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

Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről

northward along the banks of the Tisza.

98 On one short stretch one sees an overlap of Körös and Szatmár sites. From now on therefore one can neither discount the possibility that developments occurred on site in the Upper Tisza Region in the northernly areas of the Körös Culture. It is possible therefore that we require new models. It is now time to rethink the questions involving the extent of the Körös Culture, the Körös-ALP transition, as well as the possible role the Mezolithic peoples played in local Neolithisation. Whilst it is neither our intention here to concentrate on the new site mentioned above, nor to make a thorough analysis of the process of Neolithisation, it is something we will have to touch upon later since the latest results on the ALP period provided evidence, which despite current hypotheses, may, offer new alternatives. Some Comments Regarding the Question of Neolithisation on the Northern Part of the Great Hungarian Plain The most important question regarding Neolithisation is the relationship between the local indigenous population and the spreading of those people associated with a Neolithic way of living. Was there indeed an indigenous population? Did they participate in the emergence of a Neolithic culture, or did they differ? If they did participate, how did this happen? It is a matter of addressing general problems when and where they appear. The problem can also be extended into the realm of the meeting of cultures, indeed civilisations. Capable of being studied from many aspects it has spawned a considerable literature." Naturally a lot depends on both the standpoint and stance one adopts when trying to understand the past, because the danger of relativism (the influence of prevailing ideologies) is never far away. Nevertheless, there are general features which are indisputable and which continually repeat themselves. What there is to observe should of course only be analysed on a region by region basis.

100 As regards the examination of our particular region, the northern part of the Alföld, let us reacquaint ourselves only with what happened from the end of the 1970s.

101 Although N. Kalicz and J. Makkay went back to the Körös Culture in search of the origins of the ALP, they associated the people who made it not with the settlers of the incoming Körös Culture 98 We know that systematic surveys have taken place in the Polgár area and that no Körös sites have thusfar come to light (CHAPMAN, John 1994. 80.) Could the knowledge filter ( the belief that Körös sites would never turn up) have influenced the way Körös sites were viewed in the northern territories? 99 It would be enough to mention the works of G. Childe and C. Renfrew when giving classic examples of diffusionist and antidiffusionist archaeological models (RENFREW, Colin 1979.). Both views continue to exist in their various guises. A. Whittle's most recent overview provides a rich literary summary despite challenging old perceptions. (WHITTLE, Alasdair 1996.). We would like to draw attention to one particular forum-type discussion in which opinions have clashed over the spread of the TLP Culture (TILLMANN, Andreas 1993., TILLMANN, Andreas ET AL. 1993.). I refer to L. Verhart because in his Dutch case studies he makes interesting ethnographical parallels (VERHART, Leo B.M. 2000. 15-45., 225-234.). 100 RACZKY Pál 1983. 191. 101 For earlier research see: RACZKY Pál 1988. 14-17. 31