Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 17. 1976 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1978)

Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Choyke, A. M.: A Classification of the Bone and Antler Tools from the Bronze Age Hill-fortress of Pákozdvár. p. 9–21.

of dissimiliar functions but the same tool may itself have multiple functions. This particular aspect of tools made from animal material tends to blur distinctions between tools and makes definition of precise types difficult. Given the problems raised above, it is not surprising that there has been little study of bone tools in the analyses of technologies from Bronze age populations in Europe and the Near East. It seems clear however, that until the Iron age, with the advent of metal as a cheap and widely available raw material, the greater part of the day-to-day technologies of the Bronze age farmer and craftsperson were still dominated by stone and bone. The exception to this dominance seems to be in the area of cutting and slicing tools where the harder matal is so much more effective than stone or bone. This point aside, bronze must first be regarded as an important status good and exchange item rather than as an all-encompassing part of the subsistence technology. Copper is not a common metal in Europe while tin is actually rare (PIGGOTT — CLARK 1965, 294). Childe hypothesizes that: ,,The Neolithic village need never look beyond its own demains for the necessary material. . . but metal tools, the farmer must, except in exceptional circumstances, import this material from outside the communal boundaries." (1930, 9). Stone and bone tools could still perform most of the tasks which bronze tools did and had the advantage of being more easily obtainable and much more expendable. There may even have been some tasks for which bone, as a softer, lighter, more résiliant material may have been better suited, for example, leather or pottery burnishing. The site To better understand the technoeconomics of Bronze age subsistence it is important that we look at antler, bone, and tooth tools. Hopefully, the following analysis of worked and or utilized faunal material from the Bronze age site of Pákozdvár in Transdanubian Hungary will help further the understanding of the use and function of these sorts of raw materials in the economy of that time period. The artifacts are part of a collection excavated in the late 1920's. As such, the sample may not represent the full range of bone tools in use at that time since clearly, only the more heavily modified bone was saved for analysis. The Bronze age site of Pákozdvár is located in a region of low granitic mountains in Fejér county near the village of Pákozd. The region lies about 50 kilometers south of Budapest on the western side of the Danube river which flows directly north-south at that point. The site is located at an elevation of about 352 meters on a promontory situated between two broad valleys. A third smaller valley cuts this promontory and simultaneously offers a path of access up to the large citadel. This valley also contains a small stream. Pákozdvár is located near fish-rich Lake Velence, but it is not clear whether the lake existed previous to the last century. In any case, the present lake basin was probably always marshy land if not a true lake. The area adjacent to the site is now barren in the upper reaches but was once covered with forest. (Marosi 1930, 53 — 54). Trees are presently restablishing themselves as the area is now a wildlife refuge where wild boar and deer roam in numbers. In historic times most of the region was farmland. Rainfall is low, about 500 mm/year so that vegetation is found most luxuriantly in the better watered valleys (SÁRFALVY, 1969, 73-81). Pákozdvár has been known to archaeologists for a long time due to its large urn grave cemetary. Excavations were carried out at the site itself from 1925 through 1927 in a series of short term seasons by the Hungarian archaeologist Arnold Marosi. A recent survey of the area by Judit Antoni of the King Stephen museum of Székesfehérvár however, casts doubt on some of M а г о s i's published data. Mapping techniques of the 1920's do not appear to have been as precise as those of today. Pákozdvár is dated by stylistic criteria to about 1400 — 1200 В. C. The site may have been occupied for at least 200 years before abandonment. It is usually placed within the Vatya culture, a middle Bronze age group known largely from urn cemeteries and hill-fortresses. Pákozdvár is the largest and most elaborate of some 26 hill-fortresses running in two northweast-southwest lines in the area between the Tisza and Danube rivers and just west of the Danube itself (Petres — Bandi 1969, 170). Indeed, the excavations to date have uncovered only a tiny part of the entire site. Outside the fortified area, the settlement lay on a more sandy soil. This area included semi-subterranean houses, hearths, stone tools, broken bone, antler, and heaps of sherds (Marosi 1930,57 — 59). Apparently the artifacts under study in this analysis come from this area. The chief point of the excavation seems to have been the definition of the extent of the earthwork along the edge of the large citadel looking over the access route in the small valley (Bodza valley). Several extensive trenches, many meters long and some two to three meters deep, were laid down. There were two layers of soil. The upper culture-bearing soil was grey and disturbed. Under this layer was sterile yellow clay disturbed only by intrusions from prehistoric pits and pit houses. Recovery of bone from the fortified area is not mentioned expressly. The lack of a systematic sample from all areas of the site may have resulted in a reduction of variability in antler and bone artifacts from Pákozdvár. This sampling problem should be kept in mind while considering this classification. 10