Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 16. 1975 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1978)
Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Makkay János: Excavations at Bicske. I, 1960. The Early Neolithic – The Earliest Linear Band Ceramic. p. 9–60.
Some scattered ceramic finds have recently been published from the territory of Lower Austria. These types possibly belong to the earliest Middle European Linear Band Pottery culture period. There are some 19 sites which, if excavated, would yield further ceramic material of this natureC 7 ). Stray finds of vessels from more northwestern territories (i. e. southern parts of the GDR) do not provide enough evidence to conclusively demonstrate an even greater distribution of this earliest LBP over more remote territories, since parallels to these types may occur in both the earliest and later phases of the LBP groups of Transdanubia and Western Slovakia^ 8 ). H. Quitta stated in his 1960 comprehensive article on this problem( 49 ) that types of earliest LBP occured on territories of the GDR (at sites in Bernburg, Halberstadt, Erfurt, etc.)( 50 ). The most common type used as examples were carinated bowls. The rich Bicske material two decades later supports his contention that the earliest LBP of Transdanubia and Middle Europe had its roots in the material culture of the Körös —Starcevo culture( 51 ). The spread of new ideas and forms from Transdanubia to northwestern areas of Central Europe was very rapid. More rapid in fact than has been suggested by Ammerman and Cavalli — Sforza for the Southeast European early Neolithic in generally( 52 ). The first question one must ask however is how such a rapid movement occurred. The first possibility is that these ideas and forms were spread during the course of rapid expansion by small groups in the whole territory north of the Körös —Starcevo region. However this rapid spread of ideas and forms appears to have occurred in two different ways in two geographically separate but adjoining areas (i. e. Transdanubia and the northern part of the Great Hungarian Plain) with no cultural sharing of ideas between these two areas over a small physical distance of only 100 kilometers (the northern part of Danube — Tisza middle region). This separation of ideas tends to rule out the possibility that this rapid development and spread involved actual physical movement of groups since such movement would inevitebly mean physical contact in such a narrow corridor. The most likely possibility is that these new ideas and forms were able to move swiftly from group to group only in those areas where communities were already related historically and culturally to each other. Thus they already possessed traditional and smoothly operating cultural mechanisms for transmitting new informations. Such mechanisms might include for example trade, exogamous marriage patterns and language. These two territories (i. e. Transdanubia and the middle and northern parts of the Great Hungarian Plain) seem to have been culturally separated by middle Mesolithic times. Thus the influencing sphere of the Körös — Staröevo culture produced LBP ceramics in both areas which developped along independent but parallel lines. It should be stressed that these two groups did share a common culture from Palaeolithic times and for this reason may also be viewed together as an entirely separate group from the Körös —Staröevo culture. J. Makkay (47) E. RUTTKAY et ah, Eine Kulturschicht der ältesten Linearbandkeramik in Prellenkirchen, p. B. Brück, Niederösterreich. Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Entstehung der Linearbandker amik. Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien, LXXX, 1976, pp. 843—854, with further literature. ; H. MAUER, Neue jungsteinzeitliche Funde aus Niederösterreich. ArehAustr, LIX —LX, 1976, pp. 25—26.; E. LENNIES, Ein neuer Zufalls fund der ältesten lyinearkeramik aus Frauenhof en in Nö. FO, XV, 1977, pp. 85—90. (48) Cf. E. ROTTKAY, О. С, pp. 849—851. — Her opinion about the origins of the Alföld Linear Pottery (,,die lineare Verzierung der Keramik des östlichen Karpathenbeckens auf Impulse der mitteleuropäischen LBK zurückzuführen) seems fully unacceptable. Beyond that, we can not understand, why she considers our opinions and dates on the Bicske material obscure („Die Unsicherheit der Forscher . . . zeigt sich z. B. wenn wir zwei ungarische Arbeiten, die sich . . . mit der älteren LBK beschäftigen, miteinander vergleichen", о. c, p. 851). (49) Zur Frage der ältesten Bandkeramik in Mitteleuropa. PZ, XXXVIII, 1960, Heft 1—2, pp. 1—38 and Heft 3—4, pp. 153—188. (50) Ibid., Heft 1—2, Fig. 4, Fig. 16, Heft 3—4, Fig. 7.; D. KAUEFMANN, Eine befestigte linienbandkeramische Siedlung bei Eilsleben. ZfA XI, 1977, pp. 97—99, Abb. 5. (51) H. QUITTA, О. С. Heft 3—4, pp. 167, 184—188. (52) A. J. AMMERMAN — L. L. CAVALLI-SFORZA, Measuring the rate of spread of early farming in Europe. MÁN, VI, 1971, 674—688. 32
