Agria 39. (Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve - Annales Musei Agriensis, 2003)
Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről
Samples and Dating Data We would have liked not only to have dated some of the pits at the settlements we had excavated with greater accuracy but establish the chronological relationship between them. Dating thusfar has meant establishing the basic characteristics of the material by placing the ceramics into the early, classical or late typologies. On first inspection the finds appeared to be of mixed provenance, with types covering several periods in a single pit. It was therefore a question of deciding which date seemed most appropriate on an item to item basis, thus necessitating some more reliable points of reference. Indeed, the traditional ceramic typologies method used for dating within the ALP period has come in for a lot of criticism in recent years. 17 When dating objects we endeavoured to take specimens from pits which not only had the richest remains but which were also adjacent to one another. This will also enable us by means of seriation to establish the chronological order of the finds to better effect. At the same time we would have liked to have obtained data from each of the settlement rows (especially in the case of Gubakút). For the purposes of accuracy we selected animal bones. We also endeavoured to get samples from the same layer, the deeper the better. If we were unable to get enough of one specimen from one layer (25dkg being the minimum amount), it was necessary to take specimens from larger samples, in some cases from several spadefuls, or indeed the entire contents of a particular pit. We tried to get as large a quantity as possible for the dating specimen, something which was perhaps a mistake in hindsight as the larger quantities involved (especially when it involved the contents of an entire pit) meant the homogeneity of the specimens was not always guaranteed. In the diagrams one can see exactly where the individual samples originate from (figs 1^4-). In order to clarify the terminology used one needs to know that a pit was opened up along the longer axis and divided up into two cross sections. In the cases of the longer pits the cross sections have been divided into two or more cross sections, sometimes referred to as squares. The depth, in places where we were unable to find clear statification, were measured mainly in spade-depths counted down from the level of the yellow subsoil, counting from 1 to n. There are also times, however, when absolute measurements are taken from the current ground level or measured relative to the level of the yellow subsoil. We used those bones which had not already been deemed important and worthy of cataloging by archaeozoologist I. Vörös. The dating itself was carried out by E. Hertelendi at the Atomki Laboratory in Debrecen. The results came out in July 1998. 1X Dates were produced in relation to the time fixed (uniformally from 1950) in conventional radiocarbon years (BP=Before Present) with +/- variables from which, once calibration (based on dendrochronological graphs) had taken place, the ВС (Before Christ) calendar date was calculated. The calendar age, is given a mean value (given in brackets in the table) and two time intervals (la and 2a) based on the calibrated graph (where the +/intervals have also been calibrated!). It is important to stress that the actual calendar date does not necessarily correspond with the mean value and could appear anywhere within the 17 HORVÁTH Ferenc-HERTELENDI Ede 1994. 114-118., HORVÁTH László András 1994. 187-188. 18 The conversion of the conventional radiocarbon data to calendar dates was done using the RADIOCARBON CALIBRATION PROGRAM REV 4.0 (STUIVER, M.-REIMER, P.J. 1993.) 10
