Folia archeologica 34.
26 VIOLA 'Г. DOBOSI by typological differences between the classical Moustérian and the pebbleworking Tata. The grouping of proven value in the elaboration of other sites follows the type list, but we have fused the types which could have had the same functions the scrapers which are not represented in the classical lists, could be e. g. inserted to Group II, or else they embrace implements not generally (not vet or no more) -characteristic for the cultural level. The groups are as follows: I: Types 1-8 (Levalloisian blade, chip, point and their atypical variations); II: Types 2-29 (scrapers) (Figs. 6-7); III: Types 30 35 (Upper Palaeolithical tool group: side-scrapers, burins, borers (Fig. 7); IV: Types 36-43 (knives, channeled tools); V: Types 45-54 (this group can be outlined rather difficultly, namely technological characteristics mav be fused with tool complexes to be separated functionally); VI: Types 55-61. Lower Palaeolithic reminiscences (Figs. 8-9); VII: others. For making a comparions we paralleled the type lists of the two big pebbleworking sites 3 2 Type groups Érd Tata pes % pes % I 9 1.13 222 8.5 II 510 65.43 1407 53.7 III 43 5.42 318 12.1 IV 130 16.44 235 9.0 V 19 2.38 179 6.8 VI 43 5.42 152 5.8 VII 28 3.54 109 4.1 782 2622 Remarks to the type groups: Group I: very incidental, atypic, the blades do not exhaust the criteria, they are mostly blade-like chips. The application of the Levalloisian technique becomes questionable when we regard the silex pebbles as ground raw material. Group II: Vértes did not even try to group the scrapers according to Frenchs norms. In the Tata material the ground form (pebble split, sector, segment, chip) is more characteristic for an implement than the relation of its working edge to the straight or the angle of contingence of the double working edge. To the solution of the problem of the pointed scraper — Moustérian point Tata adds further data only inasmuch these small pointed —in some cases bifacial —implements cannot be called points. - Tata. 142- 174; Érd. 164.
