of any future surveys or excavations (Gyucha 2007, personal communication). The 1:10,000 topographic maps marked with the location of all identified sites are kept at the Institute of Archaeology of the Hungarian National Academy of Sciences in Budapest, and the artifacts collected during fieldwork are stored in the county and city museums in Békés County, the Hungarian National Museum, and the Institute of Archaeology. Over the last decade, most of the topographic maps used for the surveys in Békés County have been photocopied and subsequently electronically scanned and georeferenced for use in Geographic Information Systems. Although the MRT studies have been an invaluable tool for Hungarian and international archaeologists working on the eastern Hungarian Plain, very little effort was made for interpretation of the data. There have been some notable exceptions, as Makkay (1981, 1986a, 2007) excavated and published on some sites shortly after their identification and publication in the MRT. Recently, foreign researchers have expanded upon the initial MRT research, and Gyucha (2010) published an excellent analysis of Early Copper Age trends on the eastern Plain. In addition to the Hungarian MRT research in the region, a collaborative British/Hungarian research project (Sherratt 1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b) was undertaken in the northern part of Békés County in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Sherratt originally published the results of this research in the Oxford Journal of Archaeology (1983, 1984). They have subsequently been reprinted in a more recent volume: Fieldwork in Hungary was designed to track changes in object-distributions and settlement-patterns over thousands of years, from c. 6,000 to 2,000 B.C., in order to see how long-term social processes work out on the ground in a nodal area of central Europe. The contrasting patterns of site-distribution in the survey area are a unique record of fluctuating (and slowly evolving) forms of spatial organization over long periods of time, which a comprehensiveness and degree of resolution unequalled anywhere (Sherratt 1997:270).

Sherratt’s Körös-Berettyó project described the long-term patterns of settlement and settlement change that characterized 4,000 years of agricultural life on the eastern Hungarian Plain. His analysis and interpretation consisted of two parts: a regional description (1983, 1997a) that provided a detailed description of the current and prehistoric geomorphology of the region and how Neolithic and Copper Age site distribution correlated with geological features such as soil type, hydrology, and elevation; and a detailed discussion of patterns of site location based on previous survey work in the Körös Basin, including the MRT. In fact, most of the data for Sherratt’s analysis came from the initial stages of survey for the first MRT volume published on Békés County. Sherratt noted a “considerable measure of continuity” from the Neolithic to Early Bronze Age on the eastern Plain in his high-resolution study region, which was limited to a section of northern Békés County covered in volume 6 of the MRT near the modern towns of Szeghalom and Dévaványa (1997a:292). However, on a wider scale he also noted variations in and between the central area of the Plain and on the margins of the occupied areas. Most notably, at the scale of the entire Hungarian Plain he documented a trend toward the focus on the resource-rich edges of the Plain in the foothills through time, culminating in a depopulation of the center of the Plain in the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr phase. Although the central area of the region had been re-occupied by the Early Bronze Age, he observed a focus of settlement in the foothills, presumably the result of an emphasis on procuring raw and finished materials, and access to trade routes along which finished, perhaps high-prestige, materials were traded (Sherratt 1997b). At a much smaller scale on the Dévaványa Plain of northern Békés County, this same pattern could not be observed (probably due to its position in the center of the Plain). Sherratt (1997b:311) did note, however, the cyclical nature of settlement variability that oscillated between low-density, ephemeral sites and high clustered, high density occupation. The low- density early Neolithic sites began a period of 700 years of aggregation into larger, higher density, more stable settlements. By the Early Copper Age, smaller more ephemeral settlements were dispersed more widely across the landscape, possibly partly as a result of the emerging trend of settlement focus on the margins of the Plain nearer to copper and other raw material sources. The economic pull of the foothills, potential local ecological changes, and the arrival of migratory pastoral populations from the east during the Middle Copper Age all may have played a part leading up to a period of relative abandonment in this area of the Plain. According to

Sherrat, by the Late Copper Age small enclaves of Baden agriculturalists lived amongst the kurgan-building populations, and the focus of settlement continued to shift into the surrounding uplands. By ca. 3,000 B.C. and the Early Bronze Age, the agricultural areas in the center of the Plain were characterized by small defended villages in an area not marginal to the main zone of occupation to the east (Sherratt 1997b:311-312). The work of Sherratt in the late 1970s and early 1980s and the work of the Hungarian archaeologists who compiled the MRT volumes constituted a major achievement in regional methodology and the analysis and interpretation of regional data not only in Hungary, but in Eastern Europe and the Balkans as a whole. In many ways, the Körös-Berettyó project laid the foundation for later regional projects on the Hungarian Plain. The Körös Regional Archaeological Project (KRAP), which focuses on a region of the eastern Plain characterized by the slow-flowing channels of the Körös and Berettyó Rivers, was started in the late 1990s. Parkinson (1999, 2004, 2006b) used such a methodology as advocated by Binford in his stylistic analysis of the Late Neolithic Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex and the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture group. The initial goal was to develop a more complete understanding of the social changes affecting the nature of social organization at the beginning of the Copper Age on the eastern Hungarian Plain. Concerned with the cyclical nature of settlement organization that has been discussed previously, Parkinson (1999:355-428, 2006b) analyzed a battery of 20 stylistic ceramic attributes in order to measure the degree of interaction between Early Copper Age settlements in the study region. The results of the stylistic analysis were used along with a cyclical model of social interaction derived from diachronic settlement pattern data analyzed by KRAP and first collected in the MRT volumes. Parkinson determined that the overall pattern was one of uniformity, which suggests a high degree of continuous interaction between the sites in the study area. However, the distribution of incised ceramics suggests the marking and maintenance of social boundaries within the study area. Interestingly, the same area identified by Parkinson as a boundary previously marked a more discreet boundary zone between the Herpály and Tisza groups during the Late Neolithic. This suggests that boundary maintenance, though present, was less actively maintained during the Early Copper Age. At the site level, KRAP has focused primarily on two adjacent Early Copper Age sites on the Great Hungarian Plain. Excavation at Vésztő-20 and Körösladány-14 has shed much light on

72 the household organization and economy of the period. Research conducted by KRAP modeled social organization during the Late Neolithic and Early Copper Age across the Körös River study region, and suggested that household competition was restricted by patterns of nucleation and dispersal (see Chapter Three). This leveling mechanism effectively prohibited the development of social ranking on the Plain during the Neolithic and the Copper Age (Gyucha et al. 2004; Parkinson et al. 2004:118), to the point where it did not appear until other economic and material factors took hold during the Middle Bronze Age, over 1,000 years later. The regional, multi- scalar, diachronic nature of research at KRAP allows for the observation of changes not only in settlement patterns over time, but when modeled effectively also sheds light on how settlement and social systems change over the long term.

A Problem with Regional Studies, and how to Approach it in the Future Regional multi-scalar research does have a major problem relating to research location and scale. To illustrate this problem, I refer to a segment of the research conducted as part of Andrew Sherratt’s Körös-Berettyó project. Sherratt analyzed settlement patterns on the scale of the Great Hungarian Plain in order to observe general patterns of settlement development, and then analyzed a much smaller micro- region – a part of the MRT survey on the Dévaványa Plain in northern Békés County near the towns of Szeghalom and Dévaványa – to comment more specifically on those general trends (Sherratt 1984, 1997b). He argued for cultural continuity from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in the area. Though Sherratt’s analysis shed a great deal of light on prehistoric settlement on the Great Hungarian Plain, his project also illustrates the problem of geographic location and scale in many regional projects. Although general patterns may exist at very large scales – such as the spatially complementary distribution of Late Copper Age settlements and kurgan burial tumuli – and may hold true in some smaller analytical regions, the same patterns may not hold true in other nearby micro-regions. Depending on a researcher’s sampling strategy and how one defines the study region, patterns could be falsely identified or missed altogether. This will be discussed further in Chapter Six. A problem with the identification of variability also exists in regional analysis when working at very large geographic scales. A major point in Marija Gimbutas’ model for the

73 arrival of kurgan building people in eastern Hungary in the Middle and Late Copper Age is the homogeneous nature of the Yamnaya culture of the Eurasian steppe, and their emigration from their homeland (Gimbutas 1952, 1979, 1989). However, it has been noted that a high degree of variability exists in the archaeological record for kurgan builders at this time, to the point that the term “Yamnaya” may be best considered a package of shared behaviors and material culture rather than a unified social or cultural group (Merpert 1968, 1974). Anthony (1986, 1990) has been critical of Gimbutas’ homogeneous characterization of the Yamnaya, and proposed a different model for Yamnaya migration less dependent on the movement of “cultures” and more concerned with the movement of people acting within the framework of a cultural system (1990:895). One can more readily observe such cultural variability at numerous resolutions and different geographic scales, rather than examining primarily large or small scales.

Social Change, Ceramics, and Technology Ceramic analysis has, for decades, been the lynchpin in establishing chronological cultural sequences archaeologically and, to a very large extent, defining culture groups across not only time but also space. Although archaeologists have mostly moved past the “pots equals people” mentality of previous generations, ceramic assemblages across the world are still often assumed implicitly to represent both the geographic extent and ethnicity of culture groups. This is problematic when it comes to large, regionally homogeneous material cultures like the Baden horizon, since such material representations of human activity do not necessarily represent ethnicity or, necessarily, even cultural affiliation. A great deal of attention has been devoted to the study of pottery in modern archaeology. Rice (1987:24-25) listed a number of reasons for this disproportionate amount of study, including that pottery has a long history and is present in almost all parts of the world, it is essentially non-perishable and preserves well in the archaeological record, and that unlike other artifacts such as projectile points, pottery sherds are not particularly attractive for looters and collectors, and it is in general not an exotic or highly valued good and not usually confined to specific sectors of a population. Most importantly, however, is its manufacturing method:

Pottery is formed and informed: pottery making is an additive process in which the successive steps are recorded in the final product. The shape, decoration, composition, and manufacturing methods of pottery thus reveal insights – lowly and lofty, sacred and profane – into human behavior and the history of civilizations. Potters’ choices of raw materials, shapes to be constructed, kinds of decoration, and location of ornamentation all stand revealed, as do cooking methods, refuse disposal patterns, and occasional evidence of clumsiness and errors in judgment. The sensitivity, spatial as well as temporal, of pottery to changes in such culturally conditioned decisions has fed archaeologists’ traditional dependency on this material for defining prehistoric cultures and their interrelations (Rice 1987:25).

Rice (1987:25) went on to say that most modern archaeological pottery studies are based on one or more of three approaches: classification, decorative analyses, and compositional studies. Classification studies focus primarily on the grouping of sherds or vessels representative of a particular material culture or phase of a material culture, and sometimes the subsequent comparative analysis of groupings over space or time. Such studies formed the basis of archaeological chronology, especially in the 19th and most of the 20th centuries. Decorative analyses focus on painting, surface treatment, and plastic decoration of vessels, and in addition to offering insight on esthetics and ideological systems, stylistic variability can also deliniate social boundaries across space (Parkinson 2006a; Stark 1998a, 1998b). This dissertation embraces Rice’s belief that pottery manufacturing methods are just as important, if not more important, than ceramic form and design. However, I further incorporate more recent perspectives on technology in anthropology and ceramic analysis in order to refine this perspective and to make it directly applicable to the anthropological and archaeological problem at hand. Lemmonier (1992) followed Mauss (1955) in suggesting that even our most basic acts – sitting down, standing up, scratching one’s nose – are culturally determined, and included more complex modes of technology (such as building a jumbo jet or creating a pot from clay) as culturally structured and influenced. As such, he identified two types of technological traits: stylistic traits and functional traits. Stylistic traits, such as color, design, decoration, and sometimes form, are often correlated with social identities based on characteristics such as gender, age, hierarchy, or membership in a particular society or group. Such characteristics convey conscious and unconscious messages that provide information regarding the object and its provenance and/or provenience to the observer to construct a social identity. On the other hand, functional characteristics –the selection of certain materials for certain objects or purposes,

75 or for a particular technological action, or a particular chain of events by which an object is created – often unintentionally convey social or cultural messages (Lemmonier 1992:85-86).

A Technological Approach to Ceramic Analysis A theme running throughout Lemmonier’s work – that intentional, stylistic elements of technology can substantially change arbitrarily and relatively quickly while functional technological elements are of a more conservative nature and resistant to change – underpins much of the present research (see Lemmonier 1992:51-77). Lemmonier’s perspective on technological change is nowhere more appropriate than in the study of archaeological ceramics, where design and decoration often appear to change arbitrarily and suddenly. Early and middle 20th century archaeologists often explained such changes in terms of invasions, migrations, or other direct movement of people (see Adams et al. 1978; Anthony 1990; Childe 1958a, 1969; Gimbutas 1963, 1977; and Chapter Two of the present work for thorough discussions of material culture change and migration). While more antiquated ceramic studies equated material culture changes (e.g., changes in form, design, and/or decoration) with ethnic changes or the arrival of new cultures into a previously occupied region, more recent studies have emphasized human continuity during periods of material culture change, often over thousands of years. On the Great Hungarian Plain, arguments for continuity from the Neolithic through the Early and Middle Copper Age have been successfully supported for years. Sherratt (1997a, 1997b), Parkinson et al. (2004, 2010), Gyucha et al. (2004), and Parkinson and Gyucha (2007) have supported models of long-term human continuity over the course of systemic, cyclical social and economic changes in the region. They cite not only direct evidence from the archaeological record as support for these models (for example, continuity in burial practices; see Bognar-Kutzian 1963), but also patterns of economic specialization as part of nucleation and dispersal cycles across the Carpathian Basin (Makkay 1982; Parkinson et al. 2004).

Macroscopic Analysis The majority of research conducted on archaeological ceramics over the past century has been without the aid of a microscope, using only characteristics visible to the naked eye (design, form, some kinds of temper, and firing conditions) or with low-power hand lenses. Although

76 space and the focus of the present research prevent a comprehensive review of such a large portion of the archaeological publication and research record, I do present an overview of literature that has contributed methodologically and theoretically to macroscopic methods, and I briefly discuss some of the weaknesses of this method of research. Macroscopic analysis of ceramics initially focused on the creation of detailed typologies of design and form, and delineating geographically-based culture-groups on continental or regional scales (Childe 1958a; see Trigger 1989:122-123). In North America, this manifested in the systematic study of variation in the archaeological record oriented toward defining geographic rather than chronological patterns, and followed the tendency of American ethnologists in the late 19th century to organize the study of material culture similarities and differences into culture areas. For example, McGuire (1899) created fifteen geographic cultural divisions based on the distribution of different types of Native American pipes. In terms of ceramic analysis, Holmes (1903) used stylistic analysis as well as some technological variables (such as temper and firing conditions) to define pottery regions for the eastern United States. In Europe during the late 19th and early 20th century, the culture-historical perspective in archaeology both relied on and shaped the study of material culture, including ceramics. Unlike in North America, however, European antiquarians and archaeologists were more concerned with establishing chronological sequences based on how design, form, and the use of materials changed over time. The primary European objectives of this time were nationalist in nature, as researchers associated artifact (e.g., ceramic) types with ethnic groups in order to learn more about their specific national heritage and how their ancestors lived (Sklenář 1983:91; Trigger 1989:149). In central and eastern Europe especially, an orientation toward nationalistic study led to an emphasis on the Neolithic and later periods (Trigger 1989:149) (which not only focused on the establishment of ethnic continuity over long periods of time, but also on the development of material culture groups spreading across both time and space). Orton et al. (1993) divided this general process into several chronological phases of ceramic analysis: the art historical phase, the typological phase, and the contextual phase. Most of the previous analyses of Late Copper Age Hungarian ceramics (and indeed, most ceramic studies in the region) can roughly be said to belong to the typological phase. This phase has roots in the 1880s with Pitt-Rivers’ (1906) development of typological classes for many categories of artifacts. Subsequently, this set a trend for the development of type-series (see

Déchelette 1904; Dragendorff 1895; Knorr 1906; Ludowici 1904; Orton et al. 1993; Walters 1908). Kidder’s (1924, 1931) integration of stratigraphy, survey, and ceramics set the stage for decades of research to come. This method of ceramic study is integral to Childe’s general approach to material culture and its representation of cultures, and though the focus was chronological, the typological approach was crucial to the development of geographic cultural groupings. Ultimately, it was the typological approach that was initially used to develop chronological sequences and define culture areas throughout North America, Europe, and the Great Hungarian Plain. Anna O. Shepard’s (1956) work, as part of what Orton et al. (1993:13) called the “contextual phase,” emphasized a holistic approach to ceramic studies that emphasized chronology, distribution, and technology. She was also one of the first to directly highlight the importance of studying technological aspects of ceramic form and manufacture. Technologically focused studies are largely indebted to her pioneering and comprehensive work, and scientific methods became increasingly utilized in the study of archaeological ceramics. Many of these scientific methods came in the form of chemical and, more important for the present research, microscopic analysis.

Microscopic Analysis Unlike macroscopic ceramic analysis, microscopic analysis and the observation and classification of ceramic inclusions under high magnification does not have a theoretical history stretching to the nationalist and evolutionist perspectives of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Scientific, microscopic approaches to ceramic analysis have most notably been useful in dating, sourcing, and function studies (Orton et al. 1993:18). Of most importance for the research presented as part of this study, the thin sectioning and microscopic analytical techniques were first explored quite early (Bamps 1883), and much later refined and used for investigating more specific questions (Peacock 1967). Shepard (1942) applied thin-sectioning techniques to show how Rio Grande glaze-paint pottery was traded over very long distances, and by the 1930s thin- sectioning and petrographic analysis had gained popularity on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean (Orton et al. 1993; see Gladwin 1937; Liddell 1932; Obenaur 1936). Ceramic petrography, of the many various methods of ceramic analysis, may be uniquely able to best address questions of technology, manufacture, and variability in production

78 techniques over time. Most often, the goal of ceramic petrography is to classify sherds or wares according to material or technology, or to identify categories such as wares, series, or types (Reedy 2008:151). Numerous studies have shown that precise information gathered from petrographic analysis can establish sets of standards that allow ceramic characterization using only low-powered microscopy (see Chandler 2001; Freestone 1995; Reedy 2008; Shepard 1939, 1942). Petrographic analysis of ceramics can address many questions of archaeological significance. Peacock (1968) examined questions of provenance in Iron Age British ceramics, while Beynon et al. (1986) and Kreiter (2005) have used petrographic methods to investigate questions of manufacture, technology, and cultural implications for various methods of vessel construction. They also noted functional reasons for the inclusion of different tempers, and Kreiter (2005) discussed grog as a non-functional inclusion with imbedded cultural meaning, linking potters with their ancestors through the reuse of crushed ceramic material. Although a complete review of the utilization of ceramic petrography is beyond the scope of this study (for a recent survey of ceramic petrography see Reedy 2008), it should be remembered that petrography can address numerous archaeological questions via various nuanced methodologies. Most modern thin section studies involve analysis, identification, and characterization of non-plastic inclusions (Reedy 2008). These studies may involve determining provenance through the comparison of ceramic mineral inclusions with clay samples gathered from the field, and they may be complemented by the observation of other features not observable macroscopically that are useful in describing manufacturing techniques or grouping fabric types (Whitbread 1995). Some clay minerals, referred to as “plastics” because of their malleable nature when wet, usually compose more than 50% of a ceramic sample’s volume, but they cannot be characterized by thin section analysis due to their small size (approximately 1µm thick) (Reedy 2008:124). The analysis and characterization of this amorphous groundmass, or matrix (see Stoltman 1989, 2001) can often prove just as useful as the study of non-plastic mineral inclusions, especially when identifiable minerals are homogeneous over time or space, or when studying technological characteristics of the ceramic samples. Reedy (2008:124) characterized the most important contributions of thin-section petrography: The most important focus of thin-section petrography of pottery is on identifying, quantifying, and interpreting nonclay inclusions. These inclusions improve working, drying, and firing properties of the clay, and

can also affect the use properties of the finished ceramic material. Beyond identifying the inclusions present, useful interpretations may require identifying a variety of characteristics such as abundance (frequency of inclusions), size (average or modal, or most common, as well as the grain- size distribution), internal distribution of particles, morphology, and alteration mechanisms.

Shape, abundance, and distribution of non-plastic particles can prove useful; for example, rounder quartz inclusions suggest a longer period of alluvial transport and weathering (Reedy 2008:124). Speaking generally, two types of petrographic microscopic analysis have been applied to the description of archaeological ceramics (see Middleton and Freestone 1991; Reedy 2008). The first, qualitative petrography, identifies minerals present in each sherd, roughly characterizes the size and shape of mineral inclusions, and describes paste characteristics that provide details about production and construction (see Whitbread 1989, 1995). The mineralogical differences identified by qualitative analysis may serve to delineate ceramic types and establish provenance (Galaty 1999). Other characteristics, especially in terms of the appearance of the clay matrix, can also be used to bolster qualitative research. The second petrographic analytical technique, quantitative petrography, applies a more rigorous and objective methodology for collecting petrographic data. Typically, mineral inclusions and void space are systematically counted and recorded according to size and shape in a process called “point-counting.” Many modern petrographic researchers utilize the methodology developed by Stoltman (1989, 1991) that emphasizes a distinction between clay body and clay paste. Clay “body” is defined as “the bulk composition of a ceramic vessel, including clays, larger mineral inclusions in the silt, sand, and gravel ranges, and temper” (Stoltman 1991:109). “Paste” is defined as the aggregate of natural materials, i.e., clays and larger mineral inclusions, to which temper was later added to produce the body from which a vessel is made (Stoltman 1991:109-110). This distinction is important because it recognizes the independent origins of the artificial temper and natural paste collected and worked by a potter (Galaty 1999; Stoltman 1989, 1991). Because quantitative petrography under Stoltman’s methodology accounts for both natural and artificial inclusions present in the composition of a ceramic material, the combination of a systematic quantitative analysis with a detailed qualitative analysis can be especially useful.

Both natural and added components of a potter’s mixture can be identified, and the technological, functional, and design priorities of a pot’s creator can be inferred. For example, design and production characteristics identified in paste characteristics qualitatively, such as coiling versus slab forming methods, can be observed. Or, ratios of certain mineral grits identified in quantitative analysis may be added only to cookpots, for example, in order to improve resistance to thermal stress (Arnold 1985:25; Galaty 1999:39; Rice 1987:228-229). Stoltman’s (1989, 1991) methodology requires the petrographer to accurately distinguish between natural and intentional (temper) inclusions. Galaty (1999) and others (see Whitbread 1995; Zubrow 1988) noted guidelines for making these distinctions. Generally, rock temper grains are larger, polyminerallic, and more angular than natural inclusions. As a result, a bimodal size distribution of mineral inclusions may indicate the intentional addition of temper to a clay’s paste (Whitbread 1995; Kreiter 2005). In addition to the identification and characterization of non-plastic inclusions in a paste, a key element of quantitative petrography involves point counting the slide in order to determine inclusion percentages. Stoltman (2001) described point counting as superimposing a grid over the thin section and recording all observations at the cross hairs of set intervals. These observations may be mineral inclusion grains, clay matrix, void space, or other features. So long as rigorous point counting procedures are followed, the basic theory of the method is that the counts made in this section analysis reliably estimate the actual volumetric proportions of each constituent feature (Reedy 2008). Experimental work by geologists (Chayes 1954a, 1954b) has validated this relationship. Some studies have attempted to add a more rigorous component to qualitative analysis by utilizing estimation charts to estimate variables such as mineral inclusion abundance (Orton et al. 1993; Reedy 2008; Rice 1987; Stoltman 1989). Although it is possible to criticize semi- quantitative methodologies, it has been shown that such an approach can quickly and accurately characterize ceramic fabrics both within and between chronological periods (see Kreiter 2005). Additionally, archaeologists have used combinations of petrographic and chemical or trace- element analyses to characterize the nature of ceramic production and exchange. Roper et al. (2010) utilized a dual methodology of petrographic analysis and oxidization analysis on order to demonstrate the local production of shell tempered pottery in the North American Central Plains, while simultaneously describing regional variability in firing techniques. Galaty (1999) used

81 petrographic analysis and chemical analysis (a combination of weak acid extraction and inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy) in order to characterize Mycenaean coursewares and finewares, and to demonstrate different administrative implementation strategies for mobilizing utilitarian goods. While many archaeologists have used ceramic petrography to characterize fabric types within periods or between contemporaneous geographic or geological zones in order to understand trade, economic systems, and manufacturing techniques (see Galaty 1999; Parsons 2005), the utility of microscopic ceramic analysis goes beyond the establishment and discussion of fabrics. Utilizing the history of petrographic research as a foundation, the present research projects examines ceramics and ceramic fabrics over a long period of time (approximately 1,500 years) in order to identify changes in manufacturing or production techniques that could indicate an influx of people into the Körös region during the transition between the Middle and Late Copper Age, and into the Bronze Age.

Interpretive Framework: Linking Settlement Patterns and Pottery in the Körös Region Late Copper Age The framework for interpreting the data and applying them to the tested models in this research is not a complicated one. However, imperative to the interpretation of the spatial and ceramic results is the understanding that the lines of evidence presented here are related analyses that must be interpreted together. Despite the various methodologies employed as part of this research, the results speak to the same issues and must be considered as a package. Indeed, it is hoped that the results and interpretations presented in this volume will serve as a foundation for the establishment of future research questions. As such, a simplified interpretive framework of possible outcomes of the spatial and ceramic analyses is presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1. Table depicting the interpretive framework for data sets utilized in this research. Note that change in ceramic design has previously been established and well documented, and while not directly tested as part of this project is considered as part of the interpretive framework. Model of Change Data Sets Expected Patterning Migration Ceramic Design Distinct change in form and decoration

Ceramic High degree of variability in microscopic and macroscopic characteristics Paste/Body between cultural phases; indicators of manufacturing and/or raw material preparation changes, and/or changes in firing technology (examples include changes in oxidization of paste, changes in b-fabrics, preferred orientation, changes in natural mineral inclusion or intentional temper ratios)

Settlement Patterns High degree of spatial exclusivity between Late Copper Age archaeological sites and kurgans. Possible observable and quantifiable reduction in Middle and Late Copper Age site frequency and density Adoption Ceramic Design Possible change in form and decoration, but retention of design characteristics (e.g., surface treatment) throughout the study between cultural phases

Ceramic Little variability in microscopic and macroscopic characteristics within the study Paste/Body area between cultural phases; no indication of changes in manufacturing technology, or observable, quantifiable change over time (through cultural phases)

Settlement Patterns Little or no spatial exclusivity between Late Copper Age sites and kurgans. Any changes in site frequency and density attributable to other factors Combination Ceramic Design Change in form and decoration between cultural periods with possible retention of earlier characteristics

Ceramic Diachronic variability observed in some manufacturing/technological features and Paste/Body not others (e.g., change in mineral inclusions or tempering, especially sudden change, but no change in other fabric characteristics)

Settlement Patterns Little or no qualifiable or quantifiable spatial exclusivity between Late Copper Age sites and kurgans; or, spatial exclusivity between sites of different cultural phases attributable to one phase's spatial relationship to kurgans

Spatial Analysis: Observing Nucleation, Dispersal, and Spatial Association through Time The analysis of site distribution and settlement location change over time is a primary concern of this study. As such, a spatial analysis research design must account not only for how sites appear and contrast across a large geographic region but also at multiple smaller units. This is an important step in site spatial analysis, as patterns that hold true at one resolution do not necessarily hold true at others. In order to account for scalar variability, and to observe the long- term patterns of nucleation and dispersal discussed elsewhere (see Sherratt 1997a, 1997b; Parkinson 2006), two broad perspectives are utilized in the spatial analysis conducted as part of

83 this research project. First, a traditional multi-scalar approach generally observes long-term diachronic changes in settlement patterns over several cultural phases at several scales in the Körös region. This largely expands geographically on Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) mid-1980s study in northern Békés Country in an effort to determine if his observed patterning at two scales (the Dévaványa Plain and the Hungarian Plain more generally) holds true elsewhere in the research area. This line of evidence in the spatial analysis focuses heavily on the spatial relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age Baden archaeological sites, as a major observation of Sherratt’s research (1997b) was the spatial exclusivity of these sites at the resolution of his study region and the Hungarian Plain. This led him to conclude that two separate populations – the indigenous Late Copper Age people and the migratory kurgan builders – intentionally avoided contact and settled in different areas of the Plain. The multi-scalar approach applied to a wider geographic region in the present research aims to test and expand upon Sherratt’s conclusions. Second, known Early, Middle, and Late Copper Age sites are subjected to average nearest neighbor statistical analysis, in order to quantify clusters of sites (nucleation) and ascertain the statistical significance of qualitatively observed nucleation and dispersal over the time period covered by the research. This tests the conclusions of other researchers (Gyucha 2010; Makkay 1982; Parkinson 2006; Sherratt 1997a, 1997b) who have observed nucleations and dispersals over time, and serves as a supporting line of evidence for the multi-scalar study undertaken as part of the present research. The two approaches aimed at qualifying and quantifying changing settlement patterns over time in the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plain will speak to the nature of social change during the Late Copper Age. A qualifiable and quantifiable spatial exclusivity between kurgans and Late Copper Age Baden sites, for example, supports a model that includes the migration of kurgan builders onto the Plain. If associated with a reduction in density and frequency of Middle and Late Copper Age sites, such a pattern may suggest a disruption in local economic and social processes. On the other hand, the presence of Late Copper Age sites near kurgans or kurgan clusters would make a model of intentional avoidance untenable, and would not support a model by which major changes on the Plain at this time were catalyzed by migrating kurgan builders (see Table 4.1). It is imperative to remember, however, that the arrival of new people on the Plain would not necessarily directly cause major material culture

84 and settlement change in the study region. As discussed elsewhere (see Chapter Three), factors other than migration may account for both changes in material culture and settlement patterns, though a migration as a separate event may have occurred at around this time.

Ceramic Analysis: Measuring and Observing Technological Change through Time The methods of ceramic analysis described in the research examples above allow for qualitative and quantitative data to be gathered macroscopically and microscopically. While such a dual approach to addressing the same research questions in a single research project is unusual, in this case it addresses specific variables best approached using a separate analytical methods. For example, macroscopic analysis of a fresh break in a vessel fragment allows for rapid description of features such as firing environment, completeness of raw clay kneading, and sorting of visible mineral and intentional inclusions. A large number of samples can be quickly and accurately described, making for a large sample size and large amount of data to interpret. Petrographic analysis, on the other hand, is better suited for accurate groundmass descriptions of the ceramic paste. This may include identification of birefringent (a condition in which minerals refract light in multiple directions, causing the mineral’s color to appear differently when viewed at different polarizations) fabrics, the identification of specific minerals or mineral classes, the identification of specific intentional tempers difficult to identify in hand sample, the classification of void space, and specific qualtitative descriptions of fabrics between samples and groups. Quantitatively point-counting mineral inclusions for fabric characterization and size estimates, on the other hand, produces specific ratios of paste and body inclusions. Point counting requires a great deal more time in terms of both sample preparation and analysis. As such, a combination of both approaches allows for the characterization and description of manufacturing techniques and technological approaches of vessel manufacture in a timely, accurate, and efficient manner. A ceramic analysis research design making use of macroscopic and petrographic techniques is also useful in this case due to the unusual design of the petrographic study, involving the study of change over a long period of time. The majority of petrographic studies have focused on the identification of variability over a relatively restricted timeframe and attempted to identify specific fabrics within that timeframe (see Krieter 2005; Reedy 2008). This allows the researcher to discuss implications for the existence of different fabrics,

85 technologically and in terms of vessel form, design, and function. In this research project, fabric types are also identified but are used as general representations of fabrics over time, rather than the basis for comparison. Here, cultural phases (e.g., Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age) are the default groupings for comparative purposes. By grouping samples in this way, it is possible to identify variability over long periods of time, as well as within specific cultural phases. As such, the results of the macroscopic and petrographic analyses augment one other, and act as a control to subsequently identify any potential problems with the methodology. Following collection, data can be analyzed diachronically in order to qualify and quantify how ceramic technology changed over various cultural phases, beyond the most obvious characteristics of form and design. Indeed, Krieter (2005) demonstrated the utility of using petrographic methods to analyze technological change in Early and Middle Bronze Age ceramics from Transdanubia. Such a technique can also be applied to a research design constructed to identify changes in manufacturing techniques over the long-term. Change in form, design, surface treatment, and other seemingly superficial elements of ceramic manufacture has been well documented in the Körös region during the Middle and Late Copper Age (see Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998), at which point the regionally homogeneous Baden material culture tradition became dominant on the Hungarian Plain. Though often attributed to the influence of a foreign population present in the region, such explanations are not sufficient for explaining material culture change, as the characteristics often change over a short-term, even generational, basis, and can be attributed to other factors such as economic integration into wider interaction spheres. However, culturally embedded techniques for preparation and manufacture tend to be conservative and resistant to change (Lemmonier 1992; Michelaki 1999; see Chapter Three). Therefore, if distinctive changes in the manufacturing process indicated in paste composition and groundmass appearance are observed between cultural phases (specifically between the Middle and Late Copper Age), it may indicate an outside influence on pottery technology, and would lend support to a migration or invasion model. On the other hand, if little or no change is observed in the technological aspects of ceramic manufacture over time, a migration model would not be supported. In such a case, a model of population continuity and incorporation into a wider economic and interaction sphere would better explain the material culture changes observed at this time (Table 4.1).

Summary In this chapter, I have presented the links between research design and research methodology and the anthropological and archaeological information presented in Chapters Two and Three. I discussed the temporal and geographic appropriateness for the research in this volume, and provided brief research histories of research veins important to the study at hand. Finally, the framework by which the collected data will be interpreted was discussed and presented. The following chapter will apply these design and methodological links directly to the present research by discussing the methodologies utilized for the spatial and ceramic analyses presented in this dissertation.

CHAPTER FIVE METHODOLOGY Introduction In this chapter, I first present a rationale for conducting the present research in the Körös River study area. I then present the analytical methods used to examine changes in settlement patterns between the Late Neolithic, Early and Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age, the field methods used for site visitations, mapping, measurement, and systematic collection, and macroscopic and microscopic ceramic analysis. I then discuss the methods and purpose of long-term settlement analysis in this project, and explain the principles of macroscopic and microscopic ceramic analysis and ceramic petrography. The process for description and documentation of the finds from the site collections and surveys is included. The selection and preparation of ceramic samples are also discussed.

Selection of the Study Area The foundations for this research were developed over the course of three seasons of work with the Körös Regional Archaeological Project (Parkinson 2002, 2006b) and the Bronze Age Körös Off-Tell Archaeological Project (Duffy 2010). While both of these projects provide excellent insight into their respective periods of study, the intermediate cultural phase in the region – the Late Copper Age Baden phase – now remains the least understood in terms of how it fits into the long-term patterns of social and settlement change on the southeastern Hungarian Plain. The area of the Körös River system drainage is an ideal location for archaeological research in many respects. The location and general characteristics of the landscape are convenient and accessible, a foundation of previous research is available in a number of languages with high-quality publications available in serial, monograph, and book forms, and materials from previous projects are available for those conducting continuing research in the area.

MRT Volume 8

MRT Volume 6

MRT Volume 10

Figure 5.1. The Körös River basin study area, including modern cities and MRT parish boundaries. Located in southeastern Békés County, Hungary (inset).

Geographic and Archaeological Location The study area selected for the research includes over 3,000 km2 in the western half of Békés County in the eastern portion of the Great Hungarian Plain. Known as the Körös-Berretyó Region or the Körös River Valley, the region is named for, and characterized by, the river system that dominates the local topography and has produced the complex cultural history and geomorphology of the region (see Figure 5.1).

Foundation of Recent and Previous Research in the Region The Körös-Berretyó Region has been the focus of extensive and intensive archaeological research for decades, and a solid foundation of previous research exists to guide and inform current researchers. This body of literature, produced by both Hungarian and foreign researchers, is discussed at length in Chapters Three and Four and will not be given a full 89 treatment here. However, a brief overview is useful in understanding how previous research contributed to both the corpus of archaeological knowledge in the region, as well as the research topics addressed in the present research. Using the Hungarian MRT research, as well as other settlement data on the Hungarian Plain as a platform, Andrew Sherratt’s Körös-Berretyó project on the Dévaványa Plain in the 1970s and 1980s synthesized decades of pervious research and conducted more intensive settlement investigation in the extreme northern parishes of Békés County (1983, 1984, 1987a, 1987b). Sherratt’s economic and settlement models, along with the pioneering studies of Gimbutas (see Gimbutas 1997), helped shape much of the tone of the present research. Most recently, Parkinson and Gyucha’s Körös Regional Archaeological Project (KRAP) has focused a critical mass of Hungarian and foreign archaeological researchers on the eastern Hungarian Plain and the Körös-Berretyó study region in particular. Though Parkinson and Gyucha’s project began as a vehicle by which to understand the social and cultural mechanisms that shaped the Early Copper Age apart from the earlier Neolithic, it now includes the study of virtually all aspects of the transition between the Late Neolithic and Early Copper Age, including household and settlement organization, settlement patterns, social boundaries, and geological and geomorphological studies. As more researchers have collaborated with Parkinson and Gyucha, KRAP has produced several related projects that cover much of the Holocene. These include studies of the Neolithic (Salisbury 2010), the Early and Middle Bronze Ages (Duffy 2010), and now the Late Copper Age. In addition to research carried out by local county museums and other Hungarian researchers, this modern foundation of research offers a rich tapestry of material from which to formulate new research questions and develop new projects.

Availability of Materials As a result of the extensive surface survey carried out as part of the production of the MRT volumes, a great deal of material from the surface of identified sites has been curated at national and county museums throughout the country. In Békés County, the Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum stores the majority of items collected as part of the survey in Békés County. I was granted the opportunity to analyze the ceramic material from all of the collected sites in the study region, which served as the initial foundation for both the petrographic study and site revisits. Additionally, colleagues with the Kulturális Örökségvédelmi Szakszolgálat (the Field Service for

Cultural Heritage, or KÖSZ), allowed me to both visit and photograph a large Baden site currently being excavated named Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya. I was also permitted to take a sample of ceramics from this site to include in my study as a control for the stratigraphically ambiguous collected surface material. All of this material was incorporated into the current research project.

Spatial Analysis Since the 1970s, archaeologists have been concerned with systematizing different manifestations of archaeological spatial analysis, including settlement analysis, site system analysis, regional studies, territorial analyses, locational analyses, catchment area studies, distribution mapping, density studies, and ultimately the integration of these types of information into large databases (Clarke 1977; Galaty 2005). Each of these forms of spatial study can be used at particular scales at in particular ways to answer specific archaeological questions (Clarke 1972:47, 1977). This research project is concerned with multiple scales of analysis, and one of the questions framing the project as a whole is: how do settlement patterns, or changes in settlement patterns, serve as an indicator of social change? This spatial study aimed to test models of change involving kurgans in the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plain during the Middle and Late Copper Age. Previous research has reaffirmed continuity between the Neolithic, Early, and Middle Copper Age on the eastern Hungarian Plain. Parkinson (1999, 2005) noted, along with others (see Bankoff and Winter 1990), a break in this continuity between the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr and Late Copper Age Baden periods. Stark (1998a:1, 1998b) argued that social groups and their boundaries are marked by observable patterns in the archaeological record. Therefore, a study of formal variation in settlement type, location, and/or degree of centralization is useful to determine the degree of continuity or change in the region. The goal of the spatial analysis component of this research is to expand upon Sherratt’s (1983, 1984, 1997a, 1997b, see Chapter Three for a detailed discussion of Sherratt’s research in the region) previous spatial study in northern Békés County. Since the 1980s, more data has become available, including the publication of additional MRT data, such as site locations and site descriptions. Including such an analysis as part of this research project allows for an update of Sherratt’s research, while at the same time expanding the research both in terms of geography

91 and scales of analysis. Ultimately, the spatial analysis conducted here broadly tested two models of change during the Late Copper Age: Andrew Sherratt’s environmental and economic model and the migration and invasion model as popularized by Marija Gimbutas. Three primary questions were asked in conduction the spatial analysis. 1) Did the arrival of kurgan people cause dramatic, sudden change during the latter half of the Copper Age? 2) Are kurgans and Late Copper Age sites spatially complementary, as Sherratt stated? And, 3) what implications does the spatial relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age sites have for understanding social and settlement changes at the end of the Late Copper Age? Additionally, the spatial analysis broadly examined changes in settlement patterns over time, from the Late Neolithic through the Late Copper Age, with an emphasis on how settlement evolved between the Early, Middle, and Late Copper Ages. The questions were approached from three scales of analysis: 1) The eastern Great Hungarian Plain (using Sherratt’s maps and data); 2) the Körös River Basin study region (see Figure 5.1); and, 3) several smaller micro- regions throughout the study region. A total of 588 presumably invasive kurgans are recorded and published in the MRT volumes for the study area, along with 70 Middle Copper Age sites and 105 Late Copper Age sites. This provides a statistically significant sampling universe in terms of visual settlement pattern analysis, average nearest neighbor analysis, and density analysis. The creation of a detailed geographic information system (GIS) was the first methodological step in conducting the settlement analysis. ArcMap 9.3 was used for this purpose. The principle units of analysis, along with relevant geographic and cartographic data (rivers, maps, borders, cities) include settlement data on Middle and Late Copper Age sites, kurgan locations, and information on Late Neolithic, Early Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age sites. All site locations were recorded in the GIS using georeferenced and rectified digital copies of the original 1:10,000 survey maps. Within the Körös River study region, average nearest neighbor analysis was used to determine level of clustering and randomness within cultural periods, based on the nearest neighbor index. The nearest neighbor index is the ratio of the actual distance between sites divided by the expected difference based on the area of study. The expected difference is the average distance between neighbors in a hypothetical random distribution. If the index is less than 1, the pattern exhibits clustering. If the index is greater than 1, the trend is toward

92 dispersion. The Z score in nearest neighbor analysis is a measure of statistical significance that indicates whether or not to reject the null hypothesis, which in this case is that all points are randomly distributed across the landscape. At a 95% confidence level, a Z score between -1.96 and 1.96 means that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected (Ebdon 1985). The Körös region was divided into three zones for analytical purposes, and the mean nearest neighbor index and Z score was used. Using the nearest neighbor data as a guide, density maps of kurgans were constructed (based on number per square kilometer) in order to clearly define kurgan clusters, and to determine if kurgan clusters throughout the Körös region were spatially correlated with Late Copper Age archaeological sites. Additionally, the creation of site distribution maps of various cultural periods across the Körös region allows for a detailed analysis of settlement shifts over long periods of time, at a larger scale (but at an equal resolution) as Sherratt’s previous settlement analysis.

Fieldwork and Site Revisits As part of the field component of the research, site revisits and systematic collection were undertaken in order to address several issues. First, it was necessary to field-check the MRT assignments of periods represented at each site and to assess, at multi-component sites, the approximate areas of Late Copper Age archaeological sites since the MRT records only the distribution of all material at each site, rather than site size by cultural phase. Second, a systematic collection served the purposes of both establishing an approximate site size and collecting diagnostic ceramic samples for subsequent macroscopic and petrographic analysis. Finally, collecting ceramic materials from the surface of many sites throughout the county was necessary to compile a sample size large enough to effectively identify any local variability in ceramic production.

Overview of Site Revisits and Collection Since an extensive amount of previous research had been conducted in the study area over the last four decades, only a sample of Late Copper Age sites were revisited with the following goals in mind:

1. Field check MRT period data, in order to determine if maps based on MRT settlement data are an accurate representation of site distribution in the region. 2. Approximate size of Late Copper Age settlement, based upon the distribution of ceramic material and other artifacts in the plowzone, and the presence of surface features. 3. Collect a representative sample of ceramic samples from single and multi-component sites in order to macroscopically and microscopically test for change in ceramic production over time.

Site Selection According to the MRT, many recorded Late Copper Age sites were not occupied in previous or earlier periods; however, the vast majority have at least one earlier or later material culture component. Unfortunately, Late Copper Age sites are often described as thin scatters of material on the surface, with little diagnostic material present. Using the MRT descriptions as a guide, all 105 Late Copper Age Baden and Boleráz sites were placed in a database and coded according to size and cultural components. The following criteria were used to determine which sites to revisit and potentially collect: 1. Cultural phases represented, as documented in the MRT site descriptions. Single component Late Copper Age sites were given priority for re-visitation and collection in order to maintain chronological control. However, collection of sites exhibiting only Late Copper Age material was uncommon. 2. Surface representation of ceramic materials, as documented in the MRT site descriptions. An attempt was made to focus on Late Copper Age sites exhibiting large quantities of Boleráz or Baden material, in order to measure relative site size as accurately as possible, and to ensure an adequate collection for further ceramic analysis. 3. Previous research conducted at the site, as documented in the MRT site descriptions and other sources. An attempt was made to avoid sites where previous excavation or systematic collection had taken place. With these criteria in mind, the ultimate goal was to revisit and collect as many Late Copper Age sites as possible given the constraints of time, weather, site accessibility, and site condition.

Site Collection During the re-visitation of Late Copper Age sites, it was first determined whether or not the surface finds warranted a systematic surface collection or survey. The final decision to systematically collect samples from the surface was made on the basis of: 1) quantity of material on the surface; 2) culturally identifiable material on the surface, including a significant Late Copper Age assemblage; and 3) surface visibility, including vegetation and soil condition (plowing). Many sites described as single component Late Copper Age sites in the MRT were devoid of surface artifacts upon re-visitation, while several multi-component sites produced very few or zero Boleráz of Baden artifacts on initial investigation. Additionally, much of the autumn field season was plagued by long stretches of wet, inclement weather. As a result, a number of sites were virtually submerged, and several were unreachable due to severe road deterioration. Once the decision to systematically collect samples from the surface of the site was made, the extent of the surface scatter was determined by placing fieldwalkers at 15-20 meter intervals and walking parallel transects, marking diagnostic ceramic material, surface features, and other artifacts or artifact clusters of interest with pinflags. Since collection of multi- component sites was necessary, special effort was made to establish the density and extent of the Late Copper Age assemblage. Once density and size was roughly established, a site datum was placed in the center of the densest area of Late Copper Age material and its coordinates recorded with a hand-held GPS unit. Systematic collection was based on one of two strategies: dog-leash collection units, or systematic surface survey and collection. Dog-leash collection followed Parkinson’s (1999:184) methodology. Surface samples were collected using 5 meter radius circular collection units (“dog-leashes”) at 30 meter intervals (Figure 5.2, see Figures 6.3-6.13). Each 78m2 unit was named according to its relative position to the established datum (such as, Center, North 30, North 60) and its coordinates recorded with a hand-held GPS unit. Collection continued at 30 meter intervals in the four cardinal directions until the number of surface finds dropped below five artifacts for two consecutive collection units. In many cases, the placement of collection units extending in four cardinal directions would not accurately define the size or shape of the site, or would be limited by topographic features (canals, roads). As such, the units were slightly skewed in order to more efficiently

Figure 5.2. Systematic “dog-leash” collection unit site collection strategy.

collect a site. In some of these cases, or when the number of collected diagnostic ceramics was insufficient for further analysis, additional collection units were conducted at 45-degree angles from the site datum (unit Center), beginning at 15 meters from the datum and subsequently conducted at 30 meter intervals. Every artifact was collected within each unit and sorted into different categories (including pottery, daub, lithics, bone, metal, and shell). Each category was counted, weighed, and recorded in the field. Diagnostic ceramic material (including rims, bases, and incised or decorated body sherds) were sorted separately, counted, bagged, and saved for further analysis. Lithic materials, daub samples, faunal samples, and human remains were also saved for potential further analysis.

In cases where significant artifacts (e.g., large diagnostic ceramics), surface features (e.g., houses, plowed-out graves), or significant clusters were discovered during collection but not included in the systematic collection units, additional collection of features or clusters was conducted. Individual artifacts were piece-plotted on maps, their location recorded with a handheld GPS unit, and documented as “special finds” (SF). Artifact clusters were collected, their location recorded, and documented as “extra units” (XU). Specific features were collected, their location recorded, and documented as “feature” (F). At particularly large sites, or when large sites exhibited a low surface density but unusual numbers of diagnostic ceramics, a systematic linear survey was conducted in order to approximately measure the site and collect a representative ceramic assemblage for further analysis. Fieldwalkers were placed at 15-20 meter intervals and walked parallel transects until no more artifacts were seen on the surface. Pin flags were placed at the location of diagnostic ceramics. The ceramics were later collected. Their location was documented with a handheld GPS unit, and recorded as special finds. This combination of collection strategies proved efficient and effective at determining the approximate size of sites and collecting a systematic sample of archaeological material from the surface. Unfortunately, since most of the collected and survey sites were multi-component and had two or more periods represented on the surface, assessments of site size were difficult and, while occasionally useful, should be used with caution. The general impression, however, is that Late Copper Age sites, with rare exceptions, are relatively small and ephemeral in comparison with sites of other cultural affiliation in the study region.

Description and Documentation of Finds The collected finds from each site were washed, assigned field specimen (FS) numbers, and cataloged upon returning from the field. All material was measured, weighed and described. A site collection report, diagnostic ceramic sort by unit, unit collection forms, and FS logs were entered into a collection database. With the exception of diagnostic ceramics, which were needed for further analysis, artifacts were organized for curation by site, collection unit, and FS number.

Ceramic Coding Every diagnostic sherd was described and recorded in the ceramic analysis database in order to record variables useful for identifying characteristics of production and manufacture. Certain stylistic attributes were also recorded in order to identify any variability or trends within Late Copper Age pottery. The variables coded for each sample include descriptive variables such as cultural affiliation, weight, thickness, and length, as well as variables designed to record characteristics of production and manufacture. These include fabric characteristics (hardness, feel, texture, grain size, kneading, identifiable natural mineral inclusions and/or artificial inclusions, inclusions sorting of those inclusions, and color and structure of the firing core), surface finish (exterior surface, interior surface, decoration), and firing characteristics (paste color and surface color). Special attention was paid to variables and variable sets that indicate raw material preparation, production, or vessel formation techniques (i.e. technological or functional variables). These variables, such as data on firing characteristics and fabric descriptions, record embedded information on practices that, unlike decorative techniques, are resistant to change over time. These variables in particular are useful for analyzing change over time, and to determine if changes in form and design indicate the arrival of new personnel bringing their own techniques with them, or if production and manufacture remained unchanged and decorative changes resulted from other processes.

Other Materials Though potsherds comprised the majority of material collected from each site, other materials were often encountered. These included chipped stone (lithics), grinding stone fragments, animal bones, and rarely human bones and metals. With the exception of faunal material (which was sampled), all of this material was collected, washed, documented, and curated.

Photography Every artifact collected from the field was photographed obverse and reverse using a Nikon D60 digital SLR camera with an 18-55mm lens. Photographs were imported onto a computer in .tiff format and maintained at the highest possible resolution.

Current Location of the Material Material systematically surface collected from sites during the fall of 2009 is curated at the Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum in Békéscsaba, along with the previously collected MRT material included in this study and the pottery from Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá. The material from Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya is curated by the KÖSZ.

Ceramic Analysis Macroscopic Ceramic Analysis As described in detail above, every potsherd collected during survey was subject to coding of numerous descriptive and functional variables, with a focus on those that provide information on production technology. The macroscopic research portion of this study aimed to observe any changes in ceramic production between the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr and Late Copper Age Baden phases, and to identify any interregional or within-region inter-site variability within the Late Copper Age. Material for this study included ceramic sherds collected as part of the MRT survey, material collected as part of the field component of this dissertation research, described above, ceramics from the excavated context of the Doboz Homokgödöri- tablá Late Copper Age site, and ceramics from excavated contexts from Hódmezővásárhely- Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the adjacent Maros River watershed. All MRT materials were coded at the Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum in Békéscsaba, Hungary during the summer of 2009, while the ceramics collected during the field component of this research were collected and coded in the fall of the same year. Sherds were coded according to multiple variables, including diagnostic type, thickness, hardness, feel, texture, grain size, completeness of kneading, natural and intentional inclusions (e.g., clay nodules or grog), inclusion sorting, color, surface treatments, and decoration. In total, 352 of 509 total analyzed and coded sherds were assigned to the Middle and Late Copper Age. Of these, 303 sherds came from surface contexts at sites in the Körös study region, 21 from the excavated site of Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá in the Körös Region, and 28 from the ongoing excavation of a Baden settlement near Hódmezővásárhely in the adjacent Tisza River watershed. The Hódmezővásárhely ceramics are included as a counterpoint and control for the Körös region ceramics, and in order to observe any interregional variability (see Tables 6.1 and 6.2 for a summary of collected ceramic material).

Microscopic Ceramic Analysis Of the 509 sherds coded during the fall 2009 field season, 147 were selected for microscopic petrographic analysis. Sherds were selected based on diagnostic characteristics – primarily incised decoration and patterns of punctation – that unambiguously assigned them to specific known chronological phases. This allowed variability between the samples to be accurately described over both space and time. Prior to analysis, every sherd was thin sectioned with the assistance of Dr. Attila Kreiter and his colleagues at the Ceramics Laboratory of the KÖSZ in Budapast, Hungary. Thin sectioning first involved removing a small sample from the sherd, polishing the fresh break, and mounting the sample onto a glass slide using an impregnative epoxy. The sample was then ground to a thickness of .02-.03 mm, the point at which light characteristically passes through clay groundmass and mineral inclusions and allows for specific description and identification. Thin sections were then analyzed under a polarizing light microscope in Tallahassee, Florida. A mechanical “click-stop” stage (a stage that moves a slide a set distance and direction with the turn of a knob) facilitated point counting. Counts were made at 2 mm intervals as per Stoltman’s methodology (1989, 1991). As many as 150, but never fewer than 100, points were counted per slide. Qualitative description followed Whitbread’s methodology and classification scheme (1995). Data were recorded on quantitative and qualitative collection sheets and entered into a Microsoft Access database for sorting and further analysis (Figures 5.3 and 5.4). Recorded quantitative data included point counts for matrix, voids, natural inclusions, temper inclusions (including clay nodules), and ratios of matrix, sand, silt, and temper for body and paste. Natural and temper inclusions were tallied by size, ranging from silt at .25 mm to gravel at 8 mm. Also calculated were sand size index and temper size index, which are ordinal numerical indexes between 1 and 5 that represent a general size assessment of natural and intentional inclusions (Stoltman 1989). General qualitative description included description of void size and shape, kneading, natural inclusion grain distribution, sorting of natural mineral inclusions, groundmass description (including crystallitic birefringence and birefringent fabric description, or inactive groundmass description), and color. Although samples were not analytically divided into fabric types within cultural periods, samples were assigned to fabric types according to Riederer’s (2004) classification scheme. Microphotographs were taken of every slide’s fabric, and of important features of a ceramic sample (such as evidence of clay mixing, rare minerals, lithic

100 inclusions, distinctive grog, and so on). To ensure objectivity, slides were analyzed blind. Additionally, slides were counted in groups of mixed cultural period and provenience, and results were tabulated upon completion of the petrographic analysis.

Summary In this chapter, I outlined the specific methodology used in the field and in the laboratory to address the research questions at hand in this project. The methods applied to this research and outlined in this chapter function to observe any variability, macroscopically and/or microscopically, in prehistoric ceramics from the Körös Region of the Great Hungarian Plain. Any distinctions delineated between cultural phases, especially those related to manufacturing and production technology, may indicate the presence of new personnel in the region and support a hypothesis of migration, invasion, or intrusion onto the Plain to account for social, settlement, and material culture changes. On the other hand, absence of marked variability, or continuity in production methodology over time, may indicate that local populations adopted foreign traditions as part of a wider shift in economy and social interaction in the Carpathian Basin at this time.

101

Figure 5.3. Coding sheet for quantitative ceramic petrography.

102

Figure 5.4. Coding sheet for qualitative ceramic petrography.

103

CHAPTER SIX ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND ASSEMBLAGES Introduction In this chapter, I present and discuss the four different sources of material analyzed as part of this research project: 1) The Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája (MRT) series (see Ecsedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) and their associated illustrated and 1:10,000 topographic maps. 2) A sample of the ceramic material gathered from archaeological sites in the Körös River Basin study region during the MRT surveys (Table 6.1); 3) Fieldwork conducted in the autumn of 2009 at a sample of archaeological sites in Békés County in the Körös River Basin study region and in the Maros alluvial fan, and the ceramic samples collected during this fieldwork (Table 6.2); 4) Ceramic material from excavated contexts at the archaeological sites of Doboz Homokgödöri-tábla and Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya (Tables 6.1 and 6.2). Each source will be discussed in a separate section. Descriptions of all visited sites are provided, and detailed descriptions of surveyed and collected sites, including maps, are included.

MRT Sites The MRT volumes 6, 8, and 10 (Ecsedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) list a total of 105 sites containing Late Copper Age material. Of these sites, five are listed as single component sites, while the remaining sites also contain material dating to other periods. Table 6.3 provides information on all relevant sites as described in the MRT, and Table 6.4, and Figures 6.2-6.13 provide an overview of the relevant sites included in this analysis. They are listed alphabetically by parish name (e.g., Tarhos) and site number (e.g., Tarhos 67 = Kifli Domb). The various periods documented at each site by the MRT are included in Tables 6.1 and 6.2. Site sizes listed in the table are based on site sizes as measured by the MRT fieldwalkers and as they are indicated on the original 1:10,000 topographic field maps used during the survey. As such, they indicate the site size as a whole, meaning that all periods are included in the

104

Figure 6.1. Sites recorded in the MRT revisited during the fall 2009 field season (n=49).

estimation. This is problematic, as material from the various periods is often clustered in certain areas of the site. As such, when multi-component sites were collected, an effort was made to delineate the Late Copper Age artifact scatter and estimate site size based on collection rather than site size as indicated by the MRT.

Sites Revisited During Fieldwork A sample of Late Copper Age sites described in the MRT were revisited during fieldwork during the fall of 2009. Single component Baden sites were given priority for revisitation. However, low surface densities or an absence of surface representation required the visitation and collection of multi-component sites. The specific criteria used to select sites for revisitation and collection are given in Chapter Four. A total of 49 sites were revisited between October and December 2009 (Figure 6.1).

105

Bucsa 13

Füzesgyarmat 97

Szeghalom 80 Biharugra 33 Körösladány 21

Bélmegyer 82 Mezőberény 34 Bélmegyer 32

Békés 178 Békés 26 Gerla 64

Figure 6.2. Sites systematically collected during the fall 2009 field season (n=11).

Sites Collected and Intensively Surveyed During Fieldwork Of the 49 sites revisited during the fall 2009 field season, 11 featured enough Late Copper Age material visible on the surface to warrant either collection or transect survey. Site summaries for these sites are provided in Table 6.4, and more detailed description of collected material is found in Appendix A. The specific criteria for selecting sites to collect and determining which method to use for collection are outlined in Chapter Four. Collection methods and analytical techniques are also outlined in Chapter Four. The following section gives a brief geographic, geomorphological, and archaeological description of each collected sites. A summary of materials collected from each site is also provided.

106

Békés 26 – Kászmánkert I Békés 26 (see Figure 6.3) is located just to the south of the town of Békés in the eastern part of the parish. The site is located in the center of a small settlement just outside of town, and is surrounded by houses. At least a few of the structures appear to have been built in the last 10- 15 years and have destroyed part of the northern section of the site. Jankovich et al. (1998:59- 60) described the area as a large, multi-component site containing ceramics corresponding to the Early Neolithic Körös and Middle Neolithic AVK, Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár, Late Copper Age Baden, Middle Bronze Age Ottomány, Szarmation, and Avar periods. At the time of research, the site was divided into several fields with different vegetation and soil conditions. The easternmost fields were covered in vegetation with very little surface visibility, and a rectangular field in the western portion of the site containing a small structure was completely overgrown. The four fields that were surveyed had recently been plowed, with a small amount of re-growth making for visibility of between 75-85% on average. Based on artifact density on the surface, it was decided to conduct a transect survey before attempting a systematic dog-leash collection of such a large, complex multi-component site. In total, 12 transects were walked with field-walkers spaced at 20 meter intervals. Prehistoric diagnostic sherds were flagged, while non-prehistoric sherds were noted and not flagged, collected, or piece plotted. In addition to prehistoric ceramic fragments, animal bone (including cow), and a small amount of chipped stone (obsidian) were observed on the surface. Small amounts of glazed modern pottery were present on the surface, and Szarmation material was thinly scattered across the site, but not flagged or piece plotted. A total of 11 surface finds were collected and piece- plotted with GPS. One sherd dated to the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár phase, five to the Late Copper Age Baden period, three to the Early Bronze Age, and two dated to the Middle Bronze Age. An accurate site size estimate is difficult due to recent construction and fields that have been left to grow fallow since Jankovich et al.’s (1998) estimate of approximately five hectares; however, artifact distribution was roughly congruent with the site boundaries indicated on the 1:10,000 MRT topographic map.

Békés 178 – Lápos-Domb The site of Békés 178 (see Figure 6.4) is located on a low 1.5 meter rise along the bank of an irrigation canal, formerly a streambed in prehistory. The site is located approximately 300

107 meters to the northeast of the modern Kettős Körös River. Jankovich et al. (1998:115) described the site as a scatter of prehistoric material running north-northeast along the natural levy above the channel. At the time of MRT research, field walkers observed Middle Neolithic Szakálhát, Late Copper Age Baden, and Middle Bronze Age Ottomány ceramic material. At the time of the present research, the conditions were very wet, the site had been plowed and disked, and a large amount of grassy overgrowth covered the surface, making for a surface visibility of only 40%. A transect survey was conducted in order to gather more information about the site. Six transects were walked with the contour of the landscape and field in a southeast-northwest orientation with field walkers placed at 20 meter intervals. Prehistoric diagnostic sherds were flagged, and a total of 14 diagnostic ceramic surface finds were collected and piece plotted with GPS. Three sherds could not be classified according to period, one sherd dated to the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár period, four to the Late Copper Age Baden phase, four to the Early Bronze Age Makó culture, and two to later periods. A site size estimate based on finds of 1.5 hectares is roughly comperable to Jankovich et al.’s (1998) estimate as drawn on the MRT 1:10,000 topographic map.

Bélmegyer 82 – Cserszád I Located near the center of the parish and just north of the town of Bélmegyer, the site (see Figure 6.5) consists of approximates 1.6 hectares and runs roughly 200 meters northeast to southwest across three agricultural fields, and is between 50 and 100 meters wide along this distance (Jankovich et al. 1998: 365). The site sits atop a small loess rise and is bordered to the north by a defunct streambed. Jankovich et al. (1998:365) found some AVK material on the surface of the site, as well as classic Late Copper Age Baden material and material with incised and punctated design that corresponded to the Early Late Copper Age Boleráz period. They also located material that dated to the Middle Ages. At the time of the research, the three fields in which the site is located were in various 1 states of production. The north /3 of the site was under clover and fodder and had not been plowed in at least two years. The central field was under thick layer of clover and had not been 1 plowed in at least one year. The southernmost /3 of the site had recently been plowed, with very little overgrowth. Collection was done using 78.5m2 collection units (5 meter radius “dog-leash units”). A total of 12 units were collected in this manner, for a total of 942m2. Visibility was

108 quite poor across most of the site (30% on average), but a total of 137 prehistoric sherds were collected and sorted. A total of 11 diagnostic prehistoric sherds were recovered from three of the 12 units, with all of the diagnostic sherds coming from within 30 meters of unit N60. However, the scatter of material including ceramics, animal bone, and daub, is roughly consistent with Jankovich et al.’s (1999) assessment of 1.6 hectares of area. Two of the diagnostic ceramics could not be identified to prehistoric material culture period, and two Neolithic sherds (one of them AVK) were recovered. Three Boleráz sherds were recovered, as well as four Late Copper Age sherds that could not be distinguished between Boleráz and Baden. One Szarmation sherd was collected, and several modern ceramics were noted on the surface. Additionally, 700 grams of daub were collected from the surface, as well as five yellow chert chipped stone fragments. A total of 196 grams of faunal material was collected from the surface of the site.

Biharugra 33 – Kincses Tanya Located in the far southwestern corner of Biharugra parish, the site (see Figure 6.6) is located in a small agricultural field approximately two hectares in area, and approximately 100 meters north of an agricultural processing center. The field is bordered on the north by a levy approximately 2m high, and is bordered on the south by a shallow irrigation ditch. Beyond the ditch to the south was a grassy, unplowed field. Escedy et al. (1982: 21) described the site as having prehistoric ceramics on the surface, specifically sherds that corresponded to the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár phase, and some sherds that corresponded stylistically to the Late Copper Age Baden phase. At the time of research, the site had recently been harvested of a cereal crop and plowed. The site was also extremely muddy, which made initial field sorting of diagnostic ceramics difficult. On the other hand, very little new growth existed on the surface, making for an excellent average surface visibility of 92.5%. Initial field walking revealed Tiszapolgár lugs, Baden sherds, and several Early Bronze Age Ottomány decorated body sherds. Subsequently, collection was done using 78.5 m2 collection units (5 meter radius “dog-leash” collection units). A total of seven units were collected in this manner, for a total intensively collected area of 453 m2. One Special Find (SF1) of two Baden sherds was also collected. A total of 229 body sherds (6,400 grams) were collected, along with 80 pieces of daub (2,250 grams). The vast majority of the daub came from collection unit S60, where a dense daub

109 concentration covered an approximately 16m2 area of the surface (Feature 1). A total of 43 diagnostic sherds were collected, including 16 rims, one base, 22 decorated body sherds, two handles, and two undecorated body sherds. Eight of the sherds were clearly prehistoric but could not be assigned to cultural period. Interestingly, we collected no Tiszapolgár sherds from the collection units. Three sherds were assigned to the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr period, 23 sherds to the Baden period, two to the Early Bronze Age Makó period, and seven to later periods. Most of the later material could be assigned to the Middle Bronze Age Ottomány phase. Although no faunal material was observed on the surface, two small pieces of chipped stone (one chert and one obsidian) were collected.

Bucsa 13 – Kis Kecskés The site of Bucsa 13 (see Figure 6.7) is located on the western bank of a defunct streambed, just to the north of the multi-component archaeological site of Bucsa 12, which shares the same geographic name. Escedy et al. (1982:32) described the site as containing a small Late Copper Age Baden component as well as Szarmation and Árpádian material. At the time of research, the site was extremely wet, and had been replanted with a small amount of new crop growth. Average visibility was moderate at approximately 75-80%. Unfortunately, a large amount of standing water was present on the northern and western portions of the site, which made the inundated areas unwalkable. At this site, a total of six transects were spaced at 20 meter intervals and walked in a northeast to southwest direction along the natural topography of the paleochannel. Despite a relatively steady distribution of prehistoric ceramic sherds across the surface of the site, only three diagnostic samples were collected during the investigation (57 grams). These samples were collected and piece plotted with GPS. All three collected samples were decorated body sherds, two of which were assigned to the Late Copper Age Baden material culture phase and one to the Middle Bronze Age Ottomány phase.

Füzesgyarmat 97 – Pázmán The site of Füzesgyarmat 97 (see Figure 6.8) is located to the northeast of the town of Füzesgyarmat in the northeastern region of the parish. It is located just to the south of and across a small irrigation canal from Füzesgyarmat 96. Escedy et al. (1982:96) described the site as

110 containing a Late Copper Age Baden component based on the collection of punctated and incised ceramic body sherds, as well as characteristically thick-walled rim fragments. Additionally, the MRT surface survey observed Szarmation and Árpád ceramics. At the time of research the site had recently been plowed and disked, with very little recent re-growth on the surface, making for visibility of 85%. The site is bordered on the north- northeast and east by irrigation canals, but neither of the canals appears to truncate the site. An initial survey revealed a thin but consistent scatter of prehistoric material across the surface of the site, including prehistoric ceramic fragments and a small amount of animal bone. Few diagnostics were observed, but it was decided to conduct a transect survey in order to gather more information about the site, including site size and distribution of artifacts of different periods. Eight transects at 20 meter intervals were walked in a northeast to southwest direction, with the orientation of the field. Flags were placed at the location of each diagnostic ceramic, and every collected ceramic was piece-plotted with GPS. A total of seven diagnostic ceramics were collected from the site, including four decorated body sherds and three rims, for a total of 94g of collected ceramic material. Of the seven diagnostic sherds, five were assigned to the Late Copper Age Baden material culture group based on design characteristics, while two sherds dated to the later Szarmation period. Based on artifact distribution across the surface of the site, a site size estimate of one hectare is roughly congruent with Escedy et al.’s (1982:96) assessment.

Gerla 64 - Veres Gyűrűs The site of Gerla 64 (see Figure 6.9) is located in the northeastern portion of the parish, to the northeast of the village of Gerla. It is located on the west bank of a defunct prehistoric streambed atop a low redeposited loess rise. Jankovich et al. (1998:451) noted the presence of Middle Neolithic Szakalhát ceramic fragments as well as Late Copper Age Boleráz material scattered across the surface of the site. At the time of research, the surface had been plowed and disked within a few months, and a large amount of regrowth obscured the surface, making for an average surface visibility of only 28.6%. Additionally, conditions were very wet. Collection was done using 78.5 m2 circular collection units (5 meter radius “dog-leash” units), and a total of seven units were collected for a total of 549.5 m2 intensively collected. Due to the very small size of the site, intervals between

111 collection units were placed at 15 meters rather than the normal 30 meters. In total, 127 body sherds were collected, with the vast majority of material coming from within 15m of the site center. Twenty-nine miscellaneous fragments of faunal material were collected (77 grams), and 127 pieces of daub were collected and weighed in the field (2,600 grams). Approximately 80% of the daub came from Unit C, where a dense daub scatter covered the surface over an area of approximately 15m2 (Feature 1). A total of 18 diagnostic ceramics were collected for further analysis, with 11 of those coming from Unit C, spatially associated with Feature 1. Two prehistoric sherds were collected that could not be assigned to cultural period. Seven sherds were assigned to the Middle Neolithic Szakalhát phase, eight to the Late Copper Age Boleráz phase, and one to the Early Bronze Age. The very small size of the site (less than .5 hectares) is roughly consistent with Jankovich et al.’s (1998) assessment of the site.

Körösladány 21 – Tekerő Located in the southeastern area of the parish near its eastern border with Szeghalom parish, the site (see Figure 6.10) proved difficult to locate due to its small size and modest scatter of prehistoric material. Escedy et al. (1982:107) described the site as containing a scatter of prehistoric ceramics, some of which could be assigned to the Baden period of the Late Copper Age based on punctated and incised decoration. Only Baden diagnostic ceramics were located as part of the MRT surface collection. At the time of research, the hayfield in which the site was located had recently been plowed and disked, with some chaff remaining on the surface. After walking the site and attempting to locate concentrations of prehistoric material, we decided that although the material was likely Late Copper Age, not enough material was present on the surface to warrant a collection. However, in order to collect a small sample of diagnostic material from the site, we conducted a transect survey with field walkers walking transects across the site at 20 meter intervals. Diagnostic ceramics were flagged, piece plotted in GPS, and subsequently collected for further analysis. A total of eight transects were walked in this manner. Only a light scatter of prehistoric material over an area of less than one hectare was observed, and only two Late Copper Age Baden diagnostic ceramics were recovered from the surface of the site. One small

112 flake of obsidian was also recovered; very little daub and faunal material was seen on the surface of the site.

Mezőberény 34 – Frei-Tanya Mezőberény 34 (see Figure 6.11) is a relatively small site in the northeast portion of the parish, just to the north of the Kettős-Körös River and adjacent to the river’s levy and an unpaved service road. Jankovich et al. (1999:561) described the site as a dense artifact scatter on the surface approximately 200x100 meters in area. The MRT description lists finds as Middle Neolithic AVK ceramics, prehistoric sherds resembling Late Copper Age Classic Baden ceramics, and a number of rim sherds assigned to the Árpád, or Hungarian Conquest, period. The Baden finds were described as straight rims, multiple lines of linear punctations, and crosshatched incisions common to the period. At the time of research, the sunflower field in which the site is located had recently been plowed and disked, making for an average surface visibility of 76.6%. Located on a small crescent-shaped rise approximately .5 meter in elevation, we located Neolithic, Late Copper Age, Baden, Árpádian, and a small number of modern sherds after walking systematic transects across the site. Unfortunately, it appears that one of the areas of the site densest with cultural material may have been truncated and destroyed during the construction of the levy, road, and ditch at the south end of the site. Collection was done using 78.5 m2 collection units (5 meter radius “dog- leash” collection units). A total of six units were collected in this manner, for a total of 453 m2 intensively collected. A total of 270 body sherds (3,000 grams) were collected, along with 8 small pieces of daub (200 grams) and five unidentifiable animal bone fragments (<100 grams). An unfortunately small number of 13 diagnostic sherds were collected, including five rims, two bases, five decorated body sherds, and one lug. Four of the sherds could not be definitely assigned to a cultural period. We collected two Neolithic sherds, and two sherds assigned to the Late Copper Age Classic Baden phase. Based on unit collection, my site size estimate of less than 1 hectare is not consistent with Jankovich et al.’s estimate (1999:561). However, a thin, inconsistent scatter of material continued beyond the area intensively collected, and it is likely that their estimate includes this area.

113

Szeghalom 80 – Dió-Ér The site of Szeghalom 80 (see Figure 6.12) is located in the southwestern portion of Szeghalom parish adjacent to the Dió-Ér irrigation canal. This portion of the canal was a natural channel in prehistory, and the site itself sits atop an alluvial deposit approximately 1m in elevation above this streambed. Escedy et al. (1982:154) described MRT finds as large amounts of animal bone and daub across the surface of the site, as well as a number of decorated body sherds corresponding to the Neolithic period, the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár phase, the Late Copper Age Baden phase, the Early Bronze Age Makó culture, a relatively small number of Szarmation sherds, and some large diameter sherds described as large Árpád cooking vessels. Between 1971 and 1973, István Escedy excavated 400 square meters of the site in an effort to investigate the site’s Baden and Neolithic components (Escedy 1973, 1973a). Ultimately, a Szakálhát component of the site was discovered, and Bodrogkeresztúr and Makó sherds were also uncovered during the excavation. However, the primary focus was a Baden settlement (including a small Boleráz component). Located 40-50 cm below the modern ground surface, the Late Copper Age layers consisted of a large amount of daub interpreted as a house structure, several areas of burned material, and 14 middens/pits. At the time of research as part of this project the site had recently been plowed and disked, making for an average surface visibility of 87.5%. An initial survey of the site revealed Neolithic, Early and Middle Copper Age, and Late Copper Age ceramic material. As a result of the variety and density of material on the surface, a decision was made to collect the site intensively despite the previous excavations. Collection was done using 78.5 m2 collection units (5 meter radius “dog-leash” collection units), and a total of 16 units were collected for a total of 1,256 m2 intensively collected. A total of 587 body sherds were collected (9,300 grams), along with 341 pieces of daub (7,000 grams). The majority of the daub on the surface of the site came from Unit C and two units just to the east, E30 and E60. However, notable amounts of daub were also collected in units W30, W60, S30, N30, NE15, and NE45. Most daub, therefore, was concentrated within about 60 meters of the site center at the top of the loess deposit, and tapered off downslope. A total of 78 diagnostic sherds were collected from the surface of the site, including 26 rims, 46 decorated body fragments, three lugs and handles, and three other sherds. Of those, 24 could not be identified to cultural period and were classified as general prehistoric sherds. Six Neolithic

114 sherds were collected, including one Early Neolithic Körös sherd, four Middle Neolithic AVK sherds, and one sherd classified as general Neolithic. Seven Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr sherds were collected, as well as 20 Baden sherds and four Boleráz fragments. Eleven Early Bronze Age sherds were recovered, and six sherds dating to later periods were also found. In all, the finds closely correspond to Escedy et al.’s (1982) initial assessment of the site. Additionally, the site size estimate based on unit collection matches the MRT estimate of 2.73 hectares, as measured from the site boundary drawn on the 1:10,000 topographic map.

Tarhos 67 – Kifli Domb Located in the northwestern part of Tarhos parish, northwest of the village of Tarhos and just to the east of the sites Békés 34 and 35, the site (see Figure 6.13) is located just to the east of a 19th century levy that serves as the boundary between Békés and Tarhos parishes. The site itself sits on a one meter high crescent-shaped redeposited loess rise on the bank of a small defunct fluvial streambed. There is a small irrigation canal that bisects the site running roughly east to west, and acts as a field boundary. Jankovich et al. (1998:666) recorded large numbers of Late Copper Age Baden diagnostic sherds with punctated linear decoration, as well as incised decoration typical of the Classic Baden phase. They also noted some sherds identified as belonging to the Middle Neolithic AVK period. The half of the site south of the canal had recently been plowed at the time of research with very little overgrowth, while the half north of the canal was still under corn and overgrown with thistles. The southern portion was therefore ideal for surface collection, while the northern half was not collected due to a zero visibility condition. Collection was done using 78.5 m2 circular collection units (5 m radius “dog-leash units”) at 30 meter intervals. A total of 13 units were collected in this manner, for a total intensively surveyed area of 1,020.5 m2. Non- diagnostic body sherds were scattered across the site, and 469 total sherds (15,950g) were collected and sorted. A total of 63 diagnostic sherds were recovered in the 12 units, with ten sherds (“Special Finds”) collected and piece-plotted onto the map (see Figure 6.13). Seven of the diagnostic sherds could not be assigned to a specific cultural phase, and six sherds belonging to the Middle Neolithic AVK material culture were collected. One Avar (Middle Ages) sherd was collected. The majority of diagnostic sherds recovered from this site correspond with Late Copper Age design and manufacture, including 48 Classic Baden sherds and one probable

115

Boleráz sherd. Additionally, we recovered four fragments of chipped stone, one ground stone axe or hammerhead, a polished canine tooth, and 297 grams of miscellaneous faunal material. Interestingly, we observed and collected very little daub (<100 grams) at the site, though a thick daub scatter (Feature 2) was located in the northwest area of the site. A number of modern ceramic sherds were present on the site. Additionally, a sub-adult human maxilla fragment and phalange were collected from the site surface (Feature 1). The majority of the collected material came from the seven units nearest the center of the site, within an area of 0.6 hectares. This is not consistent with the six hectare area derived from the 1:10,000 topographic MRT map created by Jankovich et al. (1998); however, since much of the site was not collectable at the time of research, the entire area of the site remains uncertain.

Previously Excavated Sites Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá The site of Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá, located near the town of Doboz in central Békés County, lies just outside of the study area proper, but within the Körös River watershed. The site was excavated by Megyesi (1982, 1983) between 1980 and 1982, and consisted primarily of a Szarmation settlement. However, several Late Copper Age Baden pits were excavated at the site. Though the Baden pits themselves were unsubstantial and yielded little in the way of artifacts, a number of ceramic fragments were recovered. Twenty-six diagnostic ceramics from this site were included in the ceramic analysis.

Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya At the time of writing, this site near the town of Hódmezővásárhely in Csongrád County in southern Hungary continues to be excavated by archaeologists from the KÖSZ. Though the work is ongoing and the results will not be published for some time, the KÖSZ allowed me to take a sample of 28 diagnostic ceramics to include in this analysis. The ceramics came from a variety of feature types, including trash pits, pits inside of houses, and house floors. Though they originate from the adjacent Maros River watershed, these samples are included as a counterpoint to the Körös material, and to observe any potentially inter-regional variability in production technology.

116

Summary In this chapter, I have outlined the sources of the data analyzed in Chapter Eight. The data analyzed in this dissertation originates from four sources. This data originates from multiple sources, and each source has its own benefits, drawbacks, and makes separate contributions to the research project. The spatial data derived from the MRT volumes (Escedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) allow synchronic and diachronic patterns to be studied at the regional level, while measurements and observations made during site revisitations allows for a refinement of the MRT data and analysis at a finer spatial resolution. Analysis of the ceramic material collected during the MRT surveys allowed for the rapid collection of a large amount of macroscopic ceramic data, while also ensuring that ceramic samples for both the macroscopic and microscopic portions of the analysis were included from a large number of sites across the entire study region. Fieldwork and site revisits in the fall of 2009 allowed me to field-check the MRT spatial data, while simultaneously refining site descriptions and the spatial distribution of sites of different periods across the study region landscape. The diagnostic ceramics collected during this fieldwork bolstered the sample number for ceramic analysis, while also providing site level spatial data based on the distribution of surface ceramics. Finally, the ceramics from excavated contexts provide excellent comparative data, in terms of inter-site, inter-regional, and intra- regional comparison. As a whole, this collection of data from various sources allows for a more complete and integrated analysis of changes in settlement and material culture during the Late Copper Age on the Plain. The goal of the following chapters, therefore, is to apply the information derived from the combination of these datasets to interpret these changes. Chapter Seven focuses on the results of the spatial analysis, and Chapter Eight presents the results of the macroscopic and microscopic ceramic analysis. Ultimately, the results of the analysis will focus specifically on understanding settlement and material culture change as the Hungarian Plain became incorporated into the regionally materially homogeneous Baden material culture group.

117

Figure 6.3. Transects and surface find locations at the site of Békés 26.

118

Figure 6.4. Transects and surface find locations at the site of Békés 178.

119

Figure 6.5. Collection units at the site of Bélmegyer 82.

120

Figure 6.6. Collection units at the site of Biharugra 33.

121

Figure 6.7. Transects and surface find locations at the site of Bucsa 13.

122

Figure 6.8. Transects and surface find locations at the site of Füzesgyarmat 97.

123

Figure 6.9. Collection unit locations at the site of Gerla 64.

124

Figure 6.10. Transects and surface find locations at the site of Körösladány 21.

125

Figure 6.11. Collection unit locations at the site of Mezőberény 34.

126

Figure 6.12. Collection unit locations at the site of Szeghalom 80.

127

Figure 6.13. Collection unit locations at the site of Tarhos 67.

128

Table 6.1. Summary of analyzed ceramics from the MRT collection and Doboz H. tábla by site and cultural period. MCA=Middle Copper Age, LCA=Late Copper Age, EBA=Early Bronze Age, MBA=Middle Bronze Age. Site MCA LCA EBA MBA Other Békés39 - 24 - - 1 Békés75 - 1 - - - Bélmegyer56 - 46 - - - Biharúgra53 - 6 - - - Bucsa12 - 1 - - - Dévaványa166 2 - - - - Doboz H. tábla - 26 - - - Füzesgyarmat18 - 1 - - - Füzesgyarmat97 - 2 - - - Körösladány16 8 - - - - Körösladány21 - 1 - - - Körösladány33 - 4 - - - Mezőgyán2 - 3 - - - Okány43 - 7 - - 1 Szeghalom112 - 14 - - - Szeghalom168 3 8 - - - Szeghalom177 - 5 - - - Szeghalom194 - 5 - - - Szeghalom49 - 1 - - - Szeghalom58 - 1 - - - Szeghalom60 - 7 - - - Szeghalom80 2 4 1 - - Szeghalom89 - 7 - - - Vésztő119 - 3 - - - Vésztő17 - 1 - - - Vésztő4 - 2 - - - Vésztő49 2 10 - - - Vésztő65 - - - 1 - TOTAL: 17 190 1 1 2

129

Table 6.2. Summary of analyzed ceramics from the collected sites and Hódmezővásárhely by site and cultural period. MCA=Middle Copper Age, LCA=Late Copper Age, EBA=Early Bronze Age, MBA=Middle Bronze Age. Site MCA LCA EBA MBA Other Békés178 - 4 4 4 4 Békés26 - 5 3 2 1 Bélmegyer82 - 7 - - 4 Biharúgra33 3 23 2 6 9 Bucsa13 - 2 - 1 - Füzesgyarmat97 - 5 - - 2 Gerla64 - 8 - - 10 Hódmezővásárhely - 28 - - - Körösladány21 - 2 - - - Mezőberény34 - 2 - - 11 Szeghalom80 7 24 11 4 32 Tarhos67 - 49 - - 14 TOTAL: 10 159 20 17 87

Table 6.3. Summary of sites described in MRT volumes as containing Late Copper Age surface material. NEO=Neolithic, E-M-NEO=Early/Middle Neolithic, L-NEO=Late Neolithic, ECA=Early Copper Age, MCA=Middle Copper Age, LCA-BOL=Late Copper Age Boleráz, LCA-BAD=Late Copper Age Baden, BA=Bronze Age, EBA=Early Bronze Age, SAR=Szarmation.

Size Site Name (HA) NEO NEO E-M-NEO L-NEO ECA MCA LCA-BOL LCA-BAD Kurgan BA EBA SAR LATER Békés 103 8.37 * * * Békés 109 6.02 * * Békés 110 8.69 * Békés 112 4.86 * * * * Békés 117 1.84 * * Békés 124 3.43 * * * * * Békés 125 1.36 * * * Békés 131 2.42 * * * * Békés 134 4.71 * Békés 135 7.38 * Békés 161 8.89 * * * Békés 169 5.75 * * * Békés 171 2.17 * * * * Békés 178 5.96 * * * * * Békés 200 2.11 * * * Békés 203 2.87 * * * *

130

Table 6.3 - continued

Size Site Name (HA) NEO NEO E-M-NEO L-NEO ECA MCA LCA-BOL LCA-BAD Kurgan BA EBA SAR LATER Békés 26 1 * * * * * * * * Békés 35 1.03 * * * * * * * Békés 38 1.06 * * * Békés 39 7.17 * * * * * * Békés 51 1.2 * * * * * * * Békés 52 2.53 * * * * * * Békés 55 5.51 * * * * Békés 58 3.19 * * * * Békés 75 4.12 * * * * * * * Békés 88 4.15 * * * * * * * * Békéscsaba 332 7 * * * * Békéscsaba 443 5.47 * * * Békésszentandras 12 n/a * * * * * Bélmegyer 13 1.11 * * * * * * Bélmegyer 14 5.08 * * * * * * Bélmegyer 15 2.17 * * * * * Bélmegyer 16 4.12 * * * * * Bélmegyer 17 2.41 * * * * * * * Bélmegyer 2 1.48 * * * * Bélmegyer 22 4.81 * * * Bélmegyer 41 4.2 * * * * Bélmegyer 53 6.04 * * * Bélmegyer 56 2.26 * * * * * Bélmegyer 65 3.97 * * * * * Bélmegyer 66 1.94 * * * * Bélmegyer 81 6.78 * Bélmegyer 82 1.63 * * * * Bélmegyer 87 8.76 * * * * Biharugra 1 5.51 * * * * * Biharugra 33 1.56 * * Biharugra 53 n/a * * Bucsa 12 n/a * * * * * Bucsa 13 n/a * * * Busca 11 n/a * * * * Ecsegfalva 1 1.44 * * * * * * Endrőd 101 n/a * Endrőd 149 n/a * * *

131

Table 6.3 – continued

Size Site Name (HA) NEO NEO E-M-NEO L-NEO ECA MCA LCA-BOL LCA-BAD Kurgan BA EBA SAR LATER Endrőd 6 n/a * * * * * * * * Endrőd 89 n/a * * * * * * * Füzesgyarmat 18 5.56 * * * Füzesgyarmat 69 8.47 * * * * Füzesgyarmat 97 7.43 * * * Gerla 30 3.57 * * * * * Gerla 33 2 * * Gerla 53 3.37 * * * * * * Gerla 54 1.85 * * * * Gerla 55 1.68 * * * * Gerla 63 4.68 * * * * Gerla 64 7.49 * * * Gyoma 121 1.65 * * * * * Gyoma 125 7.24 * * * Gyoma 15 n/a * * * * Gyoma 170 n/a * * * * * Gyoma 176 n/a * * * * Gyoma 19 n/a * * * * * * * Gyoma 196 n/a * * * * * Gyoma 7 n/a * * * Körösladány 21 6.89 * Körösladány 32 5.54 * * * Körösladány 33 9.47 * * * Körösújfalu 12 7.59 * * * Körösújfalu 15 2.66 * * * * * * Körösújfalu 4 2.33 * * * * Mezőberény 2 n/a * * Mezőberény 23 8.34 * * * * Mezőberény 32 6.36 * * * * * * Mezőberény 34 9.64 * * * * Mezőberény 35 2.98 * * * * * * * Örménykút 78 n/a * * Szarvas 29 n/a * * * * * * Szarvas 93 n/a * * * * Szeghalom 229 n/a * * * * Szeghalom 234 n/a * Szeghalom 58 6.84 * * * * * *

132

Table 6.3 – continued

Size Site Name (HA) NEO NEO E-M-NEO L-NEO ECA MCA LCA-BOL LCA-BAD Kurgan BA EBA SAR LATER Szeghalom 59 2.29 * * * Szeghalom 80 2.6 * * * * Szeghalom 84 6.97 * * * Szehalom 97 n/a * * Tarhos 67 6.29 * * * Telekgerendás 142 n/a * * Telekgerendás 65 n/a * * * Vésztő 17 9.25 * * Vésztő 49 2.7 * * * * * *

Table 6.4. Summary of sites collected during the fall 2009 field season, as described in the MRT volumes. NEO=Neolithic, E-M-NEO=Early/Middle Neolithic, L-NEO=Late Neolithic, ECA=Early Copper Age, MCA=Middle Copper Age, LCA-BOL=Late Copper Age Boleráz, LCA-BAD=Late Copper Age Baden, BA=Bronze Age, EBA=Early Bronze Age, SAR=Szarmation.

Size Site Name (HA) NEO NEO E-M-NEO L-NEO ECA MCA LCA-BOL LCA-BAD Kurgan BA EBA SAR LATER Békés 26 – Kászmánkert I 1 * * * * * * * * Békés 178 – Lápos-Domb 5.96 * * * * * Bélmegyer 82 – Cserszád I 1.63 * * * * Biharugra 33 – Kincses T. 1.56 * * Bucsa 13 – Kis Kecskés n/a * * * Füzesgyarmat 97 –Pázmán 7.43 * * * Gerla 64 - Veres Gyűrűs 7.49 * * * Körösladány 21 – Tekerő 6.89 * Mezőberény 34 – Frei-T. 9.64 * * * * Szeghalom 80 – Dió-Ér 2.6 * * * * Tarhos 67 – Kifli Domb 6.29 * * *

133

CHAPTER SEVEN RESULTS OF THE SPATIAL ANALAYSIS Introduction In this chapter, I provide the results of the spatial analysis of prehistoric site distribution in the Körös River study area, and how this distribution changed over time. It revisits the research conducted in the 1980s by Andrew Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) and reinterprets the data with the inclusion of site information not available during the previous analysis. Additionally, the results presented here provide information on a wider geographic scale at multiple spatial resolutions than previous studies. This allows for a more thorough interpretation of changing settlement patterns over time. The chapter essentially reports a test of Sherratt’s environmental/economic model by statistically and qualitatively observing the nature and degree of association between the culture groups present on the Plain during the Middle and Late Copper Age. The transition between the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr phase and Late Copper Age Baden phase coincides with a dramatic change in material culture (especially ceramic form and decoration), burial practices, the more intensive use of beasts of burden, and the first appearance of wheeled vehicles (Anthony 1996, 1990; Banner 1956; Kalicsz 1998; Whittle 1996). Additionally, it has been argued that a migratory population of burial mound (kurgan) builders appeared on the Great Hungarian Plain at this time. This arrival has often been associated with these material changes, and with the economic changes that followed during the Early and Middle Bronze Age (Anthony 1990; Gimbutas 1977, 1980; Milisauskas and Kruk 1989, 2002:247). The potential social, settlement, and material culture effects of the arrival of such a migratory population are tested as part of the present research. It has been argued that this transition and burgeoning economic pattern may have contributed to the development of regional political systems with a tributary economy, craft specialization, and institutionalized hierarchy (Earle 2002; O’Shea 1996). Andrew Sherratt’s spatial study in the Körös region of the Great Hungarian Plan dovetails with other researchers’ economic models, and as such is deserving of reevaluation and expansion. Sherratt’s settlement research conducted almost 30 years ago focused on a study area in northern Békés County (Figure 7.1). Within this relatively restricted area, he observed a dispersal and an increase in site number between the Late Neolithic and Early Copper Age, a

134

Figure 7.1: Andrew Sherratt’s Dévaványa Plain study region in northern Békés County (outlined in red), in contrast with the present study area.

reduction in site number and further dispersal in the Middle Copper Age (interpreted as a population decline), an almost total abandonment of the area in the Late Copper Age and the intrusion of kurgans (Figure 7.2), and a subsequent resettlement and nucleation by the Middle Bronze Age (Figure 7.3). Site data at this resolution correlated well with his lower resolution assessment of site distribution and density of the entire Hungarian Plain at this time (see Sherratt 1997b:304, figure 11.17). His general conclusions also fit well into other economic and social/settlement interpretations of the Carpathian Basin during the Copper Age and Bronze Age (Childe 1930; Pare 2000; Parkinson 2002; Sherratt 1993). However, the study was based on a limited data set of site locations available at the time of research. The following results incorporate more recent site and settlement data (see Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) into the analysis.

135

Figure 7.2: Kurgan locations overlaid with kernel density map of kurgans per square kilometer. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

A Reassessment of Settlement in the Körös River Study Region Study area boundaries – both geographic and political – have a profound impact on the archaeological observation of patterns, since modern boundaries rarely correspond to prehistoric cultural distributions. This is true both descriptively and statistically, as site locations and clusters of sites can appear more closely related in one area, or at one resolution, than another. It is therefore important for archaeologists interested in observing distributions and patterns in a geographic region to operate within a multi-scalar framework. The present research takes a multi-scalar approach by describing changes in settlement patterns over time at three resolutions (Sherratt’s study region, the Körös River drainage study region, and micro-regions within the Körös drainage), in addition to quantitatively describing settlement change in the region utilizing average nearest neighbor analysis.

136

Figure 7.3: Late Neolithic, Early Copper Age, Middle Copper Age, and Late Copper Age sites in the Sherratt study area. Site locations are laid over a map of kurgan density. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer. The density map is intended to illustrate kurgan clusters in contrast with site locations.

Three specific questions related to the migration of kurgan builders into the study region were approached in this spatial analysis, which adds an intermediate level of resolution (the area of the Körös River drainage system) to Sherratt’s analysis: 1) Did kurgan builders cause dramatic change during the latter half of the Copper Age; 2) Are kurgans and Late Copper Age archaeological sites spatially complementary throughout the entire region, as per Sherratt’s conclusions? And 3) what implications does the spatial relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age sites have for understanding material culture and settlement changes at the end of the Copper Age? More generally, the analysis evaluates settlement pattern change in the Körös region over time in light of Sherratt’s diachronic study in his higher resolution study area. The results presented here largely supports Sherratt’s earlier conclusions. Observable as the Middle

137

North

East

South

Figure 7.4: The three average nearest neighbor analytical zones in the study region.

and Late Neolithic progressed, a nucleation gave way to a dispersal and increase in site number during the Early Copper Age, and a progressively less intense occupation during the Middle and Late Copper Age. The average nearest neighbor analysis, general spatial analysis, as well as data gathered during the visitation of 49 prehistoric archaeological sites in the Körös region during the fall of 2009, approach these questions and considerations, and test Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) conclusions against a wider data set.

Average Nearest Neighbor and Density Analysis Within the Körös study region, the average nearest neighbor statistic was used to determine level of clustering or randomness within cultural periods, based on the nearest neighbor index. The nearest neighbor index is the ratio of the actual distance between sites divided by the expected difference based on the area of study, with a range of 1-2.15. It is calculated as described

138

Figure 7.5: The Körös study region and all Early, Middle, and Late Copper Age sites.

below, with “Rn” as nearest neighbor value, “D(Obs)” as mean observed nearest neighbor distance, “a” as area under study, and “n” as total number of points:

The expected difference is the average difference between neighbors in a hypothetical random distribution. If the index is less than 1, the pattern exhibits clustering. If the index is greater than 1, then the trend is toward dispersion. The Z score in nearest neighbor analysis is a measure of statistical significance that indicates whether or not to reject the null hypothesis, which in this

139 case is that all points are randomly distributed across the landscape. At a 95% confidence level, a Z score between -1.96 and 1.96 means that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected (Ebdon 1985). The Körös Region was divided into three zones for analytical purposes (Figure 7.4), as the non-symmetrical boundary of the study area, as well as distribution of sites throughout the county on a general level, confounded nearest neighbor results when calculated as a whole. The mean nearest neighbor index and Z score of the three zones was used for this analysis. All nearest neighbor calculations for all regions and all cultural phases are provided in Table 7.1. Using the nearest neighbor data as a guide, density maps of kurgans (based on number per square kilometer) were constructed on order to clearly identify kurgan clusters, as have been described in the literature (see Gimbutas 1997). The goal within the scales of resolution was to determine if Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden sites, as identified in the MRT survey (Escedy 1979; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998) exist within these clusters and, by proxy, if they are spatial correlated rather than spatially complementary, as Sherratt suggested (1987b). Unfortunately, the majority of the nearest neighbor calculations produced Z values of greater than 1.96 (Tables 7.1 and 7.2). This means that the results are not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Two primary factors, among others, might account for these results. First, the irregular boundaries of the analytical zones (and of the study area as a whole) likely confounded the nearest neighbor calculations, as the statistic is most accurate in discretely, evenly bounded areas. Second, dense clusters of sites in certain areas of the study region and an almost complete lack of sites in others may have generated results indicating clustering, while not producing a statisitically significant result. This is especially true of Late Copper Age sites and site clusters. Despite the lack of statistical significance for most of the calulations, the results are still useful in conjunction with the density analysis discussed above. The results are also useful in a general sense for measuring settlement nucleation and dispersal, but the interpreations should be carefully considered. With the realities of statistical significance in mind, the average nearest neighbor analysis, density analysis, and observations and data on spatial relationships of sites of different periods largely support Sherratt’s earlier conclusions. At the scale of eastern Hungary, his model holds generally true, as seen in his distribution maps and in maps presented in this chapter (see

Figures 7.5 and 7.6) that incorporate additional site data culled from the more recently published

140

Table 7.1. All nearest neighbor calculations for the three analytical regions in the Körös study region, organized by cultural phase. Average Nearest Neighbor for Kurgans in Study Region NN Z Index Value Average NN Distance (m) Expected NN Distance if Random (m) North Group 0.8 6.91 674 871 East Group 0.69 11.31 524 1076 South Group 0.9 6.7 1025 1047 Average 0.8 8.3 741 998

Average Nearest Neighbor for Boleráz-Baden Sites in Study Region NN Z Index Value Average NN Distance (m) Expected NN Distance if Random (m) North Group 0.84 1.11 2889 3451 East Group 0.62 5.11 1191 1911 South Group 0.87 1.09 2889 3667 Average 0.78 2.43 2323 3010

Average Nearest Neighbor for Bodrogkeresztúr Sites in Study Region NN Z Index Value Average NN Distance (m) Expected NN Distance if Random (m) North Group 1.39 2.9 3623 2605 East Group 1.01 0.37 3153 3289 South Group 0.96 0.68 2409 2390 Average 1.12 1.32 3062 2761

Average Nearest Neighbor for Tiszapolgár Sites in Study Region NN Z Index Value Average NN Distance (m) Expected NN Distance if Random (m) Körös Region 0.61 14.05 985.14 1604.63

141

Table 7.2. Average nearest neighbor calculations for Early Copper Age, Middle Copper Age, and Late Copper Age archaeological sites in the Körös study region. Average Nearest Neighbor for ECA-LCA Sites in Study Region NN Z Index Value Average NN Distance (m) Expected NN Distance if Random (m) ECA 0.61 14.05 985 1604 MCA 1.12 1.32 3062 2761 LCA 0.78 2.43 2323 3010

MRT volumes. At this large scale, the relative density of sites in the Middle Copper Age decreases when compared to that of the periods immediately before and after. This is supported by the nearest neighbor statistic, which suggests that density and tendency toward clustering decreased in the Middle Copper Age and increased in the Late Copper Age (Table 2). Additionally, Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden sites do, in a very general sense, exist spatially exclusively of kurgans. Sherratt’s model also holds true at a more detailed resolution in his select micro-region on the Dévaványa Plain. A decrease in settlement density is observed during the Middle Copper Age (Figure 7.6), for a total of 15 Bodrogkeresztúr sites. Only nine Late Copper Age sites are documented by the MRT within the boundaries of this study region. Most of these sites are between two kurgan groups, and are no farther than 1 km from each other (Figure 7.7). Additionally, kurgan clusters, as observed by Sherratt (1997b), are clearly visible. As he might have suspected, these clusters are statistically demonstrable (though not significant) in the northern part of Békés County, with a nearest neighbor index of 0.8 (Z=6.91). However, at the scale of the Körös River Basin study region Middle Copper Age settlement is not as sparse, and Late Copper Age sites do correlate spatially with kurgans and kurgan clusters in some cases. Early Copper Age settlements occur densely and in clusters throughout the region. Although there is a significant reduction in number of Middle Copper Age sites – 394 Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár sites vs. 70 Bodrogkeresztúr sites – small clusters of Middle Copper Age sites do occur in several locations on the Plain; for example, just north and south of the modern city of Gyomaendrőd and near the towns of Békésszentandrás and Szarvas (Figure 7.8). However, these clusters are hardly notable in comparison to the clustering exhibited by Early Copper Age sites and kurgan burial mounds.

142

Figure 7.6: Early (n=97) and Middle Copper Age (n=15) site distribution in Sherratt’s study region. Note decrease in site number and density.

A density map of kurgan tumuli emphasizing the footprint of statistically significant kurgan clusters overlaid with the locations of Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden sites shows that, in some areas in the study region, kurgans and Late Copper Age sites are not always spatially exclusive and exist quite close to one another (Figure 7.9). Interestingly, Boleráz and Baden sites were over 5 km on average from their nearest Late Copper Age neighbor, while all are located on average only 2.3 km from the nearest kurgan. More than 50% of all Late Copper Age sites are within 1.5 km of a kurgan. This pattern could partially be attributed to the sheer number of kurgans in the study area (n=591). But, more than 33% (n=36) of Late Copper Age sites occur adjacent to or within zones with the highest concentrations of kurgans.

143

Figure 7.7: Kurgan locations overlaying a map of kurgan density to illustrate kurgan “clusters,” and Late Copper Age site distribution in Sherratt’s study region. Note the general spatial exclusivity between kurgan clusters and Late Copper Age sites. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

At an even finer resolution, one can see that Late Copper Age sites exist within kurgan clusters in some areas of the study region. For example, two significant kurgan clusters near Körösújfalu have a Late Copper Age presence (Figure 7.10). Two Baden sites exist in the middle of two significant kurgan clusters in the eastern part of the study region near the town of Biharugra (Figure 7.10). Near Gyomaendrőd, a Baden site exists within 200 meters of two kurgans (Figure 7.11). Near the town of Bélmegyer, a large cluster of Late Copper Age sites sits within 200 meters of several kurgans (Figure 7.1). Given the proximity of numerous kurgans and Late Copper Age settlements throughout the study area, a practice of avoidance between two populations does not seem tenable. However, this assumes contemporaneity between the kurgans, settlements, and their builders. This sticking point has, unfortunately, not been addressed satisfactorily.

144

Figure 7.8: Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr site distribution. Potential “clusters” are circled in red. Though the clusters themselves are not significant in comparison to the dense cluster of Early Copper Age sites and kurgans, their presence in the center of the Hungarian Plain is intriguing in terms of Sherratt’s argument for depopulation and shifting economic focus away from the region. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

A Reevaluation of Late Copper Age Settlement Location in the Körös Region Field research conducted in the fall of 2009 involved the visitation, collection, and rough measurement of Late Copper Age archaeological sites. Initially, single component archaeological sites were given visitation priority under the assumption that the collection of multi-component sites introduces a lack of temporal control and causes difficulty in determining size of individual period occupations. Unfortunately, all Late Copper Age sites described as single component in the MRT lacked identifiable material on the surface, or more often were completely devoid of surface material. This is notably the case at the sites in the previously mentioned cluster of Late Copper Age settlements in the center of the county near the city of Békés. Even more, when Late Copper Age material was encountered and systematically

145

Figure 7.9: Kurgans, density of kurgans per square kilometer, and Late Copper Age site distribution in the Körös River study region. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

collected at multi-component sites, Baden artifact density was quite low and estimated site size was very small, never exceeding 2.7 hectares (see Chapter Six for more detailed descriptions of archaeological sites and collected assemblages). Although these descriptive observations do not call into serious question the accuracy of the site descriptions and maps created by the MRT researchers (Escedy 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998), as surface assemblages on regularly plowed archaeological sites change constantly and rapidly, it does require a reevaluation of how archaeologists working the Körös region assess site representation, frequency, and density. This is especially true of cultural phases such as the Late Copper Age, when artifact density and surface representation tends to be low, even at large sites. Variability in how sites were assessed and recorded during the MRT

146

Figure 7.10: Late Copper Age sites located within kurgan clusters near Körösújfalu. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

surveys – which took place many years apart, and involved many different researchers – may have affected maps produced during different periods. This could explain the extremely high density of Late Copper Age sites recorded in the in the center of the county (MRT Volume 10, published in 1998), as opposed to the much lower frequency, and almost total absence of single component, Late Copper Age sites recorded in previous volumes. Even more, the Late Copper Age Boleráz/Baden ceramic phase distinction is used inconsistently between MRT versions, with discrepancies between the assignment of sherds to the respective phases based on decorative characteristics. When taken into consideration as a whole, it is possible that Late Copper Age occupation and site distribution may, in reality, more closely resemble the pattern observed in the rest of the county, including Sherratt’s Dévaványa Plain study region.

147

Figure 7.11: Late Copper Age sites in close association with kurgans south of Gyomaendrőd. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

Discussion and Conclusions of the Settlement Pattern Research Following the Middle Copper Age, the Baden material culture tradition had become ubiquitous on the Hungarian Plain. A similar level of homogeneity had not been seen since the Middle Neolithic AVK period. However, even this dramatic material culture change does not necessarily support a migration model such as the one formulated by Gimbutas. Indeed, material excavated from kurgans suggests interaction and perhaps trade – not just abandonment –was happening at this time. The presence of Bodrogkeresztúr sites in a previously unoccupied area of the Plain – the Tisza and Danube interfluve – points to an increase in interaction with Transdanubian populations. Additionally, the possibility of a large Lengyel- type earthen roundel at the Middle Copper Age site Szarvas 38, in the center of the Plain, lends support to this assertion (Makkay 1983), though whether or not this site actually consisted of an empty earthen

148

Figure 7.12: Kurgan clusters near a concentration of Late Copper Age sites near Bélmegyer. Darker blue shading indicates a higher density of kurgans per square kilometer.

roundel, or was a more typical Middle Copper Age settlement, remains debatable (Parkinson 2010, personal communication). At Kétegyháza, a kurgan within a Bodrogkeresztúr settlement contained a great deal of Middle Copper Age Material (Escedy 1979). At Debrecen- Dunahálom, numerous sherds of typical Baden form were recovered from a kurgan burial (Escedy 1979). Ultimately, the Middle and Late Copper Age settlement evidence in the Körös region suggests that long-term cultural processes on the Plain were responsible for changes in both material culture and settlement behavior, and any migratory populations on the Plain at this time acted within this context, rather than having catalyzed it. Indeed, based on the present evidence, it is unlikely that the arrival of migratory kurgan builders instigated a sudden change in material culture and settlement patterns in the study region. Rather, Sherratt’s model of diachronic

149 economic change is much more tenable – the trend toward settlement on the margins of the Plain, perhaps to exploit raw material sources and participate in trade networks, developed over the long-term with roots in the Neolithic at the breakup of AVK, the subsequent development of the Lengyel interaction sphere in Transdanubia, and the Tisza-Herpály-Csőszhalom complex on the Eastern Plain. The development was more obviously stated during the Tiszapolgár and Bodrogkeresztúr phases of the Copper Age, and by the Late Copper Age was fully realized as populations became incorporated into a regionalized, more homogeneous material culture group with strong economic and social ties beyond the edges of the Great Hungarian Plain. Despite these conclusions, the kurgans themselves and their appearance across the landscape must be accounted for. Due to the lack of direct kurgan evidence, save for limited excavation and stratigraphic evidence (see Escedy 1979), this remains difficult. Although long presumed that Yamnaya migrants from the east built the kurgans, it has not been demonstrated that all of the tumuli were constructed by the same population, or even contemporaneously. Other possibilities for the development of kurgans across the landscape must therefore be considered. For example, it is possible that a migration from the east occurred late in the Middle Copper Age, but later kurgans are an adopted practice emulated by indigenous inhabitants of the Hungarian Plain. This may explain why Yamnaya material was not present in all excavated kurgans, and why Middle Copper Age material was located at some kurgan excavations such as at Kétegyháza (Escedy 1979). Even more, kurgans were often reused as burial locations and sites of later construction well into the historic and modern periods, and more kurgans were constructed in the region later in the prehistoric period (Escedy 1979). This suggests that they were frequently emulated over time, and may not have simply been a Middle/Late Copper Age Yamnaya phenomenon. This line of reasoning may also explain why some Late Copper Age sites do exist near kurgans and within kurgan clusters, though this relationship will remain unclear until more kurgans and Late Copper Age sites are accurately dated in the Körös region. Given the uncertainties of kurgan cultural affiliation in the Körös region and across most of the Great Hungarian Plain, it must be considered that even small emigrations of people can have considerable impact on location culture through emulation over the long-term. In other words, large-scale, demic migrations such as those discussed by Anthony (1990) are not the sole, or even the best, explanation for a phenomenon such as kurgan appearance. Nor is a diffusionist model based solely on adoption sufficient to explain their appearance and spread on the

150

Hungarian Plain. A model of small-scale migration and subsequent emulation of kurgan building accounts not only for the initial appearance and spread of kurgans across the landscape of the Körös region, it also accounts for the lack of Yamnaya-like settlement sites in the region. Importantly, the problem of establishing contemporaneity between kurgans, Middle Copper Age sites, and Late Copper Age sites continues to confound efforts to understand the nature of the kurgan builders’ influence on the settlement patterns, material culture, economy, and society of the latter half of the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. Until more is understood about how the kurgans came to be across the region – in terms of both chronology and developmental pattern – models of the exact nature of their interaction with the indigenous population of the Plain will remain incomplete.

Summary In this chapter, I have presented the results of the spatial analysis conducted to build upon the body of spatial knowledge established by Andrew Sherratt’s research on the Hungarian Plain (1997a, 1997b), and the work of Hungarian archaeologists in developing and publishing the volumes in the MRT series. Overall, the results presented here at the scale of the Körös River study region support Andrew Sherratt’s results at the scale of the Dévaványa Plain study region and the Great Hungarian Plain as a whole. However, at the highest resolution analyzed in specific areas of Békés County, the general spatial correlations between Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and kurgan archaeological sites are not as strong. This suggests that the kurgan builders and inhabitants of Late Copper Age Baden settlements in the region may not have avoided each other at the level proposed by Sherratt. Based on the evidence presented here, I do not argue in favor of a migration or invasion explanation for material culture and settlement change during the Late Copper Age ca. 3,500 B.C., and instead support a model of long-term change with social and economic implication on and beyond the eastern Hungarian Plain. The results of the ceramic analysis presented in Chapter Eight will bolster this model, and its implications for understanding the nature of Late Copper Age settlement and culture on the Hungarian Plain will be discussed in Chapter Nine.

151

CHAPTER 8 RESULTS OF THE CERAMIC ANALYSIS Introduction In this chapter, I present the results of the macroscopic and microscopic analyses of ceramics from the Körös study region, as well as a small number of samples from the adjacent Tisza River watershed as a control and comparison. Material for the study was obtained in three ways: 1) material collected as part of the MRT survey was analyzed at the Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum in Békéscsaba, Hungary, during the summer of 2009; 2) ceramics collected as part of the field component of the Late Copper Age Körös Archaeological Project in the fall of 2009; and, 3) samples from the recent excavations at the Late Copper Age Baden site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya. Ceramic form and decoration can change quickly during times of population continuity as well as during times of rapid social, economic, or political change (Kreiter 2003; Lemmonier 1992). However, production technology – including raw material preparation, the addition of tempers, and firing techniques – is more conservative, even when form and decoration undergo marked changes. Therefore, approaching culture change through pottery typologies is not the most reliable method by which to model migration or other demographic shifts. This is especially pertinent in the eastern part of the Hungarian Plain, which experienced a discontinuity in ceramic form and decoration as well as settlement patterns at the beginning of the Late Copper Age, concurrent with a possible migration of new people into the region. In order to observe differences in ceramic production technology between cultural phases, and to identify any regional variability within the Late Copper Age phase, two ceramic analysis strategies were employed: 1) a macroscopic study, in which whole sherds were analyzed and coded in hand sample; and 2) a petrographic study, in which microscopic characteristics of ceramic paste, temper, and mineral inclusions were analyzed. The two methods provide different data sets and different perspectives on understanding prehistoric pottery, and when used together provide a clearer picture of ceramic manufacture in the past than the use of either method exclusively.

152

Description of Variables Many of the variables discussed in this chapter are measured in both macroscopic and microscopic analyses, albeit at different resolutions. As such, an overview of variables and their various indications is provided here, while their more specific applications will be discussed in the sections dealing with macroscopic and microscopic results, respectively. Sorting describes the distribution of natural and intentional mineral inclusions in the ceramic paste, and is measured along a range of poorly, fair, good, and very good. A poorly sorted sample will contain unevenly distributed mineral inclusions of unequal size, and is especially used to describe a bimodal distribution of natural inclusions such as quartz. A sample described as “very good” will have evenly distributed inclusions of equal size. Good sorting of natural inclusions often indicates a high degree of raw material preparation through techniques such as levigation. Poor sorting indicates relatively little raw material preparation, or in the case of a bimodal distribution the intentional addition of crushed minerals as temper (Galaty 1999; Shepard 1956; Orton et al. 1993; Whitbread 1989). Kneading is a measure of the amount of void space present within the body of a sherd, and is an indicator of how well and for how long the potter folded, pressed, and kneaded the clay (Orton et al. 1993). Kneading is measured along a scale of poorly (many large voids), moderately (relatively few voids), and well (few small voids). In hand sample (the unaided eye), kneading is measured by observing the texture of the paste in a freshly broken sherd, while void space is qualitatively and quantitatively measured directly in petrographic analysis (Reedy 2008; Whitbread 1989). Like kneading, the texture of a fresh break in hand sample indicates the thoroughness of a potter’s processing of raw clay before the material was shaped into final vessel form. Texture is measured along a scale of hackly (very irregular and angular break), irregular (irregular break), fine (slightly angular break), and smooth (smooth break). The measurement and description of a sherd’s firing condition is largely based on color, with darker color brown, grey, and black paste colors indicating a reducing (oxygen poor) firing environment, and reds and brighter browns indicating an oxidizing (oxygen rich) firing environment. Reducing environments are often indicative of long firing times, the use of closed pits and coals as firing environments, or both. An oxidizing environment may involve open flame, and usually short firing times. Of course, a range of variability exists within these

153 extremes, and so qualitative descriptions of firing environments are usually generalized (Orton et al. 1993). In this research project, firing conditions of complete sherds are described macroscopically as reduced exterior/oxidized interior, reduced sandwich (oxidized on interior and exterior surfaces with a reduced core), oxidized exterior/reduced interior, oxidized sandwich (reduced interior and exterior surfaces with an oxidized core), all reduced, and all oxidized.

Results of the Macroscopic Analysis The macroscopic ceramic study aimed to measure any changes in ceramic production technology between the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr and Late Copper Age Boleráz/Baden phases, and to measure any variability within the Late Copper Age assemblage. Sherds were coded according to multiple variables aimed at measuring elements of production, including diagnostic type (rim, decorated body, base), thickness (mm), hardness, grain size, quality of kneading, natural and intentional inclusions (such as clay nodules or grog), inclusion sorting, color, surface treatments, and decoration. In all, 352 Middle and Late Copper Age sherds were analyzed. Three hundred three of these sherds came from surface contexts in the Körös study region, 21 from the excavated site of Doboz Homokgödör-tablá in the Körös Region, and 28 from excavated feature contexts of the Baden settlement of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the adjacent Tisza River watershed. The Hódmezővásárhely ceramics are included as a counterpoint and control for the Körös region ceramics, and to measure any interregional variability.

Diachronic Ceramic Variability: Middle Copper Age vs. Late Copper Age Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramics from sites in the Körös River watershed exhibit a great deal of similarity, though some variability over time was measured. The visible inclusions in hand sample are sorted similarly, with the majority of samples from both phases classified as sorted “good” or “very good” (Table 8.1). Likewise, Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramics exhibit similarity both in terms of kneading (Table 8.2) and texture of a fresh break (Table 8.3). Even more, the Middle and Late Copper Age assemblages exhibit general similarities in firing conditions (Table 8.4). Kneading and texture of a fresh break both indicate the thoroughness of processing before the raw clay material was shaped into its final vessel form by the potter. As might be

154

Table 8.1. Sorting of visible inclusions in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. Period Poorly Fair Good Very Good MCA (n=31) 1 2 12 16 3% 6% 39% 52% LCA (n=321) 25 45 125 126 8% 14% 39% 39%

Table 8.2. Kneading of raw material (clay) in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. Period Well Moderately Poorly MCA (n=31) 18 11 2 58% 36% 6% LCA (n=321) 130 133 58 41% 41% 18%

Table 8.3. Texture of a fresh break in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. Period Smooth Fine Irregular Hackly MCA (n=31) 2 8 16 5 6% 26% 52% 16% LCA (n=321) 2 19 200 100 1% 6% 62% 31%

Table 8.4. Firing characteristics in Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. All All Oxidized Reduced Period Oxidized Reduced Sandwich OxiEx/ReduIn Sandwich ReduEx/OxiIn MCA (n=31) 1 21 1 4 4 0 3% 68% 3% 13% 13% 0% LCA (n=321) 11 235 1 47 23 4 4% 73% 0% 15% 7% 1%

expected the observed level of kneading and paste texture are closely correlated in this analysis. A very low percentage of sherds from both the Middle and Late Copper Age have a smooth paste texture, while the majority of samples from both phases have an irregular, or rough and angular, paste texture. While the overall pattern in raw material preparation of Middle and Late Copper Age ceramic samples is one of continuity, some diachronic variability does exist. Notably, a higher proportion of Late Copper Age sherds exhibits only moderately or poorly kneaded paste, and an irregular and hackly paste texture, while simultaneously exhibiting a tendency toward 155 better sorting of visible inclusions. This suggests that less time was being spent in the manipulation of raw clay during processing in the Late Copper Age, while more effort was expended ensuring that intentional and unintentional inclusions were of equal size and distribution. This slightly different approach to raw material processing was likely an effort to prevent unintentionally added large inclusions from causing cracking while drying and/or structural failure of the pot while firing. Interestingly, despite a modest shift in raw clay processing between the Middle and Late Copper Age, firing conditions went essentially unchanged between the cultural phases (Table 8.4, Figure 8.1). The majority of sherds are reduced throughout, indicating a firing environment low in oxygen. The vast majority of remaining samples in both periods are reduced on either interior or exterior surfaces, while less than 4% of sherds in both the Middle and Late Copper Age are oxidized throughout the sample (indicating a firing environment high in oxygen). Most telling, only two sherds (one Middle and one Late Copper Age) exhibit an oxidized core, suggesting that the overall firing environment was a reducing one, and that interior and exterior color variation are likely the result of differential exposure to heat, flame, and coal as the result of a relatively uncontrolled firing process, compared to later techniques. The overall pattern suggests that firing conditions did not undergo substantial change between the Middle and Late Copper Age, and probably consisted of open pit-firing techniques utilizing smothered coals and relatively long firing times with little or no direct exposure to the flame. Fired pots were cooled slowly, and were probably removed from the pit several hours to days after firing (Orton et al. 1993). Additionally, the similarity in firing conditions also suggests a measure of continuity in raw material collection and preparation. The pattern of reduction suggests that organic material present in the raw clay remained in the paste throughout the entire manufacturing process, and was not systematically removed during the raw material processing stages. Such a pattern indicates significant continuity in the production of ceramics during the Middle and Late Copper Age. The differences should not be ignored, however. For example, a higher incidence of poorly sorted samples in Late Copper Age materials suggests either a less rigorous approach to raw material processing, or possibly a bimodal distribution of visible inclusions – which points toward intentional addition of mineral or grog temper.

156

100% 90%

80% ReduEx/OxiIn 70% Reduced Sandwich 60% 50% OxiEx/ReduIn 40% Oxidized Sandwich 30% All Reduced 20% All Oxidized 10%

0% MCA LCA Figure 8.1. Firing conditions of Middle and Late Copper Age ceramics. Note the almost identical distribution of measured firing characteristics between the Middle and Late Copper Age, particularly the significant majority of samples reduced throughout the firing core.

Additionally, more frequent observation of poorly kneaded and hackneyed textured Late Copper Age ceramics points to slight changes in production and, again, may signify less focus on raw material processing and the increasing use of mineral or temper to stabilize the clay paste during the drying and firing phases of production. The addition of tempers, especially grog, in Late Copper Age ceramics is discussed more extensively in the section below detailing the results of the petrographic analysis that focused more explicitly on the identification and classification of intentional and unintentional inclusions.

Spatial Ceramic Variability: Late Copper Age Inter-site Variability in the Study Region A total of 191 Late Copper Age sherds from six sites within the Körös River study region were included in the inter-site analysis. This includes 26 samples from the excavated site of Doboz Homokgödöri-tablá. The ceramics from Late Copper Age sites in the study region exhibit characteristics along a common range of variability, though notable (if not dramatic) differences exist between sites in terms of both firing conditions and sorting of visible inclusions (Tables 8.5 and 8.6). The vast majority of the sherds from all sites were reduced and probably open-fired at low temperatures, as described above. Variables intended to observe firing characteristics reveal very little indication of oxygen-rich reducing environments, as completely reduced samples and samples

157 with reduced cores were predominant (see Table 8.5 and Figure 8.2). This pattern suggests that Late Copper Age inhabitants of the region utilized very similar techniques for firing their pots, resulting in similar proportions of oxidized and reduced ceramics at settlements throughout the region. It seems likely given the similarities in firing condition between Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramic samples, and similarities in firing condition between samples from Late Copper Age sites throughout the Körös region, that the firing process remained relatively unchanged during the approximately 1,000 year period encompassing the two cultural phases. Interestingly in terms of intra-regional variability, one site – Bélmegyer 56 – did exhibit a different set of characteristics from other Late Copper Age sites in the region, especially in regard to the sorting of visible inclusions (Table 8.6, Figure 8.3). The ceramic material from Bélmegyer 56 is typically very well sorted, consisting of evenly spaced and relatively uniformly sized inclusions. On the whole, Late Copper Age ceramics are not very well sorted, often containing inclusions of various sizes unevenly spaced. Multiple sets of behaviors could account for the aberrant characterization of ceramics from this site. However, it is likely that the raw clay materially was more thoroughly processed and, perhaps intentionally cleaned of visible inclusions either for aesthetic or practical reasons (i.e., to prevent cracking during drying). Regardless of the purpose of the behavioral variability, the variability in sorting indicates that a completely uniform set of pottery production practices was not always used at settlement sites in the Körös region during the Late Copper Age.

Inter-Regional Variability of Baden Ceramics from the Körös and Maros Watersheds In order to measure possible variability of Baden ceramic production between regions on the Great Hungarian Plain, 26 sherds from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz- tanya in the Maros River watershed were obtained and analyzed. Additionally, the inclusion of ceramics from the Maros watershed in this analysis serves as a control for the interpretation of diachronic ceramic variability in the Körös region. If significant diachronic variability had been observed in the Körös watershed, and if significant inter-regional variability had been observed from in the Maros watershed, it could have indicated an indigenous increase in spatial variability

158

Table 8.5. Firing characteristics in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. All All Oxidized Reduced Site Oxidized Reduced Sandwich OxiEx/ReduIn Sandwich ReduEx/OxiIn Tarhos67 (n=48) 2 37 0 5 4 0 4% 77% 0% 11% 8% 0% Bél.56 (n=43) 3 27 1 6 5 1 7% 63% 2% 14% 12% 2% Biharugra33 (n=22) 0 18 0 4 0 1 0% 78% 0% 18% 0% 4% Szeghlm80 (n=28) 1 26 0 1 0 0 3% 93% 0% 4% 0% 0% Békés39 (n=24) 1 14 0 7 2 0 4% 59% 0% 29% 8% 0% D. H. tábla (n=26) 0 20 0 5 1 0 0% 77% 0% 19% 4% 0%

Table 8.6. Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Körös River watershed. Site Very Poorly Poorly Fair Good Very Good Tarhos67 (n=48) 1 3 9 17 18 2% 6% 19% 35% 38% Bélmegyer56 (n=43) 0 0 1 7 35 0% 0% 8% 41% 50% Biharugra33 (n=22) 0 2 8 10 2 0% 9% 36% 46% 9% Szeghalom80 (n=28) 0 4 5 13 6 0% 14% 18% 47% 21% Békés39 (n=24) 0 4 7 13 0 0% 17% 29% 54% 0% Doboz H. tábla (n=26) 0 3 0 14 9 0% 11% 0% 54% 35%

Table 8.7. Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz- tanya in the Maros River watershed and Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region. Region Poorly Fair Good Very Good Maros (n=28) 3 4 8 13 11% 14% 29% 46% Körös (n=321) 25 45 125 126 8% 14% 39% 39%

159

100% 90% 80% 70% ReduEx/OxiIn 60%

50% Reduced Sandwich

40% OxiEx/ReduIn 30% Oxidized Sandwich 20% 10% All Reduced

0% All Oxidized

Figure 8.2. Firing condition of Late Copper Age ceramics from sites in the Körös Region.

100%

90% 80% 70% 60% Very Good

50% Good 40% 30% Fair

20% Poorly 10%

0% Very Poorly

Figure8.3. Sorting of visible inclusions in Late Copper Age ceramics from sites in the Körös Region

of Late Copper Age ceramics on the Plain and not necessarily an invasion, migration, or diffusion scenario, as might be initially assumed were diachronic variability observed in the Körös region. The fact that this interregional pattern is observable despite the dramatically different sample sizes illustrates the strength of the relationship.

160

100%

90%

80% 70%

60% Poorly

50% Moderately 40% Well 30%

20%

10% 0% HMVH Körös

Figure 8.4. Kneading in Late Copper Age Ceramics conditions from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region.

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Hackly 50% Irregular 40% Fine 30% Smooth 20% 10% 0% HMVH Körös

Figure 8.5. Paste texture in Late Copper Age ceramics from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region.

Speaking generally, the 28 samples from Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the Maros region resemble the Late Copper Age sherds collected from the Körös region, though some regional variability was detected. For example, the sorting of visible inclusions in pottery from the Körös and Maros regions are quite similar, indicating similar techniques for the collection and processing of raw clay materials (Table 8.7). However, samples from Hódmezővásárhely are collectively more poorly kneaded than the Körös material (Figure 8.4).

161

Table 8.8. Firing characteristics in Late Copper Age ceramics from archaeological sites in the Maros region and from the Körös region. The regional difference in firing characteristics observable despite radically different sample sizes illustrates the strength the pattern. All All Oxidized Reduced Region Oxidized Reduced Sandwich OxiEx/ReduIn Sandwich ReduEx/OxiIn HMVH (n=28) 1 26 0 0 1 0 3% 93% 0% 0% 4% 0% Körös (n=321) 11 235 1 47 23 4 4% 73% <1% 15% 7% 1%

Additionally, 62% of Late Copper Age sherds from the Körös region are irregular in cross- section, while 50% of the sherds from Hódmezővásárhely are hackly in cross-section, correlating with the kneading measurements (Figure 8.5). This indicates that while the removal of inclusions from the raw clay material was conducted similarly in both regions, the process of preparing the material for shaping did vary. A significant difference in indicators of firing condition was observed between Late Copper Age samples from the Körös region and samples from the Maros region (Table 8.8). The vast majority of samples in both cases were reduced throughout the interior and exterior surfaces, and through the cores of the sherds. This again indicates a low oxygen, relatively slow firing environment with little or no direct contact with flame. However, 93% of Hódmezővásárhely Baden samples exhibited total reduction, while Körös region Late Copper Age sherds were thoroughly reduced in only 73% of the sample. More variability in terms of indicators of firing conditions is visible in the materials from the Körös region (Figure 8.6). This difference may represent differences raw material preparation, the heterogeneity of raw materials between the watersheds, or slightly different firing techniques that resulted in more variable indicators of firing conditions in the Körös region. Although these possibilities are worth considering, it is important to note the sample sizes from the region (n=28, Maros; n=321, Körös). It is possible that the much larger samples size from the Körös region accounts for the greater variability in firing condition indicators. However, the fact that the differences appear despite the different sample sizes may also indicate the strength of the relationship.

162

100%

90%

80% ReduEx/OxiIn 70%

Reduced Sandwich 60%

50% OxiEx/ReduIn

Oxidized Sandwich 40% 30% All Reduced 20% All Oxidized 10% 0% HMVH Körös

Figure 8.6. Comparison of Late Copper Age ceramic firing conditions from Hódmezővásárhely and in the Körös region.

Conclusions and Interpretations of the Macroscopic Ceramic Data All of the materials evaluated as part of this study exhibited a similar range of characteristics over time and space. Notably, however, inter-site variability within the Körös region and interregional variability between the Körös and Maros regions was observed in Late Copper Age ceramics. Although slight, given the relative homogeneity of the Hungarian Plain’s geology and, thus of raw material sources, even subtle differences between ceramic assemblages should be discussed. Slight but observable variability in the sorting of visible inclusions at the site of Bélmegyer 56 suggests that, although generally similar throughout the region, some variability in ceramic processing and production did occur on the site level – or, perhaps even on the level of individual, highly productive potters within a particular village. Although more samples from different culture phases are necessary to make such a determination, it is possible that Bélmegyer 56 and perhaps other sites in the region maintained independent local processing and production methods that result in slightly different signatures when submitted to the battery of measurements used here. Interregionally, the observed differences in indicators of production and firing techniques are relatively subtle, but have significant consequences for understanding the nature of the Plain’s incorporation into the Baden material culture during the Late Copper Age. Since variability exists between two adjacent regions, both part of the Baden material culture complex, a cautious approach must be taken when interpreting slight variability over time

163 as evidence of a break in population continuity between ceramic phases in the Körös region. Indeed, when viewed as a whole, the macroscopic data suggest a great deal of continuity in raw material preparation and ceramic manufacturing techniques between the Middle and Late Copper Age. When considered alongside the spatial data suggesting a marked level of continuity, and the presence of an internal cultural trajectory consisting of cycles of population nucleation and dispersal, the data support an overall trend of continuity in the Körös region between the Late Neolithic and the Early Bronze Age.

Results of the Petrographic Analysis Of the samples collected and analyzed from museum, site surface, and excavation contexts, a total of 147 were selected for thin sectioning and point counting under the microscope. The samples were chosen due to their clear association with a cultural period, typically based on surface decoration such as patterns of incised design. Three forms of information were collected during microscopic analysis that contributed to the description of change in prehistoric ceramics on the Hungarian Plain between the Copper Age and Bronze Age: 1) point-counts of natural and intentional temper inclusions; 2) rock and mineral identifications; and, 3) general groundmass descriptions. As discussed in Chapter Five, Stoltman’s (1989, 1991) point counting method and Whitbread’s (1989, 1995) system of petrographic description was used. This point-count analysis does not aim to produce a catalog of fabric classes within cultural periods as is common in many petrographic studies (see Galaty 1999; Kreiter 2005), even though samples are divided into fabrics according to Riederer’s (2004) classification scheme as part of general groundmass description. Fabrics specific to material culture phases were not developed as part of this project, as previous petrographic studies (Hoekman-Sites et al. 2007; Parsons 2005) as well as the current macroscopic analysis have observed little compositional variability over individual cultural phases. Rather, these results focus on the identification of diachronic changes in composition and manufacture. Data pertaining to characteristics of the different ceramic material culture groups are presented in Appendix II, and in summary form in Tables 8.9 and 8.10. A number of photomicrographs of samples illustrating key petrographic characteristics, including mineral identifications, elements of technology, indicators of manufacturing technique, and different forms of temper, are presented throughout the chapter in Figures 8.7-8.18. The field of view in

164

Figure 8.7. Sample 001, Fabric E1. Late Copper Age from Tarhos 67. Crossed polars. Natural mineral inclusions. The bright sub-angular inclusions are monocrystalline quartz in a birefringent groundmass. The very small streaks in groundmass are muscovite mica lathes.

the microphotographs is approximately 2 mm. Taken together, the data from Appendix II and the tables and figures in this chapter allow for both the general and specific characterization of ceramics in the Körös Region of the Great Hungarian Plain. The petrographic results correlate well with the macroscopic ceramic results presented earlier in this chapter. The overall pattern is one of homogeneity across both space and time, with samples falling within a common range of variability. However, notable variability is observable at the inter-site level in the Körös region, and a clear discontinuity in fabric characterization exists between the Early and Middle Bronze Age. Although not likely substantial enough to indicate sudden production changes vis-à-vis the introduction of a new population into the region, the variability over space and time is indicative of social processes occurring in the region during the time period covered by the study.

General Petrographic Characteristics Almost all of the ceramic samples from the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early and Middle Bronze Age fall into a common range of variability. Nearly all thin-sections

165

Figure 8.8. Sample 015, FabricF2. Early Bronze Age from Békés 26. Crossed polars. Caliche is present around the edges of the large vughs in the image. Natural mineral inclusions, predominately silt sized quartz inclusions, are present in a mosaic speckled b-fabric.

across all cultural phases contained monocrystalline quartz, muscovite mica, and potassium feldspar (Figure 8.7). Other common mineral inclusions present in the majority of samples include olivine, pyroxene, plagioclase feldspar, amphibole, and calcite. To a lesser extent, epidote, chalcedony, apatite, serpentine, and sandstone were found in samples across all periods as small detrital grains. All of these inclusions are naturally occurring minerals found in the raw clay paste. Virtually all of the natural inclusions in the paste fall into the silt size class, though a small percentage is classified as fine sand. Most of the samples contained opaque minerals that could not be definitively identified. Using Whitbread’s (1989, 1995:386-387) methodology, opaques could be categorized as amorphous concentration features (ACFs) given their unidentifiable nature. In the present research, they are referred to simply as “opaques.” Carothers (1992:310) and Galaty (1999:50) both suggested that opaque minerals in thin section are most likely hematite and less often magnetite. Calcite is found in two forms in the samples. Occasionally, large angular grits are observed, while less common were amorphous crystallized grains of calcite that resulted from the transformation of calcite at high temperatures. Calcium carbonate is visible in nearly all of the samples in both hand sample and microscopically as caliche. Caliche is easily distinguished from the other forms of calcite described here, and is

166

Figure 8.9. Sample 007, Fabric E2. Neolithic from Gerla 64. Crossed polars. Unprocessed clay nodule inclusion. Note sub-angularity of inclusion and inclusion boundary incorporated into surrounding matrix near top-left of image.

Figure 8.10. Sample 008, Fabric D1. Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80. Crossed polars. Grog temper. Note angularity of inclusion and distinctive void space around edges. Fire-clouding is visible (inclusion is darker at bottom), indicating a previous firing episode.

167 formed as the result of secondary crystallization of calcite in and along the edges of voids as water percolated through the porous ceramic as a post-depositional process (Figure 8.8). Another inclusion found in clay pastes on the Great Hungarian Plain – amorphous clay inclusions resembling intentional temper – are almost ubiquitous in the samples (Figure 8.9). Under Whitbread’s (1989, 1995:386-387) classification system, these clay inclusions could be either amorphous concentration features (ACFs), similarly to opaques, or as textural concentration features (TCFs). In this research, they are categorized as TCFs, but are referred to simply as nodules or clay nodules. In thin-section, clay nodules are similar in appearance to grog – bits of crushed fired ceramic material intentionally added by the potter to the clay paste before forming the vessel. However, the nodules characteristically differ from grog in subtle ways. Grog is typically highly angular and usually surrounded by void space resulting from water loss and contraction during firing (Figure 8.10). Conversely, clay nodules are typically sub-angular (often completely round), and commonly have little or no void space separating them from the surrounding paste. This difference occurs due to natural clay inclusions contracting during firing along with the surrounding paste, while the previously fired grog temper does not contract during the firing process. Additionally, grog may exhibit signs of fire-clouding, or color differences creating during the initial firing episode. Such color differences are not present on naturally occurring clay nodules. It is therefore likely that the sub-angular clay nodules found almost universally in samples of prehistoric ceramics on the Hungarian Plain are not intentionally added temper. Rather, it is almost certain that they are unprocessed remnants of the base clay material, left over from the preparation process (Whitbread 1995:387). As small portions of the raw clay material from which the paste was derived, the number and size of the nodules is dependent on the degree to which the raw material was crushed before wetting and forming, or possibly crushed or separated during levigation. Resulting from this process, the clay nodules contain silt and fine sand inclusions and occasionally void space, in almost identical proportions to the surrounding clay matrix. On the other hand, due to their ubiquitous nature whether or not the presence of the clay nodules in the paste is due to the actions of the potter is difficult to ascertain. The possibility exists that the nodules occur as an intentional byproduct of the production sequence, or they were processed separately from the same source material and added during the mixing or folding of the clay before vessel formation. Given these possibilities and the uncertainty of their

168 provenance, clay nodules were counted as temper during point counting, although the presence of nodules, grog, and other potentially intentional temper were recorded separately. Only occasionally present in samples from all time periods, the occurrence of grog increases slightly in the Late Copper Age and in all subsequent cultural phases. However, point counted samples from every period contained grog (Table 8.9), though not nearly as frequently as clay nodules. Few samples contained grog in proportions higher than 5% of the clay matrix, and in the vast majority of cases only a single grog fragment was identified in the sample. This suggests that the grog played no functional role in preventing cracking while drying or firing (Kreiter 2005). Although it is not impossible to rule out the intentional or ritualistic addition of grog temper, especially beginning late in the Copper Age (see Kreiter 2005), it seems more likely that these rare additions were accidental on the part of the potter, and are small fragments of broken sherds that unintentionally found their way into the clay paste during the processing and preparation stages of ceramic production. Although they are a common temper used throughout the world, no prehistoric ceramic samples from the Hungarian Plain included in this analysis contained sedimentary or metamorphic rock fragments that were beyond a doubt intentional temper. The appearance of crushed fragments of polycrystalline quartz is often indicative of intentional tempering, and polycrystalline quartz did appear in numerous samples from multiple periods. However, their sporadic appearance and low inclusion percentage, as well as their sub-angular, weathered appearance, suggest that they, too, are naturally occurring minerals in the clay source. Indeed, the ceramic petrographic samples from the study region throughout the periods sampled can be described as generally homogeneous, with occasional localized or exceptional variability. The possible exception to this trend is the increased presence of grog temper in the Late Copper Age, and an even greater increase in the Early and Middle Bronze Age samples (grog is present in greater than 60% of both Early and Middle Bronze Age samples, Table 8.9).

Diachronic Petrographic Variability: The Middle and Late Copper Ages, and Early and Middle Bronze Ages The Middle Copper Age. As was the case with the macroscopic analysis, the Middle and Late Copper Age petrographic samples exhibit a great deal of similarity in petrographic

169

Table 8.9. Summary statistics of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age petrographic point counts from sites in the Körös study region. PASTE BODY % Matrix % Sand % Silt %Mat/Silt % Sand % Temp Period MCA Average 85.42 0 14.58 98.4 0 2.6 (n=14) Std. Dev. 6.16 0 6.16 2.65 0 2.75

LCA Average 83.14 0.54 16.32 94.21 0.53 4.1 (n=89) Std. Dev. 8.67 1.67 8.55 11 4.01 1.65

EBA Average 82.12 0.13 18.75 91.57 0.11 6.52 (n=15) Std. Dev. 6.42 0.35 6.42 8.33 0.29 4.21

MBA Average 84.2 0.61 15.19 89.29 1.61 9.1 (n=10) Std. Dev. 2.92 1.29 2.86 5.63 3.26 6.12

description and point count analysis (Table 8.9). Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr sherds exhibit remarkably similar fabric composition, consisting almost entirely of silt-sized naturally occurring mineral inclusions. Inclusions are usually single or double-spaced (Figure 8.11), with one open-spaced exception. When averaged over all samples, paste consists of 85% clay matrix and 15% silt (Figure 8.12), while the body consists of 97% matrix and silt, and 3% temper (temper consists primarily of clay nodules, which were likely unintentional on the part of the potter) (Figure 8.13). Natural mineral inclusions consist predominantly of quartz, potassium feldspar, and muscovite mica lathes. Samples are otherwise undifferentiated in terms of natural inclusions, which consist of occasional, rare, or very rare amphibole, pyroxene, and calcite. All samples are optically active under crossed polars, with a mosaic speckled birefringent groundmass. Half of the samples exhibit a slight preferred orientation of muscovite mica at an approximate 45° angle toward the surface of the sherd, while the others had no clearly identifiable preferred orientation of natural mineral inclusions. Each of the samples contains unprocessed clay nodules with diffuse and merging inclusions boundaries, and two of the samples contain one piece each of angular grog. In both cases, the matrix of the grog is sorted differently and contains a different ratio of natural mineral inclusions than the paste that surrounds them. The fabric of one sample (Figure 8.14) contains a mixture of clays, evidenced by slight differences in paste color, a folded-over appearance, and a slightly different pattern of 170

Figure 8.11. Sample 030, Fabric E1. Middle Copper Age from Szeghalom 80. Crossed polars. Typical example of MCA mosaic speckled b-fabric, with a slight striated fabric area near the center of the image. Muscovite mica displays an angular preferred orientation. Other natural inclusions are primarily silt-sized monocrystalline quartz. Note the uncommon channel void near the center of the image.

sorting and spacing between the clay types. Voids are characterized in all samples as either planar voids – long, thin void spaces that develop as a formed pot dries prior to firing – or as vughs – large, irregular voids that remain following the kneading and shaping process. All Middle Copper Age ceramics fell into three fabric categories – E1, E2, and F1 according to Riederer’s (2004) classification system. This indicates an extremely fine, silty paste, with occasional larger quartz and potassium feldspar inclusions. All three fabrics are similar, with fabric F1 containing slightly smaller silt-sized natural mineral inclusions than the E fabrics. The fabrics are undifferentiated in terms of natural mineral inclusions, optical birefringence, and characterization of void space. The Late Copper Age. Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden petrographic samples are also similar in terms of paste, body, and natural and intentional inclusions (Figure 8.15). Paste consists of 83% matrix, less than 1% sand, and 16% silt-sized natural inclusions (Table 8.9, Figure 8.12). Body consists of 94% matrix and silt, less than 1% sand, and 4% clay nodules and grog temper (Figure 8.13). Grain distribution varies from single to double-spaced, with very rare

171

% Silt MCA 40 60 LCA

Matrix

10 90 %

% Sand 40 10

Figure 8.12. Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramic paste composition. Though compositionally similar, Late Copper Age samples are often slightly sandier than Middle Copper Age samples.

% Sand MCA LCA 40 60 Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

% 40 10

Figure 8.13. Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age and Late Copper Age ceramic body composition. Note higher proportions of temper and sand in the Late Copper Age.

172

Figure 8.14. Sample 137, Fabric E1. Middle Copper Age from Szeghalom 168. Crossed polars. Mixing of different clays is evident in slight color variation and inclusion spacing visible between left and right side of image.

open-spaced exceptions. Natural mineral inclusions are similar to those in Middle Copper Age samples, consisting predominately of monocrystalline quartz, potassium feldspar, and muscovite mica lathes. Also present are occasional calcite, olivine, and pyroxene, and rare or very rare instances of amphibole, chlorite, chalcedony, biotite mica, epidote, apatite, and serpentine. Hematite staining is occasionally present in the samples, and three unintentional lithic inclusions are present in three separate samples. All samples exhibit an optically birefringent fabric, characterized predominately as mosaic speckled with occasionally striated areas. All samples contain large and small vughs, most contain planar voids, with vesicles and channel voids only rarely observed. Muscovite mica expresses a slightly diagonal preferred orientation to the surface of the sherd in the majority of samples, though samples with no obvious preferred orientation of naturally occurring minerals are common. Like Middle Copper Age samples, the majority of Late Copper Age samples fall into fabric categories E1, E2, and F1 under Riederer’s (2004) fabric classification system. Fabrics with slightly larger natural mineral inclusions and slightly sandier fabrics are rare. The fabrics are undifferentiated in terms of natural mineral inclusions, optical birefringence of groundmass (all active), or characterization of void space.

173

Figure 8.15. Sample 54, Fabric E2. Late Copper Age from Tarhos 67. Crossed polars. Typical mosaic speckled b- fabric of Late Copper Age samples. Natural inclusions include monocrystalline quartz and muscovite mica lathes. Note clay nodules (dark areas in top right corner of image) with diffuse inclusion boundaries.

Figure 8.16. Sample 125, Fabric E1. Late Copper Age from Mezőgyán 2. Crossed polars. Typical mosaic speckled b-fabric of Late Copper Age samples. Large angular grog inclusion with evidence of previous smoothing or burnishing (light grey color at bottom of grog). Large vugh in bottom of picture.

174

Figure 8.17. Sample 42, Fabric F1. Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80. Crossed polars. Typical mosaic speckled b-fabric of Early Bronze Age samples, including unintentional clay nodules. Natural inclusions include monocrystalline quartz and potassium feldspar.

Interestingly, 25 of 89 (30%) of Late Copper Age samples contain grog in addition to naturally occurring clay nodules. This is in contrast to the rare occurrence of grog in Middle Copper Age samples. Grog is differentiated from clay nodules by its angular shape, the presence of sharp boundaries between the grog and surrounding paste, and commonly the presence of void space around the grog separating it from the paste (Figure 8.16). This difference is reflected in the percent of the body consisting of temper – less than 3% in the Middle Copper Age samples, and just over 4% in the Late Copper Age samples. The Early Bronze Age. Early Bronze Age ceramic petrographic samples from the Körös region (n=15) are similar to ceramics of other cultural phases included in this analysis. Early Bronze Age paste, on average, consists of 82% matrix, less than 1% sand, and 18% silt, mostly in the form of naturally occurring mineral inclusions (Table 8.9, Figures 8.17 and 8.18). Body consists on average of 92% matrix and silt, less than 1% sand, and 7% temper (Figure 8.19). Temper occurs in the forms of unprocessed clay nodules and intentional grog inclusions.

175

% Silt

40 60 LCA EBA

Matrix

10 90 %

40 10 % Sand Figure 8.18. Ternary plot of Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age paste composition. Both exist within a common range of variability, though the Late Copper Age group contains sandier outliers.

% Sand

40 60 LCA EBA Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

% 40 10

Figure 8.19. Ternary plot of Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age body composition. Note an increased number of tempered samples in comparison to the Middle Copper Age. More frequent grog temper accounts for the increase in the proportion of temper in the body. Additionally, note the proportionally infrequent occurrence of samples falling into the arbitrary “heavy fraction” containing greater than 10% temper inclusions.

176

Figure 8.20. Sample 8, Fabric D1. Early Bronze Age from Szeghalom 80. Crossed polars. Example of a striated active b-fabric.

Grog continues to increase in frequency in Early Bronze Age ceramic material, occurring in 73% (n=11) of the samples. Once again, an increase in the percentage of temper point- counted in the ceramic body indicates the more frequent use of temper. However, grog in Early Bronze Age ceramics still does not occur in significant enough proportion to affect the drying or firing of the vessel. Naturally occurring minerals in the clay paste consist almost exclusively of single and double-spaced silt-sized particles. Predominate minerals include monocrystalline quartz, potassium feldspar, and muscovite mica. Plagioclase feldspar and calcite are common, with pyroxene, amphibole, and unidentifiable opaque mineral inclusions occurring less frequently. Epidote, olivine, chlorite, apatite, and serpentine are observed only rarely or very rarely. As in other periods, several Early Bronze Age samples contain hematite staining. All of the samples feature an optically active birefringent groundmass. Most b-fabrics are characterized as mosaic speckled, with striated b-fabrics observed slightly more often than in the Middle or Late Copper Age samples (Figure 8.20). A preferred orientation of muscovite mica lathes is observable at an approximately 45° angle to the surface of the sherd in most

177

Figure 8.21. Sample 16, Fabric E2. Middle Bronze Age from Békés 26. Crossed polars. Mosaic speckled and striated b-fabric containing naturally occurring monocrystalline quartz and muscovite mica inclusions.

samples, though some samples have no clear preferred orientation of natural mineral inclusions. Like samples from previous cultural phases, Early Bronze Age samples fall into fabric types E1. E2, and F1 in Riederer’s (2004) classification system. However, one sample fell into the slightly sandier fabric D1, and one falls under the extremely silty F1 fabric. Void space consists primarily of irregular vughs, and less commonly planar voids that formed during the vessels’ drying phase. Vesicles are not common, and channels are extremely rare. Within the period, the fabrics are undifferentiated in terms of groundmass description, natural mineral inclusions, and characterizations of void space. The Middle Bronze Age. Middle Bronze Age ceramic petrographic samples from sites in the Körös region (n=10) exhibit homogeneity within the cultural phase (Figure 8.21). On average, Middle Bronze Age paste consists of 84% matrix, less than 1% sand, and 15% silt (Table 8.9, Figure 8.23). The paste exhibits a significantly decreased range of compositional variability compared to earlier periods (Figure 8.23), which points toward increasing specialization of pottery manufacture (Budden and Sofaer 2009; see discussion below). The body consists of 89% matrix and silt, 2% sand, and 9% temper inclusions (Table 8.9, Figure 8.24). Temper inclusions include naturally occurring clay nodules and intentionally added grog

178

Figure 8.22. Sample 80, Fabric F2. Middle Bronze Age from Békés 178. Crossed polars. Medium-sized polycrystalline quartz inclusions in a mosaic speckled b-fabric.

temper. One sample contains frequent sand-sized polycrystalline quartz inclusions (Figure 8.24). Abundant, angular inclusions of polycrystalline quartz often indicate intentional tempering of the paste; however, since only one sample exhibits this unusual characteristic and no pattern can be established, no definite conclusions can be drawn regarding the intentionality or function of large quartz inclusions in this sample. Naturally occurring mineral inclusions consist predominantly of single- and double- spaced monocrystaline quartz, potassium feldspar, and muscovite mica lathes. Polycrystalline quartz, pyroxene, calcite, and amphibole inclusions are not as common, but still frequently observed. Less common mineral inclusions include olivine, pyroxene, and plagioclase feldspar, with serpentine, chalcedony, biotite, and unidentifiable opaque minerals are rarely observed. Grog occurs in 60% of the samples (see Figure 8.25). Though this is a reduction in frequency compared to the Early Bronze Age, grog remains more common than in either the Middle or Late Copper Age. Interestingly, the average percentage of temper in the body of Middle Bronze Age (n=15) samples increases from 7% in the Early Bronze Age (n=10) to 9%, despite a reduction in grog frequency. This is due in part to a general increase in size of both intentional grog temper and unprocessed clay nodules.

179

% Silt EBA 40 60 MBA

Matrix

10 90 %

10 % Sand 40 Figure 8.23. Ternary plot of Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze Age paste composition. Note a decreased range of variability in Middle Bronze Age samples compared to all previous cultural phases.

% Sand

40 60 EBA MBA Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

40 10 % Figure 8.24. Ternary plot of Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze age body composition. Though compositionally similar to previous periods, a higher proportion of Middle Bronze Age samples fall into the arbitrary “heavy fraction” containing greater than 10% temper inclusions.

180

Figure 8.25. Sample 17, Fabric F2. Middle Bronze Age from Békés 26. Large grog inclusion with fire clouding, in speckled and striated b-fabric.

All of the samples possess an optically active birefringent groundmass. Most b-fabrics are mosaic speckled, with striated b-fabrics observed roughly as equally as in Early Bronze Age samples, but more frequently than in Middle or Late Copper Age samples (Figure 8.25). A preferred orientation of muscovite mica lathes exists at an angle to the surface of the sherd in the majority of samples, though some samples have no clear preferred orientation of natural mineral inclusions. Middle Bronze Age samples fall into a wider variety of fabric types than previous periods, including fabrics E1, E2, E3, F1, and F2 according to Riederer’s (2004) fabric classification system. This wider variety of fabric types suggests a slight trend toward sandier fabrics, including frequent grog inclusions, and a higher frequency of polycrystalline quartz when compared to other periods. Additionally, sand-sized monocrystalline quartz, which occurs naturally in the clay parent material, occurs more frequently in Middle Bronze Age samples. Voids are characterized similarly to earlier periods, consisting primarily of irregular vughs with very common planar voids, caused by vessel shrinkage during the drying process. Channels and vesicles occur only very rarely. The fabrics within the Middle Bronze Age are undifferentiated in terms of groundmass description, mineral inclusions, and characteristics of void space.

181

Summary of Diachronic Variability. In a general sense, Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age petrographic samples fall into a common range of variability (see Figures 8.26 and 8.27). Despite this homogeneity, however, subtle differences and consistent changes over time are present, and must be discussed. Most notably, an increase in the frequency of intentionally tempered ceramics is visible between the Middle Copper Age and the Middle Bronze Age. Although the first significant appearance of tempered samples occurred after the Middle Copper Age, the general trend for the approximately 2,000 year time span encompassing the Middle and Late Copper Age and Early and Middle Bronze Age is a subtle, but steady and marked, increase in the frequency of temper, especially grog, observed petrographically (see Figures 8.28 and 8.29). Accounting for this increase is important, as it indicates a continuous trend rather than an abrupt change in vessel manufacturing technology. The increasing temper trend is observable by establishing a set of arbitrary heavy and light fractions, with samples containing more than 10% temper (grog, clay nodules, and intentional mineral inclusions) in the body designated the heavy fraction, and samples consisting of less than 10% temper in the body as light fraction. Very few samples contained greater than 10% sand in the paste, therefore naturally occurring sand is not considered in this example. All Middle Copper Age samples fall into the light fraction, with none of the samples containing more than 10% temper in the body (see Figures 8.13and 8.26). In fact, sand-size particles were not observed in any Middle Copper Age samples in this study. The paste in these samples is extremely silty, containing primarily of a very fine, highly processed, clay matrix. This concurs with previous studies (see Hoekman-Sites et al. 2007; Parsons 2005) on Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár pottery, which also contained very little sand. Conversely, approximately 12% of Late Copper Age samples fall into the heavy fraction. This change is explained by the more frequent appearance of grog in thin-section; though, it should be emphasized that grog temper never occurs in a proportion great enough to affect vessel stability during the drying or firing process. Though unusual, Kreiter (2005) noted a similar phenomenon in Transdanubian Bronze Age ceramic assemblages. The addition of grog in such small amounts could be an accidental byproduct of the production sequence, or as Kreiter suggested, it could be an intentional, non-discursive action not related to vessel structure.

182

% Silt MCA 40 60 LCA EBA MBA

Matrix

10 90 %

% Sand 40 10

Figure 8.26. Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age paste compositional variability. A trend toward the inclusion of more grog temper is observed over time (see text, Table 8.1).

% Sand MCA LCA 40 60 EBA MBA Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

% 40 10 Figure 8.27 Ternary plot of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age body compositional variability. Note higher percentage of temper in Early Bronze Age samples.

183

100% 90% 80% 70%

60% %Mat/Silt 50% % Sand 40% % Temp 30% 20% 10% 0% MCA LCA EBA MBA

Figure 8.28. Body composition of Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age ceramic samples. A steady shift in the ratio of temper (including grog) to sand and matrix plus silt is observable over time. This shift is subtle, but important, as it indicates minor, continuous change in vessel manufacturing rather than an abrupt change. Such a trend indicates continuity in manufacturing technology over the long term.

10% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% % Temp 4% % Sand 3% 2% 1% 0% MCA LCA EBA MBA

Figure 8.29. Percentage of temper and sand observed in point counted Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age ceramic samples. Note the marked trend of an increased appearance of temper (especially grog) over time.

184

Early Bronze Age samples fall into the heavy fraction at a rate of approximately 16% (see Figures 8.19 and 8.26), a 5% increase over the Late Copper Age. Again, this is due to an increase in the frequency of grog temper observed petrographically, with grog recorded in more than 70% of Early Bronze Age samples. Moreover, 50% of Middle Bronze Age samples fall into the heavy fraction. As with Early Bronze Age material, a very high percentage (60%) of the samples contains grog. Ultimately, this long-term, measured increase in average percent of temper in ceramic material does not point to dramatic changes in ceramic manufacturing technology at any point during the time period covered by this study.

Spatial Variability in Late Copper Age Ceramics Ceramic variability between sites in the Körös region is measured as a control for the observation of change over time in the region. In other words, marked heterogeneity in ceramic assemblages between sites within the region would confound results focused on identifying change over time based on averages and standard deviations of materials from multiple sites. Additionally, the identification of subtle differences in assemblages from different sites would indicate the maintenance of localized manufacturing techniques, rather than a replacement of local practices with outside methods. The observation of inter-regional petrographic variability also serves as a control measurement for the diachronic ceramic data. Additionally, it allows for speculation on the roles of regional ceramic traditions and different regional geology on changes in material culture at the end of the Copper Age.

Petrographic variability in the Körös Region. Very little variability was measured in the average paste and body composition ratios of Late Copper Age ceramics in the Körös River study region (Figure 8.30). When averaged by site, paste composition never exceeds 4% sand, and is described as silty clay. Silt content exists in a wide range between ceramic samples from sites across the region, ranging from 5% to 23% silt. This does not indicate the intentional addition of temper or removal of naturally occurring mineral inclusions. Rather, this range suggests slight differences in mineral composition of raw clay sources, perhaps weathered from different parent materials upriver (Frolking 2009).

185

% Silt

40 60

Matrix

10 90 %

% Sand 40 10

Figure 8.30. Ternary plot of Late Copper Age paste compositional variability in the Körös Region. Each colored square represents the average paste value of one site.

% Sand

40 60 Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

40 10 % Figure 8.31. Ternary plot of Late Copper Age body compositional variability in the Körös Region. Each colored square represents the average paste value of one site.

186

A similar homogeneity exists in the average body composition of ceramics from sites in the Körös region (Figure 8.31). A consistent range of variability was measured between the sites, with no site average consisting of more than 10% temper and 4% sand. This indicates a standardized methodology for raw clay gathering, processing, and vessel production in the Körös region during the Late Copper Age. Inter-regional petrographic variability. The petrographic results of ceramics from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the Maros region (n=5) match the results of the macroscopic analysis, but they should be considered cautiously due to the small sample size. Natural mineral inclusions are similar to samples from the Körös region and consist primarily of monocrystalline quartz, potassium feldspar, and muscovite mica lathes. Less common minerals include pyroxene, amphibole, and opaque minerals. Serpentine, apatite, chlorite, calcite, and chalcedony are observed only rarely. The paste composition of ceramics from the two regions is virtually identical and is statistically indistinguishable (Table 8.10, Figure 8.32). This similarity in paste composition suggests similar choices in raw material procurement and clay processing in the regions during the Late Copper Age. On the other hand, differences in ceramic composition between the Körös and Maros regions are evident in the ceramic body composition (Table 8.10, Figure 8.33). Matrix and silt compose 94% and 88% of the fabric in the Körös and Maros regions respectively, and temper composes 4% and 9% respectively. Two factors explain the difference. First, grog temper is present in 60% of the Maros samples – a much higher frequency than in Late Copper Age samples from the Körös region. Second, the Maros samples fall into fabrics D1, D2, E1, and E2 according to Riederer’s (2004) fabric classification system. The D fabric classifications are slightly sandier than fabric classes E and F; and indeed, large monocrystalline and polycrystalline quartz inclusions are present in one of the Maros samples. The high frequency of polycrystalline quartz suggests that the mineral may have been crushed and intentionally added to the raw clay paste during the manufacturing process. However, the large quartz inclusions also exist within unintentional clay nodules in the sample, suggesting that the inclusions are naturally present in the source material. It is therefore difficult to say with certainty that the quartz is intentional temper, though it cannot be ruled out as a possibility.

187

% Silt Körös 40 60 Maros

Matrix

10 90 %

% Sand 40 10

Figure 8.32. Ternary plot of average paste composition of Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region and from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the adjacent Maros region.

% Sand Körös 40 60 Maros Matrix + Silt Matrix +

10 90 %

% 40 10

Figure 8.33. Ternary plot of average body composition of Late Copper Age ceramics from the Körös region and from the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the adjacent Maros region. Note the higher average ratio of temper to sand and matrix plus silt in the Maros samples.

188

Table 8.10. Summary statistics of Late Copper Age point counts from the Körös and Maros regions.. PASTE BODY % Matrix % Sand % Silt %Mat/Silt % Sand % Temp Region Körös Average 83.14 0.54 16.32 94.21 0.53 4.1 Std. Dev. 8.67 1.67 8.55 11 4.01 1.65

Maros Average 82.22 0.7 18.08 88.92 0.6 8.69 Std. Dev. 8.69 1.57 8.47 5.25 5.05 1.32

Discussion of the Petrographic Data As with the macroscopic data, the materials evaluated as part of the petrographic study exhibit a common range of characteristics over time and space. Ceramic fabrics from all periods tend to be very silty and have similar compositional signatures. Although all samples fall into a shared range of variability diachronically, subtle but consistent change in ceramic body composition is observable over time, especially in terms of the temper to sand ratio, and the ratio of matrix to silt. The addition of grog temper and its increasing frequency in the Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age does not happen abruptly, however, and grog does not occur in amounts significant enough to mitigate undesirable effects – such as cracking – in the drying and firing stages of the production sequence. Homogeneity of body and paste composition, natural mineral inclusions, preferred orientation of muscovite mica lathes, optically active groundmass, and mosaic speckled b-fabric across time and space also suggests continuity in the collection of raw materials, preparation of clay, vessel forming techniques, and firing process through the time periods covered in this study. Despite significant changes in vessel form and decoration during the transitions between the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age, vessel production technology and the firing process underwent few significant modifications during this time period. When observed, changes in body composition occurred gradually – not indicative of significant change in production technology. Ultimately, the petrographic data do not support a migration or invasion hypothesis for material culture change at the beginning of the Late Copper Age.

189

Summary In this chapter, I presented the data and the results of the macroscopic and microscopic petrographic ceramic analysis. The macroscopic analysis, petrographic point-counting, and petrographic general description all suggest continuity in ceramic production technology during the approximately 1,500 year span covering the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, and Middle Bronze Age. This includes similar choices in raw material collection and common behaviors in processing raw materials, techniques of vessel production, and firing processes. Interestingly, a long-term change in body composition to include a higher percentage of grog by the latter periods is observed, as is a more restricted range of compositional variability in Middle Bronze Age materials. This trajectory points to an evolving non-discursive knowledge in ceramic production over time, as well as specialization in ceramic production by the Middle Bronze Age. Importantly, the changes described in this chapter over the long-term do not indicate an influx of a migratory population producing vessels under a different discursive or non-discursive template, nor do they indicate the penetration of foreign ideas of pottery production into the practices of the local population. In short, both the macroscopic and petrographic data support a model of population continuity in the Körös River study region, as ceramic production methods and non-discursive knowledge of potting did not change following the appearance of kurgans on the Great Hungarian Plain. A migration of peoples into the region who drastically altered production methods, material culture, and settlement patterns is not supported by this data.

190

CHAPTER NINE DISCUSSION: MODELS OF CHANGE ON THE GREAT HUNGARIAN PLAIN DURING THE LATE COPPER AGE Introduction In this chapter, I discuss the implications of the results presented in Chapters Seven and Eight for the general anthropological models outlined in Chapter Two. I also discuss how these interpretations affect our understanding of the specific archaeological models presented in Chapter Three. This chapter integrates the spatial and ceramic data generated as part of this research project with those general and regional models. The multiple-resolution spatial analysis presented in this dissertation demonstrates patterns of nucleation and dispersal and a tendency toward settlement dispersal in the Körös region and the central Hungarian Plain from the Late Neolithic period through the Late Copper Age. The broad pattern observed by Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) in his study region in northern Békés County holds true at the larger scale, lower resolution Körös River watershed. His observation that kurgan burial mounds constructed by a presumably migratory population on the eastern Plain during the Late Copper Age are spatially discrete from Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden archaeological sites also holds true at the scale of the Körös region. However, exceptions on the micro-level at high resolution where kurgans and Late Copper Age sites are within less than 1,000 meters of each other are common. Ultimately, the patterns observed in this study concur with Sherratt’s model, rather than with models of migratory change. Similarly, the results of the macroscopic ceramic analysis presented in Chapter Eight support a model of long-term population continuity rather than a model of invasion or migration. Data regarding raw material processing, vessel forming, and surface treatment do not suggest the introduction of foreign pottery production methods. In fact, the opposite is indicated. More variability in production methodology was observed between sites within the Körös region and than between cultural phases. The results of the petrographic data also support a model of production technology continuity throughout the Middle and Late Copper Ages and Early and Middle Bronze Ages. Samples from all periods fall within a common range of variability. Importantly, however, changes in production methods over the long-term were noted. A subtle but steady increase in the use of grog temper was measured during the approximately 2,000 year time span between the Middle Copper Age and Middle Bronze Age. This does not indicate the

191 appearance of new production methods, and supports a model of population continuity rather than a migration model. The sections in this chapter address the models and cultural trajectories discussed in Chapters Two and Three. They incorporate the results of the present study into our current archaeological understanding of social and settlement change on the Great Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age, and how a refined understanding of the nature of changes during this period affects our understanding of later prehistory in the region.

Modeling Change on the Great Hungarian Plain Kurgan Builders, Migration, and the Late Copper Age Discussion of the spatial results. As Parkinson (2006b) noted, and as is indicated in this dissertation, the social and cultural tapestry of the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain cannot be fully understood until the appearance of the kurgan burial mounds is explained, and they are aligned definitively with specific cultural phases. This, of course, has not yet been achieved. Unfortunately, the exact nature of the relationship between the kurgans and the people of the Baden material culture in the Körös region remains unclear. Some of the results presented in this research project focus on reevaluating archaeological perspectives on migration, and migration’s impact on society and settlement patterns. This speaks directly to the appearance of kurgans on the Hungarian Plain, and although the results of this project do not resolve the issue of relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age settlements, it does contribute to the discussion – both in terms of the spatial analysis results and the results of the ceramic analyses. This study determined that kurgans and Late Copper Age Boleráz and Baden settlements exist in a complementary distribution at the scale of the Körös River watershed study area. At higher resolutions throughout the region, though, Baden archaeological sites and kurgans exist quite close to one another. Furthermore, average nearest neighbor data are at best inconclusive in statistically demonstrating Sherratt’s (1997b) claim of ongoing settlement dispersal during the Middle and Late Copper Ages (on the other hand, distribution maps of Middle and Late Copper Age sites do show a decrease in site number during this time period). Given these data, Sherratt’s conclusions are supported. Unfortunately, many questions remain regarding the relationship between kurgans, their builders, and the indigenous people of the Körös region.

192

Sherratt’s (1997a) analysis of the spatial relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age sites concluded that, for one reason or another, kurgans were constructed away from Baden settlement locations, or Baden settlements were intentionally placed at a distance from kurgans. The results of this study confirm this observation in Sherratt’s study area in northern Békés County, at a low resolution across the entire study area. Kurgans and Late Copper Age sites are located quite close to one another (sometimes within a few hundred meters) at multiple locations throughout the study area when observed at higher resolution. This calls into question portions of Sherratt’s conclusions. Specifically, a strict strategy of avoidance between contemporaneous kurgan builders and an indigenous Late Copper Age population is untenable given the proximity of Baden settlements and kurgans in the study region. Unfortunately, lacking temporal control for the construction of the kurgans it remains impossible to describe what, if any, implication this has for understanding the relationship between kurgans and Baden. The implications of the kurgan density analysis go beyond providing new data on the spatial relationship between kurgans and Late Copper Age archaeological sites in the Körös region. The differences in results and interpretation of spatial analyses in Sherratt’s (1997b) study and the present study illustrate the importance of measuring regional and local patterns at multiple analytical scales. The use of multiple resolutions in this study has redefined the archaeological understanding of the relationship between Baden settlement and kurgan building on the Great Hungarian Plain. Though much remains to be learned, this is a small but important step toward understanding when and by whom the kurgans were constructed. What is clear about the kurgans on the eastern Hungarian Plain at this time is their resemblance to the monumental burial architecture of the Yamnaya of the Eurasian Steppe. Given the archaeological evidence (see Escedy 1979), a model of independent development for kurgans on the Plain, or even their appearance through diffusion without a migration, seems untenable. Indeed, in his discussion of the kurgan phenomenon, Anthony (1990) suggested that if a migration were to have taken place, the patterned kurgan distribution across eastern Europe into the Great Hungarian Plain is what one would expect a migration to look like. However, several vexing issues complicate the migration scenario. First, and perhaps most importantly, where are the settlements of the kurgan builders? Up to this point, no convincing evidence of kurgan builders exists in the region except the tumuli themselves, and the skeletons and pottery deposited below them. It is of course possible that that they constructed temporary shelters that

193 would leave little or no trace in the archaeological record. As such, expecting to find architecture as a mark of their presence may be unreasonable. Second, what of the subsistence and economy of the kurgan builders? Given the pastoral subsistence economy of the Yamnaya, evidence for a similar strategy would be expected on the Plain, or in any other destination regions. Yet, no archaeological evidence has yet been found that indicates an increase in pastoralism or transhumance during the Middle/Late Copper Age transition, though such a scenario has been suggested for both the appearance of Baden in the region and for the kurgan builders (see Escedy 1979; Gimbutas 1977; Mallory 1989). The geology of the Körös watershed itself raises questions regarding Baden and kurgan- builder pastoralism. Although the Körös region in prehistory was ideal for agriculture due to predictable seasonal flooding and the regular deposition of nutrient-rich fluvial soils (Frolking 2009; Gyucha 2010), the region was not amenable to a pastoral lifestyle. The mosaic of marshes, inundated areas, large and small rivers, and relatively dry land led prehistoric occupants of the region to engage in a subsistence strategy featuring the exploitation of domesticated plants and animals that, through variable over time, remained the predominate subsistence strategy for thousands of years. On the other hand, the hydrologically more balanced and much drier Maros River alluvial fan sits immediately adjacent to the Körös River study region, and its grasslands offered more favorable conditions for large-scale animal keeping and herding (Gyucha 2010). As such, one would expect to find evidence of pastoral kurgan builders in this region only tens of kilometers from kurgan “cemeteries” (Escedy 1979; Gimbutas 1979). This is not the case, however, as no archaeological sites attributed to the kurgan builders (and very few kurgans) have been located in the Maros region at the present time. Furthermore, if Baden economy had relied heavily on pastoralism, one would expect to find Baden settlements in the region, and architectural elements (such as apsidal houses) found at Baden sites in regions outside of the Carpathian Basin that have been associated with animal husbandry (Mallory 1989). Such evidence, however, has not been located. Indeed, the Maros region does not come under substantial settlement until much later during the Iron Age, at which point transhumant pastoralists occupied the area (Jankovich et al. 1998). As a result of the lack of archaeological data pertaining to the kurgan builders, a model of Yamnaya migration onto the Great Hungarian Plain during the Middle/Late Copper Age transition is easy to envision, but difficult to support concretely. As such, two general

194 possibilities exist for the appearance of kurgans on the Plain at this time: 1) local adoption of a foreign practice through diffusion and acculturation; or 2) a migration onto the Plain from the east that left few traces in the archaeological record. Snow (2009) recently addressed similar migration issues. He stated that a key element of understanding the nature of a prehistoric migration involves not only having knowledge of its structure, but also estimating (or accurately determining) the size of the movement. As such, a large-scale migration may occur by which a large migratory population subjugates a subordinate population in the destination region, with possible consequences for the subjugated population including displacement, absorption, and annihilation. Conversely, a relatively small migration or a steady flow of multiple small groups or bands of people over a long period of time can result in a non-violent arrival in a previously occupied region, where migratory populations receive subordinate status (Snow 2009:11). Possible long-term consequences for such a population include absorption into the local population, isolation (insulation or marginalization), annihilation of the group by locals, expulsion, or return migration. In addition to outlining long-term consequences of migration for local and migrant populations, Snow listed four classes of evidence that one would expect to find preserved from the donor culture in the destination. In order of significance, they are burials, architecture, ceramics, and economy (Snow 2009:13). Snow’s justification of selecting these particular culture characteristics for preservation in the destination region is similar to Lemmonier’s (1992) description of conservative technologies and Budden and Sofaer’s (2009) illustration of the importance of non-discursive knowledge and technology in pottery manufacture. To distill their main ideas into a single thought, certain cultural and technological characteristics are subject to change relatively rapidly, while other more conservative technological attributes are deeply imbedded non-discursive knowledge, and are therefore highly resistant to change. In applying some of Snow’s (2009) argument to the appearance of kurgans of the Great Hungarian Plain, this project’s spatial analysis tested absorption of a migratory population vs. isolation of an invasive population by local groups. Sherratt (1997b) argued for the isolation of the migratory kurgan builders based upon the spatial exclusivity of kurgan burial tumuli and Late Copper Age Baden archaeological sites. The results of this dissertation’s spatial analysis support Sherratt’s conclusions that kurgans and Late Copper Age settlements exhibit a complementary distribution at a low resolution, though a number of exceptions to this rule exist at higher

195 resolutions in the Körös River study area. Ultimately, Sherratt argued for a case of isolation (1997b:310), by which a relatively small population of kurgan builders arrived in the Körös region around 3,500 B.C. and became insulated against the surrounding Baden population. This isolation occurred either through social pressures, or more likely due to the kurgan builders’ selection of previously deforested open areas for stockbreeding. These areas were unpopulated after half a millennium of thinning Middle Copper Age populations due either to environmental or economic factors (Sherratt 1997a:281-282, 1997b:309:310). Although such a model is satisfying, it fails to account for the lack of other archaeological evidence that could explain the presence of a foreign population in the Körös region at this time (for example, increased evidence of stockbreeding, campsites, or stronger evidence of interaction with the indigenous population), or why they apparently failed to exploit the nearby Maros fan that would have been ideal environment for herding. As an alternative to Sherratt’s model, I propose a scenario under which the migratory population of kurgan builders was absorbed into the local population of the Körös region relatively rapidly after their arrival. This differs from Sherratt’s model, which proposed a prolonged period of avoidance (perhaps territoriality) between the Körös region’s indigenous population and the kurgan builders. The results presented in earlier chapters of this dissertation do not conclusively rule out a migration into the region around the time of the Middle/Late Copper Age transition, and indeed could be used to support a model of migration with an extremely limited effect on the cultural or economic trajectory of the Körös region’s indigenous population. Such a migration scenario fits into the frameworks set forth in this volume, including those of Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) and Snow (1999), while simultaneously taking into account Anthony’s (1990) contention that migrating culture groups tend to replicate the parent culture in simpler form. For the present discussion, Anthony’s replication hypothesis explains the retention of conservative behaviors – such as burial traditions – that are extremely resistant to change. A key component to an absorption scenario is Snow’s belief that demic expansions of even dominant culture groups like the Yamnaya can result in their absorption by societies in the destination region if they spread themselves too thinly, or if their numbers are too few to maintain a dominant presence on the landscape (2009:19). The Huns are an excellent example of this scenario. Despite their continuous expansion and eventual ubiquity between the Caspian Sea

196 and France, the nature of their society was such that few traces of them are found in the archaeological record (Thompson 1996). Indeed, by the time the Huns had spread across Europe, they had all but abandoned pastoralism and were almost entirely dependent on local subject populations for food and shelter, having almost no means of production. After A.D. 450, the thinly spread Hun Empire lost their military and strategic edge against the Romans, and Hun leaders began to look to their own local interests. This led to the dissolution of the empire without a decisive military battle. Although many Huns may have been killed by local subject populations or fled east in a return migration, many thousands of Huns were absorbed into local populations and dissolved into the societies that they once had conquered (Snow 2009:17; Thompson 1996). Although no solid archaeological evidence exists to label the Yamnaya or the migrant kurgan builders as conquerors, the signature of kurgan builders in the archaeological record of the Great Hungarian Plain is comparable to that of the Huns. The presently available evidence suggests that a migration, even of modest size, did indeed occur around 3,500 B.C. onto the Great Hungarian Plain. The migrants constructed burial monuments in their own tradition, but they were most likely absorbed into local populations relatively quickly. This scenario is plausible given not only the lack of an archaeological signature beyond monumental burial architecture, but also the lack of evidence for a significant increase in a pastoral subsistence economy in the Körös region, or in the adjacent Maros fan that was not intensively exploited during this time period despite an environment ideal for stockbreeding and herding (Gyucha 2010). Discussion of the ceramic results. Ceramic data analyzed as part of this study support a scenario of population continuity between the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age. Both macroscopic and petrographic data suggest relatively homogeneity in production methods, firing technology, and the addition of temper over time. Variability does exist, however. Most notably, the addition of grog became more frequent between the Middle Copper Age and Middle Bronze Age, and subtle but measurable change in paste and body ratios took place during the same time period. Importantly, this change is measured over a long period of time, rather than as a disjunction between two distinct cultural phases. In fact, the first notably grog tempered ceramics occurred after the Middle Copper Age, and the general trend of the approximately 2,000 year period of the Middle and Late Copper Age and Early and Middle

197

Bronze Age is a subtle, but steady increase in the frequency of grog temper. Thus, changes in body composition occurred gradually and in a way not indicative of an abrupt shift in production technology. Such a change is not the archaeological signature expected in the case of a migration or invasion scenario, where the more likely pattern is one of change. Indeed, even ceramics from the Middle Copper Age and Early Bronze Age exhibit measured, rather than abrupt changes in body and paste composition at a time of drastic change in ceramic form and decoration (Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998). Similar to the settlement pattern data, the ceramic data do not point to a significant cultural impact caused by a migratory population entering the Great Hungarian Plain at this time. In fact, a recent elemental study of white encrustation on ceramics from the Hungarian Plain by Parkinson et al. (2010) determined that bone paste was applied to incised decoration on Copper Age and Bronze Age ceramics. The authors applied the results to the question of material culture impact at the time of the appearance of kurgans, determining that the influence of the “Kurgan invasion” did not affect subtle aspects of ceramic decorative tradition (2010:69). As a decorative technique highly susceptible to change in the case of cultural contact through migration or invasion, such a characteristic persisting over a long period of time contributes to an argument of population continuity and little or no indigenous change resulting from the arrival of a population of kurgan builders. Despite the ceramic data presented in this dissertatation and in Parkinson et al.’s (2010) pilot study, it remains impossible to rule out an immigration event based on the archaeological data, as limited as they may be, and the settlement data relating to kurgan burial tumuli. Stratigraphic data indicate that at least some of the kurgans were constructed at around the time of the Middle/Late Copper Age transition (Escedy 1979), and although the relationship between kurgans and settlements remains difficult to interpret without greater chronological control, the complementary distribution of kurgans and Late Copper Age sites is compelling in regards to a migration scenario. As discussed above, migratory populations can be and have been incorporated into local populations relatively quickly and without a significant signature in the archaeological record (Thompson 1996). The conclusions presented here largely support Sherratt’s (1997a, 1997b) contention that a population of Yamnaya kurgan builders co-existed with the indigenous Late Copper Age (and possibly Middle Copper Age) population in the region, and that the populations tended to place settlements and burial monuments in separate

198 locations across the landscape. This may have stemmed from a desire for areas of higher or lower relief, access to fertile agricultural soils, a need for soils more suited for pastoralism, or perhaps just a general strategy of avoidance. This is in contrast to the scenario of invasion, subjugation, and replacement in indigenous Hungarian Plain groups by conquerors from the east proposed by Gimbutas (1970).

A Revised and Expanded Model of Late Copper Age Settlement and Economy The set of settlement and material culture changes experienced on the Great Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age was multi-faceted and more complicated than most previous models have indicated. Although the period was characterized by the Plain’s incorporation into the wider, materially homogeneous Baden material culture horizon, multiple internal and external factors were in play that made this time period exceptional. Sochacki (1990:99-101) has previously discussed the complexity of Baden at the scale of eastern Europe, and the regional range of diversity in economic strategies and burial customs. Furholt (2008) also discussed variability of social and cultural practices between regional populations of the Baden material culture group in his analysis of stylistic variability in pottery. The results presented as part of this research project also point toward modest compositional variability between pottery of the Körös and Maros regions (though a more complete comparison of a battery of stylistic attributes would be useful for comparative purposes). The variability at multiple scales throughout the Baden material culture area does not resemble a pattern one might expect in a destination region with a large demic migration ushering in substantive material culture change. Indeed, the presence of thousands of kurgans scattered across the Hungarian Plain is the only convincing tangible evidence of migration from the east at this time. This renders a migration model in and of itself insufficient to explain the changes on the Plain at the beginning of the Copper Age, and of the development of the materially homogeneous Baden material culture as a whole. Rather, a complex interaction of multiple factors contributed to changes at the local level in the Körös region that in many ways mirrored changes throughout the Carpathian Basin and eastern Europe. The changes observed in ceramic form and design late in the Copper Age may partially reflect an attempt on the part of the Plain’s indigenous population to display their economic and social identities in the face of an intrusive migration. Bourdieu (1984:281) noted the symbolic value of ceramic display, and the adoption of the wider Baden material culture style may have

199 been a conscious or unconscious move on the part of the people of the Hungarian Plain to align themselves economically and socially with their trading partners beyond the Carpathian Mountains. Bowser (2000) discussed pottery decoration as a signaling process for the expression of social identity, and such behavior has analogues during the Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain when social boundaries were more rigorously maintained between groups in the region despite general similarities in economy, subsistence, and settlement organization (see Parkinson 2006a; Chapter Three, this volume). A population of migrants likely entered the Carpathian Basin from the east sometime around 3,500 B.C., at or near the time of the Middle/Late Copper Age transition. Currently, archaeologists lack the evidence necessary to estimate the size of this migration, or even the path of a migration stream or multiple, smaller migrations. However, the population must have been sizeable enough to create an initial signature of kurgan burial mounds across the landscape of the Körös River watershed, though the duration of the initial occupation remains uncertain given the absence of definitive stratigraphic, settlement, or radiometric data. The issue then becomes not one of the existence of a migration, but the impact of such an event on the indigenous people of the Great Hungarian Plain. Did the arrival of the kurgan builders significantly impact the lifeways of the native population or substantially affect the social and cultural trajectories already in play? The results of this study do not support such a scenario. The ceramic and spatial data together support a model of long-term population continuity, characterized by an extended pattern of population nucleation and dispersal closely related to social and economic factors. This interpretation supports the conclusions of researchers such as Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) and Gyucha (2010), and the results of recent studies pointing toward long-term population continuity in the region (Parkinson et al. 2010). The contribution of the kurgan builders to the cultural tapestry of the Hungarian Plain may not have been the introduction of specific cultural characteristics, but may have been the construction of the kurgans themselves. Following their construction, the kurgans became dominant landmarks on a landscape otherwise characterized by its flatness. Aside from large tell settlements, larger kurgans would have been the most visible landscape features in the Körös region, and even the smaller kurgans would have been noteworthy monuments on the Plain. This implies that a relatively small migration of kurgan builders into the region late in the Middle

200

Figure 9.1. Monument to a modern Hungarian political movement placed atop a kurgan in Békés County. A cartographic survey marker is visible in the background, at the apex of the mound. Even in the modern era, kurgans remain important landmarks and prominent features on the Great Hungarian Plain.

Copper Age or early in the Late Copper Age would have had an impact on the visual landscape of the Körös region. Previous models of Yamnaya migration onto the Hungarian Plain (see Gimbuas 1977, 1979, 1980; Anthony 1990) have described migrations occurring in multiple waves over an extended period of time, or at least one large migration into the region. However, it is possible that a modestly sized migration event could have resulted in the archaeological signature seen in the Körös region, if the tradition of kurgan building was adopted by local populations and carried on into later periods. The social and cultural impact of this signature – the kurgans – may have had a greater impact over time than in their initial appearance. Kurgans and cultural context. Although kurgans have been excavated in the Körös region and across the Great Hungarian Plain (Escedy 1979), it has not been firmly established that Yamnaya immigrants from the east constructed all of the tumuli. The possibility exists that people indigenous to the region who emulated the burials of Yamnaya migrants constructed many kurgans on the Hungarian Plain later, or perhaps contemporaneously. Such a scenario

201 seems plausible, since not all kurgans contained Yamnaya materials (see Chapter Three; Escedy 1979). Subsequent inhabitants of the region reused kurgans as burial locations, and Scythians and Sarmations constructed burial mounds as late as the Iron Age (Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich et al. 1998). In the Middle Ages and later, churches and other buildings were constructed atop kurgans much like monks between the 11th and 13th centuries placed the Csolt Monastary atop the Vésztő-Mágor tell near the city of Vésztő in the Körös region. Even now, kurgans retain place names that are hundreds of years old and serve as landmarks for farmers, geographers, and even as monuments for modern political movements (Figure 9.1). Given their significance after the Copper Age, the continuing construction and reuse of burial mounds later in prehistory, emulating the earliest kurgans on the Hungarian Plain, may represent the long-term cultural contribution of the Middle/Late Copper Age Yamnaya migrants into the region. Higgenbotham (2000:7) noted the importance of not only the construction and use of emulated aspects of material culture, but also the necessity of modification of borrowed features in order to be legitimized by local populations. She stated that one of the best indicators of cultural emulation is the modification or hybridization of features of the emulated object to integrate them into the local cultural context. The placement of some kurgans near Late Copper Age settlements (or vice-versa), as well as the presence of Middle and Late Copper Age ceramic material in kurgan burials and construction layers, serve as indications of modification, hybridization, and legitimization. Further archaeological research is necessary to bolster these claims, though the questions of hybridization and emulation remain intriguing and important. Archaeological and modern examples of emulation. Many examples of emulation, modification, and hybridization can be found in the archaeological, ethnohistoric, and historical records. The examples presented here are meant to briefly illustrate this phenomenon through various lines of archaeological evidence at different times throughout history. Pottery and other ceramic materials were often emulated in prehistory; or, as Dickinson (1994:131) noted, vessels of wood and stone were often produced alongside pottery throughout the Neolithic, though this practice subsided as ceramic technology improved. Even more, non- ceramic materials of the Bronze Age Aegean were primarily produced for display, made of attractive materials (usually bronze), were difficult to work, and were often decorated more elaborately then their clay counterparts. These metal vessels were associated with status – the majority of examples have been found in contexts such as palaces, large buildings, religious

202 sites, and elaborate graves. As such, it is not surprising that the emulation of metal vessel forms in clay took place as far away as the Carpathian Basin. During the Late Copper Age, some vessel handles emulated the handles of bronze and ceramic vessels from the Balkans (Kalicz 1963). Although the emulation of metal vessel forms did not necessarily accompany dramatic change in society of economy in the Carpathian Basin at this time, it does illustrate how the introduction of foreign ideas can have lasting effects on the material culture of a region, despite little direct interaction with foreign populations. From a much different perspective, emulation has taken place in contact and colonization scenarios, where subjugated populations incorporated certain characteristics of material culture from the dominant population. For example, Colono ware is low-fired, unglazed earthenware produced from the east coast of North America and the Caribbean in the 18th and 19th centuries. As one of the best examples of emulation and hybridization found in the archaeological record, Colono ware represents a combination of features of European refined earthenwares, Native American course earthenwares, and traditions in West African pot-making brought to North America by African slaves (see Noël Hume 1962). Quite often, Colono ware emulated form and function of European finewares, while utilizing the less sophisticated production technology available to African slaves. Especially common was the emulation of specific design features such as rim shape and footrings, in addition to overall form. Colono wares are particularly common in archaeological contexts in Spanish colonial regions of North America, including the Caribbean and parts of Florida. Such pottery frequently reproduced Spanish forms of refined earthenwares, but sometimes retained local forms, manufacturing techniques, and materials. Local aboriginal groups as well as Africans produced Colono wares, and they incorporated a wide variety of local ceramic making traditions into the largely homogeneous Spanish colonial material culture (Deagan 1987; see also Noël Hume 1962; Fairbanks 1962; Ferguson 1978). Deagan (1987:104) stated that the incorporation of local New World ceramic characteristics and the manipulation of local materials to accommodate Hispanic preferences was an intentional adaptive strategy on the part of aboriginal and African populations. Although the emulation of ceramic form and design can only be applied broadly to the emulation of kurgans on the Hungarian Plain, examples depicting the emulation of burial mounds and monumental burial architecture also exist in the archaeological record. For

203 example, Williams (2006) described changes in existing mortuary traditions that occurred over a very short time period at Sutton Hoo in medieval England. Variability is observed over time in terms of kind and number of grave goods. Despite this variability, however, large earthen mounds were continuously constructed atop graves throughout the early medieval period. The mound burials were not reused, and appear to have been singular events commemorating the death and remembrance of individuals rather than groups or lineages (Williams 2006:159-162). Interestingly, prehistoric barrow cemeteries exist in the region surrounding Sutton Hoo (Carver 1998), and Williams (2006:161) suggested that the medieval mounds at the site may have evoked associations with prehistoric barrow cemeteries in the region rather than, or in addition to, association with other medieval mounds at and around the site. In addition to its cemeteries of burial mounds, Sutton Hoo is well known for its rich assortment of grave goods and its famous ship burial, and thus its description as a “burial ground of kings” (Carver 1998). Although in many ways exceptional in comparison to the kurgan tumuli of the Great Hungarian Plain at the end of the Copper Age, the mounds at Sutton Hoo may illustrate a similar phenomenon. As on the Hungarian Plain, barrows and barrow cemeteries built prehistorically remained dominant features on the landscape for many centuries, into the early medieval period in Britain. The mounds at Sutton Hoo may have referenced the prehistoric barrows as powerful or important places on the landscape, and the individuals interred beneath the mounds may have sought an association with the ancestors who constructed other important and dominant monuments on the landscape. Summary. Ultimately, there is not sufficient evidence to state that kurgan builders dramatically affected the established social structure and cultural trajectory of the Hungarian Plain prior to their arrival. The results of this study suggest a period of long-term population and economic continuity stretching from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age. Internal economic and social trajectories led to a decrease in occupation of the central Plain by the Late Copper Age, tighter integration with economies outside of the Carpathian Basin, and incorporation into the materially homogeneous Baden material culture horizon. However, such a model does not mean that even a modest migration of kurgan builders onto the Plain at around 3,500 B.C. did not have a lasting impact. The initial constructions of kurgans in the region may have resulted in the continued emulation and construction of kurgans well after the initial Yamnaya migrants were absorbed into the local population. One premise

204 regarding migration implied by the model described above – that even small emigrations of people can have a dramatic impact on local culture through emulation over the long-term – is supported by other archaeological evidence and by the results of the archaeological investigation presented in this dissertation. Unfortunately, until we better understand how kurgans developed across the landscape, and until we develop a detailed chronological sequence for their appearance, the true impact of their construction on the Great Hungarian Plain will remain shrouded in uncertainty.

Long-term Population and Economic Continuity on the Great Hungarian Plain The results of this research project support a model of settlement and material culture change based on a foundation of long-term population continuity. Based upon the settlement and ceramic evidence presented in Chapters Seven and Eight, the model described in this chapter resembles and expands upon the settlement, economic, and environmental model developed by Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) as part of his work in on the Dévaványa Plain area of Békés County. The overall pattern in the Körös region and of the central Plain moves away from settlement in the center of the Plain, and shows an increase in site number and density on the edges of the Plain. This intensification represents a movement closer to raw materials, finished goods, and access to trade and exchange routes. Punctuated by internal cycles of population nucleation and dispersal, this pattern persisted throughout the Neolithic, Copper Age, and into the Early and Middle Bronze Age. As discussed in Chapter Three, the developmental trajectory of the Great Hungarian Plain does not fit easily into traditional models of social development. Sherratt (1997a, 1997b) most directly approached the long-term movement of settlements away from the center of the Plain and, essentially, out of the Körös region. This is especially true during the Middle Copper Age, when fewer Bodrogkeresztúr settlements are known than in the previous Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár phase. The settlement data presented as part of this research mirror Sherratt’s assessment of his study region on the Dévaványa Plain at the scale of the entire Körös region. This continued dispersal from the central tell sites of the Late Neolithic resulted both from a cyclic social leveling mechanism (e.g. voting with one’s feet; see Gyucha et al. 2004; Parkinson 2002, 2006b), and from the wider pull of large-scale trade and exchange systems operating primarily outside of the Plain. During the Late Neolithic, Early Copper Age, and Middle Copper

205

Age, Parkinson (2002) noted a correlation in material culture differentiation between groups in the Körös region, and degree of nucleation or dispersal (termed “integration”). In other words, in periods characterized by nucleation, material culture expressed more regional differentiation. This is clear during periods such as the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age in the Körös River watershed, where multiple material culture groups occupy relatively distinct geographic areas. The Late Copper Age Baden material culture phase adheres to this pattern. Previous assessments of stylistic variability (see Escedy et al. 1982; Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich 1998) and the macroscopic and petrographic analyses of visible features of ceramic manufacturing technology presented here support a model of broadly homogeneous ceramic material within the Körös region and between the Körös and Maros regions. In this period of settlement dispersal, almost no material culture differentiation is observed. On the other hand, for the first time since the Neolithic, the Körös region and the Great Hungarian Plain became incorporated into a homogeneous material culture horizon that developed and existed well beyond the Carpathian Basin. At around 3,500 B.C., settlement focused on the margins of the Plain (Banner 1956; Roman and Németi 1978; Sherratt 1997a, 1997b), and the pattern of exchange with populations outside of the Plain witnessed in the Early and Middle Copper Age continued to intensify (Gyucha 2010; Parkinson 2006b). The resource- rich intermountain valleys that previously supported only modest populations became the focus of Baden settlement in the region (Sherratt 1997a:291). Although the overall pattern during the Late Copper Age was one of dispersal from the Körös region and the central Hungarian Plain, it is incorrect to suggest that these areas became a cultural backwater. In fact, the archaeological evidence points to the contrary. Late Copper Age ceramic assemblages from both surface and excavated contexts across the central Plain are clearly related to the wider Baden cultural horizon based on vessel form and decoration (Jankovich et al. 1989; Jankovich 1998; Megyesi 1983). Furholt (2008) demonstrated that regional variability does exist amongst various Late Copper Age Baden assemblages, but this variability pales in comparison to the regional variability observed during the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. Even more, as previously discussed, regional Baden horizons maintained a variety of local practices (burial, house design) in spite of the generally homogeneous ceramic characteristics (Sochacki 1985). The retention of some local and regional cultural characteristics and the adoption of visible, easily transferrable characteristics like ceramic form and design do not point to a sudden

206 invasion or migration, even throughout the entire Baden region. Rather, the pattern suggests population continuity, with the adoption of certain cultural characteristics to indicate and legitimize participation in a wider economic system. Examples of the adoption and/or emulation of certain highly visible elements of material culture exist throughout the prehistoric archaeological record around the world. The Southeast Ceremonial Complex of the Mississippi Period (ca. 800-1500 C.E.) in North America is perhaps one of the geographically largest examples of this phenomenon. Although local populations retained some elements of material culture and cultural practices, specific highly visible characteristics were adopted that emulated the material culture and monumental architecture of larger Mississippi period settlements. Some examples of these characteristics include the construction of large platform mounds at major centers, repousse copper breastplates, and the use of shell temper in most Mississippi ceramics (Bense 1994; Pauketat 1994). In this way, authority was maintained by elites, and participation in a much wider cultural system was indicated and legitimized. The incorporation of the Hungarian Plain’s inhabitants into the wider Baden material culture and economic system significantly impacted the internal cycle of nucleation and dispersal – the leveling mechanism that held in check social momentum toward the development of institutionalized hierarchy. While levels of social complexity beyond egalitarianism did not develop fully at the end of the Neolithic, and the population subsequently dispersed across the landscape, the involvement of the Plain’s people in a wider economic system allowed for the procurement and utilization of prestige items – especially those made from bronze – near the end of the Late Copper Age and beginning of the Early Bronze Age. This is especially true of the central Plain, where both raw and finished materials were scarce and likely held a special significance. Corellates for the significance of rare or important objects exist in Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr burials, both intramurally and in cemeteries such as Tiszapolgár- Basatanya, where copper axe-heads were occasionally interred with male bodies (Bognár- Kutzián 1963). Unfortunately, not enough burial data exists in the Körös region, or on the eastern Hungarian Plain in general, to definitely observe similar behavior in Late Copper Age contexts. The general pattern established by the Late Copper Age in the study region continued for the next millennium. This lends support to a scenario by which the material culture homogenization observed during the Baden horizon had economic and social, rather than

207 migratory, origins. Although settlement nucleation and a return to a tell-based settlement system (as well as the appearance of institutionalized hierarchy and craft specialization) occurred on the Plain by the Middle Bronze Age, a focus on settlement near the edges of the Plain continued for the next 1,000 years. Bóna (1975), O’Shea (1978), and Sherratt (1997b) noted the role of trade in explaining intensified settlement near major rivers on the edges of the Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age. Due to their potential for linking long-distance trading partners and serving as established transportation routes, the Tisza and Maros Rivers took on important roles at this time (Sherratt 1997a:291). O’Shea noted imported items such as copper ornaments and shell beads in the Bronze Age graves of the Maros Region (1978, 1996), indicating that the procurement of finished foreign materials increased in importance and in volume over this time period. Ultimately, incorporation into a wider economic system led to the establishment and ubiquity of the Late Copper Age Baden material culture horizon in the Körös River watershed and across the Great Hungarian Plain. The migratory arrival of kurgan-building invaders, or a fully realized, internal cultural trajectory, are both insufficient explanations for the changes seen at this point in the region’s prehistory. The more frequent appearance of metal objects in burial contexts, the increasing focus of settlement on the resource-rich margins of the Plain, and the increasing importance of metal and prestige goods at this time have been well documented. Many archaeologists have noted the fundamental shifts in social interaction brought about by the mining, trading, and production of bronze during the Early and Middle Bronze Age, from some of the earliest studies of the period to more recent investigations (Childe 1930; Pare 2000; Raczky et al. 1995; Shennan 1986; Sherratt 1993). Although the use of prestige objects to express status in the social hierarchy had not been fully realized as early as the Middle and Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain, the economic engine that funneled such goods into the region had become well established. By the Late Copper Age, the Great Hungarian Plain was incorporated into a pan-central and -eastern European exchange system. The Baden material culture complex, most especially an extremely similar set of ceramic assemblages, was ubiquitous across the region, though a homogeneous ethnic, religious, or otherwise culturally related population did not exist at this time. Baden should not be conceptualized as a homogeneous “culture.” Rather, Baden existed as a cultural complex linked by a wide-ranging economic system and extremely similar

208 assemblages of ceramic materials. This model of Baden exchange and interaction concurs with Furholt’s (2008) recent assessment of heterogeneity in Boleráz and Baden materials on a continental scale, while simultaneously accounting for the general homogeneity of Late Copper Age ceramic material on the Plain, and in the Körös River watershed study region. The incorporation of people on the Hungarian Plain into a wider, more materially diverse exchange system during the Late Copper Age fundamentally affected the internal cycle of nucleation and dispersal, and the social leveling mechanism by which a relatively egalitarian social structure was maintained for thousands of years. The arrival and production of bronze prestige goods, coinciding with the beginning of a period of nucleation during the Early Bronze Age, contributed to nucleation during the Middle Bronze Age. This period experienced a renewed emphasis on tell settlements and the first appearance of craft specialization and institutionalized hierarchy on the Great Hungarian Plain. Far from resulting from the arrival of an invasive and dominating migratory population, the social structure consisting of population nucleation and dispersal, in combination with stronger economic and social ties with economic partners outside of the Plain, led to elements of societal organization never previously observed in the region. The changes documented at the end of the Copper Age did not result from a fully realized internal social trajectory. In fact, the internal trajectory likely delayed the initial development of specialization and institutionalized hierarchy in the region during the Late Neolithic/Early Copper Age transition (Parkinson 2002). So, the Late Copper Age Baden culture on the Great Hungarian Plain is not an anomalous phenomenon, but is instead a vital link, both in terms of economy and settlement, between the largely egalitarian social structure of earlier periods and the hierarchical social structures that appear later during the Bronze Age.

Implications for Anthropological Models of Homogeneous Material Cultures One purpose of this research project – to link the specific regional archaeological case study of the Baden Culture with wider anthropological models explaining the development of homogeneous material cultures – has framed the discussion of migration models, interaction spheres, and economic interaction as they pertain to the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. Each of the models for homogeneous material culture change discussed in Chapter Two are directly or indirectly tested in this dissertation through the application of the results of the

209 settlement and ceramic analyses presented in Chapters Seven and Eight to the archaeological and social models of Marija Gimbutas and Andrew Sherratt (see Chapter Two). In terms of migration as an explanatory force for the appearance of regionally homogeneous material cultures, archaeological, historical, and ethnohistorical examples exist that show the role that migration can play in such scenarios (see Chapter Two). Many archaeologists, from the earliest days of the discipline to the present, have alternately emphasized or questioned the role of migration in shaping cultural history. Less frequently discussed, however, is how relatively small immigrations of migratory people can fundamentally alter the physical signature of people occupying a region over the long-term. As suggested above, a modest arrival of kurgan-building migrants in the Great Hungarian Plain can account for the thousands of tumuli across the landscape, not only through primary construction but also through emulation and reuse of the mounds by indigenous people. The ephemeral signature of those who initially constructed kurgans in the region is explained by a rapid acculturation and an integration of tumulus use by the subsequent culture groups on the Plain. Although the Late Copper Age Baden material culture does not correspond to the precise use of Caldwell’s (1966) concept of an interaction sphere as initially developed, the appearance and ubiquity of Baden ceramic material on the Plain was due primarily to its incorporation into a wider economic interaction sphere. Caldwell did state, however, that interaction between sociocultural and socio political groups is amenable to and likely formative in the development of elite institutions and an overarching institutionalized hierarchy amongst participating groups (1944:141). When accounting for the influence of economy in the interaction sphere model, one can argue that the economic and information exchange networks, even amongst culture groups generally considered egalitarian and without ruling elites, can contribute to the development of institutionalized hierarchy depending on the material and cultural value of the items moving through the network. In the case of the Great Hungarian Plain, the economic ties developed and solidified by the Late Copper Age allowed the frequent acquisition and use of bronze and metal objects. As such, the regional material culture homogeneity seen on the Great Hungarian Plain should be viewed as an indicator of economic integration, and not as evidence of change catalyzed by migration or invasion.

210

Summary The results of this research support Sherratt’s model of economic integration and its consequences for settlement and material culture in the Körös region of the Plain. However, migration cannot, and should not, be eliminated as a contributing factor to the local archaeological signature over the long-term, especially when dealing with kurgans, their construction, and their subsequent use and reuse by populations indigenous to the study region. This is especially important to consider given the highly visible consequences of even relatively small migrations, such as the emulation of ceramic forms or, in this case, burial tumuli. The long-term prehistoric trajectory of settlement on the Great Hungarian Plain consisted of a regional trend toward economic and social interaction, supported by a local foundation of population and settlement nucleation and dispersal cycles. This research supports a model of the Late Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain not as an anomalous end to the social and settlement pattern visible in the Late Neolithic and Early and Middle Copper Age, but rather as an economically and culturally integrated part of the region’s prehistory that set the stage for social structures in the Bronze Age previously unseen on the Plain. The material culture homogenization on the Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age marked by pottery characteristic of the Boleráz and Baden material culture groups can be best explained by a model combining increased integration into an outside economic system and a social trajectory internal to the Plain. In terms of wider anthropological models, this research has demonstrated that material culture homogenization can be closely related to economy and exchange, and migration, invasion, or elimination scenarios are not the most likely or even most convenient explanations.

211

CHAPTER TEN CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Conclusions In closing, this research provides a glimpse of how regionally homogeneous material cultures can develop across a landscape over time, and of how such material culture horizons play out on the local level in terms of economy and settlement. It is hoped that long term social and economic trajectories, often spanning hundreds or thousands of years, will begin to gain more consideration for modeling material culture and settlement change, along with the more traditional explanatory mechanisms of migration and invasion. A focus on identifying continuity in the more subtle aspects of the archaeological record is indeed emerging, and though such studies often present more practical and theoretical challenges than the more accessible study of discontinuity and sudden change, they can often be just as, if not more, effective in developing and testing models of change. Recently, archaeologists working on the Great Hungarian Plain have greatly redefined our understanding of the region’s prehistory, especially in terms of modeling transitions between cultural phases possessing different settlement pattern and material culture characteristics. The results presented as part of this research project simply add to this ongoing effort, and contribute to the ever growing archaeological and anthropological knowledge of the region’s prehistory. The research described in this volume contributes to the wider body of archaeological and anthropological methods and theory in several ways. First and foremost, the results presented here contribute to our understanding of how regionally homogeneous material cultures develop across a landscape over time. Multiple trajectories can contribute to an artifact type’s ubiquity over a region or continent. As discussed in Chapter Two, human behaviors including migration, invasion, interaction spheres, and economic trends can contribute to regional homogeneity. Less often, however, a combination of multiple behaviors is used to explain the phenomenon. This is in spite of the likelihood that multiple factors can contribute to material culture spread, adoption, and ubiquity. This dissertation emphasizes the role in material culture homogenization played by both internal social trajectories and forces that involve interaction with outside populations, such as the development and intensification of economic ties and the duel dynamic of migration and integration. Such an approach can help explain not only how a particular aspect of material culture became extremely common over a wide area, but it can also

212 explain how and why other aspects of culture and societal structure, such as settlement patterns, changed as they did. Given the approach taken in this project, the research secondly contributes to modeling social, settlement, and material culture change on the Great Hungarian Plain at the end of the Copper Age. It speaks directly to the nature of the region’s incorporation into the wider Baden material culture complex by illustrating the relative compositional, technological, and manufacturing homogeneity of ceramic materials from the Middle Copper Age, Late Copper Age, and Early Bronze Age in the Körös region of the Plain. Variability among the ceramics of different periods, when it does exist, tends to occur steadily and slowly, rather than suddenly. This suggests that the culturally embedded framework and methodology for creating pots changed little over the approximately two millennia covered by this study, and indicates population continuity rather than a large migration of new people into the region. Additionally, the results contribute to the overall understanding of the social trajectory at play between the Neolithic and the Bronze Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. The model presented here suggests that the internal process of population nucleation and dispersal actually acted in concert with an intensifying settlement emphasis on the margins of the Plain as access to raw and finished materials, especially bronze goods, became more important at the end of the Copper Age and beginning of the Bronze Age. Ultimately, these two combined processes contributed to the development of institutionalized hierarchy and craft specialization on the Hungarian Plain during the nucleation phase of the Middle Bronze Age. In this context, the Late Copper Age was actually a pivitol period of time for the development of social complexity on the Plain. Third, from a methodological standpoint this research contributes to the understanding that multiple lines of evidence are required for the testing and refining of specific archaeological and anthropological models. Furthermore, this study has illustrated the importance of measuring local and regional patterns at multiple analytical scales since variables such as site distribution and density can dramatically differ from one portion of a study area to the next. And, the fact that patterns can appear quite different on local, regional, and continental scales demonstrates the value in observing patterns at multiple resolutions. For the present research, the development of the model described in Chapter Nine describing the behaviors that led to the study region’s incorporation into the Baden material culture horizon and economic system, the changing settlement pattern of the Copper Age, the integration of a migratory population into indigenous

213 society, and the social trajectory culminating with the nucleation of the Middle Bronze Age would not have been possible without multi-scalar spatial and ceramic analyses. While an expanded and updated archaeological site spatial analysis or macroscopic and petrographic ceramic analyses would have been interesting of their own merits, the use of just one line of evidence would have been insufficient for approaching the set of changes at the end of the Copper Age on the Hungarian Plain. Furthermore, a multi-scalar spatial study (e.g. site level, sub-region level, and regional level) allows for a controlled analysis of variability in material culture that is not possible at one scale along. For example, this study determined that Late Copper Age ceramics remained similar in terms of design and production throughout the region and between regions, though slight inter-site and inter-regional variability did, in fact exist. While this variability is not significant enough to suggest that an appearance of new manufacturing techniques influenced one particular group over another, it does suggest that regional variation in production and manufacture were maintained despite the Great Hungarian Plain’s incorporation into the Baden horizon, and as such it dovetails with Furholt’s (2008) results that detailed local stylistic variability in Boleráz and Baden materials over a wide area. Finally, the data and interpretations presented here can be made available to a wider archaeological and anthropological audience. Although the tested case studies are specific to the prehistoric Great Hungarian Plain, the overarching anthropological issues involved – including the development of regionally homogeneous material culture groups, and how local populations are incorporated into wider economic structures – are relevant in multiple time periods in many areas across the globe. Even more, the methodologies employed in both the settlement analysis and ceramic analyses may be useful for other archaeologists interested in the same types of questions in other regions and during other time periods. As such, this volume provides data useful for broader comparison, not just on the Great Hungarian Plain but in other regions where similar phenomena are being studied.

Future Research Although the results of this research project and the model developed from them stand on their own as a cohesive piece of work, numerous possibilities exist for the expansion of the research presented here and for future research directions. First and foremost, it is possible to expand upon the work presented here by incorporating petrographic data from different Baden

214 regions within and beyond Hungary in order to establish if local production traditions maintained themselves elsewhere. Although the material on the Great Hungarian Plain indicates population continuity over the long-term, this may not be true in other regions incorporated into the Baden material culture horizon, and other social processes may have been at work in the appearance of Baden elsewhere. Similarly, a multi-scalar study of settlement location and settlement change over time may reveal different processes at work before and during the Late Copper Age in different places. Second, further systematic excavation of intact Late Copper Age sites in the Körös region is necessary in order to firmly establish a ceramic chronology and to determine the relationship between Boleráz and Baden materials in the region. A major hindrance of the present research – a lack of chronological control between ceramic samples described variously as Boleráz and Baden – prevented a high-resolution comparative macroscopic and petrographic analysis of these phases of the Late Copper Age. Furthermore, excavation of Late Copper Age settlement sites in the region would bring to light other elements of material culture – such as house structure, settlement organization, burial traditions, and so on – that are largely lacking in the Körös region for the time period. Currently, the site of Hódmezővásárhely-Kopáncs I., Olasz-tanya in the Maros watershed to the southwest is under investigation, and it should produce a wealth of useful data of this type of analysis and interpretation. The excavation of such a site in the Körös watershed will provide an opportunity to continue and expand upon the comparative research presented in this volume. During the process of site collection in the fall of 2009, the site of Tarhos 67 was identified as a candidate for further testing and possible investigation. In the coming months and years, I hope to conduct an in-depth investigation of this site (and ideally other sites in southeastern Hungary) in order to compare the results with other geographic regions and countries. The biggest question remaining unanswered at the end of this research relates to the kurgans and how they came to be across the landscape of the Great Hungarian Plain. Given the approach of the present research, and the resources necessary to directly investigate the kurgans, a more in-depth study was beyond the scope of this dissertation. Unfortunately, without further research directly addressing the question of the kurgans their exact nature will remain uncertain. However, it may be possible to understand their relationship to the sites and people of the Late Copper Age on the Hungarian Plain by employing a number of different research strategies. A

215 direct study of a large number of kurgans will be a lengthy and expensive endeavor. But, by sampling a large number of kurgans across the landscape of the Hungarian Plain, it may be possible to establish and refine a chronology for their appearance and spread. First and foremost, the direct radiometric dating of skeletal material excavated from the primary burials of kurgans would be useful. Isotopic studies (especially strontium) of skeletal material could shed light on the provenance of the interred individuals, thereby directly approaching the question of migration. Nitrogen and oxygen isotopic study could shed light on the unanswered question of pastoralism on the Plain during the Late Copper Age. Accelerator mass spectrometry dating may be useful in conjunction with the collection of a large number of core samples from kurgans; however, this line of research would only prove useful if datable material was retrieved in the cores. Ultimately, a research project consisting of a battery of lines of evidence will be necessary for fully exploring and perhaps answering the question of the kurgans. The results of further research into the nature of social and settlement changes on the Great Hungarian Plain during the Late Copper Age will shed light not only on the region and time period under study. Like the research presented in this dissertation, it has the potential to speak to numerous other archaeological and anthropological issues. Although this dissertation is but a small contribution to the excellent body of scholarship available on Eastern European and Hungarian prehistory, I hope to make further contributions by continuing the research with similar archaeological and anthropological goals in mind. And, though this study has addressed a specific set of research questions and provided interpretation and discussion of them, future research will expand upon these questions and continue to examine broader anthropological phenomena with the support of archaeological lines of evidence.

216

APPENDIX A SITE COLLECTION SUMMARIES

217

Site: Békés 26

Transects Walked: 12 Average Visibility: 80%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 0 0 Total Body 11 157 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 3 0 8 0 0 0

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 0 Tiszapolgar 1 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 5 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 3 Csoszhalom 0 Later 2

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other SF1 1 9 1 SF2 1 52 1 SF3 1 12 1 SF4 1 17 1 SF5 1 7 1 SF6 1 10 1 SF7 1 4 1 SF8 1 6 1 SF9 1 11 1 SF10 1 7 1 SF11 1 22 1

218

Site: Békés 178

Transects Walked: 6 Average Visibility: 40%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 0 0 Total Body 14 233 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 1 1 11 1 0 14

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 3 Tiszapolgar 1 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 4 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 4 Csoszhalom 0 Later 2

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other SF1 3 29 3 SF2 1 7 1 SF3 1 23 1 SF4 1 8 1 SF5 2 29 2 SF6 1 18 1 SF7 1 17 1 SF8 2 28 2 SF9 1 68 1 SF10 1 6 1

219

Site: Belmegyer 82

Area Intensively Collected: 942 m2 Average Visibility: 30

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 64 1700 Total Body 137 3050 Total Bone 37 196 Chipped Stone 5 20 Ground Stone 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 6 1 2 0 2 11

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 2 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 1 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 4 AVK/Szakalhat 1 Boleraz 3 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 0

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 13 150 0 0 0 11 9 1 S30 1 <100 0 0 2 0 5 1 W30 6 100 0 0 3 6 6 0 E30 1 <100 0 0 1 2 1 3 N30 6 100 0 0 0 3 0 0 N60 36 600 4 0 0 16 7 0 N90 8 100 0 0 0 5 1 0 XU1 18 600 0 0 0 8 0 0 XU2 6 100 0 0 1 0 0 0 XU3 24 650 3 1 0 8 3 0 XU4 17 650 4 0 0 3 3 0 XU5 1 <100 0 0 0 2 2 0

220

Site: Biharugra33

Area Intensively Collected: 453 m2 Average Visibility: 92.5%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 80 2250 Total Body 229 6400 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 2 2 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 16 1 22 2 2 43

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 8 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 3 Körös 0 Baden 23 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 2 Csoszhalom 0 Later 7

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 90 2650 22 0 0 5 0 1 S30 46 2000 7 0 0 6 0 0 S60 36 800 3 0 0 57 0 0 N30 35 800 4 0 0 2 0 1 N60 5 <100 1 0 0 5 0 0 W30 11 150 2 0 0 3 0 0 E15 6 <100 1 0 0 2 0 0 SF1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

221

Site: Bucsa 13

Transects Walked: 6 Average Visibility: 70%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 0 0 Total Body 3 57 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 0 0 3 0 0 3

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 0 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 2 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 1

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other SF1 1 27 1 SF2 1 14 1 SF3 1 16 1

222

Site: Fuzesgyarmat 97

Transects Walked: 8 Average Visibility: 85%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 0 0 Total Body 7 94 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 3 0 4 0 0 7

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 0 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 5 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 2

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Pre Body Dia Late Mo Dau Unit (N) BodyWt (g) g r d b Bone Other SF1 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF2 1 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF3 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF4 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF5 1 26 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF6 1 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 SF7 1 24 0 1 0 0 0 0

223

Gerla 64

Area Intensively Collected: 549.5 m2 Average Visibility: 28.6% ‘ Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 128 2600 Total Body 127 5150 Total Bone 29 77 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 10 3 41 9 0 63

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 2 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 0 AVK/Szakalhat 7 Boleraz 8 Tisza 0 EBA 1 Csoszhalom 0 Later 0

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 50 2200 11 0 0 90 13 0 W15 16 600 3 0 0 11 7 0 W30 1 100 0 0 0 6 1 0 E15 16 800 1 0 0 4 3 0 E30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S15 9 700 1 0 0 1 0 0 N15 17 750 2 0 0 16 5 0

224

Site: Korosladany21

Area Intensively Collected: n/a Average Visibility: 85

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 0 0 Total Body 2 10 Total Bone 0 0 Chipped Stone 1 1 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body/Lugs Other Total 1 0 1 0 2

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 0 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 2 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 0

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other SF1 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 SF3 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0

225

Site: Mezobereny34

Area Intensively Collected: 453 m2 Average Visibility: 76.6%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 8 200 Total Body 270 3300 Total Bone 5 <100 Chipped Stone 0 0 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 5 2 5 1 0 13

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 4 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 2 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 2 AVK/Szakalhat 0 Boleraz 0 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 5

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 74 1000 2 0 0 4 5 0 N30 41 100 2 0 0 2 0 0 N60 1 <100 0 0 0 0 0 0 S30 57 1200 3 0 0 1 0 0 W30 90 1000 5 1 1 1 0 0 E30 7 <100 0 0 0 0 0 0

226

Site: Szeghalom 80

Area Intensively Collected: 1256 m2 Average Visibility: 87.5

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 341 7000 Total Body 587 9300 Total Bone 37 149 Chipped Stone 18 80 Ground Stone 0 0

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 26 0 46 3 3 78

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 24 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 1 Bodgrogkeresztur 7 Körös 1 Baden 20 AVK/Szakalhat 4 Boleraz 4 Tisza 0 EBA 11 Csoszhalom 0 Later 6

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 69 900 13 0 0 105 0 2 E30 96 1200 16 0 0 38 7 2 E60 84 1000 10 4 1 19 0 1 E90 20 200 0 0 0 9 0 1 E120 7 <100 1 0 0 3 0 0 E150 1 <100 0 0 0 1 0 0 W30 29 600 14 0 0 39 5 0 W60 53 400 0 0 1 18 2 5 W90 23 200 0 0 0 3 0 0 W120 3 <100 0 0 0 1 0 0 S30 55 1000 7 0 0 35 16 4 N30 58 2000 7 0 1 22 0 0 N60 6 <100 0 0 0 3 0 0 NE15 58 1200 7 0 0 35 7 2 NE45 22 600 0 0 0 10 0 0 NE75 3 <100 0 0 0 0 0 0

227

Site: Tarhos 67

Area Intensively Collected: 1020.5 m2 Average Visibility: 95%

Overview Material N Wt (g) Daub 7 <100 Total Body 468 15950 Total Bone 11 297 Chipped Stone 4 4 Ground Stone 1 66

Diagnostic Sherds Rims Bases Dec Body Lugs/Handles Other Total 10 3 41 9 0 63

Periods Represented Prehistoric General 7 Tiszapolgar 0 Neolithic General 0 Bodgrogkeresztur 0 Körös 0 Baden 48 AVK/Szakalhat 6 Boleraz 1 Tisza 0 EBA 0 Csoszhalom 0 Later 1

Distribution of Material (Rough Sort) Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other C 98 2000 13 0 4 4 25 1 N30 59 1900 8 0 3 0 14 2 S30 73 1700 5 1 7 1 5 2 E30 60 3000 8 0 2 1 4 1 E60 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 S60 31 1750 1 1 4 0 0 0 S90 3 <100 0 0 2 0 0 0 W30 2 <100 0 0 2 0 0 0 SE15 96 3000 15 0 0 0 5 0 SE45 25 800 2 1 6 0 9 1 SE75 1 <100 0 0 0 0 1 0 NW15 9 800 0 0 3 1 4 2 NW45 11 1000 1 0 0 0 0 1 SF1 1 31 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF2 1 15 1 0 0 0 0 0

228

Site: Tarhos 67, Distribution of Material, continued.

Unit Body (N) BodyWt (g) Pre Diag Later Mod Daub Bone Other SF2 1 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF3 3 62 3 0 0 0 0 0 SF4 1 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF5 1 28 1 0 0 0 0 0 SF6 3 67 3 0 0 0 0 0

229

APPENDIX B PETROGRAPHIC DATA

230 in

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2.3 3.7 0.8 4.3 0.8 1.9 1.6 10.2 Body

% Sand %

5 9 0 8 2 1 8 10 12 3.8 6.9 0.8 5.9 5.1 4.4 6.8 4.5 3.4 8.8 4.7 3.8 11.6 18.7 16.5 14.3 10.7 17.3 10.6 10.6

% Temper %

95 91 92 90 98 99 87 93.9 96.3 93.1 98.4 88.4 81.3 83.5 85.7 94.1 86.3 84.7 95.6 82.7 89.4 93.2 95.5 92.3 91.2 89.3 93.7 89.4 96.2

% Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

7 20 10 16 19 19 16 24 19 5.8 5.7

30.9 24.6 26.2 19.4 18.2 25.9 17.9 10.8 17.4 27.9 18.3 21.9 13.1 18.4 22.9 17.8 23.5 21.6 % Silt %

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2.4 3.7 0.8 3.5 4.5 2.1 1.6 1.1

% Sand %

% 81 93 90 84 81 80 81

66.7 75.4 73.8 76.3 80.6 94.2 94.3 74.1 78.6 89.2 82.6 72.1 81.7 78.1 86.9 81.6 77.1 77.7 81.9 74.4 76.5 77.3 Matrix

8 9 7 2

11 4.3 8.8 8.2 7.9 8.3 2.5 2.7 2.5 4.9 7.2 7.6 4.3 4.1 8.8 8.8 3.8 2.4 4.5 11.1 12.3 16.7 11.7 10.3 11.5

% Voids %

F3 F2 F2 F2 F3 F1 E1 E1 E1 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E3 E2 E1 E2 C2 C2 C2 D1 D1 D2 D2 D3 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA EBA LCA LCA LCA LCA EBA EBA EBA LCA LCA LCA LCA EBA LCA LCA AVK AVK MBA MBA MBA Culture Neolithic Neolithic Neolithic Neolithic

Site HMVH HMVH HMVH HMVH HMVH Gerla64 Gerla64 Gerla64 Gerla64 Gerla64 Gerla64 Gerla64 Békés26 Békés26 Békés26 Békés26 Békés26 Békés26 Békés26 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Békés178 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 Sample Number Sample

231

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 5.1 4.5 Body % Sand in in Sand %

0 3 4 0 0 1 0 4 20 4.5 3.9 3.9 6.7 2.4 7.5 5.5 3.4 7.8 5.6 5.2 1.7 0.8 1.8 2.9 9.3 3.1 10.6 15.1 13.5 % Temper %

80 93 99 96 100 100 100 95.5 96.1 96.1 96.1 94.3 97.6 92.5 94.5 69.6 89.4 92.2 93.4 94.8 98.3 99.2 84.9 98.2 97.1 90.7 91.8 95.5 86.5 % Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

16 31 16 28.6 14.1 10.3 21.2 20.2 18.2 12.5 24.7 23.7 12.8 28.2 30.1 37.6 15.8 22.2 39.1 15.5 35.7 25.3 22.9 23.6 28.4 18.6 15.8 10.4 13.5 % Silt %

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 5.3 4.5 % Sand %

% 83 69 71.4 85.9 89.7 78.8 79.8 81.8 84.4 75.3 76.3 87.2 71.8 69.9 62.4 84.2 77.8 60.9 84.5 64.3 74.7 77.1 76.4 71.6 81.4 78.9 79.5 89.6 86.5 Matrix

7 8 1 13 15 3.3 6.5 5.5 2.8 3.7 8.3 9.3 5.2 4.9 5.5 5.5 4.9 4.8 3.1 4.8 5.2 2.6 8.7 3.6 8.4 5.9 0.9 12.4 13.9 % Voids %

F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F2 F1 F1 E1 E1 E1 E2 E3 E1 E3 E1 E1 E1 E1 E3 E1 E2 E1 E1 D1 D3 D3 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA EBA EBA EBA LCA EBA LCA EBA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA AVK AVK AVK AVK MCA MCA MBA MCA MBA Culture Neolithic

berény34 Site ő Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Tarhos67 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom89 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Szeghalom80 Mez

030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 Sample Number Sample

232

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 2.9 Body % Sand in in Sand %

1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 11 6.5 4.5 2.8 0.8 6.9 5.8 2.6 2.9 6.3 6.2 3.1 4.5 5.6 9.6 9.1 12.9 5.56 20.6 10.4 15.2 % Temper %

99 86 99 96 98 89 100 100 100 100 93.5 94.4 95.5 97.2 99.2 93.1 94.2 97.4 94.2 93.7 93.8 96.9 95.5 79.4 89.6 94.4 84.8 90.4 90.9 % Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

22 16 17 19 8.1 22.3 16.1 14.7 20.6 18.3 18.3 15.9 20.4 11.6 11.2 13.4 10.6 14.2 25.5 16.8 16.4 14.3 23.5 18.9 20.2 11.2 14.1 11.1 13.3 % Silt %

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 % Sand %

% 78 81 80 81 91.9 77.7 82.7 85.3 79.4 81.7 81.7 84.1 79.6 88.4 88.8 86.6 89.4 85.8 74.5 83.2 83.6 85.7 76.5 81.1 79.8 88.8 85.9 88.9 86.7 Matrix

5 14 12 6.3 9.7 9.2 5.1 4.6 5.3 5.9 0.9 6.4 9.7 6.3 7.3 4.6 4.3 8.3 9.8 1.8 6.2 6.3 9.6 6.6 16.4 14.2 10.7 15.2 17.3 % Voids %

F1 F1 F1 F2 F2 F1 F1 F2 F2 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E3 E2 E3 E2 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA EBA EBA LCA LCA EBA ECA EBA LCA LCA LCA LCA MBA MBA MBA Culture Neolithic Prehistoric Prehistoric Szarmation Szarmation

berény34 Site ő Busca13 Busca13 Busca13 Tarhos67 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Békés178 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Bélmegyer82 Bélmegyer82 Bélmegyer82 Mez Füzesgyarmat97 Füzesgyarmat97 Füzesgyarmat97 Füzesgyarmat97 Füzesgyarmat97 Füzesgyarmat97

60 059 0 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 Sample Number Sample

233

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 5.1 5.6 0.9 Body % Sand in in Sand %

0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5.2 9.6 4.8 4.4 7.7 2.1 1.1 1.8 6.2 6.3 1.7 6.6 1.9 3.3 3.3 12.2 10.3 % Temper %

99 99 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 94.8 90.4 95.2 95.6 87.8 92.3 97.9 98.9 98.2 93.8 93.7 97.5 86.7 93.4 98.1 94.9 96.7 94.4 99.1 96.7 % Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

17 16 16 8.1 8.4 7.9 9.2 9.7 9.5 17.9 10.8 13.8 12.7 14.8 14.9 14.4 24.8 14.4 21.6 20.8 11.7 10.9 13.6 17.1 16.8 10.7 14.3 11.1 19.8 % Silt %

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 5.1 5.6 0.9 % Sand %

% 83 84 84 82.1 90.2 86.2 91.9 87.3 85.2 91.6 85.1 85.6 75.2 85.6 77.6 79.2 88.3 89.1 92.1 86.4 77.8 83.2 85.2 89.3 89.4 90.5 85.7 88.9 80.2 Matrix

3 11 8.5 7.9 5.8 5.9 0.9 3.3 6.3 3.9 9.5 3.9 6.1 4.4 5.5 1.9 7.9 3.3 6.6 4.5 11.4 10.3 10.3 10.9 12.6 16.7 10.7 14.4 10.9 % Voids %

F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 E1 E1 E2 E1 E2 E1 E1 E2 E2 E2 E1 E3 E3 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E2 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA LCA EBA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA MBA MCA MBA MCA MCA MCA MCA MCA Culture Prehistoric

49 65

119 ő ő ő Site Békés39 Békés39 Vészt Vészt Vészt Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra33 Biharugra53 Bélmegyer56 Bélmegyer56 Bélmegyer56 Bélmegyer56 Bélmegyer56 Szeghalom60 Szeghalom89 Szeghalom80 Doboz H. tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz Körösladány16

088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 Sample Number Sample

234

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 4.8 10.7 Body % Sand in in Sand %

0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 2 2 7.4 7.8 4.6 3.5 2.8 3.8 1.9 2.5 3.8 2.2 3.9 9.7 3.1 7.8 2.1 6.2 2.2 % Temper %

99 99 95 98 98 100 100 100 100 100 92.6 92.2 95.4 96.5 98.9 89.3 92.4 96.2 98.1 97.5 96.2 97.8 96.1 90.3 96.3 92.2 97.9 93.8 97.8 % Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

Silt 4 13 10 5.7 3.7 4.9 7.9 3.9 8.4 9.9 9.9 9.9 4.8 7.3 7.4 9.1 14.4 19.4 22.9 10.4 12.5 14.7 18.9 11.3 16.8 17.2 18.8 13.3 12.4 %

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 4.9 10.7 % Sand %

% 87 96 90 94.3 96.3 85.6 80.6 95.1 77.1 88.5 92.1 76.8 80.4 96.1 81.1 91.6 90.1 88.7 83.2 90.1 90.1 82.8 81.2 95.2 92.7 86.7 92.6 87.6 90.9 Matrix

3 13 13 13 7.8 4.1 8.5 8.3 7.3 2.9 2.8 1.9 1.9 6.2 2.9 1.9 2.5 5.9 2.8 8.8 4.6 7.9 4.8 2.9 6.6 0.09 14.9 11.1 10.9 % Voids %

F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 F1 E1 E2 E1 E2 E1 E3 E3 E2 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E3 E2 E1 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA LCA MCA MCA MCA MCA MCA Culture Neolithic

49 17

ő ő gyán2 ő Site Békés39 Békés39 Békés75 Békés39 Okány43 Okány43 Vészt Vészt Mez Bélmegyer56 Szeghalom89 Szeghalom60 Szeghalom60 Szeghalom112 Szeghalom168 Szeghalom168 Szeghalom168 Szeghalom168 Szeghalom168 Szeghalom168 Dévaványa166 Doboz H. tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz tábla H. Doboz Körösladány33 Körösladány16 Körösladány21

120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 Sample Number Sample

235

0 0 Body % Sand in in Sand %

0 4.1 % Temper %

100 95.9 % Matrix + Silt + Matrix %

4.2 19.1 % Silt %

0 0 Sand %

% 80.9 95.8 Matrix

8.6 10.1 % Voids %

F1 F1 Fabric Class Fabric

LCA LCA Culture

Site Szeghalom60 Füzesgyarmat97

149 150 Sample Number Sample

236

WORKS CITED

Adams, W. Y., D. P. Van Gerven and R. S. Levy 1978 The Retreat from Migrationism. Annual Review of Anthropology 7:483-532.

Adovasio, J. M., J. D. Gunn and J. Donahue 1983 Evidence from Meadowcroft Rockshelter. In Early Man in the New World, edited by R. Shutler. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

Ammerman, A. J. and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza 1984 The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Anderson, D. G. 1990 The Paleoindian Colonization of Eastern North America: A View from the Southeastern United States. In Early Paleoindian Economies of Eastern North America, Research in Economic Anthropology, Supplement 3, edited by K. B. Tankersly and B. L. Isaac, pp. 163-190. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Anthony, D. W. 1986 The "Kurgan Culture," Indo-European Origins, and the Domestication of the Horse: A Reconsideration. Current Anthropology 27(4):291-313.

1990 Migration in Archeology: The Baby and the Bathwater. American Anthropologist 92(4):895-914.

1992 The Bath Refilled: Migration in Archaeology again. American Anthropologist 94(1):174-176.

1995 Horse, Wagon, and Chariot: Indo-European Languages and Archaeology. Antiquity 69:554-565.

2007 The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Arnold, D. 1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bakker, J. A., J. Kruk, A. E. Lanting and S. Milisauskas 1999 Bronocice, Flintbek, Uruk, and Jebel Aruda: The Earliest Evidence of Wheeled Vehicles in Europe and the Near East. Antiquity 73:778-790.

Bamps, A. 1883 La Céramique Americaine au Point de vue des Éléments Constitutifs de la Pâte et de sa Fabrication. Congrès des Americanistes Cinquième Session.

237

Bankoff, H. A. and F. A. Winter 1990 The Later Aeneolithic in Southeastern Europe. American Journal of Archaeology 94(2):175-191.

Banner, J. 1956 Die Péceler Kultur. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Barton, C., G. A. Clark, D. R. Yesner and G. S. Pearson 2004 The Settlement of the American Continents: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Human Biogeography. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Bellwood, P. 2004 First Farmers: The Origins of Agricultural Societies. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

Benecke, N. 1994 Archäozoologische Studein zur Entwicklung der Haustierhaltung in Mitteleuropa und Südskandinavien von den Anfangen bis zun ausgehenden Mittelalter. Akademie Verlag, Berlin.

Bense, J. A. 1994 Archaeology of the Southeastern United States: Paleoindian to World War I. Academic Press, New York.

Berry, M. S. 1992 Time, Space, and Transition in Anasazi Prehistory. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Beynon, D. W., J. Donahue, R. T. Shaub and R. A. Johnston 1986 Tempering Types and Sources for Early Bronze Age Ceramics from Bab edh- Dhra' and Numeria, Jordon. Journal of Field Archaeology 13(3):297-305.

Billman, B. 1999 Settlement Pattern Research in the Americas: Past, Present, and Future. In Settlement Pattern Studies in the Americas: Fifty Years Since Virú, edited by B. Billman and G. M. Feinman, pp. 1-5. Smishsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Binford, L. 1963 Archaeology as Anthropology. American Antiquity 28(2):217-225.

1964 A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design. American Antiquity 29:425- 441.

1965 Archaeological Semantics and the Study of Culture Process. American Antiquity 31:203-210.

238

1982 The Archaeology of Place. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:1-31.

Blanton, R. E. 2001 Mediterranean Myopia. Antiquity 75:627-629.

Boas, F. 1889 The Aims of Ethnology. Hermann Bartsch, New York.

1940 Race, Language, and Culture. The Macmillan Company, New York.

Bognár-Kutzián, I. 1963 The Copper Age Cemetery of Tiszapolgár-Basatanya. Archaeologica Hungarica. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

1966 Das Neolithikum in Ungarn. Archaeologia Austriaca 40:249-280.

1972 The Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár Culture in the Carpathian Basin. Archaeologica Hungarica. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Bogucki, P. 1996 The Spread of Early Farming in Europe. American Scientist 84:242-253.

1999 The Origins of Human Society. Blackwell, Oxford.

Bökönyi, S. 1951 Untersuchung der Haustierfunde aus dem Gräberfeld von Alsónémedi Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 1:72-79.

1974 History of Domestic Mammals in Eastern and Central Europe. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

1988 History of Domestic Mammals in Central and Eastern Europe. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Bóna, I. 1965 The Peoples of Southern Origin of the Early Bronze Age in Hungary. I. The Pitvaros Group. Alba Regia 1:17-63.

1975 Die Mittlere Bronzezeit Ungarns und ihre südöstlichen Beziehungen. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Bourdieu, P. 1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

239

Bowser, B. 2000 From Pottery to Politics: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of Political Factionalism, Ethnicity, and Domestic Pottery Style in the Ecuadorian Amazon Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7:219-248.

Budden, S. and J. Sofaer 2009 Non-discursive Knowledge and the Construction of Identity: Potters, POtting, and Performance at the Bronze Age Tell of Százhalombatta, Hungary. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 19(2):203-220.

Caldwell, J. R. 1958 Trend and Tradition in the Prehistory of the Eastern United States. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association 88. Menasha.

Carver, M. O. H. 1998 Sutton Hoo: Burial Ground of Kings? University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Chandler, G. 2001 Development of a Field Petrographic Analysis System and its Application to the Study of Socioeconomic Interaction Networks of the Early Harappan Northwestern Indus Valley of Pakistan. British Archaeological Reports 995, Oxford.

Chapman, J. 1994 The Origins of Farming in South East Europe Préhistorie Européenne 6:133-156.

1997 Landscapes in Flux and the Colonization of Time. In Landscapes in Flux: Central and Eastern Europe in Antiquity, edited by J. Chapman and P. M. Dolukhanov, pp. 1-21. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

Chapman, J. and P. M. Dolukhanov 1992 The Baby and the Bathwater: Pulling the Plug on Migration. American Anthropologist 94(1):169-174.

Chayes, F. 1954a Petrographic Modal Analysis. Willey, New York.

1954b The Theory of Thin Section Analysis. Journal of Geology 62:92-101.

Cherry, J. F. 1984 Emergence of the State in the Prehistoric Aegean. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 210:18-48.

240

2003 Archaeology Beyond the Site: Regional Survey and its Future. In Theory and Practice in Mediterranean Archaeology: Old World and New World Perspectives, edited by J. Papadopoulos and R. Leventhal. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, Los Angeles.

Childe, V. G. 1930 The Bronze Age. The Macmillan Company, New York.

1950 Prehistoric Migrations in Europe. Instituttet for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, Oosterhout N.B., The Netherlands.

1958a New Light on the Most Ancient East. Routelege, London.

1958b The Prehistory of European Society. Penguin, London.

1969 Prehistoric Migrations in Europe. Oosterhout N.B., The Netherlands.

Clark, D. L. 1972 Models and Paradigms in Archaeology. In Models in Archaeology, edited by D. L. Clark. Metheun, London.

1977 Spatial Information in Archaeology. In Spatial Archaeology, edited by D. L. Clark. Academic Press, London.

Clark, J. E. and M. Blake 1994 The Power of Prestige: Competative Generosity and the Emergence of Rank Societies in Lowland Mesoamerica. In Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, edited by E. M. Brumfiel and J. W. Fox, pp. 17-30. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Comşa, E. 1974 Die Entwicklung, Periodisierung, und relative Chronologie der jungsteinzeitlichen Kulturen Rumäniens Zeitschrift für Archäologie 8:1-44.

Davis, J. L. (editor) 1998 Sandy Pylos: An Archaeological History from Nestor to Navarino. The University of Texas Press, Austin.

2008 The Mallakastra Regional Archaeological Project: Internet Edition. vol. 2008.

Deagan, K. 1987 Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500-1800. Volume I: Ceramics, Glassware, and Beads. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

241

Déchelette, J. 1904 Les Vases Céramiques de la Gaule Romaine, Paris.

Dragendorff, H. 1895 Terra Sigillata. Bonner Jahrbücher 96:18-155.

Earle, T. K. 2002 Bronze Age Economics: The Beginnings of Political Economies. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Ebdon, D. 1985 Statistics in Geography: A Practical Approach. . Blackwell.

Ecsedy, I. 1973 Szeghalom 80 Dió-Ér. Régészeti Füszetek 1973:20-21.

1979 The People of the Pit-grave Kurgans in Eastern Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

1981 A Keletmagyarországi Rézkor Fejlődésének Fontosabb Tényezői (On the factors of the Copper Age development in Eastern Hungary). Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 26:73-95.

Ecsedy, I. and S. Bèokèonyi 1979 The People of the Pit Grave Kurgans in Eastern Hungary. Fontes archaelogici Hungariae. Akadâemiai Kiadâo, Budapest.

Ecsedy, I., L. Kovács, B. Maraz and I. Torma (editors) 1982 Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája. VI. Békés Megye Régészeti Topográfiaje: A Szeghalmi Jaras (IV/1). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Fairbanks, C. 1962 A Colono-Inidian Ware Milk Pitcher. Florida Anthropologist 15:103-106.

Faught, M. K. 2008 Archaeological Roots of Human Diversity in the New World: A Comilation of Accurate and Precise Radiocarbon Ages from Earliest Sites. American Antiquity 73(4):670-698.

Ferguson, L. 1978 Looking for the "Afro" in Colono-Indian Pottery. Conference on HIstoric Site Archaeology Papers 12:68-86.

Flannery, K. V. 2002 The Origins of the Village Revisited: From Nuclear to Extended Households. American Antiquity 67(3):417-433.

242

Foley, R. 1981 A Model of Regional Archaeological Structure. Proceedings of the Historical Society 47:1-17.

Forenbaher, S. 1993 Radiocarbon Dates and Absolute Chronology of the Central European Early Bronze Age. Antiquity 67:218-256.

Forster, P. and C. Renfrew (editors) 2006 Phylogenic Methods and the Prehistory of Languages. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.

Fowles, S. M. 2002 From Social Type to Social Process: Placing "Tribe" in a Historical Framework. In The Archaeology of Tribal Societies, edited by W. A. Parkinson, pp. 13-33. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI.

Freestone, I. C. 1995 Ceramic Petrography. American Journal of Archaeology 99(1):111-117.

Frey, O. H. 1995 The Celts in Italy. In The Celtic World, edited by M. Green. Routlege, London.

Fried, M. H. 1967 The Evolution of Political Society: An Essay in Political Anthropology. Random House, New York.

Frolking, T. 2009 Title. Holocene Hydrology, Soil Development and Landscape Evolution of the Bikeri Area in the Körös Basin of Eastern Hungary, in press.

Furholt, M. 2008 Pottery, Cultures, People? The European Baden Material Re-examined. Antiquity 82:617-628.

Galaty, M. L. 1999 Nestor's Wine Cups: Investigating Ceramic Manufacture and Exchange in a Late Bronze Age "Mycenaean" State. British Archaeological Reports International Series 776. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

2005 European Regional Studies: A Coming of Age? Journal of Archaeological Research 13(4):291-336.

243

Galaty, M. L. and W. A. Parkinson 1999 Putting Mycenean Palaces in Their Place. In Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretations of an Old Idea, edited by M. L. Galaty and W. A. Parkinson, pp. 1-8. The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles.

Gazdapusztai, G. 1967 Chronologische Fragen in der Alfölder Gruppe der Kurgan-Kultur. Móra Ferenz Múzeum Évkonyve 1966-67:91-100.

Georgiev, G. I., N. Y. Merpert, R. W. Katinsharov and D. G. Dinitrov 1979 Ezero, Rannobronzovoto Selišče (Ezero, eine Siedlung aus der Frübronzezeit), Sofia.

Gimbutas, M. 1952 On The Origin of North Indo-Europeans. American Anthropologist 54(4):602- 611.

1963 The Indo-Europeans: Archaeological Problems. American Anthropologist 54(4):602-611.

1965 Bronze Age Culture in Central and Eastern Europe. Mouton, The Hague.

1970 Proto-Indo-European Culture: The Kurgan Culture during the Fifth, Fourth, and Third Millenia B.C. In Indo-European and Indo-Europeans, edited by G. Cardona, H. M. Hoeningswald and A. Senn. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

1977 The first wave of Eurasian Steppe Pastoralists into Copper Age Europe. Journal of Indo-European Studies 5:277-331.

1979 The three Waves of the Kurgan People into Old Europe, 4500-2500 B.C. Archives Suisses d'anthropologie genéral 43(2):113-137.

1980 The Kurgan Wave #2 (c. 3400-3200 B.C.) into Europe and the Following Transformation of Culture. Journal of Indo-European Studies 8(3&4):273-315.

1997 The Kurgan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe, edited by M. Robbins Dexter and K. Jones-Blet. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph No. 18. Institute for the Study of Man, Washington, D.C.

Gladwin, N. 1937 Petrography of Snaketown Pottery. In Excavations at Snaketown, edited by H. S. Gladwin. Medallion Papers, Gila Pueblo, Arizona.

Gmelch, G. 1980 Return Migration. Annual Review of Anthropology 9:135-159.

244

Goebel, T., M. R. Waters and D. H. O'Rourke 2008 The Late Pleistocene Dispersal of Modern Humans in the Americas. Science 319:1497-1502.

Gyucha, A. 2007 Personal Communication. Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája Collection Methodology.

2010 A Körös-vidék Kora Rézkora (The Early Copper Age in the Körös Region). Dissertation, Eötvös Loránd Science University, Budapest.

Gyucha, A., W. A. Parkinson and R. W. Yerkes 2004 El″ozetes Jelentés A Körös Regionális Régészeti Program 1998-2002 Között Végzett Munkájáról (Preleminary Results of The Körös Regional Archaeological Project, 1998-2002). Studia Archaeologica X(2004):25-52.

Gyulai, F. 1993 Environment and Agriculture in Bronze Age Hungary. Archaeolingua, Budapest.

Haggett, P. 1966 Location Analysis in Human Geography. St. Martin's Press, New York.

Hayden, B. 1995 Pathways to Power: Priciples for Creating Socioeconomic Inequalities. In Foundations of Social Inequality, edited by T. D. Price and G. M. Feinman, pp. 15-86. Plenum Press, New York.

Haynes, G. 2002 The Early Settlement of North America: The Clovis Era. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Higgenbotham, C. R. 2000 Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside Palestine: Governance and Accomodation on the Imperial Periphery. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 2. BRILL.

Hodder, I. and C. Orton 1976 Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hodges, R. 1987 Spatial Models, Anthropology, and Archaeology. In Landscape and Culture: Geographical and Archaeological Perspectives, edited by J. M. Wagstaff. Basil Blackwell, New York.

245

Hoekman-Sites, H., T. Parsons and S. Duwe 2007 Elemental Interaction: Stylistic, Composition, and Residue Analyses of Copper Age Ceramics on the Great Hungarian Plain. SAS Bulletin 29(4).

Holmes, W. H. 1903 Aboriginal Pottery of the Eastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology, Annual Report 20:1-237.

Horváth, T., S. Svingor and M. Molnár 2008 New Radiocarbon Dates for the Baden Culture. Radiocarbon 50(3):447-458.

Jankovich, D., J. Makkay and M. Szoke (editors) 1989 Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája. VIII. Békés Megye Régészeti Topográfiaja: A Szarvasi Járás (IV/2). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Jankovich, D., P. Medgyesi, E. Nikolin, I. Szatmári and I. Torma (editors) 1998 Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája. VIII. Békés Megye Régészeti Topográfiaja: Békés es Békéscaba Környéke. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Jochim, M. 2002 The Upper Paleolithic. In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by S. Milisauskas. Plenum Publishers, New York.

Jochim, M., C. Herhahn and H. Starr 1999 The Magdalenian Colonization of Southern Germany. American Anthropologist 101(129-142).

Kaczanowska, M. 1982/1983 Z Badań nad przemysł Krzemiennym Kultury Ceramiki Promienisej. Acta Archaeologica Carpatica 22:65-96.

Kalicz, N. 1958 Rézkori Sztratagráfia Székelu Közég Határában (Copper Age Stratigraphy Near the Village of Székelu) ArchÉrtesítő 85:3-6.

1963 Die Péceler (Badener) Kultur und Alatolien Studia Archaeologica, Budapest.

1976 Ein neues kupferzeitliches Wagenmodell aus der Umgebung von Budapest. Festschrift für Richard Pirrioni sum siebzigsten Gubertstag. Deuticke, Vienna.

1998 Figürliche Darstellung und Bemalte Keramik aus dem Neolithikum Westungarns. Archaeolingua, Budapest.

246

2001 Die Protoboleráz phase an der Grenze von zwei Epochen. In Ein Vorgeschichtliches Phänomen zwischen dem Oberrhein und der Unteren Donai, edited by P. Roman, pp. 385-422. Studia Danubiana ser. Cernavoda III-Boleráz Symposium 2001. Institude of Thracology, Bucharest.

2002 Eigenartige anthropomorphe Plastik der kupferzeitlichen Badener Kultur im Karpatenbecken. Budapest Régiségei 36:11-53.

Kalicz, N. and J. Makkay 1977 Die Linienbandkeramik in der Grossen Ungarischen Tiefebene. Studia Archaeologica. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Kalicz, N. and J. Makkey 1997 Die Linienbandkeramik in der Drossen Ungarischen Tiefebene. Studia Archaeologica. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Kalicz, N. and P. Raczky 1984 Preliminary Report on the 1977-82 Excavations at the Neolithic and Bronze Age Tell Settlement of Berettyóújfalu Herpály. Part I. Neolithic. Acta Archaeologica Hungarica 36:85-136.

1987a The Late Neolithic of the Tisza Region: A Survey of Recent Archaeological Research. In The Late Neolithic of the Tisza Region, edited by P. Raczky. Szolnok County Museums, Budapest-Szolnok.

Kearney, M. 1986 From the Invisible Hand to Visible Feet: Anthropological Studies of Migration and Development Annual Review of Anthropology 15:331-361.

Kertész, R. 1996 The Mesolithic in the Great Hungarian Plain: A survey of the evidence. In At the Fringes of Three Worlds: Hunter-Gatherers and Farmers in the Middle Tisza Valley, pp. 5-34. Damjanich Museum Press, Szolnok, Hungary.

Kertéz, R. 1996 The Mesolithic in the Great Hungarian Plain: A Survey of the Evidence. In At the Fringes of Three Worlds: Hunter-Gatherers and Farmers in the Middle Tisza Valley, pp. 5-34. Damjanich Museum Press, Szolnok, Hungary.

Kidder, A. V. 1924 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern archaeology. Papers of the Southwestern Expedition, Department of Anthropology 1. Yale University Press, New Haven.

1931 The Pottery of Pecos. Papers of the Southwestern Expedition, Department of Anthropology 5. Yale University Press, New Haven.

247

Knorr, K. 1906 Die Verzierten Terra Sigillata von Cannstatt, Stuttgart.

Korek, J. 1951 Ein Gräberfeld der Badener Kultur bei Alsónémedi. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 1(35-51).

Kosse, K. 1979 Settlement Ecology of the Early and Middle Körös and Linear Pottery Cultures in Hungary. BAR International Series No. 64. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

Kreiter, A. 2005 Technological Choices and Material Meanings: Analyses of Early and Middle Bronze Age Ceramics from Hungary. Thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, School of Humanities, University of Southamptom, Southampton.

Kristiansen, K. 1998 Europe Before Prehistory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

2005 What Language did Neolithic Pots Speak? Colin Renfrew’s European Farming- Language-Dispersal Model Challenged. Antiquity 79:679-691.

Kulcsár, G. 2003 The Early Bronze Age. In Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn of the Millennium, edited by Z. Visy and M. Nagy. Ministry of National Cultural Heritage, Budapest.

Kutzián , I. 1944 A Körös-kultura. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Lee, E. S. 1966 A Theory of Migration. Demography 3:47-57.

Lemmonier, P. 1992 Elements for an Anthropology of Technology. Anthropological Papers No. 88. University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, MI.

Lewis, G. J. 1982 Human Migration: A Geographical Perspective. St. Martin's Press, New York.

Liddell, D. 1932 Report on the Excavation at Hembury Fort, Third Season, 1932. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Exploration Society 1:162-183.

Ludowici, W. 1904 Stempel-Namen Römischer Töpfer von meinen Ausgrabungen im Rheinzabern, Munich. 248

Madsen, D. B. 2004 Entering America: Northeast Asia and Beringia Before the Last Glacial Maximum. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake city.

Makkay, J. 1981 Eine kultstätt de Bodrogkeresztúr-kultur in Szarvas und fragen der sakralen hügel. Mittelilungen des Archäologisches Institut der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10/11:45-57.

1982 A magyarországi neolitikum kutatásának új eredményei (New Issues in Hungarian Neolithic Research). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

1983 Eine Kultstätte der Bodrogkeresztúr-Kultur in Szarvas und Fragen der sakralen Hügel. Mitteilungen des archaeologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Academie der Wissenschaften 10-11:45-47.

1986 Gyomaendrőd-6 lelőhely. Régészeti Füszetek 40(13).

1996 Theories about the Origin, the Distribution, and the End of the Körös Culture In At the Fringes of Three Worlds: Hunter-Gatherers and Farmers in the Middle Tisza Valley, pp. 35-49. Damjanaich Museum Press, Szolnok, Hungary.

2007 The Excavations of the Early Neolithic Sites of the Körös Culture in the Körös Valley, Hungary: The Final Report. In The Excavations of the Early Neolithic Sites of the Körös Culture in the Körös Valley, Hungary: The Final Report, edited by E. Starnini and P. Biagi. Società per la Preistoria e Prorostoria dell Regione Friulli-Venezia, Guilia.

Makkey, J. 1996 Theories about the Origin, the Distribution, and the End of the Körös Culture. In At the Fringes of Three Worlds: Hunter-Gatherers and Farmers in the Middle Tisza Valley, pp. 35-49. Damjanich Museum Press, Szolnok, Hungary.

Mallory, J. P. 1989 In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology, and Myth. Thames and Hudson, London.

Maran, J. 2001 Zur Westausbreitung von Boleráz--Elementen in Mitteleuropa. In Cernavodă III- Boleráz. Ein vorgeschichtliches Phänomen zwischen dem Oberrhein und der unteren Donau, edited by P. Roman and S. Diamandi. Vavila, Bucharest.

2004 Die Badener Kultur und ihre Räderfahrzeuge. In Rad und Wagen. Der Ursprund einer Innovation. Wagen Orient und Europa, edited by S. Burmeister and M. Fansa, pp. 265-282. Philipp von Zabern, Mainz.

249

Matson, R. G. 1991 The Origins of Southwestern Agriculture. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Mauss, M. 1955 The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Routledge, London.

McDonald, W. A. and G. R. Rapp (editors) 1972 The Minnesota Messenia Expedition: Reconstructing a Bronze Age Regional Environment. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

McGuire, J. D. 1899 Pipes and Smoking Customs of the American Aborigines, Based on Material in the U.S. National Museum. . United States National Museum, Annual Report 1897(1):361-645.

Megyesi, P. 1982 Jelentég a Doboz – Homokdörögdi táblán 1982. Unpublished field notes.

1983 Doboz-Homokgördöri táblá. Régészeti Füzetek.

2009 Personal Communication, Békéscsaba, Hungary

Merpert, N. Y. 1968 Drevenishaia Istoriia Naselnia Stepnoi Polos Vostochnoi Evropy (IIIrd-Nachalo Ilnd Tys. Do N.E.). Akademiia Nauk, Moscow.

1974 Drevnejshie skotovody volzhsko-ural'skogo mezhdurech'ja, Moscow.

Middleton, A. and I. C. Freestone 1991 Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology. British Museum, London.

Milisauskas, S. and J. Kruk 1989 Economy, Migration, Settlement Organization, and Warfare During the Late Neolithic in Southeastern Poland. Germania 67(1):77-96.

2002 Late Neolithic Crises, Collapse, New Ideologies, and Economies. In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by S. Milisauskas. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.

Minnis, P. E. 1992 Earliest Plant Cultivation in the Desert Borderlands of North America. In Origins of Agriculture: an International Persoective, edited by C. W. Cowan and P. J. Watson, pp. 121-141. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.

250

Morgan, L. H. 1885 Ancient Society. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Moscati, O. H., V. Kruta, B. Rafferty and M. Szabó (editors) 1991 The Celts and their Movements in the Third Century BC. Rizzoli, New York.

Nádor, A., Á. Magyari, E. Thamó-Bozsó, E. Babinszki and Z. Kercsmár 2005 The role of the Érmellék-Berettyó-Körös depression in the river course development of the Great Hungarian Plain. Geophysical Research Abstracts 7.

Němejcová-Pavuková, V. 1981 Náčrt Periodizácie Badenskej Kultúry a jej chronologických vztahov k juhový chodeney Europe (An Outline of the Periodical System of Baden Culture and its Chronological Relations to Southeast Europe). Slovenská Archeológia 29(2):261-296.

1984 K problematike trvania a konca boleazkej skupiny na Slovensku. Slovenská Archeológia 34:133-176.

Némeskeri, J. 1951 Anthropologische Untersuchund der Skelettfunde von Alsónémedi Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 1:55-72.

Noël Hume, I. 1962 An Indian Ware of the Colonial Period. Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia 17(1):2-14.

Novotný, B. 1981 Zur Idolatrie der Badener Kultur in der Slowakei. Slovenská Archeológia 29(131- 138).

Obenauer, K. 1936 Petrographische Untersuchung der Keramik. In Die Bandkeramische Ansiedelung bei Köln-Lindenthal, edited by W. Buttler and W. Haberey, pp. 123-129. de Gruyter, Berlin.

Orton, C., P. Tyers and A. Vince 1993 Pottery in Aarchaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

O'Shea, J. M. 1978 Mortuary Variability: an Archaeological Investigation with Case Studies from the Nineteenth Century Central Plain of North America and the Early Bronze Age of Southern Hungary, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

251

1996 Villagers of the Maros: A Portrait of an Early Bronze Age Society. Plenum Press, New York.

Otte, M. 1988 Processus de Diffusion a Long Terme au Magdalénian. In Le Peuplement Magdalénian. Éditions du CTHS, Paris.

Parkinson, W. A. 1999 The Social Organization of Early Copper Age Tribes on the Great Hungarian Plain. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

2002 Integration, Interaction, and Tribal 'Cycling:' The Transition to the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. In The Archaeology of Tribal Societies, edited by W. A. Parkinson. Archaeological Series. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

2006a Tribal Boundaries: Stylistic variability and boundary maintenance during the transition to the Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25:33-58.

2006b The Social Organization of Early Copper Age Tribes on the Great Hungarian Plain. BAR International Series. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Parkinson, W. A. and M. L. Galaty 2007 Secondary States in Perspective: An Integrated Approach to State Formation in the Prehistoric Aegean. American Anthropologist 109(1):113-129.

Parkinson, W. A. and A. Gyucha 2007 A Késő Neolitikum-Kora Rézkor Átmeneti Időszakának Társadalomszerkezeti Változásai az Alföldön. Rekonstrukciós Kísérlet (Changes in Social Organization During the Transition from the Late Neolithic to the Early Copper Age Periods on the Great Hungarian Plain: An Attempt at a Reconstruction). Archaeológiai Értesítő 132(1):37-81.

Parkinson, W. A., A. Gyucha, R. W. Yerkes, M. Hardy and M. Morris 2004 Settlement Reorganization at the End of the Neolithic in Central Europe: Recent Research in the Körös River Valley, Southeastern Hungary. Journal of Eurasian Prehistory 2(2):57-73.

Parkinson, W. A., E. Peacock, R. A. Palmer, Y. Xia, B. Carlock, A. Gyucha, R. W. Yerkes and M. L. Galaty 2010 Elemental Analysis of Ceramic Encrustation Indicates Long-Term Cultural Continuity in the Prehistoric Carpathian Basin. Archaeology, Ethnology, and Anthropology of Eurasia 38(2):64-70.

252

Parsons, T. 2005 A Petrographic Analysis of Early Copper Age Ceramics from Vésztö 20, Körösladány 14, Vésztö-Mágor, and Örménykút 13, in Bekés County, Hungary. La Tinaja (May 2005).

Pauketat, T. R. 1994 The Ascent of Cheifs: Cahokia and Mississippian Politics in Native North America. University of Alabama Press.

Pavelčík, J. 1982 Drobné terrakoty z Hlinska u Lipníku (okr. Přerov). Památky Archeologické 73:261-292.

1992 Nové nálezy anthropomorfních a zoomorfních idolůna Moravé. Pravěk Nova Řada (2):205-214.

Peacock, D. P. S. 1967 The Heavy Mineral Analysis of Pottery: A Preliminary Report. Archaeometry 10:97-100.

1968 A Petrological Study of Certain Iron Age Pottery from Western England. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34(414-427).

Pécsi, M. 1964 Part One: The Physical Geography of Hungary. In The Geography of hungary, edited by M. Pécsi and B. Sárfalvi. Collets, London.

1970 Geomorphological Regions of Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Pécsi, M. and P. Jakucs 1971 The Natural Vegetation of Hungary. In Hungary: Geographical Studies, edited by M. Pécsi, G. Enyedi and S. Marosi, pp. 11-64. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Pécsi, M. and B. Sárfalvi 1964 The Geography of Hungary. Collets, London.

Pitt-Rivers, A. H. L. F. 1906 The Principles of Classificiation. In The Evolution of Culture and Other Essays, edited by J. L. Myers. Clarenden Press, Oxford.

Ravenstein, E. G. 1885 The Laws of Migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 48:167-235.

1889 The Laws of Migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 52:241-305.

253

Reedy, C. 2008 Thin-Section Petrography of Stone and Ceramic Cultural Materials. Archetype Publications, London.

Renfrew, C. 1975 Trade as Action at a Distance: Questions of Integration and Communication. In Ancient Civilization and Trade, edited by J. Sabloff and C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 3-59. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

1987 Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. Jonathan Cape Ltd., London.

2003 Time Depth, Convergence Theory, and Innovation in Proto-Indo-European. Paper presented at the Languages in Prehistoric Europe, Eichstätt University.

Renfrew, C. and J. F. Cherry (editors) 1986 Peer Polity Interaction and Socio-political Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Rice, P. 1987 Pottery Analysis: A Source Book. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Riederer 2004 Thin Section Microscopy Applied to the Study of Archaeological Ceramics. Hyperfine Interactions 154(1-4):143-158.

Roman, P. and S. Diamandi 2001 Cernavodă III-Boleráz. Ein Vorgeschichliches Phänomen zwischen dem Oberrhein und der unteren Donau. Vavila, Bucharest.

Roman, P. and I. Németi 1978 Cultura Baden în România. Institute of Archaeology, Bucharest.

Roper, D. C., R. L. Josephs and M. E. Beck 2010 Determining Provenance of Shell-Tempered Pottery from the Central Plains Using Petrography and Oxidation Analysis. American Antiquity 75(1):134-157.

Rouse, I. 1958 The Inference of Migrations from Anthropological Evidence. In Migrations in New World Culture History, edited by R. Thompson. University of Arizona Bulletin. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

1986 Migrations in Prehistory: Inferring Population Movement from Cultural Remains. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

254

Ruttkay, E. 1995 Spätneolithikum. In Jungsteinzeit im Osten Österreichs, edited by E. Lenneis, C. Neugebaur-Maresch and E. Ruttkay, pp. 108-209. Niederösterreichisches Pressehaus, Vienna.

Sachße, C. 2005 Untersuchungen zu den Bestattungssitten der Badener Kultur in ihrem räumlichen und zeitlichen Umfeld., University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Sahlins, M. and E. Service 1960 Evolution and Culture. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.

Salisbury, Roderick B. 2010 Sediments, Settlements, and Space: A Practice Approach to Late Neolithic Communities on the Great Hungarian Plain. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.

Séfériadès, M. 2007 Complexity of the Processes of Neolithization: Tradition and Modernity of the Aegean world at the dawn of the Holocene Period. Quaternary International 167- 168:177-185. Service, E. 1971 Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective. Second ed. Random House, New York.

Shepard, A. O. 1939 Appendix A: Technology of La Plata Pottery. In Archaeological Studies in the La Plata District, edited by E. Morris. vol. 519. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication, Washington, D.C.

1942 Rio Grande Glaze Paint Ware: A Study Illustrating the Place of Ceramic Technological Analysis in Archaeological Research. Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington.

1956 Ceramics for the Archaeologists. Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington.

Sherratt, A. 1983 The Development of Neolithic and Copper Age Settlement in the Great Hungarian Plain. Part I: The Regional Setting. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 1(1):287- 316.

1984 The Development of Neolithic and Copper Age Settlement in the Great Hungarian plain. Part II: Site Survey and Settlement Dynamics. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 2(1):13-41.

255

1997a The Development of Neolithic and Copper Age Settlement in the Great Hungarian Plain I: The Regional Setting. In Economy and Society in Prehistoric Europe: Changing Perspectives, pp. 270-292. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

1997b The Development of Neolithic and Copper Age Settlement in the Great Hungarian Plain II: Site Survey and Settlement Dynamics. In Economy and Society in Prehistoric Europe: Changing Perspectives. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Sklenář, K. 1983 Archaeology in Central Europe: The First 500 Years. Leicester University Press, Leicester.

Snow, D. 2009 The Multidisciplinary Study of Human Migration: Problems and Principles. In Ancient Human Migrations: A Multidisciplinary Approach, edited by P. N. Peregrine, I. Peiros and M. Feldman. Foundations of Archaeological Inquiry, J. M. Skibo, general editor. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Sochacki, Z. 1980a Kultura Ceramiki Promienistej w Europie (Kultur der Radialverzierten Keramik in Europa), Warsaw.

1985 The Relationship Between the Baden Culture and the South-East European Cultures. Journal of Indo-European Studies 13(3 & 4):257-268.

Stark, M. 1998a The Archaeology of Social Boundaries. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

1998b Technical Choices and Social Boundaries in Material Culture Patterning: An Introduction. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, edited by M. Stark. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Steward, J. 1955 Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinier Evolution. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.

1960 Evolutionary Principles and Social Types. In The Evolution of Man: Mind, Culture, and Society, edited by S. Tax. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Stoltman, J. 1989 A Quantitative Approach to the Petrographic Analysis of Ceramic Thin Section. American Antiquity 54(1):147-160.

1991 Ceramic Petrography as a Technique for Documenting Cultural Interaction: An Example from the Upper Mississippi Valley. American Antiquity 56(1):103-120.

256

2001 The Role of Petrography in the Study of Archaeological Ceramics. In Earth Sciences and Archaeology, edited by P. Goldberg, V. T. Holliday and C. R. Ferring, pp. 297-326. Kluwer/Plenum, New York.

Szujkó-Lacza, J. 1991 Reconstruction of the History of the Postglacial Flora and Vegetation in the Region Between the Danube and Tisza and Tiszantul, Kiev.

Telegin, D. I. 1973 Seredno-Stogivska Kul'tura Epokhi Midi. Naukova Dumka, Kiev.

Thompson, E. 1996 The Huns. Blackwell, Oxford.

Trigger, B. 1989 A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Tringham, R. 1971 Hunters, Fishers, and Farmers of Eastern Europe: 6000-3000 B.C. Huchinson Univerisity Library, London.

Tylor, S. E. B. 1871 Primitive Culture. John Murray, London. van Andel, T. H. and C. H. Runnels 1995 The Earliest Farmers in Europe. Antiquity 69:380-390.

Walters, H. B. 1908 Catalogue of the Roman Pottery in the Department of Antiquities of the British Museum. British Museum, London.

Wandsnider, L. 1988 Regional Scale Processes and Archaeological Landscape Units. In Unit Issues in Archaeology, edited by A. F. Ramenofsky and A. Steffen. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Wells, P. 2002 The Iron Age. In European Prehistory: A Survey, edited by S. Milisauskas, pp. 335-383. Plenum Publishers, New York.

Whitbred, I. 1989 A Proposal for the Systematic Description of This Sections Towards the Study of Ancient Ceramic Technology. In Archaeometry: Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium, edited by Y. Maniatis. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

257

1995 Greek Transport Amphoraw: A Petrological and Archaeological Study. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 4. British School at Athens, Athens.

White, L. A. 1959 The Evolution of Culture. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

Whittle, A. 1996 Europe in the Neolithic: The Creation of New Worlds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Willey, G. R. and P. Phillips 1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Williams, H. 2006 Death and Memory in Early Medieval Britain. Cambridge Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Willis, W. H. 1992 Foraging Systems and Plant Cultivation During the Emergence of Agricultural Economies in the Prehistoric American Southwest. In Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory, edited by A. B. Gebaur and T. D. Price. Prehistory Press, Madison

1995 Archaic Foraging and the Beginnings of Food Production in the American Southwest. In Last Hunters, First Farmers: New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture, edited by T. D. Price and A. B. Gebaur. School of American Research, Santa Fe.

Zubrow, E., J. Fountain, A. Pelcin, K. Allen, P. Bush, K. Bartolotta and L. Hunt 1988 Prehistoric Distribution Networks of Domestic Ceramics in Sosogon, Phillipines: An Archaeometric Study. In Ceramic Ecology Revisisted 1987: The Technology and Socioeconomics of Pottery. , edited by C. Kolb, pp. 33-56. British Archaeological Reports International Series. vol. 436(i). British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

258

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Parsons received his B.A. in Sociology and Anthropology at Millsaps College in Jackson, Mississippi. While at Millsaps he studied under Dr. Michael Galaty, and participated in archaeological research in Virginia, Hungary, and Albania. He also spent several years as a staff member and Managing Editor of the Millsaps College Purple & White newspaper. Prior to his graduate studies at Florida State, Parsons held a research fellowship and was Historical Programs Manager at the Blue Ridge Center for Environmental Stewardship in Loudoun County, Virginia. He earned his M.A. in Anthropology at Florida State University in the Department of Anthropology in 2007. At Florida State he was awarded a College Teaching Fellowship in 2005-2006, and served as President of the Anthropology Society at Florida State University in 2008-2009. While completing his M.A. and Ph.D., Parsons participated as a teaching assistant and trench supervisor on the Körös Regional Archaeological Project in Békés County, Hungary. He also taught Physical Anthropology and Archaeological Science laboratory courses, and instructed a European Prehistory course. While at Florida State, Parsons helped to create and implement a mock-dig science and archaeology education program for elementary and middle school students in Tallahassee, Florida. He has continued to work occasionally with the Blue Ridge Center on issues of environmental and cultural resource conservation and preservation and management, and as a consultant on issues of cultural and archaeological resources.

259