Zalai Múzeum 10. 50 éves a Zalaegerszegi Göcseji Múzeum (Zalaegerszeg, 2001)

Bondár Mária: Adatok a Délnyugat-Dunántúl kora bronzkori kutatási problémáihoz

76 Bondár Mária Contribution to the research problems of the Early Bronze Age in Southwest-Transdanubia In this study - with the knowledge of the latest research results - the author tries to find an answer to the question, that which cultures did really spread in the Transdanubian region in the age of early Bronze Age I. and Early Bronze Age II. In her history of research she examines, that which are those statements that are valid even nowadays, and which are those that can only be history today. In the Hungarian research there were three basic opinions up to now: the opinions of István Bona, the theory of Nándor Kalicz and Rózsa Schreiber and the ideas of István Ecsedy. Up to the end of the sixties the opinions of Bona and Kalicz were more or less the same: the Makó-Vucedol-Nyírség group and the regional groups of the Zók culture are from the same age, because the inner decorated footed plates can be found in both cultures. Problems were caused by the acknowledge and separation of the Somogyvár culture. From that time the opinions of Bona and Kalicz - based on theoretical ideas - were different in more points. Kalicz waited the solution from the great Baranya County (Pécs-Nagyárpád) excavations of the beginning of the seventies and accepted the verbal reports of G. Bandi. At the end of the seventies Ecsedy, in the form of a bit complicated theory, rejected the simultaneousnes of Makó-Vucedol cultures, and on his distribution map he entered the presence of the two phases of Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture into the Hungarian research. From that time total chaos rules in the research of the theme. The former Makó sites suddenly change to Somogyvár-Vinkovci sites, and the theory of the expansion of the Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture appears. Chronological correspondences are made after the wandering of objects. The author, based on the systematic researches made in Zala County in the past twenty years (fig. 1.), and on her own excavation (Börzönce), and on the processing of site Nagykanizsa-Inkey chapel, previews her own settlement theory of Early Bronze Age I. and Early Bronze Age II. She agrees with the former statement of Bona, that says the Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture was not long present in the Transdanubian region, and it did not have two phases either, because it is not supported neither by the finds, neither by the site characteristics. The author agrees with the opinion of Bona and Figler that says on the Transdanubian region Vinkovci A-type finds can be traced, the smaller typological differences are regional based and can be explained with the different populations. The theory about one pot type = parallel aged cultures does not stand nowadays, because the inner-decorated footed pots - now proved - can be found in more consecutive cultures too. The author declares, on the South part of the Transdanubian region (Baranya County, Tolna County and lately Somogy County) the Vucedol culture settled. Parallel to this on the Northern part of the Transdanubian region the short living settlements of the Makó culture can be found. These were followed by Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture, which, according to the author under a very short time, settled more or less in the same time. Around some bigger centres, smaller short time used lodgings can be traced. Makó culture was followed by Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture, so it doesen't make a sense to force the idea of a parallel. The author suggests that the old stereotypes must be forgotten and after the reassessment of the findings the former processes and settlement hierarchy must be thought over. Translated by Attila Ködmön