Tálas László szerk.: The late neolithic of the Tisza region (1987)

The Late Neolithic of the Tisza region: A survey of recent archaeological research (N. Kalicz and P. Raczky)

N. KALICZ-P. RACZKY trade routes. The Aszód site also yielded Herpály painted import wares. (For a general discussion of trade and other interregional contacts, see BOCNÁR-KUTZIÁN 1966, 268, 276; 1972, 212-222; KAUCZ 1970a, 13-23; HORVÁTH 1982, 220, 222; MAKKAY 1982, 63-67; ECSEDY 1982, 73-95; KALICZ-RACZKY 1984,131-133; RACZKY 1985, 106-107; DIMITRIJEVIC 1968, 120-122 and Fig. 18; 1971, 145-147; GARASANIN 1951, 130-132; GARASANIN-GARASANIN 1957, 199-218; LAZAROVICI 1976, 213-215; 1983, 131-176; PAVÚK 1969, 345-358; CHAPMAN 1981, 19-31.) The new interpretation and definition of the early Tisza period implies a widening of its chronological dimensions and, also, of its cultural connections. The early Tisza period can now be confidently synchronised with the late phase of the Middle Neolithic Bükk, Szilmeg, Zseliz and Sopot-Bicske groups as evidenced by Bükk imports in the lowermost levels of the tell settlements, as well as the occurrence of bitumen-coated pottery in Bükk, Szilmeg and Zseliz contexts (RACZKY 1985, 104, 107-108). RITUAL OBJECTS AND SACRED BELIEFS Ritual practices permeated almost all aspects and activities of Late Neolithic life, and in this sense it is almost irrelevant to devote a separate section to ritual ceremonies since these cannot be sharply dissociated from everyday activities, with the underlying implication that all surviving categories of finds were, in some respect, linked to a sacred belief that, however, can no longer be recaptured. In the following, the term ritual finds and sacred beliefs will be used in a sense to include all artefact types and phenomena that are unique or unusual and thus probably fell outside the sphere of everyday activities, as well as finds that are generally relegated to the category of prehistoric art (MAKKAY 1975,161-173; 1978b; 1983,157-167). No structures that can be definitely interpreted as sanctuaries or shrines have yet been uncovered on the Late Neolithic sites of the Tisza region. The evidence from South-East Europe, however, would suggest that there were certain communal activities and ceremonies that were performed in communal buildings and areas that could, at the same time, have been the scenes of everyday life. The excavations on certain sites such as Vésztő, Gorzsa and Herpály uncovered houses in which special areas were set aside for ritual activities. These areas contained altars or basins sunk into the floor, animal heads (mainly in the form of bull heads) modelled from clay and applied onto the house wall, and other anthropomorphic sculptures, that usually formed a wellcircumscribed assemblage. These assemblages generally also included artefacts such as stone axes and grinding stones that would otherwise be considered common tools or implements. Cult activities often centered around a sacrificial pit whose form, contents and position within the settlement differed from other pits dug for the extraction of clay or for depositing 22 • ::

. •• - •

v ^ refuse (e.g. Herpály). Sacrificial pits have occasionally been discovered also inside houses at Gorzsa and at Öcsöd. Not only built-in altars, but also portable ones have been found. One characteristic variant of the latter type is a basinlike bowl set on a quadrangular base ornamented with incised meandric or spiral patterns. These patterns probably carried some symbolic meaning since they were accentuated by oftrecurring human or animal heads. This is most clearly illustrated by the triangular altar from Kökénydomb (BANNER 1942b, 3-8) that depicts a mythical, event: the act of birth. The small triangular face of the new-born is set in the triangle symbolizing the female genital (FETTICH 1958, 115-125; KAUCZ 1970, 42). A similar scene, modelled in clay, has been found at Catal Höyük: the figure of a woman giving birth (MELLAART 1967, 110-117,124; PAVLÜ 1966, 714; GIMBUTAS 1974, 176). Altars also include types that are set on small legs and ornamented with painted patterns, such as the specimen with anthropomorphic representation from Szentes-llonapart (HORVÁTH, L.A. 1983, Fig. 7 and PI. 24). The most spectacular and sophisticated figurines of the Late Neolithic are undoubtedly the enthroned male and female statuettes, the more or less stylised anthropomorphic vessels with or without human face. These representations were concentrated particularly on the territory of the Tisza culture. Enthroned figurines are either small sculptures, as the statuettes from Szegvár (l-ll-III), or are hollow and vessel-like, as the Venuses from Kökénydomb, that include figurines without face representation (Venuses I and II) and a figurine with marked facial features (Venus III) (BANNER 1942a, 458-463; 1959, 14-35). The transition between small sculptures and anthropomorphic vessels is illustrated by a seated figurine from Szegvár (Statuette IV) that carries a basket-like vessel on its back. Opinions are divided on the interpretation of the masked male figurine from Szegvár, that has variously been interpreted as a simple peasant portrait (MÜLLER-KARPE 1968, 395), and, in contrast, as one of the earliest representations of a god (MAKKAY 1964, 3-64). This latter, with its implications of Near Eastern connections and a possible Kronos-Enlil relationship has likewise provoked heated debates (KOMORÓCZY 1973, 21^5 and notes 83-84; MAKKAY 1978,164-174,183). Vessels with a human face representation, but without a pronounced human body, belong to a separate category. One variant is the jar with small foot on whose high neck the human face is set in a rectangular panel, whilst the vessel body is ornamented with incised patterns. The other group of human face vessels includes large-size storage jars with a face representation set above an M motif. This type can be traced to the Szakáihát heritage. The large human face vessels occasionally have vertical lugs in the shape of human arms and small incised human figures can sometimes be observed on their shoulder (GOLDMAN 1978, Figs 9,13, 41; CSALLÁNY 1939). The Late Neolithic of the Tisza region is relatively poor in