Folia archeologica 27.

Viola T. Dobosi: Őskori telep Demjén-Hegyeskőbércen

24 Chipped stone implements Type groups: pes. 28^5 19,9 Unworked blades Worked blades resp. flakes End-scrapers Side-scrapers Rough implements Chisels-burins-borers Points Others Total 242 40 43 1 12 69 48 19 8 100 3,3 16,5 17,7 0,4 5,7 8,0 Typology The typology of chipped stone implements, younger than the Palaeolithic Age, is by far not so thoroughly elaborated as that of the earlier periods. Methods applied in the research of North European Mesolithic

2

3 cannot be used here because of the well-known difficulties (scarcity of implements, different types, uncertain chronological position, a peculiar quality of the tool assemblage). A further problem is, whether in the case of the Newell-Vroomans method, applied in the processing of the Dutch Mesolithic stone industry (cf. n. 23) by evaluating the material of great excavations, yielding thousands of implements, there is a reason for creating types represented by a couple of speciments. Had they ever really separate functions ? Would it not be advisable to attach a greater significance to eventuality? Though I apply statistic methods myself, I would question whether the exaggeration of the method over a certain point would serve a more thorough knowledge of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic life ? The various processing methods seem to be rather self-contained as to the present and results yielded with a great accuracy by computers, controlled many times and fed back, do not give an answer to the questions we would be eager to know. In the research of the Mesolithic of Hungary there is, for the present, no "menace" of an absolutisation of computer methods. Sites often do not allow a sampling évaluable by statistical methods. Typological groupings of Mesolithic tools, used in Hungarian publications so far, are occasional, varying even within the same authors. L. Vértes chose different systems in investigating the find material of Eger-Kőporostető,

2

4 resp. the environments of Korlát.

2

5 I have chosen - with a slight modification - the latter system for evaluating the finds of Ostoros-Rácpa.

2

0 Also in processing the chipped stone material of Demjén-Hegyeskőbérc the same method seems to be the most efficient one. 2

3 Newell, R. K.-Vroomans, A. P. J., Automatic artifact registration. (Oosterhut 1972) 2* Vértes, L., Acta Arch.Hung. 1(1951) 153-190. 2

5 Vértes, L., FA 17(1965) 9-36. 2G j" Dobosi, V., Mesolithische Fundorte in Ungarn. In: Die aktuellen Fragen der Bandkeramik. 39.