Agria 39. (Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve - Annales Musei Agriensis, 2003)

Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről

first evidence of an in situ debris layer in Heves County at the 3K excavation site at Tarnaörs (map 10).

26 Thus, it would appear that the pits were dug for extracting the clay necessary for daubing houses, which were consequently filled with refuse. With the exception of one or two well pits, the pits here are shallow, 1.5m deep at the very most. They filled up quickly during the course of an erosive process lasting about one or two years.

27 If they did in fact put rubbish which happened to be at hand into the pits this would have speeded up the filling process. That the pits were initially dug for the extraction of clay is supported by the fact that the yellow clay layer is conspicuously absent from the infill, which is most frequently made up of high-quality black humus. In addition, experience at Gubakút shows that in most cases the filling is homogenous with no evidence of stratification. From this one can deduce that the pits were not open for a very long time and that they were filled in relatively quickly, if not indeed in one go. The filling of the pits probably took place in a deliberate manner. Hence, the pits were initially used for the extraction of clay, as a large amount of clay was necessary for the daubing of their wooden dwellings and the fashioning of their household vessels. Why the pits happened to be long in shape also requires explanation, certainly as it would have been more practical to dig deeper holes rather than longer ones (thus saving the extra work created by digging up unnecessary humus material). From a logical and functional point of view the digging of longer pits does not make sense,

28 suggesting therefore that we should focus on less rational considerations. At that time the construction of dwellings was no doubt a ritual act. It must have been an activity interwoven with all kinds of traditions, in which the creation of a microcosm was interspersed the house remains are in keeping with the examples known up to that point (LOSITS Ferenc 1980. 33. footnote 25., KALICZ Nándor-MAKKAY János 1977. 72.). According to F. Losits's interpretation what one has is a house which has fallen sideways from which debris has spread out covering an area much larger than the house. It is strange that F. Losits, who is otherwise meticulous, doesn't attach any importance to the fact that the southern side of the house was missing (they had in fact dug it up) and that posts may also have been present there. We believe that the author was over-influenced by previous publications with the result that he preferred to stick to the existing consensus rather than admit to having discovered a new (and it would now seem totally valid) house type. Using F Losits's documentation we now believe that we can reconstruct an in situ collapsed house from which the posts on the southern side are missing, being 10x5m and therefore larger in size. This would be in keeping with Gubakút (DOMBORÓCZKI László 2000b. 103.) and more generally the known house remains from this period with a ground area of 6xl2-16m (DOMBORÓCZKI László 1997c. 74.). 26 The data was put onto the map following a systematic metre by metre surface collection. The darkest areas probably mark the house's original size. 27 This is an estimate based on my own excavation experience. On several occasions I have noticed how, after only one or two rainfalls, the shallower pits silt up completely. This observation is however contradicted by a number of experiments proving that over a period of seven years, pits are only filled up to a negligible degree (PAVLÚ, Ivan ET AL. 1986. 313.). According to other experiments on narrow pits с 2m deep (Spitzgraben) the entire filling process takes a maximum of 10-20 years (PETRASCH, Jörg 1991. 456-463). 28 The explanation that they were used for channeling away rain water cannot be applied to our wide and deep pits (MODDERMANN, Pieter J.R. 1985. 50.). 15