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

from above-perhaps to the great luck of Hungarian archaeology-, but rather called to life by the demands of a younger generation of archaeologists who hoped to base their studies on authentic source material. This led to the excavation of a number of Vatya hillforts and fortified settlements such as Sárbogárd-Cifrabolondvár, Aba-Belsőbáránd-Bolondvár, Bara es-Bottyánsánc, Kajaszó-Várdomb, Százhalombatta-Téglagyár and MendeLeányvár, as well as to successive campaigns on sites such as Lovasberény-Mihályvár, Igar-Vámpuszta, BölcskeVörösgyir and Tiszaalpár-Várdomb.

55 A number of tell settlements in the Great Hungarian Plain were also investigated in the course of this programme: Klárafal va-Hajdova, Vésztő-Mágorhalom,Tiszaug-Kémény te tő, Füzesabony-Öregdomb, Gáborján-Csapszékpart, EsztárFenyvespart and Bakonszeg-Kórogypuszta.

56 Beside the sites listed in the above, extensive work was carried out at Nagyárpád-Dióstető, Szigetszentmiklós-Felsőtag, Nyergesújfalu-Téglagyár, Tiszaluc-Dankadomb, Rétközberencs-Paromdomb, Jászdózsa-Kápolnahalom, Ároktő-Dongóhalom, Tiszafüred-Ásotthalom, Tószeg-Laposhalom and, more recently, at Zók-Várhegy, Berettyóújfalu-Herpály, Túrkeve-Terehalom and Velemszentvid.

57 These excavations have greatly enlarged our knowledge of the Early and Middle Bronze Age. This obviously incomplete list in itself conjures up an imposing picture; however, a few not so obvious difficulties must be mentioned in passing. Bronze Age studies in Hungary have mostly been denied the opportunity for investigations with extensive excavation surfaces. The only site to have been completely excavated is Nagyárpád, a single-layer settlement; and with the exception of Békés-Várdomb, Berettyóújfalu-Herpály, Jászdózsa-Kápolnahalom, Tiszaalpár-Vár domb, Zók-Várhegy and Velemszentvid, most multilayered settlements were only investigated with small, stratigraphie soundings. Even so, the relatively more extensive investigation of these sites only resulted in the research of a given percentage of the site. Even though modern excavation techniques for the investigation of multilayered settlements had been gradually introduced and applied in the excavations conducted at Bölcske, Jászdózsa, Tószeg and Herpály for example, hardly more is known about changes in the structure and organisation of Bronze Age settlements than before.

58 Or, to be more precise: we can hardly be aware of the greater abundance of data at our disposal until the relevant results are published. The time-lag in this respect can mostly be blamed on the restrictions of the possiblities for publication on the one hand, and on the fact that most archaeologists have only recently begun to experiment with methods for the economic separation and publication of the relevant information from large-scale excavations. The intensive research of settlements can undoubtedly be viewed as a positive achievement of Bronze Age studies in Hungary; at the same time, its momentary contradictions do in part explain the almost complete lack of socio-economic analyses.

59 Neither is the situation better regarding the theoretical and methodological issues of settlement archaeology, even though some attempts have been made in this respect—for all archaeological periods—with the analyses of fortified settlements and hillforts,

60 and in the course of topographical work that was begun several decades ago.

61 Disregarding now the relevant sections of comprehensive studies covering various periods of the Bronze Age,

62 a separate, thematic study devoted only to settlement history is practically lacking.

63 But perhaps the greatest need is not for studies of this kind, but rather for the detailed and rapid publication of all data recovered from recent settlement excavations—as has been done in the case of Tiszaalpár-Várdomb.

64 This is all the more important since earlier cultural and chronological systems that appeared to be sufficiently flexible for some time have by now hardened into a rather schematic framework, not only in Hungary, but also in other countries of the Carpathian Basin and adjacent regions. It would appear that the precondition to any advance in this respect is the revision of the relative chronology and the former definition of the settlement territories of the population groups of our Bronze Age in the light of authentic finds and data. A new analysis of the nature of the material culture—combined with a review of the areal and chronological connections of similar, peculiar and unique phenomena-appears to be necessary for certain periods and for certain regions. Ample source material for new analyses of this kind are provided by the wealth of information recovered from the settlement excavations conducted in recent decades —especially on multiperiod sites. The unbiased publication of any of these sites would in itself have restricted informational value. Only a complex information system surfacing within a relatively short period of time can induce advances in Bronze Age studies in Hungary.

65