Agria 39. (Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve - Annales Musei Agriensis, 2003)
Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről
the outlines of any of the dwellings. 12 We found one single Neolithic grave on the site, in one of the refuse-filled pits. Owing to the finds previously on the surface the site was already known in the literature and, only a few hundred metres away, pits containing ALP finds had already been excavated. 13 It can therefore be concluded that the row of dwellings uncovered were merely part of one much larger settlement. For the time being we have three calendar datings (fig. 3). Kompolt-Kígyósér An extraordinaily dense string of excavation sites ran between Kál and Nagyút beside the projected route of the M3 motorway. Finds were uncovered from several periods, from as early as the Neolithic period to as late as the Middle Ages. In 1994, during an excavation covering an area 400m x 60m on the SE edge of the village of Nagyút, the remains of a Neolithic settlement containing late ALP finds was uncovered on what was primarily an Avar and Sarmatian site. The pits and graves we found were situated one kilometer southeast of the edge of the village, on the eastern side of the Kígyós-ér. A few hundred metres to the east of this, at the site known as the Kompolt-Kistéri-Major, A. Vaday uncovered objects of a similar age from a contemporary settlement (possibly the very same one). 14 Settlement objects with ALP finds were scattered over an area about 130m in length. Some of them most certainly date from the age of the great migrations, with the ALP pieces as stray finds having only latterly found their way into them. Nevertheless, some of objects are probably from the Neolithic period, since, with the exception of a few Szakáihát- and Bükk-type tile fragments, the finds are clearly all late ALP (map 9.). To this period belong the longish pits, each pointing in a NW-SE direction, eight round beehive-shaped pits and six burial sites. 15 We were neither able to examine what appeared to be a row settlement nor discover the exact position of the houses. This may have been partly due unfortunately to a lack of excavational expertise and shortfalls in excavational technology. The fact was that in 1994 we had not yet got into the habit of looking for the kind of regularities we are familiar with today. It is possible, therefore, that we failed to notice the existence of postholes and that in an effort to find other objects we kept to the excavation area marked without extending out in an effort to establish how the settlement fitted together. Of the sites we excavated the most interesting was a round pit with a diameter of one and a half metres in which we found thirty or more reconstructable vessels. 16 From these and an albeit less impressive object we found we managed to collect enough bone material to be able to produce a sample big enough for С 14 dating (fig. 4). 12 DOMBORÓCZKI László 1997c. 93., fig. 12. 13 SZ. KÁLLAY Ágota 1986. 14 For an evaluation of the site: BÁNFFY Eszter 1999. 141-170. 15 DOMBORÓCZKI László 1997c. 67-68., 82-83. 16 The date of the bone sample from the pit richest in material (195/C) we were able to determine even before 1997 at the Debrecen laboratory with the helpful co-operation of Pál Raczky. 9
