Székely Zoltán (szerk.): Arrabona - Múzeumi Közlemények 48/2. (Győr, 2010)
Tanulmányok - Horváth József: Dr. Kovács Pál és a Hazán. (A szerkesztő és az újság helye, szerepe a magyar sajtótörténetben)
ARRABONA 2010.48/2. TANULMÁNYOK HALSTATT AGE TUMULI IN NAGYBARÁTI (GYŐRÚJBARÁT) The finds of the four tumuli were first published partly by the archaeologist Börzsönyi Arnold in 1909 followed by the monograph of Gallus Sándor and Horváth Tibor in 1939 which partly contained false information. The latest - but also partial - publication of the finds came in Patek Erzsébet's book in 1993 (Westungarn in der Haistattzeit. Abb. 53.1-4.; Abb. 88-92.). Consequently, the present posthumous publication of the author’s diploma work, which was finished in 1983, can be considered as the first complete discussion of the finds except for the objects that were lost or became unidentifiable between 1909 and 1983. The earlier state of the tumuli - the earth of which was partly levelled to fill up a nearby wetland in the 19th century and was partly upset by the several excavation campaigns in 1909 and later was continuously ploughed and eroded - was surveyed in 1948. We have the fullest information about the Number 1 tumulus. The author suggests that its large tumulus and suspected burial vault refer to carriage burial (iron discs with rim that the author consider as yoke-nail washers), while the sets of harness, the iron axe and the whetstone refer to a man of rank. He also discusses the graphite mines (i.e. in the Bohemian-Saxonian Erzgebirge and Passau), the graphite trade and its role in the cultural connections. He questions the Late Urn-field and Early Iron Age dating of Pécs-Jakabhegy by Maráz Borbála and Sopron-Bugrstall by Patek Erzsébet. The author’s following suggestions are worth to taken into consideration also by the young archaeologist generation: 1. In the Transdanubian area there are only exceptional instances of the transition of the Urn-field and Halstatt Cultures; 2. In the Transdanubian area the Halstatt Culture appeared in its fully developed form; 3. The lack of HaD finds in the Transdanubian area can be explained by the phase shift described in Point 2; 4. For the application of Ha Cl-2 differentiation the criteria of the separation of the finds should be first developed. Based on the above-mentioned considerations Figler András dates the tumulus burials of Nagybarát to the Ha C period, i.e. to the first half of the 6th century B.C. Based on the manuscript compiled by Ilon Gabor 48
