Budapest Régiségei 15. (1950)

Banner János: Adalékok Budapest újabb-kőkorához 7-25

impressions. On the rims, there is an unadorned stripe and they are jointed by impressed warts (fig, 1:1—3,). But the wellknown material of the Kőrös culture awakens doubts in us whether or not these fragments really belong to the linear pottery. It is true that the nail decoration is at home in the culture of the vessels with band decoration. It chiefly appears on these vessels where, under the rim as well as on the bulgy part, there is a row of warts, so that between two upper warts falls a lower one and vice versa, and the upper and lower warts are connected with ribbons consisting of nail decorations, in single or in double rows. We seldom find denser ornaments in the territory beyond the Carpathian Basin. The shape of the few finds discovered in Slovakia does not point to the linear pottery, although it occurs together with it. It also appears together with the Bükk culture in special shapes which cannot be compared with the above mentioned ones. These facts awake in us a suspicion, as to the correctness of the classification of the Tabán finds. Neither the shape, nor the execution and decoration are similar to the above mentioned. Se we must search elsewhere for their origin. Among the find material discovered at Zsoldos-farm (Hódmezővásárhely — Kopáncs), at Kovács-farm, at Kotacpart and Bodzáspart, there are many fragments which agree with those well-known from Tabán as regards their shape, execution and decoration. The thickness of the vessel wall, the rim, the material of some vessels, the empty stripe under the rim, the characteristic wart and the decoration corresponds to those to such an extent, that there can be no doubt about their connection with the same culture. We refer here to the already published material, which betrays the common origin. We try to find the origin of these finds or at least the development of their shape in the Körös-culture. The geographical situation does not contradict this. The map constructed by Ida Kutzián showing the spread of this culture — based partly on my map — does not only prove that the Kőrös culture was at home beyond the Tisza, but also that it reached the district between the Danube and the Tisza and got as far as the Danube. The authentic finds of Gombos, Monostorszeg, Csatalja and Vaskút prove this. The culture spread along the Danube northwards and through Kiskunhalas and Kiskunmajsa, as proven by the Dunabogdány finds — known only from the literature, Now whichever way the people of the Kőrös culture followed, they had to go through our territory. So we must take into consideration, that this culture reached Budapest although we cannot draw final conclusions from one find and its chronological situation can be perhaps cleared here. The Tabán material seems to prove that the older linear pottery and the Kőrös culture arrived at the same time to this district, or at least they got into touch here, which equally seems to indicate synchronism. This confutes the opinion that the Körös culture was simultaneous with the Bükk culture. After the researches of Ida Kutzián, this is not at all surprising. Another find from which we can draw interesting conclusions, is the Nagytétény grave. This was laid open ten years ago. The publisher states that : »as the grave goods indicate, the grave belongs to the faciès of the younger linear pottery, called by dr Tompa Zseliz culture.« But — as the figures prove — the Zseliz culture is represented in the grave only by one vessel. This is of a globular shape, the neck is nearly cylindrical, the bottom flattened, (fig 2 : 2.) The whole surface is covered with decorations consisting of parallel bundles of lines with incisions. According to Gallus, there are four vessels together with this, showing the shapes of the linear pottery. He does not publish the picture of one of them, as it is in a very bad state. Dater we are going to deal with these vessels. 22