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

Domboróczki László: Radiokarbon adatok Heves megye újkőkori régészeti lelőhelyeiről

different pits. These can be seen as new, relative chronological points of reference to the dating of the settlement objects and can be collated with the calendar dates provided by the radiocarbon data. Once the С

14 and the reconstructed objects had been collated and analysed, it was possible to test the validity of previously published hypotheses concerning the internal chronology of the excavated sites

4 and by that a totally new picture emerged. Of course it has not been possible to use all the various dating techniques in all cases and it is for this reason that the chronological scheme outlined below cannot be considered definitive. From the analysis and catagorisation of the individual specimens and from the sedation of the fine material of each settlement object we can expect to make ever newer discoveries in the quest to draw up the relative chronological order. The item by item analysis is currently still in its early stages and the end is still a long way off. It is still hoped, however, that the findings will eventually find their way into print. It was originally intended to publish the С

14 data here, but we simply could not wait.

5 The Sites, the Conditions and the Radiocarbon Data Most of the data and information available to us came from the excavation site known as Füzesabony-Gubakút. Indeed, most of the datings, seventeen in all, come from here. It is here also that both the quality of the observations concerning the settlement structure and the quantity of finds were at their most favourable. It is also the earliest of the four sites we will be covering here, being datable to the early and classical periods of the ALP Culture. The ALP site showed very few signs of later disturbance, the archaeological remains being covered by a thick layer of humus. Theoretically everything is in place for a complete reconstruction of the settlement's history. Apart from one or two graves and a woodenframed house of uncertain provenance the layout of the site at Mezőszemere-Kismari-fenék was only marked by pits and although we were clearly looking at a row-like settlement of considerable size the finds themselves are not as impressive as at Gubakút. The site had suffered considerable disturbance and the finds dated from several periods. The four dates we have, coming from the classical and late periods of the ALP, are from that part of the site where most finds were uncovered. Three dates come from the Füzesabony-SzikszóBerek site, being both early and late. Here we also uncovered a band of settlement marked by a row of pits along a straight river bank. Although the site was regular in layout (a grave was also uncovered) with the position of the houses recognizable, the large number of 4 Up to this point we believed that settlements had short time spans and that the finds from the sites all dated from the same period. This is something we have suggested on various occasions (DOMBORÓCZKI László 1996. 211. note 56., DOMBORÓCZKI László 1997a. 24., DOMBORÓCZKI László 1997c. 75-76., DOMBORÓCZKI László 2001. 31-33.). From now on it looks as though a new model will be necessary. 5 I would like to take the opportunity here to thank all those colleagues with whom I had thoughtinspiring conversations, and who drew my attention to the errors and oversights in earlier versions of the text and who offered their advice. I am particularly indebted to Pál Raczky, as well as to Robert Kertész. Most of the ceramics from the ALP sites shown here were restored by Gyula Tóth. His observations were particularly important on the question of dating. László Fodor and Tivadar Petercsák drew my attention to the old maps. The maps published here were drawn by Sándor Tóth and Sándor Tanyi. Here we would like once again to express our thanks. 6