Kovács Tibor - Stanczik Ilona (szerk.): Bronze Age tell settlements of the Great Hungarian Plain I. (Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae 1; Budapest, 1988)

Tibor KOVÁCS: Review of the Bronze Age settlement research during the past one and a half centuries in Hungary

REVIEW OF THE BRONZE AGE SETTLEMENT RESEARCH DURING THE PAST ONE AND A HALF CENTURIES IN HUNGARY Tibor KOVÁCS As in other countries of Europe,it was the registration of hillforts and earthwork ditches-the historical objects visible on the surface —that preceded a conscious archaeological activity also in Hungary.

1 Their identification and mapping—from the close of the 17th century-primarily served military purposes. Since a number of these sites later became partly or totally destroyed, these 18th and 19th century military maps —that were drawn in the course of surveys between 1763—1787 and 1810—1869 —preserved a wealth of information for present-day research.

2 In the latter half of the 19th century, an active interest towards a better understanding of the national past arose as part of the independence movement against the Hapsburgs, and it is by no means accidental that the conscious identification and investigation of historic monuments — which included the hillforts and fortified settlements from various periods —began at roughly the same time.

3 Since this interest extended to the whole of the historic past it was, by and large, accidental which prehistoric settlement would catch the attention of the budding archaeological research. Obviously, the exact date of the prehistoric sites discovered at this time could not be accurately defined, partly because the self-trained archaeologists tried to identify, recover and interpret the heritage of periods known from written sources.

4 The middle of the 19th century saw the investigation of several hillforts and their ditches. A number of prehistoric settlements were examined too, even though only brief reports of the latter were published.

5 The social and scholarly conditions for settlement investigations on a higher level only began to unfold from the 1860s. Beside the National Museum that reigned supreme until then,

6 museums were also founded in Kolozsvár (Cluj) and Győr (1858), and in less than two decades, various local museums collecting the natural and historical relics of the given area were called to life in a number of the country's towns and cities.

7 The Archaeological Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences was founded (1858) and the Historical Society was formed (1858); they were soon followed by the Archaeological and Anthropological Society (1878). The results of scholarly research were presented and discussed in their meetings, and these were subsequently published in new scholarly journals, the Archaeologiai Közlemények (1861) and the Archaeologiai Értesítő (1868). Lastly, the scholars who were to become the leading figures of Hungarian archaeology and monument conservation and who could boast a European perspective also began their activity at this time. It was the wide-ranging knowledge and organisational ability of Imre Henszlmann (1813—1888), Ferenc Pulszky (1814-1897), Flóris Rómer (1815-1889), Arnold Ipolyi (1823-1886) and József Hampel (18491913) that provided the cohesive force for elevating Hungarian historical and especially Hungarian archaeological research to an international level. Neither is it mere chance that the author of the first book reviewing and surveying the archaeological heritage of Hungary in a clear style came from this circle of scholars.

8 The International Prehistoric Congress of 1876 held in Budapest was a significant event since the excavations conducted specifically for this occasion —primarily at Tószeg

9-, and the more detailed publication

10 of earlier finds and investigations mark the real beginning of prehistoric research organised along scholarly principles. The by and large accurate chronological grouping of the excavated and collected material was greatly aided by Ferenc Pulszky

's monograph on the Copper Age

11 and by József Hampel's

12 studies covering the Bronze Age. Rómer's study which surveys the then known, roughly one hundred and fifty hillforts considered to be prehistoric is the most important in terms of settlement archaeology.

13 All this played an important role in the gradual shift of emphasis in prehistoric research which had until then concentrated on the identification and topographical survey of sites. Beginning with the 1860s the investigation of settlements with actual spadework gained in importance. Even though surveys of various sites combined with excavations had been conducted previously in various areas,

14 the nationwide spread of this "method" only began at this time. Several major sites, significant also in terms of their size and stratification, were excavated, including Kisterenye-Hársashegy (1861),

15 Nagyrév-Zsidóhalom (1865),

16 Szihalom-Árpádvár (1868),

17 Piliny-Várhegy (1876),

18 Tószeg-Laposhalom (1876),

19