A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Archaeologica 5. (Szeged, 1999)

SZABÓ Géza: Kora bronzkori leletek Szentes-Várostanya lelőhelyről

Makó sites were restricted to an increasingly smaller area, especially in Transdanubia. However, there was very little useful evidence for internal chronology. The finds from the Tiszakürt-Homoki szőlők site, assigned to the Makó culture — which was found to be strongly linked to the Ada and Somogyvár-Vinkovci complexes —, and the Makó pits uncovered at Hódmezővásárhely-Barci rét clearly indicate that two periods can be distinguished within the Makó culture in the Early Bronze Age I period: the period immediatley succeeding the Copper Age, marked by 'pure' Makó assemblages — with the occasional Vucedol element — and a later period characterized by elements betraying the SomogyvárVinkovci and early Nagyrév traits. This periodization is also supported by the distribution maps based on sites dated to the Early Bronze Age I period. The appearance of Ada type finds near the eponymous Makó site in the Tisza region, and the proto-Nagyrév finds from sites along the Danube also reflect the changes which can be noted in the material culture. The changes in the lifeways, reflected also in the archaeological record, are much greater than to be linked to changes in decorative styles, suggesting that these can be attributed to historical changes marked by the migration of population groups. It therefore seems reasonable to subdivide the Early Bronze Age I period into two sub-periods, similarly to other periods of the Early Bronze Age: a) Early Bronze Age la, characterized by Makó finds and late Vucedol elements over the greater part of Hungary and in the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, and by the Somogyvár—

Vinkovci culture in the western and southwestern part of Transdanubia, and b) Early Bronze Age Ib, marked by the appearance of Makó finds mixed with Somogyvár-Vinkovci and early Nagyrév elements in the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, as well as by the appearance of distinctive Ada type artefacts, and the appearance of the proto-Nagyrév population along the Danube and, most likely, along the Tisza (Fig. 6). It would appear that parallel to these south to north historical processes, the northward retreat of the Makó population had begun already in the Early Bronze Age Ib period, as a result of which the Makó culture, ousted from the territories occupied by the Somogyvár-Vinkovci, Nagyrév and Nyírség cultures during the Early Bronze Age la period, only survived in isolated spots - the sites known from northeastern Hungary. Although the low number of finds from the Szentes-Várostanya site calls for caution in interpretation, the strong correspondences with the proto-Nagyrév finds from Transdanubia nonetheless suggest that this seasonal campsite can be associated with the process which began during the Early Bronze Age Ib period, as a result of which population groups — including the bearers of the later Nagyrév culture — arriving along the rivers occupied the Makó territory and ousted the Makó population which withdrew northwards. In spite of the differences in the economy and lifeways of the population groups on the tells and on settlements established on the loess ridges, this created a cultural unity which preserved its unique features even in areas far from the tells of the Middle Tisza region and, later, in the Perjámos terriotry. This is an important caveat: adherence to culture was a determinant force in prehistopry and we must be careful when assuming the blending of different cultures, especially in the case of cultures with differing economies and lifeways. Translated by Magdaléna SELEANU Szabó Géza 7100 Szekszárd, Bocskai köz 6.