A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, 1980/81-1.(Szeged, 1984)
Régészet - Horváth, Ferenc: Ada-type Artifacts of the Early Bronze Age in the Southern Alföld
The best parallels with the Hungarian pitgrave burials may be found in the western Soviet Union, Rumania, and in northern Bulgaria in the time period falling between the Cernavoda III — Celei, early Baden, and early Co|ofeni cultures. For this reason, Ecsedy proposes the existence of a zone of rich cultural connections between the Moldava and Tisza regions instead of the previously assumed invasion of Pit —grave people which supposedly occured in the earliest phases of our Bronze Age 7 . The Makó group of the Zók culture may instead be considered the earliest Bronze Age material in the southern part of the Hungarian plain, Alföld 8 . Occasional occurences of corded ware pots seem to have existed parallely with the Makó group (Szerbkeresztúr, Pitvaros, grave 23). 9 Under influences from the south, the Makó group seems to have given rise to the Nagyrév culture. The Óbéba—Pitvaros group on the other hand, appeared only at the very end of the Makó group 10 . The Ökörhalomand —Kó'törés groups of the Nagyrév culture are partly synchronous with the Óbéba — Pitvaros group in that the first somewhat preceded and the latter somewhat survived it 11 . The history of our Early Bronze Age finishes with the occurence of the local classical Middle Bronze Age cultures (Szőreg—Perjámos culture and Vatya culture) 12 . In the mean time, not only have we come to a better understanding of the Ochre grave — Kurgan people 13 , but our historical and chronological picture of the Zók culture has been modified as well 14 . The development and the inner chronology of the artifacts from the Makó — Kosihy — Caka period in the southern Alföld has not yet been entirely clarified. New archaeological material from the Óbéba—Pitvaros group and the Nagyrév culture has not yet come light in sufficient amount and thus the general opinion about this group and culture remains basically unchanged 15 . Since the last publications on this topic however, use of comparative collections of artifacts, and Early Bronze Age research in the Transdanubian region of Hungary and in Yugoslavia has made it possible to distinguish a new group of artifacts. According to our present knowledge these finds cannot be confidently assigned to any group living at that time in the southern region of the Alföld. 7 See note 4; Ecsedy (1975) 277—284. 8 Bona (1965a). 9 Bona (1965a) 28. 10 Ibid; Kürti (1974) 50. István Bona directed my attention to the fact that he has consistently taken exception to the earlier theories of the genesis of the early Nagyrév culture (Bona 1975, 285; paper given on the Nagyrév culture in the Early Bronze Age Symposium, 1977.). 11 Bona (1965a) 28; Bona (1963) 21. 12 The beginnings of the Szőreg—early Perjámos culture in Bóna's chronology belongs to the third stage of the Early Bronze Age as well (Bona, 1965b, 66). The appearance of these cultures marks the boundary between the Early and Middle Bronze Ages in the proposed chronology of the Archaeology handbook, currently in press. 13 Ecsedy (1979a). 14 Bona (1975) 285—286; Ecsedy (1977) 186; Ecsedy (1979b) 107; Kovács ( 1 975) 265. 15 Since the publication of the g.-ave goods from the cemetery at Mokrin, the artifacts from the Óbéba—Pitvaros group and Szőreg—^erjámos culture are often combined together as the Maros culture. Opinions are given in the folio ving: Giric (1971); Trogmayer (1971) 36; Trogmayer (1975) 317—321; Bona (1965b) 285. 9
