Achaeometrical Research in Hungary II., 1988

PROSPECTING and DATING - György GOLDMAN - Júlia SZÉNÁSZKY: Topographic research on the neolithic settlements in Békés Sárrét

riverbed that probably the river's dam itself acts as a protective cover for the neolithic settlement as well. From the west and east, its borders are defined by the old channels. It is not possible to determine its northern extension on the basis of topographical data because holiday resorts cover this area. The intervals between these resorts are covered with either grass or trees. Under such circumstances, it was therefore very difficult to carry out a surface investigations as has so far been described. The extent settlement could only be determined through open sections at different points on the site. We were able to uncover a close interconnection between the eastern and western parts of the settlement. We noticed that in both the Szakáihát and Herpály cultures, the layers of the site formed clearly defined borders and thus did not intermix. Contrary to this, the test pits in the middle of the settlement were indicative of intensive occupation. Here, fragments pertaining to the Herpály culture lay within a depth of 60 cm, followed by those of the Esztár and Szakáihát cultures at a depth of 80 cm. The east-west section of the site gave a good view of the water trench which ran parallel to the river 'Sebes-Körös'. While trying to find a solution to the question of the section or segment running southwards from the north, we opened surface areas measuring 15 x 1 m. From this it became clear that beyond a distance of 200 m from the river bank there were no neolithic remains. Judging from these sites, we can conclude that site phenomena of the Szakáihát and Herpály cultures which settled here are completely similar to one another. Everywhere we observed Szakáihát culture pits in a similar way as we saw Herpály occurrences. In accordance with life in the later period, houses with structures of posts, as well as pits were found at the Herpály site. There was nothing to indicate that this phenomenon is indigenous to eastern Hungaiy. To the best of our knowledge, there was nothing to indicate that the settlers here might have formed a tell. The site during the Herpály period was also of single layer. Both of these great cultures settled in Sárrét, that is, the southern and central sections of the Great Hungarian Plain during the Middle Neolithic. We probably studied the border zone between these two cultures. The situation was even more exciting during the Late Neolithic. Dévaványa-Sártó is a widely-spread Tisza culture settlement, with a multi-strata habitation in the centre. Szeghalom-Kovácsdomb 15 km to the east from here. Going further 6 km to the south, the Vésztö-Mágor tell settlement can be found. Between the last two, and hardly a few km from either of them, we find Szeghalom-Várhely a single layer, Herpály culture settlement. The southernmost Herpály tell, which is the nearest here, lay in KörösújfaluJákódomb, approximately 10 km east of Vésztö-Mágor. If we go another 6 km further south-eastwards, another Tisza culture settlement, Zsadány-Püski-hill can be encountered. We think that an examination of relationships between these settlements could provide some very interesting data. Very important results can be expected in connection with the appearance of Szakáihát and Tisza cultures, and the part they played in the development of Neolithic, especially if we examine developments observed in the Körös-valley along the Maros-valley. Here Szakáihát occurrences are more intensive than those of the Tisza culture.lt seems to have occupied a major part of the plain starting from here. H