Vadas Ferenc (szerk.): A Szekszárdi Béri Balogh Ádám Múzeum Évkönyve 13. (Szekszárd, 1986)

László Bartosiewicz–Alice M. Choyke: Animal exploitation at the site of Csabdi–Télizöldes

ence of a butchering area in the eastern part of the settlement where other data of exclusively archaeological nature (features, artifacts) were relatively scarce. Of the wild animals, red deer seems to have been the second best represented species, while bones of wild pig and roe deer occur in smaller numbers. The presence of sporadic remains from brown hare and beaver may be regarded as reflective of the natural environment. Another special aspect of these latter two species is that while their meat value was probably negligible compared to that of larger mammals, their skeletal remains may also be indicative of the use of fur, although no marks of skinning occur on the few bones. To date a total of 29 worked animal remains have been recovered from the excavations (Table 3). While the sample is not very large, certain tendencies may be observed on the manufacture and use of these objects. Previous studies show that, the factors chiefly influencing the choice of bone part in the making of tools for domestic use are cultural traditions within and between geographically limited groups of people, and the availability of certain species. The skeletal part actually chosen is usually somewhat variable. However, the within group distribution of tool manufacture traditions is probably defined by the extent of the kinship network, and these traditions are expressed in the size and shape criteria which the ancient craftsperson took into account. The species exploited provide the basis of raw material of choice. What sorts of activities were these tools used for and what may be deduced from certain aspects of their manufacture? First, although a good number of the tools under discussions bear the criss-cross striations indicative of contact with ceramic surfaces (N. Rüssel, personal communication), the lack of uniformity in shape seems to indicate that pottery was not intensively produced at this site. The proportions of species providing bone parts for such tools as well as floor and wall smoothers, more or less reflect species percentages in the faunal list. Preforators or pointed tools seem to have been made largely from the long bones of roe deer and sheep/goat which appear to have been interchangeable sources of raw material in this size category of bone tools. Pig bone, although comparable in size is rarely used for tool manufacture because of the great amount of fat which must be removed from the bone material first. All of the pointed tools have been further worked after initial fracturing with flint. Flint working leaves bunched wavy lines on the bone surface (Campana 1982). In general, the trend seems to be towards the use of wild animal remains in tool making. Since cattle bone is most numerous at this site, it is most striking that preference rather appears to be shown for the bones of red deer and aurochs in the large size category. It would be interesting to see whether this perceived pattern holds up when bone tool samples from other Lengyel culture sites are compared. Such findings would demonstrate the role of cultural tradition in this aspect of manufacture and perhaps suggest preferential procurement of particular animal species. To some extent these data are skewed by the relatively large number of antler tools. Shed antler may be gathered, but antler may also be hunted for. Inhabitants of this site used antler because it was easily available, but not to make tools for which it was particularly suited by virtue of weight or easy carving. It appears to have been casually picked up and used unlike the elaborate antler tools at another Lengyel culture site, Aszód-Papiföldek. 183