Kisné Cseh Julianna – Kemecsi Lajos szerk.: Komárom – Esztergom Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 7. (Tata, 2000)

Vicze Magdolna: The symbolic meaning of Urn 715

under discussion, was applied extensively.

35 The zigzag ornament without frame is just as frequent on the decorated Nagyrév as well as Kisapostag vessels. Although with the Kisapostag examples those decorations are always made with rolled-stick impressions and not with incision and they are situated rather under the rim than on the neck, nevertheless their basic concept is the same. Corresponding pieces can be found at Dunaújváros-Duna-dűlő from graves 75,329,478,1036,1052,

36 Kisapostag-Kollár föld,

37 Balatongyörök,

38 Szentlőrinc-Strandfürdő, Háromfa-Rinyapart,

39 etc. Nagyrév examples are known from the „altar" fragment from Tószeg-Laposhalom,

40 or the pedestalled jar from the same site,

41 other jugs and jars from DunaföldvárKálvária,

42 Tószeg-Ökörhalom, Szanda, Vác.

43 The other two elements of the decorative composition are placed on the shoulder of the urn right above the handles, forming pairs, which are situated opposite to each other. One of the elements is the swastika, which in this form is quite rare in the material remains of both the Early Vatya and the Nagyrév complexes,

44 but nevertheless can very easily be fitted into the strictly geometrical decorative tradition of the latter one. A variation of the swastika can be seen on the already mentioned small „altar" from Tószeg-Laposhalom,

45 an other example from an early Vatya context the urn from grave 349,

46 and on a bird-shaped rattle also from Tószeg-Laposhalom.

47 The other decorative 35 CSÁNYI-STANCZIK 1982, Fig. 9. 8; 1992, 116. This motive later disappears from the Vatya pots but not from the whole tradition, which can be seen from a much later appearance on a bird-shaped small ceramic vessel from grave 779 in Vicze 2001, PI. 138.5. 36 VICZE 2001, Pis. 10.1,3; 13.5; 15.14; 19.3; 21.7. 37 MOZSOLICS 1942, PI. 11.1,60,57,145; and stray finds Pis. IX.2,3,4,21; X.26; XII.9. 38 TORMA 1972, Fig. 4.15; 6.11,17; 7.3,6; 9.11. 39 BÁNDI1967, Pis. 1.1,5; XI.4. 40 BANNER-BÓNA-MÁRTON 1957, 90 Fig. 1.18; the same in SCHREIBER 1984, Fig. 6.3. 41 TOMPA 1936, PL 21.8; the same in SCHREIBER 1984, Fig. 6.7. 42 SZABÓ 1992, PL LXXXIV 43 BONA 1963, Pis. 1.3; IV. 1; XIII. 11. 44 The motive itself would deserve a wider chronological and territorial study, but that would divert this analysis to fields, which presently lie outside the scope of this paper. 45 BANNER-BÓNA-MÁRTON 1957, 90 Fig. 1.18. 46 VICZE 2001, PL 84, 8. 47 BONA 1975, PL 262. 6; BONA 1992, 104. 122