Madaras László – Szabó László – Tálas László szerk.: Tisicum - A Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok Megyei Múzeumok Évkönyve 8. (1993)

Kertész Róbert: Adatok a Nagyalföld mezolitikumához

between the two sites, only that scalar retouch does not appear on the tools of Jászberény II. Alternate retouch occurs at both sites. An interesting feature of both industries is that besides the carefully, finely manufactured tools at both sites appear also larger, roughly made pieces. The structure of raw material utilization was similar at both sites, namely both industries were based on limnoquarzite and hyroquarzite varietes of Mátra Mts. origin and obsidian appears only in a very low per cent. Due to the similar conditions of fossilization the tools of both Jászberény I and II are covered by a white patina, which concerning also some other data

31 as well, suggests that the geochronologlcal position of the culture layers at both sites was nearly identical. Since, however, at both sites there were surface finds to compare we still must not speak of a geostratlgraphlc Identification of the culture layer of Jászberény II. The data necessary for the determination of a more exact relative chronological position of the two sites are not yet available for us. According to the present state of research in the central region of the Carpathian Basin the Mesolithic period can be divided into two chronological horizons well distinguishable from each other. The Early Phase — covering the turn of the late Glacial and of the Preboreal Period till the end of the first one-third of the Boreal Period — is represented by the sites Szekszárd-Palánk

33 and Sződliget.

34 It seems that in the middle of the Boreal Period and in its second half there was a hiatus in the Hungarian record because finds which could be put into this phase are still missing. The Late Phase — the end of the Boreal Period and the beginning of the Atlantic Period — is represented by Tarpa-Márki tanya, Jászberény I and perhaps by Kaposhomok. According to typological and chronological investigations the Jászberény II industry belongs to this Late Phase. Within the Northern strip of the Great Hungarian Plain Tarpa-Márki tanya and the sites at Jászberény are the important authentic synchronous contributions to the younger Mesolithic history of the Great Hungarian Plain, a history which is still scarcely known. The further connections of Jászberény II we find in the trapeze industries of the marginal areas of the Carpathian Basin. In W Slovakia near the river Vág there is a younger Mesolithic settlement

35 in a sand dune at Vréky near Dolná Stredá. There the tools are made of radiolarite. In the industry backed blades, truncated pieces of different types are present. There are only few retouched blades; chips, blade-like flakes and blades with intact edges are predominant. Those blade points which are present at Dolná Stredá, e.g. Federmessers, are still unknown from Jászberény II, at the same time the geometric microliths — crescents, trapezes — which are present at Dolná Stredá, were found also at Jászberény II. The microlithic industry of Ciumesti II

36 was excavated in a sand dune in the NW part of the Partium. The industry contains scrapers and burin on flakes and obliquely truncated blades — otherwise blades are poorly represented — and blades with intact edges of small typological value which can be considered as analogies of the Jászberény II tools. Geometric microliths are present at both sites but they are more diversified at Ciumesti II than at Jászberény II. In addition to the different types of trapezes at Ciumesti II there are also triangles and crescents while at Jászberény II there are trapezes and crescents but triangles are missing. In the locality of Gilma

37 in the SE part of Transylvania, there are various types of scrapers, burins, truncated and backed pieces and also blades with intact edges. The geometric component appearing both at Gilma and Jászberény II seems to be similar to each other, that is at both sites only crescents and trapezes represent this component. The geometric tool groups at Hurbanovo in Slovakia and at Cremenea in Transylvania

38 are rather poor in types, they contain only trapezes. Theoretically, concerning only the presence of trapezes, both sites may belong into the same horizon together with Jászberény II. At the same time at Hurbanovo and at Cremenea not only the composition of geometric tool group differs from that observed at Jászberény II but other elements predominate also within other groups of tools. Because of the above-mentioned facts and other data

39 we consider a further comparison of them to the Jászberény II site unnecessary. Conclusions J. K. Kozlbwski determined the industries of Kaposhomok, Dolná Stredá, Ciumesti II, Gilma, Hurbanovo and Cremenea as belonging to the late facies of the Epitardigravettian culture.

40 The peripheral areas of the Carpathian Basin during the Mesolithic were inhabited by the peoples of the Sauveterrian, Beuron-Coincy cultures while in the Iron Gate area the Lepenski Vir culture flourished. The cultures within the region were not separated from each other since those changes which we can observe in the development of 90