Savaria - A Vas Megyei Múzeumok értesítője 24/3. (1997) (Szombathely, 1997)

Kovács Tibor: A kiskőszegi (Battina) bronzkori és korai vaskori ékszerlelet

KOVÁCS TIBOR: A BRONZE AND AN IRON AGE HOARD FROM KISKŐSZEG (BATTINA, YUGOSLAVIA) ble (MOZSOLICS 1957, 139), to suggestions that they were hidden in the face of the Tumulus advance (BONA 1958, 224; 1975, 226; KOVÁCS 1966, 197. 198. 201-202; MOZSOLICS 1967, 123; BANDI 1967b, 3233; KEMENCZEI 1968, 162. 186; KŐHEGYI 1968), or that the northern hoards were hidden when the late Madarovce/Magyarád culture migrated southward, while the southern ones were hidden owing to the southern expansion of the Szeremle culture (BÁNDI 1968, 7173; BÁNDI - KOVÁCS 1970). Other scholars considered these hoards to have been votive deposits (RUTTKAY 1983, 1-2; SCHUMACHER - MATTHÄUS 1984. 158). This wide range of interpretations can be attributed to the fact that the number of hoards in this horizon is rather low, their composition is often uncertain and that there are very few bronze finds recovered from reliable contexts, either from the settlements or burials of the Encrusted Pottery culture. This was the main reason why this hoard is published here since - seeing that it offers little new in the way of previously unknown artefacts. We know next to nothing about its find circumstances, and it is also possible that, similarly to the Iron Age assemblage, László Mauthner perhaps split up the original Bronze Age hoard. It is therefore quite possible that the hoard had originally contained more artefacts. The incompleteness of the Kiskőszeg (Battina) hoard, containing thirteen pendants, is also supported by the number of items in other comparable hoards from northern Transdanubia (Abda, с. 400 items; Szomód, 45 items; Tata, 193 items; Ipoly-völgy in Slovakia, с 62 items; Esztergom, 38 items; Szigliget, 166 items; Felsőörs, 360 items) and southern Transdanubia (Lengyeltóti, 11 items; Mosdós-Pusztasárkánytó, 125 items; Mucsi, 58 items; Tolnanémedi, с. 138 items; Bonyhád, 42 items; Kórós, 22 items) (MOZSOLICS 1967, 127184; FURMÁNEK 1980, 11-12. 15-16; MRT 2. 91; KOVÁCS 1994, 159-160; HANSEL 1997; CSEH 1998.). Of the hoards listed here, the Abda hoard, containing mostly conical sheet buttons, had the most finds (400 items), together with the Felsőörs hoard (360 items). The hoards with a high number of bronze objects, representing a wide range of artefact types, such as the hoards from Szigliget, Tata, Mosdós, Tolnanémedi and Kölesd-Nagyhangos, represent another category. The Kiskőszeg (Battina) hoard can in this respect best be compared to the Lengyeltóti assemblage (11 items) (MOZSOLICS 1967, 147). The composition of these two hoards is similar insofar as the latter contains eight anchors shaped pendants, a disc pendant, a spearhead and a lump of bronze. In view of the two latter finds, however, the Lengyeltóti assemblage cannot be regarded as a jewellery hoard. Little can be added to the comprehensive discussion of the artefact types (MOZSOLICS 1967, 90-92; HANSEL 1968, 118-121; BONA 1975, 215-216; KOVÁCS 1994,160) on the basis of the Battina assemblage. Most anchor shaped pendants from this assemblage (Fig. 1. 3-4,6-10) can be assigned to the medium sized variant of this pendant type. Larger pendants are only known from the still unpublished Szigliget hoard, from an unprovenanced Hungarian hoard (the Rath collection), the Carnuntum hoard (RUTTKAY 1983, 2, PI. 1.1; KOVÁCS 1994, 159-160, Fig. 1.) and a grave assemblage from Simon tornya (WOSINSKY 1896, 498502). The precursors of this pendant type were the more or less similar bone pendants of the Early Bronze Age (MOZSOLICS 1967, 90; KOVÁCS 1994,160). Although both the bone and the bronze variants of this pendant type were part of the costume (Cp. SCHUMACHER-MATTHÄUS 1985, 68-74, Pl. 42. 2, Pl. 43. 1-2.), their appearance on vessels suggests their cultic importance (Cp. the vessel from Pákozd in the collection of the István Király Museum, Székesfehérvár [Inv. no. 7107]; the vessel from Neszmély in the collection of the Kuny Domonkos Museum, Tata), as does the fact that a combination of the two most common pendant types used by the population of the Encrusted Pottery culture is also known: á'few disc pendants, such as the ones from Kórós and Kölesd-Nagyhangos, are decorated with anchor shaped ribs (MOZSOLICS 1967, PI. 30. 13-14. [Kórós]; MOZSOLICS 1967, PI. 31. 10, 14 and BONA 1975, PI. 270. 9-11 [Nagyhangos]). One of these ribbed disc pendants is especially noteworthy (Fig. 1. 12). Both sides of this pendant are ornamented in an identical, unique way. The ornamentation is a cruciform rib set within a circular frame. Analogies to this ornamentation are known from Szomód (MOZSOLICS 1967, 167-168, PI. 23. 5.), Ipoly-völgy (FURMÁNEK 1980, 12. Pl. 4. 79.), Mucsi (Unpublished), Kórós (MOZSOLICS 1967, 144-145, Pl. 30. 10-12.) and Zmajevac (Vörösmart) (MOZSOLICS 1967, 177, PI. 29. 1-2.). The Szomód pendant stands closest to the Battina specimen. Unfortunately, the distribution (findspots) of these pendants does not allow any far-reaching conclusions since they occur both in the northern (Szomód, Ipoly-völgy) and the southern (Mucsi, Kórós, Zmajevac) territory of the Encrusted Pottery culture. This pendant type, however, offers some starting points for dating this hoard. One similar variant of these ribbed pendants, provided with a suspension loop, occurs in Koszider type hoards. The Dunaújváros-Koszider I hoard contains two variants of the pendant with cruciform ribbing set within a circular frame (MOZSOLICS 1967, 133-134, PI. 46, 5-9) suggesting that the Battina hoard was probably concealed in a late phase of the Encrusted Pottery culture, some time before the horizon marked by the Koszider hoards. 25