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

Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről

consideration of how it spread on the Alföld.

81 Perhaps we should return to the original definition of the Szatmár Group, replacing its geographical denomination for one emphasizing its transitional nature. The degree to which the material is mixed would also have to be referred to with the help of quantative data and clear descriptions. We are certainly not the only ones to have seen things in this way. In their work published in 2000 mentioned above, N. Kalicz and J. Koós emphasis the evolutionary nature of the changes seen in the group finds when outlining the three phases of development.

82 In the cases of the Kőtelek, then the Tiszacsege and the Rétközberencs, and finally the Mocsolyás and Gubakút finds, they put the material into some kind of order of stylistic development, believing one should not discount the possibility that a chance, and not strictly evolutionary, mixture or transition had taken place. It is particularly necessary to consider this possibility because according to P. Raczky's theory the Szatmár Group could have spread from the north in a southerly direction meeting the Alföld variant of the Körös Culture at Kőtelek. It can easily be seen that a mixture in the finds could quite simply have come about through exchange or marriage. Despite the remarks made above we do of course believe that N. Kalicz and J. Koós's work amounts to a major step forward. As to how long the transitional period could have been, certain estimates have been made. According to Nándor Kalicz's three phase scheme, Gubakút and Mocsolyás, dating from 5500-5600 ВС, must have been predated by the Kőtelek data by several generations. This would mean that the ALP Culture must have developed at a very early date

83 with the result that these supposed dates could be correlated with the Méhtelek dates.

84 If this were to be the case, however, one would have to contend with the idea that the ALP and Körös settlements were neighbours, albeit independent ones, over a long period of time, where a mixture of finds could have taken place in the context of an exchange of goods or the receiving of guests on a greater or a lesser scale. This could explain the kind of mixed finds one sees at Kőtelek, Tiszacsege, Gubakút or Mocsolyás. In the case of a non-evolutionary stylistic development, however, it is not even necessary to suggest such early dates, as the mixture of the finds and their development may have happened both quicker and later. It is a recognised fact that the ALP Culture covered the Alföld as a whole even in territories once inhabited by the Körös Culture during the mid81 Mixed finds could also have come about through exchange during the spread of the ALP Culture across the Alföld. J. Makkay also mentions the ALP pieces which appear in the various Körös finds, which must have meant some kind of exchange or direct contact (MAKKAY János 1982a. 44-45.). Despite this he sees the spread of the ALP Culture taking place in an aggressive fashion (most recently: MAKKAY János 2001. 69.). Rather than a change of populations or an aggressive spreading we subscribe to the view that it amounted to a gradual increase in material cultural exchange. The best example of such a peaceful change in fashion can be seen in the SzakáihátTisza transition at Öcsöd-Kováshalom. Here changes took place within the lifetime of a single house (RACZKYPál 1987. 64-67.). 82 KALICZ Nándor-KOÓS Judit 2000. 69. 83 О. Trogmayer earlier argued the ALP Culture developed earlier rather than later (TROGMAYER Ottó 1982. 282-283). 84 KALICZ Nándor-MAKKAY János 1976. 23. 27