Fitz Jenő (szerk.): Die aktuellen Fragen der Bandkeramik - István Király Múzeum közelményei. A. sorozat 18. A Pannon konferenciák aktái 1. (Székesfehérvár, 1972)
R. R. Newell: A hollandiai vonaldíszes kerámia korakő-eszközeinek rokonsága a közéső kőkori kőeszköziparral
flint tools are made from the same silicates of the Gulpen formation as were those of the Mesolithic peoples, who began its exploitation. Furthermore, all four elements of the basic technology of the Dutch Bandkeramik were already practiced by local Younger Oldesloe peoples in the lower Rhine Basin. The degree of proficiency was also comparable. Both cultures produced long, wide, and regular blades. The complete range of blade-core rejuvenation was practiced and the blade-breaking techniques were, in part, the same. The characteristic transverse truncation across one or two notches has been observed at Sweykhuizen II (PI. 20, 20) and other sites. Also duplicating the Bandkeramik technique<39) is the half-formed trapeze from Sweykhuizen II (PI. 20, 21). Finally, the complete range of secondary techniques utilized by the Bandkeramik flint knappers was already a functional part of the indigenous Mesolithic culture. Steep, flat, and surface retouch, burin striking and resharpening, and tranchet striking are the most distinctive techniques which are shared by both cultures. In conclusion, all the technological traits which characterise the Dutch Linearbandkeramik are to be found in the preceding and contemporary core and flake axe context in the Maas valley. The similarities between the two industries will be immediately apparent from an analysis of the comparative morphology. In the following section, it will be clear that almost every type found in the Limburg industry is morphologically and technologically identical or immediately related to the same characteristic type represented in Mesolithic contexts. Secondly, it will be demonstrated that nearly every type found within this Mesolithic context is also represented in the Limburg Linearbandkeramik. Taken as a group, the Bandkeramik points display a close relationship with Mesolithic points. Firstly, most points are made from sections of blades which have been snapped in a Mesolithic technique. Secondly, the further retouching is, in whole or in part, identical to that on Oldesloe types ; ie. one side steeply retouched straight or convex, the ether flat retouched or unretouched, and the base steeply retouched straight or convcave. Furthermore, the typical Rhine Basin trait of flat surface retouch is utilised to a greater or lesser extent on many examples. In addition to general technological agreement, the Bandkeramik forms are clearly microlithic and/or geometric in their conception and express an adaptation of the microlithic tradition to larger, generally wider blades. The Simple Points (Pl. 1, E 40) can be seen as derivations from the Mesolithic A point. An exact parallel comes from Zuid Hijkerzand (PI. 17, 28) The second Simple Point (PL 1, Sd 162) most closely resembles a В point such as that from Kesseleik I (PI. 25,14—15(, Sweykhuizen II (PI. 20, 1) and other sites. The Leaf-Shaped Point (PI. 1, E 452) (3!)) A. RRUIJN, о. c.; J. G. CLARK, o. c. is not so identical but nevertheless can be related to the larger specimens of the Rhine Basin Kreis Mesolithic. The Heart-Shaped Point (PI. 1, E 610) has no known parallel in the Mesolithic. As it appears first in the Younger Linearbandkeramik (Period II), it is best to consider same as an exclusively Neolithic form which may have developed out of the Leaf- Shaped Point. The various Long Symmetrical Triangles, however, are unmistakably Mesolithic in origin. The first subtype (PI. 1, Sd —309) is clearly derived from a C point like that found in Sweykhuizen II (PL 20, 4). The second sub-type (PI. 1, E 116) is also related to the C points of Sweykhuizen II (PI. 20, 8). Sub-types C (PL 1, E 196) and I) (PL 1, E 61) are closer to the Kesseleik point (PI. 25, 12). The last sub-type (PL 1, E 330) is comparable with large lanceolates reported from Belgium while the Large Asymmetrical Triangle (PI. 1, E 448) has no directly recognisable progenitor. The „Tardenois” Point (PI. 1, S) is obviously a C point and is paralleled at Sweykhuizen II (PI. 20, 5 — 7, 14, 8c 15), Zuid Hijkerzand (PL 17, 9—11, Kesseleik I (PL 25, 25) and many other sites. The characteristic Bandkeramik Point (PL 1, E 75, E 124) is paralleled in contemporary contexts at Kesseleik I (Id. 25, 38, 39, 50), Sweykhuizen II (PL 20, 15) and most southern Mesolithic sites. The Isosceles Triangle (PL 1, E 179) is clearly a geometric point of Mesolithic form and origin. The only morphological trait which separates it from the original type is the greater tendency toward flat retouch on one side. Comparable specimens come from Kesseleik I (PL 25; 24, 26, 27, 30). Bandkeramik Trapezes (PI. 1, E 332) of the narrow type are broader than most Mesolithic examples but similar pieces come from Zuid Hijkerzand (PL 17; 25, 26). Broad trapezes from Kesseleik I (PI. 25; 31 — 37, 41—43), Sweykhuizen II (PL 20; 9—13, 17) and Zuid Hijkerzand (PL 17; 20—24) compare with (PL 1, Sd 262 and other published Bandkeramik Trapezes. The Mesolithic microlitba recovered from Bandkeramik contexts<40), (PL 1, Sd 109), and elsewhere, are unmistakable indications of the contemporaneity of both populations and also that contact and acculturation took place. The last type within the group Points is the Handpoint (PL 2, E). This form is related to the handpoints and large tanged points exlusively characteristic of northern core and flake axe cultures. These types occur at Kesseleik I (PL 29; 1, 3), Sweykhuizen II (PL 24, 2) and many other sites. Like their Mesolithic equivalents, the Bandkeramik Borers are divisable into a number of constituent types. The Miniature Borer (PL 2; E 202, E 227, Sd 75) is clearly paralleled at a number of Dutch and German sites. The Short Blade Borers (PL 2; Sd 309, E 81, Sd 143) are exactly identical to specimens from Sweykhuizen II (PL 20, 31) and Zuid Hijkerzand (PL 17, 34). The single Bandkeramik (40) Palaeohistoria 1958/59, Abb. 113-114. 34
