Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone 9781407308029, 9781407337920

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Table of Contents
Foreword
Editorial Preface
List of Contributors
List of Referees
Introduction: Requiem for kurgans
Chapter 1: Perspectives in kurgan studies
The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary
On the history of the Bronze Age studies in the steppe near the Ural Mountains
Chapter II: Archaeology
Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades
Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom - An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary)
Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains
Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds
Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages
Chapter III: Environmental Sciences
III./1. Anthropology
Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups
III./2. Geography, geomorphology, geochemistry
Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain
Groundwater movements and its geochemical properties around and in the Csípo-halom kurgan
Geomorphological classification of Hungarian kurgans
III./3. Pedology, palaeopedology
Detailed palaeopedological analysis of kurgans of the Great Hungarian Plain
Soil micromorphological investigations of the buried soil and cultural layers of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom
Detection of the directional variation of palaeosol properties in the Filippovka 1 kurgan cemetery (Orenburg region, Russia)
An interpretation of the soil 14C results of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom kurgan
Short and long-term pedochronosequences of the Skvortsovsky burial ground in the Buzuluk River valley (Orenburg region, Russia)
The process of the Bolshoi Sintashta Kurgan’s construction (Chelyabinsk region, Russia) in the light of pedological and radiocarbon data
III./4. Palaeozoology
A quarter-malacological inventory of Hungarian kurgans
III./5. Palaeo-ethnobotany
The usage of wood in burial rites: data obtained from kurgans of the Filippovka-1 burial site
Archaeobotanical remains of the Late Copper Age from the Carpathian Basin
Palaeovegetational reconstruction of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom based on combined micropalaeobotanical analysis
III./6. Botany
Anthropogenic impacts and management of natural grasslands on kurgans
Evaluation of vegetational changes in the natural vegetation cover of kurgans (Csípo- and Kántor-halom)
Effects of extrazonal and climatic conditions on the vegetation of kurgans. A pilot study from the Hortobágy (Csípo-halom)

Citation preview

BAR S2238 2011

Kurgan Studies An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone

PETŐ & BARCZI (Eds)

Edited by

Ákos Pető Attila Barczi

KURGAN STUDIES

B A R

BAR International Series 2238 2011

Kurgan Studies An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone

Edited by

Ákos PetĘ Attila Barczi

BAR International Series 2238 2011

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 2238 Kurgan Studies © The editors and contributors severally and the Publisher 2011 COVER IMAGE

Photograph courtesy of Attila Barczi

The authors' moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407308029 paperback ISBN 9781407337920 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407308029 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2011. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS Page Foreword BÁNFFY, E.

iv.

Editorial Preface BARCZI, A.; PETė, Á.

v.

List of Contributors

vi.

List of Referees

x.

Introduction – Requiem for kurgans TÓTH, A.

1

CHAPTER I. – PERSPECTIVES IN KURGAN STUDIES

1. The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary

7 9

TÓTH, Cs.; TÓTH A.

2. On the history of the Bronze Age studies in the steppe near the Ural Mountains

19

YEVGENYEV, A.A. CHAPTER II. – ARCHAEOLOGY

3. Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

23 25

DANI, J.

4. Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom - An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) HORVÁTH, T.

71

5. Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

133

MORGUNOVA, N.L.

6. Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds MORGUNOVA, N.L.; KUPTSOVA, V.L.

145

i

Page

7. Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

155

MATYUSHKO, I.V. CHAPTER III. – ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

169

III./1. Anthropology

171

Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups ZOFFMANN, Zs. K.

173

III./2. Geography, geomorphology, geochemistry

181

9. Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain

183

8.

CSANÁDI, A.; M. TÓTH, T.

10. Groundwater movements and its geochemical properties around and in the CsípĘhalom kurgan KUTI, L.; FÜGEDI, U.; BOROS, A.

193

11. Geomorphological classification of Hungarian kurgans

205

TÓTH, Cs. III./3. Pedology, palaeopedology

12. Detailed palaeopedological analysis of kurgans of the Great Hungarian Plain

211 213

BARCZI, A.; JOÓ, K.

13. Soil micromorphological investigations of the buried soil and cultural layers of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom kurgan BUCSI, T.

239

14.

Detection of the directional variation of palaeosol properties in the Filippovka 1 kurgan cemetery (Orenburg region, Russia) KHOKHLOVA, O.S.; JUSTUS, A.A.; MESHALKINA, J.L.;KHOKHLOV, A.A.

249

15. An interpretation of the soil 14C results of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom kurgan

255

MOLNÁR, M.; SVINGOR, É.

16. Short and long-term pedochronosequences of the Skvortsovsky burial ground in the Buzuluk River valley (Orenburg region, Russia) KHOKHLOVA, O.S.; KHOKHLOV, A.A.

259

ii

Page

17.

The process of the Bolshoi Sintashta Kurgan’s construction (Chelyabinsk region, Russia) in the light of pedological and radiocarbon data GOLYEVA, A.A.; KHOKHLOVA, O.S.

269

III./4. Palaeozoology

277

18. A quarter-malacological inventory of Hungarian kurgans

279

SÜMEGI, P.; SZILÁGYI, G. III./5. Palaeo-ethnobotany

293

19. The usage of wood in burial rites: data obtained from kurgans of the Filippovka-1 burial site

295

GOLYEVA, A.A.

20. Archaeobotanical remains of the Late Copper Age from the Carpathian Basin

301

GYULAI, F.

21. Palaeovegetational reconstruction of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom based on combined micropalaeobotanical analysis PETė, Á.; CUMMINGS, L.S.

315

III./6. Botany

22. Anthropogenic impacts and management of natural grasslands on kurgans

327 329

PENKSZA, K.; KISS, T.; HERCZEG, E.; NAGY, A.; MALATINSZKY, Á.

23. Evaluation of vegetational changes in the natural vegetation cover of kurgans (CsípĘand Kántor-kurgan) PENKSZA, K.; JOÓ, K.; NAGY, A.; HERCZEG, E.

339

24. Effects of extrazonal and climatic conditions on the vegetation of kurgans. A pilot study from the Hortobágy (CsípĘ-halom) PENKSZA, K.; LOKSA, G.; BARCZI, A.; MALATINSZKY, Á.

iii

347

FOREWORD Today, in lowlands, two types of mounds articulate the flat horizon: prehistoric village mounds (tell settlements) and burial mounds. These latter earthworks can be traced back to the 4th Millennium cal BC, and the custom of burial mounds re-appears in later epoches (in the Great Hungarian Plain), or remains more or less a continuous phenomenon (as in the Russian steppe region). These features are part of our perception, but certainly, not only of ours. Landscape is something like a page from a thick book that is open for us at present times, but it must be kept in mind, that a previous page of the same "book" was open for our fathers, as for their fathers, back to prehistory. Mounds that were emerged in the Late Copper Age were apparent for the Bronze Age people, then all prehistoric kurgans for the Hunnic, Germanic, Avarian peoples of the Migration Period, and even medieval Hungarian village inhabitants often used these rare "peaks" of the lowland for building a chapel or putting up a Crucifix on the top, to make it visible for everyone from a greater distance. Each generation changed a little in the landscape inherited. Thus, the lowland scene in front of our eyes is nothing else than our multi-layered common heritage.

Sciences immediately confirmed to participate in a (Hungarian Science and Technology Foundation) program with the Russian Academy of Sciences, and with the participation of the Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management, Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology of the Szent István University of GödöllĘ. On behalf of the Russian Federation, not only the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geography and the Institute of Physicochemical and Biological Problems in Soil Science partook in the program, but two universities, the Orenburg State Pedagogical University and the Chelyabinsk State University also joined the work. Within this cooperation, between 2004 and 2007, Russian experts visited Hungary several times in order to visit the excavation at the kurgan site involved, as well as for consultations, laboratory works and eventually for a joint evaluation of the results. The Hungarian fellow researchers, organised by the GödöllĘ University, on the other hand, participated in field works in the Russian steppe region in order to see excavating Yamnaya culture burials and to learn about the practice of soil sampling and preparation by Russian colleagues.

Kurgans are obviously major archaeological sources. They reveal not only the anthropological features of the burial; in most cases the position of the skeleton, some rests of garments and other organic material, and also grave goods tell us about burial habits and possible burial rites, as well as the stratification of the mound itself gives us important hints of the materiality of past groups of people. After many centuries of just robbing out these mound burials, the archaeological investigation of kurgans is almost as old as archaeology as a science itself. However, given the fact that the mounds were not easy to plough and harvest, up to the twentieth century they were mostly evaded from agriculture. In this way of undisturbance, kurgans have become major places for testimony of geological layers and soils, of the hydrological and climatic circumstances, of ancient vegetation in past millennia: in other words, a quarry of information for environmental investigations.

The outcome of this common work, permanent exchange of experience and knowledge is presented in this volume. However, it offers more. As it becomes clear from the authors' list, the experts from many more institutions added their results to these kurgan studies, so that the reader finds a broad spectrum of research fields that can have a word on the unique archaeological and environmental phenomenon: the burial mounds. I started this short foreword with a hint on landscapes within their time-depth, how they may have been sensed by people who lived watching and acknowledging kurgans in the remote and less remote past. Now I shall finish with a thought that might express the same idea from the other end. Kurgans have been robbed, a part of them were damaged by later earthworks, but nothing proved to be a threat like modern agriculture. It is, after all, the landscape that our generation is about to decide, whether to save it or not for the future, what and to what extent present landscapes should be saved. In this sense, documenting and evaluating an important part of this cultural heritage, is a further benefit of the present volume, a sort of rescue work.

It is surprising how, in spite of these ideal circumstances, not many programs have been initiated and fulfilled on a joint environmental and archaeological investigation of kurgans yet. This is one of the several reasons why the Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of

Eszter Bánffy Head of project co-ordination of the Russian-Hungarian Kurgan Research Project (Archaeology) Doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Professor of Archaeology

iv

EDITORIAL PREFACE knowledge of mankind and its relation to the environment in this part of the world. In the light of the above mentioned aims an international research group was set up in 2005 to conduct researches in Russian and Hungarian target areas. The research groups of the two countries applied partly different methodologies, but they worked on the basis of the same hypotheses. The cooperation between Russian and Hungarian institutions gave space for methodological and theoretical comparison.

In our environmentally and socially changing world, the recognition of information ‘encapsulated in past environments’ has never been more timely than today. Climate and environmental changes of the Holocene Epoch are researched throughout various disciplines and methods. However, contradictory models are still being set up regarding the Holocene landscape development of the Carpathian Basin and more specifically the Great Hungarian Plain. According to one of these scientific theories, the Carpathian Basin was gradually occupied by forest vegetation from the beginning of the Atlantic phase. Steppe environments gave place to closed forests, and alkalinization was not typical, whilst in the light of the other hypothesis, the Great Hungarian Plain could not have been covered by extended and closed forests for a longer period and salinization processes had already occurred during the Holocene.

The gradually extending examinations focused on environmental issues; however, the complex understanding of kurgans is not possible without the archaeological part, which provided the social frame for the palaeoenvironmental reconstructions. Studies presented in this volume do not only comprise the Lyukas-halom and CsípĘ-halom kurgans in Hungary and the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds in Russia (the target areas of the project), but present studies that complement our knowledge of the world of kurgans.

Palaeosoils preserve archaeological and environmental records of past environments, of ‘past horizons’, therefore their memory function may be used to affirm questions related to Holocene environmental reconstructions. Kurgans, special human-made structures of the endless Eurasian steppe zone provide a unique possibility for these purposes. The erection of kurgans resulted in the isolation and preservation of intact soil profiles and kept them in extremely good condition for the future. Unfortunately their number has decreased in a distressing manner. While archives and military surveys report of around 40000 formations, today only a few thousand of them are known.

Besides science historical summaries, results are presented of the archaeological research done in Hungary and Russia in the last decades. Environmental proxies cover a broad spectrum; from the anthropological analysis of humans buried under these enormous formations, to palaeoenvironmental studies. These imply the reconstruction of abiotic and biotic factors as well. Studies include the discussion of the geochemical and pedological evolution of these earth monuments, and the problems of absolute aging of kurgans based on radiocarbon dating. Complemented with various methodological aspects, biotic factors of the time of the erection of kurgans are presented through charcoal, phytolith, pollen and malacological analyses. As a focus on the role of kurgans in conserving threatened habitats of the Eurasian steppe zone, studies in botany are presented at the end of the volume.

Kurgans, according to the strict archaeological definition, are burial mementos of Bronze and Copper Age societies; however, they preserve the cultural heritage of the peoples in connection with them. Beside their cultural significance, they bear environmental, such as palaeoecological, soil scientific, geochemical, botanical values and provide research opportunities on a broad spectrum. All of the above mentioned facts lead to the same recognition, namely that by the examination of these flatland structures we address complex environmental and archaeological questions of the Eurasian steppe zone, and may contribute to the

On the whole, this volume brings together papers on a multi- and interdisciplinary scale, and intends to shed light on the current status and state-of-art of kurgan studies.

Attila Barczi Head of project co-ordination of the Russian-Hungarian Kurgan Research Project (Environmental Sciences) habil. senior lecturer in Soil Science, Volume editor Ákos PetĘ Project co-ordinator of the Russian-Hungarian Kurgan Research Project (Environmental Sciences) Museologist, Volume editor GödöllĘ, 27th July 2010

v

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS BARCZI, Attila Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

DANI, János Management of Hajdú-Bihar County Museums, Déri Museum Déri tér 1. Debrecen 4026 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] FÜGEDI, Ubul Geological Institute of Hungary Stefánia út. 14. Budapest 1143 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

BÁNFFY, Eszter Hungarian Academy of Sciences Archaeological Institute Úri u. 49 Budapest 1014 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

GOLYEVA, Alexandra A. Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Geography Laboratory of Soil Geography and Genesis Staromonetnij per. 27. Moscow 119017 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

BOROS, Andrea Geological Institute of Hungary Stefánia út. 14. Budapest 1143 – Hungary

GYULAI, Ferenc Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Agri-environmental Management Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

BUCSI, Tamás Plant and Soil protection Service of Pest County Kotlán Sándor u. 3. GödöllĘ 2100 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] CSANÁDI, Attila University of Szeged Department of Mineralogy, Geochemistry and Petrology Dugonics tér 13. Szeged 6720 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

HERCZEG, Edina Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

CUMMINGS, Linda Scott PaleoResearch Institute Inc. Youngfield st. 2675 Golden, Colorado 80401 – USA E-mail: [email protected]

vi

HORVÁTH, Tünde Hungarian Academy of Sciences Archaeological Institute Úri u. 49 Budapest 1014 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

KUPTSOVA, Lidiy V. Orenburg State Pedagogical University Sovetskay ul. 19. Orenburg 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] KUTI, László Geological Institute of Hungary Stefánia út. 14. Budapest 1143 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

JOÓ, Katalin Plant and Soil protection Service of Pest County Kotlán Sándor u. 3. GödöllĘ 2100 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

LOKSA, Gábor Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

JUSTUS, Alexander A. Institute of Physicochemical and Biological Problems in Soil Science Institutskaya ul. 2. Pushchino 142290 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] KHOKHLOV, Alexander A. Institute of Cell Biophysics Institutskaya ul. 3. Pushchino 142290 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

MALATINSZKY, Ákos Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

KHOKHLOVA, Olga S. Institute of Physicochemical and Biological Problems in Soil Science Institutskaya ul. 2. Pushchino 142290 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

MATYUSHKO, Irina V. Orenburg State Pedagogical University Sovetskay ul. 19. Orenburg 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

KISS, Tímea Kecskemét College Institute of Flori- and Vegetable Cultural Erdei F. tér 1-3. Kecskemét 6000 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

MESHALKINA, Joulia L. Lomonosov Moscow State University Department of Soil Science Leninskyje Gory Moscow 119991 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

vii

MOLNÁR, Mihály Hungarian Academy of Sciences Institute of Nuclear Research Hertelendi Laboratory of Environmental Studies Bem tér 18/c Debrecen 4026 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

SVINGOR, Éva Hungarian Academy of Sciences Institute of Nuclear Research Hertelendi Laboratory of Environmental Studies Bem tér 18/c Debrecen 4026 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

MORGUNOVA, Nina L. Orenburg State Pedagogical University Sovetskay ul. 19. Orenburg 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

SZILÁGYI, Gábor Hortobágy National Park Directorate Sumen u. 2. Debrecen 4024 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

M. TÓTH, Tivadar University of Szeged Department of Mineralogy, Geochemistry and Petrology Dugonics tér 13. Szeged 6720 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

PENKSZA, Károly Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

NAGY, Anita Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

PETė, Ákos Szent István University Institute of Environmental and Landscape Management Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

SÜMEGI, Pál University of Szeged Department of Geology and Palaeontology Szeged, P.O.B. 658. 6701 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

TÓTH, Albert Szolnok University College Department of Tourism Tiszaligeti sétány 5000 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

Hungarian Academy of Sciences Archaeological Institute Úri u. 49 Budapest 1014 – Hungary

viii

TÓTH, Csaba University of Debrecen Department of Physical Geography and Geoinformatics Egyetem tér 1. P.O.B. 9. Debrecen 4010 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] YEVGENYEV, Andrey A. Orenburg State Pedagogical University Sovetskay ul. 19. Orenburg 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] ZOFFMANN, Zsuzsanna K. Rózsa u. 36. Budapest 1042 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

ix

LIST OF REFEREES

ALEXANDROVSKIY, Alexander L. Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Geography Laboratory of Soil Geography and Genesis Staromonetnij per. 27. Moscow 119017 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]

BÁNFFY, Eszter Hungarian Academy of Sciences Archaeological Institute Úri u. 49 Budapest 1014 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

FÜLEKY, György Szent István University Institute of Environmental Sciences Department of Soil Science and Agrochemistry Páter Károly u. 1. GödöllĘ 2103 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

SZMYT, Marzena PoznaĔ Archaeological Museum ul. Wodna 27 PoznaĔ – The Górka Palace 61-781 – Poland E-mail: [email protected]

x

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Introduction pp. 1–5.

Requiem for kurgans Albert TÓTH Szolnok University College, Department of Tourism, Tiszaligeti sétány, 5000 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

halom in the vicinity in Sárrétudvari (formerly called Biharudvari). Lajos Zoltai, archaeologist of the City Museum of Debrecen (Déri Museum currently) received information in the spring of 1910 that more than 3000 carts of earth were carried away from the Balázs-halom to fill the main road of the settlement.

INTRODUCTION Landscape of the Great Hungarian Plain has significantly changed by today. Half a century ago series of farms dominated the landscape. In a more professional sense they made landscape diversity richer. Today farms are substituted by artificial objects like power-lines, towers of telephone transmitting stations, water towers, silos, river locks, etc. Kurgans stand shyly in this changed landscape as Ecsedy (1977) says: “mementoes of the puszta”, in a wider context as Gyula Illyés says: “our cathedrals”. Kurgans hold numerous values of the Carpathian Basin so rich in specific and unique features. Walking in our plain landscapes and seeing these earthworks of specific form, all of us wander whether they are natural forms or strange creations of man of past ages. If the latter is accepted, who, when and why built them? Focus of interest was driven on kurgans in our world of seeking interest. Experiencing their baleful deterioration, pointless reduction our urgent common task is to enable their effective protection. This can be only successful if we know why kurgans are irreplaceable values of the country. Saving them is a responsibility for us to the World. The task is not simple. Their wide nature protection and cultural historical values have to be focused and the main causes and sources of their endangerment and deterioration have to be identified.

Lajos Zoltai was a famous researcher of excellent sight, therefore he observed and recorded the “excavation” with exemplary carefulness. Thus knowledge provided by the excavation of the Balázs-halom sets the standard and serves as important information on the nature of burial mounds with ochre graves. Following the carrying away of the complete mass of the mound, excavation of the grave was possible. A research ditch 6 m long and 3 m wide was dug. As deep as 50 cm colourful stripes were observed on the surface of the original (buried) soil. In the depth of 90 cm the red coloured skeleton appeared. No objects were found beside the back-laid, 162 cm long shrunk, intact skeleton looking towards the west. Red paint dust covered the soil 25 cm left of the head. Intact yellow clay was found underneath the skeleton. This makes it clear that the vast amount of earth was mounded from the surrounding areas to cover the grave and serve as a memento. No signs of dwelling sites or other graves were found during further research. The careful excavation almost a hundred years ago founded further research as well. Unfortunately, the number of excavations has not been increased as it could have been since then even though burial with ochre graves and the culture associated with them present an important field of research of prehistoric Eastern Europe. The number of exposed kurgans in the Trans-Tisza region – together with those unpublished – hardly reach twenty five.

SPECIAL „MOUNTAINS” OF THE GREAT HUNGARIAN PLAIN LANDSCAPE: THE KURGANS Lowland landscapes of the Carpathian Basin provided beneficial conditions for man to settle due to their hydrologic conditions. Flood-free high river embankments, terraces and the water enveloping them provided both safe sites to live on and protecting space supplying provision for survival.

This explains the special importance of the exposition forty years ago that was published as the complete research of the Kincsesdomb (Nyakvágószék-halom) near Püspökladány. On the 7th May 1969 when constructing the section of main road No. 4 that bypasses Püspökladány a report was received by the Déri Museum of Debrecen expressing that a “tunnel” was found in the Kincsesdomb. Archaeologists with the leadership of Ibolya M. Nepper found an artificial archway 120-140 cm wide in the western side of the mound. Further investigations exposed the labyrinth underneath the mound, in which the ochre shrunk skeletons were placed. On the dry-rotten wooden floor of the labyrinth human bones were laid everywhere. The wood coated chamber was constructed for the grave that was later robbed and despoiled.

Middle landscape units of the Great Hungarian Plain (Nagykunság, Hortobágy, Nagy-Sárrét) are especially rich in kurgans. At the end of the Copper Age – around 2000 BC – tribes of cattle keeping people entered the Carpathian Basin from the east and conquered the territory of the Copper Age population inhabiting the Carpathian Basin until the Tisza River and south to the lower course of the Danube. Their characteristic burial sites, the huge mounds of semi-spherical shape (kurgans) belong to the landscape since then. Most of them still keep their secret as they have not yet been exposed by archaeologists. One of the earliest excavated kurgans is the Balázs1

A. TÓTH

Three separate passage systems at the same depth level were exposed in the Kincsesdomb. Completing the central burial under the mound this was the first in Hungary to recover graves of three different rituals by the systematic and complete exposition of the mound. This was also the first case when the complete environment of the graves was investigated.

Recent artificial forms (geodesy marks, waste heaps, heaps of brick factories, humus depositories, etc.) cannot be classified into either type of Cumanian mounds. Similarly to those mound remains, mound torsions that were accumulated from the remnants of former mounds.

INTERPRETATION PROBLEMS

Undoubtedly, kurgans are unique landscape historical values of the Carpathian Basin. Not only mementoes of several thousands years old cultures but pieces of the nature before the drastic landscape transforming activity of man. Apart from archaeological values wide range of landscape, geomorphological, stratigraphic, soil, palaeoecological, island biogeographical, hydrological, cultural historical, folklore, literature, art historical and many other values are associated with them. The water flooded Carpathian Basin assimilated numerous people and cultures throughout history. Flood-free levees and neighbouring waters provided excellent conditions for settling (Kozma 1910). Péter Havassy stated aptly: “what elevated from the water in the Great Plain was sat on by man”. This special landscape explains the great number of kurgans as well. Despite the fact that 94 % of Hungarian kurgans are unexplored, vast amount of information accumulated as a result of explorations in recent centuries, however, most of it is archaeological. Surveying thematically the nature protection values of kurgans are missing so far. Unbelievable, but exploration of their flora and faune has been started only recently. Unfortunately in the meanwhile deterioration of the Cumanian mounds that started centuries ago, continues. This has three significant reasons: 1. The landscape in which kurgans were formed changed drastically compared to the original state. With the advancement of agricultural activities kurgans have been enclosed by cultivated parcels. Ploughing, deforestation, overgrazing, building, fertilizers, material extraction, waste disposal, etc. threaten the survival of kurgans with no mercy. 2. The true value of kurgans is still unknown for the public. Without knowledge, kurgans are regarded to be only a pile of earth usable for any purpose. Their carrying away or deterioration is neither damage nor value elimination if values are not associated to them. 3. Robbing, ravage, despoil of kurgans by treasure hunters can be detected throughout history causing loss of value. With the technical advances of today having land radars applied in geodesy researches this type of damage has increased significantly.

EPILOGUE

The term Cumanian mound was established in Hungarian literature in the middle of the 1800s as a result of a historian error. The linguist, historian István Horvát (1784–1846) regarded kurgans as also the products of the Cumans. Since then all mound types (kurgan, tell, guard and border mound) have been interpreted as Cumanian mounds (“kunhalom” in Hungarian). The term is so strong in public language and in scientific literature as well that no substitution is possible. It has to be made clear, however, that kurgans are only grave hills independent from age, burial technique and the constructing people. Based on a united viewpoint in the literature today, it can be stated that kurgans are landscape elements formed by human activity. Despite these there are famous geologists and geographers who preferred a natural origin for the kurgans. József Szabó (1822–1894) geologist, member of the academy considered mounds that were investigated as natural creation born in water. Károly Miskolczy (1864) expressed similar thoughts in his paper written on the mounds of the Great Hungarian Plain: “mounds are the product of Nature formed by the waves when sea covered the plain”. The researcher of geomorphology and fluvial erosion, László Kádár (1908–1989), colleague of Pál Teleki (1879–1941) associated the formation of mounds with the surface forming effects of water, wind and partly ice. Nevertheless, these scientists also emphasized that nature generally only helped man who elevated the mounds. The situation is made more difficult as authors do not distinguish the forms adequately and apply geomorphological forms present in the landscape mixed. Thus it is hard to separate nature-developed and artificially constructed forms. School founder scientist of Hungarian archaeology, Flóris Rómer (1815-1889) in the French publication of the VIIIth International Ancient Archaeological and Anthropological Congress held in Budapest in 1876 called different type mounds found in the Carpathian Basin simply as mounds (les tumuli) in the most general sense. Lajos Zoltai (1861-1939), leader of numerous archaeological excavations published his work including 250 site names under the following title: “Mounds, mountains, other artificial and natural elevations, as depressions, plots, rises, hills, gerends, and ridges in the vicinity of Debrecen”. Buka (1996) wrote a similar document under the title of “Hills, mounds and kurgans” on the surface forms of Hajdú-Bihar County. This also represents well the above mentioned uncertainty and mixture of terms occurring even today.

Act LIII of 1996 on the protection of nature was accepted thanks to the wish feeling responsibility for the fate of kurgans. This act states the protection of kurgans. As a result all Hungarian kurgans independent from their place, state, type, function, etc. are protected ex lege. Unfortunately realisation orders are still missing today. Nature Protection Office of the Ministry for the Environment charged the Foundation for Researching the Great Hungarian Plain, centred in Kisújszállás in 1997 to 2

Requiem for kurgans

Fig. 3. A typical Great Hungarian Plain kurgan is the reeded, unexplored Cserke-halom in the vicinity of CserkeszĘlĘ (photo by Tóth A.)

carry out the national survey of Cumanian mounds authenticated by field works. This work was completed with listing and recording the data of 1649 mounds. This database could serve as the basis for the above mentioned realisation order. Fig. 1. Carrying away of the Copper Age – early Bronze Age Balázs-halom kurgan in the vicinity of Biharudvari (today Sárrétudvari) in 1910 (published by Zoltai L.)

Fig. 4. The large, but strongly destructed, deforested Ágota-halom near the Hortobágy river (photo by Tóth Cs.)

Fig. 2. Exploration of the ochre grave culture of the Kincses hill (Nyakvágószék-halom in Püspökladány in the tunnel system forming the base of the mound (M. Nepper I. 1976)

Fig. 5. Pásztó-halom, in the vicinity of Túrkeve the kurgan having a nice shape but ploughed up to the top (photo by Tóth A.)

3

A. TÓTH

Fig. 6. Typical example of pointless mound destruction is the Papp László-halom in the surroundings of the industrial area in MartfĦ (photo by Tóth Cs.)

REFERENCES CITED Buka, L. 1996. Hajdú-Bihar megye jelen kiemelkedései. Dombok, halmok, kurgánok. [Present elevations of Hajdú Bihar county. Hills, mounds, kurgans] Debrecen Csányi, M. 1999. A kunhalmok régészeti értékei. [Archaeological values of cumanian mounds] In: Tóth, A. (ed.), Cumanian mounds, 38-45. Kisújszállás Ecsedy, I. (ed.) 1979. The people of the pit-grave kurgans is Eastern Hungary. Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó Györffy, I. 1921. Kúnhalmok és telephelyek a karczagi határban. [Cumanian mounds and sites in the vicinity of Karczag] Föld és Ember 1, 59-62. Horváth, I. 1825. Rajzolatok a magyar nemzet legrégibb történetbĘl. [Drawings from the most ancient history of the hungarian nation] Pest Kádár, L. 1965. A magyar medence feltöltĘdése [Filling of the Hungarian basin]. Acta Geographica Debrecina 10-11, 167-183. Kozma, B. 1910. A kunhalmok elhelyezkedése az Alföldön [Distribution of cumanian mounds in the Great Plain]. Földrajzi Közlemények 38, 437-443. M. Nepper, I. 1976. Okkersíros temetkezés Püspökladány–Kincsesdombon [Ochre grave burial in Kincsesdomb–Püspökladány]. In: Dankó, I. (ed.), Déri Múzeum Évkönyve, 49-65. Debrecen, Déri Múzeum M. Nepper, I. 1991. Alföldi „földpiramisok”. Négyezer éves kurgánok a Tiszántúlon. [„Earth pyramids in the Great Plain. Four thousand years old kurgans in the Trans-Tisza region] OrszágépítĘ 91/4, 41-42. M. Nepper, I., SĘregi, J. and Zoltai, L. 1980. Hajdú-Bihar megye halomkatasztere I. Bihar. [Mound cadastre of Hajdú-Bihar county I. Bihar] Berettyóújfalu. Bihar Museum Annual. Miskolczy, K. 1864. A magyar alföldi halmokról [On mounds in the Great Hungarian Plain]. Vasárnapi Újság. 11, No. 23. Pest. Rómer, F. 1878. Résultats généraux du Mouvement Archéologiqie en Hongrie. Congrés International D’ Anthropologie et D’ Archéologia Préshistoriques. Domte-Rendu de la Huitiéme Session á Budapest, 1876. 103-187. Tóth, A. (ed.) 2002. Az Alföld piramisai [Pyramids of the Great Hungarian Plain]. Kisújszállás, Foundation for Researching the Great Hungarian Plain. Tóth, A. and Tóth, Cs. 2002. A kunhalmok országos állapotfelmérésének eredményei [Results of the national state survey of cumanian mounds]. Report of the Foundation for Researching the Great Hungarian Plain, Kisújszállás. Tóth, A. (ed.) 2004. A kunhalmokról más szemmel. [On Cumanian mounds from a different perspective] Kisújszállás-Debrecen, Foundation for Researching the Great Hungarian Plain and Hortobágy National Park Directorate. Tóth, A. 1988, 1989, 1990. Szolnok megye kunhalmai IIII. [Cumanian mounds of Szolnok county I-III.] Szolnok, Szolnok County Archive Annual.

Fig. 7. Re-construction important from landscape point of view can be started on the previously deforested Hagymás-halom following cutting of the forest (photo by Tóth Cs.).

Fig. 8. Mounds are safest in our national parks as in the case of Nagyfüves-halom, which is situated in the sodic environment of the Hortobágy National Park (photo by Tóth Cs.).

4

Requiem for kurgans

Tóth, Cs. and Kozák, J. 1998. Országos kunhalom kataszteri adatlap [National Cumanian mound cadastre datasheet]. Kisújszállás, Foundation for Researching the Great Plain. Tóth, Cs. 2003. A Hortobágy megyeidĘszak végi felszínfejlĘdésének fĘbb természeti és antropogén vonása [Major natural and anthropic characteristics of the surface development of the Hortobágy at the end of the Pleistocene]. Ph.D thesis, University of Debrecen. Tóth, Cs. 2006. Az országos kunhalomfelmérés eredményei a földtani értékvédelem szemszögébĘl [Results of national Cumanian mound survey regarding geological value protection]. Acta GGM Debrecina, Series of Geology, Geomorphology, Physical Geography. 1, 126-132.

5

6

CHAPTER I PERSPECTIVES IN KURGAN STUDIES

7

8

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 1, pp. 9–17.

The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary Csaba TÓTH;1 Albert TÓTH2 1

University of Debrecen, Department of Physical Geography and Geoinformatics, Egyetem tér 1. P.O.B. 9., Debrecen, 4010 – Hungary; E-mail: [email protected] 2 Szolnok University College, Department of Tourism, Tiszaligeti sétány, 5000 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: Kurgan cadastre completed in 2002 and their national condition assessment survey were very important stages in protecting Hungarian kurgans. These revealed that the original number of kurgans was reduced to one twentieth by today. Remaining kurgans are located mostly in the eastern part of Hungary on the loess floodfree plains of the Great Hungarian Plain. Some can be found in Transdanubia in the Bakony and the Keszthely Mountains in the form of mound grave fields. Environmental condition of the 1649 kurgans included in the database is adverse. Unfortunately almost half of the kurgans are in such a deteriorated condition (cultivated, destructed, carried away) that they have no values at all. Almost 52 %, however, is involved in at least one value category regarding geomorphological, landscape, archaeological, botanic, and other cultural historical values. Among these low, intact, archaeologically unexposed kurgans with cultivated surface and with no surface findings dominate. These kurgans can be regarded as valuable only in geomorphological relations. The most valuable kurgans involve only 28 objects that have outstanding nature protection values. Data of the condition survey can be utilised in the course of nature protection management by national park directorates. In the case of endangered kurgans, although partly, rehabilitation works have been initiated in the form of e.g. deforestation, weed clearing, establishing information tables and establishing study trails. Keywords: kurgan cadastre, condition anthropogenic impacts, nature protection

protected values located within the borders of the settlement in order to present information on them to the wider public and to protect them. Act 53 of 1996 on the protection of nature was a benchmark in cadastre and research of kurgans in Hungary and also in the relationship of society and kurgans, as kurgans were declared as protected objects of national importance. This resulted in the first national survey of kurgans according to united aspects and in the construction of a digital database more detailed and diverse compared to earlier ones. The first non-archaeological publication considering kurgans was published by Cholnoky (1907) who thought that the curvilinear distribution pattern of kurgans in the Central-Tisza region showed the pattern of ancient beds of the Tisza River. Exactly a century ago the first general geographic work related to Cumanian mounds was published by Kozma (1910) and this flashed entirely new light on kurgans as compared to the earlier archaeological works. He called the Great Hungarian Plain as one of the richest archaeological locality based on the 1200 prehistoric mounds (tells, kurgans and guard mounds) described and mapped by himself using the military maps with the scale of 1:75000. He determined that most of the mounds are located in the middle of the Great Hungarian Plain on the left side of the Tisza in an area bordered by the settlements of Tiszafüred–Balmazújváros–Püspökladány– Fegyvernek mainly in the flood-free areas of active and abandoned river beds in curvilinear forms.

survey,

INTRODUCTION

Zoltai (1938), a museum director surveyed the most important natural and artificial elevations in and around Debrecen on the basis of his own field trips. He published not only the locality but the outer characteristics and archaeological information of the surveyed 83 kurgans. Kurgan cadastre of the Trans–Tisza region of the Great Hungarian Plain was published by Dénes Virágh (1979). This work summarised the number, diameter and relative height of kurgans sorted by counties and settlements on the basis of documents of archives and maps without field work. He described 3733 kurgans in total in six counties in the Trans–Tisza region. According to this work most kurgans are found in Hajdú-Bihar (1668), Békés (962) and Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok (684) Counties (Virágh 1979).

After the clarification of the construction method of the Cumanian mounds, especially kurgans was accomplished, the survey and inventory of kurgans in Hungary was started. The numerous kurgans rising in the Great Hungarian Plain drew the attention of archaeologists, ethnographers and geomorphologists. Initially only the number, density and distribution of mounds located in different landscapes of the Great Hungarian Plain were described based solely on maps. Later, apart from simply locating them, detailed, mainly archaeological characterisations were published, however, not throughout the country. In the 1980s the first general county mound cadastre were published, in which geomorphological, archaeological, botanic, landscape and other cultural historical information was summarised. Local governments and civil organizations published detailed descriptions of the kurgans designated as locally

Mound cadastre of Hajdú-Bihar County justified by field walking was prepared during 1980-1981 including 262 kurgans. This work contains the locality (settlement,

9

CS. TÓTH; A. TÓTH

name, and synonym if available, geographical coordinates (EOV) of the mound, settlement, or border name, side length of the base of the mound, absolute and relative height, intactness, or disturbance of the mound, objects on the surface of the mounds, vegetation cover and land-use types. Land-use and objects and their orientation in the 500 m vicinity of mounds are also recorded on the sheets. Finally the datasheet records literature history, cultural history and archaeological, botanic and faunal information (Tóth and Kozák 1998). To find the mounds in the field topographic maps with the scales of 1:10000 and 1:25000, while to locate them accurately GPS devices were applied. One of the main aims of the survey was to record the geographical location of the mounds exactly and thus identify the registry number of the sites and the owners of the land. These were essential considering the protection of the mounds in practice.

orientation and distance from the settlement centre), size (elevation a.s.l.), archaeological details (non-exposed, or exposed, findings) and the literature of the mounds (Nepper et al. 1980, 1981). Prehistoric mound cadastre of Szolnok County was also performed during 1980-1981. In the course of this, Albert Tóth identified 277 mounds (tells, kurgans and guard mounds) in the field out of which he described 272 as kurgans. The main aim of the survey was to help the protection of the rapidly deteriorating mounds with presenting their state of that time. This survey gave a much detailed image on the mounds than the former ones. Apart from giving information on accessibility, geomorphological conditions, grade of disturbance, landuse types, landscape and botanic values, archaeological and other cultural historical findings he classified mounds into 7 groups regarding their state (Tóth 1988, 1989, 1990).

54 people were involved in the cadastre survey. Processing of the data sheets was performed with the help of data processing software developed for the work (Register System of Cumanian Mounds). Furthermore, the software Microsoft Excel and ArcView 3.2 were applied in assessing the results.

Newer mound cadastre was published by the South Nyírség – Bihar Landscape Protection Association in 1996. This gives the mound names sorted by settlements. The work involved partial field trips and lists 629 kurgans in total including already eliminated ones as well (Buka 1996).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Prehistoric mounds that are valuable anthropogenic features of the Carpathian Basin from several aspects have been prone to various human disturbances and damages. Thus their legal and practical protection became urgent, for which obtaining information on their current state was essential. Chapter (2) § 23 of Act 53 of 1996 gave full legal protection for prehistoric mounds and qualified them as national natural values. This act states the necessary of national cadastre and survey of the mounds. This was essential as sustaining the long-term remaining of mounds by appropriate nature protection treatment is only possible if the current state and endangerment of them is known.

The survey was completed in 2002. During this time, 1649 kurgans in 14 Hungarian counties were recorded in the cadastre (Figure 1). Out of these 27 kurgans are marked as mound grave fields where the number of mounds varies between 3 and 165. All together 757 mounds were surveyed in these mound grave fields the state of which was characterised together by grave fields and not individually. Such mainly Celtic, Early Iron Age and Late Bronze Age mound grave fields can be found in Veszprém, Zala and Baranya Counties, the Bakony and Keszthely Mountains and in the western part of the Mecsek in western-southwestern Hungary at elevations between 140 m and 620 m a.s.l. The largest mound grave field in the Bakony Mountains is the Száz mound I, II and III near the settlement of Bakonyjákó. The Late Bronze Age field contains 231 mounds with 10-30 m diameter and 2-3 m relative height. Together with the 757 mounds located in mound grave fields the number of kurgans in Hungary is 2406.

The current publication presents the results of the national survey. Our aim was to obtain an accurate view of the number and state of Hungarian kurgans at the beginning of the 21st century. Therefore, besides plotting them on a map, the general condition of the kurgans together with the vegetation types on their top, their landscape and archaeological values and their endangerment are also discussed.

If only the number of 3733 kurgans described in the Trans–Tisza region (Virágh 1979) is compared to the most recent data it is clear that a significant part of the kurgans present at the end of the 18th century became eliminated. Certain publications consider the original number of kurgans somewhere between 30000 and 40000 (Tóth 2002), thus it can be stated that around one twentieth of them survived human carelessness and damage of past centuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Preparation of the national mound cadastre was carried out according to the prescriptions of the Act on Nature protection mentioned above between 2000 and 2002. In the course of the survey both tells and kurgans were recorded in the database. These together are called Cumanian mounds in Hungarian literature. The present paper deals only with data related to kurgans.

Studying the geographical position of kurgans, the majority of them can be found in low and high loessy plains of the Great Hungarian Plain, mostly in river levees and flat elevations accompanying older abandoned

State survey of the mounds was performed according to a cadastre sheet including 24 points. The sheet recorded the 10

The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary

Mounds having smaller anthropogenic damage (carrying away, digging, holes of amateur archaeologists, smaller ditch, dust road cutting in, etc.) reducing the original volume of the mound not more than 20 % were regarded as disrupted. If clearly greater damage threatening the main body of the mound was observed the mound was classified as deteriorated.

river beds along the Tisza, Körös, Maros and Zagyva rivers. Kurgans are rare or completely absent from the Pleistocene wind-blown sand covered alluvial fans of the Great Hungarian Plain like the Nyírség and the Danube– Tisza Interfluve. In the course of assessing the data sheets the primary aspect was to determine the anthropogenic geomorphological conditions of the mound bodies. Based on this, mounds were grouped into six categories: intact, disrupted, deteriorated, carried away, mound place and stilted types (Figure 2).

Unfortunately during surveying it was often experienced that human damage had catastrophic effects on mound bodies. If a smaller earth mound not higher than half a metre remained following carrying away the mound was classified as carried away. However, sometimes only flat arable land, planted forest or a negative form (sand quarry) were found at the site of the former mound. These were called mound places. The number of carried away mounds and mound places were given compared to the number of mounds marked on topographic maps of the 1970s.

Fig. 1. Geographical position of Hungarian kurgans (kurgans and mound grave fields) (by Tóth, Cs.)

Fortunately intact mounds dominate (42%) in national terms, however, rate of disrupted and deteriorated mounds together is almost the same as that of intact ones (Figure 2). Studying human damage in the case of disrupted, deteriorated and carried away mounds it can be stated that most damage (53 %) was caused by that the mounds were used as quarries. Earth exploitation was applied mostly in flood preventing fillings, rice dams, road foundations etc. The second most dangerous activity was traffic (27 %). Dust roads running immediately next to or on the top of the mounds and used for longer time periods cause damage by cutting into the mound body. In smaller grade constructions of military objects, channel cutting in, and amateur archaeological activities (treasure hunters) are responsible for damage. Apart from anthropogenic effects, disruption of mounds is also caused by natural processes. Sides of the Tök-halom and the Pente-halom in the Hortobágy were eroded by the Hortobágy stream while the sides of the Büte- and Kékhalom (Figure 8) were washed away by the Kösely stream. For the identification of mounds in the field mainly military maps with the scale of 1:25000 published in 1970 were used. 95–99 % of the mounds marked on the maps were identified in the field. The obtained low number of carried away mounds (6%) and mound places (5%) indicate that deterioration of the forms happened mostly before the 1970s. Reduction of mound number was way less in the last three decades than in the times before the 1970s. The damaging process started from the middle of the 19th century with the booming of agriculture, industry and traffic accompanying the civil transition culminating in agricultural changes and high rate of construction (roads, railways, fishing lakes, channels etc.) following World War II. Due to lack of information 7 % of the mounds have unknown state in the national database.

A mound is regarded to be intact if its form was not altered except for natural erosion and possible soil cultivation, its material was not carried away from its sides and there are no holes or trenches in its surface. If soil cultivation affected a mound but it was not lowered significantly and no drastic asymmetry occurred they were considered to be intact. Although cultivation may cause significant erosion, this factor is not calculated here. It is calculated at the vegetation type of the mound surface. Mounds having bodies proved to be stilted in the past were separated. This rare type is the result of positive human interference (e.g. installing water storage, building summer houses, church decrees) that increased the chances of subsistence.

11

CS. TÓTH; A. TÓTH

10 % of the studied mounds are covered by some kind of arboreal vegetation (shrub, forest). These are mainly plantations of landscape gentile and native forest. Moreover, spontaneous deforestation and shrub development mainly by landscape gentile species (wattle, American ash) is also experienced. Considering nature protection neither native nor landscape gentile forests are regarded as appropriate covers because the original vegetation on the mounds and in their vicinity has always been open loess grassland. Therefore, plantation and forestry together with spontaneous deforestation (wattle) are regarded to be detrimental processes. In recent years national parks started to clear kurgans from their forest cover increasing their landscape value apart from creating beneficial cover.

Fig. 2. Mound body states of the Hungarian kurgans (Tóth, Cs.) heightened 1%

unknown 7%

mound place 5% carried away 6%

intact 42%

deteriorated 19%

disrupted 20%

Dominant vegetation types covering the kurgans

On 1 % of the kurgans garden vegetation is found (fruit trees, hobby gardens). Finally, 3 % of the kurgans are partly retaining their original cultural functions. They serve currently as cemeteries: e.g. KettĘs-halom (Fegyvernek), Battonya-halom (Battonya), TemetĘ-halom (Békés) and TemetĘ-halom (Geszt). Sometimes a chapel is built on them e.g. Kálvária-halom (Karcag, Tiszaörs), Kriptály-halom (Dombegyháza) or houses are located on them, e.g. Szántay-halom (Debrecen), SzĘlĘs-halom (Jászkisér).

After surveying the mound bodies’ vegetation cover on the top of the mounds and land use applied on and around the mounds had to be determined (Figure 3 and 4). In many cases several vegetation types and land use types are present on the surface of mounds. Despite this the dominant, most characteristic one was always chosen during field work. Therefore, in order to make the assessment of the datasheets easier only the columns of mainly (T) and dominant (M) of appropriate questions were considered.

Fig. 3. Dominant vegetation types covering kurgans (Tóth, Cs.)

Data revealed that in the case of 47 % of kurgans the prevailing land use type is arable land. Naturally in the better soils of Nagykunság and Hajdúság the ratio of mounds cultivated completely is higher than the average while this value is far less (17 %) than average in the Hortobágy, especially where the area belongs to the National Park.

forest, shrub 10%

garden 1%

cultural 3%

unknown 2%

loess grassland 14%

The second place is occupied by kurgans covered by disturbed grassland dominated by weeds (23 %). This vegetation cover was developed either from the original loess grassland by deterioration or from arable lands following abandonment. Spreading of weeds was intensified significantly by extensive industrial agriculture (pesticides, chemical fertilisers).

arable land 47%

disturbed grassland 23%

Land use types of kurgans’ surface Land use types on mounds show similar tendencies to vegetation types. ‘No land use’ was chosen only if human activity is not present near the mound at all. On one third of the kurgans no land use can be observed. Unfortunately pastoral lands and meadows that are more favourable regarding the sustainment of kurgans and nature protection become subordinate compared to arable lands. Therefore substituting arable lands with those should be supported.

The original vegetation in the majority of the Great Hungarian Plain was a species-rich loess grasslands (Salvio Festucetum rupicolae, Agropyro Kochietum prostratae) (Soó 1931) that remain only in patches generally enclosed by arable lands on the top of a few higher mounds, in border zones and in nature protection areas. On 14 % of the studied kurgans partly deteriorated type of this original and valuable vegetation can be found, however, usually in a few m2 patches. Ancient grasslands can be regarded as dominant vegetations on only 9 % of the mounds, i.e. on 159 mounds. Most mounds having ancient grasslands on them can be found in the Hortobágy, especially in the area of the Hortobágy National Park (HNP) due to the fact that the ratio of sodic soils unsuitable for agriculture is high. Primary and most urgent task of nature protection is to protect these mounds strictly from further deterioration and degradation.

Forestry (5 %) is significant especially in mound grave fields in Transdanubia, however, there are hardly any forests on mounds in the Great Hungarian Plain. Intense cattle raising (stock yard, sheep folds and stalls on the mound or next to it) and gardens occur on only a few mounds and can hardly be calculated in percentages.

12

The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary

disturbed grasslands are enveloped mostly by arable lands. These mounds elevating from the “cultural desert” as oases provide shelter for numerous vegetation and animal species.

We have already mentioned the harmful effects of traffic on mound bodies. This activity is a characteristic human activity on 2 % of the kurgans. Industrial activity is observed on 1 % of the kurgans, e.g. Olajos-halom (Battonya): oil extraction.

Low ratio of kurgans bordered by meadows and pastoral lands is unbeneficial considering nature protection. The third most frequent type of environment is forest. Forests are found in the mound grave fields of mountainous areas and on levees of the Great Hungarian Plain and on sodic soils of poor quality afforested during the Great Plain Afforestation Program in the 1930s.

Finally, tourism of kurgans needs to be mentioned. Although some efforts try to boost mound tourism there are many things to improve in this field. The first place is given to the Archaeological Park in Százhalombatta where burial traditions of the Hallstatt culture can be studied in kurgans built in the 6th and 7th centuries BC.

Some kind of regularity can be observed in the geographical location of the mounds, i.e. most of them are located along rivers and river beds. This fact, however, seems to be contrary to the environment characteristics: open waters (lakes, rivers) are not significant in the vicinity of kurgans. This contradiction is the result of two things. On the one hand, rivers that once attracted mound constructers are mainly cut and filled, thus today these are water-free beds. On the other hand, regular flooding supplying water for cut beds and covering the vicinity of the mounds for almost the entire year became rare following the river regulation works. More and more rivers were canalised from the 19th century changing frequently their course as well. Thus both natural and artificial processes caused dewatering of the landscape and thus the environment of the mounds.

Three kurgans are located in the Hortobágy that are popular among visitors: Szálka-halom with a study trail visited frequently by both national and foreign tourists. Meggyes-halom in Etyek visited due to the closeness of the Meggyes inn, and Filagoria-halom visited because a predator bird repatriation site is close to it. The Hegyesbori-Kis-halom in Karcag is situated next to main road No. 4 in the area of the Nagykunság. It is visited because of a Cumanian memento stands on it. Religious attraction is related to the Kálvária-domb in Karcag and also in Tiszaörs. Szélmalom-domb in Kengyel is visited due to the wind-mill, an ancient monument on top of it. The Nagy Sándor-halom located in Debrecen and marked by information tables together with the Templom-halom in Zelemér are well-known kurgans in the Hajdúság as the first is the monument of a soldier of the revolution in 1848-1849 and the latter is located near a church from the Árpádian Age. Generally all kurgans having a cemetery, chapel or crypt on them have visitor attraction.

During the last decades more and more artificial objects like farm houses, concretes of canals, industrial constructions occurred in the vicinity of the mounds. These objects influence the landscape values of the mounds significantly. Almost 3 % of the mounds are located in completely artificial environment as these were enclosed by the settlements. Kurgans located within settlements are for example: Hegyes-halom, Görbehalom, Nagy Sándor-halom, Basa-halom, Szántay-halom, László-halom in Debrecen; Kálvária-halom in Karcag and Tiszaörs and the Túri-halom in TörökszentmiklósSurjány.

Fig. 4. Land use types dominating the surface of kurgans (Tóth, Cs.) no land-use 32% arable land 47%

industry 1% tourism 2% traffic 2% cattle raising 1%

Fig. 5. Environment of the kurgans (Tóth, Cs.) garden, farm 3%

garden 1%

industrial construction artificial object 1% 2%

within settlement 3%

water 1%

pastoral lands and meadows 9%

forestry 5%

forest 9%

meadow, pastoral land 17%

Environmental conditions at the feet of the mounds were examined. This pointed out the main land use types with determining dominant vegetation types of the environment. Considering neighbouring data it can be stated that mounds are surrounded by arable lands most frequently (64 %) (Figure 5). This value is higher than that of the mounds having ploughed tops. This indicates that mounds unploughed, covered by ancient grasslands, or

arable land 64%

Originally kurgans were burial mounds elevated in the open grasslands of the Great Hungarian Plain except for the mound grave field of mountains and hills. They were excellent orientation and view points, i.e. they belonged to the given landscape. However, landscape value of most

13

C S. TÓTH TÓTH TÓTH , Cs.;; A. TÓTH , A.

Of course archaeological findings can only be found on the surface if the mound was disturbed in a way. Cultivation occupies first place here as well as the plough turns findings from the deeper parts of the soil. Studying the strata cut by digging also provides archaeological information. Occasionally intense cattle tramping brings findings onto the surface, e.g. KĘ-halom (Kenderes). Mounds covered by closed grasslands are not informative archaeologically. Surface findings (bone pieces, ceramic fragments) were found on 13 % of the surveyed mounds. This proves that following the original burial later cultures buried their dead in the same kurgans (findings from the Migration and from the Conquest period).

of the mounds has been lowered in the course of significant environmental transformation of last centuries due to the lowering, cultivation, carrying away of the forms and to that artificial object of the society (afforestation, weeded areas, buildings, power line, waste heaps, etc.) prevent free view on the heaps. Thus landscape value of the mounds is greatly dependant on the type of environment discussed above. Mounds were classified into four landscape value categories as follows: highly valuable (high mound free of disturbance that is a striking feature of the landscape visible from great distance), valuable (high and moderately high mound with some disturbance, e.g. power tower, trees, building), intermediately valuable (low or lowered by cultivation, carrying away, or high mound that is hardly visible due to significant disturbance of the environment), not valuable (carried away, completely cultivated and totally forested or built in mounds, mound places).

Literature revealed that only 4 % of the kurgans have been exposed archaeologically. These excavations took place mainly in mound grave fields of Transdanubia and in the area of the Hortobágy and the Hajdúság in the form of saving findings when roads were constructed, e.g. Kincses-halom (Püspökladány), Árkos-halom (Hajdúszoboszló).

It is clear that valuable mounds are high and their environment ensures good visibility of the mounds without disturbance. Regarding these mounds elevating high from an arable land environment and covered by grasslands are the most valuable, however, cultivation reduces the height of the mounds, as viewing the mounds is possible throughout the year. Based on field experience it can be stated that if a kurgan reaches the height of 3 m it can easily be viewed in the field from great distance and it is a dominant element of the landscape thus it is a potential landscape value.

Last among the assessed questions was the endangerment of mounds the field study of which had subjective elements in a certain amount. It had to be examined whether there are any harmful processes (carrying away, strong disturbance, afforestation, fertiliser dumping, advancement of weeds, overgrazing, traffic, etc.) in the vicinity of the kurgans that may lead to significant deterioration of their state, endangering the long-term survival chances of the mound. Unfortunately these processes have to be monitored following legal protection as well.

Results of surveying reveal that in average only 10 % of the kurgans can be regarded as highly valuable in the landscape. Considering the objects near the mounds show that there are disturbing objects in the vicinity – with a circle of 500 m radius – of 78 % of the mounds that disturb the view of the mound (house, heap, fence, row of trees, planted forest, power line, road, mobile tower, waste dump, industrial establishment, sheep fold, etc.). Depending on their disturbance, mounds were classified into valuable, intermediately valuable and not valuable categories. Unfortunately most mounds, 41 % in average, belong to the category of not valuable regarding the landscape as certain objects hide the mound completely. In many cases the form itself was lowered so much (carrying away, cultivation) that it is hardly visible holding slight landscape value. Knowing these, nature protection agencies have to do hard work in order to increase the number of valuable mounds regarding the landscape. Help may come from local civil organisations as shown by some positive examples.

Based on these criteria mounds were classified as strongly, slightly and not endangered. Mound endangerment survey produced the result of 30–50– 20 % endangerment in average (strongly–slightly–not endangered). Category of slightly endangered could be true for almost all of the mounds. However, hardly accessible mounds with natural or close to natural habitats can be classified as not endangered. Such mounds can be in areas free of human disturbance in national parks and nature reserves. Kurgans involved in tourism, provided with information tables and wellknown, can also be classified here. Category of strongly endangered applies for a mound if there are several harmful processes simultaneously in its vicinity. A kurgan also belongs to this category if a process or a human activity (e.g. fertiliser dumping at the foot of the mound) strongly or irreversibly threatens one of its value types (e.g. botanic value: elimination of ancient grassland, strong advancement of weeds).

From the archaeological point of view, two questions had to be answered during surveying the state of the mounds. First, their surface was examined in order to look for archaeological findings. Second, literature was used to see which mounds were exposed legally by archaeologists.

Field surveying revealed that a significant number of kurgans suffered from such damage that restoration of their original state is no longer possible (low mounds and mound places ploughed, carried away, significantly deteriorated, valueless regarding landscape, covered by weeds). In order to enable nature protection to focus on mounds regarded as valuable from some aspect we separated mounds into valuable, i.e. worth further 14

The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary

in the future. All mounds rich in archaeological findings, holding unique cultural historical values are equally valuable for us. In the course of the survey archaeological findings were found on the surface of 118 mounds that were included in the category of valuable mounds.

protection and not valuable ones. Determining valuable mounds their geomorphological, landscape, botanic, archaeological and other cultural historical values were considered. No priority order was set for the five categories in the course of the selection. If a mound was regarded as valuable because of only one value type (e.g. archaeological findings on its surface) it was still classified into the valuable category. Naturally several mounds were valuable regarding to three or four value types. This helped us to select those mounds that have significant value regarding nature protection and worth further protection.

Age, history, purpose of mounds can be unveiled most accurately by archaeological excavations. Findings supply information on the everyday life, traditions of people lived in the various historical ages. Therefore mounds that were officially exposed by archaeologists were also classified as valuable adding 32 mounds into the category.

Primary aspect in the selection of valuable mounds was the state of the mound body and its relative height, i.e. geomorphological conditions. Mounds higher than 3 metres, being intact or heightened, symmetric or asymmetric due to natural reasons – a total of 323 mounds – from the database were classified as valuable. The second aspect was the landscape value of the mounds. Based on this all highly valuable (170) and valuable (315), i.e. a total of 485 kurgans regarding landscape were classified as valuable.

Finally, selection was performed considering other cultural historical values. Here mounds occurring in literature, historical descriptions, legends or beliefs, holding the graves of famous families or persons, or provided place for fights are considered. The number of such mounds is 48, the majority of which are regarded to be valuable from the aspect of one of the above four value categories as well. Based on the above five categories, just more than half of the kurgans occurring in the database, i.e. 856 kurgans were selected that were considered to be valuable and holding significant nature protection value. Among these valuable kurgans only one category dominate: 462 kurgans were selected due to their landscape value, smaller loess grassland cover or for their archaeological value. In total 249 kurgans have double values. They are mostly higher than 3 m, having intact bodies and landscape value. 117 kurgans are valuable regarding three categories; most of them are having geomorphological and landscape values with loess, greater or smaller grassland cover and significant archaeological findings (excavation, rich in surface findings). Much less is the number of kurgans (26) valuable regarding four value categories. Two kurgans have been found that are valuable regarding all of the five aspects and they are the most valuable considering nature protection. One of them is the Baghy-halom (Figure 6.) near Kengyel in the area of the Nagykunság. This is a 12 m high, possibly Scythian kurgan with an intact body, highly valuable considering the landscape, covered by species rich in loess grassland and there is a legend associated to it (Photo 1). According to the legend Gyula Baghy, a poor shepherd living around became rich as his dog dug treasures out of the mound. The other mound rising in the borders of Hajdúnánás is the Fekete-halom (Figure 7.) that is 11,2 m high with intact body. It is a Scythian kurgan of high landscape value with a smaller loess grassland patch on the top of it. There are archaeological findings on its surface and a legend is associated to it as well. As the tale says Mr Für lived here who had three children, two daughters and a boy. The boy died at a young age and the girls built mounds in competition following their marriage. The results are the Nagy-Fürj-halom and to the north the Fekete-halom. A smaller third mound was constructed between the two large ones in memory of their brother, the Kis-Fürj-halom that is currently a low mound hardly noticeable due to cultivation.

Next was the botanic state of the kurgans. Here the only aspect was whether the ancient loess grassland vegetation is present in any form on the surface of the mound or not. If yes, then the following categories were set depending on the extent of the grassland: x Mounds of high botanic value. Covered almost completely by ancient grassland (Achilleo Festucetum pseudovinae; Artemisio Festucetum pseudovinae; Salvio Festucetum rupicolae; Agropyro pectinatii-Kochietum prostratae). Weeds are present only at the edges. x Mounds of significant botanic value. Having ancient grassland cover of several m2, however, aggressive weeds are advancing. x Mounds of slight botanic value. One or two individuals of the ancient grassland fight against advancing weeds, e.g. Stipa capillata, Agopyron pectinatum. x Mounds of no botanic value. Loess grassland vanished from their surface. Weed associations and forests of different kind (wattle, poplar) cover them. All mounds on the surface of which ancient grassland of some extent was found were classified as valuable. As a result another 236 kurgans were included in the valuable category, 113 of which had high, 46 significant and 77 slight botanic values. The fourth aspect of determining valuable mounds was archaeological information. If archaeological findings (ceramic, bone, metal and stone pieces) turned from the soil by ploughing were found on the surface of ploughed mounds, they were classified as valuable even if they were insignificant, low (1–1.5 m high), ploughed mounds without botanic or landscape values. This is justified by the possibility of undisturbed cultural strata underneath the ploughed layer excavation of which might take place

15

CS. TÓTH; A. TÓTH

protection measures and the positive change of attitude of the society. In order to sustain kurgans and their values, however, the best solution would be the expropriation of their site with a smaller puffer zone and the changing of dominant land use on the surface and in the immediate surroundings of the mounds.

SUMMARY Hungarian kurgans have been in focus thanks to the Act of 1996 on nature protection. Completion of the national survey of their state was important regarding their protection and scientific research of kurgans also gained new momentum.

Fig. 6. Most valuable kurgan of Hungary, the Baghyhalom (Kengyel) (photo by Tóth, Cs.)

The majority of the 1649 mounds listed in the kurgan cadastre are kurgans of the Bronze Age located in the eastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain mainly in floodfree loess covered flats. Their number has been reduced drastically compared to earliest map sources due to human carelessness. Less than half of the mounds can be regarded as intact due to various anthropogenic effects on the mound bodies (digging, disruption, carrying away, ploughing). Most of them belong to categories of disrupted, deteriorated, carried away and mound place. Currently there are 9 types of land use on their surface. Regarding the survival of mounds, the most harmful land-use types are ploughing, forestry, intense cattle raising, industrial activity and traffic. These have to be limited or ceased completely by adequate measures. Less harmful land use types fitting into the landscape like meadows and pastoral lands have to be supported. A problem is presented by the loss of landscape value of the mounds in the 20th century as a result mainly of artificial objects disturbing the view of the mounds, intense arable land erosion, carrying away and afforesting the mounds. According to value categorisation, just over half of the surveyed 1649 kurgans (51,9 %) have some kind of a value (geomorphological, landscape, archaeological, botanic, other cultural historical). Protecting them belongs to the most urgent tasks of nature protection. Unfortunately the other half of the kurgans not worth dealing with them by nature protection as their state is so deteriorated (ploughed, damaged, carried away mounds, mound places) that their reconstruction is useless and cannot be financed.

Fig.7. Most spectacular kurgan of the Hajdúhát, the Fekete-halom (Hajdúnánás) (photo by Tóth, Cs.)

The state survey revealed for the national parks about which mounds are endangered seriously and what measures shall be taken in order to sustain them in a long run. Particular measures have already been made: bush and tree cutting on and in the vicinity of the mounds, establishment of study trails, information tables and memory columns. Much greater work was to collect the lot numbers of the lands having mounds on them from the Land Registry Office. However, this was essential to identify owners with whom discussions have been initiated on the preferable land use types.

Fig. 8. Forested, weeded kurgan without landscape value (Kék-halom near Nádudvar) (photo by Tóth, Cs.)

In forming the attitude of the society publications, scientific papers and presentations of recent years are very important. Open air museums constructed recently also attract many visitors who can receive much information on kurgans (Százhalombatta – Archaeological Park, Polgár – M3 Archeopark). Fortunately deterioration of the state of the kurgans slowed down in the past decade as a result of nature 16

The complex condition assessment survey of kurgans in Hungary

Tóth, Cs. 2006. Az országos kunhalomfelmérés eredményei a földtani értékvédelem szemszögébĘl [Results of the national mound cadastering from the aspect if geological conservation] Acta Geographica ac Geologica et Meteorologica Debrecina. 1, 129135. Tóth, Cs. 2007. Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok megye kunhalmainak állapotfelmérése [State survey of the kurgans in Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok county]. Jászkunság. 50, 42-59. Tóth, Cs. 2008. A Tiszazug kunhalmainak állapotfelmérése [State survey of the kurgans in the Tiszazug]. Tiszavilág. 3, 9-20. Virágh, D. 1979. Cartographical data of the kurgans in the Tisza region. In: I. Ecsedy (ed.), The people of the pit-grave kurgans in Eastern Hungary, 117-148. Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó. Zoltai, L. 1938. Debreceni halmok, hegyek, egyéb mesterséges és természetes kiemelkedések ú.m.: laponyagok, telkek, ülések, dombok, gerendek és hátak a város határában, valamint külsĘ birtokain [Mounds, mountains, other artificial and natural elevations of Debrecen, like depressions, plots, seats, hills, gerends and ridges in the vicinity of the city]. Debrecen, City Press.

REFERENCES CITED Buka, L. 1996. Hajdú-Bihar megye jeles kiemelkedései (Famous elevations of Hajdú-Bihar county). In: Gyarmati I. (ed.): Dombok, halmok, kurgánok [Hills, mounds, kurgans], Debrecen, South Nyírség-Bihar Landscape Protection Association. 7-23. Cholnoky, J. 1907. A Tiszameder helyváltozásai [Shifts of the Tisza bed]. Földrajzi Közlemények. 35, 425445. Kozma, B. 1910. A kunhalmok elhelyezkedése az Alföldön [Distribution of cumanian mounds in the Great Hungarian Plain]. Földrajzi Közlemények. 38, 437-443. M. Nepper, I., SĘregi, J. and Zoltai, L. 1980. Hajdú-Bihar megye halomkatasztere I. Bihar [Mound cadastre of Hajdú-Bihar county I. Bihar]. Berettyóújfalu, Bihar Museum Annual. M. Nepper, I., SĘregi, J. and Zoltai, L. 1981. Hajdú-Bihar megye halomkatasztere II. Hajdúság [Mound cadastre of Hajdú-Bihar county]. Hajdúböszörmény, Hajdúság Museum Annual. Soó, R. 1931. A magyar puszta fejlĘdéstörténetének problémája [Problem of the development history of the Hungarian puszta]. Földrajzi Közlemények. 59, 115. Tóth, A. 1988. Szolnok megye tiszántúli területének kunhalmai. [Cumanian mounds of the Transz Tisza area of Szolnok county] Zounuk. County Archive Annual 3, 349-410. Tóth, A. 1989. A Jászság kunhalmai. [Cumanian mounds of the Jászság] Zounuk. County Archive Annual 4, 419-439. Tóth, A. 1990. Szolnok környékének kunhalmai. [Cumanian mounds of the vicinity of Szolnok]. Zounuk. County Archive Annual 5, 355-365. Tóth, A. (ed.) 2002. Az Alföld piramisai [Pyramids of the Great Hungarian Plain] Kisújszállás. Alföldkutatásért Alapítvány. Tóth, A. and Tóth, Cs. 2004. A kunhalom-program általános tapasztalatai. [General experiences of the kurgan project] In: A. Tóth (ed.), A kunhalmokról más szemmel [On kurgans from a different perspective], Kisújszállás – Debrecen. 171-180. Tóth, Cs. and Kozák, J. 1998. Országos kunhalom kataszteri adatlap [Datasheet of the national cumanian mounds cadastre] Kisújszállás, Fundation for the research of the Great Hungarian Plain. Tóth, Cs. 2002. Anthropogenic transformation of prehistoric mounds on the Hungarian Great Plain. In: Andrejchuk, V. N. and Korzhyk, V. P. (eds.), Regional aspect of land use, Chernivtsy – Sosnowiec. 173-181. Tóth, Cs. 2004. A kunhalmok geomorfológiai és tereptani viszonyainak vizsgálata a Nagykunság, a Hajdúság és a Hortobágy térségében [Studying the geomorphological and relief conditions of kurgans in the Nagykunság, Hajdúság and Hortobágy]. In: Tóth, A. (ed.), A kunhalmokról más szemmel [On kurgans from a different perspective], Kisújszállás, Debrecen. 129-166.

Maps used Die Erste Militärische Aufnahme Königreich Ungarn (1782-1785). Arcanum. Die Zweite Militärische Aufnahme Königreich Ungarn (1819-1869). Arcanum. Die Dritte Militärische Aufnahme Königreich Ungarn (1869-1887). Arcanum. Gauss-Grüger 1:25,000 méretarányú katonai térképszelvények [Military maps with the scale of 1:25,000], 1969. EOTR 1:10,000 méretarányú katonai térképszelvények [Military maps with the scale of 1:10,000], 1981.

17

18

Kurgan Studies: YEVGENYEV , A. An A. environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 2, pp. 19–22.

On the history of the Bronze Age studies in the steppe near the Ural Mountains Andrey A. YEVGENYEV. Orenburg State Pedagogical University, Sovetskay ul. 19., Orenburg, 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: This paper is devoted to the history of the Bronze Age studies in the steppe near the Ural Mountains. The most actual problems and questions of Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages are analyzed. The evolution of Gorodtsov scheme of the steppe in the Bronze Age in the 20th century is investigated.

numerous kurgan burial grounds at the construction site of the Volgograd hydro-electric power station (Shilov 1959; Sinitsin 1959; Smirnov 1960; Merpert and Smirnov 1961). As a result the occupation area of the Pit–Grave culture had changed considerably in the near Volga region.

Keywords: Bronze Age, steppe near the Ural Mountains, Pit–Grave culture, Middle Bronze Age, Timber–Grave culture, Andronovo culture.

The Pit–Grave sites in the area near the Ural Mountains practically have not been excavated until the early 1950s, thanks to the excavations carried out by the South Ural (Orenburg) archaeological expedition of the Institute of Archaeology, USSR Academy of Science headed by Smirnov between 1956 and 1974. The first Pit–Grave sites in the steppe near the Ural Mountains were found in 1956 during the excavations at Uvak burial ground. The Uvak and Bliznetsy burial grounds by the River Ilek had graves peculiar to the Pit–Grave culture. They were dug under mounds, the pits were deep and rectangular in shape with the traces of flooring made of poles or boards. The skeletons were very much covered with ochre and were placed either on the back or the right side in a crouched position. The grave goods consisted of roundbottomed vessels and copper tools (a knife and a twobutted hammer). In 1963–1964 Pit–Grave sites were found at the Gerasimovka 1 and Gerasimovka 2 burial grounds by the River Kindelya. The find of a wooden wheel in one of the graves was of tremendous importance. It showed that Pit–Grave people used horse-drawn carriages (Smirnov 1965; Fedorova-Davydova 1971).

INTRODUCTION The key role in the development of chronology of the Bronze Age sites in the Easter European steppe zone belongs to the outstanding Russian scientist of the early 20th century Gorodtsov. He offered a comprehensive conception of Bronze Age sites in the steppe zone based on stratigraphical analysis, burial rite features and grave goods discovered during excavations of kurgans in the Kharkov region in 1901 (Gorodtsov 1905a; 1905b). Gorodtsov distinguished three periods of the Bronze Age in the area in question: the Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Consistent with these periods were three cultures (or cultural and historical communities): the Pit–Grave, Catacomb and Timber–Grave cultures, which he distinguished with the help of stratigraphical and typological methods. This triad is still valid today. It is quite obvious, however, that the general pattern of cultural development in the Bronze Age has grown more complicated since his time. The historiographic situation in this field is far from being simple and comprises a number of controversial and unresolved issues. Some of them were studied and solved during excavations in the steppe, near the Ural Mountains. This paper is to make evaluation of the studies devoted to the Bronze Age conceptions regarding Eastern European steppe zone carried out near the Ural Mountains in the 20th and early 21st centuries.

In 1956–1970 the South Ural Expedition excavated 30 graves related to the Pit–Grave culture. The results of these excavations were published by Smirnov (1960) and Fedorova-Davydova (1964, 1971, 1973a, 1973b). They were the first to raise essential problems of the Pit–Grave culture: the peculiar features of the burial rite and grave goods, their chronology, the type of economy and metallurgy in the Early Bronze Age. The excavated graves were dated to the second half of the 3rd millennium BC. As a result of the studies carried out by the South Ural Archaeological Expedition the boundaries of the Pit–Grave culture shifted far to the east.

EARLY BRONZE AGE: THE PIT–GRAVE CULTURE

The key role in the studies of the Pit–Grave culture and also the development of the concept regarding the Early Bronze Age in the Volga–Ural steppe belongs to Merpert. He described the burial rite and grave goods near the Ural Mountains, which enabled him to put forward the existence of some ritual groups, which could be distinguished chronologically.

Gorodtsov distinguished the sites of the Pit–Grave culture on account of a number of features: deep graves, the buried situated in a contracted position on the back or left side, orientation to the east or north-east, bones covered with ochre. Later the Pit–Grave culture, which at first was localized in the near Dnieper area, would spread to the east. In 1920s Rykov and Rau discovered Pit–Grave sites in the near Volga area (Rau 1928). Early in the 1950s Sinitsin, Smirnov, Shilov and Merpert excavated

Merpert distinguished 9 local variants of the Pit–Grave culture and suggested their chronological periods.

19

A. A. YEVGENYEV

Orenburg region (for instance, Belozerka 1, the burial ground at Mount Beryozovaya) and a collection of ceramics from various settlements in this area (Gorbunov et al. 1990; Khalyapin 2000).

Besides, he pointed out that peculiar to the local sites was the positioning of the buried on their right side. He thought it was the Volga–Ural variant that prompted the origin of the Pit–Grave cultural and historical community.

The first graves related to the Sintashta culture were found in 1973 during excavations at kurgan 25 at Novy Kumak burial ground near Orsk. Smirnov and Kuzmina were the first to suggest that such sites as Novy Kumak (kurgan 25) and Sintashta should belong to a separate chronological period dated to the second quarter of the 2nd millennium BC before the Andronovo culture (Smirnov and Kuzmina 1977). Peculiar to these graves were large pits with the dead crouched on their left side or on the back and buried with vessels, metal goods as well as heads and legs of some cattle and bones of sheep (Smirnov and Kuzmina 1976). A typical vessel was represented by a flat-bottomed pot with straight walls and a clear rib sometimes with a bent collar decorated mostly by zigzag, herring bone, triangle and rhombic patterns with the help of some press tools. Later there were largescale excavations carried out in the South Trans–Urals including those at Arkaim and the Sintashta River, which made it possible to distinguish the Sintashta culture. At the same time they uncovered sites of the Potapov and Petrov cultures, which were chronologically similar to the Sintashta ones (Zdanovich 1988; Gening et al. 1992; Vasilyev et al. 1994).

The problems of the variant of the Pit–Grave culture near the Ural Mountains are actively tackled by Morgunova. In 1980s she headed the Orenburg Archaeological Expedition of the local pedagogical institute, which excavated kurgan burial grounds at Trudovoye, Boldyrevo, Nizhnaya Pavlovka, Medvedka, Krasnoholm, Kardailovo, Buranchi, Tamar–Utkul, Izobilnoye, Linevka and so on. As a result they collected varied materials, which helped to understand the ancient Pit–Grave people better and define more exactly the concept of the Early Bronze Age in the South Ural area (Morgunova and Kravtsov 1994). Unlike others the Orenburg Archaeological Expedition studied the Pit–Grave sites in close association with natural history scientists. Combined studies conducted together with palaeosoil scientists are of special importance. The combination of archaeological and natural historical methods of study (radiocarbon dating, palaeosoil, biomorphic and palaeoanthropological analyses) made it possible to describe the Pit–Grave sites at Shumayevo and Mustayevo burial grounds thoroughly enough between 2000 and 2004 (Morgunova et al. 2003). Thus, the comprehensive approach could define more exactly the chronology and periods of the Pit–Grave culture in the area near the Ural Mountains as well as helped to settle a number of controversial issues in the historiography of the culture in question.

The Sintashta sites in the Orenburg region have not yet been studied very well. Archaeologists from Chelyabinsk discovered and studied a site of an ancient town at Alandskoye, which is as important as Arkaim. Sintashta graves were found in the necropolises at Gerasimovka 2, Obilkin Lug 2, 3, near Mount Beryozovaya and so on (Porokhova 1992; Khalyapin 2001). A major work to sum up the materials related to the turn of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages was accomplished by Tkachev (2006). He described the burial rite and grave goods from the Sintashta sites and those of other cultures at the time. This scholar managed to show a consistent pattern in the development of various cultures of antiquity at the turn of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages and determined the origin of the Sintashta culture (ibid.).

MIDDLE BRONZE AGE: THE ABASHEVO AND SINTASHTA CULTURES The South Ural area in the Middle Bronze Age is one of the archaeological problems, which is studied the least of all. Many scholars believe that people of the Late Pit– Grave cultural period in the Middle Bronze Age (the last quarter of the 3rd millennium – the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC) actively contacted with the Catacomb people. As a result of extensive social relationships, a peculiar Poltavkino culture appeared. It must be noted, however, that Poltavkino sites are rather rare in the South Ural steppe, that is, this problem should be thoroughly investigated.

However, the study undertaken by Tkachev is quite exceptional and so the Middle Bronze Age in the Orenburg region is not yet investigated very well. LATE BRONZE AGE: THE TIMBER–GRAVE AND ANDRONOVO CULTURES

More varied are the sites at the turn of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, which are represented by the Abashevo and Sintashta burial complexes. But historiography of this problem is very complicated as a result of only a few excavated sites and endless controversy on many vital issues.

Peculiar to Late Bronze Age antiquities in the Orenburg region are the signs of close association between the people of the Timber–Grave and Andronovo cultural and historical communities. It is this aspect that is considered to be one of the most important in the studies of the Late Bronze Age in the South Ural steppe.

The Abashevo complexes are not frequent in the Orenburg region. For example, one of them is an earthen burial ground at Nikiforovsky forestry (Vasilyev and Pryakhin 1979). Other Abashevo sites include mixed Abashevo and Sintashta graves in the central part of the

In 1926 Gryaznov excavated burial sites, related to the Andronovo culture, to the west of Orsk in the basin of the Rivers Kirgilda and Terekla, which he dated to 1400– 20

On the history of the Bronze Age studies in the steppe near the Ural Mountains

region in question. For example, some features of the burial rites peculiar to the Timber–Grave culture were noted at Uvak, Novy Belogorka and Khabarnin burial grounds, which supports the idea expressed by Salnikov that some groups of the ancient near Volga people had penetrated the steppe of the South Ural.

1100 BC. The ceramics found there were of special concern for the scholar who made several conclusions according to their peculiarities in relation to the area near the Ural Mountains and Siberia. He managed to distinguish two types of vessels characteristic of the western (the basin of the Rivers Ural, Tobol, Ishim) and eastern (the Upper Irtysh, Ob, Yenisei) areas respectively (Gryaznov 1926). His work extended the area of the Andronovo culture to the west and revealed its certain ties with other cultures from adjacent territories. That is, the study of the Andronovo culture in the South Ural began during the excavations in the basins of the Rivers Kirgilda and Terekla.

In the 1960s the collected material related to the history of the Late Bronze Age was evaluated and presented in a number of works (Fedorova-Davydova 1964, 1973a; Kuzmina 1964). The material collected to study the antiquities of the Late Bronze Age was extended between the 1980s and 1990s thanks to the work of the Orenburg Archaeological Expedition headed by Morgunova. The expedition concerned itself mostly with excavating ancient settlements and worked at the sites of Ivanovka, Sukhorechka, Tok, Krasnoholm and Rodnikovo. These settlements belonged to the Timber–Grave culture with some features influenced by the Alakul period in the development of the Andronovo culture (Morgunova and Porokhova 1989).

The amount of the material regarding the Andronovo culture in the South Ural and North Kazakhstan areas was growing in the 1930s. In 1930 Grakov and Salnikov excavated 7 stone rings at the Kozhumberdynsky necropolis (Krivtsova-Grakova 1947) and in 1936 Podgayetsky (1940) excavated 13 graves related to the Andronovo culture. Podgayetsky pointed to the signs of the Timber–Grave culture, which were evident in these graves. These observations testified the correlation between the Andronovo and Timber–Grave cultures in the South Ural area (ibid.).

The Orenburg Archaeological Expedition carried out excavations of Timber–Grave sites at Sverdlov-sovkhoz, Uranbash, Alekseyevka, Ryazanovka, Krasnoholm, Kardailovo, Studenoye, Pokrovka (Gorbunov and Ivanov 1992; Morgunova 1996, 1999; Khalyapin, 1998; Khalyapin and Bogdanov 1999).

In the summer of 1937 Salnikov excavated the first Timber–Grave kurgans in the Orenburg region near the settlement of Pogromnoye. Among the grave goods discovered at the site of excavations there were some potlike and jar-like ceramics and animal bones. He dated the kurgans to the 13th and 12th centuries BC. The peculiarity of the burial rites, that is they included cremation and some decorative patterns normally used on the ceramics of the Andronovo culture, he thought of the correlation between the Timber–Grave culture of the near Volga area and the Andronovo culture of Siberia in the Orenburg steppe (Salnikov 1950).

Many sites had signs of the Timber–Grave and Alakul cultures both in the burial rites and grave goods. These signs prove the assumption that the centre of the Orenburg region used to be a contact zone of the Timber– Grave and Alakul people. Some interesting materials were uncovered between 2006 and 2008 during the excavations of the kurgan burial grounds at Labazy and Skvortsovka by the River Buzuluk, which are presented in this volume.

A major contribution in the study of South Ural antiquities related to the Late Bronze Age was made by the South Ural (Orenburg) Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of Archaeology, USSR Academy of Science. They excavated a number of family and tribal cemeteries related to the Timber–Grave culture from the burial grounds at Novy Belogorka, Gerasimovka 1 and 3, Perevozinka. Andronovo sites were uncovered by the expedition from the burial grounds at Khabarnoye, Uvak, Bliznetsy, Mechet–Sai, Pyatimary 1 and Novy Kumak.

Peculiar to the studies devoted to the problems of the Late Bronze Age over the latest decades is a great concern about metallurgy. In the 1990s the central part of the Orenburg region was explored by the Near Ural Expedition of the Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Science, headed by Chernykh. They excavated various ancient sites around the Kargalinsky copper mines. Morgunova has conducted excavations of settlements and an earthen burial ground related to the Timber–Grave and Abashevo cultures at Bulanovo by the River Salmysh near the Kargalinsky mines since 1998.

These excavations in the Orenburg region produced some valuable archaeological materials so that it became possible to consider cultural ties among the tribes in the area near the Ural Mountains in the Bronze Age as well as some aspects of social differentiation and economy in the Timber–Grave and Andronovo cultural communities. The study of the Andronovo sites in the Orenburg region showed that the period when this culture flourished was several centuries older and went well back to the 15th and 14th centuries BC. Besides, it helped to reveal some peculiarities in the development of this culture in the

That is, the study of ancient cultures in the South Ural area remains one of the vital issues of contemporary archaeology in Russia. The collected material regarding the Timber–Grave and Andronovo cultures is representative enough. Yet a comprehensive study of all the ancient sites in the steppe near the Ural Mountains is still pending and must go on.

21

A. A. YEVGENYEV

Merpert N.Y. 1974. Drevneishie skotovody VolgoUral'skogo mezhdurech'ja. Moscow Morgunova, N.L. 1996. Kurgany u sel Krasnoholm i Kardailovo v Ilekskom rayone Arheologicheskie pamyatniki Orenburzhya. I. 8-43. Orenburg Morgunova, N.L. 1999. Mogilnik u s. Uranbash na Kargalinskih rudnikah. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki Orenburzh'ya. III. 40-64. Orenburg Morgunova, N.L. and Porohova, O.I. 1989. Poseleniya srubnoy kul'tury v Orenburgskoy oblasti. Poseleniya srubnoy obschnosti. 160-172. Voronezh Morgunova, N.L. and Kravtsov A.Y. 1994. Pamyatniki drevneyamnoy kul'tury na Ileke. Ekaterinburg Morgunova, N.L., Golyeva, A.A., Kraeva, L.A., Mescherjakov, D.V., Turecky, M.A., Khalyapin, M.V. and Hohlova, O.S. 2003. Shumaevskie kurgany. Orenburg Podgayetsky, G.V. 1940. Mogilnik epohi bronzy bliz g. Orska. Materialy i issledovaniya po arheologii SSSR 1. 69-82. Moscow Porohova, O.I. 1992. II Gerasimovsky kurganny mogil'nik v Orenburgskoj oblasti. Drevnaya istoriya naseleniya volgo-uralskih stepej. 92-107. Orenburg Rau, P. 1928. Höckergraber der Wolgasteppe. Pokrowsk Salnikov, K.V. 1950. Khvalynsko-andronovskie kurgany u s. Pogromnogo. Sovetskaya Arheologia. ʋ 13. 311-319 Shilov, V. P. 1959. Kalinovsky kurganny mogilnik. Materialy i issledovaniya po arheologii SSSR 60. Moscow Sinitsin, I.V. 1959. Arheologicheskie issledovaniya Zavolzhskogo otryada (1951-1953). Materialy i issledovaniya po arheologii SSSR 60. 39-205. Moscow Smirnov, K.F. 1960. Bykovskie kurgany. Materialy i issledovaniya po arheologii SSSR 78. Moscow Smirnov, K.F. 1965. Drevneyamnaya kul'tura v Orenburgskih stepyah. Novoe v sovetskoy arheologii. 156-159. Moscow Smirnov, K.F., Kuzmina, E.E. 1976. Rannie pogrebalnye kompleksy pod Orskom i problema hronologicheskogo sootnosheniya kul'tur epohi bronzy Priuralya. Problemy arheologii Povolzhyja i Priuralya (neolit i bronzovy vek). 45-47. Kuibyshev Smirnov, K.F., Kuzmina, E.E. 1977. Proishozhdenie indoirancev v svete novejshih arheologicheskih otkrytij. Moscow Tkachev, V.V. 2006. Stepnoe Priuralye na rubezhe epoh srednei i pozdnei bronzy. Chelyabinsk Vasilyev, I.B., Pryahin, A.D. 1979. Beskurganny abashevsky mogilnik u Nikiforovskogo lesnichestva v Orenburzhye. Sovetskaya Arheologia. ʋ 2 Vasilyev, I.B., Kuznetsov, P.F., Semenova, A.P. 1994. Potapovsky kurganny mogilnik indoiranskih plemen na Volge. Samara Zdanovich, G.B. 1988. Bronzovyj vek Uralo-Kazahstanskih stepej (osnovy periodizacii). Sverdlovsk

REFERENCES CITED Fedorova-Davydova, E.A. 1964. K voprosu o periodizacii pamyatnikov epohi bronzy v Yuzhnom Priuralye. Arheologiya i etnografiya Bashkirii II. 84-92. Ufa Fedorova-Davydova, E.A. 1971. Priuralskaja gruppa pamyatnikov yamnoy kul'tury. Istoriya i kul'tura Vostochnoi Evropy po arheologicheskim dannym. 4660. Moscow Fedorova-Davydova, E.A. 1973a. Obryad truposozhzheniya u srubno-alakulskih plemen Orenburzhya. Problemy arheologii Urala i Sibiri. 165-173. Moscow. Fedorova-Davydova, E.A. 1973b. K probleme andronovskoy kul'tury. Problemy arheologii Urala i Sibiri. 133-152. Moscow Gening, V.F., Zdanovich, G.B., Gening, V.V. 1992. Sintashta. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki ariyskih plemen Uralo-Kazahstanskih stepey. Ch. 1. Chelyabinsk Gorbunov, V.S., Denisov, I.V., Ismagilov, R.B. 1990. Novye materialy po epohe bronzy Yuzhnogo Priuralya. Ufa. Gorbunov, V.S., Ivanov, V.A. 1992. Pamyatniki epohi bronzy iz Orenburzh'ja i Juzhnoj Bashkirii. Drevnaya istoriya naseleniya volgo-uralskih stepey. 166-194. Orenburg Gorodtsov, V.A. 1905a. Rezultaty arheologicheskih issledovaniy v Izyumskom uezde Harkovskoy gubernii 1901 goda. Trudy XII Arheologicheskogo s'ezda Gorodtsov V.A. 1905b. Rezultaty arheologicheskih issledovaniy v Bahmutskom uezde Ekaterinoslavskoy gubernii 1903 goda. Trudy XII Arheologicheskogo s'ezda Gryaznov M.P. 1927. Pogrebeniya bronzovoy epohi v Zapadnom Kazahstane. Kazaki. 2. 172-221. Leningrad Khalyapin, M.V. 1998. Kurgany srubnoy kul'tury u s. Sverdlovo. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki Orenburzhya. II. 57-86. Orenburg Khalyapin, M.V. and Bogdanov, S.V. 1999. Pogrebalnye pamyatniki epohi bronzy s territorii Orenburgskogo Priuralya. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki Orenburzhya. III. 75-104. Orenburg Khalyapin, M.V. 2000. Novye abashevskie materialy iz Orenburzhya. Problemy izuchenija eneolita i bronzovogo veka Juzhnogo Urala. 102-125. Orsk. Khalyapin, M.V. 2001. Pervy beskurganny mogilnik sintashtinskoy kul'tury v stepnom Priuralye. Bronzovyj vek Vostochnoj Evropy: kharakteristika kul'tur, hronologija i periodizacija. Materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii «K stoletiju periodizacii V.A. Gorodcova bronzovogo veka yuzhnoi poloviny Vostochnoj Evropy». 417-425. Samara. Krivtsova-Grakova, O.A. 1947. Kozhumberdynsky mogilnik. (Vyderzhki iz dnevnika raskopok). Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo Muzeya. XVII. Arheologicheskiy sbornik. 165-169. Moscow Kuzmina, E.E. 1964. Periodizatsia mogilnikov Elenovskogo mikrorayona andronovskoy kul'tury. Pamyatniki kamennogo i bronzovogo vekov Evrazii. 121-140. Moscow Merpert N.Y. and Smirnov, K.F. 1961. Arheologicheskie raboty v zone stroitelstva Stalingradskoy GES. Kratkie soobscheniya Instituta Arheologii 84. Moscow. 22

CHAPTER II ARCHAEOLOGY

23

24

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 3, pp. 25–69.

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades János DANI Management of Hajdú-Bihar County Museums, Déri Museum, Déri tér 1., Debrecen, 4026 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] and first and foremost of Gazdapusztai (1965, 1967) new kurgans were excavated.

Abstract: This paper attempts to summarize the research of the Pit–Grave culture kurgans (Yamnaya culture) done in the last 3 decades in Hungary. It is sure, that the first Eastern European effects came into the Carpathian Basin yet at the end of the Early Copper Age (Tiszapolgár culture). From the Late Copper Age (Baden culture) onwards till the 1st phase of the Early Bronze Age we can detect the presence of the elements of Eastern European origin. Based on the examination of the burial rite of the graves under the Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom kurgan we can assume Pre-Yamnaya phenomenon in Hungary, too. According to several new and the re-evaluated old discoveries the population of the Pit–Grave culture played an important role in the transformation of the Late Copper Age and in the formation of the Early Bronze Age in the Carpathian Basin. It is probable that the newcomer Eastern elite with the custom of kurgan burial had been ruled and assimilated to the autochtonous Late Copper Age and later Early Bronze Age population of the Great Hungarian Plain. After the biggest local Late Copper Age cultures (Baden, Coþofeni) later the new Early Bronze Age cultures (Vuþedol, Somogyvár– Vinkovci, Livezile) had been adopted the rite of burying the dead under kurgans. We have to make distinction in time and in space between this earlier mentioned population and between the so called Corded Ware culture.

Afterwards, Ecsedy (1979) summarized both his own and the available results in his monograph published in 1979 that still has elementary importance. Gimbutas (2000 with her earlier bibliography) divided the intrusion of the Pit– Grave culture that spoke Proto-Indo-European language into three chronologically separated waves. She connected the Indo-Europeanisation of Old Europe to this culture. Primarily, the latest results embracing 30 years of the Hungarian research following István Ecsedy’s milestone work are summarized in this study. Judging the role of the Pit–Grave culture in the Late Copper Age and in the Early Bronze Age is indisputably problematic. Basically, it has three main reasons: 1. there has been a small number of archaeological excavations of kurgans so far in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin (research limitation); 2. the shortage or lack of grave furniture found under the excavated kurgans; 3. the interdisciplinary studies focusing on the kurgans and the phenomena excavated under them have been partially or entirely missing till the latest researches, therefore the number of radiocarbon measurements is relatively small (Forenbaher 1993, Table 1: 241, 247, Fig. 7). Based on these it is evident that the available source material is definitely limited.

Keywords: people of the Pit–Grave culture, chieftains, Late Copper Age, Early Bronze Age, relative chronology; calibrated radiocarbon dates, new discoveries, retrospective research INTRODUCTION: A SHORT RESEARCH HISTORY The research of the people of the Pit–Grave culture burying their dead under kurgans, or as they are known in the Eastern European territories the Yamnaya culture, has more than a hundred year old tradition in Hungary. Among the first kurgan researchers we should draw attention to the activities of András Jósa (Csallány 1958, 1968, 1978) and Lajos Zoltai (1911, 48), influenced by Béla Posta, who already in 1911 tried to explain the origin of the kurgans he excavated with the help of southern Russian analogy. The first written summary of the kurgans found in HajdúBihar County is owned to Zoltai (1907, 1938) too, who explored and identified them. The cultural and chronological analysis on the Great Hungarian Plain kurgans was initially carried out by Kalicz (1968) and KĘszegi (1962). The next significant period concerning the excavation of kurgans was between the 1950’s and 1960’s, when due to the work of Csalog (1954), István Balogh (Ecsedy 1979, 18-19), M. Nepper (1974), Selmeczi (1967) 25

In the early phase of research the people of the Pit–Grave culture culture was often referred to as ’Ochre-grave kurgans’ or ‘Kurgan-culture’. Nowadays, it became definitely clear that neither the ritual of building the mounds (Ecsedy 1982, 126-127), nor the ochre grave furniture can be considered as culture-specific (Morintz and Roman 1968, 118; Dinu 1974, 272-273). The reason for this is that in Oltenia cremation burials (Dumitrescu 1960, 69, 86-88) while in Bulgaria CoĠofeni burials have already been found under kurgans (Nikolov 1976, 41-42, 49-50, Obr 4.ɚ, b, v; Obr. 7.ɚ, b). Moreover, the tradition to raise a mound over cremated graves was also employed by certain communities of the Baden culture (B. Kovács 1987 99-105; Brukner et al. 1974, 21, 55; Giriü 1982, 101; 1987, 73; Dimitrijeviü 1979, Taf. 22: 11; Kalicz 1998, 171). Due to the precise chronological categorization of Csongrád-KettĘshalom (Ecsedy 1973; 1979, 11-13) and of Püspökladány-Kincsesdomb kurgans, and as a consequence of exceeding the limits of the ‘so far common’ interpretation Ecsedy (1979, 51) was the first who recognized the fact that in the Hungarian research the Eastern European effects emerging from the Copper Age could not be connected to a single time horizon and they

J. DANI were even further from being connected to a single ethnic group. Therefore, it is obvious that the culturalchronological situation of every single excavated kurgan and the burials under them should be examined one by one and cannot be interpreted as a part of a universal unit. GEOGRAPHICAL FRAMEWORK Pit–Grave kurgans can be found mostly on the left bank of the River Tisza (and its opposite bank as well) following the riverbed as far as the delta of the River Sava, the southern part of Vojvodina and in the fields of the Great Hungarian Plain (Figure 1). In the Romanian part of the Banat, however, only one excavated kurgan is known called Bodo (Stratan 1974, 71-74). One of the kurgans of the people of the Pit–Grave culture has already been excavated inside Transylvania in the valley of the River Aranyos in the frontier of Câmpia Turzii/Aranyosgyéres (Ferenczi 1997). Only a few kurgans can be found in the region of Nyírség [a geographical region in NE Hungary] (Jósa 1897; Csallány 1958, 51-51; Patay 1987, 89; Virágh 1979, 121, Fig.1.-map, 126-127, Suppl. I-II.), probably due to the special, local ecologic-geographical circumstances (sandy soil conditions). Zoltai (1938, 6-7) observed that the kurgans were built along the higher natural levees of watercourses (rivers, streams), mainly in regions with good soil properties (high productivity). However, Ecsedy (1979, 51) called attention to the phenomenon that in relation to the location of the kurgans the settlements of the Late Copper Age Baden culture can be found in regions covered with loess. On the other hand, in the Nyírség region, as a consequence of loess-related soils missing, the Baden communities were settled in sandy soil areas (Bóna 1986, 25; Bóna 1993a, 74). Based on studying the topographic location of the kurgans and their complementary late Copper Age settlement network, Ecsedy assumed a certain symbiosis (and synchronism at the same time) between the Baden culture and Pit–Grave culture kurgans (Ecsedy 1973, 19, 39; Ecsedy 1979, 51; Ecsedy 1981, 82, 86, 92, 95; Ecsedy 1982, 82, 151, 158). He questioned Kalicz’s (1968, 58) notion according to which the settlements of the Baden culture were destroyed by the people of the Pit–Grave culture, coming from the east at the end of the Copper Age. CHRONOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK In the territory of the Carpathian Basin, the beginning of eastern European effects is traditionally marked by the isolated burial of Csongrád–KettĘshalom and by the cemetery in Decea Mureúului/Marosdécse. This, on the basis of a relative chronology, was dated by Ecsedy (1973; 1979, 11-13; Kovács 1944) as a subsequent to the very end of the Tiszapolgár culture and was brought into connection with the Sredny Stog II culture. Although the relative chronological location of the grave found in Csongrád was not modified, Rassamakin (1999, Fig.3.1, 111-112) on 26

account of his new research results brought them into connection with the Skelya culture. In the case of some kurgans (Kétegyháza, Debrecen– Dunahalom) Ecsedy (1973, 3-15; 1979, 16, 20-32, 47-52, Pl. 1. 2-8, Pl. 2, Pl. 7-9, Pl. 12-16) – on the basis of the observed stratigraphy and eastern European analogies – verified the co-existence of the Pit–Grave culture and Boleráz (Cernavoda III) – and later mainly of the Baden culture (Ecsedy 1975a, 277, 279-283; Ecsedy 1975b; 161; Ecsedy 1979, 48-52; Ecsedy 1982, 126). Nevertheless, Ecsedy (1975a, 282; 1975b, 161; 1979, 52; 1982, 85) supposed in his several work that the Pit Grave population lived at the beginning of the Bronze Age. Ecsedy’s hypothesis is turned out to be right according to the data available at present time. The eastern European cultural influence and in all probability the presence of ethnic groups could be traced as far as the middle of the Early Bronze Age in the Carpathian Basin. On the grounds of the currently available calibrated radiocarbon data Rassamakin (1999, Tab. 3.2, 129, 168174) placed the period of the Yamnaya culture between 3000/2900-2300/2200 BC. He confirms, that these chronological borders still only represent ’floating borders’. I am inclined to think that much ‘older’ dates are known from certain sites of eastern Europe, the Carpathian Basin, Bulgaria and Romania (2nd half of the 4th millenium BC) might propose the earlier dating of the culture and hereby the earlier dating of its expansion towards the west. Based on the Pit–Grave population’s Early Bronze Age dating, in the Upper Tisza region the ‘hiatus’ between the Baden culture at the end of the Late Copper Age and the first known Early Bronze Age culture, that is the Makó culture could be explained. At present more data is available for the research of some part of the Pit–Grave kurgans’ late dating (at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age). According to the stratigraphy of the Jabuka-Tri humke site the Baden layer was followed by the Kostolac culture’s settlement then finally the Pit–Grave culture settled on the next Eneolithic humus level (Bukviü 1979, 14-18; 1987, 85; Tasiü 1995, 161). The MezĘcsát– Hörcsögös and Tiszavasvári–Gyepáros sites provided similar stratigraphic data where the Pit–Grave culture was built on the Baden culture’s cemetery (Kalicz 1989, 129130, Abb. 4-6; 1998, 169-170, Abb. 7-10). In the case of Debrecen–Dunahalom, the Baden pottery fragments found in the filling of the kurgan also mean a "terminus post quem" with respect to the kurgan’s age (Ecsedy 1979, 16, Pl. 1: 2-8; Kalicz 1998, 169). This is supported by the excavated kurgans in Perlez-Batka C (Pašiüa humka/Pašiütumulus) (Medoviü 1987, 79-82, Abb. 4.; Tasiü 1995, 153) and Padej–Barnahát (Giriü 1982, 102; 1987, 72-73, 76) sites, which were built on the Baden culture’s settlements. In the filling of the mound of Bare (near to Kragujevac) CoĠofeni pottery fragments were found (Srejoviü 1976, 122, sl. 3-5; Tasiü 1995, 73). The CoĠofeni I pottery fragments found in the filling of the kurgan of Bodo excavated in the Rumanian Banat also indicate a „terminus ad quem” or a „terminus post quem” for the ochre grave

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades burial (Stratan 1974, 71-74; Roman 1976a, Pl. 63/4-17; Gumă 1997, 99). More recently, pottery fragments from the Late CoĠofeni (CoĠofeni III.) and Early Bronze Age period (Barczi et al. 2008, Fig. 4.) were discovered in the thin stratum on the border of the second and third construction layers of the kurgan called Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom1. This represents an unambiguous evidence for the presence of the people of the Pit–Grave culture at the beginning of the Carpathian Basin’s Bronze Age. So in all probability, the people of the Pit–Grave culture should be considered as a peculiar eastern factor (the so called ’Yamnaya package’ by Richard Harrison and Volker Heyd) not just in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin, but also in forming the relations of Central Europe at the end of the Late Copper Age and at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age (Ecsedy 1979, 51-52, 57; Harrison and Heyd 2007, 193-203). NEW DISCOVERIES Szentes–BesenyĘhalom HegedĦs (1978) performed a significant rescue excavation on a kurgan in 1975. In the central grave – disturbed by robbing pits from the Late Medieval period and from the Early Modern times – a 50-59 year-old heavily-built man was found (Zoffmann 1978), laying on his back with his head towards west. Compared with the top, in a 460 cm deep rectangular-shaped grave remains of a wood was found both in the top and in the bottom of the burial vault. It is observable for instance in cases of Balmazújváros– Kárhozotthalom (Csalog 1954, 41-43) or the kurgans of Kétegyháza 3 (Ecsedy 1979, 21-24). The dead laid on hide or fur and probably were covered with bulrush mat. Both of his arms were bent at the elbows and rested on his pelvis; and in the area of skull and shoulder remains of ochre could be observed. Derekegyház–Ibolyás-domb In 1981 HegedĦs (1982) performed the excavation of the mound. Two burials of the original kurgan were found. In the ‘A’ grave a 9-10 year old boy was discovered oriented towards south-north and was laid on his back with legs contracted to his right side. His arms were situated along his body in a stretched out position. The organiser of the excavation observed remains of shrouds on the skeleton. In the ‘B’ grave a skeleton of an adult man was laid on his back with legs contracted to his right side and was oriented towards west-east. His arms were bent at the elbows and were rested on his pelvis. In this case the remains of some shroud (veil) could also be traced on the bone, however, remains of ochre were noticed on the sinciput. Kunhegyes–Nagyállás-halom 1

see Horváth in this volume for detailed archaeological, Barczi and Joó, as well as Bucsi for pedological, PetĘ and Cummings for palaeobotanical description

27

In 1993 Csányi and Tárnoki (1995, 34-36, Figures 1, 5, 89) performed an excavation on a kurgan. The kurgan’s central burial was completely destroyed by a Sarmatian robbing pit dug from the centre of the structure. Nevertheless, in the northern and southern direction from the centre of the kurgan three graves of the same age as the kurgan was discovered (Figure 2 and 3). The grave 12 is slightly rounded-cornered and asymmetric rectangular pit, in which a skeleton of a child oriented towards west-east laid on his back; his head and back was chocked up. His arms were bent at; his right arm was placed onto his chest while his left one was placed onto his pelvis. His bent and pulled-up knees leant on the right side. Ochre clods were found in the right side of the skull and in the left side of his pelvis (Figures 2.1, 3.3). Under his skeleton remains of a brown – probably leather – rug/blanket could be identified. The thick, white coloured layer observed over his skeleton and in the filling could indicate a grave covering (probably fur). In the rounded, trapezoid-shaped pit of the grave 14 – in my opinion it was used to cover it with leather – a skeleton of an adult was discovered with his legs pulled up, lying on his back and his head was chocked up similarly to the method used at grave 12. The skeleton was oriented towards west-east. This time the legs leant on the left side. The arms bent at the elbows were placed onto the pelvis (Figures 2.2, 3.1). On this spot remains of white coloured, porous organic substance was also found, which undoubtedly implies textile or fur covering over the dead. Ochre clod was discovered next to the left upper arm. Grave 18 was a round-cornered rectangular pit, in which a skeleton of an adult oriented towards west-east was also found lying in the same way as in grave 14 (Figure 2.3, 3.2). In the bottom of the grave-pit impression of leather could be observed. Above the skeleton remains of the cover (fur?) was found which appeared with loose and white pigmentation. Ochre clod was discovered also in this case, next to the right shoulder. In this case, it could be clearly observed that the legs – pulled up and bent at the knees – just later leant on the left side and got into secondary position as a result of the decay progresses and the soil pressure. It was observed in every grave, that the pit was dug in from above after the structure was raised and roughly into the same depth (Csányi and Tárnoki 1995, 37) which clearly indicate that they could be secondary in-burials. Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom In 1991-92 Istvánovits and Kurucz (Istvánovits and Kurucz 1993, 27; Istvánovits 1994, 27-28) performed a rescue excavation in the kurgan’s disturbed western part because of the disruption of the structure (Figure 4). In the course of the excavation, a settlement and contracted burials, both dated from the Middle Neolithic, were unearthed (Figure 5). Burials brought into connection with the kurgan were the following (:

J. DANI Grave 1 (Figure 6.1, 7.1): Completely disrupted skeleton of an adult without grave furniture. Its direction used to be south-east–north-west. The skeleton was laid on its abdomen. According to the on-site description it was dug into the black filling of the structure, therefore the grave’s speck could not be observed. On the basis of its orientation it probably does not belong to the burials of the kurgan. Grave 2 (Figure 7.3): Also completely disrupted skeleton without grave furniture. Its direction used to be northwest–south-east. On the basis of the abided bones it is likely that it was laid onto his back in an extended position. Grave 3 (Figure 6.2, 7.2): Skeleton of an adult lying on his back in a stretched out position oriented towards northwest–south-east. His arms were laid tightly next to his body in an extended position. Under the left mastoid (processus mastoideus) of the skull, fallen on its left side, a hair-ring made of bronze wire was discovered (Figure 7.4). Its two ends were bent on one another; one of them was flattened and open. The analysis of this piece of jewellery had brought surprising results. The copper was alloyed with zinc and lead. It is an absolutely unusual bronze alloy in this time period (Table 1). Grave 4 (Figure 6.3, 8.1): Disrupted skeleton of an adult lying on his back in an extended position towards northwest–south-east without grave furniture. Grave 5 (Figure 6.4, 8.2): Skeleton of an adult man (?) with damaged skull lying on his back in an extended position oriented towards north-west–south-east without grave furniture. His arms were laid tightly next to his body in a stretched out position. All of the graves were dug into the kurgan’s black filling, thus the graves’ pit could not be observed. Except Grave 1, all burials listed so far were found at the southern side of the kurgan; their orientations therefore are almost completely the same (Figure 5.2). Grave 6 (Figure 9, 10): This is the only burial whose rounded rectangular speck was clearly visible. The infilling of the upper part of the grave was identical with the in filling of the kurgan. In the grave, a skeleton of a colossal adult man was discovered lying on his back in an extended (supine) position oriented towards north-west–south-east without grave furniture. Around the skeleton large quantity of white organic substance remains were found that might be the fission product of the animal fur that used to cover the dead. From both ends of the grave’s pit remains indicative of wooden construction (coffin grooved from log) was found. The grave intersecting the Neolithic ground-level (buried humus layer) and slightly plunging into the substratum was undeniably the most significant and richest burial, although it had no grave furniture. The grave was found about 14 metres far from the current middle of the kurgan in a north–west direction. Accordingly, it undeniably belongs to a man (chief) of higher social status. However, it is not sure that it is the base burial of the kurgan at the same time. 28

On the basis of the identical orientation and laying, it is certain that graves 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are of the same age. The dating and chronological labelling of graves with extended position found under Goran-Slatina tumuli also raise similar questions as the inhumations of Deákhalom (Nikolova 1999, 380, 386). This type of laying position can be classified as Type 1 - inhumation in extended position with extended arms - in the system worked out by Nikolova (Nikolova 1999, 386, Table 22. 14). Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom The Archaeological Department of the Déri Museum performed an excavation on the kurgan called Árkoshalom (or incorrectly ‘Ákos’) preceding the construction phase of the road 4 evading Hajdúszoboszló. The structure is a large-sized kurgan that became threadbare of the continuous usage and natural erosion (Figure 11). The kurgan originally was built on the River Kösely’s high bank being protected from floods and partly covering a settlement from the end of the Middle Neolithic. The kurgan was used several times during the course of history (Figure 12): x A cremated urn grave from the Middle Iron Age was dug in the southern part of the kurgan’s filling. x Numerous rich (Sarmatian) burials from the Roman imperial period were dug into the kurgan’s top which was covered by further filling layer. x In the 10th and 11th centuries (the time of the Hungarian Conquest and in the age of the Árpáds) it was used as a burial place. As a result of it, 246 graves were unearthed at the entire surface of the structure (M. Nepper 2002, 58). x In the Árpád Age a brick kiln of huge size was deepened into the centre of the structure. As the consequence of the secondary usage (mainly due to the brick-kiln) the kurgan’s central burial could be destroyed, since it has no sign after the kurgan’s entire excavation. However, the remains of ‘funeral feast’ relating to the burial turned up. One of the archaeological features (Obj. 331) containing animal bones, used as food and animal sacrifice and related to funeral rites was excavated at the level of the former surface (buried humus layer) (Figure 13.8). From this feature only five animal bones came to light. One of these was a fragment of a cattle tibia, another three (fragments of a metacarpus, a scapula and a radius) belonged to a greater cattle or a smaller auroch. About the fifth bone, a fragment of a vertebra it was possible to state only that it belonged to a cattle/horse sized animal. No chewing, cutting or burning traces were observed on the bones2. A ceramic sherd with cord impression was also discovered among the bits and pieces of bone fragments (Figure 13.4). As a token of the profile, the first filling phase could be related to the original creation of the 2

I would like to express my special thanks to Márta Daróczi-Szabó and László Daróczi-Szabó for the examination of the zoological material.

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades kurgan, while the second earth-filling could be connected to the Sarmatian burials (Figure 12.). Discussion Examining the orientation of the graves, it could be laid down as a fact that except the “A” grave of Derekegyház– Ibolyás-domb the burials of the “B” grave of Derekegyház–Ibolyás-domb, the central grave of Szentes– BesenyĘhalom and of Kunhegyes–Nagyállás-halom are all orientated towards west. The western orientation is considered to be dominant regarding the kurgan burials of Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria (Ecsedy 1979, 41-43). The south–north orientation observed at the “A” grave of Derekegyház–Ibolyás-domb is also common in the Eastern European tribal territory of the Pit–Grave culture. Studying the burial rite in case of every examined grave, the characteristic features of the Pit–Grave culture could be observed (rectangular or rounded rectangular pit-grave deepened into the substratum which in certain cases was lined with wooden construction; laying on the back with legs pulled up at the knees; leather placed under the deceased and leather, fur or bulrush mat placed over it; the ochre pigment spread onto the dead and/or the ochre clod placed into the grave). The first publisher, Makkay had interpreted the grave of the “Bigman” (grave 6) in Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom, as burial of a Pit–Grave chieftain. He had connected the Proto-Europid (with Indo-Iranian language) high stature Pit–Grave and Catacomb males with the early Mycenean rulers (Makkay 2000, 19-20, Fig. 4; Makkay 2006, 9-10, Fig.1 a-b; Makkay 2008, 165-166, Fig. 1). We can interpret the four in-burials (graves 2, 3, 4, 5) excavated under the southern part of Deákhalom and the main grave (grave 6) found in the north-western part of the structure in another way. The north-west–south-east orientation also seems to be uncommon among the known burials in the Trans-Tisza region, however the burial rite of supine position is considered as absolutely unfamiliar. Rassamakin, in the course of analysing the burial rites, classified this peculiar placing manner as burial tradition type I (Rassamakin 1999, 73, Fig. 3.4-5; Rassamakin 2004, 23-35). He stated that this kind of laying position occurs regarding both the simple grave-pits and tumulus burials. Furthermore, it is a characteristic feature of the Kvityana culture that was mainly widespread in the Dnieper region, in the steppe and forest-steppe, in the period of Middle and Late Eneolithic (Rassamakin 1999, Fig.3.2a; Rassamakin 2004, Abb.3-4, Abb. 15a). The proper analogues of the grave 6 can be found among the Kvityana culture’s wooden-chamber burials such as Zvenigorodka XI kurgan-group; grave 3 of kurgan Nr. 7 (Rassamakin 2004 Teil II., 57-58, Taf.177.1); Novoaleksandrovka I kurgan-group, grave Nr. 16 of kurgan Nr. 6 (Rassamakin 2004 Teil II., 40, Taf.119.1). In connection with this culture, it was also a common phenomenon to bury more than one dead into the kurgans (Rassamakin 2004, 30-33). The flattened-ended hair ring made of wire found in grave 5 is a relatively rare find. Its best analogues were found in 29

the Terny and Osokorovka kurgans (Rassamakin 2004, 71, Abb.57.11-12). Since, still no calibrated radiocarbon dates are available from the Kvityana culture sites, therefore Rassamakin made them parallel with the period Tripolye C1-C2 based on the conventional relative chronology and rendered it probable to the absolute dates 3900/3800– 3500/3400 BC (Rassamakin 1999, 87, Tab. 3.2; Rassamakin 2004, 184, Abb.136). Based on the single pottery fragment with cord impressions excavated at the Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom kurgan, it could not be dated with complete certainty, since the food-sacrifice consumed during the funeral feast for the sake of ritual can be considered as a general phenomenon at the communities of both post-Mariupol Kvityana culture (Rassamakin 1999, 83) and Pit–Grave culture (Ecsedy 1979, 44). Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom Two main filling phases of the kurgan located on the bank of Körtvélyes brook (Figure 14, 15, 16, 17) excavated in 1986-89 and in 1998 could be separated. According to the preliminary conveyance Vladár and Lichardus chronologically considered it to be synchronous with the Makó-Glina III-Schneckenberg B, or with the Catacomb culture (Lichardus and Vladár 1996, 31, Taf. 1). However, Kalicz considered the graves to be the youngest Pit–Grave burials whose vessel grave furniture was also brought into connection with the Makó– Schneckenberg–Glina III cultures (Kalicz 1998, 174, Abb. 11-13; Kalicz 1999, 94). Description of grave 4 (Figure 16.1, 18.1) is the following: x Direction: north-east–south-west (towards N: 5’(18.5’) x Relative depth: 138 cm x Absolute depth: 88,7 - 88,8 m x Gender, age: mature man (40-59) (K. Zoffmann 2006, 51) The dead lay on its left side, in a slightly contracted position, with his knees pulled up. His left arm almost completely straight; extended almost as a continuation of the genial tubercle. His right arm, bent in a right angle, is rested across the centre of the chest; the right hand hangs down next to the inner side of the left forearm. The lower 2/3rd of the leg was completely fractured; it must have been disrupted by animals. 18 cm behind the skull of the dead body lay a large, crashed vessel on its side. It had a spherical body and a cylinder shaped neck. We discovered the fragment of a cattle scapula above the vessel; it is uncertain whether the bone found on the same level with the bottom of the grave was grave furniture, or it got there secondarily. Above the right mastoid of the skull, a thick, silver hair ring /Lockenring/ was found, while under the skull, on its left side, likewise near the mastoid a golden hair ring /Lockenring/ was discovered. The bottom of the grave-pit – presumably even the area under the vessel – was covered with some sort of organic substance, which appeared as a brownish red or dark brown pigmentation. The same pigmentation could also

J. DANI x

be observed in the area 7 cm above the skeleton. This could indicate that the dead was covered with a sheet of hide during the burial. Description of the grave furniture: x Corroded, solid, round silver hair ring /Lockenring/ (Figure 18.3)3; Weight: 3.9 g, h.: 2.16 cm, w.: 2.06 cm x Hollow, oval hair ring bent from an electron sheet /Lockenring/ (Figure 18.2)4; Weight: 6.1 g, h: 2.25 cm, w: 1.96 cm x Large, spherical bodied vessel with a cylindershaped neck, and four symmetrically positioned grasping knobs on the body of the vessel. There are worn, vertical lines on the lower part of the vessel’s body (Figure 18.4)5. x Animal bone (animal bone grave furniture?)6

Solid, prolate electron hair ring /Lockenring/ (Figure 19.3)9; Weight: 8.37 g, h: 1.8 cm, w: 1.43 cm x Solid, thick, somewhat oval, silver hair ring /Lockenring/ (Figure 19.4)10; Weight: 10.1 g, h: 1.67 cm, w: 1.45 cm x Knob ended copper axe with handle-tube (Figure 19.6). There are three coils made up of plastic ribs running from the upper part of the handle-hole to the start of the handle-tube, intersecting each other at the handle-tube. Weight: 308.43 g, h.: 15.45 cm, largest w: 2.8 cm, edge w: 2.75 cm, largest th.: 2.94 cm, diameter of the handle-hole: 1.65-1.7 cm (top) and 1.83-1.9 cm (bottom). x Willow leaf shaped copper dagger with spiked grasp (Manyü-type) (Figure 19.7)11; Weight: 202.5 g, h.: 22.77 cm, largest w.: 3.7 cm, largest th.: 0.57 cm x Fashioned, drilled through ochre clod (Figure 19.5)12; Weight: 14.3 g; fragmentary size: 4.2x2.98 cm, largest th. 1.71 cm, diameter: could have been around: 5cm Description of grave 8 (Figure 16.1, 20): Completely disrupted grave. Its direction used to be north-west– south-east or south-east–north-west. Only very small bone fragments turned up from the grave, however the wide-leaved bulrush mat (Typha latifolia L.) (Torma 2006) the dead was lain on was preserved in a very good condition. A brownish, silky, organic substance was observed in the grave, which is probably the remains of the hide (?) used to cover the dead. Absolute depth: 9292,5 m.

Description of grave 7 and 7a (Figure 16.1, 19): x Direction: north-east–south-west 26’ x Relative depth: 135 - 110 cm x Absolute depth: 88,9 - 89,15m x Gender, age: mature man (40-59), a 5-7-year-old child buried next to him /Grave 7a/ (K. Zoffmann 2006, 51) The grave turned up in a very disrupted condition, therefore the position of the dead is very hard to determine (he might have been lying on his back?). There was a 5-7-year-old child buried next to him. Only a fragment of the child’s skull and a few of his smaller bones were found. The adult skeleton was rather incomplete as well. A large, tubby bodied, cylinder necked vessel was placed into the northwestern corner of the grave, with its right side up. Above the skull lay a golden hair ring /Lockenring/. Before the face /cranium viscerale/ there was a copper axe with wooden-handle (made out of beech) (Fagus sylvatica) (Rudner 2006) and with its edge turned towards the face. A copper dagger with spiked grasp was placed across the edge of the axe, at the point of the dagger we found a fashioned ochre lump, which was drilled through in several places, and was originally shaped round, but now flat on one side, 7 and cambered on the other. According to the analyses , the origin of the ochre is unsure. The closest deposits area: the area of Rudabánya (the Aggtelek Karst), the Tokaj-hills and the area of Vaskóh (Transylvania: Béli mountains, Bihar mountains). In this case too, the remains of some sort of organic substance covered the bottom of the grave-pit. Description of the grave furniture: x Sand coloured vessel with flattened spherical body and cylinder shaped neck. There are five, horizontally drilled through knob handles on the body of the vessel (Figure 19.2)8.

Description of grave 9 (Figure 16.1 21.1): x Direction: north-west–south-east x Relative depth: 145-150 cm x Absolute depth: 89,3 m x Gender, age: adult man (23-30) (K. Zoffmann 2006, 51) Rather disrupted grave. The shape of the grave was oval, prolate. The dead lay on his back, his legs were in the so called ‘frog position’. The arm of the dead was in an almost straight position, at a slight distance from the body. The right arm must have been bent at the elbow, the hand must have been rested on the pelvis. The right foot lay close to the left heel, the right foot was in a pressed down position, which gives ground to the assumption that there was some sort of shoe on it. A jug with handle was put with its mouth up into the north-east corner of the grave. The bottom of the grave-pit was covered with an organic substance (hide?), which was sporadically observable. Due to the disruption only the mandible remained from the skull. A dog’s tooth (lower premoralis) turned up from the in filling of the grave, too. Description of the grave furniture: x Black-sand coloured spotted barrel bodied, cylindrical necked jug, with a splaying out edge and a wide ribbon ear starting from the edge. At

3

Inv. No. IV.92.58.1. Inv. No. IV.92.58.1. Inv. No. IV.92.58.2. 6 Inv. No. IV.92.58.3. 7 The analysis of the ochre was carried out by Sándor Szakáll. Special thanks for his work! 8 Inv. No. IV.92.59.5. 4 5

9

Inv. No. IV.92.59.1. Inv. No. IV.92.59.1. Inv. No. IV.92.59.2. 12 Inv. No. IV.92.59.4. 10 11

30

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades the intersection of the body and the neck there are three twin knobs consisting of two small, round sections (Figure 21.2)13.

Grave buried under the first tumulus, deepening into the substratum. The dead was placed into the rounded down rectangular shaped grave-pit. It lay on its left side, in a strongly contracted position. Both arms were bent at the elbow, the hands were put side-by-side in front of the face, the forearms were parallel with each other and the chest. There was no grave furniture.

Description of grave 10 (Figure 16.1, 21.3): x Direction: west–east 52’ x Relative depth: 180 cm x Absolute depth: 87,7 m x Gender, age: mature man (44-50); ochred atlas epistropheus (K. Zoffmann 2006, 51, 53)

Discussion The best analogues with the vessel grave furniture found in the inhumations excavated under Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom are to be found in the pottery craft of the communities of Eastern Hungary and Transylvania from the Early Bronze Age. The parallels with the jug with handle of Grave 9 are mainly known from the burials of the Livezile group (West Transylvania): from AmpoiĠa– Peret from the kurgan grave T VIII/2 (as a grave furniture) and from the kurgan grave T IV. (a fragment from the infilling) (AndriĠoiu 1992, Pl. 14/16, 19; Ciugudean 1991, Abb. 20: 11, Abb. 23: 18; Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 31/4, Fig. 34/18); from the 7a grave of the kurgan Meteú-La Meteúel (Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 46/1); from the 3rd grave of the T I. kurgan Livezile-Baia. Based on the latest calibrated radiocarbon data, it can be dated to 2700–2580 BC, 2780–2580 BC (Ciugudean 1997, 21-22, Fig. 21/1; Ciugudean 1996, 139-143, Fig. 20/4) A similar vessel turned up at an excavation at the Cicău-Săliúte settlement from the Early Bronze Age (Ciugudean 1991, Abb. 25: 3; Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 49/3; Rotea 1993, Pl. X/3). This type of pottery is also available in the find material of the Copăceni group and ùoimuú group (Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 64/4; Fig. 83/7, Gligoreúti–La Holoame).

The dead lay on its right side, in a slightly contracted position. Both arms were bent at the elbow, the hands are placed in a “praying” position before the face. There was a flat grinding stone placed over the brainpan (neurocranium). We found bone fragments of cattle (os ph. II., 2 fragments of astragalus) and horse (fragment of the right side femur proximalis) in the infilling of the grave. Description of the grave furniture: x grey grinding stone made of amphibole andesite (Figure 21.4)14 Description of grave 11 (Figure 16.1, 22.1): x Direction north-west–south-east (?) x Relative depth: 95 cm x Absolute depth: 90,3 m x Gender, age: adult man (?) (23-39) (K. Zoffmann 2006, 53) The grave is strongly disrupted thus the positioning of the dead cannot be safely determined. The dead was placed on a smoothed down bench. There was a tubby bodied, cylindrical necked vessel placed with its mouth up into the north-west corner of the grave. There was 20-30 cm-s of loosely structured infilling above the grave. The archaeologist observed pigmentation indicating metal in connection with the prolate bones. Cattle bones were also found in the infilling of the grave (petrosa bone, upper molaris, ulna). Description of the grave furniture: x Brick coloured amphora, with egg-shaped body and spout neck. There are two horizontally positioned ribbon handles on the abdomen. A rib, articulated by pressing in runs around the bottom of the neck. There are some irregular scratches here and there on the lower position of the vessel (Figure 21.2)15.

The vessels from graves 4 and 7 with spherical bodies, cylindrical necks and horizontally placed grasping knobs or drilled through knob ears on the abdomen side have parallels mainly in the pottery of the Makó culture: from urn graves of Oros–Belterület (Kalicz 1968, Taf. XVI/9; Kalicz 1984, Taf. XXVII/5), HódmezĘvásárhely–Gorzsa (Kalicz and Schreiber 1991, 18. kép: 6), Kiskánya (Csalog 1941, VI. t.: 2) and Budapest XI. Budaörs– RepülĘtér (Schreiber 1972, 1. kép: 9; Kalicz 1984, Taf. XXII/14). The large vessel of the scattered cremated grave excavated in ŠaĐa (Vladár 1966, Abb. 30: 1) and from the 6/61 feature of ýaka site also belong to this group. The best analogy of the spout necked amphora decorated with articulated ribs from Grave 11 is known from the find material of the Livezile group. Among the finds of the Livezile–Dealul Sârbului tumulus (Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 21: 12) there is a similar amphora decorated with three vertical ribs hanging down from the horizontal rib on the bottom of the neck. Another similar vessel was also known from the finds of the kurgan of the ğelna-Rupturi II (Ciugudean 1996, Fig. 38: 11). Furthermore, other fine parallels are known from the find material of Roúia group (EmĘdi 1985, Fig. 8: 6, Fig. 16: 1), Glina culture (Schuster 1997, Fig. 55: 1), Jigodin culture (Roman et al. 1992, Taf. 105: 3-6, 7-8) and Makó culture (Gogâltan 1999, 17. t.: 2, 8).

Description of grave 12 (Figure 16.1,21.3): x Direction: north-west–south-east 44’ x Relative depth: 4.4 m x Absolute depth: 86,4 m x Gender, age: juvenile (15-17) female (?) (K. Zoffmann 2006, 53)

13

Inv. No. IV.92.60.1. Inv. No. IV.92.62.1. The analysis of the stone was carried out by Pál Sümegi. Special thanks for his work! 15 Inv. No. IV.92.61.1 14

31

J. DANI the basis of their functions, these are mostly described as ‘spear-heads’. Even in the case of the perfectly intact specimen from ėrhalom it is only the point that is shaped into a sharp edge, while the sides are blunt. Korenevskij puts these into the 2nd group in his summary on the knives of the Pit–Grave, Catacomb and Poltavka cultures. These so called Manyþ-type daggers, however, turns up primarily in the finds of the Catacomb culture, it also appears in the Poltavka culture, moreover, among the finds of the culture of the many ribbed vessels (Korenevskij 1978, 36-40, 46, Ris. 4, 11-43, Ris. 5). Therefore it is fair to call it a long-lived type. Primas’s and Kuna’s analyses showed that this dagger type of Eastern European origin (Pit-Grave and Catacomb cultures) was spread in SE-Europe as well at the end of the Late Copper Age and the period of the Early Bronze Age (Kuna 1981, 30-32, Taf. XXV.; Primas 1996a, 98100, Abb. 7. 7). Its most western appearance could be the dagger found in the twin burial excavated in Wien– Essling site (Zimmermann 2003, Abb. 1.1; Harrison, Heyd 2007, 201, Fig. 49.).

The best parallel for the copper axe with the handle-tube found in grave 7 is known from Hunyad County (stray find from unknown site, Museum of Rîmnicu-Vîlcea, Romania) (Vulpe 1970, 22, Taf. 56, C3). Similar copper axes are known from Grave 15 from kurgan 9 at Cuconeútii Vechi II. (Moldavia) (Dergaþev 2002, 26, 100-101, Taf. 18.R); from Grave 2 of kurgan 1 at the site of Niznepavlovka V. (Kargaly Region, SW part of the Ural Mountain, Russia) (Chernykh et al. 2002a, Fig. 7: 24; Chernykh et al. 2002b, Ris. 7: 24) relating to the Pit– Grave culture and from the Grave 2 (with a stone cist) of the so-called “Klady” kurgan (North Caucasus, beside Novosvobodnaja) relating to the Maykop culture (Chernykh 1992, 69, Pl. 2: 2; Chernykh et al 2002a, 93). A similar axe with a handle-hole dated to the Copper Age is also known from Herrsching am Ammersee (Oberbayern, Germany) (Pászthory and Mayer 1998, 19, Taf. 1: 1). Based on the morphological resemblance it may be brought into connection with the Eschollbrückentype copper axes with handle-tube as well earlier dated to the end of Cooper Age (Kibbert 1980, 24-25, Taf. 1, 1-2). Recently, this type is dated to the Early Bronze Age (Maran 2007, Abb.1, 176). Beside the morphological resemblance, however, the differences in the size (in the weight) could indicate functional difference as well (Dani and Nepper 2006, 40-41).

On the basis of the XRF analysis (Table 1) carried out by Miklós Kis-Varga (Kis-Varga 2006) we could compare the metal objects with those were found in the kurgan burials of Velika Gruda and Mala Gruda. This comparison showed surprising similarities in the composition of the component elements in certain cases, which led us to the conclusion, that the ore (gold) presumably originates from the same mining place (Dani and Nepper 2006, 40). On the basis of the analyses regarding the profile of the kurgan, we can differentiate primarily between two phases inside the kurgan (Figure 16, 17). Although, based on the results of the radiocarbon measurements (14C) (Table 2) we can differentiate at least three phases among the graves.

The hair rings found in the graves 4 and 7 belong to the group identified by Zaharia as types A and B (Zaharia 1959, 107). The round and oval rings found in the same grave prove that the two types were used together in this period. Parallels to the round Lockenrings were found in the PleniĠa kurgan of the Pit–Grave culture (Zaharia 1959, Abb. 4/2) and grave of Nikopol 1/1938/15 (Häusler 1974, 174, Taf. 47: 3- upper Fig.); furthermore in the burials of Preslav 1/13-a of Catacomb culture (Häusler 1974, 167, Taf. 38: 15), Ilmen 8/2 (Häusler 1974, 150, Taf. 41: 12) and Akkermen I. 20/1 (Häusler 1974, 191, Taf. 72: 3). Both Lockenrings found in the Pit-Grave burial of the kurgan 60/1 in Jackowica have a slightly prolate shape (Häusler 1976, 116, Taf. 22: 10) similar to one of the Lockenrings found in the ėrhalom site.

Grave 12 is the base-burial of the kurgan and belongs to the first phase (Figure 23). Its calibrated 14C age (deb6869; 3346–3309 BC or 3234–3115 BC, respectively) fits well in the calibrated radiocarbon results of the older Pit– Grave burials of Romania, the Ukraine, Bulgaria and Serbia (Forenbaher 1993, 241, 247, Fig. 7; Boyadziev 1995, 176; Kalicz 1998, 174; Kalicz 1999, 94; Boyadziev 1992, 405; Görsdorf and Bojadžiev 1996). The graves orientation towards north-west–south-east is a little bit uncommon regarding the Pit–Grave burials in the Carpathian Basin, since they are usually characterized with western orientation. Regarding the contracted laying position, Rassamakin stated that the Pit–Grave culture adapted the features of the local (autochthonous) communities. Therefore it is understandable that the Pit– Grave also used the contracted burial rite (Rassamakin 1999, 125, 127). Chronologically it is followed by Grave 10 (deb-6639; 3004–2960 BC and 2949–2908 BC) which is considered to be the secondary in-burial in the first kurgan (second phase) (Figure 24). The west–east orientation of the grave seems to be typical among the Pit–Grave culture graves known in the Carpathian Basin. The mature man was contracted in the similar way as in Grave 12, but in this case it was contracted to its right side. The reverse laying should indicate the difference of

Gold hair rings of similar form were found in some of the burials of the Goran–Slatina kurgan group (Primas 1995, 82-83, Fig. 3 A; Kitov et al.1991) and such massive silver rings appeared in the graves of the Zimnicea culture (Alexandrescu 1974, Pl. 9/1-2). Artefacts similar to the copper dagger are known from the 4/6 pit-grave belonging to the Poltavka culture in Ch. Stepan Razin (Häusler 1974, 139, Taf. 13: 12); the 5/2 pit-grave burial in Kolpaþki belonging to the Pit–Grave culture (Häusler 1974, 141-142, Taf. 18: 3), the 1/10 pit-grave burial in Careva Mogila (Häusler 1976, 92, Taf. 20: 15-16), the 520/a pit-grave burial in Zlatopol (Häusler 1976, 124, Taf. 24: ); the 3/6 pit-grave burial in Zamožnoe (Häusler 1976, 153, Taf. 47: 12), and pit-grave in Ch. Popova 306/9 and Solenoe 3/8 (Häusler 1974, 145, 146, Taf. 24: 9, 13), furthermore from graves under the first kurgan in Ch. Chrjašþevskogo (Häusler 1974, 146, Taf. 15: 22) belonging to Catacomb culture and the 1/5 pit-grave burial in ýerevkov (Häusler 1974, 154, Taf. 29: 7). On 32

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades sex (too). Both graves could belong to the III-C group determined by Rassamakin (Rassamakin 1999, Fig.3.4, Fig.3.5, 73; Rasamakin 2004, 55-59, Abb.48.,49). Nikolova describes this type of laying method as Type 6 that is inhumation in crouched aside with crouched arms before the face (Nikolova 1999, Table 22.14.).

OLD FINDS IN NEW PERSPECTIVE

The Early Bronze Age burials (Graves 4, 7-7a, 9, 11) in semicircular position in the south–western and western side of the kurgan and the soil brought upon them comprise the next phase (third phase) (Figure 25). The age of Grave 4 (deb-7182; 2859–2801 BC and 2760–2620 BC) and Grave 9 (deb-6871; 2637–2489 BC) belongs to the same time horizon with the dates of the Livezile group (West Transylvania)and the EH II. „R”-graves of Steno (Leukas) (Ciugudean 1996, 145-147; Ciugudean 1998, 72; Manning 1995, Fig. 2.), which was recently proven by Maran’s typological analyses (Maran 1998, 322, 330-335, Taf. 19-22., Taf. 81). Based on the east/north-east– west/south-west orientation of the mature man from the grave 4 and his contraction to the left side (with his arm underneath characteristically extended), it undoubtedly belongs to the III-A group, as determined by Rassamakin (Rassamakin 1999, Fig.3.4, Fig.3.5, 73; Rasamakin 2004, 50-54, Abb. 42, 44). It is the equivalent of laying type 5 in the Nikolova-system (Type 5, inhumation in crouched on back with one extended and other crouched arm) which is typical not just for the Pit–Grave culture but for the Early Bronze Age cultures in the Balkan (Nikolova 1999, Table 22.14., 388). Despite the disrupted condition of the Grave 7, the lying position of the mature man found here in north-east–south-west position could be observed. Because of the insufficient length between the skull and heel bone (calcaneum), it can be assumed that the legs were pulled up, thus it belongs to II-B group determined by Rassamakin and to the type 3 in the Nikolova-system (Rassamakin 1999, Fig. 3.4, Fig. 3.5, 73; Rassamakin 2004, 43-45, Abb. 36-38.; Nikolova 1999, 386). Despite the disrupted condition of the grave 9, the adult man found here oriented towards north/north-west–south/south-east lay on his back in a characteristic so-called frog fork (originally his legs were also pulled-up). This type of position was absolutely common in the communities of the Pit–Grave culture both in the Carpathian Basin and in Eastern Europe. This – based on its direction – fits well into the II-C group of Rassamakin’s system as well as to the type 3 of Nikolova (Rassamakin 1999, Fig.3.4, Fig.3.5, 73; Rassamakin 2004, 45-48, Abb. 39.; Nikolova 1999, 386). The positioning of the adult man oriented towards north-west–south-east found in grave 11 cannot be safely determined due to the disruption. In the middle of the 2nd fill-in layer of the kurgan, the dating of the plundered grave 8 – that is found on the highest part of the kurgan – is uncertain because of the lack of grave furniture and radiocarbon dates. Presumably, it is of the same age with the graves found in the 3rd phase. In this case, the mat made from bulrush – the only thing that can be analysed from an archaeological point of view – could be viewed as common at the local Pit–Grave communities (recently the robbed, secondary burial in Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom kurgan). 33

Békésszentandrás–Nádas-halom (Site 1/5116) (Figure 26): the edge of the tumulus was disturbed during the road construction between Szarvas and Szentes, then a vessel with handle decorated with the so-called „Wickelschnur” or wound „false” cord turned up (Figure 26.5). On the basis of this, it can be assumed that as grave furniture it might belong to the kurgan’s secondary burial (so it does not belong to the base burial)17. As for its dating, several – the most varied – views emerged (Cucuteni C, Sredny Stog, Catacomb culture, Pit–Grave culture, East Slovakian tumulus graves). At Békésszentandrás–Furugy (Site 1/27) a fragment with similar decoration turned up from the settlement of the Bodrogkeresztúr culture too18. On the basis of the analyses regarding the applied ornamental technique, Roman dated the finds of Békésszentandrás to the first period of the Corded Ware culture, i.e. the period of Bodrogkeresztúr–Cernavodă I– Cucuteni C–SălcuĠa III–Šuplevec–Crnobuki–Bakarno Gumno cultures (Middle Copper Age) (Roman et al. 1992, 35, 38-47; Abb. 2.). Fragments decorated with wound ”false” cord technique also known from Ózd–Stadium (Figure 26.2) (Banner 1956, 100-101, Taf. LXXVII/16; Kalicz 1968, 42, Taf. I/14.) (from a pit of the Late Copper Age Baden culture), and as stray finds from the settlements of the Early Bronze Age Nyírség culture in Nyírbogdány–ėze tag (Figure 13.6) (Kalicz 1968, 43, 67, Taf. I/11) and in Paszab-SzĘlĘhomoka (Figure 26.3) (Kalicz 1968, 43, 67, Taf. I/5). Small bowl decorated in- and outside with similar technique like the fragment found in Ózd turned up as grave furniture of the kurgan excavated in the border of Lohovo (Figure 26.7-8) (Potusnjak 1958, 7576, Tabl.XLV/1a-b, 8). In greater part of the dating regarding the fragments decorated with cords found in the area of Košice, in the Upper Tisza region and in the region of Spiš – beside Ózd–Stadium – the stratigraphical observations of Košice–Barca tell (where the finds decorated with cords turned up from the IV/1 layer of the tell, in the layer of the Baden-culture’s settlement) (Hájek 1961, 61; Budinský-Kriþka 1967, 324, Obr. 49; Vladár 1970, 233234, Obr. 41; Bátora 1983, 194; Roman et al. 1992, 63) as well as the fortified settlement on a high ground in VeĐka Lomnica-Burchbrich (where pottery decorated with cords came to light from the late Baden horizon of the site) (Bátora 1983, 192, no. 35.; 196, no.15, Obr.6) could render help. The similar cord-decorated vessel was found in one of the ochre-grave burials (called M 20) of the Ploieºti–Triaj kurgan – identified by Comºa as an inhumation of the Pit–Grave culture (Comúa 1989, 187, Fig. 6: 2) – is considered to be a good morphological and ornamental analogue to one of the oldest known sporadic find with 16

According to the Archaeological Topography of Hungary (MRT) MRT 8, IV/2, 85-86, 19.t.: 8a-c 18 MRT 8, IV/2, 73-74, 11.t.: 24 17

J. DANI culture as a sporadic item19. In form it is similar to the bowl found at Iža/Izsa but its decoration is the same as the hatched triangle motif on the vessel in Buj, and on the corded finds discovered in the sites of Peútera IgriĠa and Peútera Izbîndiú (EmĘdi 1992, Fig. 5; Fig. 8/13, 17; Fig. 11/61; Fig. 12/62, 73; Fig. 14). Its exact parallel is the similarly internal decorated bowl from Brno–LíšeĖ (known as the site of the Jevišovice B culture and hoard containing a copper axe and a chisel of Fajsz-type) (Novotný 1955, Obr. 1: 6). So, typologically we can classify this sporadic bowl fragment from Halmaj to this period, although we could think – because of the circumstances of the recovery – that it comes from a later period.

cord decoration in Eastern Hungary, called the vessel of Buj (Figure 13.7) (Roska 1914, 418-420, Fig. 1.; Kalicz 1968, 42, Taf. I/13), which was originally a form with handles. Roman placed the vessel decorated with cord found in Ploieº ti-Triaj kurgan to the 4th period of pottery decorated with cord and dated to the post-Glina-Schneckenberg period, whereas he placed the vessel of Buj into the third period (Roman et al 1992, 64, Abb. 7: 27, 104-105, Abb. 9: 3, Taf. 64./1.). According to the similarity of these two vessels, we can assume the contemporaneousness of the two sites and that the vessel of Buj used to be a grave furniture, too (Dani 2001, 132, Tab. 1: 2-3.). On the ground of the original report of the finder, we could identify the site, where the corded vessel was found in 1910. It was during the construction work of the railway of Buj-Balsa. The railway had been crossing only one kurgan north-east to Buj (now it belongs to Paszab, the vicinity is called ’Péntek Aranya’), beside the chanel of Buj. The works had exactly cut one of its burial (Figure 27).

The best analogy of the sporadic corded bowl fragment known from Nagyhalász–Királyhalom archaeological site (Figure 13.9) is the internal decorated bowl with concentric cord impression found in the site of Iža/Izsa (Toþik 1963, 14, Obr. 6/10; NČmejcová-Pavúková 1968, 386, 406-408, Abb. 22, Abb. 28/7-8) and also the sporadic item known from the site of Branþ/Berencs (Vladár 1966, Abb. 33:7). On the historical maps we can see, that Nagyhalász–Királyhalom is a kurgan, too (Figure 29), which indicates that the bowl-fragment from this site could be a grave furniture, as well. The site of Iža/Izsa is dated by the Vuþedol imports found in the archaeological features encoded 1/59 and 36/64 (NČmejcová-Pavúková 1968, 413 ff, Abb. 41; Roman et al. 1992, 63, Abb. 6). On the basis of this the two sporadic items without any artifact relationship can be related to this period. Burger called this type of the internal decorated pedestalled bowls the Iža-type and dated it to the late Eneolithic (Burger 1980, 14, Karte 2).

Besides to the above mentioned analogues, a vessel with handles of similar form and ornament like the one of Buj was found close to one of the Pit–Grave burials of the Akkermen I kurgan (Häusler 1974, Taf. 64: 6). The form and decoration of the cup decorated with cords found in Peútera IgriĠa site (EmĘdi 1992, Fig. 14: 1) is not completely the same as the vessel of Buj, however it could be considered as a good analogy of the latter one as geographically it is the nearest to it. We found the ornamental analogues of the Buj on the vessels of the Central European Corded Ware groups as well. However, in most instances these vessels have different forms (more lengthened, goblet-like form, or cylindrical necks with edges, or cylindrical necks with spherical body) with no handles at all (e.g. Buchvaldek 1998, Obr. 10; Obr. 11). Based on these typological differences, we must share François Bertemes’ view that the vessel of Buj cannot be brought into connection with the Central European circle (Bertemes 1998, 194). Vessels with similar forms of the one of Buj were common at the people of the Pit–Grave culture who were occupying the Moldavian territories.

The fragment of the bowl with both inside and outside cord decoration from Tiszavasvári–Koldusdomb (Figure 13.5) also has to be mentioned here, whose decoration is similar to the items listed above. On the basis of the corded pottery fragment we can assume that the kurgan in Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom (Figure 13.4) is of similar age, as well. Regarding the circumstances of the recovery it cannot be excluded that the corded fragments from BedĘ (Figure 13.1) and Hencida (Figure 13.3) could be the furniture or accompanying finds of the former, entirely disrupted kurgan burials. Typologically the sporadic fragments found in the site of Debrecen–Haláp, Mauer–kaszáló (Figure 13.2) can also be dated to this period. In my opinion the decorated stone battle-axe found at the archaeological site of Tiszaeszlár–TemetĘ (Figure 26.1) can also be dated to the same period. The corded handle fragment found at Vinkovci in the stratum of the Vuþedol culture can also be related to this period (Mozsolics 1942, 45, Abb. 8). By the dating the sporadic corded fragments/vessels found in eastern Hungary the most difficult is the fact that these finds are without relationship and they are very

The decoration of the corded vessel found as a child grave’s furniture in the site of Tiszabábolna–Szilpuszta (Figure 26.6) and the corded amphora turned up in the site of Tápiószentmárton–Attila-domb (Figure 26.4) is similar to the vessel in Buj (hatched triangles). In agreement with Patay we can assume with good reason that both of the vessels similar to the one in Buj were furniture of burials (Patay 1981, 238-239). The internal decorated bowl fragment found in the site of Halmaj–Vasonca brook (excavation of T. Kemenczei) (Figure 28.1) and decorated both inside and outside turned up at one of the archaeological sites of the Nyírség

19

34

Inv. No. HOM 67. 2. 276

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades fragmented in most of the cases, therefore their exact form or decoration analogy is hard to be determined or is not possible at all. The analogues of the corded motifs consisting of hatched triangles can be found for example both among the Corded Ware culture in Central Europe (Schnurkeramik) and among the finds of the Pit–Grave culture. Studying the similarities in form and decoration it can be proved that the corded vessels listed above and known from the area of eastern Hungary cannot be related to the Central European Corded Ware culture, but to the Pit–Grave culture of Eastern Europe.

An increasing number of evidences indicate that the people of the Pit–Grave culture as peculiar ethnic group with East European origin should be considered as one of the important components of the local Early Bronze Age. Thousands of kurgans ranging from the Upper Tisza to the Lower Danube (Figure 1) indicate that we have to take the effects coming from the Eastern European steppe and infiltration of larger and/or smaller populations into account from the period of the Early/Middle Copper Age (Csongrád–KettĘshalom, Decea Mureúului/Marosdécse) till the period of the Early Bronze Age I.

CONCLUSIONS

One of the most important evidences for the presence of the people of the Pit–Grave culture is that tradition of burying under kurgans appears at many cultures at the end of the Copper Age and partially at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age: e.g. Baden (e.g.: Gemer (B. Kovács 1987); Mokrin-Aradjanska humka (Giriü 1974, 21; Giriü 1987, 73); Skorenovac (Garašanin 1958, 39 ff, Pl. 7; Sachsse 2008, 63), Coþofeni (e.g.: Târnava (Nikolov 1976, 38-44; Roman 1986, 30; Garašanin 1987, 33; Alexandrov 1995, 257; Ciugudean 1996, 142), Vuþedol culture (e.g.: Batajnica and Vojka (Tasiü 1959, 30-32; Tasiü 1983, 26; Tasiü 1995, 79), Moldova Veche (Roman 1976b, 145; Roman 1980, 224, Taf. 12: 2-3), Adriatic type of the Vuþedol culture (e.g.: Velika Gruda; Mala Gruda (Primas 1996a); Danilo, Podgorica-Tološi (Govedarica 1989); Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture (GönyĦ (Bóna 1965,); Šurany (Novotná and Paulik 1989); Neusiedl am See (Ruttkay 2002; Ruttkay 2003), Livezile group (West Transylvania) (Ciugudean 1996; Ciugudean 1998). The adoption of customs and rites was not at all unlikely, since these cultures lived simultaneously (synchronous) at least partly with the population of the Pit–Grave culture. Consequently, the elites of the coeval cultures could adapt this burial method. In cases of the Baden, Coþofeni and Vuþedol cultures I should say that the tradition of burying under kurgans is not just the manifestation of the social differentiation and the power of the leading stratum (prestige) (Bóna 1965, 60; Ecsedy 1982, 128), but it alludes to a real connection with an Eastern European population (people of the Pit–Grave or Yamnaya culture) (Harrison and Heyd 2007, 194, 196, 203).

With the main features of those factors and processes at the end of the Copper Age provided having influenced the peculiar development of the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin in the Early Bronze Age, we can make the following conclusion: In the Upper Tisza region (and in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin) the Baden and CoĠofeni cultures can be considered as the two local, autochthonous factors of the cultural landscape at the end of the Copper Age prior to the Bronze Age. Although, in the Transylvanian inner territories the final III. C phase of the CoĠofeni culture is dated to the period of the Early Bronze Age I. (Ciugudean 1996, 139-142, Fig. 96) we cannot reckon with it in the territories examined by us. At present, it is considerably open to question whether there could be late Baden groups living in the Early Bronze Age or – and it seems to be more probably now – they did not live to see the rise of the Early Bronze Age. On the Great Hungarian Plain there is no – archeologically comprehensible – unequivocal evidence, on the basis of which we can assume a relationship (a continuity) between the local inhabitants from Late Copper Age and the new cultural elements from Early Bronze Age. Although the number of the data we have is only few, we can assume that the chronological hiatus between Baden culture and Makó culture can be filled with the presence of the Pit–Grave culture, a special ethnic group of East European origin. At present the most spectacular proof for this are the graves dated to the Early Bronze Age and found under the kurgan of Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom. The anthropological research proves the actual (ethnical) presence20.

Examining the spread and chronological situation of the pottery decorated with cord-impressions, it could be wholly ascertained that they are most often connected to the presence of late Baden or Pit–Grave culture. This process – even if uncertain because of their sporadic presence – could be traced back to Eastern European effects (pottery with cord impressions). The kurgan graves of east Slovakia, earlier connected to the Pit–Grave culture (Budinský-Kriþka 1967, 353; Kalicz 1968, 30), can probably not connected to that. Today it is clearly discernible that the migration of the Corded Ware population in the area bordered by the upper courses of the Dniester, the Western Bug and the Vistula rivers towards south, via the Carpathian mountains’ passes (Lubaczów and Upper Dniester area groups) can provide us explanation to the origin of the kurgan graves of east Slovakia (Novotná 1987, 92-95; Machnik 1992, 272;

The system created by Rassamakin based on the analysis of different burial customs does not necessarily mean chronological differences on certain areas. It is proved on the area between Dnieper and Southern Bug by the fact that the I., II. and III. burial tradition was used on the same area at the same time (Rassamakin 2004, 185). The same study is reinforced by the 3rd phase of Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom where the dead were put in the graves in different ways during the Early Bronze Age.

20

see Zoffman in this volume for detailed anthropological review and summary

35

J. DANI Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeit (4000-500 v.Chr.). München-Rahden/Westf. 1998, 191-209. B. Kovács, Št. 1978. Hügelgräberfelder der Badener Kultur im Slanátal (Vorläufige Bemerkungen zum Bestattungsritus und Chronologie). In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd, 1987, 99-105. Boyadziev, J. 1992. Probleme der Radiokohlenstoffdatierung der Kulturen des Spätäneolitikums und der Frühbronzezeit. Studia Praehistorica 11-12; 389-406. Boyadziev, J. 1995. Chronology of Prehistoric Cultures in Bulgaria. In: Bailey, D. W. and Panayotov, I. (eds.), Prehistoric Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology 22, Madison, Prehistory Press 1995, 149-191. Bóna, I. 1965. The Peoples of southern Origin of the Early Bronze Age in Hungary, I. The Pitvaros Group; II. The Somogyvár Group. Alba Regia 4–5 (1963–64), 1965, 17–63. Bóna, I. 1986. Szabolcs-Szatmár megye régészeti emlékei I. ėskor. [Archaeological remains of Szabolcs-Szatmár county I. - Prehistory] In: Entz, G. (ed.), Szabolcs-Szatmár megye mĦemlékei I. Budapest, 1986, 15–55. (in Hungarian) Bóna, I. 1993. A honfoglalás elĘtti kultúrák és népek. [Cultures and tribes before the Hungarian Conquest] In: Cservenyák L. (ed), Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg megye monográfiája I. Történelem és kultúra. Nyíregyháza, 1993, 63–137. (in Hungarian) Brukner, B., Petroviü, J. and Giriü, M. 1974. Vojvodina u bakarnom i rannom bronzanom dobu. Katalog Vojvidinski Muz. Novi Sad, 1974 Buchvaldek, M. 1978. Otázka kontinuity v þeskomoravském mladším eneolitu. Zur Frage der Kontinuität im jüngeren Äneolithikum in Böhmen und Mähren. Praehistorica 7 - Varia Archaeologica 1, Praha, 1978, 35-64. Buchvaldek, M. 1998. Kultúra se šĖurovou keramikou ve stĜední EvropČ II. Skupiny mezi horním Rýnem, Mohanem a stĜedním Dunajem. Die schnurkeramische Kultur in Mitteleuropa II. Die Gruppen zwischen Oberrhein, Main und mittlerer Donau. Praehistorica XXIII, Praha,1998, 17-60. Budinský-Kriþka, V. 1967. Východoslovenské mohyly. Slovenská Archeológia XV-2, 1967, 277-388 Bukviü, L. 1979. Results of the Researches of the mound near Jabuka. A contribution to the study of the culture of graves under tumuli. Archaeologia Iugoslavica XIX, Beograd, 1979, 14-18. Bukviü, L. 1987. Die ältesten Hügelbestattungen im südlichen Banat. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-BalkanZone während der neolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985 Beograd, 1987, 83-85. Burger, I. 1980. Die chronologische Stellung der Stellung der Fussschalen in den endneolitischen Kulturgruppen Mittel- und Südosteuropas. In:

Dzieduszycka-Machnikowa 1992, 281-282; Machnik and Maþala 1998, 219). The intensive relationship between the two regions are well backed up by the graves discovered in the neighbourhood of Brestov and Hankovce within the frames of a joint Polish-Slovakian microregional programme along the upper course of Tapoly. The Baden sherds found in the covering of the Brestov grave unambiguously date this burial to the period after the Late Copper Age (Machnik and Maþala 1998, 215-219, Abb. 8-12). This connection is backed up by similarities between burial rites (including the cremation tradition at the Lubaczów group) as well as relations between the pottery and stone industry, not just by the geographical closeness. (Novotná 1987, 92-93). Up till now there is only a few late Baden settlements dated with calibrated radiocarbon measurements are known from the time period between 3000-2500 BC (Horváth et al. 2008, Table 1 and 2). Presumably ‘real’ Pit–Grave culture settlements are not present in Eastern Hungary similarly to the situation observed in Serbia and Southern part of Bulgaria (Jovanoviü 1991, 71; Kalþev 2002, 57-58). Behind the Pit–Grave culture kurgans and chiefs we definitely have to see the settlements of the local Late Copper Age or/and Early Bronze Age communities. The slowly assimilated Pit–Grave elite had radically changed the world of the former Late Copper Age from the direction of East to Central Europe. REFERENCES CITED Alexandrescu, A.D. 1974. La nécropole du Bronze ancien de Zimnicea (dép. De Teleorman). Dacia XVIII, Bucarest, 1974, 79-93. Alexandrov, S. 1995. The Early Bronze Age in Western Bulgaria: periodization an cultural definition (Chapter 13). In: Bailey, D. W. and Panayotov, I. (eds.), Prehistoric Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 22., Madison, Prehistory Press 1995, 253-270. AndriĠoiu, I. 1992. CivilizaĠia tracilor din Sud-Vestul Transilvaniei în epoca bronzului. Die Zivilisation der Thraker im Südwesten Transylvaniens. Die Bronzezeit. Bibliotheca Thracologica II, Bucureúti, 1992 Banner, J. 1956. Die Péceler Kultur. Archaelogia Hungarica 35, Budapest, 1956 Barczi, A., Horváth, T., Joó, K., Csanády A., and Dani, J. (2008): Egy alföldi kunhalom feltárása. [Excavation of a kurgan on the Great Hungarian Plain] (In: Csorba, P. and Fazekas, I. (eds.), Tájkutatás– tájökológia, 299-308. Debrecen, Meridián Kiadó (in Hungarian) Bátora, J. 1983. Záver eneolitu a zaþiatok doby bronzovej na východnom Slovensku. Historica Carpathica 14, Košice, 1983, 169-226. Bertemes, F. 1998. Überlegungen zur Datierung und Bedeutung der schnurverzierten Keramik im noröstlichen Karpatenbecken und Siebenbürgen. In: Hänsel, B. and Machnik, J. (eds.), Das Karpatenbecken und die Osteuropäische Steppe. 36

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Dani, J. and M. Nepper, I. 2006. Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom. Tumulus grave from the beginning of the EBA in Eastern Hungary. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 29-48. Dergaþev, V. 2002. Die äneolitischen und bronzezeitlichen Metallfunde aus Moldavien. PBF XX/9, Stuttgart Dimitrijeviü, St. 1979. Vuþedolska kultura i vuþedolski kulturni kompleks. In: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemlja III. – Eneolitsko doba. Sarajevo, 1979, 267. Dinu, M. 1974. Le probléme des tombes á ocre dans les régions orientales de la Roumanie. Preistoria Alpina 10, Trento, 1974, 261-275 Dinnyés I. 1973. Blaskovich Múzeum régészeti gyĦjteménye. [Collection of the Blaskovich Museum] Studia Comitatensia 2, Budapest, 1973, 37–70. (in Hungarian) Dumitrescu, V. 1960. La plus ancienne tombe á incinération trouvée en R.P.R. Dacia IV., Bucureúti, 1960, 69-88 Dzieduszycka-Machnikowa, A. 1992. Die Spaltindustrie der Schnurkeramikkultur in Südostpolen In: Buchvaldek, M. and Strahm, Chr. (eds.), Die kontinentaleuropäischen Gruppen der Kultur mit Schnurkeramik, Schnurkeramik Symposium 1990, Praha-ŠtiĜín. Praehistorica XIX, Praha, 1992, 275282. Ecsedy, I. 1973. Újabb adatok a tiszántúli rézkor történetéhez. New data on the history of the Copper Age in the region beyond the Tisza. A Békés Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 2, Békéscsaba, 1973, 3-40. (in Hungarian) Ecsedy, I. 1975a. Die Grubengrabkurgane und Elemente von Steppenursprung in der ungarischen Frühbronzezeit. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 27, 1975, 277-284. Ecsedy, I. 1975b. Bemerkungen zur Frage der relativen Chronologie der Grubengrab-(Jamnaja-) Kultur und deren Eindringung in Ostungarn. Acta Archaeologica Carpathica XV, Kraków, 1975, 159-162. Ecsedy, I. 1979. The peoples of the pit-grave kurgans in Eastern-Hungary. Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae 1979, Budapest Ecsedy, I. 1981. A kelet-magyarországi rézkor fejlĘdésének fontosabb tényezĘi. On the factors of the Copper Age development in Eastern Hungary. A Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 26, Pécs, 1981, 73–95 Ecsedy, I. 1982. Some steppic and Aegean components of the Early Bronze Age in South-East Europe. In: Todorova, H. (ed.), Thracia Praehistorica. Semaines Philippopolitaines de l’histoire et de la culture Thrace. Plovdiv, 4-19 octobre 1978, Supplementum Pulpudeva 3, Sofia, 1982, 119–131 EmĘdi, I. 1985. Asupra începutului epocii bronzului în Bihor. [Zu den Anfang der Bronzezeit im BihorGebiet.] Thraco-Dacica 6, Bucureúti, 1985, 123-144. Ferenczi, I. 1997. Észrevételek az erdélyi rézkor keleti népi és mĦveltségi elemeivel kapcsolatban. [Erwägungen zu den Elementen östlicher Herkunft in Transsilvanien während des Übergangs vom Neolithikum zur Bronzezeit.] Szolnok Megyei Múzeumi Adattár 33, Szolnok, 1997 (in Hungarian)

Spindler, K. (ed.), Vorzeit zwischen Rhein und Donau. Neue archäologische Forschungen und Funde aus Franken und Altbayern. Erlanger Forschungen Reihe A 26, Erlangen, 1980, 11-45. Chernykh, E.N. 1992. Ancient metallurgy in the USSR. The Early Metal Age. Cambridge, 1992 Chernykh, E.N., Avilova, L.I. and Orlovskaya, L.B. 2002a. Metallurgy of the Circumpontic Area: from unity to disintegration. In: Yalçin, Ü. (ed.), Anatolian Metal II. Der Anschnitt. Zeitschrift für Kunst und Kultur im Bergbau, Beiheft 15, Bochum, 2002, 83100. Chernykh, E.N., Avilova, L. ., Orlovskaya L.B. and Kuzminyh S.V. 2002b. Metallurgija v Cirkumpontijskom Areale: ot edinstvo k raspadu. Rossijskaja Arheologija 2002, No.1, 5-23. (ȿ. ɇ. ɑɟɪɧɵɯ- Ʌ. ɂ. Ⱥɜɢɥɨɜɚ- Ʌ. Ȼ. Ɉɪɥɨɜɫɤɚɹ ɋ. ȼ. Ʉɭɡɶɦɢɧɵɯ: Ɇɟɬɚɥɥɭɪɝɢɹ ɜ ɢɪɤɭɦɩoɧɬɢɣɫɤɨɦ Ⱥɪɟɚɥɟ: ɨɬ ɟɞɢɧɫɬɜɨ ɤ ɪɚɫɩɚɞɭ.) Ɋɨɫɫɢɣɫɤɚɹ Ⱥɪɯɟɨɥɨɝɢɹ 2002, No.1, 5-23. Ciugudean, H. 1991. Zur frühen Bronzezeit in Siebenbürgen im Lichte der Ausgrabungen von AmpoiĠa, jud. Alba. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 66, Berlin, 1991, 78-118 Ciugudean, H. 1996. Epoca timpurie a bronzului în centrul úi sud-vestul Transilvaniei. [The Early Bronze Age in Central and South-Western Transylvania.] Bibliotheca Thracologica XIII., Bucureúti, 1996 Ciugudean, H. 1997. Cercetări privind epoca bronzului úi prima vârstă a fierului în Transilvania. In: Ciugudean, H. (ed.), Studies on the Bronze and first Iron Age in Transylvania. Bibliotheca Musei Apulensis VII, Alba Iulia, 1997 Ciugudean, H. 1998. The early Bronze Age in Western Transylvania. Bibliotheca Musei Apulensis VIII., Alba Iulia, 1998, 67-83. Comúa, E. 1989. Mormintele cu ocru din movile II-1943 de la Ploieúti Triaj. Les tombes á ocre du tumulus II1943 découvertes á Ploieúti Triaj. Thraco-Dacica X, 1989, 181-188. Csallány, D. 1958. Jósa András régészeti és múzeumi vonatkozású hírlapi cikkei (1889-1900). Nyíregyháza, 1958 (in Hungarian) Csallány, D. 1968. Jósa András régészeti és múzeumi vonatkozású hírlapi cikkei (1901-1907). Nyíregyháza, 1968 (in Hungarian) Csallány, D. 1978. Jósa András régészeti és múzeumi vonatkozású hírlapi cikkei 1908-1918. Nyíregyháza, 1978 (in Hungarian) Csalog, J. 1941. A „Vuþedol-Zóki” típusú kerámia lelĘhelyei Tolna vármegyében. Fundorte der Vuþedol-Zóker Keramik in dem Komitate Tolna. Archeológiai ÉrtesítĘ III/II, Budapest, 1941, 6-14. Csalog, J. 1954. A balmazújvárosi Kárhozott-halom feltárása. [Excavation of Kárhozott-halom at Balmazújváros] Folia Archaeologica VI, Budapest, 1954, 37-44. (in Hungarian) Csányi, M. and Tárnoki, J. 1995. Halom-feltárás Kunhegyes határában (Kunhegyes-Nagyálláshalom). In: Ujváry, Z. (ed.), Tanulmányok és közlemények. Ethnica kiadás, Debrecen-Szolnok, 1995, 27-47. (in Hungarian) 37

J. DANI Forenbaher, S. 1993. Radiocarbon dates and absolute chronology of the central European Early Bronze Age. Antiquity 67, 218-256, 1993 Garašanin, M. 1959. Neolithikum und Bronzezzeit in Serbien und Makedonien. Bericht der RömischGermanischen Kommission 39 (1958), Berlin, 1959, 1-130 Garašanin, M. 1987. Kulturhistorische und ethnische Probleme des Äneolithikums an der Unteren Donau. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd, 1987, 31-36. Gazdapusztai, Gy. 1965. Zur Fragen der verbreitung des sogenannten „Ockergräberkultur” in Ungarn. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1963-65, Szeged, 31-38. Gazdapusztai, Gy. 1967. Chronologische Fragen in der alfölder Gruppe der Kurgan-Kultur. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1966-67, Szeged, 91-100. Gimbutas, M. 2000. Das Ende Alteuropas. Der

und ältere Bronzezeit. Nitra, 1958, Bratislava, 1961, 59-76. Harrison, R. and Heyd, V. 2007. The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millenium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I+III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland). Prähistirische Zeitschrift 82, Berlin, 129-214. Häusler, A. 1974. Die Gräber der älteren Ockergrabkultur zwischen Ural und Dnepr. Berlin, 1974 Häusler, A. 1976. Die Gräber der älteren Ockergrabkultur zwischen Dnepr und Karpaten. Berlin, 1976 HegedĦs, K. 1978. Der Tumulus mit dem Grubengrab von Szentes-BesenyĘhalom. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1976-77/1, Szeged, 1978, 27-37. HegedĦs, K. 1982. Derékegyház Ibolyás-domb (Csongrád m.) [Ibolyás-domb at Derekegyház – Csongrád county] Régészeti Füzetek Ser.1 No.35, 1982, 9-10. (in Hungarian) Horváth, T., Svingor, É. and Molnár M. 2008. New radiocarbon dates for the Baden culture. Radiocarbon Vol. 50, Nr. 3, 2008, 447-458. Istvánovits, E. 1994. Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom (SzabolcsSzatmár-Bereg m.) [Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county] Régészeti Füzetek Ser.1 No.46, 1994, 27-28. (in Hungarian) Istvánovits, E. and Kurucz, K. 1993. Tiszavasvári– Deákhalom (Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg m.) [Tiszavasvári-Deákhalom – Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county] Régészeti Füzetek Ser.1 No.45, 1993, 27. (in Hungarian) Jósa, A. 1897. Szabolcsmegyei Ęshalmok. Archaeologiai ÉrtesítĘ XVII, Budapest, 318-325. (in Hungarian) Jovanoviü, B. 1991. Steppenbegräbnisritual im Äneolithikum des Balkanischen Donauraums. (Festschrift für M. Garašanin) Starinar XL-XLI (1989-1990), Beograd, 1991, 67-71. Kalþev, P. 2002. Das frühbronzezeitliche Gräberfeld von Stara Zagora “Bereketska Mogila” (Bulgarien). Saarbrücker Studien und Materialien zur Altertumskunde 8, Bonn Kalicz, N. 1968. Die Frühbronzezeit in Nordost-Ungarn. Archaelogia Hungarica XLV, Budapest, 1968 Kalicz, N. 1984. Die Makó-Kultur. In: Tasiü, N. (ed.), Kulturen der Frühbronzezeit des Karpatenbeckens und Nordbalkans. Beograd, 1984, 93-108. Kalicz, N. 1989. Die chronologische Verhältnisse zwischen der Badener Kultur und den Kurgangräber in Ostungarn. Praehistorica XV, Praha, 1989, 121132. Kalicz, N. 1998. Östliche Beziehungen während der Kupferzeit in Ungarn. In: Hänsel, B. and Machnik, J. (eds.), Das Karpatenbecken und die Osteuropäische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v.Chr.). Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa 12, München, 1998, 163-177. Kalicz, N. 1999. A késĘ rézkori Báden kultúra temetĘje MezĘcsát-Hörcsögösön és Tiszavasvári-Gyepároson. Das Gräberfeld der spätkupferzeitlichen Badener Kultur in MezĘcsát-Hörcsögös und in Tiszavasvári-

Einfall von Steppennomaden aus Südrußland und die Indogermanisierung Mitteleuropas. Archaeolingua, Budapest, 2000. (2nd edition). Giriü, M. 1974. Vojvodina u bakarnom dobu. Katalog Vojvodinski Muz. Novi Sad, 1974 Giriü, M. 1982. Über die Erforschung der Grabhügel in der Wojwodina. Atti del X Simposio Internazionale sulla fine del Neolitico e gli inizi dell’etá del Bronzo in Europa, Lazise-Verona 1980, Verona, 1982, 99105. Giriü, M. 1987. Die Erforschung der äneolitischen Hügelgräber in nördlichen Banat. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd, 1987, 71-76 Gogâltan, F. 1999. A bronzkori lelĘhely értékelése. In: Petercsák, T. and Szabó, J.J. (eds.), Kompolt-Kistér; ÚjkĘkori, bronzkori, szarmata és avar lelĘhely. LeletmentĘ ásatás sz M3-as autópálya nyomvonalán. [A Neolithic, Bronze Age, Sarmatian and Avar site. Rescue excavation at the M3 motorway.] Heves Megyei Régészeti Közlemények, Eger, 1999 (in Hungarian) Görsdorf, J. and Bojadžiev, J. 1996. Zur absoluten Chronologie der bulgarischen Urgeschichte. Berliner 14 C–Datierungen von bulgarischen archäologischen Fundplätzen. Eurasia Antiqua 2, 1996, 105-173. Govedarica, B. 1989. Rano bronzano doba na podruþju istoþnog Jadrana. Centra za Balkanološka Ispitivanja 7, Sarajevo, 1989 Gumă, M. 1997. Epoca bronzului în Banat. Orizonturi cronologice úi manifestări culturale. [The Bronze Age in Banat. Chronological levels and cultural entities.] Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica V, 1997 Hájek, L. 1961. Zur relativen Chronologie des Aeneolithikums und der Bronzezeit in der Ostslowakei. In: Kommission für das Äneolithikum

38

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Gyepáros. A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve 37, Miskolc, 1999, 57-101. (in Hungarian) Kalicz, N. and Schreiber, R. 1991. A SomogyvárVinkovci kultúra Dél-Északi irányú közvetítĘ szerepe a korabronzkorban. [Die Vermittlungsrolle in Süd-Nord Richtung der Somogyvár-Vinkovci-Kultur in der frühen Bronzezeit.] Budapest Régiségei 28, 1991, 9- 43. (in Hungarian) Kis-Varga, M. 2006. X-ray fluorescence analysis of metals from Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom graves. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 50. Kitov, G., Panayotov, I. and Pavlov, P. 1991. Mogilni nekropoli v Loveshkiya kraj. Ranna bronzova epokha (Nekropolut Goran-Slatina). Razkopki i Prouchvaniya 23, Sofia, 1991 Korenevskij, S.N. 1978. O metallicheskikh nozhakh Yamnoj, Poltavkinskoj i Katakombnoj kyl’tury. Les couteaux en metal des cultures de Poltavkino et a inhumations en fosse et en catacombe. Sovetskaja Arheologija 1978/2, Moskva,1978, 33-48. Kovács, I. 1944. A marosdécsei rézkori temetĘ. [La cimetiére de l’âge de cuivre de Marosdécse.] Közlemények az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Történeti-, MĦvészeti- és Néprajzi Tárából IV/1-2, 3-21. (in Hungarian) KĘszegi, F. 1962. Adatok a magyarországi okkersírok kérdéséhez. [Contribution a la question de l’origine des tombes a ocre en Hongrie.] Archaeologiai ÉrtesítĘ 89, Budapest, 15-22. (in Hungarian) Kuna, M. 1981. Zur neolitischen und äneolitischen Kupferverarbeitung im Gebiet Jugoslawiens. O neolitskoj i eneolitskoj obradi bakra na podruþju Jugoslavije. Godišnjak Centra za Balkanološka Ispitivanja XIX, Sarajevo, 1981 K. Zoffmann, Zs.1978: Das anthropologische Material der Ockergräber-Bestattung von SzentesBesenyĘhalom. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1976-77/1, Szeged, 1978, 39-40. K. Zoffmann, Zs. 2006. Anthropological finds of the Pit Grave culture from the Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom site. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 51-58. Lichardus, J. and Vladár, J. 1996. KarpatenbeckenSintašta-Mykene. Ein Beitrag zur Definition der Bronzezeit als historischer Epoche. The Carpathian Basin- Sintašta-Myceae. Contribution to defining the Bronze Age as a historical epoch. Slovenská Archeológia 44-1, Nitra, 1996, 25-94. Machnik, J. 1992. Neue Daten zur Problematik der Schnurkeramikkultur in Südostpolen. In: Buchvaldek, M. and Strahm, Chr. (eds.), Die kontinentaleuropäischen Gruppen der Kultur mit Schnurkeramik, Schnurkeramik Symposium 1990, Praha-ŠtiĜín, Praehistorica XIX, Praha, 1992, 265274. Machnik, J. and Maþala, P. 1998. Die Bedeutung der Karpatenpässe für Kontakte über das Gebirge von der Trichterbecherkultur bis zur Schnurkeramik. In: Hänsel, B.and Machnik, J. (eds.), Das Karpatenbecken und die Osteuropäische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den

vorchristlichen Metallzeit (4000-500 v. Chr.) München-Rahden/Westf., 1998, 213-220. Makkay, J. 2000. The early Mycenaean rulers and the contemporary Early Iranians of the Northeast. Budapest, Published by the author, 2000 Makkay, J. 2006. The oar of Odysseus. Budapest, Published by the author, 2006 Makkay, J. 2000. Antik források – Ęsi szokások. Néhány ókori adat a hajdani vallásos világhoz. [Ancient sources – early ritual beliefs and customs.] A Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve L. Nyíregyháza, 161-190. (in Hungarian) Manning, S.W. 1995. The absolute chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age. Archaeology, Radiocarbon and History. Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 1, Sheffield, 1995 Maran, J. 1998. Kulturwandel auf dem griechischen Festland und dem Kykladen im späten 3. Jahrtausend vor Chr. Teil I-II. UPA 53, Bonn, 1998 Maran, J. 2002. Zur Zeitstellung und Deutung der Kupferäxte vom Typ Eschollbrücken. In: Falkenstein, F., Schade-Lindig, S. and Zeeb-Lanz, A. (eds.), Kumpf, Kalotte, Pfeilschaftglätter. Zwei Leben für die Archäologie. Gedenkschrift für Annemarie Häusser und Helmut Spatz., Internationales Archäologie – Studia honoraria 27. Rahden/Westf. 2008, 173-187. Medoviü, P. 1987. Resultate der Untersuchungen auf drei Grabhügeln in der Gemarkung des Dorfes Perlez im mittleren Banat In: Hügelbestattung in der KarpatenDonau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Hrsg. von D. Srejoviü-N. Tasiü Beograd, 1987, 77-82. M. Nepper, I. 1974. Dannie k raspostraneniju Jamnoj kultury v Vengrii. (Predvoritelnoe svedenie o raskopkah 1969-1970 godov Pjuspekladany-Kinchesdomb). (Ⱦɚɧɧɵɟ ɤ ɪɚɫɩɨɫɬɪɚɧɟɧɢɸ ɹɦɧɨɣ ɤɭɥɶɬɭɪɵ ɜ ȼɟɧɝɪɢɢ. (ɉɪɟɞɜɨɪɢɬɟɥɶɧɨɟ ɫɜɟɞɟɧɢɟ ɨ ɪɚɫɤɨɩɤɚɯ 1969-70 ɝɨɞɨɜ ɉɸɲɩɟɤɥɚɞɚɧɶ-Ʉɢɧɱɟɲɞɨɦɛ). A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1971/2, Szeged, 1974, 111-117. Morintz, S. and Roman, P. 1968. Aspekte des Ausgangs des Äneolithikums und der Übergangsstuffe zur Bronzezeit im Raum der Niederdonau. Dacia XII., Bucureúti, 1968, 45-128. Mozsolics, A. 1942. Zur Frage der Schnurkeramik in Ungarn. Wiener Prähistorische Zeitschrift 29, Wien, 1942, 30 ff MRT 8. Archaeological Topography of Hungary. Jankovich, B. D., Makkay, J. and SzĘke, B. M. (eds.), Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája 8. Békés megye, Szarvasi járás. Budapest, 1989. (in Hungarian) NƟmejcová-Pavúková, V. 1968. Äneolithische Siedlung und Stratigraphie in Iža. Slovenská Archeológia XVI-2, 1968, 353-433. M. Nepper, I. 2002. Hajdú-Bihar megye 10-11. századi sírleletei. 1. rész. In: Kovács, L. and Révész, L. (eds.), Magyarország Honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei. Budapest-Debrecen, 2002. (in Hungarian) 39

J. DANI Roman, P. 1976b. Kontakte der CoĠofeni-Kultur mit den Baden-Kostolac- und Vuþedol-Kulturen im Westen Rumäniens. Istraživanja 5, 1976, Novi Sad, 143-147. Roman, P. 1980. Der „Kostolac-Kultur” - Begriff nach 35 Jahren. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 55/2, Berlin, 1980, 220-227. Roman, P. 1986. Perioada timpurie a epocii bronzului pe teritoriul României. [Période ancienne de l’âge du bronze sur le territoire de Roumanie.] Studii úi de Cercetări Istorie Veche úi Arheologie 37/1, Bucureúti 1986, 29-55. Roman, P., Dodd-OpriĠescu, A. and János, P. 1992. Beitr äge zur Problematik der Schnurverzierten Keramik Südosteuropas. Mainz am Rhein, 1992 Roska, M. 1914. A zsinegdíszes agyagmĦvesség nyomai Magyarországon. Dolgozatok az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárából V, Kolozsvár, 1914, 418-436. (in Hungarian) Rotea, M. 1993. ContribuĠii privind bronzul timpuriu în centrul Transilvaniei. [Contributions á l’étude du bronze ancien dans la Transylvanie centrale.] Thraco-Dacica 14, 1993, 65-86. Rudner, E. 2006. Anthracological examination of the wooden handle of a copper pickaxe from Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom, Grave 7. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 59-60. Ruttkay, E. 2002. Das endneolitische Hügelgrab von Neusiedl am See, Burgenland. Zweite Vorlage – Teil I. Die Fazies Neusiedl. In: EndrĘdi, A. and Kalicz, N. (ed.), Gedenkschrift für R. Kalicz-Schreiber. Budapest Régiségei 36, 2002, 145-170. Ruttkay, E. 2003. Das endneolitische Hügelgrab von Neusiedl am See, Burgenland. Zweite Vorlage – Teil II. Kulturgeschichtliche Aspekte des Zentralgarbes. In: Jerem, E. and Raczky, P. (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für N. Kalicz zum 75. Geburtstag. Archaeolingua 15, Budapest, 2003, 445-474. Sachsse, C. 2008. Baden cultural identities? Late Copper Age funerals reviewed. In: Furholt, M., Szmyt, M. and Zastawny, A. (eds.), The Baden Complex and the Outside World. Proceeding of the 12th Annual Meeting of the EAA 2006, Cracow, Bonn, 2008. 49-68. Schreiber, R. 1972. Adatok Budapest környékének korabronzkorához. [Data to the Early Bronze Age of Budapest.] Archaeológiai ÉrtesítĘ 99, Budapest, 1972, 151-166. (in Hungarian) Schuster, C. 1997. Perioada timpurie a epocii bronzului în bazinele Argeúului úi IalomiĠei Superioare. [Die Frühbronzezeit im Argeú- und IalomiĠa-Becken.] Bibliotheca Thracologica XX, Bucureúti, 1997 Selmeczi, L. 1967. Kora bronzkori nemzettségfĘ sírja Tiszaroffon. [Early Bronze Age grave of a head of a clan at Tiszaroff.] Jászkunság 13. No. 4, Szolnok, 1967, 168 (in Hungarian) Srejoviü, D. 1976. Humke stepskih odlika na teritoriji Srbije. Godišnjak Centra za Balkanološka Ispitivanja XIII, Sarajevo, 1976, 117-130. Stratan, I. 1974. Un mormînt cu ocru de la Bodo (com. Balint, jud. Timiú) Tibiscus III, Timiúoara, 1974, 71-74.

Nikolov, B. 1976. Mogilni pogrebeniya ot rannata bronzova epokha pri Turnava i Knezha, Vrachanski okrug. Arheologija 17(3), Sofija,1976, 38-51. Nikolova, L. 1999. The Balkans in Later Prehistory. Periodization, Chronology and Cultural Development in the Final Copper and Early Bronze Age (Fourth and Third Millenia BC). British Archaeological Reports International Series 791, 1999 Novotná, M. 1987. Die Kultur der Ostslowakischen Hügelgräber und ihre Beziehungen zu den benachbarten Gebieten. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Zone während der Äneolithischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd 1987, 91-97. Novotná, M. and Paulík, J. 1985. Neskoroeneolitická mohyla v Šuranoch, okr. Nové Zámky. Archeologické Rozhledy 41. Praha, 1989, 368-378. Novotný, B. 1955. Slavónska kultúra v ýeskoslovensku. fSlawonische Kultur in der Tschechoslowakei.] Slovenská Archeológia III, 1955, 5-69. Pászthory, K. and Mayer, E. F. 1998. Die Äxte und Beile in Bayern. PBF IX/20, Stuttgart, 1998 Patay, P. 1981. Ein Grab der Schnurkeramik aus der Ungarischen VR. Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 64, Halle, 1981, 237-239. Patay, P. 1987. Topographische Verbreitung der Grabhügel in der Tiefebene des Karpatenbeckens. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd, 1987, 87-90. Potusnjak, F. M. 1958. Arheologichni znahidki bronzovovo ta zaliznovo viki na Zakarpatti. Uzhorodskij Derzavnij Universitet, Uzhorod, 1958 Primas, M. 1995. Gold and silver during the 3rd mill. cal. BC. In: Morteani, G. and Northover, J.P. (eds.), Prehistoric Gold in Europe. Mines, Metallurgy and Manifacture. Dordrecht-Boston-London, 1995 Primas, M. 1996a. Velika Gruda I. Hügelgräber des frühen 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Im Adriagebiet – Velika Gruda, Mala Gruda und ihr Kontext. Tumulus burials of the early 3rd Millenium BC in the Adriatic – Velika Gruda, Mala Gruda and their context. Bonn, 1996 Primas, M. 1996b. Frühes Silber. In: Kovács, T. (ed.), Studien zur Metallindustrie im Karpatenbecken und den benachbarten Regionen. Festschrift für Amália Mozsolics zum 85. Geburtstag. Budapest, 1996, 55-59. Rassamakin, Y. 1999. The Eneolithic of the Back Sea Steppe: Dynamics of cultural and economic development 4500-2300 BC. In: Levine, M., Rassamakin, Y., Kislenko, A. and Tatarintseva, N. (eds.), Late prehistoric exploitation of the Eurasian steppe. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge, 1999, 59-182. Rassamakin, J. J. 2004. Die nordpontische Steppe in der Kupferzeit: Gräber aus der Mitte des 5. Jts. bis Endes des 4. Jts. v. Chr. Arch. Eurasien 17, Mainz, 2004 Roman, P. 1976a Cultura CoĠofeni. [CoĠofeni culture], Bucureúti, 1976

40

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Vulpe, A. 1970. Äxte und Beile in Rumänien I. PBF IX/2, München, 1970 Zaharia, E. 1959. Die Lockenringen von SărataMonteoru und ihre typologischen und chronologischen Beziehungen. Dacia 3, 1959, 103134. Zimmermann, T. 2003. Zwischen Karpaten und Kaukasus – Anmerkungen zu einer ungewöhnlichen Kupferklinge aus Wien-essling. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 33, Mainz, 2003, 469-477. Zoltai, L. I. 1907. A Basahalma megásatása. In: Jelentés a Debreczeni Városi Múzeum 1906.évi régészeti ásatásairól. Múzeumi és Könyvtári ÉrtesítĘ I, 1907, 24-28. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1911. Jelentések halmok megásatásáról. Jelentés Debreczen sz.kir. város múzeuma 1910.évi mĦködésérĘl és állapotáról. [Reports from the Museum of Debrecen at 1910] Debrecen, 1911, 40-46. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1938. Debreceni halmok, hegyek, egyéb mesterséges emelkedések ú.m.: laponyagok, telkek, Ħlések, dombok, gerendák és hátak a város határában, valamint külsĘ birtokain. [Mounds, mountains, other artificial and natural elevations of Debrecen, like depressions, plots, seats, hills, gerends and ridges in the vicinity of the city] Debrecen. (in Hungarian)

Szántó, Zs. A., Molnár, M., Svingor, É. and Mogyorósi Sándorné, M. 2006. Radiocarbon analysis of the Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom's graves. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 48-49. Tasiü, N. 1959. Velika humka kod Batajnice. Arheološki Pregled 1, Beograd, 1959 Tasiü, N. 1983. Jugoslovensko Podunavlje od indoevropske seobe do prodora Skita. Novi SadBeograd, 1983 Tasiü, N. 1995. Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans. Belgrade, 1995 Toþik, A. 1963. K otázke mladého eneolitu na Juhozápdnom Slovensku. [Zur Frage des späten Äneolithikums in der Südwestslowakei.] Študijné Zvesti 11, Nitra, 1963, 5-22. Torma, A. 2006. Plant remains found in grave No. 8 at Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom: An archaeobotanical report. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, Budapest, 61-63. Virágh, D. 1979. Cartographical data of the kurgans in the Tisza region. In: Ecsedy, I. (ed.), The peoples of the pit-grave kurgans in Eastern-Hungary. Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae 1979, Budapest, 119-148. Vladár, J. 1966. Zur Problematik der Kosihy-ýakaGruppe in der Slowakei. Slovenská Archeológia 14., Nitra, 1966, 245-336. Vladár, J. 1970. Skupina Nyírség-Zatín. In: Slovensko v mladšej dobe kamennej. Bratislava, 1970, 224-229.

41

J. DANI Tab. 1. Composition of metals from the kurgan excavated at Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom and Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom (after Kis-Varga 2006, Table 1.) Composition (%) Sample Fe Cu Ag Au Pb Zn Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Grey hair ring from grave 7. 88.6 11.3 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.59.1.) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Yellow hair ring from grave 7. 12.6 34.2 53.0 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.59.1.) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Yellow hair ring from grave 4. 2.3 20.1 77.4 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.58.1.) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Corroded hair ring from grave 4. 14.9 76.3 8.7 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.58.1. -) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Hacker from grave 7. 0.43 99.2 0.01 0.35 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.59.3.) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, Dagger from grave 7. 99.9 0.02 (Inv. No.: DM IV.92.59.2.) Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom, Hair ring from grave 3. 86.7 0.09 3.06 10.0 (Inv. No.: JAM 94.159.1.)

Code deb-6871 deb-7182 deb-6639 deb-6869

Tab. 2. Radiocarbon dates of the graves excavated at Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom archaeological site (after Szántó et al. 2006) Conventional Calendar date G13C(PDB) Sample radiocarbon age cal BC [‰] (BP) Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 9. - 19.53 4060 ± 50 2637–2489 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 4. - 19.58 4135 ± 60 2859–2801, 2760–2620 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 10. - 19.98 4350 ± 40 3004–2960, 2949–2908 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 12. - 19.82 4520 ± 40 3346–3309, 3234–3115

42

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Fig. 1. The end of the Late Copper Age in the Eastern part of the Carpathian Basin

43

J. DANI Fig. 2. The graves under Kunhegyes–Nagyállás-halom: 1. grave 12; 2. grave 14; 3. grave 18 (Photos by K. Kozma, courtesy of M. Csányi and J. Tárnoki)

44

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Fig. 3. The graves under Kunhegyes–Nagyállás-halom: 1. grave 14; 2. grave 18; 3. grave 12 (after Csányi and Tárnoki 1995)

45

J. DANI Fig. 4. The north–west profile of Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom

46

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Fig. 5. 1. Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom and Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom on the map of the Third Military Survey, 2. Contour map of Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom with the graves and the excavated profile

47

J. DANI J. DANI Fig. 6. Kurgan graves from Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom: 1. grave 1, 2. grave 3, 3. grave 4, 4. grave 5

48

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades Fig. 7. Graves under the filling of Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom: 1. grave 1, 2. grave 3, 3. grave 2, 4. hair ring from the grave 3

49

J. DANI Fig. 8. Graves under the filling of Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom: 1. grave 4, 2. grave 5

50

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 9. Photo of grave 6 excavated at Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom

Fig. 10. The grave of the “Bigman” from Tiszavasvári–Deákhalom (grave 6)

51

J. DANI

Fig. 11. Contour map and 3D reconstruction of Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom (compiled by J. Lóki)

52

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 12. Profile of Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom

53

J. DANI

Fig. 13. Finds with cord impression from Eastern Hungary: 1. BedĘ, 2. Debrecen–Haláp, Mauer–kaszáló, 3. Hencida– Csíkostó, 4. and 8. Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom (Object.331/Strat.431), 5. Tiszavasvári–Kuldusdomb, 6. Nyírbogdány–ėzetag, 7. Buj, 9. Nagyhalász–Királyhalom

54

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 14. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom and the west–east profile of the kurgan

55

J. DANI

Fig. 15. Localization of Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: 1. On the map of the First Military Survey, 2. On the map of the Second Military Survey, 3. On the map of the Third Military Survey, 4. On topographic map (EOV; 1:10.000)

56

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 16. 1. Contour map of Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom with the cross section and the excavated graves; 2. The south–north profile 3.

57

J. DANI

Fig. 17. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: 1. The west–east profile 1., 2. The west–east profile 2.

Fig. 18. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 4

58

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 19. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, grave 7 and 7a

59

J. DANI

Fig. 20. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: 1. The outrobbed, destroyed grave 8 (with bulrush mat), 2. Sample from the bulrush mat

60

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 21. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: 1 and 2. grave 9, 3 and 4. grave 10

61

J. DANI

Fig. 22. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: 1 and 2. grave 11, 3. grave 12

62

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 23. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: Contour map and 3D reconstruction of the 1st phase of the kurgan before the erosion and formation of the covering top-soil (compiled by P. Sümegi)

63

J. DANI

Fig. 24. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: Contour map and 3D reconstruction of the 1st phase of the kurgan after the soil formation and erosion (compiled by P. Sümegi)

64

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 25. Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: Contour map and 3D reconstruction of the 2nd phase of the kurgan before disturbance and the excavation (compiled by J. Lóki)

65

J. DANI

Fig. 26. Finds with cord impression from Eastern Hungary: 1. Tiszaeszlár–Graveyard, 2. Ózd–Stadium, 3. Paszab– SzĘlĘhomoka, 4. Tápiószentmárton–Attila-domb (after Dinnyés 1973, II.t:9), 5. Békésszentandrás–Nádas-halom (after MRT 8. IV/2, 19.t.8), 6. Tiszabábolna–Szilpuszta, 7 and 8. Lohovo (Ukraina), grave furniture of a kurgan (courtesy of J. Kobal’)

66

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 27. Localization of the kurgan between Buj and Paszab: 1. On the map of the First Military Survey, 2. On the map of the Second Military Survey, 3. On the map of the Third Military Survey, 4. On topographic map (EOV; 1:10000)

67

J. DANI

Fig. 28. Halmaj–Vasonca brook: stray finds from the Section IV. (depth: 80-110 cm)

68

Research of Pit–Grave culture kurgans in Hungary in the last three decades

Fig. 29. Localization of Nagyhalász–Királyhalom: 1. On the map of the First Military Survey; 2. On the map of the Second Military Survey, 3. On the map of the Third Military Survey, 4. On topographic map (EOV; 1:10000)

69

J. DANI

70

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 4. pp, 71-131.

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom - An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Tünde HORVÁTH Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Archaeological Institute, Úri u. 49., Budapest, 1014 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: In the first part of the paper a case study is presented: the multidisciplinar excavation of HajdúnánásTedej-Lyukas-halom,1,2 one of the typical Pit–Grave kurgans in the Great Hungarian Plain region. The second part of the study would like to illustrate the Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age 1-2 periods with the Boleráz/Baden, CoĠofen, Pit–Grave, Makó and Nyírség cultures at north-eastern Hungary, their connection with the geographical, hydrogeological and climatic parameters of this territory. The focus is on the funeral customs, settlement patterns, and archaeological materials of the researched cultures and on the investigation of their common features in a hypotetical symbiosis, or succesive period of their life.

significant part of the area is covered by sandy grasslands (Festucetum vaginatae, Festuco Corynephoretum). The area is defined by good quality soils formed on loess deposits; the most typical of them is the calcareous chernozem soil. The climate of the micro region is moderately warm and dry (Marosi and Somogyi 1990, 268-275). The Lyukas-halom is situated in the so called Utasér-field in the boundary of the towns of Hajdúnánás and Tiszavasvári (also referred to as Büd and Szentmihály in the Medieval Ages), at the border of Hajdú-Bihar and Szabolcs-Szatmár counties. The EOV coordinates are: X: 824397, Y: 288968; the elevation above sea level is 103,3 m, the relative height of the mound is 6,5 m (Figure 1). The kurgan is presented in the First Ordinance Survey as Szántó-halom (literally Arable mound) (Figure 13-14)3 – and this type of land use was even identified during the research as modern plough trace features in the lower strata of the recent soil.4 The mound was used as a boundary mark during the centuries, and recently acacia trees occupied its surface. Before the present research, the following data was known about the site: according to the typology of Kalicz (1968, 28.) this kurgan belongs to the high, so-called Szabolcs type mounds, with large ground space (additional examples for this category are: Buj–Feketehalom, Tiszeszlár– Potyhalom, Nagykálló–Nagykorhány, all excavated by A. Jósa (1897). The deposit zone of the mound is clearly visible on the surface, defining an area of 14700 m2, from which area the body of the mound occupies only 2200 m2. Due to the acacia forest, the survived part of the mound is in good condition, but unfortunately the trees destroyed its original steppe vegetation (Barczi et al. 2004a). Presently, the territory of the mound is exempted from arable farming, but the neighbouring area is intensively cultivated. The north-western part of the kurgan, in the Szabolcs boundary is cultivated by a private owner from Tiszavasvári, while the south-eastern part is located in Hajdú-Bihar County, and managed by the Tedej Ltd.

Keywords: Pit–Grave kurgans, Carpathian Basin, Great Hungarian Plain, Late Copper Age/Early Bronze Age, Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom INTRODUCTION The survey area is located in north-east Hungary, between the Nyírség and the Hortobágy, in the Hajdúság region, more closely in the Hajdúhát microregion. The archaeological site is situated on the ridge of an alluvial fan covered by loess and loess-clay, at an elevation of 93162 m above sea level. The pre-modern hydrological circumstances of the area were defined by the network of several small abounding streams such as the Vidi, Fürj, Utas, or Kengyel in the drainage area of the Hortobágy River. The direction of the wind is usually north, northeast and south, south-east. The study region belongs to the vegetation region of the Great Hungarian Plain.This region belongs to the Tiszántúl/Crisicum floristic province in the Eupannonicum floristic region, its potential ecological association is the oak-ash-elm forest steppe (Querco-Ulmetum), alkali oak-forests (Pseudovino-Quercetum roboris), and the oak-maple forests on loess (Acerei-tatarici-Quercetum), while

In 1993, during a field survey project connected to the proposed route “A” of the M3 motorway, Márta Sz. Máthé (†) and Zsigmond Hajdú, archaeologists from the Directorate of Debrecen County Museums first observed

1 In this paper the burial is consequently named as a kurgan, referring to those eastern populations who arrived to the Carpathian Basin during the Copper Age and the Bronze Age from the Azovean-Pontus steppe, characterized by kurgan burials. As this term is not only present in most Slavic languages, but its adoption as well as meaning is deeply rooted in Hungarian language, I will use this expression throughout the text instead of the other popular phrase “kunhalom” (Cumanian mound), avoiding the historically erroneous connections of these features to the Medieval Cuman population. Moreover, the term “kurgan” precisely precludes the possibility of substituting the prehistoric burials for natural mounds, the Neolithic as well as Bronze Age tell-settlements, and also the earth mounds from the Árpádian period. See Tóth 2004; and Tóth in this volume for further details! 2 The present paper was supported by the OTKA PUB-C 81728 found.

3 First Ordinance Survey, 1782-1785. The mound named as Szántóhalom (Arable Mound) was labeled as Lyukas-halom (literally Hollowed Mound) in the Second Ordinance Survey (1819-1869), which suggests that the earliest large soil exploitation pits observed in the upper levels of the kurgan can be dated to the period between the two surveys (Figure 4; 13-14). 4 Layer 9 (recent soil B-horizon, Figure 3-4).

71

T. HORVÁTH

At last, due to the described specific circumstances, the investigation of the selected site had become one of the emblematic examples of the kurgan surveys in present day Hungary, which resembled all difficulties of a modern society, including both legal and human attitudes. The targeted investigation was carried out in two research seasons, which will be presented here as the excavation campaigns of 2004 and 2009.9

that the southern part of the mound located in HajdúBihar County was severely disturbed. In September 2000, the calculated destruction was around 30-60% as it was measured by the specialists of the Hortobágy National Park. Thus, the kurgan became listed among the most endangered monuments of the region. The investigation revealed that the exploitation of the soil, the through traffic and the expansion of acacia are those factors, which mostly responsible for the damaged condition of the mound. At the same time, the kurgan was inventoried as one of the most important scenic values of the region (Horváth Tibor 2008).5 Ten years after the first archaeological report, in 2003, István Fodor, leading archaeologist and honorary director of the Hungarian National Museum visited the site together with a local activist, István Bacskai, during the rescue excavation projects of the M3 motorway, and sadly experienced that the mound was further destroyed.6 Despite the law on Natural Reserves coming into force in 1998, which ensured the protection of all prehistoric mounds (tumuli, kurgans, tells), by 2003 the southern “peak” of the kurgan, that is one fourth of the mound was missing (Figure 2.1).7 Due to the exploitation of soil in the northeastern part of the mound, an extensive foxhole system became apparent too, which further disturbed the archaeological features. Moreover, the long-established path, which passed over the kurgan from the north and from the west crossed the central part of the mound, cut and severely condensed the original layers of the archaeological site. Additional robbers’ pits were also observed in the modern soil, but, apart from their considerable depth at places, these cut only the third, loose and lighter deposited layer of the kurgan. Despite all destruction, the general survey suggested that the mound was built over several periods, and its lower stratum, as well as the primary burial has not been affected. In the expectation of finding these undisturbed features, a research team was organized, aiming at the preparation and documentation of the visible layers through an interdisciplinary approach, in order to put the records into an extensive framework of geomorphological, climatic, environmental, as well as chronological database.8

EXCAVATION RESULTS OF HAJDÚNÁNÁS–TEDEJ–LYUKAS-HALOM

THE

The first excavation campaign in 2004 The first archaeological research was completed from the 4th to the 13th October in 2004. The basic aim of this preliminary research was the general documentation and the survey of the mound, which was completed by an excavation, namely the mound was investigated through an east-west directed cross section. The archaeological trench was intended to be positioned in the central line of the kurgan, as the direct continuation of the former disturbance in the south-eastern part (Figure 2).10 The botanical analyses resulted 46 species at the site and in its close surroundings.11 The only protected species of the kurgan is the Aster sedifolius subspecies sedifolius. The undisturbed part of the mound had been planted with acacia trees once ago. According to the observations, four different arborescent and grassy vegetations could be detected. Beginning from the north, the basic species of the abundant undergrowth is Elymus repens, which covers almost 60% of the surveyed territory, and Bromus sterilis. Among monocotyledons, insignificant appearance of Poa angustifolia was documented, which is one of the main taxa of dry loess steppes. The understory vegetation is represented by vague appearances of Rosa canina. The north-eastern sample area is noticeably distinct from the northern part. In the tree strata, the cover of acacia is around 60% too, while of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Debrecen), and Tomasz Goslar from the Poznan Radiocarbon Laboratory. Additional consulting partners were Prof. Nina Morgunova (Orenburg State Pedagogical University, Department of Russian History; Archaeological Laboratory) archaeologist, Dr. Olga Khokhlova (Institute of Physical, Chemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science, Russian Academy of Sciences), palaeopedologist, and Dr. Alexandra A. Golyeva (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences) palaeoecologist. The pollen survey was carried out by Linda Scott Cummings (Palaeo-Research Institute, USA). 9 Here I would like to thank to all contributors of the research project for their devotional work and express my gratitude to that they allowed me to use their results when writing this article. 10 Excavation permits: Hortobágyi National Park 22-68/2004, Cultural Heritage Office 480/3105/5/2004. The project was funded by the following grants: OTKA T-038272, Bólyai scholarship, TéT (Hungarian Science and Technology Foundation) Inter-Governmental Co-operation of Hungary and the Russian Federation (OMFB-00781/2005; projectcode: RUS-7/2004), and the international scholarly collaboration between the Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Institute of Geography, as well as the Institute of Physical, Chemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science, Russian Academy of Sciences. 11 The coenological sampling was carried out by Károly Penksza, whom I am especially grateful for permitting access to his findings (see Penksza et al. for more details in this volume).

5 In 1996 an extensive research started in Hungary to survey all existing kurgans (Cuman mound-project). The results were digitalized and available in Delphi programme, with the help of the software entitled Cadastre of Listed Cuman mounds I. (Tóth and Tóth 2004, see more details Tóth and Tóth in this volume). 6 Here I would like to express my thanks and gratitude for the help and the information. The amount of the missing soil was calculated as 1500 m3, which had to be re-purchased during the recultivation in 2009 because of the illegal exploitation. 7 From the 24/1991 Order of the Houses of the Parliament, and 3515/1991 Order of the Prime Minister, later the Act LIII of 1996, Chapter III, II. §. 8 The archaeological coordinator was the Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (project leader: Eszter Bánffy, D.Sc.), the appointed representatives were Tünde Horváth and János Dani on behalf of the local Hajdú–Bihar County Museums Directorate, Debrecen. The soil macromorphological, palaeoenviromental research was directed by Attila Barczi from the Szent István University (GödöllĘ), Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, the malacological survey was led by Pál Sümegi from the University of Szeged, Department of Geology and Palaeontology. The radiocarbon dates were measured by Mihály Molnár, Institute of Nuclear Research

72

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) At the same time the detailed outline as well as the relief map of the kurgan was drawn on the basis of approximately 600 measured GPS points taken by a LEICA SR520 apparatus. (Figure 3.3–6).13 Moreover, in this zone geological sampling was accomplished in a grid system by a hand operated Pürckhauer soil sampler.14 According to this, the base sediment of the site is poor quality loess-type deposit. The determinant soil type is the chernozem soil, three variants of which were detected, namely alkaline, calcareous and meadow chernozem types. The soil formation process point to humus formation, however, the inappropriate agricultural techniques caused the degradation of the structure, and the alkalization of the upper soil layers.

50% of the understory vegetation is defined by Sambucus nigra. Among the few documented steppe vegetation Agropyron repens was the dominant species. In the southern direction, all vegetation layers change considerably, the undergrowth is defined by Anthriscus cerefolium and Bromus sterilis, in the understory mainly Sambucus nigra was found, while in the tree strata the cover of acacia declines. The most characteristic vegetation element in the peak region of the kurgan is Agropyron repens, while hardly any Bromus sterilis was detected. Among dicotyledons, Carduus acanthoides occurs frequently. Accordingly, the floristic vegetation of the kurgan can be described as being destitute in species, and consists of severely degraded plant communities. Concerning loess steppe vegetation the degraded stocks of Salvio-Festucetum rupicolae formations are the predominant species, while the body of the kurgan is typified by Bromo sterili-Robinetum communities. The numerous intrusions and destructions such as the digging of pits and the plantation of acacia trees transformed the original character of the habitat. More unluckily, the mound is connected to the neighbouring plough fields without considerable buffer zone.

Simultaneously, the temporarily high water levels support the appearance of meadow type floristic compositions. The supposed deposit zone of the kurgan was covered by anthropogenic influence; the original conditions can only be reconstructed in the north-western part of the mound (Figure 3). Among the most characteristic soil types, the ploughed calcareous chernozem soil is degrading; the structure is fine, crumbly, with a clogged base horizon. Its acidity is neutral, the carbonate content suggest minor alkalization. The humus content is moderate, the colour is dark (10 YR 3/1).15 In the chernozem B-horizon, between 30-70 cm depth, carbonate deposit can be found, whose colour is light, greyish, and easily decomposes to grains. This stratum is fertile, rich in krotovina, its humus and carbonate content is satisfactory. The parent material (Chorizon) is loess-like (2.5Y 6/4), slightly crumbled (polygenetic development, infusion loess, or fluvial sediment?), with pedocal veins. The texture is adobe; the conductance in the segment is even (Barczi et al. 2006a; Barczi et al. 2006b; Barczi et al. 2006c).

In the same year, all the nearby kurgans around the Lyukas-halom were mapped in the Hajdúnánás area, in order to select additional objects for a planned investigation in the near future.12 12 The project was supported by István Bacskai and the Ligetszépe Conservationist Association of Hajdúnánás, whose familiarity with the local circumstances largely helped the research project. Many thanks for their assistance! Here I would like to refer to some of their information on additional mounds in the close neighbourhood of the researched site: 1. Testhalom or Rácdomb: located at the edge of the town Hajdúnánás according to the local popular beliefs, Rác people of Vid were buried there who were killed by local Hajdú troops. It is a small mound, with a stretching ridge overgrown by a grassy vegetation, which is not a kurgan. 2. Nagy-Vidi halom. Without further investigation it cannot be stated whether it is kurgan or/and a tell. One side seems to be intact, smaller kurgan, the other part is severly and continuously disturbed and flattened larger tell–settlement part. The close surroundings of the mound is intensively cultivated, significant finds were collected (sherds, animal bone fragments, stone tools) dating to the Tisza- or more characteristically to the Tiszapolgár horizon. Not far from this mound, the line of a prehistoric meander was detected. Thus, most probably a Tiszapolgár settlement was located along the waterflow. 3. Köveshalom: Árpádian Age site with a church and cemetery. Interestingly, a settlement was not located there. Neither pottery fragments nor spots of houses were observed. The mound is continuously endangered and destroyed by ploughing. 4. Zöld-halom: a double natural ridge, which cannot be identified as a kurgan. It is a Neolithic tell–settlement and near to it an Early Copper Age cemetery can be found. 5. TedejTemplom domb: it is situated on the first ridge along the former course of the Tisza River, in the direction of Tedej. It is a Late Medieval settlement site and a Lutheran church, in which a service was held as late as 1631. 6. Fürj-halom: according to the descriptions it was a triplemound, but today only two mounds can be clearly observed. Among the three small mounds, one is a kurgan, while the other two are rather natural sand ridges. The body of the kurgan is intact, it would be worth to study its vegetation in details. Not far from the kurgan, the burials of the Gepids were unearthed during rescue excavation projects of the M3 Motorway. 7. Fekete-halom: an intact kurgan, its base is being ploughed, but worthwhile for botanical research. Near the kurgan seven Early Bronze Age, Nyírság culture inhumation burials were found (these may also point to the emergence of the kurgan burial!), moreover at the same location a Scythian cemetery was excavated during a rescue excavation project of the M3 Motorway (Dani 2004). Its soil was analysed by the research group of the Szent István University (Barczi 2009).

During the field survey, an Early Neolithic site was located south from the tumulus, on a ridge, along a once natural waterflow (Figure 1.1). Thus, it is probable that those scattered Neolithic pottery fragments, which were found in the layers of the mound, originally belonged to the deposit of this earlier site, or maybe the extensive Neolithic site extend to the site of the kurgan. In the Ahorizon of the palaeosoil heaped animal bones and some discoloured patches were identified as settlement features, which were dated to the period of the Early Neolithic time by 14C (Deb-12788, see Table 1,), which showed that this cannot be connected to the builders of the kurgan (Figure 2.4).16

13 The recording was done by Márton Vona, the geodesic data were summarized by the Archeodata’98 Bt., whom I feel indebted for their professional contribution. 14 The soil analyses were completed by Attila Barczi, I am grateful for his work. 15 According to the Munsell Soil Colour Chart. 16 Identified archeozoological finds: Bos taurus L.–slightly fragmented right astragalus of a mature cattle, total length: 83 mm, distal width: 55,3 mm; fragment of a femur diaphyzes; distal fragment of the right tibia. Ovis aries/Capra hircus–sheep/goat left side mandibula fragment with teeth from P3 till M3, tooth bed (P2-M3), length: 72 mm–most probably belonged to an aged animal. See the mature M3 tooth and the overall wornness of the remains! Flat bone and short bone fragments of an unidentified mammal. I would like to thank the help of Erika Gál (AI of HAS) who helped with the classification.

73

T. HORVÁTH

- Layer 10: recent layer: densely interlaced by herb roots, dusty-crumbly structured chernozem A-horizon, 0.40-0 m.; for 14C date: see Table 1, 3. sample. - Layer 11: a depression detected in the western part of the mound: clayish, meadow-like, with columned structure, sack-sediment, black, 14C date: see Table 1, 4. sample). - Layer 12: identical with Layer 11, observed in the eastern part of the tumulus.

The archaeological sondage trench was deepened along the central axis down to the B/C transitional soil horizon, in a width of approximately 2-3 m. After cross cutting the kurgan its measured diameter was more than 42 m and its height was around 12 m. The documented layers of the cross section was described as follows, starting from the bottom, between 11.60-11.70 m from the western fix point “A” of the section wall (Figure 2): - Layer 0: palaeosoil C-horizon: yellow, adobe–like, fresh, moist, strongly calcareous, 5.60-5.10 m. - Layer 1: palaeosoil B/C transitional horizon: mixed in colours, transitional horizon between the parent material and the chernozem B-horizon. It is characterized by a decreasing presence of humus, adobe-like texture, and an increasing pedocal (calcareous veins, carbonate precipitatiobs) content. The pH is neutral–slightly alkaline. No structural remains were detected. Wet layer, its moistness is considerable, 5.10-5.00 m.17 -Layer 2: palaeosoil B-horizon: yellowish-brownish-grey, mixed with krotovina, transitional chernozem horizon, 5.00-4.55 m.; for 14C date: see Table 1, 5. sample. - Layer 3: palaeosoil A-horizon: dark brown, with sharp contours, adobe-textured, structured, consists of carbonate precipitation, rich in krotovina and roots, 4.554.25 m.; for 14C date: see Table 1, 1. sample. -Layer 4: cultural Layer 1–the earliest deposit layer of the kurgan: brownish, rust-dotted, mixed in colours, 4.25-3.20 m. - Layer 4/5: the transitional horizon between two layers, the closing strata of the earliest deposit. -Layer 5: Cultural Layer 2–the presumed second deposit layer of the tumulus: modestly mixed with palaeokrotovina, greyish-yellowish-brown, rust-dotted, with rusty spots, 3.20-2.40 m. -Layer 6: palaeosoil 2–the closing horizon of the supposed second deposit of the kurgan: 10-15 cm thick, greyish-black, with modest traces of humus, slightly developed palaeosoil A-horizon 2.40-2.30 m.; for 14C date: see Table 1, 2. sample.18 -Layer 7: Cultural Layer 3: the third deposit layer of the kurgan, multicoloured, with yellowish-brownish dots, which are presumably krotovina, 2.30-1.70 m. -Layer 8: strong precipitations in that layer, which slightly follows the contour of the mound as well as the rain fall leaking line, 1.70-1.40 m. - Layer 9: recent soil B-horizon: crumbly-structured, brown adobe-textured, chernozem transitional horizon, rich in krotovina, 1.40-0.40 m.

The stratigraphic as well as geomorphologic results suggest that the kurgan was built of three individual deposit layers (Figure 4). The earliest anthropological layer (Layer 4, height: 2,5 m; diameter 27 m) was the most solid as well as compressed, which significantly differed from later, darker depository levels. This was not only because it was pressed by the later sediments, but because it consisted of different soil types, moreover in the earliest phase probably more attention was paid to the building of the burial place and as a result the earliest part of the kurgan was more thoroughly made. The observations suggested that this primary layer remained undisturbed, which allowed to infer that the primary burial of the kurgan can be found in its original arrangement. According to the stratigraphic position of the following layers, this first building level was instantly followed by the second construction phase (second building phase, Layer 5), which raised the height of the tumulus by 50%, but the ground plan of the mound remained unaltered. This second stratum was made of similar soil as the first phase, but it cannot be excluded that morphological differences are the direct evidences of a definite geochemical boundary, which was formed long after the construction. Presently archaeological methods cannot define the exact interval, which might have passed during the two building phases. However, no natural soil formation was detected between the layers, which would indicate that the body of the kurgan was left open for a longer period.19 In the case of the second and the third building phases Layer 6 is a naturally formed sediment indicating that there must have been a break between the construction phases. Interestingly, in that natural deposit, more pottery sherds were collected as stray finds. One of them was dated to the phase III of the CoĠofeni culture (Figure 2.5; 5.2).20 Besides, two additional rough, brushed pot body

The 14C date of the animal remains: 7720 ±80 BP, 6620–6470 cal BC, 2 ı (see Table 1, 6. sample). 17 Supplemented by the results of the excavation in 2009! 18 The fact that the stratigraphically later Layer 6 can be dated earlier than the palaeosoil A-horizon (Layer 3), which was buried underneath can be explained by the few mineralized organic remains in the soil, because the 14C dating was accomplished from soil samples (apart from Neolithic animal bone remains). Consequently, those 14C data from humus cannot be directly used for archaeological dating, they refer to the age of the soil, not directly to the age of the kurgan’s reconstruction. These should be rather interpreted as approximate data (Molnár 2004), however, they correlate well with the dating of the samples from archaeological finds unearthed in 2009 (see Molnár and Svingor in this volume for detailed description).

19 This presupposition was strengthened by the excavation results in 2009, which did not result archaeological features or finds from the period between the first and the second building phases. 20 Body fragment of a globular pot. Brown and orange-coloured, weathered, tempered with crushed clay (Figure 5.2). The decoration is made of dense row of Furchenstich-like stab-and-drag pattern: the belly part is ornamented with a triangle framework under two horizontal lines. The horizontal lines are not interrupted by the starting of a lug or a handle. Fragments, ornamented with similar techniques and motifs are known from Mihályfalva/Boarta (Roman 1976, Pl. 83/3, 15; Pl. 86/5); HerkulesfürdĘ/Băile Herculane–Peútera–HoĠilor (Roman 1976, Pl. 78/5, Pl. 109/2; Ciugudean 2000, Pl. 95/5); Kisompoly/Poiana Ampoiului– Piatra Corbului (Ciugudean 2000, Pl. 77/1); Meteú–„Piatra Peúterii” (Ciugudean 2000, Pl. 78/1-2, Pl. 79/1); MezĘsámsond/Sincai „Cetatea

74

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) fragments were revealed,21 which can be definitely dated to the Early Bronze Age (Figure 5.1, 3, 4-5). These remains may be used as indicators for the dating of the deposits of the mound, both preceding and following Layer 6. It seems that the first and the second building phases of the kurgan cannot be dated after phase III of the CoĠofen culture,22 which, according to the relative chronology of the north-east part of the Carpathian Basin means the intermediary period between the Late Copper Age and the Early Bronze Age. Concerning absolute chronology, it can be dated between 2930–2660 cal BC, upon the 14C data from Kisompoly/Poiana AmpoiuluiPiatra Corbului (Romania), a phase III CoĠofen site.23 According to the Early Bronze Age pottery fragments, the third building phase can definitely be dated to the Early Bronze Age.24 The third construction period (Layers 7-8) was the last, archaeologically detectable building phase, which roughly doubled both the height and the ground plan of the tumulus; the diameter increased withby 16 m, and the height was enlarged by 2.5-3.0 m.

Concerning building techniques, the third phase is the least carefully designed project: multicoloured, without structure, dusty, clogged, but not as condensed as the first or the second building deposits, and due to its position, this layer was most harshly destroyed. The stratum is extensively cut by modern robbers’ pits (five of them are of significant size) as well as krotovina. The deposited soil notably differs from the earlier building phases; it is grey, dotted with yellow spots. The upper stratum (Layer 8) is strongly deposited; coloured with greyish-white veins, and slightly follows the line of the precipitation leaking-line.

Besides, the black, columnal-structured, clay textured sack object, which encompasses the feet of the kurgan, can be linked to the third depositional period. This feature does deepen into the undersoil, thus cannot be interpreted as a later pit (not a fencing ditch or deposit zone used during the building).25

Păgânilor” (Ciugudean 2000, Pl. 91/1); Boksánbánya/Bocúa Montană„ColĠan” sites (Ciugudean 2000, Pl. 102/8). 21 Body fragment of a pot. Brown, tempered with grog, decorated with sparse brushed motifs (Figure 5.1). Body fragment of a pot with roughened, cylindrical neck. Light, orangeish-brownish, weathered, tempered with grog, its decoration is oblique brushing on a spreaded clay glaze (Figure 5.3). 22 The borderland of the Late Baden culture and the CoĠofen culture can be defined around the valley of the River Ér (also known as Érmellék) the Ecsedi marshland in the study area, but, according to the distribution of the archaeological material of the two cultures this did not mean a very sharp dividing line (Figure 12). 23 Ciugudean 2000, 53, Sample 5, Pl. 153: 3755-4260 BP, 2920/28702312-2074 cal BC (1 ı). 24 The relatively late dating of the last phase of the kurgan is not unique. For further data on similarly late date see Jabuka–Tri humke: according to the stratification of the mound the Baden layer was followed by the settlement of the Kostolac culture, covered by an Aeneolithic humus layer, on which a Pit–Grave culture kurgan was ereced (Tasiü 1995, 161). Similar stratigraphic arrangement was observed at MezĘcsát-Hörcsögös and Tiszavasvári-Gyepáros, where the kurgans were built upon a cemetery of the Baden culture (Kalicz 1999, 119-130). In the case of the site at Debrecen-Dunahalom pottery fragments from the Baden-Viss period were found in the depository layer, which were used as terminus post quem dating of the kurgan (Ecsedy 1979, 16). This chronology was also observed in the case of the excavated kurgans at Perlez/Perlesz-Batka C, Pašiüa humka/Pašiü-mound (Medoviü 1987; Tasiü 1995, 153) and Padej/Padé-Barnahát (Giriü 1982, 102), which was both erected upon Baden settlements. In the depository layer of the mound excavated at Bare (near Kragujevac) pottery sherds dated to the CoĠofen period were colleted (Tasiü 1995, 73). The CoĠofen I. ceramics unearthed from the fill of the kurgan excavated at Bodo in Romania were similarly used as „terminus ante quem” or „terminus post quem” for dating the ochre grave burial (Gumă 1997, 99). 25 Its dating can be explained by the quick erodation of Layer 3, however, its structure and colour is completely different in the sack. The columned compactness of the layer can be explained by the presence of the deepened road in this zone, and also by the minor effect of the nonsubsoil originated, filtering precipitation. However, its radiocarbon dating assures that this feature could be connected to the building phase of the mound. Similar features were described at Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom

75

Both Layer 9 and Layer 10 are natural formations, the upper deposit of the modern, recent and disturbed soil. Before sampling morphological investigations were carried out on the cleared section. The carbonate content was checked in every 1 cm. Moreover, the visible concretions of the carbonates were controlled in every 10 cm. Also the visible concretions and other characteristic attributes were described. The palaeosoil buried by the Lyukas-halom (palaeosoil 0; palaeosoil 1) suggest similar conditions as today. The palaeosoil is a well-developed chernozem soil, which formed on loess-like parent material (wetland or infusion loess or maybe transferred parent material). The palaeo B-horizon (Layer 2) is extremely rich in krotovina, it contains considerable amount of carbonates, and the palaeo A-horizon (Layer 3) still preserved its highly favourable fine, crumbly texture. The former soil surface was covered with additional soil removed from its close surroundings. No sign of soil formation was detected on this deposit, which allows inferring that this layer was not opened on the surface for a long time. At the same time on the surface of Layer 5, a morphologically well definable 10-15 cm thick soil had formed. The second palaeosoil (Layer 6), is a inadequately developed soil, with slight humus content and also iron precipitations. The more robust soil formation was prevented and wrapped up by the third building-phase of the kurgan (Layer 7 and Layer 8). The recent chernozem soil developed upon this deposit, which can further be devided into an upper humus-deposited Ahorizon and a lower, lime-deposited, transitional Bhorizon (Layer 9 and Layer 10). According to the micromorphological analyses of the soil samples, the parent material (palaeo C-horizon) contains strong structural and framework elements, while the palaeo A-horizon is more porous, loose-structured, and characterized by more definite micro-aggregations. The samples included significant micro-cristallized calcite precipitation with sparite larger than 5 ȝm. Comparing the two samples it can be deduced that in the case of the sample from Level-C the carbonate was found in the soil matrix and also along the cavities, in the case of the palaeosoil the carbonate was concentrated in the cavities. Beside the carbonate, in the thin section of the parent material needle-like precipitation forms appear, where the (Dani and Nepper 2006, Figure 2, 3) and Kunhegyes-Nagyállás sites (Csányi and Tárnoki 1995, 35, Fig 2).

T. HORVÁTH HORVÁTH , T.

layers 4-5) can be divided into two parts by a geochemical border surface, and bear a resemblance to the palaeosoil, hence it was built of the upper soil containing humus. The second sedimentary stratum (third depository–layer 7) was build up of soils from the surroundings of the mound too, as the continuation of the formerly affected surface, also reaching B-horizon and Chorizon strata. Above the two palaeosoils two redox zones were indicated (layers 6, 8), in which the transformation of silicate minerals, and also the reorganization of the elements led to the formation of inner “salt-cores” as well as “alkali zones”. Similar tendencies were observed for example in the case of the CsípĘ-halom (Barczi 2009). The inner transformation of the Lyukas-halom can be explained by a similar model as it was described at the CsípĘ-halom, however, due to the two building phases, the evolution of the Lyukas-halom seems a bit more complicated (Barczi 2004; Joó et al. 2007).

needles are positioned in an angle rather than parallel. Among the organic substance in C-horizon, several molluscs were observed, while in the palaeosoil botanical remains characterized the polished sections. The samples also included iron and manganese-concretions as well as precipitations. The first deposit (Layer 4) is a clearly mixed layer. The speciality of the polished sample is that also a fine plate structure is apparent. This formation can be the result of the leachment of the clay, or the varying freeze conditions (Gerasimova et al. 1996). Since in this case no trace for the shift of clay or the formation of clay can be presumed, a freeze can be defined as the main cause for this particular structure. Among organic materials, charcoal and other botanical remains were detected. Concerning minerals, mica and quartz were described (Barczi et al. 2006c).26

Concerning the reconstruction of the former environment of the kurgan, the biomorphic analyses played crucial role, since the preservation of the pollens as well as charcoal was low among the similar ecological circumstances (elevation, relatively dry habitat), and the malacological results did not prove satisfying consequences for this paper. Still, the micromorphological and pollen-analytical results complement, and in more cases overlap each other, thus, these data are appropriate to draw consequences on the flora of the site of the mound, as well as the botanical character of the various built levels of the kurgan.27 The palaeoecological circumstances can be most clearly reconstructed from the phytolith and pollen samples that were collected from the cross section of the mound (Barczi et al. 2009). The loess-like parent material might have developed from the dust that had fallen on a temporary wetland environment. This progress had only been partly, superficially influenced by the depository activity of the rivers.

At last, the micro-analytical and geostatistical results (XRF, Rock-Eval, salt-content, factor-, cluster- and discriminant analyses) allow us to conclude that major rearrangement took place in the sediment of the Lyukashalom since it has been built, consequently secondary mineral depositions began. Due to the mobilisation of the elements the originally heterogeneous geochemical profile was followed up by homogeneous zones, divided by geochemical bordering surfaces. The pattern of the individual zones is characterized by continuous transformation, and on the border surfaces there is a sudden change. This model points to the fact that as a consequence of those diffusion processes responsible for the shifting of the elements, the mound had never got to steady state condition. In the case of the Lyukas-halom six geochemical border zones were defined along the section. Synthesizing the results of the geological analyses, all these border surfaces can be further studied (Barczi et al. 2009, for detailed description see Csanádi and M. Tóth in this volume).

The loess-based subsoil might have formed from the mixture of dust falling onto a temporarily water-covered landscape, which was superficially influenced by the post-genetic depository actions of the rivers during their development, while the parent material was more seriously affected by the periodical presence of slow water (palaeo C-horizon). The most interesting part of the biomorphic analyses was the investigation of the palaeosoil A-horizon, due to the frequent appearance of phytoliths, which strengthened the presuppositions that the horizontal sampling level is identical with the former walking level, and the weak degradation of the former upper soil cannot be precluded (the traces of trampling and/or erosion was more robustly marked by the micromorphological analyses).

The lower base of the recent soil’s B-horizon was detected in the depth of 140 cm, which is followed by a redox zone at 180 cm (the lower border of the depository layer during the third building phase), which can be connected to the second stratum of the palaeo A-horizon at a depth of 230 cm (the re-inflating effect of the palaeosoil). The second redox border surface was detected in the depth of 320 cm (boundary between the first and the second depository layers), which can be connected to the swelling soil rich in clayminerals, distinguished at a depth between 380 to 420 cm. From 420 cm the once trampled surface was identified as palaeosoil A-horizon. This stratum is replaced by Bhorizon from 460 cm, whose geochemical characteristics resemble the parent material. The mound was built in two phases, and between the building activities both erosion and soil deposition took place on the second trampled surface. The first phase (first and second depository

At last, the ecological setting was reconstructed as a woodland steppe environment, which had strong biomass productivity, 27 Pollen analysis was carried out by Linda S. Cummings, leader of the malacological investigation was Pál Sümegi, while the phytolith research was headed by Ákos PetĘ (see PetĘ and Cummings; Sümegi and Szilágyi later in this volume).

26

The micromorphological analyses was carried out by Tamás Bucsi. Here I would like to express my gratitude for allowing me to use his results (see Bucsi in this volume for detailed description).

76

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) object was closed by a 10 cm wide feature, probably made of wood. Approximately 60 cm long piece of the white carpet survived, while other parts were destroyed by the robber pit No 4 and the machine operated work. The soil was mixed and light coloured around Feature No. 1. A human patella found during the work proposes that this might have been the site of a human burial originally, which was completely destroyed or robbed. Its stratigraphic position suggests that it might have been the basic burial of the third depository period of the kurgan, described by Layers 7 and 8. Due to the fact that the modern robber pit cut the presumed burial, it cannot be clearly affirmed how the builders of this third mound constructed the burial place (1/ after raising the height of the kurgan the grave was dug into this raised surface, in the centre, in a way that the contours of a modern robber trench are more or less overlapped it; 2/ the burial was placed on the top of the earlier mound, and the third depository layer was piled up afterwards).

thriving floristic associations, and deciduous species grew in smaller clusters, but the overall image of the landscape was dominated by various grassy vegetations. The mosaic pattern of the phytoliths, and the differences observed in their quality in the palaeosoil can be explained by changes in the climate: a more humid, meadow-like vegetation was transformed into a more dry steppean-like meadow with xerophil grasses (or the vegetation had a cyclical transformation scheme as the floods arrived). The first as well as the second depository layers of the mound contained hardly any phytoliths, suggesting an accordance with other types of researches, according which it was kept uncovered for a relatively short period, and it was constructed from the upper horizons of the surrounding territory rich in humus. The sample from Layer 6 between the second and the third depository levels resulted a sample rich in phytoliths again: this indicates a rich floristic environment. The large size of the longcell phytoliths proposes a plantation of raw soil surface and the appearance of a tree-detritus marks the settlement of ligneous plants on the surface of the kurgan mound. These results shows a naturally developed soil structure above the grave.

After Feature No. 1 was documented, during the course of the work it was noticed that along the natural surface borders of the mound (on top of Layer 6; between Layers 4 and 5; and also on the surface of the palaeo A-horizon in Layer 3), a very fine, thin, deposited layer can be traced, identified as the remnant of the former natural vegetation. In this year, also surveying the layers well bellow the excavated features in 2004, it was possible to describe the full genetics of the palaeo soils (A-, B-, B/C-, C-horizons), and also the aforementioned white layer on the top of the palaeo A-horizon (Figure 8.5-6). From its deposit a fragment of a grey, finely polished everted rim of a pot was collected, decorated by scratches bellow the rim, also containing the traces of some organic material (Figure 5.4-5).

The Excavation Campaign in 2009 The second phase of the archaeological research took place between 6-14 July 2009.28 This survey had focused on the archaeological features connectable to the kurgan itself, the primarily aim was to uncover the burials.29 Accordingly, north from our previous sondage, excavated in 2004, but following the same line, a 4 m wide zone was opened for research in the central part of the mound, with a multipurpose machine.30 At the bottom of the third depository layer (Layer 7-8), without any observable feature of contamination in the layer, the first archaeological feature was found (Feature 1), which was identified as the presumable place of a former burial (Figure 3.1; Figure 7.5; Figure 8.2-4). This feature coincided with the bottom layer of the modern robber pit No. 4, starting from the surface of the kurgan. In the relative depth of -260 cm from the geodetic base point, at the bottom of Layer 7, west-east (or east-west?) oriented31 remains of a white carpet (silicified remain of decomposed grassy vegetation) were unearthed. The object was found as a somewhat hollow, 3-5 cm thick feature, woven from organic plant material, which had become compact ashy layer because of self-combustion. Its soft surface was cut by krotovina, and the cross section was documented in the north-eastern section wall. The white organic material’s 14C date is 4270 ±40 BP, 30102850 cal BC, 1ı (see Table 2). The southern side of this

At last, in the geometrical centre of the kurgan, the spot of the base-burial of the first (and second?) building period was discovered, which was dug into the palaeo A-horizon, directly under Feature 1, and it was oriented similarly to Feature 1. Unfortunately, by 2009 this burial was severely disturbed: the intensive fox burrow which was observed in 2004 expanded intensively in vertical directions, and the new openings also reached the first as well as the second building levels of the kurgan. The first indication for the presence of a burial was a human femur found in the palaeo A-horizon, in the fox burrow (Figure 7.1-2). During the disintegration of the feature the presence of the fox burrow revealed that the eastern part of the grave is probably incomplete, and the additional parts are severely disturbed as well (Figure 7.3-4).32 These impressions were proved during the excavation, since at the upper, western part of the burial the fox burrow was splitted in two directions, thus, the shoulder-skull zone of the skeleton was totally destroyed. As a whole, the grave was largely disturbed, at the same time, this area was covered by one meter thick deposit of fresh animal bones and straw, nest by the animals, which layer partly protected the archaeological remains (Figure 6).

28 Excavation permits: KÖH 480/1134/2009. The second campaign was founded by the NKA A-1002–N-5487 project, the OTKA F-67577 and the OTKA PD-73490 projects, and the research was also supported by the Local Council of Hajdúnánás. 29 More burials were expected to be found due to the described situation with the various depository layers. 30 The mechanical work was provided by the Nóra’97 Kft and the Colas Zrt. Here I would like to express my gratitude for their work, especially the help of Zoltán Tóth, and the assistance of the drivers, Antal Ádám, József Juhász and Tibor Tóth! 31 Because of the fragmented nature of the skeleton the precise orientation cannot be clarified.

32 Thus, the cross-section of Feature No. 2 does not reflect the original stratification of the burial’s filling because due to the construction of the grave chamber and the rite, the chamber was originally empty.

77

T. HORVÁTH

arms were along the body, positioned on the pelvis. The hip bones were severely destroyed, only one part of the right side was found (maybe the body/right leg turned to this side?).

Description of Feature No. 2–Grave No. 1 Orientation: south-west 240°– north-east 70°. The grave pit was 140 cm wide, 200 cm long. During the excavation the line of the pit was perceptible: the grave was dug into a homogenous, moderately coffee-brown soil. The grave form was rectangular in the upper part, with slightly rounded corners. The burial pit was relatively large; the depth was approximately one meter. The surface of the grave in the palaeosoil A-horizon (natural soil level) is covered by a grass carpet, whose grain orientation was north-south. Under this layer, thin, white, deposited features were uncovered in various levels at right angles to the previous level in the northern and southern line of the burial pit, which were provisionally identified as silicified remains of grass species. Thus, they might have served as the log-line of the grave pit. The various levels of these features possibly denotes that the covering as well as the lining part of this structure collapsed from the weight of the deposited soil, or because of the foxes’ activity (or both). At the head, the intact remains of a painted, thin (> 5 mm) blanket were found, made of organic animal-originated material up to the line of the burrowing. This layer was decorated by four cm wide red and black perpendicular stripes, at places with narrower white stripes–but this last feature might have belonged to the material of the blanket (Figure 6.3; Figure 9.3-5).33

According to the position of the remained left femur, the legs were flexed. The left heel bone was also uncovered. The upper vertebrae and ribs, as well as the clavicula were also detected, but in “sawdust”-like print.35 In relation to the anthropological definition, in Feature No. 2–Grave No. 1 a Cro-magnon type, adult, 23-39 years old robust man was buried.36 The 14C date for the human bone was 4210 ± 35 BP, 2820-2670 cal BC, 1ı (see Table 2). The bottom of the burial pit was rectangular, smooth, at the edges, at a breadth of roughly 5-10 cm strongly and sharply adjoining to the edges of the grave pit. This characteristic was defined by the Hungarian scholarly literature as a piedestal (“posztamens” in Hungarian) and Jósa (1897, 321), Zoltai (1938), Gazdapusztai (1964, 1965), and after them Ecsedy (1979) also described this phenomenon.37 Yet, it is not likely that this structure is the remain of a platform, onto which the deceased was placed, and which was plastered to the bottom of the grave pit, since no trace or such construction was uncovered. This layer was the top of the palaeo C-horizon, a natural soil stratum, which was most probably levelled and smoothed by the builders for the dead. Presumably, it is the imprint of that sunken fixing framework made of decayed organic material, which once served as the lining of the burial chamber.38 Thus, the roughly 5 cm, sharply breaking now empty part between the bottom of the burial and the lower wall of the grave pit denotes the former width of

The body was lying on the palaeosoil, on C-horizon (Layer 0), on the undisturbed yellow subsoil. The blanket (animal leather, fur, hide) was put onto this level, decorated with painted motifs, from the head, roughly to the line of the shoulders, bellow that it appeared as a brownish-black, glittering feature (remain of tanning tar?).34 At the left side of the hip, it also showed a white colour this, however, similarly to the upper parts was not painting but the original, decayed material of the cover. The sides of this blanket were turned up along the lines of the grave pit (it was especially observed on the western and the northern sides), up to 30 cm height. Moreover, it was documented that the deceased was covered into that blanket (for example around the femur). The body of the dead along the arms and in the line of the hip was dusted with ochre (Figure 6.2; Figure 9.3-4). The reconstructed position of the body was supine, and stretched out. The

35 The bad condition of skeletal remains is not unusual among kurgan burials. This is distinctive especially in such cases where the remains of coloured blankets were discovered. In several cases there were no traces of disturbance and the decay of bones was not the consequence of the immense weight of the burial mound, since the chambers were usually well built constructions. Though, it is possible that soil filtered to the chamber but this could not significantly influence the condition of the bones. The decay of the bones is rather the effect of the richly painted blankets, because the organic paints contained considerable amount of tanning material and tar. The body was wrapped into this material, thus the aggressive chemical agents extracted the collagen content of the bones during the centuries. In the case of Ohat-Dunahalom, DebrecenBasahalom, Sárrétudvari-Balázshalom, Hortobágy-Halászlaponyag kurgans the archaeological and the anthropological data correlates: see Ecsedy 1979; Marcsik 1979. Here I would like to thank the information and all the help of Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann! 36 The anthropological material was described by Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann. The measured height of the body is roughly 176 cm (see K. Zoffmann in this volume for detailed description). 37 István Ecsedy surveyed and documented 21 graves in his work published in 1979, but the majority of these burials were from the excavation materials of Gyula Gazdapusztai. 38 The chamber grave construction as well as its building material is a mystery. Since even traces of the former grass-vegetation was observed, there is no explanation what kind of material filled in the sides of the chambers without any noticeable remains. It was surely not wood, since wooden remains are often documented in the region, for example at Balmazújváros-Kárhozotthalom (Csalog 1954), Debrecen-Basahalom (Zoltai 1914, 86), and numerous additional kurgans at Kétegyháza (Ecsedy 1979, 21-24).

33 Maybe the blanket was only decorated up to this zone, and the documented situation is the intact form. In the case of the Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom kurgan burial – exceptionally resembling the Lyukas-halom – Gazdapusztai (1964) also documented the stripe of the blanket but only until the shoulder part (Figure 11), even though the burial was undisturbed. It can also be considered that the colour ornamentation (see details in the section on the burial rites) on the skull is a result of the blanket with red and black stripes, which is folded back on the body. Similar features were documented by Morgunova (2004, 65-67) in the kurgan excavated at Bolgyirevo. Painted blankets were discovered in the eastern steppe territories in Pit–Grave burials, however, in the Novotitarovszkaja culture in the Kuban region these blankets covered not the bodies, but they were deposited in the grave as the covers of the wagons, which accompanied the burials (Gei 2000, Abb. 33; Anthony 2007, 313, Figure 13.4). 34 Birch-bark (birch-bark tar?) was mentioned in the case of the primary burial at Nagyhegyes-Elep-Mikelapos kurgan (Ecsedy 1979, 18, Figure 4).

78

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) publication of Tibor Horváth on the Hajdúság (2008). Besides, the data from the quoted scholarly literature the Archives of the Hungarian National Museum (Budapest); the Archives of the Hajdú–Bihar County Museums Directorate–Déri Museum (Debrecen); Jász–Nagykun– Szolnok County Museums Directorate–János Damjanich Museum (Szolnok), and the Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County Museums Directorate–András Jósa Museum (Nyíregyháza) was used, in addition to the prehistoric collections, and of course the colleagues’ information.

the wall construction (in accordance with Jósa 1897, Figure 9). The second excavation campaign was closed by the reconstruction of the kurgan. The missing part of the kurgan was rebuilt from humus, and the mound was planted with grass. Moreover, it is planned that the archaeological site will be opened to public with the help of the Hortobágy National Park and the Local Council of Hajdúnánás39 as a tourist path from the nearby main road, with an information board, and also by a web-page, containing the newest scientific results.40

Our primary task was to identify the sites of the most important kurgans, since previous research methods resulted that the kurgans were demolished during the excavations, consequently they are not depicted on recent cartographic material.44 On historic maps mounds were denoted as primary orientation points beside the waters, wetlands or settlements: the identified sites are named in italics, while all those sites, which are mentioned in this present survey is marked with red color (Figure 13, 14, 15). Another point of the mapping was to estimate the changes in the number of the kurgans in the last 200 years, since numerous experts raised attention to the sharp decrease in the number of kurgan sites, especially from the 1950s.45 The potential number of the kurgan burials, their connections with each other influenced scholarly opinions on the burial rites.46

EVALUATION The geographical location of the kurgans in Hungary Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom is situated in the northern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, concerning the distribution pattern of the kurgans in Hungary, it situates in the northern zone, in the Upper-Tisza region (Ecsedy 1979, Figure 3). The most northern kurgan-group is in the Rétköz region, between the Tisza River and the today Lónyai-Canal41 (Tiszaeszlár–Potyhalom, Gáva–Katóhalom, Basahalom– Nagyhalom, Nagykálló–Nagykorhány, Császárszállás– Névtelen-halom, Oros–Nyírjes–Névtelen-halom, Nyírkarász– Gara-halom).

We have tried to reconstruct a potential route from a geographical or rather from a hydrological point of view, along which the eastern steppe groups might have filtered into the Great Hungarian Plain in the Copper Age and Early Bronze Age. Following the expansion zones of the kurgan burials the main route possibly went along the valleys of the Berettyó River and the Körös Rivers, in the direction of the Hortobágy River.47 The Hortobágy and its main tributaries (such as the Kadarcs, the Kösély,48 the

Further down to the south are the neighbouring regions of the Hajdúság and the Hortobágy, where the natural border of their expansion is the Tisza River.42 This territory is bordered by the Nagykunság and the Nagy-Sárrét, as well as the Tiszazug regions, whose borders are the Körös and the Berettyó Rivers. South from this area, only the kurgan-group around Kétegyháza is known from the research period (Ecsedy 1979, 21-33) (Figure 12). Beside the modern maps such as Google Earth and the the geography and hydrology of (Figure 12) the First Ordinance Survey (Arcanum 2004, Figure 13),43 the Second Ordinance Survey (Arcanum 2005, Figure 14), and also the hydrological map of Mátyás Huszár from 1822 about the Körös region (Huszár 1822; Figure 15) was used to compile the general map of the surveyed area. The identification of the kurgans was assembled based upon the National Cadastre of Kurgans, the

44 The survey at Hajdúnánás Lyukas-halom is the first attempt in Hungary when the principal task, beside the archaeological survey, was the reconstruction and the preservation of the kurgan. 45 For example Horváth Tibor (2008, 7.) argues that from the 40000 kurgans today only 4000 is identifiable, or Tóth (2004, 130-131.) claimed that the systematic kurgan survey from 1996 resulted 1692 identifiable kurgans. According to the maps 1135 kurgans disappeared without trace in the last 200 years (70% of the kurgans noticed in the 18th century!). 46 In the eastern steppe areas the kurgan burials are described as extensive and dense fields of mounds, sometimes consisting of several hundreds of burials. This feature has not been observed in Hungary. Here the distance of the kurgans is at least 1-2 km from each other even in the most concentrated kurgan zones. The question is whether it means an alteration in the rites or a sharp decline in population. The 18th century cartographic data suggest that almost surely none of these factors have any role in this pattern: most probably there were broad fields of kurgan burials in the Great Hungarian Plain, thus the rites did not change. Moreover, it is supposed that a relatively large population lived in the region. 47 The Hortobágy River was fed by smaller streams in the meadow areas of recent Tiszapolgár, Hajdúnánás and also by the flood waters of the Tisza River, and flew into the former riverbed of the Berettyó River between recent Dévaványa and Túrkeve (Zoltai 1911, 11). 48 The Kadarcs springs in the meadows of recent Hajdúböszörmény cuts through the borderland of recent Balmazújváros and Debrecen and unites with the Kösély River, which flows into the Hortobágy River at recent Nádudvar (Zoltai 1911, 12).

39

The works are to be completed during the writing of the present study. 40 www.mindenkilapja.hu/lyukashalom 41 The Lónyai Canal was built in 1879 and it is mainly responsible for draining the extra water in the Nyírség region. The discharging natural rivulets: Vaja main flow 47 km, Máriapócs main flow 37 km, Bogdány main flow 5 km, SényĘ main flow 18 km, Kálla main flow 55 km, Bököny main flow 46 km, Sima main flow 32 km. 42 In some rare cases they cross the line of the Tisza River: on the left side of the River at MezĘcsát-Hörcsögös in north-east Hungary (Kalicz 1999) or in the Tisza–Körös region the kurgan at CsongrádKettĘshalom (Ecsedy 1979, 11-13). 43 Its orientation and measures are not reliable but the names as well as the descriptions are in several cases more trustworthy than the Second Ordinance Survey.

79

T. HORVÁTH

Völgyes–Árkus,49 and also the Pap–ere) and the Tócó River near present day Debrecen50 is the most important concentration line of the Baden sites as well as the kurgan burials of this period. The spring areas of the Hortobágy and the Kadarcs streams is the Hajdúhát region, these watercourses developed in this area to permanent/temporary rivers from the local streams such as the Utas, Fürj, Vidi or Brassó. Consequently, there is a hydrologically closed, but interconnected system of rivers in the north-eastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, which might have served as an ideal orientation structure for mobile prehistoric population of herdsmen. Besides, it defines those areas (direction of camp sites, winter camps, summer camps or yearly change of camps), which were exploited by large scale animal husbandry in various parts of the year. This line, goes from the eastern areas to western direction from the South to the North is the axis of the Körös–Berettyó–Hortobágy Rivers, especially those smaller watercourses, streams, along which their sites were identified (including Late Copper Age Baden and CoĠofen sites, moreover, the legacy of the population of the Kurgan culture originated in the east). The area defined by the kurgans can be separated into two major types of hydrological zones, namely dry meadows around temporary or permanent bodies of water and marshy-wetland areas.

It is a widely accepted view that the expansion zone of the kurgans and kurgan fields, lacking permanent settlements, after all indicates the occupation area of this prehistoric population. Moreover, considering periodicity they can further be divided into seasonal winter and summer camp sites (Anthony 2007, 227).51 The summer camps are most typically located on higher elevations or interfluve plains (it is also named as deepsteppe), while the burial sites connected to winter camps are usually located in river valleys and wetland areas (such as the Pripjaty marshland in the catchment area of the Dnieper River, the Meotis marsh in the Pontus region and Dobruja/Dobrogea, Danube Delta). All those changes, which started the migration of the nomad stock breeders from the eastern steppes had begun around 4200-4100 BC, presumably as an effect of the climatic deterioration called Piora-oscillation. The palinological samples from the Alpine glaciers reveal that the winters became more and more cold, the measure of sunshine decreased. It is presumed that this process led to the disappearance of the great tell cultures such as the Karanovo–GumelniĠa–SalcuĠa–Tisza/Tiszapolgár culture by 3800 BC.52 German oak remains indicate that the decline of weather only started in Europe from 3760 BC. The first mobile population groups appeared in this period along the Lower Don (the Suvorovo– Novodanilovka type or complex = the elite chieftain burials of the Sredni Stog culture; Early Sredni Stog culture = Skelya culture),53 which gradually moved

The stock breeder population of the above mentioned Copper Age cultures variously adopted the special ecological endowments of their environment. The large scale animal husbandry required that the communities followed the herds from one temporary camp site to the other, quite resembling the farming techniques of the medieval–early modern societies of the region. Attila Paládi-Kovács claimed that pasturing in wetlands and winter grazing at the feets of the MunĠii Apuseni in Transylvania was especially important in droughtstricken years (Paládi-Kovács 2004, 81).

51 The analyses of the pollen, phytolith, and other biomorphic parts around the head and the belly zone of the dead; the investigation of the animal sacrifice feast; the definition of the contents of the grave goods; the analyses of the burial blanket of the deceased, and other methods are usually used to define the season of the burial. For example in Kalmykia the winter camps of the Pit–Grave culture and the Catacomb culture was identified. One of the groups along the Zunda-Tolga Rivers are most probably stayed there in autumn and early spring, while the Pit–Grave group moved along the Volga River and the Ural group moved along the Belaja and Ural Rivers. The distance of an average yearly transhumance is around 50-100 km, expectedly in southern direction. A flock of 500-600 sheeps goes 10-20 km daily around the available waters (river, well) (Shishlina 2000). 52 Still, the sites in west Bulgaria and smaller sites in Romania survived this catastrophe (Krivodol-SalcuĠa-Bubanj Ib, Telish III, Galatin Horizon with several cave sites, as the attributes of transhumant pastoralism). At the same time, the first cultures resembling steppean influences appeared in the Lower Danube region (such as the Cernavodă I). At various sites extensive destruction layers (soil erosion or the trace of a wartime period?), mass graves illustrate the violent character of this meetings (the tell-settlements of Yunatsite, Karanovo, GumelniĠa) (Anthony 2007, 229). The same dating is indicated by Grave No. 12 at Marosdécse (Romania, KIA-368: 5380 ±40 cal BP, 4237 cal BC, 1 ı), and the 14C date of grave from Cainari (Moldova, IA-369: 5580 ±50 cal BP, 4451-4369 cal BC, 1 ı) (Govedarica 2004, 71, 80-81). 53 The burial sites of this first steppean wave were detected at CsongrádKettĘshalom (Ecsedy 1979, 11-13), Deçea Mureúului/ Marosdécse (Kovács 1944), Meúcreac/Meggykerék, Feldiora/Földvár, VinĠu des Jos/Alvinc, ùard/Sárd burials (Govedarica 2004). Some scholars connect this invasion, which according to the Tiszapolgár/Bodrogkeresztúr type finds of the Marosdécse graveyard took place in the Early as well as in the Middle Copper Age (using the terms of the Hungarian terminology). In this period hidden treasure hoards and Hencida-type golden plates were found at Karbuna, Hăbăseúti, Ariuúd/ ErĘsd (Ecsedy 1979, 13; Anthony 2007). The earliest Ochre Grave horizontal and kurgan burials represent a relatively broad chronological horizon together with Late Sredni Stog, which is denoted as being contemporary with the late phase of Praecucuteni III-A4 -A/B–

49 Völgyes is mentioned as a fishing place in the written sources of the Árpádian period and it is identical with the Fejér Lake mentioned by sources from the Anjou period. Its length is 5,8 km, it was nourished by the Tisza River from the area of recent Tiszacsege through the TĘgy/Tölgyér stream, and from Ohat, through the Szántás-fok and the Nagy-Morotva. It was bordered by an oak forest from the north called today as Ohat Forest. East and south from the Völgyes Rivulet several kurgans were identified and also some Neolithic as well as Classic, Viss-type Baden settlement sites. The Árkus is an artificial canal going through the Hortobágy region from south-eastern direction. It is partly an ancient natural riverbed. It springs from the Völgyes fishing lake between Ohat and Csege, and flows into the Hortobágy River at the triple border of recent Zám– Nádudvar–Angyalháza. Its artificial valley was constructed in 1716, while its natural bed is 15.99 km long. Numerous kurgans and prehistoric settlement traces are located along its shores. In the medieval period, up to the Tartar Invasion in 1241-1242 its abundant water output was utilized by the neighbouring settlements (1241-1242: the beginning of a major desertion process in the Hortobágy region) of Árkusd, Derzsegyháza, Csécs, Zám-monostora and Szabolcs (Zoltai 1935). 50 The two, deep, uniting branches originates from the Zelemér area in recent Hajdúböszörmény, merges with the Kondoros rivulet at recent Mikepércs, where it is called Tekeres. Farther of recent Hajdúszovát it takes up the water from the Ondód, the Szepes, the Vérvölgye, the Zsongvölgye, and the Agodvölgye waters, from this point it is called Kösély/Kösi. Along the Tócó-Kösi, from recent Józsa-Szentgyörgy to Sáránd, and from Szováti to Nádudvar several mounds and prehistoric sites were spotted in its valley. See Zoltai 1928, 1935, 1938.

80

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) are quoted from the Transcarpathian territory by Ferenczi (1997, 16-17) in his study on kurgan burials. In his opinion five kurgan groups are especially important:56 the graves at Holboca east of Iaúi/Jászszállás near the Bahlui River, the Corlăten graveyard in norther Moldova, east of Dorohoi, the kurgan field at PleniĠa in south-west Oltenia,57 and the kurgans at Gurbăneúti between Bucureúti–ConstanĠa, and at last the kurgan field at the village Smeeni, south of the town Bodza/Buzău, on the plateau of a temporary waterflow called CălmăĠu. According to a listing from 1964 (Ferenczi 1997, 26),58 all in all 236 kurgan burials were detected in the territories of 37 settlements, in six geographical regions (belonging to various chronological zones): - The central and north-eastern part of the Moldova Plateau: Corlăteni, Glăvăneúti Vechi, Jászvásár/Iaúi– Valea–Lupului, Bogonos, Broúteni, Holboca, Gârcani, Cucuteni, Ivăneúti. Southern–Moldova and eastern part of Wallachia/Havaselve: Sztojkafalva/Stoicani, Smeeni, BrăiliĠai, Baldovineúti, Iancui, Vizirui. - Dobruja/Dobrogea: Casimcea, Hagieni, Hârúova, Baia– Hamangia, Anadolchioi. - Central and south-eastern part of Wallachia/Havaselve: Ploieúti, Sultana, Gurbăneúti, Preasna. - South-western part of Oltenia: Seaca de Câmpie, PleniĠa, VerbiĠa, Cârna, Giubeaga, Rusăneúti, Rast, Hunia, Basarabi. Among the registered sites five burials were oriented towards west, three were faced towards north-west, and four additional burials were directed towards northnothwest. Concerning the position of the dead, in 55 cases the skeleton was found in extended supine position, with flexed legs, and all in all 5 of them had their arms extended along the body–these might be the closest parallels from the primary burial of the Lyukas-halom– but unfortunately the description lacks specifying the exact sites. Still, it can be inferred that the burials at Aranyosgyéres were oriented west-east, extended on the back, and the legs were flexed at the knees. The quest for the eastern connection must be closed at this point: the evidences get more and more doubious towards the east, while the contradicting as well as imperfect survey reports would most probably mislead the present study.

towards the west, and parallel, a Tripolye expansion began in the eastern direction towards the Dnieper, which obviously led to conflict between the two populations.54 The steppean invasion was aimed at finding such areas for the herds of the stock breeder communities where the animals can safely survive the cold and dry winters. These areas were soon occupied in the wetlands near the Black Sea, in the catchment area of the Dnieper, as well as in the Danube Delta. These areas were the most extended marshlands in Eastern Europe (Anthony 2007, 255). It is probably, that a similar geographical environment was found by that smaller steppean group, which occupied the Great Hungarian Plain and built those small kurgan burials, defined by the presence of ochre and lacking grave deposits. Concerning the smaller environment of the surveyed site, a winter camp site can be reconstructed in the Hajdúhát region in the spring area of the Hortobágy and Kadarcs Rivers, the suggestion of which is perhaps supported by the micromorphological samples from the first depository layer also including indications of frost. The best analogies for the primary burial of the Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas kurgan can be detected in the Hortobágy region (the above mentioned kurgan at Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom). According to this model, the populations living in the Hajdúhát and the Nyírség regions had their summer camps in the Hortobágy area, while those living in the Nagy–Sárrét might possibly shifted to the Nagykunság (deep steppe). The north-south distance between those areas is roughly 50 km, which is adequate to sustain a yearly cycle, which became an eastwest oriented axis in relation to winter–summer relation (Figure 12). Is it possible to detect the exact route, which led this population to the Great Hungarian Plain in the eastern directions along the Berettyó the Maros and the three Körös Rivers outside the boundaries of recent Hungary? Similar kurgan excavations are known from Aranyosgyéres/Ghiriú–Arieú–Câmpia Turzii area (Romania) (Ferenczi 1997, 8-13),55 and more examples Tripolye A2-C periods, dated between 4600/4000–3600/3500 cal BC (the latest summary on the dating of this earliest Ochre Grave horizon, and its synchronization with steppean cultures as well as with cultures in the Carpathian Basin and the Balkans: Govedarica 2004). In the case of dating the Tripolye culture this period is labelled as „Polgárization process”, but this term might be misleading and inaccurate, since the phrase „Polgárization” meant not only the spread of the knowledge of the Tiszapolgár culture, but also the spreading of the metal work and ceramic related inventions of the Bodrogkeresztúr culture and the Boleráz/Early Baden culture. Thus, it must have had much wider temporal and cultural stimulation (Videiko 2000). 54 This is clearly marked by the appearance of fortified settlements of the Tripolye culture from the Tripolye B1/Cucuteni A3 period, the appearance of steppean weapon elements at Tripolye sites (horseheaded mace, sceptre, arrowhead types), and also the site at Drutsy (in the catchments area of the Prut River): Tripolye B1 period settlement, which was attacked and destroyed by steppean invaders (Anthony 2007, 231). 55 The site is located in the valley of the Aranyoshegy River, which is one of the main tributaries of the Maros River, springing from the Transylvanian Middle Mountains. The site is situated at the bottom of an open, marshy island-like area, which was once covered by oak

woods. The Transylvanian MezĘség region is part of this forest steppe grassland like ecological habitat, abundant in salt, and this circumstance presumably had a special importance concerning the salt supply of human as well as large stocks in prehistoric period. 56 Group characteristics as described by István Ferenczi: the size of the kurgan, its trampled mound, the trace of a wooden construction in the grave pit, the grave pit being not filled in, wrapping the dead into a fabric made of organic material, the positioning the dead with legs in an open position, the total lack of grave goods. We completely agree with these attributes, among these only the trampling of the kurgan coat is not typical to kurgans in Hungary, however it was distinctive in the core area (see Rassamakin 1999, Figure 3.27: the model for kurgan construction in the Lower Mikhailovka culture, Vinogradnoe kurgan). 57 Kolozskorpád/CoĠofen I. ceramics in the depository layers of the mound provide a terminus post quem dating for the building of the kurgan. This is contemporary with the Early Baden IIA-B, Cernavodă III. period, and the subsequent interval (Ciugudean 2000, 45). 58 Unfortunately the book by HarĠuche and Anastasiu was not available for the present study, thus I only could refer to it from the work of Ferenczi.

81

T. HORVÁTH

It is even debated, whether many inventions such as horse breeding, high quality riding, chariot riding, warfare, the formation of the hierarchic military elite were in fact transmitted by populations defined as steppean ProtoIndo-European groups during the Copper Age to the communities of contemporary Central Europe.61 Although horse bones are known from several sites (Molyukhov Bugor, Botai: but these are not older than 3600 cal BC, see Levine 1999, 39), the proportion of horse bone material is not strikingly high, and it is not even ascertained whether these are the remains of domesticated animals, especially in the earlier periods (presumably horses were hunted for their meat in the beginning). Why was horse keeping so important? Here I would like to quote only one example for this: ethnographic and anthropological observations proved that one man accompanied by a dog can safely control a flock of 200 sheep, while 500 animals can be securely guarded when riding a horse (Anthony 2007, 222). The importance of horse can best be shown concerning the winter period: while a sheep can cut 10-12 cm of snow by its hoof, a horse is capable of scrape out 30-40 cm, which is significant from the aspect of both feeding and pasturing of the animals, the two baselines of surviving winters (Shishlina 2000, 188).62

Lifestyle The lifestyle of the steppean populations, which arrived during the Copper Age and the Bronze Age to the territory of the Great Hungarian Plain has not changed a lot during their migration.59 Actually, it can be described as the perfect unintentional or conscious match of humans and landscape, since the settlement here defined the mobile lifestyle connected to large scale herding, which was continuously present in the history of the territories east of the Tisza River from the Copper Age, however, the populations changed during the millennia (see the occupation of the Great Hungarian Plain by “classic nomadic populations” such as the Scythians, Sarmatians, Huns, Avars, Hungarians, Pechenegs, Jászok and Cumans). The Tiszántúl region is the easternmost homeland of these pasturing communities, usually organized on a hierarchic, patrilinear basis is, more west of this area this system never became that constant: the quality of the fields rather encouraged farming. The Hungarian prehistoric research indicated an increase in animal husbandry (primarily cattle herding) from the end of the Middle Copper Age, and the reduction of farming. The transformation in the proportions of agricultural branches cannot only be interpreted as the development of new cultures, but also as the adjustment to changing climatic circumstances during the BalatonLasinja, the Baden and the Makó cultures (M. Virág 2004; Horváth 2006). At the same time, in spite of the seemingly analogous lifestyle, there are well detectable differences concerning the characteristics of the various populations living side by side, such as the Baden culture and the Makó culture (but for example the CoĠofen culture could be mentioned here too, see Ciugudean 2000). While one of them became the focus of the scholarly investigations because of its burials, and no settlements or local ceramic wares are known, the two other cultures show small, probably seasonal farmsteadlike sites and extended settlements with significant ceramic finds, which imply a considerable ceramic production.60

The domestication of the horse began in the Late Eneolithic Period, but came to a sudden stop in the Early Bronze Age: no traces of horses were found in the archaeological material of the Pit–Grave culture, and no horse bones were unearthed connected to the kurgans or other burials of this period. Even the place and date of the domestication is still questioned. The earliest visible remains on horse bones (presence/usage of the saddle or the bit), which demonstrates that the animals were used for warfare practices can only be dated from the Late Bronze Age Timber–Grave and Sintashta cultures in the territory of the steppe (1600-850 cal BC, Levine 1999; Anthony 2007). All those objects, which were formerly defined as bits or cheek pieces are recently identified as pectoral jewels, and the “horse-headed” sceptres can depict various other mammals too (Levine 1999, 10-12). Beside the denial of the primary importance of horse breeding in the earlier periods, the significance of smaller ruminants and cattle increased. Thus, the theories of “secondary products revolution” and the “secondary exploitation of animals” by Andrew Sherratt associated with the production of fermented drinks, the expansion of sheep providing sufficient wool for spinning and weaving, the spreading out of draught animals

In order to survey these different tendencies of the two stock breeding cultures, it is worth to define new terminology for nomadism/pastoralism or stock breeding. 59 See Morgunova 2000, 2004, 62-68. The excavated and reconstructed Pit–Grave grave from Bolgyirevo (Taslinskiy District, Pre-Ural) is almost identical to the kurgan burials in the Great Hungarian Plain, among them with the kurgan at Tedej. The great mound at Bolgyirevo is part of the burial field on the left shore of the River consisting of ten kurgans. This outstanding mound is 6 m high and its diameter is 64 m. Moreover, it was surrounded by a 16 m wide ditch. Only one grave was discovered in the mound. The grave pit was lined with carpets. There was a roughly 40 years old male in the grave, generously sprinkled with ochre. A copper knife, a socketed spearhead, two awls, a chisel made of meteorite iron, and three additional unidentifiable objects were deposited in the grave. In the centre of the pit a carbonate cup was put on an iron disc filled with iron ore and a quartz scraper – very odd finds in a Pit–Grave burial! 60 The Baden culture is defined by restrained farming and mobile wetland nomadism with small ruminants, with the extremely stressed ritual presence of the two most popular species, namely the cattle and sheep (Horváth 2006, 2008).

61 The Sredni Stog culture, which existed for more than one thousand years, had only one site, where notable horse breeding was observed, namely at Dereivka. This was the initial point of this hypothesis but it turned out that the layer, which produced abundant horse bones could be dated to the Scythian period. The Sredni Stog culture has considerably been revised in the recent years through the survey of Rassamakin (Levine 1999; Rassamakin 2004). 62 The ethnographic research of Masanov (2000) in Kazahstan proved that this area was the primary centre for horse-domestication and breeding, while from the south-western territories the usage of the camel spred.

82

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) (ploughing, wagon) 63 between 4500-3500 cal BC can apparently be maintained.64 The colder and drier climate from 3300-3100 cal BC led to the development of the Pit–Grave culture in the Steppe parallel with the vanishing of the long-lived Tripolye sites (around 3400/3330 cal BC). At the change between C1/C2 phases the Tripolye culture abandon the region south of the Bug, thus all those enormous Tripolye “towns” such as Tal’yanki (estimated ground space 450 hectares) or the sites at Dobrovodi and Maidanets’ke (estimated ground space 250 hectares), which were even larger than the contemporary city of Uruk (Anthony 2007, 278-281).65 The Early Pit–Grave block can be divided into two subgroups: at the Lower Don and in the area of southern Bug, the western, traditionally cattle breeding population lived (some settlement features and botanical remains denotes that the Pit–Grave culture was influenced by traditional agricultural civilizations of Eastern Europe). Along the Volga–Ural–Caspian seashore there was the eastern group who was more focused on sheep breeding and lived a more mobile life than their western neighbours (Anthony 2007, 304, 326). Rassamakin describes the western Pit–Grave block as a population following semi-nomadic lifestyle (Rassamakin 1999, 154).66

Pit–Grave tribes living in the Carpathian Basin: maybe they themselves did a small scale farming, or they imported cereals from other populations focused on farming (in this case from the people of the Makó culture, in the form of good exchange or as a tax). Taking into consideration the relative poorness of grave goods of the steppean cultures in the Carpathian Basin, there are many false suppositions about the considerable poorness of the eastern newcomers compared to agricultural societies. Unfortunately, the wealth of similar communities, the abundance of flocks, the gorgeous furs, woven textiles, carpets, and woodcarvings disappeared during the centuries, and their prints and remains are far from their luxurious appearance that they represented before.67 In the eastern territories, owing to the favourable soil conditions, more finds of these types were preserved and the number of identified sites is larger. Bátorá identified 50 metal craftsmen burials from the Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age (from Pershin the grave of a 12-13,5 years old boy!).68 Moreover, 30 smiths’ graves, and even 3 or 4 times more graves of masters dealing with chipping, 3 tanners’burials, in Grave No. 2 of a boy at Vinogradnoye kurgan No. 14 a bone, antler and pearl processing master was identified in his summary (Bátorá 2000).69 I have a definite opinion that those groups living in the Great Hungarian Plain lived in similar circumstances to the communities in the eastern steppes and surrounded themselves with the masterpieces of their own craftsmen.70

Concerning the groups living in the Great Hungarian Plain, Rassamakin (1999, 131) and additional, comparative archaeological and ethnographical studies (Shishlina 2000) consider that two basic schemes of cattle breeding can be outlined: the so called transhumance or vertical transhumance model, based on the periodic changes between summer and winter camps; and pasturing in a yearly cycle.

Stratification–the building dynamics of the Hungarian kurgans Two construction phases were defined in the case of Hajdúnánás–Tedej Lyukas-halom (1+2; 3.) based on archaeological and geological information, from which the first and the second deposits were constructed at the same time, and the third phase was built some decades later. The survey revealed that the mounds were constructed of the same type of soil, exploited from a roughly 15000 m2 area around the kurgan, which gradually lost its humus content, thus changed from A-horizon to Bhorizon and then to C-horizon (Figure 3.1).71

At the same time the grinding stone, found bellow the head of the male burial No. 10 from the second depository phase at Sárrétudvari is the only proof that cereals or cereal products were part of the diet among the 63 The earliest finds appear in kurgan burials around 3100 cal BC: wagon burials at Ostani (Kuban area) and in the kurgans of Bal’ki (Lower Dnieper), remains of a wooden wheel at the site near Koldyri in the Lower Don region. These were imported through the mediation of the Maikop-Novosvobodnaja culture to the Pit–Grave culture, presumably originating from Mesopotamia (Rassamakin 1999, 151; Anthony 2007, 312. Gei (2000) collected 257 wagon burials dating from the period between 3100 and 2200 cal BC. The latest results proved that there are wagon burials in the Pre-Ural region resembling the Kuban region: near Sumayevo village (Taslinskij district) two kurgan burials were found, but sadly without more grave deposits (Morgunova et al. 2003; Morgunova 2004, 64). In considering the wagon burials at Gerasimovka I and at Izobilnoje I there are all in all four wagon burials in the territory between the Volga and the Ural dated to the first half of the third millennium BC, thus it is worth to rethink the theories about the invention and the spreading of the wagon. 64 According to Anthony (2007, 137-138) the cattle breeding societies of the eastern steppe were characterized by a strong male preference; adaptable, opportunistic leaders; and continuous problems with cattle steeling, which led to warfare and violence. There is a possibility that the protection of cattle herds induced the development of horse keeping (for these see Proto-Indo-European creation myths). 65 At Maidanets’ke upon the settlement features a Pit–Grave kurgan was constructed. Does this mean the sign of an invasion? The aggressor might have been the Mikhailovka I. or the Late Sredni Stog population (Anthony 2007). 66 The various potential models of cattle herding is shown by Table 3.4.

67 As a comparison at Balmazújváros-Kárhozott halom wood timbers from a burial were found (Csalog 1954); in Grave No. 12 at Gurbăneúti camel hair was identified (Ferenczi 1997, 73). 68 Chernykh et al. 2000. 69 Among the master graves young males, and in one catacomb grave (Aksay) a roughly 18-20 years old female was excavated, which may denote the high social status acceptance of craftsmanship. Still, the burials themselves are not outstandingly rich. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the craftsmen were in a high social status themselves (see Eliade 2004). 70 As a comparison, a real masterpiece of wood construction from Berel under mound No. 11 (Kazakhstan, Early Iron Age) (Samashev and Mylnikov 2008). 71 The first deposit was built of 657 m3 soil, in case of the second layer 685 m3 soil was used (+28 m3), and in the third phase of the construction 2848 m3 soil (+ 2163 m3) was used up at Hajdúnánás– Tedej-Lyukas-halom. The so-called depository zones in most cases were observed supposed that the surroundings of the kurgan was intact (Figure 3.2).

83

T. HORVÁTH

1995), while at other places later burials were dug into the layers of a new building phase (Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 3, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 14), or directly on the surface of a new building phase, without digging.

There are several kurgans known from excavations, which were built in more phases,72 and based on geological sampling, even further examples can be collected73. According to an architectural reconstruction model, a kurgan, which is 50 m in diameter can be built by 500 people in one day (or in some other statistical combinations of these figures) given the technical development of the period (Anthony 2007, 332).74

One part of the burials are located in the centre of the kurgan, in various levels, below each other (Hajdúnánás– Tedej–Lyukas-halom), or in the same level (Kunhegyes– Nagyállás, Tiszaeszlár–Potyhalom), or seemingly in an unsystematic order, or arranged along an axis, which is unknown to us (Sárrétudvari, Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 3).77

When building kurgans, first usually the grave chamber was constructed and afterwards the mound was built above it, however, there are data proving that graves were subsequently dug into ready made kurgans.75 In contrast to the kurgans of the eastern steppe area and the kurgan at Aranyosgyéres (Ferenczi 1997) here the surface of the kurgan was not plastered by a waterproof layer such as clay, gravel or stone. Stone lining of the grave chamber, ditches surrounding the kurgans are missing too,76 and there are no cromlech circles or steles (except for MezĘcsát–Hörcsögös, Kalicz 1999). The lacking of stone-built features are presumably due to the shortage of raw stone materials in the Great Hungarian Plain region.

Despite that graves of various ages and mixed genders were identified in several kurgan graves (Marcsik 1979; K. Zoffmann 2006), the majority of scholars preclude the possibility that these sites would be family cemeteries (Anthony 1997; Rassamakin 1999). Concerning the construction of grave chambers there are two basic types of building techniques among Hungarian kurgans: a more simple practice of using organic materials such as reed, bulrush, grass, wood bark and parts of animal leather78 and the other method was working with wood that is making a covering a chamber with timber construction and/or lined with log.79 This can be further interpreted as chronologically different building horizons or the legacy of two populations.

Not in all cases of later burials was the kurgan heightened (see Kunhegyes–Nagyállás). In other cases the size of a kurgan was increased without any new burials (the second phase of the Lyukas-halom?). Thus, it can be deduced that perhaps the kurgan building itself was part of funerary rituals without automatically meaning a real burial: maybe it is connected to some post-mortem customs, or a form of a periodically recurring commemoration.

At last, regarding the building dynamics of the kurgans in Hungary there are at least four waves of invaders coming from the eastern steppe territories, if the Csongrád– KettĘshalom kurgan is taken as a first phase among the kurgans with three building phases. It is still debated how much time has passed between the arrival of the various populations, and how these different cultural groups can be identified in the Eastern European territories.

The depth of grave pits vary as well: later burials reach the same level as the primary burial, that is the yellow parent material (palaeo C-horizon) (Csányi and Tárnoki

The burial rites 72

Balmazújváros–Kárhozotthalom (Csalog 1954); Püspökladány– Kincsesdomb with a semicircular ditch and a north-east–south-west oriented burial (Ecsedy 1979, 19), Dévaványa–Barcé-halom (Ecsedy 1979, 17-18), Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 3 with three construction layers (Ecsedy 1979, Figure 14), Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom with two depository layers (Dani and Nepper 2006). 73 In the central part of Ohat–CsípĘ-halom there were three, while at the edges two depository layers. The dating of the buried soil is 6040 ±100 cal BP, while the dating of the anthropogenic stratum is 5630 ±100 cal BP. Sarmatian burials were excavated near the kurgan maybe at the KisCsípĘ-halom (MNM Adattár 25.N.1.). The Fekete-halom, located nearby the Lyukas-halom was surveyed due to its endangered situations when the M3 motorway was built. At last the course of the motorway avoided the kurgan and only its lower sections were excavated. This kurgan has similarly three depository phases according to the geological sampling (Dani 2004; Barczi 2009). 74 Unfortunately its height was not given! 75 The three burials of the Kunhegyes–Nagyállás-halom kurgan (but not the primary burial) were seemingly later graves cut into the prehistoric feature (Csányi and Tárnoki 1995, 37). 76 In the case of Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb a semicircular ditch was documented (Ecsedy 1979, 19, the burial is oriented opposite!), a large ditch surrounds the Szentes–Bökény-kurgan (Barczi et al. 2004b, 47), and similar features were observed at the excavation of Hajdúszoboszló–Árkoshalom by the archaeologist of the Déry Museum of Debrecen. It can be hypothesized that the feature, which was identified as a depository ring in the Great Hungarian Plain may be identical with the steppean ditch system. This feature is not usually excavated by researchers as it outside the main body of the kurgans. This can be proved by further excavations.

This chapter focuses on the shaping of the grave pit, the orientation, the position of the body and a special attention will be paid to post-mortem practices. It has to be noted that these aspects are the least explored features of the previous surveys, as this information was usually not considered as a crucial feature and was not described in documentation. Unfortunately, in those cases where there is an overall lack of such records or no illustrations are available, from which these aspects could be reconstructed, these characteristics cannot be discussed. Additional difficulty for the research is the special cultural mixture, which was observed in various horizons of steppean cultures. Consequently, no unified 77

Catacomb-package: see later. Most small kurgans in the Hortobágy, Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom, Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom. 79 For example Balmazújváros–Kárhozott-halom, Kétegyháza, Grave No. 6 in kurgan No. 3, Debrecen–Basahalom, Sárrétudvari– Balázshalom, Szepespuszta–Balogh István halma and Macsi puszta, Ormós József tanyája, Tiszaeszlár–Potyhalom, Tiszaeszlár–Bashalom. The wooden construction in the Great Hungarian Plain may substitute the stone carved elements, its presence or abscene can also be used as an indicator for the wood covering of the Great Hungarian Plain region in the given period. 78

84

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) mounds (see also at stratification) the primary burials are typically deepened into palaeo C-horizon.

positioning or orientation rites can be presumed and the forced theories on such attributes would probably deceive any scholarly research. Still, it is important to raise these questions even related to burials without grave deposits (such as most of the kurgan burials exposed in Hungary), as no further information can be used to identify the archaeological culture, to which these graves belong. Sadly, orientation was not at all tackled by recent publications on steppean cultures, while in my opinion too much attention was put on the position of the body (Rassamakin 1999; Rasamakin 2004). Nevertheless, these statistics should be used in the analyses, in order not to lose any possible data source during the study. One of the few comparable features of the steppean graves located in the Great Hungarian Plain is the westeast orientation of the burials, but in some cases the direction can diverge from this axis to nort-west–southeast direction. There are only two exceptions for orienting the dead in a north-south direction, namely the burial at Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb and the kurgan at Oros– Nyírjes (Ecsedy 1979, 35).

The deceased is placed on a soft, comfortable feather bed, made of organic materials such as fur, pelt, vegetable braid and also covered by a blanket (for example at Hajdúnánás– Tedej–Lyukas-halom, Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom, Balmazújváros–Kárhozott-halom, Sárrétudvari–Balázshalom, Hortobágy–Pipások, Hortobágy–Papegyháza, Püspökladány– Kincsesdomb). It is characteristic that the body of the dead is sprinkled with ochre or ochre lumps were put into the grave as deposits, but there are only two cases when the skull is painted with ochre: in Grave No. 2 of a juvenile person and in grave No. 3 at Dévaványa–Csordajárás (Ecsedy 1979, 33, Figure 25), and in the grave of kurgan No. 3 at Hortobágy–Pipások (Zoltai 1906, 16; Figure 10. 1-4). Its analogies are only known from the Lower Dniester region, from the Usatovo culture (Figure 10. 5).80 However, the paint remains on the skulls may originate from the painting of some head cover made of organic material (insignia of rank, shaman’s headband, or a war helmet), or can be the trace of a manipulation with the dead, and as such, might be interpreted as the precursor of the tar-painted plastered clay masks found in the Catacomb culture graves (see later).

The earliest westward oriented Pit–Grave graves are mentioned from the Lower Don region (Ecsedy 1979, 42), according to Anthony in the south Bug–Ingul– Dnieper zones (Anthony 2007, 36).

The position of the dead is understood in the broadest contexts, while it is not seems to be consistent: seemingly neither chronological nor geographical or cultural groups can be identified. At the same time, the complex analyses of the grave pit form, the type of the grave (plain or kurgan), the position of the skeleton and the grave deposits with known artefacts of some steppean settlements (the most important are: Sredny Stog, Stril’cha, Skelya, Mikhailovka, Dereivka, Molyukhov Bugor, Aleksandriya, Semenovka, Razdol’noe, Liventsovka I, Razdorskoe, Konstantinovsk and Samsonovskoye) may lead to unexpected territorial and temporal system in the apparent chaos (Rassamakin 2004).

Ecsedy (1979) refers to the form of the graves in his publication all in all nine times, but in two cases he refers to the other excavation results. Oval grave pits are known from Nagyhegyes–Elep–Mikelapos, Kétegyháza kurgan No. 3, and from Dévaványa–Csordajárás Grave No. 1. Moreover, similar contour was observed in the primary burial No. 12 from Period 1. at Sárrétudvari (Dani and Nepper 2006, Figure 8.2). Rounded corners of rectangular grave pits were documented at Hortobágy– Árkus–KettĘshalom, Kétegyháza Kurgan No. 6, Grave No .1, in addition at Dévaványa–Csordajárás graves No. 2 and No. 3. Besides these, Kunhegyes–Nagyállás graves No. 12, No. 14 and No. 18 can be categorized as belonging to this group (Csányi and Tárnoki 1995) just as the primary burial of Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom. Rectangular burial pits were built with wood lining at Kétegyháza kurgan No. 3, burials No. 4 and No. 6. Similar structures can be reconstructed from the descriptions of the kurgans at Sárrétudvari–Balázshalom, Szepespuszta–Balogh István-halma, and Macsi puszta, Ormós József tanyája sites (Zoltai 1906, 36-48) and at Balmazújváros–Kárhozotthalom (Csalog 1954).

In Period II, all in all three major types of positioning the dead were documented in the oval or rectangular pits with rounded corners: - in supine position, with legs flexed at the knees in froglike position, the arms are extended along the chest, resting on the pelvis, or next to the pelvis (Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom, Grave No. 9 (Dani and Nepper 2006, 35, Figure 7.1, Rassamakin 2004, Abb. 1.II/C); - in supine position, legs are flexed at the knees, the arms are extended along the chest (Nagyhegyes–Elep– Mikelapos, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 4; Balmazújváros– KettĘshalom, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 6; Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 6, Grave No. 1, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 19; Dévaványa– Csordajárás Grave No. 3, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 26 = Rassamakin 2004, Abb. 1.II/A) or put on the pelvis (Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom, Grave No. 1; burials at Kunhegyes–Nagyállás, Csányi and Tárnoki 1995,

Bellow a mound, the primary burials are always located in the centre of the kurgan. The secondary graves are positioned in the same level around the primary burial (Kunhegyes–Nagyállás). When there is a new building phase a grave again situated in the centre (Hajdúnánás– Tedej–Lyukas-halom building period 3, Feature No. 1; Kétegyháza kurgan 3, burials No. 4 and No. 6), or located in a more irregular way (Does Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom arranged along an external axis? Since the kurgan has not been researched thoroughly this cannot be decided.). While the burials are dug into various depths of the

80 Variously painted skulls from the cemeteries of Usatovo and Mayaki. There was one skull with traces of injuries caused by an axe (Zinkovszkij and Petrenko 1987; Anthony 2007, 358, Figure 14.5).

85

T. HORVÁTH

graves are documented without grave deposits,81 and in several cases only the burial rites are the plain indicators for dating. But as it was previously mentioned, the majority of earlier excavation documents do not contain data on this, consequently, there are only few records on the shape of the grave pits, and on the position and the orientation of the skeletons.82 As a result, the majority of the researched kurgans, lacking proper photo or descriptive documentation, are not appropriate for interpreting such phenomena. Moreover, the grave deposits can only provide data to refine chronology in the later burials (Period IV/(V.).83 More specific dating can be obtained by correlating the various periods of the excavated sites, which, however less precise than 14C dates, but by large indicate the chronological terminus ante quem or terminus post quem date for the kurgan.

Figure 5; Dévaványa–Csordajárás 1, Grave No. 2, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 24, 25); - In flexed position on the left side, with bent arms, hands are laid in front of the face (Sárrétudvari Grave No. 12, Dani and Nepper 2006, Figure 8.2 = Rassamakin 2004, Abb. 1.III/A, B). The burials from Period III are placed in rectangular grave pits, which are lined with wooden constructions, and the bodies are rested in extended supine position, or in seated position, the legs are flexed at the knees, the arms are resting along the body near the pelvis (Balmazújváros–Kárhozott-halom, Csalog 1954, Table X/6; Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 3, Grave No. 4, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 9; kurgan No. 3, Grave No. 6: arms are on the pelvis, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 10.).Alternatively skeletons are found in extended supine position, legs are similarly flexed at the knees, and the arms are stretched along the body (Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 3, Grave No. 1, Ecsedy 1979, Figure 12.).

From this perspective, the link is the Middle Copper Age Bodrogkeresztúr culture in the Great Hungarian Plain region,84 and in most cases the Boleráz/Baden culture in the Late Copper Age. Furthermore, the presence of later, Scythian urn burials, may supplement the building history of the kurgans.85

In Period IV(V) there are no information on the form of grave pits, while the dead were either placed in an extended supine position (Nezsider, Grave No. 1, Ruttkay 2002), with the legs in a frog-like position, and the arms are stretched along the body (Sárrétudvari, Grave No. 9.). It is also common that the skeleton is on its right side, with knees brought up against the chest, the arms are bent, and the hands are placed in front of the face (Sárrétudvari, Grave No. 10 = Rassamakin 2004, Abb.1. III/C).

It is without doubt that most frequently the various connections with Late Copper Age cultures can be detected, either from the soil of the kurgans, from the layers bellow the kurgan, or in relation to its surroundings. Since the Boleráz–Baden culture and the Pit–Grave culture are generally contemporaneous in the Great Hungarian Plain area, it is informative to sum up the connections between these cultures. Based on these

The II/C position represents burial Group I (thus to the Eneolithic Period, Kvityana culture), the II/A position can be assigned to Group II (Eneolithic Period, southBug–Lower Dnieper Zone, mixed groups), the III/A, B positions to Group III (Cucuteni–Tripolye and Maikop cultures), the II/C position goes to Group IV (Samara– Molokhnaya region, Zhivotilovka–Volchansk Group) (Rassamakin 2004, Abb. 111, 125). This categorization correlates to both the relative and the absolute chronological classification built up by the present study (see later), remarking the fact that the steppean origin of Period IV (V?), which is generally identified as the Southern Bug–Dnieper zone, is identified in a somewhat wider area, between the Prut and the Don Rivers. This area is situated in the Samara/Kuybyshev–Molokhnaya region, in the Zhivotivolo–Volchansk group, with a strong influence of the Maikop–Novosvobodnaya culture, which would be a satisfying explanation for the relative abundance of metal finds in those burials.

81

Traditional ochre lumps occur around the head and the shoulder. It is a typical feature that parts of the body is sprinkled with ochre, and the body is usually wrapped into a leather blanket with painted black and red stripes, while the occurrence of silver hair rings (Kétegyháza– Török-halom, Balmazújváros–Kárhozott-halom, Buj–Feketehalom, Tiszaeszlár–Potyhalom, Dévaványa–Templomdomb), copper beads (Debrecen–László-halom), animal teeth (Kétegyháza-3/b kurgan), small ruminant astragalos (Kétegyháza-3/a kurgan) is quite exceptional (Ecsedy 1979, 43-44). 82 Lajos Zoltai, the former head of the Déri Múzeum in Debrecen excavated 19 kurgans in the Hortobágy region, from which he got to the bottom of 15 kurgans, 3 others proved to be deserted medieval village sites. His works are available in the series of the Déri Múzeum Jelentései and he dedicated a book to this topic (1938) also containing a cartographic appendix. 83 The major evidence for this can be the second building phase of the Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom kurgan with burials containing abundantly deposited grave goods, which might belong to a later wave of kurgans, as suggested by both the finds and the radiocarbon dates (Dani and Nepper 2006). It can be assumed that the later deposits of larger, multiphased kurgans were constructed in this period, but because of the lack of 14C dating this can only by verified in the case of Kétegyháza–Törökhalom (Ecsedy 1979). 84 Kétegyháza, kurgan No. 4: bellow the small, all in all 60 cm high kurgan, two disturbed burials were excavated. Bellow the graves features of the Bodrogkeresztúr culture settlement were found (Ecsedy 1979, 26, e.g. 4.3; 7, 8, 9). 85 For instance at the following sites: in one of the kurgans at Hortobágy–Pipások (Zoltai 1938, 45), at the foot of Hajdúnánás– Fekete-halom during the M3 rescue excavations project in 2003-2004 (Dani 2004), at Kétegyháza (Ecsedy 1979, 20), at Balmazújváros– Kárhozott-halom (Csalog 1954, 37), Tiszaeszlár–Potyhalom? (Jósa 1897, 321). It is no surprise taking into account the quite similar mobile, stock breeding lifestyle of the Scythian population. At MezĘcsát– Hörcsögös site pre-Scythian graves were also discovered (Kalicz 1999).

Relative Chronology The dating of the kurgans in the territory of today Hungary is not an easy task. First of all, vast part of the Great Hungarian Plain in the surveyed period of prehistory (Copper Age–Early Bronze Age) was scarcely populated (see Ecsedy 1979, 51; Dani 2001; Dani 2005a; Horváth 2009). On the other hand, the majority of kurgan

86

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) - neck and belly fragment of a small beaker or ladle, reddish-brownish, polished, with a high cylindrical neck, the belly part resembles a compressed spherical segment. Size: 36×40×4 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 1. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 2/3). - outward slanting rim fragment of a bowl with high, cone-shaped neck, dark grey, tempered with micaceos sand and grog, polished, decorated with dotted line on the neck. Size: 73×90×6 mm, diameter: 160 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 7. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 2/5).

relations chronological phases were defined to group the kurgan burials.86 Period II Late Copper Age settlement features in the buried palaeosoil A-horizon of the primary burials of the kurgans: - Kétegyháza, kurgan field No. 5: on the level of the buried subsoil, settlement features dating to the Cernavodă culture Period III. appear (Ecsedy 27-28, Pl. 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, Figure 21). Thus, the kurgan was built after that period (see also the characteristic cattle depositioning practice of the Boleráz culture, Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 10.5).87 - Ohat–Dunahalom: In a depth of 2,05 m, at the bottom of a kurgan of 230 cm high, near an oven, a decayed, westeast oriented skeleton was excavated by Zoltai (1924, 1112). The arms were bent on the pelvis, the legs were in a frog-like position. At the left elbow a pebble was found,88 while on the left and on the right of the skull, and at the legs ochre lumps were deposited.

- Viss-type fragment of a bowl or an amphora with a tripartite handle, with outcurving rim, brownish-greyish coloured, tempered with grog, polished. It is noticeable on the interior broken surface that the high swinging tripartite handle was fitted to the rim. Size.: 60×47×7 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 17. 2. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 1/7, Pl. 2/2).89 - belly and neck fragment of a bowl, greyish-reddish coloured, polished, decorated with dotted line on the neck, and on the belly with incised net pattern. Size.: 54×40×4 mm. There is one belly side piece belonging to this object, grey, with red traces of fire, tempered with ground mica, polished inside. Size: 94×76×7 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 17. 1. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 1/2, 8–Ecsedy did not recognize that these two pieces belonged to the same vessel, and maybe 5.; Pl. 2/1, 4; the fragments are depicted in an erroneous position, upside down on both plates). - IV. 79.1923. three fragments of a bowl with truncated biconical neck and outcurving rim, two of the fragments matche together. Dark grey, with imprints of red flames, the inside is reddish-grey, tempered with calcite grits mixed with grog, decorated on the neck with a dotted line. Size: 67×56×4, 44×49×4 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 5). - IV.79.1923. Two matching pieces of a smaller vessel with truncated biconical neck and outcurving rim, the rim is decorated with a toothed motif on the outer as well as the inner surface. Reddish-grey, tempered with calcite grits mixed with grog, polished. Size: 80×43×4, rim diameter: 130-150 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 6. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 1/6. small dish, with a vertical handle on the belly? If this is identical to the described object then the belly part of the vessel is missing by the time of the revision in 2009). - IV.79.1923. Neck fragment of a bowl, with a dotted line, black, highly polished. Size: 57×38×4 mm.. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 4). - IV.79.1923. Side fragment of a plate, grey, the inside surface is tempered with ground mica and grog, decorated with a dotted line on the neck, and incised slanting lines

In the level of the former subsoil, in which the primary burial was discovered, a Baden culture pit oven was excavated, on which the kurgan was buil later. This was perhaps a smaller part of an extended Viss-type Baden settlement. Since István Ecsedy previously did not describe the features or published their profiles, and the figures were not good quality photos either, here I would like to present its preserved artefacts items by items to avoid any misunderstanding connected to the finds (Prehistoric Collection of the Déri Museum, Inventory No. IV. 1923. 105.3-7; Ecsedy 1979, 16, Pl. 1.1-8; Pl. 2): - neck and belly fragment of a small-handled jug, with a sharply angled profile, light brown, tempered with grog, polished with three horizontal incised lines resembling the decoration of amphorae, and on the belly, vertical, sharp channelled decoration combined with stabbed points formingg a line appear. Size: 38×47×5 mm. It shows Classic Baden/Kostolac type ornamentation (Figure 16. 2. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 1/2., Pl. 2/6).

86 The first period is maintained for the burial of Csongrád– KettĘshalom, which can be dated between 4200 and 4100 cal BC according to the 14C dating of Grave No. 12 at Marosdécse. 87 According to the published finds I think it belongs to the Boleráz culture, for the argument see Horváth 2009. Neither in the Cernavodă III culture nor in the Boleráz-Baden cultures there are any traces of a portable oven (or curfew) (Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 15.2), however, this artefact type appears in the Neolithic period (Banner 1929) and in the Bronze Age too (P. Fischl et al. 2001). It can also be supposed that this belonged to the kurgan, this artefact is known in the Catacomb culture (see e.g. ĝlusarska 2006, 99). In my opinion the horse bones were found from the remains of a site from another period, maybe from a nearby Bronze Age site (Bökönyi 1979). See the details in the previous chapter entitled “Lifestyle”. 88 It is a very strange finding because unluckily no information survived about it, and the artefact has been lost since then. It can be presumed that it was a hand axe as part of a mace or a grinding hand stone. In the previous version it might had immense chronological importance, since the so called Mariupol–Borodino type mace heads, which appear in the regions of the Carpathians are already present during the DnieperDonets and the Sredni Stog cultures (4500-4000 cal BC) (see Klochko 2002; Govedarica 2004, 242, Abb. 58), representing the early, pre-Pit– Grave horizon.

89 Since the publication of the monograph of Banner (1956) the sites of Viss-type artefacts were located in Szabolcs–Szatmár–Bereg County, Hajdú–Bihar County, Borsod–Abaúj–Zemplén and partly Pest County (north-east Hungary). These surely not belong to the earlier Boleráz horizon, but their late dating has not been proved either: they are most probably representing an older Classic IIB-III territorial group: Bondár 2002, 12. J. Korek (1983, 24-25) argued that the material found at Poroszló–Ráboly constitute a transition between the Boleráz and the Viss groups.

87

T. HORVÁTH

probably built roughly in the same period as the Baden settlement existed or after the Baden period (Déri Museum, Prehistoric Collection, Inv. No. 119.a.1924).

on the belly. Size: 28×34×7 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 16. 3). - IV.79.1923. Side fragment of an amphora or a pot, light greyish-reddish brown, polished, tempered with ground mica and grog, decorated with incised net pattern. Size: 42×38×4 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 17. 3). - IV.79.1923. side fragment of an amphora or a pot, light grey, the interior is dark grey, polished, decorated by incised lines. Size: 24×24×6 mm. Classic Baden (Figure 17. 4). - IV.78.1923. Truncated blade, first generation, cortex on the obverse, bent, on the reverse side the bulb is knocked, talon is diedre, the mutilation at the distal end is straight. Striped flint from MezĘcsát. Size: 31×21×5 mm. Baden? - IV.78.1923. Saw-toothed sickle insert made of an atypical flint, the blade is weathered. Grey hydroquarzit. Size: 16×26×3 mm Baden?

- Large, amphora with a wavy rim, dark grey, the exterior surface is roughened, one third of the vessel was found. 9-10 cm thick, height is 27 cm, rim diameter is 27 cm, bottom diameter is 12 cm. It was discovered at a depth of 140 cm in pieces. According to the Inventory of the museum it was revisioned in 1967 and also in 1993, while it was not found in 2009 (Figure 21. 6. = Ecsedy 1979, Pl. 1/9). Inv. No. 119.b, c, d, g, 120. - Rim fragment of a smaller bowl, light grey, polished, the rim is everted. Size: 41×68×6 mm, rim diameter: 100 mm (Figure 21. 1). - Everted rim fragment of a bowl, light brownish yellow, tempered with grog, polished. Size: 70×52×8 mm, rim diameter: 200 mm (Figure 21. 2). - Polished side fragment with a sharply angled profile (compressed spherical segment shape), dark grey, interior is light brown. Size: 54×40×4 mm (Figure 21. 3). - Side fragment, reddish-grey, weathered, interior is red, polished. Size: 45×47×4 mm (Figure 21. 4). - Everted rim fragment of a pot with a broken remain of a plastered handle or lug, under the rim there is a articulated rib, reddish-grey, tempered with grog, The surface is smoothed. Size: 68×54×10 mm, rim diameter: roughly 200 mm (Figure 21. 5).

Dunahalom was the first documented archaeological excavation, where a Baden settlement and a kurgan burial was discovered at the same location. Unfortunately the excavation did not undertake fine chronological observations: in this case both the contemporary existence of the settlement and the building of the kurgan can be hypothetized, or the kurgan was later erected on the site of the Baden settlement. Not far from the Dunahalom (without any specific information on the location of the site), at KülsĘ–Ohat (now it is Ohatrailway station) Zoltai unearthed the traces of a Baden settlement in the same year (Zoltai 1924, 11-12). According to the few complete pots, which were preserved by the Déri Museum in Debrecen, this was a Classic Baden settlement also (Inv. No. IV. 1923. 61, 63, 65, 67, 68, IV. 1923. 50.69.70; 72.105.7; 106c) (Figure 18-19).

These ceramics can be classified as Classic Baden pottery; however, their more precise dating cannot be decided due to their uncharacteristic nature. Moreover, beside these artefacts some atypical Neolithic wares were inventoried. - Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom: Gazdapusztai noted that in July 1964, while excavating the kurgan, a small mug with a handle was found in the level of the buried soil together with animal bones (Gazdapusztai 1964; Ecsedy 1979, 20). The find got lost.91 At last, it has to be mentioned that in the research area an individually sited Classic Baden settlement was explored at Debrecen–Tócóvölgy (Figure 22), in an area, where more kurgan mounds are known (excavated kurgans are for example the László-halom or the Szántay-halom, Zoltai 1938).92 Additional Baden settlement features in the surveyed region (after Korek 1983; Korek 1985; György 2008; Horváth 2009): - Boleráz settlement traces are reported from Levelek in the Szabolcs region, along the left shore of the Tisza River in the neighbourhood of Tiszaluc, Alattyán, Tiszavalk, Poroszló, Tiszarád, Cserhátszentistván and Gyöngyöshalász. Apart from these south of the Körös River, in Békés County, for example from the Battonya, Békés, Békéscsaba, Biharugra, Bucsa, Ecsegfalva,

Another exemple for the meeting of the two cultures is the sites at MezĘcsát–Hörcsögös and Tiszavasvári– Gyepáros (Kalicz 1999), where a Pit–Grave culture kurgan was constructed upon Classic Baden burials (sadly both kurgans were destroyed). It is notable that at MezĘcsát–Hörcsögös an aniconic, anthropomorphic-like stele was discovered (Kalicz 1999, 68, Figure 4-5.) (Figure 20.2).90 - Hortobágy–Halászlaponyag: during the excavation of the kurgan, Baden as well as Neolithic pottery fragments were found. Ecsedy published the reconstruction drawing of the lost pot only, therefore it is neccessary to describe the material here in details. In his opinion the vessel was a sacrifice for the kurgan burial, just as the find discovered at Dunahalom (Ecsedy 1979, 16, Pl. 1.9). Yet, his view cannot be accepted: the kurgan was most 90 For the formal analyses of the steles from Hungary see Horváth 2009. Two steles were discovered at Plaþidol II site (Panayotov 1989, Obr. 63, 79), similar to the piece known from MezĘcsát–Hörcsögös. Additional finds are reported from Bulgaria from the Varna area: two pieces from the site Ezerovo II, three pieces from the site Ezerovo III, and an additional stele is known from Nevša (Tonþeva 1981, Figure 152-160). The Gherla/Szamosújvár stele (Orosz 1904) quite resembles the Pianu de Jos/Alsópián example. Their analogies are quoted from the Steppes, namely from Natalivka, Pervomaevka and Belogradovka sites (Ciugudean 1982).

91

It could be a small Baden mug or a cheers cup as well. It is a sacrificial piece connected to the kurgan, or perhaps an artefact from a former, deserted settlement. 92 Zoltai 1928, Déri Museum, Prehistoric Collection Inv. No. IV. 1927.63.1.

88

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Both the geographical and the chronological situation of the kurgans and the Baden settlements may allow inferring further consequences. According to one model, Baden artefacts were mixed into the depository layers of the kurgans subsequently, from a deserted Baden settlement. The dating of these artefacts then could be provided acoording to the inner typology of the Baden culture with the terminus post quem of Early, Boleráz or Classic Baden. There is only one, but major problem with this model: the stratification cannot define the actual period of how long after the desertion of the Baden site the kurgan was constructed. This might be of key element in considering that a similar stratigraphic situation could have been created when the kurgan was built ten years or also if one thousand years after the demolition of the Baden site — presumed that no other populations occupied the same territory — as it is supposed in the case of Eastern Hungary. There is a major occupation break after the Bodrogkeresztúr culture in the major part of the area, the region is repopulated again in the first phase of the Bronze Age by the Makó culture. Therefore, archaeological stratification is not a proper methodological tool to differentiate between “nearly contemporaneous” “soon after” and “long after” situations.

Csongrád, Deszk, GyomaendrĘd, Körösladány, Szeghalom, VésztĘ area. - Boleráz–Baden settlement features were discovered during the rescue excavation project of the M3 Motorway in the borderland of Tiszavasvári and Nyíregyháza–Oros. - Several Baden sites are recorded in Eastern Hungary (for Szabolcs–Szatmár–Bereg County see Bóna 1986, 25; Bóna 1993, 74; for additional examples see Kalicz 1999; György 2008, 6),93 in the Érmellék region and in the territories of the Körös Rivers (Roman and Németi 1978, 41-45, Figure 7, Pl. 1; Németi 1996, 27) (Figure 23). The connections between the Baden culture and the steppean populations (Kvityana culture) can be exemplified by the BalatonĘszöd–TemetĘi dĦlĘ Boleráz– Baden settlement. At this stite, from Section 47/10 in Layer No. 925 destruction culture layer, an atypical pedestalled cup was unearthed. The parallels of this vessel are cited from kurgan No. 2 at Orlik by Rassamakin, stressing its origins from the Carpathian Basin (however, no precise data is included in the text: Rassamakin 1999, 116, Figure 3.22.11).94 Maybe the same steppean links are reflected in the late Tripolye male clay mask, shaped similarly as anthropomorphic figurines, discovered in pit No. 1072-1096, dating from the Classic Baden III period (Horváth 2004a, 2009) (Figure 24).95

Ecsedy (1979, 15, 19, 39) suggested that kurgan burials are typically located in woodland steppe areas in inundation zones, while Baden sites are to be found on loess soils, practically avoiding each other’s settlement areas — as a result of their dissimilar life styles — but, assuming that in few cases the overlapping is possible between the two cultures as a special form of symbiosis. Kalicz (1968, 58) even suggested that the arrival of the population of the Pit–Grave culture destroyed the Baden culture.

93 The majority of them are located on the left shore of the Tisza River, or in the foregrounds of the Mátra Mountains: MezĘcsát–Látóhalom, MezĘkeresztes, Méra, Tiszakeszi, Muhi, Tiszabábolna, Csincse, Kál, Füzesabony–Öregdomb tell settlement, Poroszló–Ráboly, Tiszafüred– Ásotthalom tell settlement (this latest is in the Trans-Tisza region). In the collection of the Déri Museum there are Viss-type Classic Baden artefacts that are registered from the following sites: KülsĘ–Ohat, Debrecen–Tócóvölgy, Hajdúszoboszló, FelsĘfülöp, Dévaványa (Figure 25), Berettyóújfalu–Nagy-Bócs-dĦlĘ (Dani and Szilágyi 2006), Komádi, Kismarja. 94 He lists it to the Kvityana culture, placing it to the local middlehorizon (3800/3700–3000/3400 BC), noting that the metal searching steppean population in the Carpathians and in Transylvania shows close relationship with the Sofievka and Usatovo groups of the Tripolye culture, who shift to the Black Sea–south Bug area. Similar finds are identified in Hungary from Debrecen–Szövetkezeti szĘlĘhely and Debrecen–BellegelĘ (Kalicz 1968, XII/1a, 2; Dani 2005b, 9. T/2, 10. T/1). 95 This earliest wave of the Pit–Grave culture can be connected to the Varna culture, which is one phase younger than the mask of BalatonĘszöd (the local group of the Kotzadermen-GumelniĠa-Karanovo VI cultures) and the golden masks from the symbolic graves No. 2, 3, and 15 (contemporary with the Hungarian Early/Middle Copper Age (Lichardus and Fol 1988), supposed that pit No 1072-1096 at BalatonĘszöd can be interpreted as a symbolic burial. The BalatonĘszöd find (dated to 3020-2910 cal BC (1ı) from the animal bones and by termoluminescens dating of the object shows 4820 ±430 BP) can be related to the Early Catacomb mask burials (ĝlusarska 2006, 98-99, 146-148, Figure 29, 2800-2000/1600 cal BC). The traits of the mask allows us to reconstruct a wide-faced euryprosop type male face, which correlates with the anthropological material of Steppean populations, but sharply differs from the average long-faced and long-skulled Mediterranean type anthropological features of the Baden culture, which represent the 80-85 % of the available material. The mask burials of the Catacomb culture exclusively appear in the Western- or Inguland Ural-Samara/Kuybyshev-Catacomb group, and also in the “mixed” Molokchna group. These masks were made of unburnt clay, ground human bones, ochre and ash in four major types, and in some cases birch-bark tar painting were applied directly to the face bones. The mask burials are excellent examples for the re-opening of the graves and post-mortem manipulations, which was vital part of the burial rites. These habits were not unknown in the Baden culture either (Horváth 2004b; Horváth et al. 2009).

As a third option, there is a theory about the “no man’s land” in the Great Hungarian Plain region in the Late Copper Age, which is not populated by the Baden culture. This geographical gap would have been occupied by Steppean cultures (Figure 23). In my opinion, this question could be rightly answered after the completion of systematic topography of the Great Hungarian Plain region based on field walking and sondage excavations of several sites. Despite the topographical surveys (see the series of the Archaeological Topography of Hungary, especially the volumes 6, 8 and 10), the large-scale archaeological projects connected to flood protection in the Tisza valley,96 and the extensive rescue excavations along the 96 As a consequence of the devastating floods of the Tisza River, in 2003 the Hungarian Government started a new large-scale water regulation project entitled Vásárhelyi-terv. In the framework of this development scheme six major water reservoirs are planned to be built in the Tisza inundation area: the Cigánd–Tiszakarád, the Bereg, the Hany–Tiszasüly, the Tiszaroff, the Nagykunság, and the Szamos– Kraszna storage lakes. From these the Tiszaroff reservoir was built, which connected to this project, where extensive archaeological research was carried out at Rákóczifalva, TiszabĘ–Galamb-dĦlĘ Partalja, Tiszagyenda–Gó Lake, and Tiszaroff, but hardly any Baden finds were identified during the excavations.

89

T. HORVÁTH

Boleráz and the Baden Periods in all the territory of recent Hungary. In the central part of the country (in the surroundings of Budapest up to Pilismarót–Vác) despite the intensive research, only Late Baden III/IV finds are identified, but based on the radiocarbon dating from Ecser Site No. 6, this period, typologically categorized as late–classic, took place in the Boleráz phase between 3400-–3000 cal BC100!

routes of the M3 and M5 Motorways as well as the main roads connected to these from the 1990s, the heartland of the Great Hungarian Plain namely the Hortobágy region, the Nagykunság as well as the Nagy–Sárrét or the Tiszazug areas, were only partially if at all involved in systematic archaeological research (see Raczky et al. 1997; Szalontai 2003). The sparse archaeological attention of the last 200 years resulted that in the studied kurgan expansion zone except for Békés County and Tiszavasvári, there are no Baden sites from the early and Boleráz phases (this would support the “no man’s land theory” in the Boleráz phase between 3600/3400–3100 cal BC, which could have been invaded by the Pit–Grave culture).97 The Classic Baden sites characterized by Viss-type ceramics are hardly present, but the few appearances are directly connected to kurgan sites regularly near to waterflows, which factor had a strategic importance for both populations (MezĘcsát–Látóhalom/Hörcsögös; KülsĘ–Ohat Inv. No. IV. 1923. 61, 63, 65, 67, 68; 50.69.70; 72.105.6-7/Dunahalom, Debrecen–Tócóvölgy Inv. No. IV. 1927.63.1./-Szántay, László and Dévaványa Inv. No. IV.1937.3/-Barcé-halom, Templomdomb etc.).98 Further on, this feature can be interpreted as an indicator of social relations between the two cultures in the Late Copper Age–Early Classic Baden period (roughly between 34003000 cal BC in this region), presumably in the previously described superior, subordinate or patron–client framework, explained as a typical feature of the ProtoIndo-European populations. In this system of relationships the Pit–Grave culture plays the violent oppressive, or the patron role (see for example Anthony 2007, 137-138, 378-379).99

Correspondingly, in all those areas, where the Boleráz phase is missing, and only late III/IV type Baden material is distinguished (such as in north-east Hungary and the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, for example in the HódmezĘvásárhely area based on the summary by Banner from 1956 but sadly still lacking 14C dating), it is possible that this typologically late material chronologically represents the early phase, which at other sites (e.g. in Transdanubia Budakalász-Luppacsárda, BalatonĘszöd–TemetĘi dĦlĘ, Nagykanizsa–Billa) grouped to Boleráz or Boleráz–Baden type sites, namely that in those regions the Classic Baden III/IV material is contemporaneus with the early Boleráz I.B/C type assemblages between 3400/3300–3100/3000 cal BC (Figure 27)! The Boleráz/Baden sites east of the Tisza River do not overlap with the young age of the Transdanubian Baden settlements (2600 cal BC): they ended around 3100 cal BC, and can be placed to the Pre-Pit-Grave culture, which infiltrated into the territory of the Great Hungarian Plain around 3400 cal BC, but in the first time they occupied such territories, where the Boleráz/Baden culture never settled (the so-called „no man’s land”: Nagykunság, Nagy-Sárrét, Hortobágy). Later - thanks to further infiltration from east - they moved from north and occupied the whole Boleráz/Baden territory, however for this time these cultures already disappeared from the Great Hungarian Plain.

The chronological framework is further complicated by the internal dating problems of the Baden culture itself: in the last fifty years there was a widely accepted hypothesis about the linear and unbroken development of the Boleráz–Baden cultures in the Late Copper Age, which theory seems to be contradicted nowadays.

Baden IIB/III–Viss and Baden III/IV– Ózd/Piliny/HódmezĘvásárhely form the Classic Baden culture in East-Hungary, as two entirely or partly neighbouring and contemporaneous territorial groups.

Recent excavation data do not support the continuous, peaceful transition and steady progress between the

Based of the partly overlap in time and space it can be a considered idea to discuss the possibility of any interaction between the Pit-Grave and Boleráz/Baden cultures, but the explaination of the disappereance of Boleráz/Baden is probably in in connection with the infiltration of the Pit–Grave culture.

97 The “no man’s land” is located more precisely east from the line of the Tisza River, south from Tiszavasvári, and north from the courses of the three Körös Rivers, from which territory no Boleráz type finds or sites have been identified (Figure 23, 28). At the same time the surroundings of recent Tiszavasvári is densely populated in this period, the traces of several cultures were detected (Figure 26). 98 The 14C dates of Baden/Viss settlement of Berettyóújfalu–NagyBócs–dĦlĘ (Poz-31805; Poz-31799) are between 4505 ±35 – 4480 ±40 BP, 3360-3090 cal BC, 1 ı. 99 After George Dumèzil’s hypothesis on the trifunctional Indoeuropean society the young males were shephards the mature males were the warriors and the old men were the ritual leaders. In (Proto-) IndoEuropean societies the fraternitas of young men (such as the Indogerman Männerbunde or the Greek Korios) usually marked with single or double band on the shoulders marked the stage of initiation (single band: initiation into brotherhood, double band: oath of loyalty to the leader). These single or double bands are regular decorative motifs of Baden anthropomorphic figures (see Horváth 2010). Taking oaths on dogs or wolfs their being as a totem animals might be symbolized by the carnivorous animals teeth found in the kurgans (Anthony 2007).

At the same time, this would also mean that the Boleráz and the Baden cultures cannot be portrayed as a cohesive development process, but rather as two completely independent material cultures, which form contemporaneous, neighbouring cultural zones in particular parts of the country, while in other regions they represent horizons one after another with temporal gaps (see more details about this problem in Horváth 2009). 100 I express my gratitude to Róbert Patay the leader of the excavation and to Peter Stadler for the information.

90

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Supposedly, all those cultures, which are not of steppean origin, were formed in the surrounding territories upon their direct stimulus, but the tradition of burying their dead into kurgan mounds, but characterised by mixed material as well as cultural legacy.103 All the east Slovakian kurgan burials can be grouped to this horizon too, in which regularly Baden, cordornamented and Nyírség type pottery is discovered (Bátora 1983). Moreover all those cord-ornamented stray finds from the territory of recent Hungary (Dani 2001, 132; 2005), and other sites with alike assemblages could not be connected to kurgans (Figure 29).104

The western and eastern part of the Danube shows different chronological periodicity, which is reflected in the cultural groups, and this falsifies the former opinion of the uniform development of the Carpathian Basin in the Late Copper Age. At last, all these hypotheses will not help, but makes the dating of the kurgans more complicated.101 Period III In the succeeding period, in the transitional phase between the end of the Late Copper Age and the Early Bronze Age, beside the population of the Pit–Grave, surviving Baden sites, as well as the Period III of the CoĠofen culture can be sketched in the Érmellék region (Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom). At the same time, sites defined as Post-Baden groups (or various ceramic styles), such as Kostolac, and additional populations remarked by distinctive cable pattern vessels (most probably not individual cultures, only sporadically identified populations with mixed material culture) are represented in the study area (Figure 28).102 This horizon was paralleled with the late Kostolac, Vuþedol A, and the CoĠofen IIIa-b phases (Dani 2001, 130).

Steppean type cist graves with cord-ornamented ceramics were identified in the wider region of the kurgan at Iaúi– Valea Lupului in Grave No. 22,105 at Bleckendorf/ Egeln,106 and also at Wien–Essling.107 103 The CoĠofen III influenced Livezile site (Ciugudean 2000), the slovakian kurgan burials stimulated by Baden–Nyírség–Corded Ware cultures (Bátora 1983), the Vuþedol (sic!) kurgans (Batajnica, Vojka, Moldova Veche (Tasiü 1995)), the Nezsider type mounds having Late/Classic Vuþedol–Early Somogyvár inspirations (Ruttkay 2002, 2003) can be listed here, and the somewhat later burial mounds of the Somogyvár-Vinkovci horizon (Gönyü–HömpölygĘ/TetĦdomb, GyĘrszabadhegy, VerbiĠa? (Bóna 1965, 40-44)), moreover, the elite kurgan burials of Dalmatia and Montenegro such as Velika Gruda and Mala Gruda, Danilo–Tumul Ivankovaþa, Podgorica–Tološi (Primas 1996). The Pit–Grave culture itself changes a lot: the late graves are inspired by the surrounding local Early Bronze Age cultures, and thus the Makó and Livezile type ceramics are represented in the rich grave deposits at Sárrétudvari (Dani and Nepper 2006), which were totally missing from the early Pit–Grave burials! The burial rites of the Pit– Grave might have influenced the habits in the Classic Baden period, one phase earlier (for the appearance of Baden kurgans during period IV; see Kovács 1987). 104 Such as for example Buj (Roska 1914, Fig 1, it was discovered during the construction works of the railway line between Buj and Baba, Inv. Nr. I. 1196/57.150.1., Nyíregyháza, Jósa András Museum, Prehistoric Collection); the best formal and ornamental parallels of which are from the Central German territory, from Niederkaina (Buchwaldek 1966, Abb. 6, 7), to the vessel discovered in a kurgan of the Srednij Stog Culture at AkkermeĔ (Telegin 1992, Abb. 2.5), and the Pit–Grave kurgan at Ploieúti-Triaj in Romania. Other examples are Tiszabábolna; Tarnabod (Kalicz 1968, Table III/2; MNM Inv. Nr. 45.1943.1; perfect formal and decorative analogy can be found in Grave No. 1. at kurgan No. 10. at Sofievka (Rassamakin and Nikolova 2008, Pl. 1.3-4); Nagyhalász–Királyhalom (Kalicz 1968, Table I/18); Paszab– SzĘlĘhomoka (Kalicz 1968, Table XIV/1); Békésszentandrás–Nádashalom (MRT 8, 85-86, Table 19/8). Good analogy is known from Lebedi, kurgan No. 2. (Gei 2000, Ric. 9:24), Tiszabábolna–Szilpuszta, Grave No. 7 (Dani 2005b, Table 2/6). Kalicz mentioned cord-impressed fragments from Hortobágy–Poroshát, Haláp, Téglás and Hencida (see more details in the catalogue in Dani 2005b). Possibly it would be worthwhile to detect the spreading of the Early Bronze Age assimetrichandled vessels and the intrnally decorated pedestalled bowls in this environment. In Catacomb kurgans this object type is classified as incense burner (see ĝlusarska 2006), which was detected by Gabriella Kulcsár not only in the Pontic region, but also in the Don–Kuban area and on the western shores of the Caspian Sea (Roman et al. 1992). 105 Ferenczi 1997, 25. However, this find belongs to the Globular Amphora culture! The closest cist grave of the Globular Amphora culture was discovered inside the Carpathian Basin at Csíkszentmárton/Sânmartin-Ciuc (Romania) with a decorated bone belt hook (Székely 2002). This grave belongs to the Podolia or Szeret/Siret sub-group of the Globular Amphora culture (between 2900-2400 cal BC) (Klochko 2003, 399; Szmyt 1999, Figure 3), similar finds are known from south Bukovina, from Suceava County. It is discussed that these communities came into this region after the Cucuteni B2 period, and created the Horodiútea-Erbiceni culture, which during its long development might have had an influence on the Early Bronze Age and the formation of Schneckenberg culture (similar cist graves). Their

Period IV / (V?) The beginning, or the first phase of the Bronze Age is represented by the spread of the Makó culture in northeast Hungary: this culture streches up to the Érmellék region, but does not step over the line of the Tisza, and its expansion zone is bordered in the south by the Temes River in the Bánát/Banat region (Dani 2001, 131-132). There are contemporaneous groups living in that zone such as the west Transylvanian Livezile–Bedeleu/BedellĘ kurgan grave group, the CoĠofen IIIc, Vuþedol B/(C?), Glina–Schneckenberg A-B groups, and in the Dráva/Drava/Drau–Száva/Sava/Save interfluve region the early Somogyvár–Vinkovci groups (and this process continues in the second phase of the Bronze Age, in Period V?). According to the Period 2 of the Sárrétudvari kurgan this phase also witnessed by a late wave of the Pit–Grave (Dani and Nepper 2006).

101

Perhaps the partial geographical and temporal overlapping of the Boleráz and the Baden cultures is responsible for the synchronization of the Tripolye-Cucuteni culture and the Boleráz–Baden group marked by vague information on import-based trading connections (see also Polgárization/Badenization in the Tripolye-Cucuteni culture in Videiko 2000). 102 One Kostolac type vessel is known, which was discovered between Tiszadorogma and ÁroktĘ during a through cutting of an embankment (Dani 2001, 129, I. Table/1), parallel to the Lower Danube the Kostolac-CoĠofen IIa-b symbiotic sites formed with mixed finds (Roman 1976, 53-55, Figure 8), while in the eastern edge of the Great Hungarian Plain a Late Baden-CoĠofen connection is observable (Roman and Németi 1978, 49-53).

91

T. HORVÁTH

(Grave No. 5, 6, 7), among which the position of Grave No. 6 is identical to, but its orientation slightly differs from the that of the primary burial in the Lyukas-halom. However, it has to be noted that this grave was a timber construction. The kurgan was built in three phases, Grave No. 4 belongs to the second, while Grave No. 6 to the first construction phase. Both burials were found in the centre of the mound. Grave No. 6 was dug into the top of the first depository layer–thus after the construction of the first mound (Ecsedy 1979, 22, Figure 10, 14). Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom: - Grave No. 12: deb-6869, 4520 ±40 BP, 3346-3309 cal BC, 1 ı. This is a primary burial of a 15-17 years old girl (?), belonging to the first construction phase (Dani and Nepper 2006, 35, 39, Figure 8.2, 48-49; Zoffmann 2006, 53). - Grave No. 10: deb-6639, 4350 ± 40 BP, 3004-2960 cal BC, 1 ı. It is a west-east oriented grave of a 44-50 years old male from the second building period, with a grinding stone deposited bellow the head, and there were animal bones in the fill of the pit (Dani and Nepper 2006, 35, Figure 7.2, 48-49; Zoffmann 2006, 51-53).

Although the Corded Ware ceramics in Hungary are not strictly connected to the primary burials of the kurgans, their appearance is usually linked to the Pit–Grave or the Catacomb horizons (e.g. Kalicz 1968, 43-46; Ecsedy 1979, 56).108 Even if these artefacts are discovered as stray finds in the close surroundings of the kurgans, it can be supposed that these might have been grave deposits (Figure 29). Absolute Chronology Austria At Neusiedl / Nezsider am See – Kalvarienberg/ Einsiedlerberg Kálváriahegy / Remetehegy) in 1943, during the digging of an anti-aircraft defence, a tumulus burial was discovered. The grave was constructed by depositing extra soil on top of a natural hill series. The burial was not dug into the soil but the top of a mound was covered with stones. Beside a mature man a golden hair ring, a classic set of Zók–Vuþedol II/Ig I.– Jevišovice/Mödling–Zöbing–Kosihy/Makó/ýaka vessels and Somogyvár–Vinkovci influenced pottery was deposited. The radiocarbon dates for the locally developed “Facies Neusiedl” grave are: - ETH-25186: 4160 ± 55 cal BP, 2820–2660 cal BC (1 ı). - VERA 2213: 4130 ± 35 cal BP, 2710–2620 cal BC (1 ı) (Stadler 2002).109

- Grave No. 4: deb-7182, 4135 ± 60 BP, 2859–2801 cal BC, 1 ı. It is a burial of a 41-59 years old male from the second building period. Grave deposits: above the head there was a large amphora typical of the Makó culture, bellow and above the skeleton traces of organic material was observed, there was a silver temple ring on the right, while a golden ring was documented at the left ear (Dani and Nepper 2006, 32-33, Figure 4, 48-49; K. Zoffmann 2006, 51).110 - Grave No. 9: deb-6871, 4060 ±5 0 BP, 2637–2489 cal BC (1 ı). It is a grave of a 23-30 years male from the second construction phase. The shape of the grave pit is oval, the skeleton was found in an extended supine position, the legs were in frog-like position, and the hands were placed on the pelvis. At the right foot an imprint of a footwear was found, in the north-east corner of the grave pit a handled Livezile-type jar was deposited. Moreover, a dog’s tooth was found in the filling of the grave. At the bottom of the pit evidences for an organic material (blanket) were identified (Dani and Nepper 2006, 35, Figure 7.1, 48-49; K. Zoffmann 2006, 51). The orientation of the grave is identical to the primary burial of the Lyukas-halom. All the burials–except for Grave 12, which is the primary burial of the first building phase–were arranged in the centre of the kurgan mound.

Hungary There are only three excavated kurgan sites in Hungary with available 14C dating: Kétegyháza–Török mound, Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom, and Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukashalom. Kétegyháza–Török-halom: - Grave No. 4 in kurgan No. 3: Bln-609, 4265 ± 80 BP, 2315 ± 80 BC (Ecsedy 1979, 21-22, Figure 9, 52). Bellow the kurgan mound three burials were unearthed appearance is especially important since the GAC in the southern Bug region as well as in the inundation area of the central Dniester-Dnieper between 2960-2850 cal BC is contemporaneous with the latest phase of the pre-Pit–Grave cultures, and the combination of these two cultures might have led to the formation of the Pit–Grave culture in the region (Szmyt, 1999, 196). It is possible that the early, cord-impressed amphora found south-west from the Attila-domb at Tápiószentmárton (best analogies were identified by Dinnyés (1973, 39, Table II/9.) in east Slovakian kurgan burials and from Malai, kurgan No. 9 (Gei 2000, Figure 15:15.) can be listed to this group (Figure 29.1). 106 Lkr. Aschersleben-Staßfurt, KIA-162: 4080 ±20 bp, 2620-2570 cal BC: Corded Ware–Bell Beakers burial with cord-impressed pottery, hammer-headed bone needle, with Manych type knife, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany (Behrens 1952; Müller 1999, 80). 107 Beside the burial dated to the Bell Beakers horizon Manych type arsenic-copper knife (Zimmermann 2003). 108 The appearance of Corded Ware culture in Podolia, Volhínia and in the Upper Vistula regions was contemporary with the decline of the Central European Corded Ware culture between 2890-2430 cal BC. The earliest Corded Ware finds are from the inundation area in the Upper Dniester area, the spring area of the Western Bug, in the valleys of the Gnyla Lypa, Zolota Lypa, Bystritsa Rivers, which is the result of an expansion into three major directions: the northern directed to the Western Bug area, the eastern towards Podolia, and at last the southeastern in the direction of Galicia/Haliþ and the feet of the Carpathian Mountains (Szmyt 1999, 114-115). 109 The other child burial is a later, secondary grave (Ruttkay 2002; Stadler 2002).

Hajdúnás–Tedej–Lyukas halom: - after the first excavation campaign in 2004 radiocarbon dates from the soil matter of the kurgan and a Neolith animal bone fragment was available (Table 1). Results of the soil matter give a information on the age of the soil that was used to erect the kurgan (the TOC dates are closer to the reality). This was dated to the Middle/Late Copper Age (see Molnár in this volume for detailed description). 110

According to the result of Russian scholars, in the vessels deposited next to the head usually water is found, while in those vessels put at the legs soup or mush is discovered (Shishlina 2000).

92

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) - in 2009, during the second excavation campaign radiocarbon dates were measured from the first archaeological feature – plant remains from the grave –

and from the bone of the primer burial that was cut in the A-horizon of palaeosoil (Table 2.)

Tab. 1. 14C results from the humus, samples extracted in the 2004 excavation campaign Type of the Sample

G13C (PDB) [‰] ( ± 0,2 ‰)

Conv 14C date (year BP)*

Deb-12771

Total Organic Carbon

-27,1

4810 ± 90

Deb-12956

Humic acid

-26,2

5410 r 90

Deb-12764

TOC

-27,1

5260 ± 80

Deb-13414

Humic acid

-26,3

5570 r 80

Deb-12762

TOC

-25,4

705 r 45

Deb-13413

Humic acid

-26,1

3020 r 60

Deb-12779

TOC

-26,7

5090 r 80

Deb-13420

Humic acid

-26,8

5810 r 90

Deb-12780

TOC

-27,0

5600 r 80

Deb-13419

Humic acid

-26,8

6560 r 90

Deb-12788

Animal bone

-21,0

7720 r 80

Serial No

Code of the Sample

Lab Code

1.

Ly-3 (Layer 3), Palaeosoil I. Aphorizon

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Ly-6 (Layer 6), Palaeosoil II. Ap2horizon

Ly-10 (Layer 10), recent soil Ahorizon

Ly-11 (Layer 11), “sackf”soil

Ly A, soil near the animal bones

Ly CS, animal bone

*see Molnár and Svingor later in this volume (pp. 255-258.) for detailed description of the radiocarbon measurements Tab. 2. The 14C dating results of the excavation campaign in 2009 Poz-31637: Hajdúnánás 1. Feature–grave? (mat): 4270 ± 40BP 68.2% probability 2920 BC (68.2%) 2870 BC 95.4% probability 3010 BC (82.3%) 2850 BC 2810 BC (11.3%) 2750 BC 2720 BC (1.8%) 2700 BC Poz-31405: Hajdunánás 2. Feature–1. grave (human bone): 4210 ± 35 BP 68.2% probability 2890 BC (23.9%) 2860 BC 2810 BC (37.3%) 2750 BC 2720 BC ( 7.0%) 2700 BC 95.4% probability 2910 BC (32.0%) 2830 BC 2820 BC (63.4%) 2670 BC

Similar observations were made in the case of the samples from the archaeological features, and the sections from the humus layer of the 2004 excavation, namely that the upper, younger stratigraphic layers produced a bit older 14C dates than the primary building phase of the kurgan. In this case this means that Feature No. 1 was dated by samples taken from the ash of selfburnt plant material, which is supposed to present older dating than bone (old wood effect). Further disturbance is presumed by a modern robber pit (No. 4), which cuts this feature. Nevertheless, the two sample dating correlate well, overlapping each other within the limit of error (e.g. Feature No. 1: 4270–40 = 4230 cal BP–Feature No. 2, Grave No. 1: 4210+35 = 4245 cal BP): consequently, most probably there were only some decades between the two construction phases, as it has already been confirmed previously by the geological investigations, the

93

T. HORVÁTH

From the Danube to the Dnieper the Mikhailovka (lower strata), in the northern area, in the Dnieper area the Kvityana culture existed,111 and further to the north, at the Donets River the Dereivka culture was present (Rassamakin 1999, 112-122).

radiocarbon dating from the humus samples and the excavation results as well. Romania Baia Hamangia: GrN-1995: 4530 ± 50 bp, Bln-29: 4090 ± 160 bp, KN-38: 4060 ± 160 bp (Bojadžiev 1992).

The Late Eneolithic is equivalent with the Tripolye C2 phase: at the Prut River and the middle Dniester region the Gordinesti/Kasperovo Group existed. In the Dniester region the Usatovo group was formed, which is marked by Lower Mikhailovka effects, and on the Romanian section of the Prut–Szeret/Siret Rivers the Horodiútea– Erbiceni variant (Rassamakin 1999, 122-127), contemporary with the Cernavodă III culture.

Bulgaria In north-east Bulgaria (in the territories of Carnbrod, Šumen, Madara, Kalugerica, Kjulevaþ, Plaþidol, Zeglara– Orljak, Poruþik–Gešanovo, Belogradec, Smolnica and Kavarna), in south-east Bulgaria Troyanovo, in south Bulgaria Kovaþevo, Dolno Sahrane, in middle-northern Goran–Slatina (western orientated), in north-west Bulgaria kurgan burials were reported from river valleys and upper plateaus from Trnava, Kneža and Hărlec. Generally, 15-20 kurgans are known in every 0,5-1 km, they are positioned in groups, in ring-like or linear arrangement. The direction of their migration is supposed to follow the line of the Dniester–Danube Rivers. They form mixed groups with the Cernavodă III-II, Ezero and Magura–CoĠofen III. cultures. In the burials stone circles, fire traces, coloured blankets, sprinkled ochre and wooden constructions are documented. The north-western territory is bound up with the south-western Romanian areas, only the Danube River divides the two groups (Rast, south Oltenia, south of Craoiva). The expansion of the same group is the appearance of the north Serbian kurgans at the Danube (Jabuka–Tri humke, Padej/Padé). Plaþidol: I. (with wagon deposit) Brl-2501: 4170 ± 50 BP, Brl-2504: 4042 ± 60 BP (Panayotov 1989). Trnava: Magura–CoĠofen III. and Corded Ware with Pit– Grave ceramics, western orientation (Panayotov 1989). Poruþik–Gesanov: 4360 ± 50 BP, 4110 ± 50 BP.

It is debated by Russian scholars, where and where exactly the Pit–Grave culture was formed. According to a widely accepted view, the antecedent of it was the Repin culture, expanding towards the Don River, while the developing phase is represented by the Pit–Grave culture (in the meaning of V. A. Gorodtsov, see Gorodtsov 1997, 291-292); by 3400/3300 cal BC it spread out to the Azovian–Pontic Steppes. Early Bronze Age (3000/2900–2300/2200 cal BC): The earliest Pit–Grave graves appear between 3400/3300 and 3100 cal BC in the south-western shore of the Black Sea, and presumably they spread from the heartland, where the culture was developed. Similar features are detected from a bit later period in the Dnieper, the Azovean Sea and the Volga areas, and they reach the Caspian Sea region around 2500 cal BC. The uniform entity can be separated into an earlier (3300/3100–3000/2700) and a later (3000/2700–2100/2000 cal BC) horizon (Klochko et al. 2003).

Serbia Kurgans are documented in the Vajdaság/Vojvodina, Šumadija regions and also in the lower valley of the Morava River (Panþevo, Perlez/Perlesz–Batka, Pašica, Kikinda–Padej/Padé, Vojlovica, Vršec, Vlajkovac, Kragujevac–Bare, Rogojevac, Tasiü 1995, 72-74). Padej/Padé: Bln-2219: 4320 ± 50 BP (Tasiü 1995, 74).

In the south-western shores of the Black Sea the Pit– Grave community develops from the Kvityana (PostMariupol) and the Zhivotilovo–Volchansk (this group could have transfered the knowledge of the wheel and the spinning–weaving towards the western areas) and became mixed with various local cultures as the Tripolye C2 groups, the Usatovo, the Kemi–Oba groups,112 resulting a special fusion of cultural elements,113 which is

Montenegro Velika Gruda: the first among the three building phases of kurgan “A” is the first construction period with Baden–Cetina-like pottery, elite Remedello and Pit– Grave type binary metal deposits, and also includes a stone construction above the primary burial. According to the 14C dating of twelve samples the mound was built after 2800–2700 cal BC (Primas 1996, 39-52). In the cist grave a roughly 25 years old male was found, the skeleton was in a poor condition, the body was oriented towards north-west–south-east.

111 The first appearance of those simple copper jewellery are in the Kvityana burials, which are represented in the kurgan burials of the Great Hungarian Plain (bead, twisted plate, ring, spiral, see footnote nr. 81.). Open and also composite moulds are known, all in all 84 finds can be connected to this so-called Post-Mariupol horizon. Its connection with the Carpathian–Balkan metal production zone: the raw material came from the Carpathian Basin or the Balkans, resembling their formal and technological traditions, but there is a change from period B1 in the use of local ores (Volhynia) and independent production (Videiko 2000, 65). 112 The first plough and wagon representation are depicted on the petroglyphs in the Pre-Pit-Grave Kemi-Oba culture in the Crimean Peninsula. This is a real stone-using culture, whose shrines, megalithic monuments are regularly re-used by the Pit–Grave population (Szmyt 1999; Telegin and Mallory 1995). 113 It has to be mentioned that the surviving cultures such as the Usatovo culture dating from the period between 3380–2950 cal BC based on eight older radiocarbon dates (see also Rassamakin and Nikolova 2008), or the Kemi-Oba culture dating from 3300-2800 cal BC are both overlap the Pit–Grave culture (Szmyt 1999, 103).

Eastern European steppes: Ukraine/Russia In the Pre-Pit–Grave horizon the Middle (3800/3700– 3500/3400 cal BC) and the Late Eneolithic (3500/3400– 3000/2900 cal BC) phases are important in relation to the kurgan burial of the Great Hungarian Plain. The Middle Eneolithic Period is contemporary with the beginning of the Tripolye B2 phase and the C1 phase (Videiko 2000).

94

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) burials in the Ural–Samara/Kuybishev region), while the allochton hypothesis recommend influences from outside the Pontic area, from the Near–East, mainly arguing the catacomb–pit grave feature (ĝlusarska 2006). There are many resemblances (burying bellow kurgan mounds, usage of catacombs, the positioning of the dead) and similar object types (hammer-headed pin,117 animal teeth, bone objects, vessel types, some stone tools and metal types, see ĝlusarska 2006, 43) can be found between the two units.118 Around 2800 cal BC the formerly uniform Pit–Grave amalgamation fell apart: in the Ural–Volga region the Poltavka culture developed, around 2500 cal BC in the Don-Kuban region the Catacomb culture became characteristic among the local groups.

fundamentally different from the clear Pit–Grave groups (Rassamakin 1999, 127).114 This region is also stimulated by strong Central European impulses in this period, which is often referred to as the „Badenization” process of the Tripolye culture, and inspired by the Funnelbeaker culture and the Globular Amphora culture too. This may be a reasonable explanation for the imported goods and the ideological resemblances between the two cultures (Videiko 2000). Rassamakin portrays this territory as the colonization area of the Late Maikop and/or Late Tripolye culture (Rassamakin 2004, 217). Consequently, the southern Bug–Dnieper area is a contact zone, where the Tripolye, the Usatovo, the Kemi–Oba, the Lower Mikhailovka, the Zhivotilovo–Volchansk and the Kvityana cultures meet, and add a varied character to the developing Pit–Grave culture. It can be presumed that this zone is the main starting point for the steppean populations migrating to the Great Hungarian Plain.

At the same time, it was proved that in some systematically researched regions such as Kalmykia it was apparent that from time to time there can be considerable variations in the burial rites and grave deposits even within one group: here for instance the eastern Manych River area was the richest (Shishlina 2000). In the semi-desert environment, the centres were located in grassy, island-like habitats.

The earliest formation on the Catacomb culture in the northern Pontus region around 2800 cal BC is contemporaneous with the catacomb-like graves of the Záota culture and the Kraków–Sandomierz Group of the Corded Ware culture (phase I and II) in Little Poland (ĝlusarska 2006, 64, 156: between 2750–2300/2200 cal BC).115

DISCUSSION The above specified descriptions on the geographical– spatial distribution, the lifestyle, the stratigraphic, the burial, the relative and the absolute chronological characteristics allows us to infer the following hypothesis about the penetration of the steppean populations to the recent territory of Hungary119:

At the same time the Pit–Grave culture (based on 210 14C dates) and the Catacomb culture (or rather entity, perhaps an ethno-social unit, cultural-historical community after Rassamakin, Anthony and ĝlusarska) not only lived side by side geographically for centuries, but also in the same horizon between 2800–2200 cal BC in the northern Pontus steppe (the Catacomb culture is listed to the Middle Bronze Age, 699 graves, 206 kurgans, 74 14C dating, and based on 6 regional test groups, see Telegin et al. 2003, 151-184).116 Its development is debated: according to the autochthon theory it diverged from the Pit–Grave culture upon stimulations from Ciscaucasia (reasoning on the mixed

Period I: Steppean ochre grave Great Hungarian Plain: the burial at Csongrád– KettĘshalom is not considered to be a kurgan burial, but rather it should be identified as a steppean ochre grave. Dating: in considering the Marosdécse burial its age is between 4200-4100 cal BC (Govedarica 2004, 71) = it is 117

The only find in Hungary comes from Szarvas (Kalicz 1968, CXII. T/21). Presumably it was a sling (see Morgunova 2004, 68; Morgunova et al. 2005, Risz. 20). In the Mu-Saret expedition identically ornamented hammer-headed bone pin was found in a Pit–Grave and a Catacomb kurgan burial (Tsutskin and Sishlina 2001, 125). 118 Despite this ĝlusarska defined in five points the most characteristic features of the Catacomb culture (Catacomb package): 1. the bodies are positioned in a circular arrangement inside the kurgan, in the edge of the mound, 2. the catacomb is always dug into an earlier kurgan mound, 3. the skeleton is in an extended supine position, in flexed position on the right side, the head is left from the entrance of the grave, there are no differences between male and female burials concerning the position of the body, 4. the preparation of the graves (ochre sprinkle, painting of the grave base, masks), 5. relative poorness of grave goods (ĝlusarska 2006, 161). 119 With the proviso that: instead of the strict chronological sequence of succeeding cultures the latest radiocarbon dating of sites suggest that prehistoric cultures in the Carpathian Basin are much more frequently contemporary, or overlapping each other in both temporal and territorial means (e.g. Tiszapolgár–Bodrogkeresztúr - Pre-Pit–Grave / Skelya; Boleráz-Baden - Pre-Pit–Grave / Kvityana - Pit–Grave, Pit–Grave Catacomb; Baden IV - Makó/Epi-Corded Ware cultures – Pit– Grave/Catacomb - Bell Beakers Csepel group - early SomogyvárVinkovci), consequently, such attempts to interpret this period on a linear periodisation an parallelisation is basically misleading.

114

For instance shows all types of flexed burials. 115 However, except for few examples, such as Kolosy, these are not kurgan burials (e.g. Kraków–CzĊstochowa group), and other rites are not corresponding. Thus, cannot be interpreted as real catacomb burials (ĝlusarska 2006, 134, 156). 116 Cattle and small ruminant breeders, with cyclic herding lifestyle horse-breeding was less important as it was suggested before. Its metal production was based on the arsenic-bronze technology of the north Caucasus. ĝlusarska (2006, 26) claimed that this population had a major influence as merchants, and supervised salt-sources in the north Crimean area. Their role as mediators in the Near East–Caucasus– Northern and Central Europe is considered to be noteworthy (see the spreading of metals, marine trade, steles). Pustovalov applied a triple hierarchic division, in which system the highest power was held by the Ingul-Catacomb group, also dominating the diabase mines along the Ingulets River, and the ochre mines around Krivoj Rog. This population produced and circulated these key trade products. Thus by the redistribution and control of mining they gained hegemony on the two other groups: the Eastern-Catacomb and the Pit–Grave cultures (ĝlusarska 2006, 28). Whichever theory would prove to be correct, there are numerous examples on the skeletons of both cultures, where injuries caused by the other culture’s weapons were clearly observed, consequently these two cultures held war against each other (see Klochko 2001).

95

T. HORVÁTH

contemporary with the Early Copper Age Tiszapolgár culture (Ecsedy 1979, 12).

Period II: Pre-Pit–Grave horizon The Late Eneolithic Period in the Steppe areas (3500/3400–3000/2900 cal BC) was contemporary with the Late Repin, the Late Konstantinovka, the Novosvobodnaja, the late Kvityana, the late Dereivka and the late Lower Mikhailovka cultures, the Tripolye C2 (with the Sofievka, Kasperovo/Gordinesti, Gorodsk, Usatovo groups, and the end of the „Polgárization” with Boleráz imports, and with the „Badenization process”) together with local groups in the Dnieper–Bug, Kemi– Oba communities, which are analogous with the Boleráz, and then with the Cernavodă III–Classic Baden cultures.

Eastern Europe: the period of the Early Eneolithic (4550– 4100/4000 cal BC) in the Eastern Steppe region. The period of the Khvalynsk, Skelya cultures is contemporaneous with the Cucuteni A–Tripolye B1 phase (which populations played a significant role in the mediation between steppean and peasant communities), moreover analogous with the Bulgarian Aldeni–Bolgrad culture and the Varna culture, whose prosperity is identified by the elite of the Skelya culture (this population could have been the intermediator between the Pre-Caucasia–Kuban area and the Varna culture, upon which stimulation the affluence of the Varna culture developed).

The earliest kurgan graves of the Great Hungarian Plain can be classified into the Pre-Pit–Grave horizon (the primary phase of the multi-depository kurgans, such as Haldúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom, the ochre graves in the Hortobágy region, which all lack grave deposits, and also those burials with grave chambers lined with some organic material). Differentiating between Period I, this phase might be categorized as, and dated after the burials at Sárrétudvari and Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom between 3400/3350–3300/3000–2750 cal BC.

The Middle Eneolithic Period of the Eastern Steppe (3800/3700–3500/3400 cal BC) can be described by the Cucuteni B–Tripolye B2-C1 phase (Tomashevo, Zhvanetsk, Kosenovo groups, and the so called early „Polgárization” process), with the Cernavodă I culture, and the Scheibenhenkel horizon, in the east the Lower Mikhailovka, Kvityana, Dereivka, Pivikha, Repin and the Maikop cultures.120 In Hungary this is the Middle–Classic Copper Age, with the Bodrogkeresztúr and the Hunyadihalom cultures.

Period III: Early Pit–Grave horizon In the eastern Steppe region this is the period of the Early Bronze Age, which corresponds with the Early Pit–Grave horizon, with surviving groups (Usatovo) dating from 3300/3100–3000/2700 cal BC. In the Great Hungarian Plain the younger building period for the multi-phased kurgan mounds, moreover, the wood-constructed burials with no or poor grave deposits can also be linked to this period, and this Late Copper Age horizon can be associated with the end of the Late Copper Age–Early Bronze Age transitional period, including the Late Classic surviving Baden/CoĠofeni IIIa,b culture. This could be called Early Pit–Grave Horizon. Hypothetically–because of lacking radiocarbon dates–this period can be dated between 3300/3100–2900/2700 cal BC, which overlapped Period II.

In my opinion the burial at Csongrád fits to this horizon, and most probably arrived to the Carpathian Basin as an early wave of eastern Eneolithic populations. The former theory suggested by Ecsedy is under change: the radiocarbon dates of Marocsdécse showed an older period. At Rákóczifalva–Bagi-föld, on the base of 79 graves of the Bodrogkeresztúr cemetery from the Middle Copper Age, 9 samples show that the cemetery can be dated to 4334–4075 cal BC. It means that this cemetery partly contemporaneous with Tiszapolgár culture of Early Copper Age (Csányi et al. 2008). Based on the successivity of both cultures, we have to suppose that the paralellism and overlapping of these cultures appeared between 4300–4000 cal BC. Into this mosaic as a third fact, we have to include the first appearance of the steppean populations, to complete this idea, we must point out that it is not conceivable that this population only consist of one single man found at CsongrádKettĘshalom.

Period IV/(V.?): Late Pit–Grave horizon with strong Catacomb influences The Early Bronze Age in the eastern steppe, that is the Late Pit–Grave horizon, contemporary with the Catacomb entity, dated between 2800/2700–2100/2000 cal BC. In the Great Hungarian Plain this is the latest, third construction phase of the kurgans when rich metal deposits and Early Bronze Age ceramic sets appear. It is contemporary with Period I of the Early Bronze Age and includes the surviving Baden, the Vuþedol, the Makó– Kosihy–ýaka, the Early Somogyvár–Vinkovci, Glina– Schneckenbeg A and the CoĠofen IIIc–Livezile cultures, and dated to 2900/2800–2500/2400 cal BC, according to the radiocarbon dates of the Nezsider, Velika Gruda and the second building phase of the Sárrétudvari kurgan. Since catacomb grave pits are missing from the Hungarian (besides Austrian Serbian–Montenegro, Romanian, and Slovakian) kurgans and tumuli, this

120 There is a so-called “steppe-hiatus” between the early and middle phase of the Eneolithic between 4100/4000–3800/3700 cal BC (Rassamakin 1999, Table 3.2).

96

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Eneolithic, originally settled in the Prut–Don interfluve region (also transmitting the techniques of wheel/wagon, weaving/spinning/woolly sheep, and the preparation of the deads’ face from the Maikop/Novosvobodnaja culture), which experienced Tripolye colonization. The direct route of this even farther living group, on which arrived into Central Europe is probably different from the previous periods: another road along the Danube seems to be dominating and interweaving the whole Carpathian Basin by using the wheel and wagon (Plaþidol), and a developed metal production based on arsenic bronze raw materials. The main cause for this large-scale migration is in all probability was the drastic change in ecological circumstances caused by a drier climate and overgrazing the meadows (Shishlina 2000).125

horizon is in accordance with the Polish CWC cist graves under mounds, however, concerning the identity of this horizon, it cannot be grouped to the Catacomb culture. The affluent arsenic bronze and gold grave goods, the secondary burials into the kurgans, and the arrangement along the outer circle can be a Catacomb influence (however, all these features are represented in the Late Pit–Grave culture). Since the contemporaneity as well as the intermingling of the two cultures have been proved in the south-west Pontic area. Because of this phenomenon, this fourth phase can be referred to as Late Pit–Grave Horizon with strong Catacomb influences. It can be presumed that this period enters into the second phase of the Bronze Age (Period V?): the Somogyvár– Vinkovci type burials, the eastern Slovakian mounds with Nyírség type pottery, at the same period with the emergence of the Bell Beaker culture and the ProtoNagyrév culture (see Bóna 1994).121 The study period is an excellent example to illustrate how contemporary cultures amalgamated, since in the Budapest region it is nearly impossible to differentiate the Bell Beaker and Early Nagyrév–Makó cultures because both settlements and burials are documented as a special mixture (KaliczSchreiber and Kalicz 1998-2000).122

Anthony (2007, 362-364) recommended that steppean people arriving to the Great Hungarian Plain came from east of the Usatovo settlement area, from the south Bug– Ingul–Dnieper region: the earliest west-oriented Pit– Grave kurgans are situated there (for example Bal’ki with a deposited wagon and one wooden plough-tooth Rassamakin 1999, Figure 3.58). The steppe along the Lower Dniester was occupied by the Usatovo culture between 3100–2800 BC, but the Pit–Grave graves (dated to 2800–2400 BC) usually cover these features. Accordingly, the majority of them are dated after the migration to the Great Hungarian Plain. Thus, Anthony supposed that the Dniester variant is a sign of a return migration from the Danube valley and the Great Hungarian Plain to that region. Although this is a very pleasant theory, it cannot be verified in the study area: without much more excavation results and radiocarbon dates, moreover without the overall revision of the Usatovo culture, this debate cannot be settled (for this see also Rassamakin and Nikolova 2008, 13).

The resettling steppean communities in Period II and Period III can be identified with mixed cultural entities of the Pit–Grave culture, and the strongly Tripolye C2– Usatovo-stimulated Kvityana groups, arriving from the Pontic area into the territory of the Great Hungarian Plain. The direction of the migration led from Moldova,123 through the passes of the Carpathian Mountains and also along the main waterways such as the valleys of the Berettyó, Maros/Mureú Rivers and stopped at the line of the Tisza River.124

Furthermore, the migrating route sketched by Harrison and Heyd (2007, 194, Figure 43) cannot be accepted for the whole period. This migration lead from the mouth of the Dnieper River, went around the Carpathian Mountains from the northern and southern directions and reached the Great Hungarian Plain. The radiocarbon dates of the kurgans in Serbia, Montenegro and Bulgaria are all later or can be correlated with Period IV/V (e.g. in the case of the kurgan at Jabuka in Serbia an individual layer of soil formation was documented after a Kostolac stratum, upon which the kurgan was built; in Bulgaria in kurgan No. 1 at Trnava, CoĠofen and Pit–Grave ceramics with corded decoration were excavated (Anthony 2007, 363, Figure 14.6); in the filling of the kurgan at Velika Gruda Late Baden–Early Vuþedol/Kotor phase– Cetina/Kotorac pottery was documented, EH II/III: Primas 1996). Their spread belongs to another cluster, which is connected to the waterways of the Danube Delta and the Lower Danube. Thus, this route can be confirmed only in the later phases of Period IV/V. What is more, the

In Period IV/(and V?) the intercultural connections with local cultures inside the Carpathian Basin strengthened and broadened out in a way that the cultural identity of the originally Catacomb-influenced late Pit–Grave groups diluted, thus it is even more problematic to reconstruct their route than in the earlier periods. The base of this wave would be the, Maikop-inspired Zhivotilovo– Volchansk Group, the origin of which rooted in the 121 The beginning of Reinecke-A Bronze Age (not earlier as 2300 cal BC) is identical with the begining of the phase 3 of the Hungarian Early Bronze Age. Thus, when discussing phase I or phase II of the Hungarian Early Bronze Age this corresponds with the final Eneolithic, Late Neolithic periods and cultures in Europe (see Horváth 2004c, 43). 122 It was not only proved in the central part of the country (see for instance the presentation given by János Dani and Katalin Tóth at the MȍMOȈ VI. conference on the burial at Panyola). Lacking radiocarbon dating it cannot be decided whether the original Pit–Grave population experienced the suggested period V. Strong Pit–Grave influence can be shown in forming or developed local cultures’ kurgan burials in period V (Somogyvár-Vinkovi, Vuþedol, Nyírség, etc.). 123 The anthropological similarity is the strongest between the kurgans in the Carpathian Basin and Moldavia (see K. Zoffman later in this volume). 124 It is an additional feature of the amalgamation that not only ProtoIndo-European anthropological material is identified from Hungarian kurgan burials (see Marcsik 1979; Zoffmann 2006).

125 According to Golyeva, in Kalmykia in most of the kurgans the buried soil was degraded and eroded. This phenomenon was further deteriorated in the transformation period of the Pit–Grave/Catacomb by the drier climate and overgrazing (Golyeva 2000).

97

T. HORVÁTH

Barczi, A. 2009. Kunhalmok eltemetett talajainak vizsgálata. [Investigation of buried palaeosoils of kurgans] GödöllĘ, manuscript. (in Hungarian) Barczi, A., Penksza, K. and Joó, K. 2004a. Research of soil-plant connections on kurgans in Hungary. Ekológia Bratislava 23, Supplement 1, 15-22. Barczi, A., Penksza, K. and Joó, K. 2004b. Alföldi kunhalmok talaj-növény összefüggés-vizsgálata. [Geobotanical studies of kurgans in the Great Hungarian Plain] In: A. Tóth (ed.), A kunhalmokról– más szemmel, 45-56. Kisújszállás-Debrecen, Alföldkutatásért Alapítvány-Hortobágyi Nemzeti Park Igazgatósága. (in Hungarian) Barczi, A., Khokhlova, O.S. and PetĘ, Á. 2006a. ɂɫɫɥɟɞɨɜɚɧɢɟ ɩɚɥɟɨɩɨɱɜ, ɩɨɝɪɟɛɟɧɧɵɯ ɩɨɞ ɤɭɪɝɚɧɚɦɢ, ɞɥɹ ɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɢɹ ɩɚɥɟɨɷɤɨɥɨɝɢɱɟɫɤɢɯ ɪɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢɣ (ɩɟɪɜɵɣ ɨɩɵɬ ɧɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɪɟ ɛɨɥɶɲɨɝɨ ɤɭɪɝɚɧɚ ɜ ɏɨɪɬɨɛɚɞɶ, ȼɟɧɝɪɢɹ) (The importance of pedological investigations in Holocene palaeoecological reconstructions. A case study: Hortobágy, Hungary). Ecology and Soils. Lectures and reports of the XIIIth Russian scientific school V, 43-52. Barczi, A., Golyeva, A.A. and PetĘ, Á. 2006b. Additional data on the palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of the Lyukas-mound based on biomorphic and pedological analysis. Bulletin of the Szent István University, 51-71. Barczi, A., Joó, K., PetĘ, Á. and Bucsi, T. 2006c. Survey of the buried palaeosoil under the Lyukas-mound in Hungary. Eurasian Soil Science, 39/1, 133-140. Barczi, A., Horváth T., Joó, K., Csanády, A. and Dani, J. 2008. Egy alföldi kunhalom feltárása. [Excavation of a kurgan on the Great Hungarian Plain] (In: Csorba, P. and Fazekas, I. (eds.), Tájkutatás–tájökológia, 299-308. Debrecen, Meridián Kiadó. (in Hungarian) Barczi, A., Golyeva, A.A. and PetĘ, Á. 2009. Palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of Hungarian kurgans on the basis of the examination of palaeosoils and phytolith analysis. Quaternary International 193, 49-60. Bátora, J. 1983. Záver eneolitu a zaciatok doby bronzovej na východnom Slovensku. Historia Carpatica 14, 169-226, Kosice. Bátorá, J. 2002. Contribution to the problem of „Craftsmen”-graves at the end of Aeneolithic and in the Early Bronze Age in Central, Western and Eastern Europe. Slovenská Archaeológia L/2, 179228. Behrens, H. 1952. Ein äneolithisches Bechergrab aus Mitteldeutschland mit beinerner Hammerkopfnadel und Kupfergeräten. Jahresschr. Mitteldt. Vorgesch. 36, 53–69. Bojadžiev, I. 1992. Probleme der Radiohohlenstoffdatierung der Kulturen der Spätneolithikums und der Frühbronzezeit. Studia Prähistorica 11-12, 384-406. Bóna, I. 1965. The Peoples of Southern Origin of the Early Bronze Age in Hungary. Alba Regia 4/5, 1965, 17-63. Bóna, I. 1986. Szabolcs-Szatmár megye régészeti emlékei. [The archaeological remains of Szabolcs-

hypothesis about the so-called “Pit–Grave package” is similarly not entirely applicable (Harrison and Heyd 2007, 196-197). In relation to the Russian archaeological literature (Saposnikova et al. 1988; Levine et al. 1999; Shishlina 2000; Tsutskin and Shishlina 2001; Morgunova et al. 2003; Morgunova 2004; Rassamakin 2004; Merpert et al. 2006), the third (social status and sex is markedly expressed),126 the fourth (craftsmen are in an elite status) and the eighth (the importance of the horse) characteristics are not confirmed. Irrespective of this, the complex stimulation of the eastern, steppean populations cannot be rejected in the investigated period in the research area. At last, it is hoped that the new excavation results and a series of 14C data discussed in this study from the westernmost zone of these cultures further enhanced this extremely complex and problematic jigsaw puzzle with some new mosaics. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author is thankful for the support of the Archaeological Institue of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) and National Cultural Found (NKA). REFERENCES CITED Az 1. katonai felmérés: 1782-1785, a Magyar Királyság teljes területe. [First Ordinance Survey] Arcanum Adatbázis Kft, DVD, 2004. A 2. katonai felmérés: Magyar Királyság és Temesi Bánság. [Second Ordinance Survey] Arcanum Adatbázis Kft, DVD, 2005. Anthony, D. W. 2007. Horse, the Wheel and Language. How Bronze-Age riders from the Eurasian steppes shaped the Modern World. Princeton-Oxford. B. Kovács, I. 1987. Hügelgräberfelder der Badener Kultur im Slanatal. (Vorläufige Bemerkungen zum Bestattungritus und Chronologie). In: Tasiü, N. and Srejoviü, D. (eds.), Hügelbestattung in der KarpatenBalkan-Zone während der äneolitischen Periode, Internat. Symposium 1985, 99-105, Beograd. Banner, J. 1929. A görög pyraunos eredete.–Der Ursprung des griechischen Pyraunos. Dolgozatok 5, 52-81. Banner, J. 1956. Die Péceler Kultur. Archaeologia Hungarica XXXV, Budapest, Akadémiai kiadó. Barczi, A. 2004. The importance of pedological investigations in Holocene palaeoecological reconstructions. A case study (Hortobágy, Hungary). Antaeus 27, 129-134.

126 And also with Ivanova 2003. It has to be considered that a kurgan burial was a kind of privilege for a not thoroughly identified social group, thus kurgan burials cannot be taken as a mirror for the whole contemporary society. The social differences reflected in the Pit–Grave graves are rather resembling differences in local, territorial accessibility of raw materials and resources (for example the valley of the River Manych, Kalmykia) (Shishlina 2000), not social or status preferences.

98

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Bronze Age of Upper-Theiss-environment before the tell-cultures] Ph.D. dissertation, ELTE-RI, Budapest, 2005, manuscript. Dani, J. and Nepper, I. 2006. Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom. Tumulus grave from the beginning of the EBA in Eastern Hungary. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, 29-58. Dani, J. and Szilágyi, K. 2006. ElĘzetes jelentés a Berettyóújfalu-Nagy-Bócs-dĦlĘ lelĘhelyen 20042005 során végzett megelĘzĘ feltárásokról. [Preliminary reports of Berettyóújfalu-Nagy-Bócs dĦlĘ, excavation campaign 2004-2005] Bihari Múzeum Évkönyve X-XI, 1-31. (in Hungarian) Dinnyés, I. 1973. A Blaskovich Múzeum régészeti gyĦjteménye. [The archaeological collection of the Blaskovich Museum] Studia Comitatensia 2, 37-70. (in Hungarian) Ecsedy, I. 1984. The People of the Pit-grave Kurgans in Eastern Hungary. Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae, Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó. Eliade, M. 2004. Kovácsok és alkimisták. [Forgerons et alchimistes. Nouvelle édition corrigée et augmentée]. Budapest, Cartaphilus kiadó. (in Hungarian) EndrĘdi, A. (ed.) 2004. Hétköznapok és vallásos élet a rézkor végén. A Baden kultúra 5000 éves emléke Budapesten. [Everyday life and spirituality a the end of the Copper Age. 5000 years old remains of the Baden Culture in Budapest] Budapest. (in Hungarian) Ferenczi, I. 1997. Észrevételek az erdélyi rézkor keleti népi és mĦveltségi elemeivel kapcsolatban.– Erwägungen zu den Elementen östlicher Herkunft in transsilvanien während des Übergangs vom Neolithikum zur Bronzezeit. Szolnok Megyei Múzeumi Adattár 33, Szolnok. (in Hungarian) Gazdapusztai Gy. 1964. Balmazújváros-KettĘshalom. Ásatási jelentés. [Balmazújváros-KettĘshalom Excavation report] Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Adattára, XIII/január/53/1964. (in Hungarian) Gazdapusztai, Gy. 1965. Zur Fragen der Verbreitung des sogennanten „Ockergräberkultur” in Ungarn. Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 1963-1965, 31-38. Gei, A.N. 2000. Novotitarovskaja kultura. Institut Arheologii, Moszkva. Gerasimova M.I., Gubin, S.V. and Shoba, S.A. 1996. Soil formation in Greyzems in Moscow district: micromorphology, chemistry, clay mineralogy and particle size distribution. In: Miedema, R. (ed.), Soils of Russia and Adjacent Countries: Geography and Micromorphology. Van Gils, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Giriü, M. 1982. Über die Erforschung der Grabhügel in der Wojwodina. In: Atti del X Simposio Internazionale sulla fine del Neolitico e gli inizi dell’etá del Bronzo in Europa, Lazise-Verona 1980, 99-105, Verona. Golyeva, A.A. 2000. Man and nature in the North-WestCaspian Sea region during the Bronze Age. In: Shishlina 2000, 163-168. Gorodtsov, V.A. 1997. Davna istoriya Ukraini. Naukowa Dumka Vol. 1, Kyiv. Govedarica, B. 2004. Zepterträger–Herrscher der Steppen. Die frühen Ockergräber des älteren

Szatmár County] In: Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg megye mĦemlékei, 15-55, Nyíregyháza. (in Hungarian) Bóna, I. 1993. A honfoglalás elĘtti kultúrák és népek. [The Cultures and nations before the Hungarian Conquest Period] In: Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg megye monográfiája, I. kötet–Történelem és kultúra, 63137, Nyíregyháza. (in Hungarian) Bóna, I. 1994. Les cultures des tells de l’Age du Bronze en Hongrie. In: Le bel Age du Bronze en Hongrie. Mont-Beauvrey, 9-39. Bondár, M. 2002. A badeni kultúra kutatási helyzete Magyarországon. Vázlat. Der Forschungsstand der Badener Kultur in Ungarn. Abriß. Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve-Studia Archaeologia VIII, 7-30. (in Hungarian) Bökönyi, S. 1979. Copper Age vertebrate fauna from Kétegyháza. In: Ecsedy, I. (ed.), The peoples of the pit-grave kurgans in Eastern-Hungary. Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae, 101-118., Budapest. Buchwaldek, M. 1966. Die Schnurkeramik in Mitteleuropa. Pamatniki Arch 1966:1. Chernykh, E.N., Kuzminykh, S.V., Lebedeva, E.Y. and Lunkov, V.Y. 2000. Isszledovanyije kurgannovo mogilnyika u sz. Persin.–Exploitation of the burial ground at Pershin. Arheologicseszkije pamjátnyiki Orenburzsjá IV, 63-84. Ciugudean, H. 1982. Stela antropomorfa de la Pianu de Jos (Jud. Alba). Apulum XX, 59-63. Ciugudean, H. 2000. Eneolithicul final in Transilvania si Banat: cultra Cotofeni. Bibliotheca Historica et Arch. Banatica, Timiúoara. Csalog, J. 1954. A balmazújvárosi Kárhozott-halom feltárása. [The excavation of BalmazújvárosKárhozott-halom] Folia Archologica VI, 37-44. (in Hungarian) Csányi, M. andTárnoki, J. 1995. Halom-feltárás Kunhegyes határában. (Kunhegyes-Nagyállás halom). [Kurgan-excavation near Kunhegyes] In: Ujváry, Z. (ed.), Tanulmányok és Közlemények, 2748, Debrecen-Szolnok. (in Hungarian) Csányi, M., Raczky, P. and Tárnoki, J. 2008: ElĘzetes jelentés a rézkori bodrogkeresztúri kultúra Rákóczifalva–Bagi–földön feltárt temetĘjérĘl. – Preliminary report on the cemetery of the Bodrogkeresztúr culture excavated at Rákóczifalva– Bagi–föld. Tisicum XVIII, 13–34. Dani, J. 2001. A Kárpát-medence ÉK-i részének kulturális és kronológiai kérdései a kora bronzkor idĘszakában. [Cultural and chronological questions concerning the NE part of the Carpathian Basin in the Early Bronze Age] MȍMOȈ I, 129-160. (in Hungarian) Dani, J. 2004. Nyírség-kultúra temetkezései HajdúnánásFekete-halom lelĘhelyrĘl. [Burials of the Nyírség Culture at Hajdúnánás-Fekete-halom] ėsrégészeti levelek 6, 27-37. (in Hungarian) Dani, J. 2005a. The Hortobágy in the Bronze Age. In: Gál, E., Juhász, I. and Sümegi, P. (eds.), Environmental Archaeology in North-Eastern Hungary. Varia Archaeologia XIX, 283-300. Dani, J. 2005b. A FelsĘ-Tisza-vidék kora bronzkora a tell-kultúrákat megelĘzĘ idĘszakban. [The Early

99

T. HORVÁTH

dĦlĘ–Kultgegenstände. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 85, 79-119. Huszár, M. 1985. Vízrajzi értekezés. Huszár Mátyás leírása a KörösvidékrĘl. [Hydrogeological dissertation about Körös-region] In: Kósa, F. (ed.), From latin original transleted: Lakatos, P. Gyula, Körösvidéki Vízügyi Igazgatóság. (in Hungarian) Ivanova, S. 2003. The social differentiation in the PitGrave Culture Society: a reconstruction based on burial data. In: Nikolova, L (ed.), Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in Southeast Europa. BAR International Series 1139, Vol. 1, 155-167. Joó, K., Barczi, A. and Sümegi, P. 2007. Study of soil scientific, layer scientific and palaeoecological relations of the CsípĘ-mound kurgan. In: Atti della Societa Toscana di Scienze Naturali, Mem. Serie A, Vol. 112, 141-144. Jósa, A. 1897. Szabolcs megyei Ęshalmok. [Prehistorical mound of Szabolcs] Archaeológiai ÉrtesítĘ XVII, 318-325. (in Hungarian) Kalicz, N. 1968. Die Frühbronzezeit in Nordost-Ungarn. Archaeologica Hungarica XLV, Budapest. Kalicz, N. 1998. Östliche Beziehungen während der Kupferzeit in Ungarn. In: Hänsel, B. and Machnik, J. (eds.), Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropäische Steppe. Prähistorische Archaeologie 12, 163-177. Kalicz, N. 1999. A késĘ rézkori Báden kultúra temetĘje MezĘcsát-Hörcsögösön és Tiszavasvári-Gyepároson. [Das Gräberfeld der spätkupferzeitlichen Badener Kultur in MezĘcsát-Hörcsögös und in TiszavasváriGyepáros] Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve XXXVII, 57-101. (in Hungarian) Kalicz-Schreiber, R. and Kalicz, N. 1998-2000. A harangedény szerepe a Budapest környékei kora bronzkor társdalmi viszonyainak megjelenésében. [The role of bell beaker in reflecting social relations in the Early Bronze Age of Budapest] Archaeológiai ÉrtesítĘ 125, 45-79. (in Hungarian) Klochko, V.I. 2001. Weaponry of societies of the Northern Pontic Culture Circle: 5000-700 BC. Baltic-Pontic Studies, Vol. 10. Klochko, V.I. 2002. Maces of the Neolithic-Bronze Age of the Northern Pontic Region. In: Fluted maces in the system of long-distance exchange trails of the Bronze Age: 2350-800 BC. Baltic-Pontic Studies Vol. 11, 22-31. Klochko, V.I., Kosko, A. and Szmyt, M. 2003. Chronology of the Prehistory of the Area between Vistula and Dnieper: 4000-1000 BC. Baltic-Pontic Studies, Vol. 12, 396-415. Korek, J. 1983. Közép-Kelet-Európa a rézkor végén. [Central-East-Europe in the Late Copper Age] Budapest, doktori disszertáció, manuscript. Korek, J. 1985. Adatok a bolerázi csoport alföldi elterjedéséhez.–Beiträge zur Verbreitung der Boleráz-Gruppe im Alföld. Archaeológiai ÉrtesítĘ 112, 193-206. Kovács, I. 1944. A marosdécsei rézkori temetĘ. [The Copper Age Cemetery of Marosdécse] Közlemények az erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Történeti tárából 4/1-2, 3-21. (in Hungarian)

Aneolithikums im karpatenbalkanischen Gebiet und im Steppenraum Südost- und Osteuropas. Heidelberger Akademia der Wissenschaften. Internationale Interakademische Kommission für die Erforschung der Vorgeschichte des Balkans. H. Hauptmann (Hrsg.), Monographien Band VI. Gumă, M. 1997. Epoca bronzului în Banat. Orizonturi cronologice úi manifestări culturale. In: The Bronze Age in Banat. Chronological levels and cultural entities. Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Banatica V, Timiúoara. György, L. 2008. A Baden-kultúra telepe MezĘkövesdNagy-FertĘn. [Die Siedlung der Badener Kultur in MezĘkövesd-Nagy-FertĘ] Miskolc, Borsod–Abaúj– Zemplén megye régészeti emlékei 7. (in Hungarian) Harrison, R. and Heyd, V. 2007. The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millenium BC: the example of ’Le Petit-Chassuer I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland). Praehistorische Zeitschrift 82, 129214. Horváth, Tibor 2008. Hajdúsági „Kunhalom” kataszter. [The Cadaster of cumanian barrows at Hajdúság] A Hajdúsági Múzeum Évkönyve XI, 7-41. (in Hungarian) Horváth, T. 2004a. New human representation from the Baden Culture: a Mask from BalatonĘszöd. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientirum Hungaricae 55, 179-237. Horváth, T. 2004b. Emberi vázakat tartalmazó objektumok BalatonĘszöd-TemetĘi dĦlĘ badeni településérĘl.–Human burials from the Baden settlement of BalatonĘszöd-TemetĘi dĦlĘ. Somogyi Múzeumok Közleményei 16, 71-111. Horváth, T. 2004c. Néhány megjegyzés a vatyai kultúra fémmĦvességéhez. Technológiai megfigyelések a kultúra kĘeszközein. [Die Metallkunst der VatyaKultur.–Technologische Beobachtungen an ihren Steingeräten] Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2004, 11-64. (in Hungarian) Horváth, T. 2006. Állattemetkezések BalatonĘszödTemetĘi dĦlĘ badeni lelĘhelyen. [Animal-burials in the Late Copper Age Baden Site: BalatonĘszödTemetĘi dĦlĘ.] Somogyi Múzeumok Közleményei 17, 107-152. (in Hungarian) Horváth, T. 2008. Sozialmorphologische Studie der spätkupferzeitlichen Baden-(Pécel)-Kultur. Mitteilungen der Antropologischen Gessellschaft in Wien 138, 159-203. Horváth, T. 2009. The intercultural connections of the Baden „Culture”. MȍMOȈ VI, 101-150. Horváth, T., Köhler, K. and Kustár, Á. 2009. Életmód és habitus a késĘ rézkori badeni-kultúrában régészeti és antropológiai adatok alapján. [Lifestyle and mental habits of the Late Copper Age Baden culture in the light of the archaeological and anthropological evidence.] In: Bende, L. and LĘrinczy, G. (eds.), Medinától Etéig. Régészeti tanulmányok Csalog József születésének 100. évfordulójára. Szentes, 2009, 269-277. Horváth, T. 2010. Manifestation des Transzendenten in der Badener Siedlung von BalatonĘszöd-TemetĘi

100

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) archaeological topographic works of Békés county: environment of Békés and Békéscsaba] IV/3. kötet, Budapest. (in Hungarian) Müller, J. 1999. Zur Radiokarbondatierung des Jung- bis Endneolithikums und der Frühbronzezeit im MittelelbeSaale-Gebiet (4100–1500 v. Chr.). BRGK 80, 31–90. M. Virág, Zs. 2004. Településtörténeti és kronológiai kutatások a Dunántúlon és Budapest környékén a középsĘ rézkor elsĘ felében. [Chronological and historical researches in the first half of Middle Copper Age, at Transdanubia and environment of Budapest] Ph.D. dissertation, ELTE-RI, Budapest, manuscript. (in Hungarian) Németi, I. 1996. Câteva consideraĠii privind descoperirile funerare din epoca bronzului din nord-vestul Românei. Studii úi comunicări XIII, 27-55, Satu Mare. Orosz, E. 1904. Egy Ęskori kĘbálvány Szamosújvárról. [Prehistorical stone idol from Szamosújvár] Archaeológiai ÉrtesítĘ XXIV, 405-406. (in Hungarian) Paládi-Kovács, A. 2004. A rét- és legelĘgazdálkodás visszaszorulása az Alföldön (XIX-XX. század). In: Novák, L.F. (ed.), Az Alföld gazdálkodása. Állattenyésztés. [Traditional rural economy in the Great Hungarian Plain. Animal keeping] Arany János Múzeum Közleményei X, NagykĘrös, 81-91. (in Hungarian) Panaoyotov, I. 1989. Jámnata kultúra v bulgarskite zemi. Razkopki i proucsvanyijá XXI. P. Fischl, K., Kiss, V. abd Kulcsár, G. 2001. A hordozható tĦzhelyek használata a Kárpátmedencében. [The use of portable stoves in the Carpathian Basin] I. MȍMOȈ I, 163-193. (in Hungarian) Primas, M. 1996. Velika Gruda I. Hügelgräber des frühen 3. Jahrtausends v.Chr. im Adriagebiet.–Velika Gruda, Mala Gruda und ihr Kontext. UPA Band 32, Bonn. Raczky, P., Kovács, T. and Anders, A. (eds.) 1997. Utak a múltba. Az M3-as autópálya régészeti leletmentései. [Paths into the Past. Rescue excavations on the M3 motorway] Budapest, Magyar Nemzeti Múzem-Eötvös Lóránd Tudományegyetem Régészettudományi Intézet. (in Hungarian) Rassamakin, Y.Y. 1999. The Eneolithic of the Black Sea Steppe: Dynamics of Cultural and Economic Development 4500-2300 BC. In: Levine, M., Rassamakin, Y., Kislenko, A., Tatarintseva, N. (eds.), Late prehistoric exploitation of the Eurasian steppe. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge, 59-183. Rassamakin, Y.Y. 2004. Die Nordpontische Steppe in der Kupferzeit. Gräber aus der Mitte des 5. Jts. bis Ende des 4. Jts. v.Chr. Teil I-II. Archäologie in Eurasien 17, Mainz, Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Rassamakin, Y.Y. and Nikolova, A.V. 2008. Carpathian Imports in the Graves of the Yamnaya Culture on the Lower Dnieper. Some Problems of Chronology and Connections in the Black Sea Steppes during the Early Bronze Age. In: Biehl, P.F. and Rassamakin, Y.Y. (eds.), Import and Imitation in Archaeology. Schriften des Zentrum für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes. Beier and Beran Langenweißbach, 51-89. Roman, P. 1976. Cultura CoĠofeni. Bucureúti.

Levine, M. 1999. The Origins of Horse Husbandry on the Eurasian Steppe. In: Levine, M., Rassamakin, Y., Kislenko, A. and Tatarintseva, N. (eds.), Late prehistoric exploitation of the Eurasian steppe. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge, 5-59. Levine, M., Rassamakin, Y., Kislenko, A. and Tatarintseva, N. (eds.) 1999. Late prehistoric exploitation of the Eurasian steppe. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge. Lichardus, J. and Fol, M. (Hrsg.) 1988. Macht, Herrschaft und Gold. Das Gräberfeld von Varna (Bulgaria) und die Anfänge einer neuen europäischen civilisation. Saarbrücken. Marcsik, A: 1979. The anthropological material of the Pitgrave kurgans in Hungary. In: Ecsedy, I. (ed), The peoples of the pit-grave kurgans in Eastern-Hungary. Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae, , 87-98., Budapest Marosi, S. and Somogyi, S. (eds.) 1990. Magyarország kistájainak katasztere. [The Cadaster of Hungary’s geographical microregions] Budapest, MTA Földrajztudományi Kutatóintézet. (in Hungarian) Masanov, N.E. 2000. Specific traits of traditional nomadic society of the Kazakhs. In Shishlina 2000, 188-193. Medoviü, P. 1987. Resultate der Untersuchung auf drei Grabhügeln in der Gemarkung des Dorfes Perles im mittleren Banat. In: Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (eds.), Hügelbestattungen in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan Zone während der äneolithischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac 1985. Beograd. 77-82. Merpert, N.J., Morgunova, N.L., Tureckij, M.A. and Szalugina, N.P. 2006. Problemi izucsenijá jámnoj kulturno-isztoricseszkoj oblasztyi. Orenburgszkij Goszudársztvennij Pedagogicsezskij Universzityet, Orenburg. Molnár, M., Joó, K., Barczi, A., Szántó, Zs., Futó, I., Palcsu, L. and Rinyu, L. 2004. Dating of total soil organic matter used in kurgan studies. Radiocarbon 46, 413. Morgunova, N.L. 2000. Bolsoj Bolgyirevszkij kurgan.–The big Boldyrevo barrow. Arheologicseszkije pamjátnyiki Orenburzsjá IV, 55-62. Morgunova, N.L. 2004. Arheologija Orenburzsjá. Orenburg. Morgunova, N.L., Golyeva, A. A., Krajeva, P. A., Meserjákov, D.B., Tureckij, M.A., Haljápin, M.V. and Khokhlova, O.S. 2003. Sumaevszkije kurgáni. Orenburg. Morgunova, N.L., Krajeva, L.A. and Matjusko, I.V. 2005. Kurgannij mogulnyik Mu-Sztajevo V. Arheologicseszkije pamjátnyiki Orenburzsjá VII, 5-69. MRT 6: Ecsedy, I., Kovács, L., Maráz, B. and Torma, I. 1982. Békés megye régészeti topográfiája. A szeghalmi járás. [The archaeological topographic works of Békés county: Szeghalom environment] IV/1. kötet, Budapest. (in Hungarian) MRT 8: Jankovich, B. D., Makkay, J. and SzĘke, B. M. Békés megyer régészeti topográfiája. A szarvasi járás. [The archaeological topographic works of Békés county: Szarvas environment] 1989. IV/2. kötet, Budapest. (in Hungarian) MRT 10: Jankovich, B. D., Medgyesi, P., Nikolin, E., Szatmári, I. and Torma, I. 1998. Békés megye régészeti topográfiája. Békés és Békéscsaba környéke. [The

101

T. HORVÁTH

Telegin, D.J., Pustovalov, S.Z. and Kovalyukh, N.N. 2003. Relative and absolute chronology of Yamnaya and Catacomb monuments. The issue of co-existence. BalticPontic Studies, Vol. 12, 132-185. Tonþeva, G. 1981. Monuments scuplturaux eu Bulgarie du Nord-Est de l’age du bronze. Studia Praehistorica 5-6, 129-145. Tóth, A. 2004. A kunhalom-kérdésrĘl. [About the kurgans] In: Tóth, A. (ed.), A kunhalmokról–más szemmel, 7-12. Kisújszállás-Debrecen, Alföldkutatásért Alapítvány, Hortobágyi Nemzeti Park Igazgatósága. (in Hungarian) Tóth, A. and Tóth, Cs. 2004. A kunhalom-program általános tapasztalatai. [The general observations of Kurganprogram] In: Tóth, A. (ed.), A kunhalmokról–más szemmel, 171-188. Kisújszállás-Debrecen, Alföldkutatásért Alapítvány, Hortobágyi Nemzeti Park Igazgatósága. (in Hungarian) Tsutskin, E.V. and Shishlina, N.I. (eds.) 2001. Mogilnyiki Mu-Saret v Kalmükii: kompleksznoje isszledovanyie. Moszkva, Eliszta. Videiko, M.Y. 2000. Studying western context of the Tripolye Culture: history and some perspectives. In Baltic-Pontic Studies Vol. 9, 7-69. Zimmermann, T. 2003. Zwischen Karpaten und Kaukasus– Anmerkungen zu einer ungewöhnlichen Kupferklinge aus Wien-Essling. Arch. Korrbl. 33, 469–477. Zinkovszkij, K.V. and Petrenko, V.G. 197. Pogrebenija s okhroi v Usatovskih moglinikakh. Sovietskaja Arheologija 4, 24-39. K. Zoffmann, Zs. 2006. Anthropological finds of the pit-grave culture from the Sárrétudvari-ėrhalom site. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2006, 5158. Zoltai, L. 1906. Jelentések halmok megásásáról. [Excavation reports from kurgans] Debrecen város múzeumának évi jelentései LXXIII, 1906-1928, 36-48. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1911. A Hortobágy. A legnagyobb magyar puszta ismertetĘ leírása térképpel és 23 szövegképpel. [Hortobágy. The greatest hungarian pusta] Debrecen. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1914. Jelentés Debreczen szabad királyi város múzeumának 1913.-ik évi mĦködésérĘl és állapotáról. [Reports from the Museum of Debrecen at 1913] 1914, Debrecen. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1924. Jelentések Debrecen szabad királyi város múzeumának és közmĦvelĘdési osztályának 1922. és 1923. évi mĦködésérĘl és állapotáról. [Reports from the Museum of Debrecen at 1922 and 1923] 1924, Debrecen. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1928. Jelentések Debrecen szabad királyi város múzeumának és közmĦvelĘdési osztályának 1927. évi mĦködésérĘl és állapotáról. [Reports from the Museum of Debrecen at 1927] 1928, Debrecen. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1935. Debrecen vizei. Folyók, folyások, völgyek, erek, fokok.–Tavak, fertĘk, fenekek, laposok, mocsarak, rétek, tiszták. Árkok, csatornák, gátak, kutak. [The waters of Debrecen] Debrecen. (in Hungarian) Zoltai, L. 1938. Debreceni halmok, hegyek, egyéb mesterséges emelkedések ú.m.: laponyagok, telkek, Ħlések, dombok, gerendek, és hátak a város határában, valamint külsĘ birtokain. [The mounds of Debrecen] Debrecen. (in Hungarian)

Roman, P. and Németi, I. 1978. Cultura Baden în România. Bucureúti. Roman, P.I., Dodd-OpriĠescu, A. and János, D. 1992. Beiträge zur Problematik der Schnuverzierten Keramik Südosteuropas. Heidelberger Akademia der Wissenschaften International Interakademische Kommission für die Erforschung der Vorgescgichte des Balkans. Monographien Bd III, Mainz and Rhein, Vergag Philipp von Zabern. Roska, M. 1914. A zsinegdíszes agyagmĦvesség nyomai Magyarországon. [Restes du ceramique cordée en Hongrie] Dolgozatok 5, 418-420. (in Hungarian) Ruttkay, E. 2002. Das endneolitische Hügelgrab von Neusiedl am See, Burgenland. Budapest Régiségei XXXVI, 145171. Ruttkay, E. 2003. Das endneolitische Hügelgrab von Neusiedl am See, Burgenland. Zweite Vorlage–II. Kulturgeschichtliche Aspekte des Zentralgrabes. In: Jerem, E. and Raczky, P. (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nándor Kalicz zum 75. Geburstag. Archaeolingua, Budapest, 445-475. Samashev, Z. andMylnikov, V. 2008. Woodworking of ancient cattle-breeders of Kazakh Altai. A. Kh. Margulan Institute of Archaeology. Saposnikova, O.G., Rassamakin, Y.Y., Jevdokimov, G.L., Kubisev, A.I. and Otrosenko, V.V. 1988. Novie namjátnyiki kulturi sztyepnoj zoni ukrajni. Kiev, Akademija nauk ukrainskoj Sz.Sz.R. Institut arheologii. Shishlina, N. (ed.) 2000. Szezonnij ekonomicseszkij cikl haszelenyija szevero-zapadnovo prikaszpija brohnzovom veke.–Seasonality studies of the Bronze Age Northwest Caspian Steppe. Moscow, Trudi Gocudarsztvennovo Isztoricseszkovo muzeja, Vípuszk 120. Srejoviü, D. and Tasiü, N. (Hrsg.) 1987. Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der äneolitischen periode. Internationale Symposium Dolnji Milanovac 1985, Beograd. ĝlusarska, K. 2006. Funeral rites of the Catacomb community: 2800-1900 BC. Ritual, thanatology and geographical origins. Baltic-Pontic Studies Vol. 13. Stadler, P. 2002. 14C-Datierung der beiden Bestattungen aus dem Hügelgrab von Neusiedl am See, Bgld. Budapest Régiségei XXXVI, 171-175. Szalontai, Cs. (ed.) 2003. Úton-útfélen. Múzeumi kutatások az M5 autópálya nyomvonalán. [On the Road! Musem research along the intended route of the M5 motorway] Szeged, Móra Ferenc Múzeum. (in Hungarian) Székely, Zs. 2002. A gömbamfórás kultúra emléke DélkeletErdélyben. [The GAC in SE-Transylvania] ėsrégészeti levelek 4, 40-45. (in Hungarian) Szmyt, M. 1999. Between West and East. People of the Globular Amphora Culture in Eastern Europe: 29502350 BC. Baltic-Pontic Studies, Vol. 8. Tasiü, N. 1995. Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans. Belgrade, Institute for Balkan Studies. Telegin D.J. 1992. Zum Ursprung der Schnurverzierung. Praehistorica XX, 333-339. Telegin, Y. and Mallory, J.P. 1995. Statue-mehirs of the North Pontic Region. Notizie Archeologische Bergomensi 3, 319-332.

102

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 1. The Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom (mound) site on a Google map

103

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 2. The excavation campaign at 2004. 1. the beginnings: the destroyed mound body. 2. the west-east section after the cleaning. 3. the layers of the mound. 4. Early Neolithic (?) remains on the palaeosoil. 5. CoĠofen III. and EBA potsherds from Layer 6.6. The west-east section with the place of sampling

104

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 7. 1-2. Feature 2. - Grave No. 1. when it appeared, 3. the patch of the grave; 4. The cross-section of the grave; 5. ground plan of Feature No. 1( with the place of the former grave)

109

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 8.1. The so called sack in the southern sondage; 2-4. excavating of Feature No. 1.; 5-6. palaeosoil cross-section in 2009 with palaeo C- and B/C-horizon and the botanical horizon on palaeo A-horizon.

110

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 11. Balmazújváros–KettĘshalom, excavation of Gyula Gazdapusztai in 1964

113

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 12. Map of north-east Hungary with the territory of Pit–Grave culture, and the main sites cited in the text. The frame represents the focused territory of the article.

114

115

Fig. 13. I. Ordinance Survey, north-east Hungary Light coloured circle: potencial kurgan sites with theirs name; black circle: identified kurgan sites

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary)

T. HORVÁTH

116

Fig. 14. II. Ordinance Survey, north-east Hungary. Light coloured circle: potencial kurgan sites with theirs name; black circle: identified kurgan sites

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 15. Environments of Dévaványa on the Ist and IInd Ordinance Survey maps and the map of Mátyás Huszár

117

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 16. Ohat–Dunahalom: potsherds, Plate 1.

118

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 17. Ohat–Dunahalom: potsherds, Plate 2.

119

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 18. KülsĘ–Ohat, Baden–Viss potsherds, Plate 1.

120

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 19. KülsĘ–Ohat Baden–Viss potsherds, Plate 2.

121

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 20. Steles from Hungary: 1. Budapest–Káposztásmegyer–FarkaserdĘ (after EndrĘdi 2004, Figure 57.), 2. MezĘcsát–Hörcsögös (after Kalicz 1999), 3. Szamosújvár/Ghirla (after Orosz 1904)

122

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 21. Hortobágy–Halászlaponyag: potsherds

123

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 22. Debrecen–Tócó: potsherds

124

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 23. The map of Baden culture in Hungary Key: dot: Boleráz; pin: Baden; triangle: Boleráz-Baden; square: from Protoboleráz till Kostolac/Baden IV

125

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 24. 1. pedestalled chalice from Orlik kurgan No. 2 (after Rassamakin 1999, Figure 3.22/11.), and BalatonĘszöd– TemetĘi-dĦlĘ, cultural layer No. 925. Sector 47/10; 2-4. male mask from pits No. 1072-1096 BalatonĘszöd–TemetĘi dĦlĘ and anthropological analogies

126

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 25. Hajdúszoboszló, FelsĘfülöp, Dévaványa: Baden potsherds

127

T. HORVÁTH

Fig. 26. The environment of Tiszavasvári at the Late Copper and Early Bronze Age I-II-III. Key: Boleráz-Baden settlement: Wienerberger-brick factory; Baden settlement: Koldusdomb, Muszkadomb, Kásaföld; Baden graves: Keresztfa, Paptelekhát; Baden grave + Pit–Grave : Gyepáros; Pit–Grave kurgan: Hajdúnánás–Tedej– Lyukas-halom (with CoĠofen and EBA I sherds), Deákhalom I-II, Kas-halom; Corded Ware: Koldusdomb; Makó culture: Városföldje-JegyzĘtag; Nyírség culture: Muszkadomb, Keresztfa, Gyepáros, Paptelekhát, Betepart, Fejérszik, Nyugati fĘcsatorna, Utasér part, Városföldje-JegyzĘtag, Dankó tanya; Sanislau culture: Dankó tanya

128

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom–An interdisciplinary survey of a typical kurgan from the Great Hungarian Plain region: a case study (The revision of the kurgans from the territory of Hungary) Fig. 29. Corded Ware from Hungary. 1: Tápiószentmárton, south-west from Attila-halom (drawing by János Jakucs); 2: Between Buj–Baba (drawing by Gabriella Beleznai, photo by Róbert Scholtz)–AkkermeĔ (after Telegin 1992, Abb. 2.5.); 3: Tarnazsadány = Tarnabod (photo by Judit Kardos)–Sofievka kurgan No. 10. Grave No. 1. (after Rassamakin and Nikolova 2008, Pl. 1.3-4.); 4. Tiszabábolna–Szilpuszta, Grave No. 7. (after Dani 2005b, Table 2/6.); 5. Békésszentandrás (after MRT129 8, Table 19/8.)

129

Archaeological Topography of Hungary (MRT)

131

132

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 5, pp. 133-143.

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains Nina L. MORGUNOVA Orenburg State Pedagogical University, Sovetskay ul. 19., Orenburg, 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Compared to other areas the first Pit–Grave sites near the Ural Mountains were uncovered as late as in 50-60s of the 20th century. The expedition headed by Smirnov discovered about 30 kurgan burials at Uvaksky, Gerasimovka 1 and 2, and at Baryshnikov settlement. The first site was located along the River Ilek, others,on the flood plain terraces of the Kindelya. Having compared the materials of excavations with those in the Lower Volga area they pointed to some peculiarities, particularly to the fact that skeletons in the graves lay in a contracted position on their right side (Smirnov 1965, 156-159). A unique find of some metal articles (a knife and a hammer) allowed raising a question of a separate centre of metallurgy in the Pit–Grave culture period (FedorovaDavydova 1971).

Abstract: For the last decade the south Urals have seen some excavations of the kurgans related to the Pit-Grave culture. The methods of palaeosoil science and radiocarbon chronology helped to correct the periods of the culture in question of the occupation of the Volga and Ural areas. The early (Repin) period dates back to 3900– 3300 BC. The advanced period is divided into 2 stages: 3300–3000 and 2900–2500 BC respectively. The late (Poltavkino) period is dated back to 2500–2000 BC. The description of the burial rite shows some characteristic features retained throughout cultural periods: a burial mound, large and deep graves, skeletons in a supine or contracted position on their right side, the head oriented to the east, covered with ochre. Peculiar to the burials are the round-bottomed ceramics which become flatbottomed during the late period. By the early period the Kargalinsky copper field has already been discovered in the Ural area. The second stage of the advanced period is marked by the finds of the wheeled transport. No matter the Pit–Grave culture ear the Ural Mountains maintained close ties with the population of the near Caucasus and northern areas of the Black Sea.

Chernykh (1966, 68-69) came to think that the goods found at Uvaksky burial ground were made of local metals, the compositions of which correspond with the ores from the Kargalinsky copper deposit in the South Urals, 80-90 kms to the north of Orenburg. Later he distinguished a separate metallurgical centre of the Early Bronze Age near the Ural Mountains as part of the Circumpontic metallurgical province. His studies of the Kargalinsky mines towards the end of the 20th century proved he was all correct. So, it became obvious that the group of sites near the Ural Mountains related to the Pit– Grave cultural and historical area had their own distinctive features (Chernykh 2002, 7-10). The materials found during the excavations of Smirnov near the Ural Mountains were considered in the works of Merpert (1974) who came to a conclusion that there was a local group of Pit–Grave sites in the Near Ural area, which together with the Lower Volga and Middle Volga groups form a single Volga–Ural variant of the ancient Pit–Grave cultural and historical identity. Contrary to Smirnov, who thought that the population of the Pit– Grave culture moved to near the Ural Mountains from the south near the Volga River area, Merpert believed that Orenburg steppe as well as other Volga–Ural areas were the places where early groups of the Pit–Grave culture originated (Merpert 1974a, 95).

Keywords: Early Bronze Age, south Urals, Pit–Grave culture, kurgans, chronology, burial rite The sites of the Pit–Grave culture embrace a vast territory on the steppe of East Europe, from Kazakhstan and South Urals to near the River Dniester. The easternmost sites in question form the group near the Ural Mountains and are mainly located in the Orenburg region and in North Kazakhstan. This area is characterized by the natural conditions of north steppe, which gradually merges with a forest steppe environment (Figure 1). The contemporary natural and climatic conditions of the south, near the Ural Mountains are determined by a continental climate with hot summers and rare precipitations as well as severe winters and rather deep snow. The vegetation on unploughed watersheds is characterised by feather grass steppe while river valleys and ravines grow various meadow grass and bushes. Flood land forests are not infrequent in the valleys of major rivers (the Ural and its tributaries, the Sakmara, Ilek, Kindelya and Samara, the latter is the Volga’s tributary). Small rivers are not accompanied by arboreal species As to trees poplar, asp, alder and nut trees are predominant. There are sometimes small groves of oak, birch and lime trees across watersheds.

After a time archaeological excavations in the Orenburg region resumed under the supervision of the author of this paper. Since 1977 it has become possible to amass new materials and discover various Pit–Grave complexes. Late in the 1980s excavations of the sites in question became regular and purposeful. As a result the number of Pit–Grave kurgans increased considerably.

The palaeoclimatic conditions in the Pit–Grave culture period were somewhat different from the contemporary environmental situation as it shown below.

The materials of the studies as they piled up were summarized in several publications of methodological

133

Kurgan Studies: An environmental archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds of the Eurasian steppe zone N. L. MORGUNOVA PETė, Á. and BARCZI, A. (Eds.). BAR International Series ####. Title 6. pp. ##-##.

character (Morgunova 1991; Morgunova and Kravtsov 1994). The authors suggested the first division of the Pit– Grave culture near the Ural Mountains into periods and studied some aspects of Early Bronze Age economy and social system. Excavations were carried out all round including large and small kurgans. Numerous finds of various copper artefacts have considerably modified a popular view of the peripheral role played by the Near Ural group of sites related to the Pit–Grave culture.

with other kurgans at Shumayevo burial ground, which were apparently built some 400 years later according to a palaeosoil analysis. Close to this chronological group there are also two kurgans excavated at Mustayevo 5 burial ground (Figure 2.2, 2.3). Both of them were erected almost at the same time in the period between 3400 and 3000 BC (Morgunova 2007, 210-216). In the first publication devoted to the Shumayevo kurgans they were considered to belong to the early (Repin) stage of the Pit–Grave culture according to their calibrated dates (14C). However, excavations at the Mustayevo burial ground raised doubts on this dating, because in addition to the standard burial rite there were some goods typical of the advanced stage of the culture (a round-bottomed vessel, a copper knife, bone pin amulets). Therefore, it is not impossible that this layer of Pit–Grave burials might belong to the early advanced stage of the culture near the Ural Mountains. According to Kuznetsov (2003, 43-51) several burial grounds near the River Volga area close to Samara at Kutuluk 1 (kurgan 4, grave 1) and Nizhny Orlyanka (kurgan 1, grave 5; kurgan 4, grave 2) may as well be related to the same time as they date back to 3350–2900 BC. The burial rite in these kurgans has a typical combination of Pit–Grave features and one of the graves contained a scepter sword quite unique in its shape and metal content.

However, by the end of the 20th century it became clear that to study Pit–Grave sites required new methods to acquire scientific data on a number of complex problems including above all such issues as their origin, division into periods and chronology. Since 1999 the expeditions of the Orenburg State Pedagogical University have been carrying out a comprehensive study of the burial grounds at Shumayevo, Mustayevo and Skvortsovka by combining archaeological methods with those of palaeosoil analysis, microbiomorphic and palinological analyses, radiocarbon dating as well as the study of metal and earthenware production (Morgunova et al. 2003; Morgunova et al. 2005; Morgunova and Khokhlova 2006). At present there are over 160 Pit–Grave culture burials in 150 kurgans uncovered in the Near Ural area (according to the data available in 2008). They are located on high terraces of the Rivers Samara, Irtek, Kindelya, Ural, Ilek and others. Despite great efforts for many years the sites of settlements have never been discovered in this area. A few Pit–Grave culture burials are investigated in the territory of the Kargalinsky copper mines (Uranbash and Pershin cemeteries), which testify a definite link between the Pit–Grave culture near the Ural Mountains and the development of the mines.

It is essential to distinguish an early advanced stage of the Pit–Grave culture dated between 3400 and 3200 BC, which is clear due to the results of radiocarbon dating from other locations of the Pit–Grave cultural and historical area. A rather detailed record of radiocarbon dates compiled by Chernykh and Orlovskaya (Chernykh et al. 2000; Chernykh and Orlovskaya 2004) for various Bronze Age cultures shows that along with the prevailing number of Pit–Grave complexes dated between 2900 and 2200 BC there are some dates as late as 3400–2900 BC. Ivanova et al. (2005, 124) distinguishes a group of the 10 most earliest burials in the Bug–Dniester area related in her opinion to the Repin culture whose radiocarbon dates fit in between 3600 and 3000 BC.

Thus, burial sites remain the main source of information to study Early and Middle Bronze Age cultures near the Ural Mountains. According to the results available today it is possible to divide all of them into 3 groups (chronological layers) of burial complexes by using radiocarbon dating.

There are earlier radiocarbon dates available for burials in accordance with the Pit–Grave cultural ritual in Kalmykia too (Shishlina et al. 2001a). For example, kurgan 1, grave 15 at Zunda–Tolga burial ground (dated by radiocarbon method to 3494–3137 BC) is quite compatible with the standard number of the Pit–Grave features by such signs as the pit shape, position and orientation of the skeleton, ochre, pieces of flint. Considering its ceramics Shishlina (1997, 81-90) thinks that the ancient burials from this kurgan are related to the Novosvobodnensky sites of the Maikop culture. Besides, there is an early radiocarbon date (3655–3375 BC) for a standard Pit–Grave burial from the burial ground at Mu-Sharet 4, which used to be communal and contained a hammer-shaped pin. A similar date is also determined for grave 1 from kurgan 12 (Shishlina et al. 2001b).

The first layer comprises 3 kurgans at Shumayevo 1 burial ground (kurgans 2, 3, 4). None of them have grave goods but the graves vary in size and shape and the position of skeletons also varies. They are considered to be erected during a short period of 50-60 years.1 Besides, it was found that one of them (kurgan 3) was built on intact soil, while two others were erected next to it on a platform cut on its top. Kurgan 3 had a grave pit with a complex construction with steps and roofing, in which laid a skeleton of a man crouched on his back with his legs turned left (Figure 2.1). Radiocarbon dating of the grave showed 4300 BP; 3300–2600 BC. Certain features of soil in all the three kurgans made it possible to distinguish them as belonging to an earlier group of sites compared 1

according to the palaeosoil research done by Khokhlova and Golyeva (see later in this volume!)

134

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

related to this layer (Kuznetsov 1996, 2003). A similar chronological period is determined for some of the advanced Pit–Grave culture sites in Kalmykia (Shishlina et al. 2001), in the north near the Black Sea and near the River Dnieper areas including those with carriages and hammer shaped pins (Ivanova et al. 2005; Nikolova 2001).

That is, using radiocarbon dating it is possible to distinguish the first layer of the advanced stage in the development of the Pit–Grave culture. At the time the burial rite shows a great variety of distinctive features and different variations in the decoration of graves. Having certain standard features (kurgan, individual graves, ochre, orientation to the east, wicker mats and covers) the rite can vary in the size of kurgans and graves, pits can be plain and complex, skeletons can be positioned crouched on the back or on the right side, graves are usually individual or communal, burials of a skull only. It is also important to note that thanks to the finds from Mustayevo such goods as round-bottomed ceramics of enclosed shape, copper knives, bone pin amulets with little horns (Figure 2.4, 2.5, 2.6) may as well belong to this cultural and historical layer.

That is, though still infrequent, radiocarbon dating of Pit– Grave complexes facilitates a chronological stratification of the second layer in the advanced stage of the development of the entire Pit–Grave cultural community when it enjoyed its greatest stability between 2900 and 2500 BC. In considering the whole advanced stage of the culture it may lie between 3200 and 2500 BC. The chronology suggested for the above layers of the advanced stage in the development of the culture in question is supported by palaeosoil study in the course of which it became clear that the kurgans of the second group had been erected approximately 300 years later and differed from the first group by both morphological and analytical properties of the buried soils. In general they showed greater humidity content testifying more humid conditions than in the period before. The humidity level in comparison with what we have today used to be 50 mm higher, i.e. the natural and climatic conditions during the Pit–Grave culture period seemed to be milder and less abrupt in temperature (Khokhlova 2007, 113-114). This consideration based on the palaeosoil analysis was confirmed by the microbiomorphic analysis of phytolit features of the burials (Golyeva 2006, 28). Contrary to the first group of kurgans the graves from the second group were mostly decorated with hydrophilic plants and rind besides meadow grass. For example, the matting of the bottom, walls and steps in the solitary kurgan at Shumayevo 2 (grave 2) was made of reed by weaving. In addition to vegetable fibers there was wool and skin apparently used in dressmaking for the dead. There were three pieces of carriage wheels found in this grave, which were made of poplar trees.

The soils from the kurgans of the early group are found to vary in their phytolith composition typical of steppe. The microbiomorphic analysis of the organic matter from the graves under study showed more meadow grass and less hydrophilic plants (cane, rush, reed) in mats, pillows and palls used for decorating the graves (Golyeva 2006, 28). In general the climate at the time of antiquity is said to be more humid than in the previous period and what we have today (Khokhlova 2007, 115). The second layer comprises 6 kurgans from the burial grounds at Shumayevo and Mustayevo. All of them vary in their burial features and definitely have much in common with respect to the burial rite (a solitary kurgan at Shumayevo 2, grave 2; a burial ground at Shumayevo 2: kurgan 6, grave 6; kurgan 3, grave 7; kurgan 4, grave 2; kurgan 5, grave 3; a burial ground at Mustayevo 5: kurgan 1, grave1). According to radiocarbon dating they are as old as 2900–2500 BC. These kurgans are close to one another, based on their soil properties. Considering its radiocarbon date grave 1 from kurgan 4 at the burial ground in Pershin located at the Kargalinsky copper mines also seems to belong to this layer (Chernykh and Orlovskaya 2004). There was an axe casting mould found in it (Figure 3).

Moreover, taking into account the properties of soil it is possible to distinguish two subgroups in the second group of sites apparently separated by a short interval of more arid conditions. This could in turn enhance the traces of the anthropogenic factor in the environment, which were found in the buried soil of different kurgans in this group. In general the advanced stage of the Pit–Grave culture shows rather comfortable natural and climatic conditions, which evidently enough determined stability of its development in the Volga–Ural area.

Thus, it is possible to determine the chronology of burial complexes, which by their burial rite features may be related to the advanced stage of the Pit–Grave culture. They had such artefacts as wooden carriage wheels, bone pin amulets with a rounded head, moulds for casting axes of the Utevsky type. Considering similar axes and wheels this layer may include the kurgans from the burial ground at Tamar–Utkul (Morgunova and Kravtsov 1994, 9-32), a grave with a wheel from Gerasimovka 1 burial ground (Figure 4), and kurgan 1 from Uteyevsky 1 burial ground (Vasilyev 1980, 32-58), which also contained some vessels and sets of woodworking tools as well as a bone pin with short horns and a copper plate with a punched ornament in addition to axes.

The advance of the next stage (Late Pit–Grave and Catacomb culture periods) in the opinion of many scholars coincides in time when the climate gradually changed for the worse and became arid (Dyomkin et al. 2006). This supposition was confirmed during the study of underground soil from kurgan 7 at Shumayevo 2 burial ground erected approximately 300–400 years later than the second group of kurgans in the period of 2600 and 2000 BC (3610 + 190 BP). The kurgan was built on a

In the Middle Volga area radiocarbon dating show that besides the Uteyevsky kurgan there are several more graves from the burial grounds at Nizhny Orlyanka1, Lopatino 1 and Krasnosamarskoye 4, which seem to be 135

N. L. MORGUNOVA

The problem of its origin and formation with respect to the Pit–Grave culture in the Volga–Ural area and near the Ural Mountains as well seems to be as complicated as the problem of its late period. Merpert thinks that the Volga– Ural variant is one of the oldest in the Pit–Grave cultural and historical area in general including the group of sites near the Ural Mountains. This viewpoint was extended in the works of Vasilyev (1981, 2003, 63) when he studied the sites of the Eneolithic period. He came to a conclusion that the Pit–Grave culture is based on Eneolithic cultures of the Khvalynsky and Sredny Stog communities. Yudin pointed out that the Pit–Grave rite to bury the dead in kurgans began during the time of the Khvalynsky burial grounds (Dryomov and Yudin 1992, 61-99).

organic matter rich soil covered with steppe vegetation without any traces of inhabitation and erosion. Some of the xeromorphic species were found only in its upper layer together with meadow-steppe flora, which was prevailed all way down. Golyeva thinks that such history shows the evolution of vegetation from meadow steppe to steppe while prior to the burial itself the conditions became arid (Morgunova and Golyeva et al. 2003, 200201). At the moment the arid processes only set in and it is interesting to note that climate changes are reflected on the use of vegetation for decorating the graves. Decorative mats were made of steppe cereals and feather grass. The problem of the final stage in the development of the Pit–Grave culture in the Volga–Ural area is rather controversial. Many scholars regard the cultural aspects of this chronological period, which according to radiocarbon dating corresponds to 2500–2000 BC in different ways. In spite of some innovations, in particular, newly found ceramics, we think that the Pit–Grave standards for the burial rite were generally preserved at this period of time leading us to believe that on the whole the sites under study belong to the late Pit–Grave culture (Morgunova 1991, 35-50). This consideration seems to be confirmed by numerous facts testifying the coexistence of Early Catacomb and Late Pit–Grave sites to the west near the River Volga area, from the River Don to the River Dniester (Sinyuk 1995; Pustovalov 2003; Shishlina 2007). Ivanova (2005, 131) points out that Catacomb influence is not traced beyond the River Bug where the Pit–Grave culture remains predominant. That Catacomb influence is dying away from the west to north-east is apparent in the Volga–Ural area too.

However, as radiocarbon dating became available for both Khvalynsky and Pit–Grave sites in the last decade there appears a great chronological gap between the principal dates with respect to both cultures. That is, Vasilyev’s conclusion on the origin of the Pit–Grave culture can raise certain doubts. Besides, scholars who think so proceed from the radiocarbon dates related mainly to the advanced stage of the Pit–Grave culture but the Pit–Grave sites of the early (Repin) stage have not been practically investigated with the help of the radiocarbon dating method. In considering the archaeological features of the latter they have much in common with the rite practiced at Khvalynsky and Berezhnovsky burial grounds and, with that of the Maikop culture, which is considered far more ancient and now it is dated back to the 4th millennium BC (Korenevsky 2004). The discovery of several Pit–Grave sites related to the Repin stage in the Volga and Ural areas including those, which have artefacts of Maikop type makes it possible to assume, firstly, that they coincide in time and, secondly, that the Maikop cultural groups participated in the genesis of the Pit–Grave culture. This process is especially evident near the Ural Mountains where even in an early stage, burial on the right side as well as some metals of Maikop origin placed in the grave were not uncommon.

There are few Catacomb sites beyond the Lower Volga area as compared to those of the Late Pit–Grave culture. They are none in the Middle Volga. Here the Late Pit– Grave cultural tradition with its flat-bottomed earthenware of the Poltavkinsky type is absolutely dominating. A similar picture is observed near the Ural Mountains. Peculiar to it is the Skvortsovsky burial ground comprising five kurgans related to the late Pit– Grave culture (Figure 5). Their burial complexes showed the following features: a mound of a kurgan, small ditches, large and deep plain pits, skeletons in a contracted position on their right side with their skulls to the east, covered with ochre, adjustable mats and palls of grass. Grave goods are few but they do not violate Pit– Grave cultural traditions: tetrahedral copper awls, a knife, a pebble stone pickaxe and ceramics. According to radiocarbon dating this burial ground is related to the Catacomb period within 2600–2200 BC. Meanwhile the goods discovered at the site and others similar to it in the Near Ural area show that Pit–Grave cultural features are gradually dying away and being replaced by the elements of a new culture. In particular it appears that the buried can be positioned in a crouched position on both the right and left side covered with less ochre, while changes in the shape of ditches and pottery are quite evident.

It is to be regretted that radiocarbon dating of Early Pit– Grave culture sites is rather scanty. The burials under kurgans from the Vertoletnoye Pole and Peregruznoye burial grounds have different dates (Shishlina 2007, 380). One of them coincides with the dates related to the Khvalynsky culture and supports the origin of the burial rite in kurgans in the steppe zone during the Eneolithic period, in the second half of the 5th millennium BC. The latest date available goes back to the turn of the 5th and the 4th millennia BC, which according to Vasilyev makes it possible for the Khvalynsky and Berezhnovsky cultural traditions to develop during the late Eneolithic period as well. There are several kurgan burials without grave goods related to the Pit–Grave culture near the River Dniester area dated to the interval between 4000 and 3000 BC, and we know some radiocarbon dates within 4500–4000 BC for several Eneolithic kurgan burials (Ivanova et al. 2005, 96-98). Therefore it is not impossible for the Khvalynsky cultural tradition, 136

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

radiocarbon dates, one of which goes back to the approximate period between 3600 and 3400 BC, while two others show 4200 to 3800 BC (Morgunova 2009, 12). Of special interest are three dates received for the bones of a man (in a supine position) and ceramics of the Repin type found in grave 1 from kurgan 31 at the Lopatino burial ground: 4750 ± 70 BP; 4800 ± 80 BP; 4432 ±66 BP (Kuznetsov and Kovalukh 2008, 196).A similar date 4730 ± 90 BP (3640–3490 BC) is available for a fragment of a Repin vessel found in the kurgan at Petrovka near the Ural Mountains.

represented by the kurgan burial complexes of the late Khvalynsky–Berezhnovsky type, to develop in the Near Volga steppe area in the course of the final stage of the Eneolithic period (4500–4000 BC) considering radiocarbon dating of the sites from the Peregruznoye and Vertoletnoye Pole burial grounds as well as the dates for Pre-Maikop sites near the Caucasus (Korenevsky 2008, 84-86). Thus, the development of the Pit–Grave culture in the Volga–Ural area seems to be rather complicated and uncertain, which was pointed out as early as in the 70s of the 20th century by Merpert. In addition to a number of cultures from the Late Eneolithic period, enclosing both steppe and forest-steppe people, this process was prompted by various links and cooperation of the local population with the cultures near the Caucasus and in the north near the Black Sea areas, which in turn, according to many scholars, borrowed a lot from steppe cultures.

Thus, a comprehensive study of kurgans related to the Pit–Grave culture near the Ural Mountains provided some new data on the chronology of different stages in its development from the Khvalynsky and Berezhnovsky period to the Catacomb time when it died away. As to the data of palaeosoil analysis, palaeoanthropology, the technical and technological analysis of ceramics and metallurgy they do not only allow to define more exactly and complete the description of every stage in its development but distinctly point to a variety of ties and ethnic multitude of the Pit–Grave culture in the Volga– Ural region.

Active integration at the turn of the Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age periods seemed to be bolstered above all by changes in economy of the steppe population. Firstly, at that time and earlier than anywhere else in the Volga– Ural area there appears a specific form of production: mobile herding that prompted contacts with cultures that were practicing more intensive agriculture. Secondly, the development of ties with farmers brought along, at first, finished metal products and then technology of metalworking to the steppe zone. Considering the materials of the Khvalynsky burial grounds during the Eneolithic period a major role in this process was played by the links between the Balkan–Carpathian centre of cultures via the Sredny Stog and Tripolye cultural formations, which is confirmed by metallographic data concerning the production of metal near the Ural Mountains at the time of the Pit–Grave culture (Degtyareva, 2003, 359-377). During the Repin time and early advanced stage the influence from the Caucasus was growing and seemed to have an effect upon the development of the Kargalinsky metallurgical centre near the Ural Mountains. The archaeological study of the Pit–Grave culture in the Volga–Ural area today is especially concerned about the beginning of its early stage, which many scholars regard in the context of the Repin culture. There are several Repin sites near the River Volga and Ural areas including kurgans and settlements (burial grounds at Bykovo 2, Yekaterinovka, Pokrovka 2, Petrovka, Gerasimovka 2, settlements Kzyl-Hak 1 and 2). For some of them radiocarbon dating has recently become available. For example, very instructive are the dates received for the ceramics of the Repin culture found at the camp KzylHak 2 in the north near the Caspian Sea region (Kuznetsov and Kovalukh 2008, 194-197). Their ratings are close enough and go back to 3700–3200 BC. Taking into account the dating of the camp Kzyl-Hak 1 4900 ± 40 BP the lower date of the Repin culture complexes might as well become more ancient.

REFERENCES CITED Chernykh, E.N. 1966. Istoriya drevneishey metallurgii Vostochnoy Yevropy. Moskva Chernykh, E.N. 2000. Metallurgicheskiye provintsii i radiouglerodnaya khronologiya. Moskva Chernykh, E.N. 2002. Kargaly – ancient mining and metallurgical complex. Earliest stages of metallurgy in northern part of Eurasia. Moskva Chernykh, E.N. and Orlovskaya, L.B. 2004. Radiouglerodnaya khronologiya drevneyamnoy obschnocti i istoki kurgannykh kultur. In Rossijskaya arkheologiya, 1, 84-99. Degtyareva, A.D. 2003. Metallicheskiye izdeliya yamnoy kultury Yuzhnogo Priuralya. In Shumayevskiye kurgany, 359-377. Orenburg Dyomkin, V.A. 2006. Paleoekologiya vostochnoyevropeiskoy stepi v epokhi eneolita i bronzy. Problemy izucheniya yamnoy kulturno-istoricheskoy oblasti, 37-41. Orenburg Dryomov, I.I. and Yudin, A.I. 1992. Drevneyshiye podkurganniye zakhoroneniya stepnogo Povolzhya. Rossijskaya arkheologiya 4. 18-30. Fyodorova-Davydova, E.A. 1971. Priuralskaya gruppa pamyatnikov yamnoy kultury. In Istoriya i kultura Vostochnoy Yevropy po arkheologicheskim dannym. Moskva. Golyeva, A.A. 2006. Osobennosti ispolzovaniya organicheskogo materiala v yamnykh pogrebeniyakh yuga Orenburgskoy oblasti. In Problemy izucheniya yamnoy kulturno-istoricheskoy oblasti, 28-30. Orenburg Ivanova, S.V. 2005. Kurgany drevnikh skotovodov mezhdurechya Yuzhnogo Buga i Dnestra. Odessa. Khokhlova, O.S. 2007. Paleoklimaticheskiye rekonstruktsii dlya 3 tys. do n. e.po dannym paleopochvennogo izucheniya kurganov yamnoy kultury v Orenburgskom Priuralye. In Vestnik

The ceramics of the Repin culture discovered in the Bronze Age layer at Turganinsky settlement have three 137

N. L. MORGUNOVA

arkheologicheskykh i paleoekologicheskikh issledovaniyakh, 210-216. Sankt-Peterburg Nikolova, A.V. 2001. Khronologiya yamnoy i katakombnoy kultur stepnoy Ukrainy: nekotoriye voprosy datirovki metodom 14C. In Bronzovy vek Vostochnoy Yevropy: kharakteristika kultur, khronologiya i periodizatsiya, 104-107. Samara. Pustovalov, S.Zh. 2003. Analiz radiokarbonnykh dat iz pogrebeniy yamnoy i katakombnoy obschnostey. In Vita Antiqua 5-6, 45-59. Kiyev Shishlina, N.I. 1997. Stratigrafiya, khronologiya i kulturnaya prinadlezhnost kurgana 1 mogilnika Zunda-Tolga. In Step i Kavkaz, 81-91. Moskva. Shishlina, N.I. 2001a. Khronologicheskaya positsiya yamnoy kultury Severo-Zapadnogo Prikaspiya. In Bronzovy vek Vostochnoy Yevropy: kharakteristika kultur, khronologiya i periodizatsiya, 117-123. Samara Shishlina, N.I. 2001b. Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya mogilnikov Mu-Sharet. In Mogilniki Mu-Sharet v Kalmykii: kompleksnoye issledovaniye, 11-73. Moskva Shishlina, N.I. 2007. Severo-Zapadny Prikaspy v epokhu bronzy (5-3 tys. do n. e.). Moskva Sinyuk, A.T. 1996. Bronzovy vek basseina Dona. Voronezh Smirnov, K. F. 1965. Drevneyamnaya kultura v Orenburgskikh stepyakh. In Novoye v sovetskoy arkheologii. Moskva. Vasilyev, I.B. 1980. Mogilnik yamno-poltavkinskogo vremeny u s. Utevka. In Arkheologiya vostochnoyevropeiskoy lesostepy, 32-58. Voronezh Vasilyev, I.B. 1981. Eneolit Povolzhya. Step i lesostep. Kujbyshev Vasilyev, I.B. 2003. Khvalynskaya eneoliticheskaya kultura volgo-uralskoy stepi i lesostepi (nekotoriye itogi issledovaniya). Voprosy arkheologii Povolzhya. Vypusk 3, 61-99. Samara

Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 10, 110-117. Orenburg Korenevsky, S.N. 2004. Drevneishiye zemledeltsy i skotovody Predkavkazya. Moskva Korenevsky, S.N. 2008. Sovremenniye problemy izucheniya maikopskoy kultury. In Arkheologiya Kavkaza i Blizhnego Vostoka, 71-122. Moskva Kuznetsov, P.F. 1996. Kavkazsky ochag i kultury bronzovogo veka Volgo-Uralya. Mezhdu Azijey i Yevropoy, 64-66. Sankt-Peterburg Kuznetsov, P.F. 2003. Osobennosti kurgannykh obryadov naseleniya Samarskoy doliny v pervoy polovine bronzovogo veka. In Materialnaya kultura naseleniya reki Samary v bronzovom veke, 43-51. Samara Kuznetsov, P.F. and Kovalyukh, N.N. 2008. Datirovaniye keramiki yamno-repinskogo oblika v Povolzhye. Arkheologiya vostochno-yevropeiskoy stepi, 194-199. Saratov Merpert, N.Y. 1974. Drevneishiye skotovody VolzhskoUralskogo mezhdurechya. Moskva Morgunova, N.L. 1991. K voprosu o poltavkinskoy kulture Priuralya. Sovetskaya arkheologiya 4, 35-50. Morgunova, N.L. and Kravtsov, A.Yu. 1994. Drevneyamnaya kultura na Ileke. Yekaterinburg Morgunova, N.L., Golyeva, A.A., Krajeva, P.A., Meserjákov, D.B., Tureckij, M.A., Haljápin, M, V. and Khokhlova, O.S. 2003. Shumayevskiye kurgany. Orenburg Morgunova, N.L., Krajeva, L.A. and Matjusko, I.V. 2005. Kurgannij mogulnyik Mu-Sztajevo V. Arheologicseszkije pamjátnyiki Orenburzsjá VII, 5-69. Morgunova, N.L. and Khokhlova, O. S. 2006. Kurgans and nomads: new investigations of mound burials in the southern Urals.Antiquity, volume 80, 308, 303317. Morgunova, N.L. 2007. Ob absolutnoy khronologii razvitogo etapa yamnoy kultury. In Radiouglerod v

138

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

Fig. 1. Location of the study sites

139

N. L. MORGUNOVA

Fig. 2. The materials of the I. horizon of the Pre-Ural Pit–Grave cultur: 1. Shumaevo (kurgan 3, burial 6); 2., 3. Mustaevo V. (kurgan 8, burial 2); 4-6. Mustaevo V. (kurgan 9, burial 2)

140

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

Fig. 3. The materials of II. horizon of the Pre-Ural Pit–Grave culture: 1-2. Shumaevo (single kurgan II., burial 2); 3. Gerasimovka I-.(kurgan 7, burial 1); 4. Shumaevo II. (kurgan 6, burial 6)

141

N. L. MORGUNOVA

Fig. 4. Findings of the II. horizon of the Pre-Ural Pit–Grave culture: 1-3. Tamar-Utkul VIII. (the kurgan 4, burial 1); 49. Tamar-Utkul VII. (the kurgan 8, burial 4); 10-13. Tamar-Utkul VII. (the kurgan 1, burial 1)

142

Pit–Grave Culture of the South near the Ural Mountains

Fig. 5. The findings of the Skvortsovka burial ground

143

144

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 6, pp. 145-153.

Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds Nina.L MORGUNOVA; Lidiy V. KUPTSOVA Orenburg State Pedagogical University, Sovetskay ul. 19., Orenburg, 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract: This paper deals with two burial complexes related to the population of the Timber–Grave cultural and historical community. The kurgans of the above necropolises included the graves belonging to different chronological periods of the Timber–Grave culture. Analysis and evaluation of the materials obtained show the evolution of the burial rite and the ceramic production peculiar to the Timber–Grave culture from the early to the late periods of its development.

from baby age to 7-8 years old were located on the periphery of the burial mound. The wood covering is found over one of the central graves where it is possible to trace some ochre. Peculiar to the central graves is the rather large size of pits, which looked apparently more spacious than it was required for the dead. As to the peripheral graves they were, on the contrary, small and the dead fitted in them in height and age. It should be noted that no additional decorative elements were found during excavating the peripheral graves of the kurgan.

Keywords: Timber–Grave culture, chronology, burial rite, grave goods, ceramics, near Volga and Ural areas

In considering the main burial rite features of kurgan 3 from the Skvortsovsky burial ground one can assume that the burial mound was built in two stages and the graves under the first mound layer seem to outdate those located under the additional one. Their earlier origin is supported by the following: wood covering, matting of organic materials, palls, skeletons powdered with ochre, larger size of pits. These features are usually characteristic of the Early (Pokrovka) stage in the development of the Timber–Grave culture (Merpert et al. 1985, 17-18; Kachalova 1985, 33; Maksimov and Lopatin 2007, 148).

Between 2006 and 2008 an expedition of the Orenburg State Pedagogical University headed by Prof. N. L. Morgunova excavated the kurgans from the burial grounds at Labazy and Skvortsovka in the Kurmanayevsky district of the Orenburg region. The materials obtained were related to all 8 kurgans from the Labazy burial ground and to 2 kurgans (Figure 1.1, 1.2) from the Skvortsovsky burial ground.1 Skvortsovsky burial ground. Here excavations were carried out on 2 kurgans containing 39 graves and a burial construction of a ritual character, which was probably made of wooden boards with a knife. In the center of it there were fragments of ceramics and a part of a grooved copper bracelet. The mound of kurgan 3 was built twice – at first above three graves in the middle, which was evidently made at the same time or shortly one after another. Following this an additional mound was built over the peripheral graves. The latter were made after a time. As to the mound of kurgan 4, it was built above all graves at once, at the same time.

Grave goods were distributed in the central graves and consisted of ceramic vessels, beads, 2 fangs, a bone arrowhead, 47 astragali of sheep and a bronze knife. The knife had a shape of a leaf with a ferrule, rectangular handle and a stiffening rib. Similar in form objects were discovered at Timber–Grave sites in the Volga area near Samara (Kachalova 1985, 54. Figure 2, 42), in the Volga– Don area (Lopatin and Chetverikov 2006, 47. Figure 3, 9), to the east of the Azov Sea (Litvinenko 1999, 16. Figure 11, 1) as well as in other areas where the Timber– Grave culture was spread. Scholars point out that this kind of knives were mostly typical of the Timber–Grave cultural period (Lopatin and Chetverikov 2006, 40), especially during its early stage (Litvinenko 1999, 14).

Kurgan 3. This kurgan was rather large (d: 34 m, h: 1 m). All burials were made in accordance with the rite of inhumation inside almost rectangular graves. All complexes had a skeleton except for one which was communal. The dead were mostly positioned with their head to north-east and to north. The position of the skeletons in the graves was generally crouched or on their left side. In two cases the skeleton was supine and in one it was on the right side.

The vessels from the central graves include pots three of which are rather squat with sharp ribs, one with a smoothed rib, another one is elongated with a little ledge on the shoulder and also one, which is biconical in shape. Three vessels are ornamented with the help of indented or plain press tool. In one case the ornament covers the entire surface of the vessel, in two others the upper parts are ornamented dividing them in two zones, above and below the rib. On some vessels the design is pressed on the edge of the collar. These combined features link the earthenware tradition in question with the early stage of development of the Timber–Grave culture (Kachalova 1985, 33; Mochalov 2008, 176-195).

As to the sex and age of the dead it was the following: adult skeletons were found in central graves as well as in three peripheral ones, while those of juvenile and infant,

1

for the location of the sites see Morgunova, Figure 1 (p. 139) in this volume

145

N. I. MORGUNOVA; L.V. KUPTSOVA

kurgan 3 at Skvortsovsky burial ground testify the contrary.

The biconical shape of a vessel is not typical of the Timber–Grave culture in general, neither is ornamentation of the entire vessel surface. As a rule it is peculiar to the ceramics related to the Abashevo culture (Kuzmina 1992, 14-15). Similar ritual goods are found among the materials of the Pokrovka culture too (Malov 2007, 87). The vessel in question seems to be more related to the Pokrovka pottery traditions because its rim is shifted to the middle of the vessel body (Maksimov and Lopatin 2007, 149).

Pot-like vessels from peripheral graves on the whole show certain standards of the Timber–Grave pottery production such as crudeness, asymmetry, thick walls (Rutto 2003, 32; Mochalov 2008, 177). But some of them posses features, which bear no similarity to Timber– Grave materials. These are traces of scratching found on 8 pots, in some cases for decoration. Such peculiarities as inside rib or ledge on the collar, the bell shape as well as individual saucers, a beak on the collar, a swastika in the design of some vessels are not typical of pottery related to the Timber–Grave culture. They are more peculiar to the Abashevo, Sintashta and Petrovo ceramics (Kuzmina 1992, 14-15; Vinogradov 2003, 227-230; Tkachev and Khovansky 2006; Yudin and Matyukhin 2006, 69). In other words one can talk about outside influence of other cultures upon the formation of the Timber–Grave culture and the fact that the interval between the central and peripheral burials in the kurgan was short enough. A conclusion like this is confirmed by the study of the jarlike ceramics (Figure 2.1-4).

A number of vessels have some features of Andronovo (Alakul) culture in the form of a small ledge on the shoulder (Zdanovich 1988, 153; Rutto 2003, 33; Mochalov 2008, 179). Related to the Andronovo pottery traditions are also such decorative designs as a combination of rhombs and meanders. However, a certain asymmetry of the vessel, a smoothed out ledge and crude execution are very likely to show that it comes from the Timber–Grave community. This assumption is supported by some features of the burial rite. For instance, communal burial of people face to face are not frequent in the Timber–Grave sites. In communal graves peculiarly to the Timber–Grave culture usually both skeletons lie in a crouched position on their left side. Burial of the dead in an embracing position is more typical of the Sintashta and then Alakul sites (Zdanovich 1988, 143; Kupriyanova 2004, 117-126).

Kurgan 4. It was 32 m in diameter and 40 cm high. There were 10 graves discovered in it, one of them was communal,. A sole burial tradition, an inhumation was revealed. Practically all burials were pits of almost rectangular shape. Their size corresponded to the age and height of the buried. Most of the graves belonged to adults while three of them contained juvenile skeletons. All buried were interred in a contracted position on their left side and oriented to north-east or to north and in one case to east.

Such grave goods as fangs or bone arrowheads are mostly found at the beginning of the Timber–Grave culture in Pokrovka, Sintashta and other sites of the transient period from the Middle to Late Bronze Age (Khalikov 1989, 75; Malov 1989, 79-90; Tkachev 2007, 201 and others).

The grave goods consisted only ceramic vessels, 9 pcs of a pot and a jar shape. Only one of them had some ornaments made with the help of a plain and racked press tool as a combination of slanting incisions and meander patterns.

Syncretical features of the burial rite and grave goods at the early stage of the Timber–Grave culture are not incidental. This fact confirms the idea of many scholars about the Timber–Grave culture. That is, it was formed on the basis of several cultural communities (Merpert et al. 1985, 10-28; Gorbunov 2006, 116-117 and others).

Kurgan 4 was used during the advanced or at the end of the advanced, the beginning of the late stage in the development of the Timber–Grave culture. It becomes evident due to the following: a fairly great number of graves under the same mound, which belonged to people of different sex and age, well-established standards in the construction of a burial chamber (almost rectangular pits without roofing, matting, palls and other additional decorative elements, few grave goods). The ceramics found in the graves in general appear to be homogenous without ornamentation (Kachalova 1985, 35-36; Vasilyev et al.1985, 78-80).

In order to find out when the second layer of kurgan 3 was erected it is necessary to study goods found in its graves. They are represented only by ceramic vessels discovered on the periphery of kurgan 3 at Skvortsovsky burial ground. They show 32 artefatcs including pots and jars. Pots can be divided into those with sharp rims (7 pcs), with smoothed ribs (14 pcs), two vessels have enlarged bodies. There are 11 ornamented artefacts. The ornamentation was made with the help of an indented, plain press tool or was drawn. In several cases the design goes down below the rib or covers the whole of the vessel body. It is interesting to note that none of the vessels in question have identical decorative design. This is not typical of the Timber–Grave artefacts in general. Some scholars believe that repeated decorative design on ceramics may testify a same kinship with the buried (Vasilyev et al. 1985, 63). The ceramic vessels from

Thus, the study of the burial rite and grave goods from two kurgans at the Skvortsovsky necropolis showed that kurgan 3 had been used during the early (Pokrovka) period of the Timber–Grave culture and the interval between the erection of the upper and lower mounds does not seem to be much. The plan graphic study of the graves in the kurgan (central graves were reserved for adults under a separate mound while peripheral ones were 146

MORGUNOVA Timber–Grave , Nina.L.; culture KUPTSOVA in the basin , Lidiy of the V. Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds

crouched on the left side. In three cases the back of the buried was curved very much. There were some graves with a non-standard position of the dead: in a prone and in a sitting position.

located under the second mound in a definite order) apparently shows that their construction performed a certain ritual function. Varied ceramics from peripheral graves testify the fact that the buried belonged to different kinships. It is not unlikely that for a time this kurgan used to be a cemetery for children from several tribes or kinships (Figure 3.1-3.3).

All the features of burial rites mentioned above (inhumation as well as cremation at the same burial ground, almost rectangular pits, northern or north-eastern orientation of pits and skeletons, solid or broken wood flooring, skeletons in a crouched position on their left side, curved back of the buried) have much in common among Timber–Grave sites in the steppe near the Volga and Ural (Fedorova–Davydova 1964, 85-86; Kachalova 1985, 34-35; Khalyapin 1998, 65-66; Lopatin and Chetverikov 2006, 24-30; Yudin and Matyushkin 2006, 39-45; Yudin and Matyushkin 2008, 47-54).

This fact that the burial rite practiced in central graves combined some features from the preceding periods of time and that the rite peculiar to peripheral graves was typical of the Timber–Grave culture supports the assumption that burial rite standards were established in the first place with respect to the common layer of society. In the case under study this phenomenon is represented by the graves of infants and juvenile (Yudin and Matyukhin 2005, 38-39; Yudin and Matykhin 2006, 56).

Considering the main features of the burial rites the central grave in kurgan 2 was the earliest of all. It is very similar to the central graves from the Skvortsovsky burial ground and has a number of peculiarities typical mostly of the early stage in the development of the Timber– Grave culture. Other kurgans at this necropolis seem to be erected a little later and can be classified among those dated to the end of the early – the beginning of the advanced Timber–Grave culture periods (Figure 4.1-4.2). It is clear that these complexes are neither related to the time when Timber–Grave culture was being formed nor do they belong to the period when it was flourishing. The burial rite features revealed at this necropolis in general show some well established standards of the Timber– Grave culture, i.e. several graves under the same mound, prevalent orientation of the dead in pits, almost rectangular shape of pits both medium and small, flooring usually made with varied wooden boards. It must be pointed out that traditions to bury the dead acquired at the beginning of the Timber–Grave culture such as a more complex decoration of central graves, varied grave goods and cremation are still retained.

Varied features peculiar to different cultural communities revealed from the burial rite, the shape and ornamentation of ceramic vessels seem to prove that the Timber–Grave cultural and historical community developed on a multiple basis. The participation of different cultural communities in the origin of the Timber–Grave culture is a highly controversial issue today (Khalikov 1989, 66-82; Malov 1989, 82-106; Malov 2007, 67-68; Gorbunov 2006, 96-122). As to kurgan 4 it seems to be used during the advanced stage of the Timber–Grave culture as it becomes clear in the light of some regular features revealed from the burial rite and ceramic goods. Labazovsky burial ground. Here there were 8 kurgans excavated, which contained 29 graves. They included both central and peripheral graves, over which the mounds were built during the same period of time. The only exception was kurgan 2 where at first an adult was buried in the central grave to be added later by a juvenile and infant graves, and kurgan 4, which had one central and 4 additional graves. So, each kurgan appeared to be a separate complex with graves made either simultaneously or shortly one after another (Figure 4.3).

The grave goods from the Labazovsky burial ground include ceramic vessels as well as metal, paste bead and stone artefacts. Ceramic vessels constitute the most substantial part of the items uncovered here. There were 25 of them all in all. According to their shape they can be divided into pot-like and jar-like vessels.

Peculiar to this burial ground is that there were 2 ways of interment: inhumation and cremation. The former amounts to 14% of the total number. All cremations were carried out outside the burial ground at first and then the dead were buried in graves. One of them used to be a sacrificial complex containing 2 aggregates of sheep bones.

There are 19 pot-like vessels amounting to 76% of the ceramic collection, which include 11 vessels with sharp ribs and 8 vessels with smoothed out ribs. These vessels are usually proportioned horizontally, that is their height is close to the mouth diameter or considerably smaller. One of the vessels has vertical proportions and its height is a little more than the diameter of its mouth. There are 16 vessels, which are ornamented. Scratching is found in 5 cases and glazing in 3 cases. Ornamentation appears to be produced in the following ways: with the help of plain and racked press tools including those with medium and big dents and by chiseling. The decorative design comprises 6 principal elements: hatched triangles with their apexes upwards, double and triple-line zigzags, herring bone, meander patterns, horizontal lines and

The dead were buried in rectangular or oval pits as well as on the level with the buried soil. The pits vary in size. There was some flooring made of pinewood boards in 5 of the graves. The graves from this necropolis had 22 skeletons all in all. Most of the graves contained a skeleton and only one of them was communal. Orientation of the buried almost always coincided with that of the grave pit. The head of the buried usually pointed to north-east or to north. The position of skeletons in pits in most cases was also standard: 147

N. I. MORGUNOVA; L.V. KUPTSOVA

slanting notches. A horizontal parallel line is always combined with other elements and serves as a dividing line. Seldom used elements are meander and herring bone patterns. The former are found on two vessels. It is interesting to note that meander patterns with crosses were found on vessels from central graves at both Labazovsky and Skvortsovsky burial grounds. The horizontal herring bone design was found on one vessel only and is said to be used far more seldom than others. Usually it is considered to belong to items related to the Poltavkino (Krivtsova-Grakova 1955, 30) or Catacomb cultures (Dremov et al. 2005, 24). Such elements as swastika made with the help of a medium indented press tool as well as hatched triangles appear to be exceptional.

The pendants were ornamented with the so-called “warts”. Some scholars believe that this kind of ornamentation was peculiar to the snake cult very popular among ancient Indo-Iranians (Ovchinnikova and Kabanova 1999, 68).

Jar-like vessels (3 pcs) were found in two graves at the burial ground under study. So, the ceramics from the Labazovsky necropolis are marked by the following features: horizontal proportions of vessels, clear shape, the utmost enlargement of vessels at the top, ornamentation in the upper part of pots separated by a line, prevalent use of medium indented press tools for ornamentation. These are the standard features of the Timber–Grave ceramics. Some vessels, though, retain certain archaic elements such as handles, herring bone design, ornaments over the entire vessel body, traces of scratching. Hence the ceramics from the Labazovsky burial ground was produced at a time when Timber– Grave culture had already possessed certain standards but appeared to retain some features from the previous period.

The stone artefact is represented by a small axe found in grave 7/2. An item most similar in shape was found incidentally at Beryozovka in the Samara region (Kuzmina 2006, 343. Figure 5.2). Many scholars suppose that the graves with axes like that one and those of other types are related either to the Pokrovka culture (Kuzmina 2006, 348) or to the Early Timber–Grave antiquities (Tsimidanov and Yevglevsky 1993, 100-103).

The bronze bracket with a piece of wood from kurgan 2 evidently served as a part of a wooden bowl. This supposition is very likely considering the features of the burial rite and ceramics from the burial complex under study, which point to the fact that this kurgan was built earlier than all of the others. Some scholars think that a wooden bowl in the grave is typical of the Early Timber– Grave cultural period (Otroschenko 1984, 90).

Paste beads white and blue in color and 3-5 mm in diameter were found in two burial complexes and have very much in common with those related to the Timber– Grave and Alakul cultures. So, the grave goods from the Labazovsky kurgans show that, probably they were mainly used at the end of the Early Timber–Grave cultural period. This is proved by the fact that the ceramics, metal artefacts and peculiarities of the burial rite have all the standard features of the Timber–Grave culture but still retain some signs of the time before.

The vessels similar in shape and ornamentation are peculiar to the Early Timber–Grave sites in general. The phenomenon that sharp-ribbed vessels outnumber others discovered at the burial ground in question shows that this necropolis was used mainly at the end of the advanced period in the development of the Timber–Grave culture (Krivtsova-Grakova 1955, 39).

CONCLUSION The study of the burial rite and grave goods from Timber–Grave cultural complexes at Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds showed that they were used during different stages in the development of the Timber– Grave culture. The earliest (Pokrovka) stage is represented by kurgan 3 from the Skvortsovsky burial ground and kurgan 2 from the Labazovsky necropolis. It is characterized by a complex burial rite and a great number of grave goods were found in the central, socially more important graves. The phenomenon that the burial rite was practiced with respect to the common people at that time and it already became a standard practice, is very closely related to the Timber–Grave culture. The ceramic goods from peripheral graves still retain some features borrowed from other cultural communities of the preceding period, which is explained by the fact that the Timber–Grave culture developed on a multiple basis.

Metal articles are represented by two leaf-shaped knives, three 1.5 turn bronze pendants, a fragment of a bronze sleeved bracelet and a bronze bracket. Bronze knives were found in two graves. They are similar to those uncovered at the Skvortsovsky burial ground, that is being leaf-shaped with a clear rhombic ferrule and a rectangular handle. The section of blades and handles are rhombic and flattened into an oval shape respectively. Bronze pendants were found in two graves and had the same shape. Similar artefacts were spread in the steppe near the Volga River (Malov 1992, 34). Such artefacts are typical of Timber–Grave sites but not infrequent in Late Pokrovka complexes either (Malov 2000, 29). Malov also assumes that the pendants related to the Timber–Grave cultural and historical community come from the antiquities of the Middle Bronze Age, from the Catacomb culture of the Caucasus and Eastern European steppe. It should be pointed out that this pendant was discovered along with a vessel, which had handles and its shape is typical of the Late Catacomb cultural period.

Most kurgans at the Labazovsky necropolis were erected during the transient period from the Early to the Advanced stages of the Timber–Grave culture. This is confirmed by the burial rite features, which as a rule became already standard, while some peculiarities of the 148

Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds

Lopatin, V. and Chetverikov, S. 2006. Issledovanie kurgannogo mogil'nika «Messer V» na severe VolgoDonskogo mezhdurech'ya. Arheologicheskoe nasledie Saratovskogo kraya 7: 23-51. Maksimov, E. and Lopatin, V. 2007. Materialy Nizovskih kurganov. Arheologiya Vostochno-Evropejskoj stepi 5: 137-161. Malov, N. 1989. Pogrebal'nye pamyatniki pokrovskogo tipa v Nizhnem Povolzh'e. Arheologiya VostochnoEvropejskoj stepi: 82-101. Malov, N. 1992. Pokrovsko-abashevskie ukrasheniya Nizhnego Povolzh'ya. Arheologiya vostochnoevropejskoj stepi 3: 22-54. Malov, N. 2000. Zoloto i serebro v srubnoj kul'turno – istoricheskoj oblasti. Povolzhskij kraj 11: 27-53. Malov, N. 2007. Pokrovskaya kul'tura nachala epohi pozdnej bronzy v severnyh rajonah Nizhnego Povolzh'ya: po materialam poselenij srubnoj kul'turno-istoricheskoj oblasti. Arheologiya Vostochno-Evropejskoj stepi 5: 34-92. Merpert, N. Kachalova, N. and Vasil'ev, I. 1985. O formirovanii srubnyh plemen Povolzh'ya. Srubnaya kul'turno-istoricheskaya obshchnost': 10-28. Molodin, V. 1984. Osobennosti pogrebal'nogo obryada detskih zaxoronenij andronovcev Barabinskoj lesostepi (po materialam mogil'nika Preobrazhenka 3). Bronzovyj vek Uralo – Irtyshskogo mezhdurech'ya: 37-44. Mochalov, O. 2008. Keramika pogrebal'nyh pamyatnikov epohi bronzy lesostepi Volgo – Ural'skogo mezhdurech'ya. Samara Rutto, N. 2003. Srubno-alakul'skie svyazi na Yuzhnom Urale. Ufa Tkachev, V. 2007. Stepi Yuzhnogo Priural'ya i Zapadnogo Kazahstana na rubezhe epoh srednej i pozdnej bronzy. Aktobe Tkachev, V. and Havanskij, A., 2006. Keramika sintashtinskoj kul'tury. Orsk – Samara. Vasilyev, I. Kuz'mina, O. and Semenova, A., 1985. Periodizaciya pamyatnikov srubnoj kul'tury lesostepnogo Povolzh'ya. Srubnaya kul'turnoistoricheskaya obshchnost': 60-94. Vinogradov, N. 2003. Mogil'nik bronzovogo veka. Krivoe Ozero v Yuzhnom Zaural'e. Chelyabinsk. Yudin, A. and Matyukhin, A. 2005. Social'naya struktura srubnogo obshchestva po materialam mogil'nikov Kochetnoe i Zolotaya Gora. Arheologicheskoe nasledie Saratovskogo kraya: 6: 36-50. Yudin, A. and Matyukhin, A., 2006. Rannesrubnye kurgannye mogil'niki Zolotaya Gora i Kochetnoe. Saratov. Yudin, A. 2008. Kurgany u sela Mokroe. Arheologicheskoe nasledie Saratovskogo kraya 8: 47-68. Zdanovich, G. 1988. Bronzovyj vek Uralo – Kazahstanskih stepej (osnovy periodizacii). Sverdlovsk

Early Timber–Grave period are still retained. The intermediate character of most kurgans from the Labazovsky necropolis in general is evident on the account of their grave goods as well. The metal artefacts, a stone axe discovered there show clearly their Early Timber–Grave cultural origin while the ceramics already marked by some standard features still retain a few archaic elements. The advanced stage of the Timber–Grave culture is represented by kurgan 4 from the Skvortsovsky burial ground. Here the burial rite is almost uniform lacking any additional elements of decoration. It does not differ between the central and peripheral graves nor does it depend on the age and sex of the dead. The grave goods consist of ceramic vessels peculiar to the Timber–Grave cultural period only. Among other burial complexes from the Labazovsky necropolis kurgan 4 was the oldest. The burial rite features discovered here were most simplified and grave goods were practically missing. REFERENCES CITED Cimidanov, V. and Evglevskij, A. 1993. Klassifikaciya pogrebenij s insigniyami vlasti srubnoj obshchnosti. Arheologicheskij al'manah 2: 99-112. Dremov, I., Tixonov, V. and Tupalov, I. 2005. Shirokij Karamysh, kurgan 4. Arheologicheskoe nasledie Saratovskogo kraya 6: 20-35. Fedorova–Davydova, E. 1964. K voprosu o periodizacii pamyatnikov -epohi bronzy v Yuzhnom Priural'e. Arheologiya i etnografiya Bashkirii II: 84-92. Gorbunov, V. 2006. Srubnaya obshchnost' Vostochnoj Evropy. Ufa. Halikov, A. 1989. Povolzh'e v pokrovskoe vremya. Arheologiya Vostochno-Evropejskoj stepi: 66-82. Kabanova E. and Ovchinnikova, N. 1999. Issledovanie kurgana srubnoj kul'tury v Buguruslanskom rayone. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki Orenburzh'ya 3: 65-74. Kachalova, N. 1985. Periodizaciya srubnyh pamyatnikov Nizhnego Povolzh'ya. Srubnaya kul'turnoistoricheskaya obshchnost': 28-59. Krivtsova-Grakova, O. 1955. Stepnoe Povolzh'e i Prichernomor'e v epohu pozdnej bronzy. Materialy i issledovaniya po arheologii SSSR 46. Kupriyanova, E. 2004. Miry sintashtinskoj kul'tury: muzhchiny, zhenshchiny, deti. Arkaim. Po stranicam drevnej istorii Yuzhnogo Urala: 117-126. Kuzmina, O. 1992. Abashevskaya kul'tura v lesostepnom Volgo – Ural'e. Samara. Kuzmina, O., 2006. Kamennye sverlenye topory Samarskogo Povolzh'ya. Voprosy arheologii Povolzh'ya 4: 334-349. Litvinenko, R. 1999. Periodizaciya srubnyh mogil'nikov Severo-Vostochnogo Priazov'ya. Drevnosti SeveroVostochnogo Priazov'ya: 4-23.

149

N. I. MORGUNOVA; L.V. KUPTSOVA

Fig. 1.1. Burial rite and grave findings of the central graves from an early Timber-Grave culture kurgan (Skvortsovsky burial ground) Fig. 1.2. Burial rite and grave findings of the central graves from an early Timber-Grave culture kurgan (Labazovsky burial ground)

150

Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds

Fig. 2.1-2. Peripheral graves from an early Timber-Grave culture kurgan (Skvortsovsky burial ground) Fig. 2.3-4. Peripheral graves from an early Timber-Grave culture kurgan (Labazovsky burial ground)

151

N. I. MORGUNOVA; L.V. KUPTSOVA

Fig. 3.1-3. Central graves from an early Timber-Grave culture kurgan (Labazovsky burial ground)

152

Timber–Grave culture in the basin of the Samara as an example of the Skvortsovsky and Labazovsky burial grounds

Fig. 4.1-2. Advanced and late stages of the Timber-Grave culture (Skvortsovsky burial ground) Fig. 4.3. Advanced and late stages of the Timber-Grave culture (Labazovsky burial ground)

153

154

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone MATYUSHKO , I. V. Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 7, pp. 155-167.

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages Irina V. MATYUSHKO Orenburg State Pedagogical University, Sovetskay ul. 19., Orenburg, 460844 – Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] The comparative study of the graves dated to the Middle Ages in the steppe of the Near Ural and numerous archaeological materials discovered in the South Russia steppe was carried out by Krivtsova-Grakova (1928, 288298) who suggested that the graves excavated in the Orenburg region should be related to Torks (ibid., 297). As a result of the studies by Grakov (1935, 100-103, 116) it became possible to distinguish peculiar features of stone constructions in the steppe of the Near Ural during the Middle Ages: oval or round stone platforms as well as small mounds, distinguished as stone kurgans. He excavated nine stone platforms like those, which contained graves with the goods of the 13th–14th centuries AD.

Abstract: This paper deals with the history of the Middle Age antiquities related to the Near Ural steppe including the description of different burials peculiar to the nomads of the region in question during the Middle Ages. The characteristics of the burial mounds and an interment of a horse reflect ethnic differences among the tribes inhabiting the Near Ural steppe in the Middle Ages. Keywords: nomads, steppe, Middle Ages, earthen kurgans, stone kurgans The history of studies regarding the nomads in the Near Ural steppe goes back more than two hundred years. The first attempts to evaluate archaeological materials related to the Middle Ages were made by the colonizers of the region in the 18th century. Rychkov (1999, 133-134) described the location of some kurgans and ruins of some towns he knew about in his book “Topography of the Orenburg province”. He thought that some of the brick ruins used to be towns in the Middle Ages and there were some remains of the great town Saraichik in the lower Ural. That is, according to Rychkov in the middle of the 18th century it was still possible to find mausoleums typical of the Middle Ages in the Orenburg region.

A considerable number of materials, dated to the Middle Ages from the steppe of the Near Ural, were studied by Fedorov-Davydov (1966). He pointed out that stone kurgans had appeared in the South Ural area earlier than in the western part of the Eastern European steppe (ibid., 122). A considerable role in the study of Middle Age antiquities was played by the expeditions of the Institute of History, Language and Literature at the Bashkir branch of the USSR Academy of Science during the 1980s headed by Ivanov. Together with Gutsalov, Kriger and Gorbunov he conducted numerous excavations of kurgans, which were built in the 9th–14th centuries AD in the Orenburg, Samara and Aktyubinsk areas. Thanks to them the large amount of the material collected from kurgans, related to the Middle Ages, made it possible to sum up the history of nomads in the steppe of the Near Ural during the Middle Ages in several publications (Kriger 1985; Ivanov and Kriger 1988; Ivanov 1990; Ivanov and Yaminov 1993; Kostyukov 1997; Garustovich and Ivanov 2001).

Since the middle of the 19th to the beginning of the 20th centuries this region had been the site of intensive archaeological excavations including those related to the Middle Ages (Ignatyev 1873, 167-186; Ignatyev 1903, 96-122; Nefedov 1899, 1-15). Nefedov (1899, 1-3) thought that the graves, which dated back to the Middle Ages could have been left by Khazar, Bashkir, Bulgarian, Mongol, Tatar, Nogai, Kirghiz and other people. A great contribution in the study of the antiquities related to the Middle Ages had been made by such active members of the Orenburg archival commission as Castanet and Popov. Castanet (1911, 3-197) took part in the excavations of kurgans and mausoleums, collected ethnographic materials, made descriptions and drawings of tombstones and studied the genesis of the burial rite peculiar to the nomads after the adoption of Islam. Popov (1906, 18-25) undertook comparison of the archaeological materials (quality and size of bricks, masonry, glazing techniques) with those of the Central Asian and Near Eastern cultures including their chronology. As a result he supposed that the mausoleums in the Near Ural steppe had been built under the influence of the Muslim culture spread from the towns of Central Asia. This was later confirmed in the works of other researches of the mausoleums (Botalov et al. 1995, 148165; Morgunova et al. 2005, 27).

At present the study of nomads during the Middle Ages is continued by the archaeological expedition of the Orenburg state Pedagogical University headed by Morgunova. They excavated a unique grave of an embalmed warrior as well as several kurgans with deep and broad ditches, some brick mausoleums and other sites dated to the 13th–14th centuries AD. There are a number of publications of the collected materials (Morgunova et al. 2003; Morgunova et al. 2004, 3-15; Morgunova et al. 2005, 5-49) and a candidate’s thesis devoted to examine the differences in the burial traditions peculiar to the Middle Ages on account of changes in the ethnic composition of nomads (Matyushko 2008). As a result it became evident that there were different peoples who roamed the steppe of the Near Ural during

155

I. V. MATYUSHKO

the Middle Ages. In the 9th–11th centuries they were Oghuz and Pechenegs. These tribes were studied through both literary and archaeological sources: they had been buried in kurgans in plain pits in a supine position with the head to the west. A man’s burial is usually accompanied by a horse skin or parts of a horse such as a skull and leg bones placed alongside the dead (Pecheneg graves) (Figure 1) or above him (Oghuz graves) (Figure 2). Peculiar to the Oghuz graves are bronze ornaments and bird-shaped pendants (Matyushko 2008, 20-23).

says that the steppe from the Dnieper to the Ural were inhabited by Cumans and south-east from the Ural (approximately as far as the Syr Daria) there was a land of the Kangli, who were another nomadic people. They both were conquered by Tatars (Mongols): “We saw a great many heads and bones of the dead in the land of Cumans, which lay everywhere on the ground as manure. These Cumans were killed by Tatars. Some of them escaped, others were put to slavery, but many of those who had fled are coming back”.

According to Ibn-Fadlan the Ghuz (Oghuz) roamed the steppe south of the Ural while Pechenegs in the Middle Ural area (Ibn-Fadlan 2002, 21-28).

In the 13th–14th centuries AD new types of burial rites appear in the Near Ural steppe. For example, graves under an earthen mound with inner rings of stones on the ground level must be related to the Turkic people from Desht-i Kipchak, but unlike the time before the Mongol invasion they contain the whole body of a horse instead of skin (Figure 5). The changes in the way a horse was interred can be explained by that the Turkic people from the western steppe of Eurasia had already joined the Golden Horde. We know that interment of a horse on a step on the left of the buried was not infrequent before the Mongol invasion in the South Russian steppe near the Volga River (Pletneva 1958, 167, 175; Fedorov-Davydov 1966, 150; Mamontov 1993, 151-172).

As there are only few sites left it is hard to determine boundaries of the areas inhabited by the Oghuz and Pecheneg tribes in the Near Ural steppe but certain distinctions in the way a horse was interred show that they were two different groups. It is known from literary sources that they used to wage wars against each other, the last of which was prompted by the invasion of the Kipchak and Cuman people from the east. An Armenian historian Matthew of Edessa in 1050–1051 wrote that the Oghuz and Pechenegs were defeated by the red-haired people, he called ‘Khardesh’, who in the opinion of Agadzhanov belonged to the union of Kipchak and Cuman tribes (Garustovich and Ivanov 2001, 104-118).

However, it should be pointed out that in the 13th–14th centuries in the Near Ural steppe graves appear under stone platforms (without an earthen mound) (Figure 6), moreover, graves with raw brick facing on the ground level under an earthen mound (Figure 7) and mausoleums (Figure 8). It is also important to note the appearance of earthen kurgans surrounded by deep and broad ditches in the 13th–14th centuries (Figure 9, 10).

The Kipchaks were first recorded in oriental literary sources by Ibn-Hordadbech (9th century AD) among the Turkic people and later on information on them and Cimmerians became regular. Since the 9th century Kipchaks began to move to the west and south, so their union broke into several major groups. As a result they were separated and scattered far away from each other. According to the scholars who studied them, the most numerous group of the Kipchaks came to dwell in the 9th–10th centuries in the area of the Rivers Ishim, Tobol and as far as the Upper Ural (Shaniyazov 1974, 52).

In general almost all types of graves (except those under stone facing) peculiar to the Near Ural steppe in the 13th– 14th centuries were common at the time in the Near Volga area too. The literary sources of the 13th and the first half of the 14th centuries refer to the nomadic people in the Near Ural area as Tatars, Mongols, Turks and Kipchaks at the same time (Klyashtorny and Sultanov 2000, 209).

That is, in the 9th century in the eastern steppe of the Near Ural graves appear accompanied by interred parts of a horse placed on a higher platform on the left of the buried under an earthen mound with stones. The stone constructions were different. In some cases there was a ring of stones around the grave on the ground level covered with an earthen mound (Figure 3), in other cases the earthen mound was surrounded by stones (Figure 4). Such distinctions in the stone constructions apparently depended on the ethnic group.

That is, there were different types of burials in the Near Ural steppe during the 13th–14th centuries, which apparently depend on the heterogeneous multi-ethnic composition of the populations. Summing up the study of the sites related to the nomads in the Near Ural steppe in the period in question it is essential to point out that it is possible to derive ethnic data from features of the burial rites such as the character of the burial mound as well as the location and the way a horse was interred.

This is confirmed by literary sources, in which it is said that the confederation of Kipchaks included some Cimmerian and Kangli people as well as those from other tribal unions (Arslanova 2002, 195). Karpini (2003, 94)

156

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Matjushko, I.V. 2008. Pogrebalnyj obrjad kochevnikov stepej Priural yeja v IX-XIV vv. n.je./Avtoreferat dissertacii na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata istoricheskih nauk, Kazan Mogilyenikov, V.A. 2002. Kochevniki severo-zapadnyh predgorij Altaja v IX-XI vekah. Moskva Morgunova, N.L., Golyeeva A.A., Kraeva L.A., Mewerjakov D.V., Tureckij M.A., Haljapin M.V. and Hohlova O.S. 2003. Shumaevskie kurgany. Orenburg Morgunova, N.L., Dojnikova I.V. and Kraeva L.A. 2004. I Kurgannyj mogilyenik u s. Buranchi. In: Arheologicheskie pamjatniki Orenburzyeyeja. Vyp. VI. 315. Orenburg Morgunova, N.L., Kraeva L.A. and Matjushko I.V. 2005. Kurgannyj mogilyenik Mustaevo V. In: Arheologicheskie pamjatniki Orenburzhyeja. Vyp. VII.5-49. Orenburg Morgunova N.L., Hohlova O.S., Golyeva A.A., Zajceva G.I. and Chichagova O.A. 2005. Rezul'taty radiouglerodnogo datirovanija kurgannogo mogilyenika Mustaevo V. In: Arheologicheskie pamjatniki Orenburzhye. Vyp. VII. 96-104. Orenburg. Nesterov, S.P. 1990. Konyev kulyetah tjurkojazychnyh plemen Centralyenoj Azii v jepohu srednevekovyeja. Novosibirsk. Nefedov, F.D. 1899. Arheologicheskie issledovanija v Juzhnom Priuralye (1887-1888) i Prikamye (18931894). In: Materialy po arheologii vostochnyh gubernij Rossii. T. 3. Moskva Popov, A.V. and Kastanye I.A. 1906. Obzor arheologicheskih raskopok v Orenburgskoj gubernii i v kirgizskoj stepi. In: Trudy OUAK. Vyp. XVI, 206226. Orenburg Pletneva, S.A. 1958. Pechenegi, torki i polovcy v juzhnorusskih stepjah. In: Trudy Volgo-Donskoj arheologicheskoj jekspedicii. Tom I. Materialy i issledovanija po arheologii SSSR. ʋ 62, 151-226. Moskva-Leningrad Puteshestvie Ibn-Fadlana na Volgu. Per. pod red. I.Ju. Krachkovskogo. 2002. Kazan Rubruk, V. 2003. Poslanie Vilyegel'ma de Rubruk / Vilgelyem de Rubruk, 116-235. – Almaty. Rychkov, P.I. 1999. Topografija Orenburgskoj gubernii. Ufa Fedorov-Davydov G.A. 1966. Kochevniki Vostochnoj Evropy pod vlast'ju zolotoordynskih hanov. Moskva Shanijazov, K.Sh. 1974. K jetnicheskoj istorii uzbekskogo naroda. Istoriko-jetnograficheskoe issledovanie na materialah kypchakskogo komponenta. Tashkent

REFERENCES CITED Botalov, S.G., Garustovich, G.N. and Jaminov, Ja.F. 1995. Novye materialy po mavzolejam Zaural'ja i Central'nogo Kazahstana. In: Nasledie vekov. Ohrana i izuchenie pamjatnikov arheologii v Bashkortostane. Vyp. 1., 148-165. Ufa Garustovich, G.N. and Ivanov, V.A. 2001. Oguzy i pechenegi v Evrazijskih stepjah. Ufa Grakov, B.N. 1935. Otchet o rabotah v rajone proektiruemyh juzhnouralyeskih gidrojelektrostancij. In: Arheologicheskie raboty na novostrojkah v 19321933 gg. II tom, 100-116. Moskva-Leningrad Ignatyev, R.G. 1873. Pamjatniki doistoricheskih drevnostej Ufimskoj gubernii. In: Pamjatnaja knizhka Ufimskoj gubernii. Ch. 2., 167-186. Ufa Ignatyev, R.G. 1903. Gorodiwa i kurgany Orenburgskoj gubernii. In: Izvestija Arheologicheskoj Komissii. Vyp. 5., 96-122. Sankt-Peterburg Ivanov, V.A. and Jaminov, A.F. 1993. Pogrebal'nyj obrjad zolotoordynskogo vremeni v Juzhnom Priural'e (sravnitel'no-tipologicheskaja harakteristika). In: Kochevniki uralo-kazahstanskih stepej, 154-161. Ufa Ivanov, V. A. and Kriger, V.A. 1988. Kurgany kypchakskogo vremeni na Juzhnom Urale (XII-XIV vv.). Moskva Ivanov, V.A. 1991. Jetnicheskie processy v stepnoj i lesostepnoj polose juzhnogo Urala i Priural'jav VIIXIV vv. n. je. Dissertacija na soiskanie stepeni doktora istoricheskih nauk. Moskva Karpini, P. 2003. Puteshestvie v Evrazijskie stepi, 3-115. Almaty Kastanye, I.A. 1911. Nadgrobnye sooruzhenija kirgizskih stepej. In: Tr. OUAK. Vyp. XXVI, 3-197. Orenburg Kostjukov, V.P. 1997. Pamjatniki kochevnikov XIII-XIV vv. (k voprosu ob jetnokulyeurnom sostave ulusa Shibana). Avtoreferat dissertacii na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata istoricheskih nauk. Ufa Krivcova-Grakova, O.A. 1928. Pogrebenija pozdnih kochevnikov iz raskopok v Orenburgskom uezde letom 1927 goda. In: Trudy sekcii RANION. T.4., 288-298. Moskva Kriger, V.A. 1985. Kochevniki Juzhnogo Priuralyeja i Zavolzhyeja v srednie veka (X-XIV vv.) / Avtoreferat dissertacii na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata istoricheskih nauk. Moskva Kljashtornyj, S.G. and Sultanov, T.I. 2000. Gosudarstva i narody Evrazijskih stepej. Drevnostye i srednevekovyee. Sankt-Peterburg Mamontov, V.I. 1993. Pogrebenija pozdnih kochevnikov iz kurgannogo mogil'nika Solodovka II. In: Drevnosti Volgo-Donskih stepej. Vyp., 151-172. Volgograd

157

I. V. MATYUSHKO

Fig. 1. The burial ground at Tamar-Utkul 1, Layout and sectional view of the grave of Kurgan 3. („C” indicates North)

158

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Fig. 2. 1-3. The burial ground at Bolgarka 1. Kurgan 1. Layout and sectional view of the grave. 4-5. The burial ground at Uvak. Kurgan 10. Layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

159

I. V. MATYUSHKO

Fig. 3. The burial ground at Novy Kumak. Kurgan 9. General view.

160

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Fig. 4. The burial ground at Novoorsky 1. Kurgan 2. General view and layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

161

I. V. MATYUSHKO

Fig. 5. The burial ground at Uralsky 1. Kurgan 5. General view and layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

162

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Fig. 6. 1-2. The burial ground at Khabarny 1. Stone platform 6. General view and layout of the grave. 3-4. The burial ground at Khabarny 1. Stone platform 7. General view and layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

163

I. V. MATYUSHKO

Fig. 7. 1-2.The burial ground at Linevsky 1.Kurgan 2. General view and layout of the grave. 3-4. The burial ground at Linevsky 1. Kurgan 10. General view and layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

164

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Fig. 8. The burial ground at Sverdlovo 5. General view of the mausoleum at Kurgan 7. („C” indicates North)

165

I. V. MATYUSHKO

Fig. 9. 1-2. The burial ground at Shumayevo 1. Kurgan 6. General view and layout of the grave. 3-4. The burial ground at Shumayevo 1. Kurgan 5. General view and layout of the grave. („C” indicates North)

166

Nomads of the steppe near the Ural Mountains in the Middle Ages

Fig. 10. 1-2. The burial ground at Alebastrovo 2. General view and layout of the grave of Kurgan 11. 3-4. The burial ground at Alebastrovo 2. General view and layout of the grave of Kurgan 5. („C” indicates North)

167

168

CHAPTER III ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

169

170

III./1. Anthropology

171

172

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 8, pp. 173-180.

Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups Zsuzsanna K. ZOFFMANN Rózsa u. 36., Budapest, 1042 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] individual. The examined anthropological material does not contain information on the cause of the death of the young male.

Abstract: The fragmented postcranial bones of an adult male preserved in a Pit–Grave kurgan at Tedej–Lyukashalom site were not suitable for detailed anthropological analyses. Anyway it could be determined that the male belonged to the high-statured robust type which was the dominant type of the Pit–Grave population in the Carpathian Basin, where a few individuals of a gracile type can also be observed, similar to the ones found within the Pit–Grave population of Moldova. This common appearing also in the Carpathian Basin, attest to a biological interbreeding with the autochthonous population, although it has not yet been clarified when and where and with what ethnic groups this mixing took place during the western expansion of the Pit–Grave population. Instead of the fragmented, insufficient series of the Carpathian Basin, the Pit–Grave cranial series from Moldova were used in a Penrose analysis carried out to find the territorial origin of the Central European Pit– Grave population finding significant connections between them and the early populations of Eastern Europe. According to the results, the Moldovan Pit–Grave ethnic group has significant Penrose connections with the populations of the Neolithic Fatyanovo and Balanovo cultures and the Bronze Age Srubnaya culture from the Lower Volga.

Tab. 1. Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom postcranial measurements Martin (1924)

Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukashalom Male Humerus

4

58

5

22

6

21,5

7a

72 Radius

4

18

5

15 Ulna

11

19

12

16 Femur

Keywords: palaeoanthropology, Hajdúnánás–Tedej– Lyukas-halom, Pit–Grave culture, Carpathian Basin, Penrose analysis

6

33

7

30

DESCRIPTION OF THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL FINDINGS

19

54 Stature

A single burial was uncovered during the archaeological rescue excavation of the Tedej-Lyukas-halom site in Eastern Hungary. It was so heavily destroyed by animals that only a few, very poorly preserved bone fragments could be rescued from the human skeleton. Beside a few fragments of the pelvic bones, the fragments of the long bones of the upper and the lower extremities, the relatively well-preserved left calcaneus and the nearly intact talus could be used for an anthropological analysis. The skull, the teeth and the bones of the trunk have perished.

Sjøvold (1990)

1757

In lack of completely preserved long bones, the stature of the skeleton from Tedej was estimated according to Schott’s (1969) method, in which the largest length of the humerus is reconstructed from the diameters of the bony diaphysis with regression calculations. Based on the largest estimated length of the humerus determined with this method, the stature of the individual buried at Tedej was calculated according to the method of Sjøvold (1990). The result was 175.7 cm, which belongs to Martin’s very high category (Martin 1924) what means that the robust man was of a very high stature.

According to the analysis of the skeletal bones using the method of Éry et al. (1963), and Nemeskéri et al. (1960), the buried individual was a young male who died between 23 and 39 years.

The definite robustness of the bone fragments and the high stature imply that the male who died at an early adult age and was buried at Tedej-Lyukas-halom was a representative of the high-statured, robust type variant of eastern origin (Cromagnon-A) that Marcsik (1979)

There were neither pathologic deformations nor traces suggesting enthesopathia, one indicator of lifestyle, on the bone fragments, only the metric data of the bone fragments (Table 1) attest to the robustness of the buried

173

Zs. K. ZOFFMANN

population of the east and the ethnic groups of the autochthonous population but the results of anthropological analyses contradict this view. The parallel presence of different types certainly indicates a biological mixing, although there is yet no answer to the questions when, in what region and with what ethnic group this mixing happened as the Pit–Grave ethnic groups expanded toward west. The results of a future Strontium analysis can perhaps solve this problem.

determined as the leading type of the Pit–Grave ethnic group in the Carpathian Basin. ANTHROPOLOGICAL FINDS OF THE PIT– GRAVE CULTURE IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN According to archaeology, the kurgan burials of the Pit– Grave culture, which arrived in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin in the late phase of the Copper Age, are known from several sites, yet anthropological finds have only been published from 18 sites (Table 2). The excavations, however, were not complete: they were generally restricted to one or two graves, in which only the osteologic remains of adults were uncovered. In the course of a few larger-scale excavations, five graves were found under a few mounds, and eight graves were unearthed at two sites where newborn babies and older infants were found just as well as adults (Table 3). According to the anthropological analyses, the find material contained twice as many adult males than adult women but because of the incomplete archaeological excavations of the kurgans, this proportion is probably accidental. In the lack of grave furniture it cannot be decided if the individuals were buried at the same time or if not what their internal chronology was. As the anthropological finds are poorly preserved, the tools of the classical anthropology are not sufficient to determine if the multiple burials in the kurgans were family grave groups. To clarify their eventual blood relations, complete kurgan excavations would be necessary, which are still lacking. The subsequent anthropological analyses, however, would be so badly impeded by the very poor conservation of the finds coming from the timber frame burials that laboratory (DNA) analyses would certainly be necessary to answer the above questions.

RESULTS OF THE BIOSTATISTICAL PENROSE ANALYSES The anthropological finds of 19 males and 9 females have so far been scientifically published from the territory of the Carpathian Basin (Figs. 2 and 3). However, the anthropological finds were so poorly preserved that this find material was not sufficient for setting up a series containing enough item numbers for a biostatistical analysis. In this case, only the data series composed of the Moldovan finds of the Pit–Grave culture (Schwidetzky 1978) seems suitable for comparisons carried out with the so-called generalised distance analysis of Penrose (1954) from among the biostatistical methods. The cranial series of the Copper Age cultures of the Carpathian Basin, the Neolithic, Copper Age and Bronze Age cultures of Eastern Europe were included in the analysis according to the data published by Zineviþ (1967), Zineviþ and Kruc (1968), Ginzburg and Trofimova (1972), Debec (1973), Konduktorova (1973), Schwidetzky (1978) and Zoffmann (2009). The significant results of the analysis (CR2 ” 0.166, that is P > 99.5%) indicate such a high degree of combined size and shape identity that allows us to suggest that the represented populations were biologically related, they had a common origin or one originated from the other.

TAXONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PIT– GRAVE ETHNIC GROUP IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

Figure 1 shows the dendogram drawn from the results (the CR2 values) of the analysis. Accordingly, the series form three clusters.

The Cro-Magnon A type variant of a high stature, a robust build, an eury-dolichomorphous skull with chamaeconch orbits dominate among the published anthropological representatives of the Pit–Grave culture of the Carpathian Basin, the same type, to which the male buried in the Tedej kurgan probably also belonged. Beside them, the representatives of a more gracile variant with narrower cranium and hypsiconch orbits also occur in the material from the Carpathian Basin (Marcsik 1979; Zoffmann 2000; 2004; 2006). At the same time, leptodolichomorphous (gracile Mediterranean) and brachymorphous type variants appear at the BrailiĠa Pit– Grave site in Moldova (Necrasov and Cristescu 1957). According to the Romanian authors (Necrasov and Cristescu 1957, 1973; Haas and Maximilian 1958), the Cro-Magnon type arrived from the east, while the gracile Mediterranean and the brachycranial types represent the autochthonous population.

Three smaller sub-clusters of the first and largest cluster contains the Bronze Age series of the Ukraine and the Lower Volga region. The Timber-Grave culture of the Ukraine is slightly separated from the rest of these Bronze Age cultures according to the analysis, but it is in significant connection with the Neolithic Balanovo and Tripolye series. The smallest sub-cluster contains the Fatyanovo series and the Pit–Grave series of Moldova. The second cluster is composed of the three Copper Age series of the Carpathian Basin. Their appearance in the same cluster is probably only partly due to their Penroseidentity: it is also due to their distance from the rest of the series. The sub-clusters of the first cluster and even more the first two clusters are connected to each other far over the significance limit of the analysis, while the connection to the third cluster is even farther according to the dendogram. Its two series, the ones of the Dnieper–

Archaeological investigations did not indicate a biological interbreeding between the Pit–Grave 174

Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups

Donets culture of the Ukraine and the Sredny Stog 2 culture are also linked beyond the significance limit.

demonstrated between the Balanovo series and the Srubnaya series of the Ukraine.

As far as the clustering of the populations represented by the analysed series can relatively clearly be observed in the dendogram, the significant connections between the individual series can remain hidden in certain cases because of the branching, three-dimensional appearance of the connections. Figure 2 was compiled to eliminate this problem. Here, the significant connections of the series involved in the comparison are directly displayed without manipulations. In this figure, not only the clusters of the dendogram can be observed (e.g. the Bronze Age series), the significant connections that reach over the clusters of the dendogram are also revealed.

The series representing the Pit–Grave ethnic group of Moldova has a significant Penrose connection with the series of the Fatyanovo and the Balanovo ethnic groups and the series of the Srubnaya ethnic group of the Lower Volga region. This is congruent with the archaeological determination of the eastern origin of the Pit–Grave culture. Not a single significant connection could be found with any other series in the case of the series representing the ethnic group of the Copper Age Sredny Stog 2 culture. The series representing the Pit-Grave the Catacomb and the Srubnaya ethnic groups of the Ukraine and the Lower Volga region are strongly interrelated, so the bearers of the cultures of these two regions certainly belonged to the same biological unit. The partial separation of the Srubnaya culture of the Ukraine is probably caused by the appearance of alien components within its population.

The followings can be deduced from the results: The three Copper Age series of the Carpathian Basin do not gave significant connections with either the Moldovan or the Eastern European Neolithic, Copper Age and Bronze Age series, while a connection appears between the Bodrogkeresztúr series and the combined series of the Boleraz and Baden cultures. This implies the interbreeding of the surviving earlier Copper Age populations and the ethnic groups that immigrated from the south-east at the beginning of the late Copper Age to the Carpathian Basin. Contrary to the results of the archaeological investigations, according to which Bodrogkeresztúr culture is directly derived from the Tiszapolgár culture, there is no significant Penrose connection between their anthropological series. This can perhaps be explained by the presence of the relatively robust, eury-dolichomorphous Cro-Magnon A type individuals, who had probably arrived from territories east of the Carpathian Basin, that occurred among the Tiszapolgár finds but were missing from the Bodrogkeresztúr material. This would mean that contrary to archaeological determinations, certain, perhaps contacts existed between the ethnic groups of the Great Hungarian Plain in the Carpathian Basin and Eastern Europe already in the Early Copper Age prior to the archaeologically attestable appearance of the Pit–Grave culture, and these contacts could sporadically lead to biological interbreedings (Zoffmann 2000, 2004). Despite that the above-mentioned robust eury-dolichomorphous variant primarily occurs in the anthropologically unpublished finds of the Polgár–Basatanya cemetery (Nemeskéri, cit. Kutzián 1963), new and documented finds would be necessary to corroborate this hypothesis and to prove if the appearance of the alien component can really be linked with the Pit–Grave ethnic group of an eastern origin or with another population.

From the above described results, the most important ones are, in this case, the Penrose connections of the Pit– Grave ethnic group of Moldova. These results can in an indirect way contribute to the clarification of the territorial origin of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups of the Carpathian Basin from the aspect of palaeoanthropology. REFERENCES CITED Debec, G.F. 1973. Die Sowjetunion. Fundamenta B/3, VIIIa, 1, 153-169. Éry, K.K., Kralovánszky, A. and Nemeskéri, J. 1963: Történeti népességek rekonstrukciójának reprezentációja. [A representative reconstruction of historic populations.] Anthropológiai Közlemények 7, 41-90. (in Hungarian) Ginzburg, V.V. and Trofimova, T.A. 1972: Paleoantropologija srednjej Azii. Moscow, Nauka. Haas, N. and Maximilian C. 1958. Antropologiþeskoe isledovanie okrašennih kostjakov iz kompleksa mogil s okroi v Glavaneúti Vechi, Corlateni i Stoicani. Sovietskaya Antropologia 4, 133-146. Konduktorova, T.S. 1973. Antropologija naseljenija Ukraini mezolita, neolita i epohi bronzi. Moscow, Nauka. Kutzián I. 1963. The Copper Age cemetery of Tiszapolgár-Basatanya. Archaeologia Hungarica 42, Budapest. Marcsik, A. 1971-72. Data to the Copper Age anthropological find of Bárdos-Farmstead at Csongrád-KettĘshalom. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, 19-27. Marcsik, A. 1976. A püspökladány-kincsesdombi temetkezések embertani anyaga. [Anthropological findings from the burials of PüspökladányKincsesdomb] A Déri Múzeum Évkönyve, 66-67. (in Hungarian) Marcsik, A. 1979. The anthropological material of the Pit-Grave Kurgans in Hungary. In: Ecsedy, I (ed.):

From the four Eastern European Neolithic cultures, the series of the Dnieper–Donets culture does not have a single significant connection, while the series of the Tripolye culture shows a significant identity to the series of the Srubnaya culture of the Volga region. Both the Fatyanovo and the Balanovo cultures have individually significant connections with the Pit–Grave series of Moldova, while another significant connection can be 175

Zs. K. ZOFFMANN . Zineviþ, G.P. 1967. Oþerki paleoantropologiji Ukrajini. Kiev, Naukova Dumka. Zineviþ, G.P. and Kruc, S.I. 1968. Antropologiþna karakteristika davnoge naseljenija territoriji Ukrajini. Kiev, Naukova Dumka. Zoffmann, Zs.K. 1976-77. Das anthropologische Material der Ockergräber-Bestattung von SzentesBesenyĘhalom. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, 39. Zoffmann, Zs.K. 1980-81. Das anthropologische Material der Kurgan-Bestattung von Derekegyház-Ibolyásdomb. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, 99-109. Zoffmann, Zs.K. 2000. Anthropological structure of the Prehistoric populations living in the Carpathian Basin in the Neolithic, Copper, Bronze and Iron Ages. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 52, 49-62. Zoffmann, Zs.K. 2004. ėslakosok és bevándorlók a neolitikus és rézkori Kárpát-medencében az embertani adatok alapján (A Somogy megyében újonnan feltárt Badeni temetĘk Penrose-analízise). [Autochtonous populations and immigrants in the Carpathian Basin of the Neolithic and the Copper Age after the anthropological data (The Penrose analysis of the recently unearthed Baden cemeteries in Somogy county)]. A Somogyi Múzeumok Közleményei 16, 127-137. (in Hungarian) Zoffmann, Zs.K. 2006. A Gödörsíros kultúra Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom lelĘhelyrĘl származó embertani leletei. [Anthropological findings from the Pit–Grave culture site excavated at Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom] In: Dani J., Nepper I. M., Sárrétudvari– ėrhalom. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungaricae, 51-58. (in Hungarian) Zoffmann, Zs.K. 2009. Biostatistical data on the origin of Bronze Age ethnic groups in the Carpathian Basin. Tisicum 19, 493-503.

The people of the Pit-Grave Kurgans in Eastern Hungary. Fontes, Archaeologia Hungarica, Budapest, 87-98. Martin, R. 1924. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Jena, 2nd ed. Medoviü, P. 1987. Resultaten der Untersuchungen auf drei Grabhügeln in der Gemarkung des Dorfes Perles im mittleren Banat. In: Hügelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone während der Äneolithischen Periode. Internationales Symposium Donji Milanovac, 1985. Beograd, 77-82. Mikiü, Ž. (1981): Stanje i problemi fiziþke antropologije u Jugoslaviji. Praistorijski periodi. – Forschungsstand und Problematik der physischen Anthropologie in Jugoslawien, Perioden der Ur- und Frühgeschichte. Centar za Balkanološka ispitivanja, Sarajevo. 9. Necrasov, O. and Cristescu, M. 1957. ContribuĠie la studiul antropologic al scheletelor din complexul mormintelor cu ocru de la BrailiĠa. – Contribution à l’étude anthropologique des scelettes des sépultures à ocre de BrailiĠa. Studii úi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 8, 75-88. Necrasov, O. and Cristescu, M. (1973): Structure anthropologique des tribus Néo-Enéolithiques et de l’âge du Bronze de la Roumaine. Fundamenta B/3, VIIIa, 1, 137-152. Nemeskéri, J., Harsányi, L. and Acsádi Gy. 1960. Methoden zur Diagnose des Lebensalters von Skelettfunden. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 24, 70-95. Penrose, L.S. 1954. Distance, size and shape. Annals of Eugenics 18, 337-343. Schott, L. 1969. Regressionsgleichungen zur Errechnung der grössten Humeruslänge aus Abschnittsmassen dieses Knochens. Biometrische Zeitschrift 11, 275-281. Schwidetzky, I. 1978. Anthropologie der Schnurkeramikund Streitaxtkulturen. Fundamenta B/3, VIIIb, 2, 241-264. Sjøvold, T. 1990. Estimation of stature from long bones utilizing the line of organic correlation. Human Evolution 5, 431-447.

176

Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups

18 sites

177

Other

Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1971-72 Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1979 Zoffmann 1980-81 Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1979 Marcsik 1979 Mikiü, cit. Medoviü 1987 Mikiü, cit. Medoviü 1987 Marcsik 1976 Marcsik 1979 Zoffmann 2006 Zoffmann 1976-77 Zoffmann Mikiü 1981

Uncertain gender

Balmazújváros (Hortobágy)–Árkusmajor-KettĘs-halom Csongrád–KettĘshalom-Bárdos-tanya Debrecen–Basahalom Debrecen–Dunahalom Debrecen(Hortobágy)–Halászlaponyag Derekegyház–Ibolyásdomb Dévaványa–Barcéhalom Dévaványa–Csordajárás Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák Nagyhegyes–Elep-Mikelapos Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka Perlez–Vuna Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb Sárrétudvari–Balázshalom Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom Szentes–BesenyĘhalom Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom Vojlovica

Females

Literature

Males

Archaeological sites

Infants

Tab. 2. Sites of published anthropological finds representing the Pit–Grave population from the Carpathian Basin

Ȉ

1 3 3 4 1 -

1 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 5 1 1 -

1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 -

1 -

1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 8 1 1 1

12 19

9

2

1

43

Zs. K. ZOFFMANN

Tab. 3. Data of gender and age of death of the anthropological finds representing the Pit–Grave population from the Carpathian Basin Taxons Archaeological sites ? Males Females Balmazújváros (Hortobágy)–Árkusmajor35-40 ? + proto-Europid traits KettĘs-halom Csongrád–KettĘs-halom Bárdos-tanya 30-40 Cro-Magnon A + nordoid Debrecen–Basahalom 25-30 ? Debrecen–Basahalom 30-35 ? Debrecen–Dunahalom 105/1923 35-40 ? Debrecen (Hortobágy)–Halászlaponyag 25-30 ? Derekegyház–Ibolyásdomb skeleton "A" 6-7 ? Derekegyház–Ibolyásdomb skeleton "B" 41-45 Cro-Magnon A + nordoid archaeomorphous Dévaványa–Barcéhalom 40-45 (protonordic ?) Dévaványa–Csordajárás, grave 1 0.0-0.5 ? Dévaványa–Csordajárás, grave 2 14-16 ? Dévaványa–Csordajárás, grave 3 0.5-1.0 ? Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 3, adultus ? grave 4 Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 3, 12-14 ? grave 7 Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 3b, 5-7 ? grave 1. Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 4, 8-10 ? grave 1 Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 5a, archaeomorphous 30-35 grave 1 (protonordic ?) Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 6, gracilised Cro-Magnon (+ 35-40 grave 1 nordoid) Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 6, archaeomorphous Cro30-35 grave 3 Magnon A Kétegyháza–Kétegyházi tanyák, mound 9, 40-45 ? grave 1 Nagyhegyes–Elep-Mikelapos, grave 34 35-40 ? Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka 1 0.0-1.0 ? Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka 2 ±2 ? Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka 3 1 ? Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka 5 1 ? Perlez-Batka–Pašiüeva humka 6 60-x ? Perlez–Vuna 9.1. ± 40 robust dolichomorph Perlez–Vuna 10.3 ± 50 robust Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb, grave 1 30-35 ? Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb, grave 2 23-x ? Püspökladány–Kincsesdomb, grave 3 ? ? Sárrétudvari–Balázshalom Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 4 Sárrétudvar–ėrhalom 7 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 7a Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 8 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 9 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 10 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 11 Sárrétudvari–ėrhalom 12 Szentes–BesenyĘhalom Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom Vojlovica Total

25-30 40-59 40 59 5-7 23-39 23-30 44-55 23-39 15-17 50-59 adultus 15

19

178

adultus 9

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Cro-Magnon A + nordoid ? robust

Human remains from the kurgan at Hajdúnánás–Tedej–Lyukas-halom and an anthropological outline of the Pit–Grave ethnic groups

Fig. 1. Dendogram according to the generalised distance values between the cranial series from the Moldovan Pit– Grave culture, from the Copper Age of the Carpathian Basin and from the Neolithic, Copper and Bronze Ages of East Europe

179

Zs. K. ZOFFMANN

Fig. 2. Significant Penrose connections between the Moldovan Pit–Grave series, the Copper Age series from the Carpathian Basin and the East European series from the Neolithic, Copper and Bronze Ages (P > 99,5%)

180

III./2. Geography, geomorphology, geochemistry

181

182

Kurgan Studies: An environmental and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 9, pp. 183-191.

Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain Attila CSANÁDI; Tivadar M. TÓTH University of Szeged, Department of Mineralogy, Geochemistry and Petrology, Dugonics tér 13., Szeged, 6720 – Hungary, E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: We completed a geochemical examination of two kurgans (CsípĘ-halom and Lyukas-halom) in the Hortobágy area of the Northern Great Hungarian Plain. X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) and Rock-Eval measurements were carried out within the framework of the study. We used multivariate geomathematical methods, factor, cluster, and discriminant analyses to evaluate and interpret the data. Factor analysis resulted in four variable groups for both mounds. In both cases, the factors represent the geochemical parameters that together play the most important role in soil formation. These roles include the organic geochemical pattern and the accumulation of chalcophile elements. Based on the results of the factor analysis we tested the classification tendencies of the soil samples by diverse cluster analysis techniques in order to reveal the genetic group structure of the samples.

INTRODUCTION The outstanding pedological and geological value of kurgans is that by the analysis of their soil material they provide information on the processes that have taken place since their construction (e.g. mineral alteration reactions, mobilisation of chemical elements and the development of new geochemical boundary surfaces). These soil profiles allow the evaluation of changes in the environment through the Holocene, as well as the stability conditions of the soils at optimum environmental states (Aleksandrovskii 1996). The primary objective of our work was to determine the mineralogical and geochemical processes that have taken place in the 40006000 years after the construction of the two chosen Hortobágy kurgans (Figure 1). Another objective was to determine a general evolutionary model based on these geochemical and mineralogical processes. To answer these questions we developed a two-stage research project.

Keywords: kurgan, geochemical evolution, multivariate geomathematical methods, genetic model

Fig. 1. Geographic positions of the two analysed kurgans. Photos of a typical kurgan CsípĘ-halom and the Lyukashalom (Photos by A. Barczi)

183

A. CSANÁDI; T. M. TÓTH

consequence of saline groundwater close to the surface. The soils of the higher areas and the kurgans are generally dominated by a Chernozem and the large surfaces of the lower elevations are dominated by vertisols (Stefanovits 1963). The CsípĘ-halom can be found near the Derzsi lakes, along the road at Ohat village. Accordingly, its northern side is bordered by 200-300 m of road, its eastern side by the Western Main Channel of the Hortobágy and its southern side by a smaller channel. The mound rises five metres above its environment with an altitude of 95.15 m. The Lyukas-halom can be found at the border of Hajdúnánás–Tedej, 1 km west of the Eastern Main Channel, 3 km south from Tiszavasvári and 250 m to the west along a main road. It rises 8 m above its environment with an altitude of 96.5 m.

When selecting the first model area we wanted an area with loess or loessy sediment parent material, where the mound was built in one stage with undisturbed soil formation circumstances, and where the model area itself is undisturbed and thus it is in its most natural conditions. This composition enables a kurgan study free from external effects, architectural habits and human impact. For this study, we analysed fifty mounds and chose the CsípĘ-halom in the Hortobágy (Figure 1). For the second mound we wanted a mound with circumstances and structure different from the “standard mound” (CsípĘ-halom). Thus, we chose the Lyukashalom also in the Hortobágy (Figure 1). The Lyukashalom is a kurgan, built in more than one stage, containing robber holes and foxholes and it is rich in other crotovina. This kurgan is more disturbed than the first and thus probably more polluted. Before research and exploration at the Lyukas-halom the kurgan had the following features:

Sampling We cored the CsípĘ-halom and its surroundings in 2000 and 2001 and the Lyukas-halom in 2005, both times with a Pürckhauer auger, in order to map and describe their sediments (Finnern 1994). Since all kurgans are "ex lege" nature protected, we did not excavate the CsípĘ-halom in order to protect it and its valuable vegetation. Samples were taken using augers, which were driven through the mound body to depths of 3–5 m at 7 points (Birks and Birks 1980). In the case of the Lyukas-halom, the samples were not taken at networked locations. Since the mound was partially dug we received an official permit for a full exploration, allowing us to acquire a full vertical profile of the soil. The 8 m high profile with a 40 m long base also provided us with the opportunity to exactly determine the soil morphological boundaries. Accordingly, the samples from the Lyukas-halom were taken from its wall.

Relatively large undamaged ground area. The “coat” of the mound was distinctly visible due to its gradual rise from its environment. The area of the kurgan was cultivated; the kurgan itself had not been ploughed. The vegetation on the mound body was not natural, modern vegetation, mainly young acacia grew on it. The revealing vertical profile shows foxholes and tunnels, which destroyed the upper layers of the kurgan. Dirt roads enclosing the northern and western sides heavily compressed and cut into the original kurgan layers. Signs of human activity were found on the upper, highest part of the kurgan in the form of deep robber holes. We were curious about the mineralogical and geochemical processes that have occurred in these widely different model areas, and whether these processes show any similarities between the two kurgans. Furthermore, we were curious to see if we could develop a general evolutionary model that could later be applied as a master model to answer questions regarding the tendency and cycle of geochemical and mineralogical processes of other mounds in the Hortobágy.

Chemical analyses Geochemical analysis was carried out on the samples taken every 10 cms. During chemical analyses XRF and Rock-Eval measurements were conducted. The XRF analyses were completed on pressed sample pastilles using a Mo KĮ radiation source, 36 kV acceleration voltage and a 4 mA current. For standardisation we used the river sediment standards Etalon 146, River 320 and NBS 612. The amounts of SiO2, TiO2, Fe2O3, MnO, CaO, K2O, P2O5, S, Cl, Cr, Cu, As, Rs, Sr, Zr and Y were determined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Description of the study area At the regional scale, the Hortobágy is an extremely monotone, perfect plain with only hillocks and kurgans emerging above the typical 88–92 metres elevation along the Tisza River (Marosi and Somogyi 1990; Pécsi 1969). The climate of the Hortobágy is moderately warm and dry with hot summers. The average annual temperature is 9.8–9.9 ºC and the average annual precipitation ranges between 520 and 550 mm with a rather uneven distribution. Altogether, it is a dry area with little downflow and water scarcity (Kovácsné and Salamon, 1976). Almost 75 % of the study area is covered by saline soil complexes with a typical mosaic pattern as a

The Rock-Eval data of the soil samples were determined using standard heating conditions with a Delsi Oil Show Analyser (OSA). The oven was programmed as follows: hold at 300 oC for four minutes, then increase the temperature at a rate of 25 ºC min-1 from 300 ºC to 600 ºC. Thermally distilled free hydrocarbonaceous compounds evolve during the isothermal phase at 300 ºC (S1 peak), followed by hydrocarbonaceous compounds cracked from the organic matter (S2 peak). Flame ionisation detection was used to monitor the evolution of hydrocarbonaceous compounds with increasing temperature. Both isothermal

184

Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain

Fig. 2. Amounts of SiO2 (a), CaO (b), K2O (c), and TOC (d) along the profile.

volatilisation and thermal degradation were performed under a helium flow in order to transport the pyrolysis products rapidly to the detectors, thus minimising secondary cracking reactions. The total organic carbon (TOC) content was computed from S1 and S2. The temperature recorded for the S2 peak (Tmax) varies as a function of the thermal maturity of the organic matter. Mineralogical analyses Eight samples from each mound were chosen for XRD analysis based on the result of the geochemical examinations. We used a DRON UM-1 X-ray diffractometer (Cu radiation source, 35 kV accelerating voltage, 20 mA current, LiF monochromator). To identify different clay minerals we compared both the settled preparations and those treated with ethylene glycol. Geomathematical analyses Data were processed and evaluated using standard multivariate statistical methods: factor, cluster and discriminant analyses. For this, we used SPSS 11.0 software. With these methods, used individually for each mound, we looked for genetic relationships. The aim of applying geomathematical methods was to determine the soil chemical parameters indicating important soil formation processes. Furthermore, we were curious to see which geochemical parameters move together in the sample set, which geochemical processes can be identified and whether these define any spatial pattern along the soil profile.

The S1 diagram shows decreasing values in the first 80 cm of the profile (from 0.2 to 0.05 mg/g) and constant values are typical thereafter (0.05–0.1 mg/g). The values then decrease again (0.01–0.04 mg/g). A similar trend is visible in the S2 diagram, the three depth intervals observed in the S1 diagram are also obvious here (with other values). The Tmax curve shows a slow decrease until 3 metres where the values strongly increase. The extreme values of Tmax are 350 and 430 ºC. The already observed 3 m boundary is also apparent in the values of total organic carbon (TOC). However, the slow decrease of the TOC values until 3 m changes to a rapid drop from this point with values between 0.0 % and 2.0 %.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results for the CsípĘ-mound

Results of the multivariate mathematical analyses

Soil chemical characteristic (inorganic and organic chemical parameters)

Since the measured inorganic and organic geochemical data follow a normal distribution, we processed our data with a multivariate geostatistical method. In order to group organic and inorganic chemical variables, we applied factor analysis (Wang 2009), the rotated component matrix of which resulted in four main variable groups (Table 1, Figure 5).

Selected and standardised XRF and Rock-Eval results are summarised in Figure 2. Although most elements do not show any characteristic pattern along the profile, some uncertain tendencies can be outlined for certain variables. The values of SiO2 range from 30 to 80 % and show strong variability. The vertical trend of the SiO2 – except for a few outlying values – shows a steady decrease. The Fe2O3 trends are also similar in the interval between 2.5– 6%. Only trace amounts of CaO occur down to a depth of 3 m with a value of 2 %, then dramatically increases to 7– 9 %, and finally reach 16 % at a depth of 4 m. The XRF measurements document constant levels of K2O between 2.5 % and 3.5 %, down to 3 metres, these values then decrease greatly at a depth of 450 cm and beyond this depth K2O is undetectable. Rb shows a value between 60 and 160 ppm with a strong decreasing trend along the whole soil profile. Sr shows a similar trend to CaO down to 3 metres, its amount is close to constant varying between 50 and 90 ppm and then increases significantly after that depth (150–200 ppm).

Tab. 1. Results of the factor analysis (CsípĘ-halom) The factor analysis determined four main factors F1 ("soil components") factor: (SiO2, K2O, Rb, Fe2O3, MnO, TOC, -Sr, -CaO) F2 ("organic matter") factor: (TOC, S1, S2) F3 ("mobile elements, redox indicators") factor: (Cr, As) F4 ("immobile elements") factor: (Ti, Zr, Y)

185

A. CSANÁDI; T. M. TÓTH

distribution throughout the profile indicates the total lack of any chemical pattern, which are simultaneous with the construction of the mound.

Fig. 3. Variation of the factor values along the profile; F(Cs)1, F(Cs)2, F(Cs)3 and F(Cs)4

In order to reveal the genetic group structures of the samples we applied cluster analyses using the results of the factor analysis based on soil chemical data. Due to the large family of available classification methods, more than 20 types of cluster analyses were tested. The best results were given by Ward’s method with an Euclidean measure. Figure 4 illustrates its simplified dendrogram. Fig. 4. Hierarchical illustration of the dendrogram (with the number of samples of each group)

The first factor (F(Cs)1) can be interpreted as the joint change of silica, clay, carbonates, iron oxides, manganese oxides and organic matter that is it shows the most important parameters in the soil formation processes (Table 1). The changes of the carbonates represented by Sr and CaO show an opposite tendency to those of other variables, thus an increase in one resulted in a decrease in the others. The F(Cs)1 trend along the section indicates two geochemical boundaries. A very sharp boundary is located at 3 m, and a less defined one at around 270 cm. The F(Cs)1 shows a clear increasing tendency through the depths of the mound deposit, and at depths below 3 m. Between the two boundaries this tendency is reversed, suggesting that element migration processes took place in the soil system.

The four groups to be genetically separated, based on the results of the cluster analysis, are A1, B1, B21 and B221. The elements in groups A2 and B222 appear dispersed along the section. According to their spatial arrangements the samples in group A1 represent the mound deposits, samples in group B1 represent the parent material and samples in group B2 represent the humificated soil horizons. Within the latter group, horizons of the recent soil (B21) and the palaeosoil (B221) can be distinguished. Figure 5 shows the spatial positions of group elements along the soil section derived from the cluster analysis.

The variables involved in the second factor (F(Cs)2) are TOC, S1 and S2. The amount and maturity of organic matter is the second most important factor that influences geochemical trends. The values of F(Cs)2 show a decreasing tendency with depth and the ‘‘transitional zone’’ observed in the case of F(Cs)1 can also be found at this same depth (approx. 3 m).

To interpret the boundary surfaces determined by the cluster analysis we used discriminant function analysis. Our objective was to define soil formation parameters that can be used to distinguish the intervals separated by the boundary surfaces in the mound. Based on these calculations we can conclude that the most important discriminating factor of the section examined is factor F2. The variables summarised in factor F1 have an important role in distinguishing the mound body and buried horizons. F2 determines the difference between the recent soil and the deposit situated below it. The palaeosoil and the deposit can be separated based on factor F2, just like the parent rock (starting at a depth of 380 cm), and the palaeosoil horizon (Table 2).

The variables of the third factor (F(Cs)3) are Cr and As, which are mobile elements in the wide pH and Eh ranges, and are mobilized by the changes in the redox conditions. The amount of chalcophile elements (Cr, As) along the profile shows a decreasing trend above the boundary at a depth of 180–200 cm. Below this depth the tendency changes and it increases to a depth of 270 cm, where it changes again. The amount of Fe and Mn stabilises below this depth (180–200 cm) and, according to previous analyses, the amount of reduced iron in the sediment increases at this depth as well (Joó et al. 2003). All of these together suggest a redox boundary at a depth around 2 metres. The fourth factor (F(Cs)4) includes the most conservative and immobile elements: Ti, Zr and Y. Their uneven

186

Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain

Fig. 6. Amounts of CaO (a), K2O (b), Cr (c) and TOC (d) along the profile

Fig. 5. Vertical position of the samples as derived from the cluster analysis

The values of K2O vary between 0.6 % and 3.6 % and show a strong variation until 240 cm. After this depth, the values stay around 3 %, and then at 450 cm, the amount of K2O drops drastically. The CaO content ranges between 0.5 % and 10.5 %. It varies strongly to a depth of 2 metres with a slight decrease at 140 cm. Starting at 2 metres only traces of CaO can be found (1 %), and then, at 450 cm its value increases drastically (10 %). The amount of Cr ranges between 10 and 280 ppm and strongly varies throughout the profile. This variation is periodic, a phenomenon often experienced in the case of mobile elements (Huang and Gong, 2005). The values of TOC vary between 0.3 and 2.8. They decrease towards a depth of 140 cm, and then strongly vary with a significant peak at 240 cm (2.6). Around 4.5 m they stay at around 1.4 then suddenly drop to 0.3. Results of the multivariate mathematical analyses

Tab. 2. Results of the discriminant analysis (CsípĘhalom) (+ denotes significant covariance) F1 F2 F3 F4 Deposit of the mound + recent soil vs. palaeosoil + parent + + material Deposit of the mound vs. + recent soil Deposit of the mound vs. + palaeosoil Palaeosoil vs. parent material +

Since measured inorganic and organic geochemical data follow a normal distribution we processed our data with a multivariate geostatistical method in the case of the Lyukas-halom as well. In order to group the organic and inorganic variables we carried out factor analysis, the rotated component matrix of which also determined four main factors (Table 3, Figure 7). Tab. 3. Results of the factor analysis (Lyukas-halom) The factor analysis determined four main factors F1 ("soil components") factor: (SiO2, K2O, Rb, Fe2O3, MnO, TOC, -Sr, -CaO) F2 ("organic matter") factor: (TOC, S1, S2) F3 ("mobile elements, redox indicators") factor: (Cr, As) F4 ("immobile elements") factor: (Ti, Zr, Y)

Results for the Lyukas-halom Soil chemical characteristic (inorganic and organic chemical parameters) Selected and standardised XRF and Rock-Eval results are summarised in Figure 6. Although most elements do not show significant variations along the profile, some uncertain tendencies can be outlined in the case of several variables.

187

A. CSANÁDI; T. M. TÓTH

Fig. 8. Hierarchical illustration of the dendrogram (with the number of samples of each group)

Fig. 7. Variation of the factor values along the profile, F(Ly)1, F(Ly)2, F(Ly)3 and F(Ly)4

The four groups, genetically separated, based on the results of the cluster analysis are A1, B1, A2 and B2. The boundaries of these groups agree well with those indicated by the factor analysis, despite the fact that the spatial pattern is more diffuse than for the CsípĘ-halom. The reason for the more complex structure may be that the Lyukas-halom is much younger and the two palaeosoil horizons made the geochemical transport processes more complicated. Figure 9 shows the spatial positions of samples belonging to the four clusters along the soil section.

The first factor (F(Ly)1), similarly to the CsípĘ-halom shows the group of silica, clay, carbonates, iron oxides, manganese oxides and organic matter. The change of the carbonates represented by Sr and CaO shows an opposite tendency compared to silica and clay. The variation of F(Ly)1 along the section indicates five geochemical boundary surfaces. These surfaces were marked at depths suggested by changes in the main trends of the factor values. They are present at 140, 230, 370, 420 and 460 cm.

Fig. 9. Vertical position of the samples as derived from the cluster analysis (Lyukas-halom)

The elements of the second factor (F(Ly)2) are TOC, S1 and S2. Similarly to the CsípĘ-halom, the amount and maturity of the organic matter is the second most important factor that influences geochemical behaviour. More boundaries were apparent. The values of F(Ly)2 exhibit chaotic variations towards a depth of 180 cm, which may solely or partially be the consequence of strong surface pollution. Down to a depth of 230 cm the values show an increasing tendency with depth. The geochemical limit values can be determined along the section, one at a depth of 320 cm, the other at 420 cm. The elements of the third factor (F(Ly)3) similarly to the CsípĘ-halom are Cr and As. The behaviour of the chalcophile element group along the profile shows the same boundaries as previously experienced. The boundaries at 180 and 320 cm indicate the present positions of the redox frontiers. The fourth factor (F(Ly)4) again includes the most conservative and immobile elements Ti, Zr and Y. The uneven distribution of these elements along the profile shows the total lack of a chemical structure simultaneous with the construction of the mound. Similarly to the CsípĘ-halom we also carried out cluster analyses using the results of the factor analysis. The best results were provided by Ward’s method with a Euclidean measure. Figure 8 illustrates its dendrogram.

188

Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain

halom the lower boundary of the recent soil is 80 cm deep, and the redox boundary is at around 200 cm for both approaches. However, regarding the exact location of the palaeosoil, there are differences, based on pedological parameters, in colour, structure or carbonate content. Moreover, in terms of malacological analysis the A-horizon of the buried soil should be at a depth of 270– 300 cm and the B-horizon between 300 and 350 cm. The depth of the buried A-horizon defined in this way still represents a part of the undifferentiated mound body according to the spatial structure of the geochemical data, and the palaeosoil is located between the interval of 300– 380 cm, well below the previous depth. This is the depth interval can be considered as the layer with the most effective soil formation within the whole mound body.

Based on the discriminant analysis we can conclude that the most important discriminating factor between the horizons of the section examined is factor F2, which is similar to the CsípĘ-halom. The variables summarised in factor F1 have an important role in distinguishing recent soil and palaeosoil as well as recent soil and the mound body. F3 is strongly represented at the redox boundary at 320 cm, a fact that confirms the result of the factor analysis (Table 4). Tab. 4. Results of the discriminant analysis (Lyukashalom) (+ denotes significant covariance) F1 F2 F3 F4 Recent soil vs. + + second deposit of the mound Second deposit of the mound vs. + palaeosoil Palaeosoil vs. first deposit + of the mound First deposit of the mound vs. + + parent material Resent soil and the second deposit of the mound vs. palaeosoil and (-) (+) first deposit of the mound and parent material Recent soil vs. palaeosoil + First deposit of the mound (ox.) vs. first deposit of the mound + + (red.)

The increase in conductivity under the recent soil cover and the decreasing conductivity below 250 cm depth indicate an internal salt accumulation in the mound (Barczi et al. 2006). Factor analysis for soluble ions of the soil material and conductivity resulted in a major group of variables of EC5, EC2.5, Cl-, NO3-, SO42-, HCO3- and Na+.2 Its high eigenvalue also suggests the presence of a “salt core” at a depth of 150–250 cm. The salt core outcrops on the southern side of the kurgan, which helped the sedentation of halophytic saline vegetation. This association would otherwise be unusual given the relief and climatic circumstances of the mound. The origin of the salt accumulation in the upper third of the mound is uncommon as the capillarity of groundwater is not possible at such heights, and salts could not even leach out from the uppermost layers. We interpret this feature as an indirect result of expansive clay mineral (smectite) accumulation in the interval of 250–300 cm, shown by geochemical and XRD measurements (Barczi et al. 2006). At the depth of the palaeosoil A-horizon (around 270 cm) increasing amount of K and Mg can be detected (Barczi et al. 2006). XRD data suggest that kaolinite and illite are the main clay constituents throughout the section, while at a depth of 250–300 cm a significant increase in smectites is clear (Barczi et al. 2006), which is in agreement with the abrupt gains of K and Mg. As infiltrating meteoric water is unable to percolate through this smectite-rich impermeable horizon, above it its amount increases for a certain time interval, stabilising a redox boundary at a depth of approximately 200 cm. The development of a saturated and evaporating zone above this horizon with increased concentration of Na+, Cl and SO4 can be characterised similarly to the formation of alkaline soils with salt accumulation.

DISCUSSION The objective of the geochemical analyses was to determine whether any chemical pattern inside the mound has formed since its construction that could be interpreted from the point of view of soil genetics. We aimed at reconstructing element migration processes that have occurred in the past 4000 years (Lyukas-halom) and 6000 years (CsípĘ-halom) respectively, in the unorganised, unbalanced profiles following the initial establishment of the mounds (Molnár et al. 2004). The above results point to significant element rearrangements during this time interval, which may have been a catalyst for secondary mineralisation processes (Barczi et al. 2006). Through element mobilisation the original heterogeneous geochemical profile was replaced by homogeneous zones separated by geochemical boundary surfaces. Only the extremely immobile elements Ti, Zr and Y reflect the original geochemical structure of the mound. While the internal structure of well-defined zones is characterised by a continuous change in chemical composition, the transformation at the boundary surfaces is abrupt. This fact suggests that as a result of diffusion processes responsible for element movement, the mound has not yet reached steady state.

The source of Na+ can be explained by the composition of the parent material of the area. The amount of feldspar, especially albite, is extremely high in the loess, in the parent material of the Hortobágy regions (SzöĘr et al. 1992). In addition, the silty material of the mound contains a significant amount of relict albite as shown by XRD spectra. The alteration of albite under slightly acidic conditions may form kaolinite and liberate Na+ by the following reaction:

The depths of the boundary surfaces identified with pedological studies and detailed geochemical analysis are in most cases nearly identical.1 In the case of the CsípĘ1

2

For detailed escription see Barczi and Joó in this volume

189

see Figure 4-7. in Barczi and Joó later in this volume

A. CSANÁDI; T. M. TÓTH

2NaAlSi3O8 + H2O + 2H+ ļ Al2Si2O5(OH)4 + 4SiO2 + 2Na+

palaeosoil layer at 230 cm. A second redox boundary surface can be found at 320 cm depth, and can be related to the layer rich in clay minerals at a depth interval of 380–420 cm. The palaeosoil, indicating the former ground level, starts at 420 cm followed by loessy parent material at 460 cm.

Such a reaction may explain both the presence of Na+ in the salt core and the origin of kaolinite in the mound. While the internal geochemical pattern of the CsípĘhalom is relatively simple, in the case of the Lyukashalom, the analyses indicate six geochemical boundaries along the profile, as a results of the two buried soil horizons. By synthesizing soil morphological and geomathematical results, these boundary surfaces can be interpreted genetically. The lower boundary of the recent soil’s B-horizon can be found at a depth of 140 cm followed by a redox zone, which can be related to the

We note that both mounds suggest very similar genetic processes indicating, due to the nature of the mounds, slightly different but clearly identifiable geochemical profiles. The figure below presents simplified profiles of the two mounds (Figure 10).

Fig. 10. Abstracted and distorted profiles of the two mounds

The evolution of the mounds – independent of their circumstances of construction, age and condition – can be described as a series of the following main events, based on which we can develop the following abstracted evolutionary model (Figure 11).

resulting in the accumulation of illite and smectite (Barczi et al. 2006). Although this zone still preserves the characteristics of the ancient soil in its structure and colour, due to the mobile elements and the changes in organic matter, it can be better classified as belonging to the mound body (Figure 11/d). The presence of the redox and pH boundary at 200 cm depth suggests periodic water coverage within the mound, that may have caused intense weathering and the neoformation of clay minerals even under steppe conditions. However, the similarity is mainly due to the fact that the soil material carried to the ancient palaeosoil A-horizon was taken from the Ahorizons of the surrounding area, often having similar characteristics. Soil formation is currently taking place. The diffusion processes are continuing within the mound body, and the mound is progressing forward on the above described path, towards a steady state. The horizon(s) of the former palaeosoil(s), namely the zone(s) of the former surface(s), can currently be considered as the one(s), which are less balanced from a chemical point of view. Over the long term, the whole profile is presumably going to reach a steady state, with chemical profiles changing continuously with depth and free of sudden changes (Figure 11/e).

Before construction of the kurgans the prevailing environment was a mosaic of waterlogged and saline areas with emerging loess ridges. The predominant soil must have been Chernozem type (Figure 11/a) (Joó et al. 2002, 2003, 2004). After the construction of the kurgans the previous surface was isolated of the zone of direct soil formation, and the mound body had a chemically, mineralogically and sedimentologically heterogeneous structure with no internal pattern (Figure 11/b). As a result of complex migration processes a chemical profile gradually developed, resulting in a balanced chemical pattern similar to the buried zone. At the same time the surface of the mound a soil was formed (Figure 11/c), resulting in a Chernozem type soil.3 Secondary mineralisation processes began in the buried soil,

3

see Barczi and Joó later in this volume

190

Mineralogical and geochemical evolution of two kurgans from the Great Hungarian Plain

stratigraphy of the CsípĘ-halom kurgan based upon soil scientific data.] III. Alföldi Tudományos Tájgazdálkodási Napok 1. kötet, 172-176. (in Hungarian) Joó, K. 2004. Kunhalmok és környezetük talajtani vizsgálata, különös tekintettel a talajképzĘdési folyamatok rekonstruálására. [Soil scientific analysis of burial mounds and teir environment, with special regard on the reconstruction of the soil forming factors] PhD Dolgozat, GödöllĘ, pp. 123. (in Hungarian) Joó, K., Barczi, A., Szántó, Zs. and Molnár, M. 2003. A hortobágyi CsípĘ-halom talajtani vizsgálata. [Soil scientific examination of the CsípĘ-halom kurgan] Agrokémia és Talajtan 52 1-2, 5-20. (in Hungarian) Kovács, G. and Salamon, F. (Ed.) 1976. Hortobágy a nomád pusztától a Nemzeti Parkig. [The Hortobágy from the nomad “puszta” to the National Park] Natura Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 351. (in Hungarian) Marosi, S. and Somogyi, S. (Ed.) 1990. Magyarország kistájainak katasztere I. [Cadastre of Hungary’s geographical microregions] MTA Földrajztudományi Kutató Intézet, Budapest, 204209. (in Hungarian) Molnár, M., Joó, K., Barczi, A., Szántó, Zs., Futó, I., Palcsu, L. and Rinyu, L., (2004): Dating of total soil organic matter used in kurgan studies. Radiocarbon, 46. (1) 413-419. Pécsi, M. (ed.) 1969. A tiszai Alföld. Magyarország tájföldrajza. [The Great Hungarian Plain of the Tisza region. Hungary’s landscape geography] Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 86-119. (in Hungarian) Stefanovits, P. 1963. Magyarország talajai. [Hungary’s soils] Akadémiai Kiadó, 299-307. (in Hungarian) SzöĘr, Gy., Barta, I., Balázs, É., Sümegi, P. and Kuti L. 1992. Az Északkelet-Alföld negyedkori pelites üledékeinek geokémiai fácieselemzése. [Geochemical facies analysis of quarter pelitic sediments from the southeastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain] In: Fáciesanalitikai, paleobiogeokémiai és paleoökológiai kutatások. MTA Debreceni Akadémiai Bizottság, Debrecen, pp. 45-64. (in Hungarian) Wang, F. 2009. Factor Analysis and PrincipalComponents Analysis. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, 1-7.

Fig. 11. Geochemical evolutionary model of the mound On the consolidated surface (a), the unorganised geochemical patterns of the forming mound (b) became more and more ordered, while soil was forming on its surface (c). Currently there are two characteristic segments separated by the buried soil horizon (d) with diffusive processes, which are expected to become perfectly balanced (e).

(The lines indicate the order of the geochemical patterns.) CONCLUSIONS After both mounds were constructed, the pattern of the disturbed culture layer (over the buried soil) was geochemically irregular. Since the construction of the mounds a chemical and mineralogical profile took shape, and the whole soil profile moved in the direction of a more stable structure corresponding to environmental and climate-zonal optimum. However, this process is ongoing in most studied cases, as suggested by the diffuse geochemical boundary surfaces between the buried soil(s) and the mound body. The geochemical distribution formed in a mound body is in many ways similar to the profile created by the original soil formation in the palaeosoil. Over the long term, the whole profile may reach a steady state, varying continuously with depth and lacking any sudden changes. REFERENCES CITED Aleksandrovskii, A.L. 1996. Natural Environment as Seen in Soil. Eurasian Soil Science, Vol. 29, No. 3, 245-254. Barczi, A., M. Tóth, T., Csanádi, A., Sümegi, P. and Czinkota I. 2006. Reconstruction of the paleoenvironment and soil evolution of the CsípĘ-halom kurgan, Hungary. Quarternary International 156-157 (2006) 49-59. Birks, H.J.B. and Birks, H.H. 1980. Quaternary Palaeoecology. E. Arnold Press, London. Finnern, H. (ed.) 1994. Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung. 4. verbesserte und erweiterte Auflage. Hannover, p. 392 Huang, B. and Gong, Z. 2005. Geochemical barriers and element retention in soils in different landscapes of the Tianshan Mountain area, Xinjiang, China. Geoderma 126 (2005) 337-351. Joó, K. 2002: A hortobágyi CsípĘ-halom rétegtani felépítése talajtani vizsgálatok alapján. [The

191

192

Kurgan KUTI, L.;Studies: FÜGEDIAn , U.;environmental BOROS, A. and archaeological multiproxy study of burial mounds in the Eurasian steppe zone Á. PETė and A. BARCZI (Eds.). BAR International Series 2238, Paper 10, pp. 193-204.

Groundwater movements and its geochemical properties around and in the CsípĘ-halom kurgan László KUTI; Ubul FÜGEDI; Andrea BOROS Geological Institute of Hungary, Stefánia út. 14., Budapest, 1143 – Hungary E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: In the study area at the CsípĘ-halom two boreholes were transformed into a ground water monitoring well: one on the kurgan and one at its base. The level and the chemistry of the groundwater in these holes are very different because a small, isolated water body was formed in the cultural layer of the kurgan. The water in the kurgan, in the depth of the 6000 years old paleosoil of the cultural layer, is more salty then the recent groundwater at the base. It can be concluded that 6000 years ago, when the mound was built, the sodification of the soils was more intensive with the accumulation of sulphates and maybe with sodium chloride. The desalinisation is caused by the climate change and the digging of canals. Now the main characteristic of the desalinisation process is the degradation of sodium-sulphate minerals (maybe practically all of the sodium-chloride was leached out).

In order to obtain more precise information regarding the movements and chemistry of the groundwater in and out of the kurgan, the boreholes were equipped using filterinstalled plastic pipes of 50 mm in diameter, and with this process they became part of the Geological Institute of Hungary’s research programme, “Agrogeological study areas”. The filter was installed between 6 and 7 metres in the case of the well in the mound (Cs-2), and between 3 and 4 metres in the case of the well at the base (Cs-1). METHODS The samples of the boreholes were described macroscopically and several samples were taken from every 20-25cm for sedimentological analysis. The samples were analysed in the sedimentology laboratory of the Geological Institute of Hungary. Samples were also taken from the groundwater explored by the borehole, which were analysed in the water chemistry laboratory at the same institute.

Keywords: Great Hungarian Plain, kurgan, hydrogeology, hydrochemistry, salinisation, desalinisation, sodification, ground water level, ground water geochemistry

The subsurface depth of the groundwater level was registered in the wells every month and water samples were taken from both wells at the same time. The wellprepared (filtered, conserved) samples were carried and analysed in the water chemistry laboratory of the Geological Institute of Hungary for 23 chemical components. The pH values, the conductivity and the temperature of the groundwater were measured on the field.

INTRODUCTION Connecting to the investigations of the Department of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology of Szent István University two shallow boreholes were made at the CsípĘ-halom (Figure 1) in the Great Hungarian Plain (Alföld) in September 2003. Further data were obtained partly about the geological structure of the mound and its surroundings, partly about the groundwater.

For technical reasons, we present two groups of analyses: the first, for samples taken until the end of 2006, and the second one for the samples taken in 2008.

Both boreholes were planned at the western slope of the kurgan. One of them was executed into the side of the body of the mound, 1.15 m below the top of the mound, on 94.0 m a.s.l. The other borehole was made a few meters north-west from the base of the mound, on 89.0 m a.s.l.

RESULTS Looking through the data, at first the extreme variability of certain micro-components is visible: the amount of some components could change one, sometimes two ranges within a monthly interval without finding easily any rules for that. At the same time the amount of the main elements (and with them the total soluble salt content) change slightly (Table 1).

The boreholes situated 100 and 140 m west from the only significant artificial watercourse, the Western Main Canal. The canal, put into operation in December 3 1965, is a typical lowland canal in its whole length. Its crosssection is variable depending on the time of construction. Its width is 10–25 m; the discharge is 4–12 m3/sec. The borehole made on the mound was seven metres deep, while the one made at the base was four metres deep. Both boreholes hit the groundwater: the one installed on the mound in a depth of 5.0 m, the one at the base in 1.9 m. The depth of the groundwater level was sampled and water samples were taken for chemical analysis.

According to our experience, the reason behind such phenomena lies not so much in natural processes, but in the sampling procedure itself (preparation, processing, etc.). For this reason, and in order to eliminate the outlying values and the accidental errors, we abandoned the goal of revealing probable trends of several years. This is quite reasonable, since data density is irregular and there are no obvious trends in the time series. We concentrated on revealing the seasonal fluctuations.

193

L. KUTI.; U. FÜGEDI; A. BOROS

Because of the irregular distribution patterns of certain components we strived to use the robust, non-parametric statistic methods from the beginning to the end, however, we only had a partial success due to the special data structure. In order to eliminate the outstanding values and to filter the accidental errors, the analyses made in different years but in the same months were reduced and the expectable concentration values of the months in question were estimated with the median (Table 2–7) because of 2–5 samples from a month are not enough to count the Hodges-Lehmann median.

DISCUSSION Subsurface depth of the groundwater level In the sampling period, the subsurface depths of the groundwater levels (Figure 2) were different, but they show a similar graphic shape. The level of the Cs-1 wellinstalled at the base was shallower: between 10.16.2003 and 12.15.2008. Its minimal value was (in February of 2006) 0.23 m, its maximal value was (in December of 2003) 2.72 m. The first value is in harmony with the local standards in Hungary, the groundwater level rises nearest to the surface in the winter months, because at this time evaporation reaches its minimum, while there is a relatively large quantity of precipitation at the same time (Rónai 1985). The groundwater level generally is in its deepest position at the end of summer and in the beginning of autumn as long as the evaporation is large because of the warm weather and the limited precipitation. According to the data of the meteorological station in Debrecen, the autumn was relatively warm and practically without precipitation in 2003. Therefore, it can be presumed that the neighbouring canals drew the groundwater off; and a significant amount of water may also have been exploited during that period. Nevertheless, there are evidences on Figure 2, how the two curves, aside from a few insignificant disturbances, go almost parallel with each other, cautiously following the changes of the weather.

Fig. 1. The location of the sampling area

Position of the groundwater above the sea level It can be clearly seen, that the groundwater level of the Cs-2 well installed on the mound is higher than the level of the other one relative to the sea level (Figure 3). The groundwater level of the Cs-2 well fluctuated between 88.22 and 90.3 m, while that of the Cs-1 well was in the interval of 87.5 and 89.25 m during the survey period. As Figure 3 shows, for most of the time, there is a marked difference of about 1 meter between the levels of the two wells, the groundwater level of the mound always being the higher one. The water levels in the two wells approached each other quite closely (7–16 cm) in January 2007 and in spring of 2008, but the groundwater level of the mound kept being higher even at that time.

Significant differences were revealed by the MannWhitney probe. Correlation connections of the variables were estimated with Kendall rank correlations, and grouped co-fluctuations of the variables were estimated with factor analysis based on Spearman rank correlations. The latter one was used under compulsion because the SPSS PC+ statistical software we use does not enable the factor analysis based on Kendall rank correlation. Because of the many order difference between the concentrations, this analysis was made in two steps: first the two-two main factors (in the cases of the two boreholes) were determined based on the six most important ions (Na+, Ca2+, Mg2+, HCO3-, SO42-, Cl-), then the correlations of the factor variables and certain components were calculated.

Total salt content of the groundwater The total salt contents of the groundwater of the two wells (Figure 4) are also different. The water closed into the mound is much more salty then the other one at the base, which combines more components with other waters, e.g. of canals from the vicinity. The total salt content of the groundwater in the Cs-2 well varied between 1456.65 and 2790 mg/l during the time of survey: it was more than 2000 mg/l except in three samples (02.28.2005, 03.31.2005 and 08.31.2005); in one case more than 2500 mg/l and generally about 2400 mg/l. The total salt content of the groundwater in the Cs-1 well was between 976.5 and 1490 mg/l; it was always above 1000 mg/l except in two samples (12.28.2003 and 08.05.2004).

Those elements of which concentrations remained under detection limit in at least the third of the months were excluded from the process, since for these elements the calculation error of SPSS PC+ software is too large because of the unsuitable treatment of the ties (Fügedi 1999, 2009).

194

KUTI, L.; FÜGEDI, U.; BOROS Groundwater , A. movements and its geochemical properties around and in the CsípĘ-halom kurgan

(Kerek et al. 2009). The main reason for this is probably the Western Main Canal that regularly floods the well precincts.

Chemical properties of the groundwater In the Cs-1 well (Figure 4 and 5) the main chemical component of the groundwater was sodium bicarbonate, but in 8 samples it was sodium-calcium bicarbonate and one time it was sodium-magnesium bicarbonate. In these last cases the concentration of sodium was below 50 equivalent %, and of calcium and magnesium exceeded 25 equivalent %.

Factor analysis shows the two wells' water to be absolutely different. In the Cs-1 well two remarkably different element-groups are observable. * Na+ + SO42- (in factor 1, with the 30.7% of total variability) * Mg2+ + Ca2+ (in factor 2, with the 26.2% of total variability) K positively correlates with factor 1 and negative with HCO3-. Sr positively correlates with factor 2.

The main chemical component of the groundwater of the Cs-2 well (Figure 6 and 7) is either sodium bicarbonate or sodium bicarbonate-chloride. In the water, the sodium appears above 75–80 equivalent %. In a little bit more than half of the samples the bicarbonate is also more than 50 equivalent %. In the other half of the cases, beside the bicarbonate (40–50%), the chloride appears as a second anion, with often a similar quantity as bicarbonate.

Three factors of the Cs-2 well: * Ca2+ + Mg2+ + Na+ + HCO3- (30.4%); * Na+ + SO42- – Ca2+ (27.6%); * Cl- + SO42- (24.3%).

The monthly treatise eliminated the majority of the suspicious, outstanding values in months, from which we have at least three samples. In addition, the distribution of most components became remarkably steady: seasonal fluctuations can hardly be revealed.

CONCLUSIONS The fact that the ions of sodic salts are much more abundant in the mound built long ago from alkaline soils than in the surrounding area shows that the water neither flows, nor evaporates from the structure. Rather, a little isolated water body formed from the groundwater in the cultural layer of the mound. As Figure 2 shows well the level of this separated water is generally higher than the groundwater level around.

Thus, it is not surprising that in the samples taken at the same time of the two wells the proportion of the different components (Table 8) fluctuates a little. Moreover, the more there is a given ion in the water (that is the relative error is less), the less the proportion fluctuates. As the charts show (Figure 8-14)the drastic difference in salt contents of the two waters clearly stems from the fact, that the sodium is about 3.5–4 times more (and with this the bicarbonate is 1.5 times more, the sulphate is 3–6 times more and the chloride is 4–6.5 times more) in the water of Cs-2 well than in the water of Cs-1. The quantities of other ions are much the same in the two waters, and what is more, there clearly are more K and Ca on the base.

The two factors of the Cs-1 borehole indicate that the calcium-magnesium bicarbonate water of the Western Main Canal regularly floods and washes out the most easily dissolving sodium sulphate salt minerals step by step. It is characteristically shown that the variability in sodium and sulphate (> 40%) is six times more than it is in the group of Ca2+-Mg2+-HCO3- (< 8%, Table 1). The chloride correlates positively but weakly with both factors. As the middle value of the relative variability (16.8 %) shows, a little sodium-chloride might also be washed out with the sodium-sulphate. However, there are very little amount of it in these poorly sodic sediments: sodium-chloride type sodic soils are located only south and south-east from the sampling site.

In accordance with it, Joó (2003, 2004) revealed that the salt content of the “cultural layer” of the mound is multiple of the lime-poor chernozem soils in the neighbourhood, and close to the salt content of the meadow solonec soils, or even larger than that. Comparing the water composition of the Cs-1 well with data of the water body 2.9.2. kept in the database of the Geological Institute of Hungary (Table 9), it may be seen that the quantity of each component included in the database remains in the interval of the background but most of it is in the upper part of the interval, in consonance with the mild alkalinity of the field. In the slack water of the Cs-2 well the proportion of chlorite (and certainly also that of sodium) is much greater than the local average.

In the Cs-2 borehole no sign of washing can be observed, there is not any main ion with variability of 16 relative % (Table 1). The most significant factor refers to the increasing salt content of the water: the colloid ‘limemud’ i.e. composite and hydrolysed carbonate of sodium, calcium and magnesium precipitates and dissolves repeatedly. All of these together clearly show, that the cultural layer and the little water-body of the mound reflect the environmental conditions of the kurgan construction time: its material is much more salty then the present soil.

As it can be seen in Tables 1 and 2 the periodical data of the main components in the Cs-1 well is slightly variable, even the “summer-end nitrate concentration”, typical in other sodic lands of the Hortobágy, cannot be noticed

Six thousand years ago, when the mound was built, the Carpathian Basin was at the end of the climatic period 195

L. KUTI.; U. FÜGEDI; A. BOROS

Apajpuszta agrogeological model area.] Kézirat, MÁFI, 14 p. + 4 mell. Hartai, É. 2005. Magyarország földtana. Holocén folyamatok. [Geology of Hungary. Holocene processes.] Miskolci Egyetem, http://fold1.ftt.unimiskolc.hu/~foldshe/mof04.htm Joó, K. 2003. Kunhalomkutatások (A CsípĘ-halom vegetációja). [Kurgan-research (The vegetation of CsípĘ-halom)] Tájökológiai Lapok, 1/1 pp. 87-96. Joó, K. 2004. Kunhalmok és környezetük talajtani vizsgálata, különös tekintettel a talajképzĘdési folyamatok rekonstruálására [Pedological research on kurgans and their surroundings, with special regards to the reconstruction of soil forming processes.] Ph.D. dissertation, unpublished manuscript. Szent István Egyetem, GödöllĘ. http://phd.okm.gov.hu/disszertaciok/tezisek/2004/tz_ eredeti1421.pdf Kerek, B., Fugedi, U., Kuti, L. and Vatai J., 2009. Spatiotemporal changes of the nitrate-ion concentration int he grundwater. Geophysical Research Abstracts Vol. 11., EGU2009-11244. EGU General Assembly http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2009/EG U2009-11244.pdf Nádor, A., Thamóné Bozsó, E., Magyari, Á., Babinszki, E., Dudko, A. and Tóth, Z. 2007. Neotektonika és klímaváltozás együttes hatása a Körös-medence késĘ-pleisztocén vízhálózat-fejlĘdésére. [Neotectonic and climatic control on the Late Pleistocene drainage pattern development of the Körös Basin, Great Hungarian Plain.] Magyar Állami Földtani Intézet Évi Jelentése 2005-rĘl, 131–148. Rónai, A. 1985. Az Alföld negyedidĘszaki földtana. [The Quaternary of the Great Hungarian Plain.] Geologica Hungarica, 21. p. 446. SzĘcs, T., Tóth, Gy., Cserny, T. and Zöldi, I. 2009. Küszöbértékek véglegesítése. [Finalisation of thresholds.] Zárótanulmány. 2.3. Függelék. VízgyĦjtĘ-gazdálkodási tervek készítése címĦ KEOP-2.5.0. A kódszámú projekt megvalósítása a tervezési alegységekre, valamint részvízgyĦjtĘkre, továbbá ezek alapján az országos vízgyĦjtĘgazdálkodási terv, valamint a terv környezeti vizsgálatának elkészítése (TED [2008/S 169226955]). — Kézirat, MÁFI Vízföldtani osztály, Budapest.

called Atlantic (Nádor et al. 2007). The Atlantic era that begun 8000 years ago was a long, warm and wet period with a 2–3 ºC higher annual average temperature. The Great Hungarian Plain was covered with oak forests, willow-poplar gallery forest (Salicetum albae-fragilis) were growing along the marshes and rivers (Hartai, 2005). The fact that the soil could become so sodic implies that the area might have been a local depression with intensely evaporating groundwater. This also supports the fact that the salt effected soils of the Carpathian Basin developed on the same places where they are found today, and even the river control did not change their spread (Sümeghy, 1951). Presumably, six thousand years ago much more sodiumchloride and sodium-sulphate was in the soil than in their present soil types. Decline of salt content was not only due to the climate change; the river control may have considerably contributed to it too. The water level fluctuation of the Western Main Canal, finished in 1964 (Frisnyák 2001), is extremely irregular depending on the River Tisza, the needs and the water take-out: it bleeds and swells back the groundwater in and out, and with this it leaves regularly its bank. Presumably, the effect of river control was mostly similar to that in other regions of the country: it resulted in a decrease in the soil's salt content and probably the concentration of some microelements too. The kurgan was built on the clayey, salty surface on the River Tisza floodplain. After the construction the water leaking downward began to wash out the salt content of the mound and clay particles. It was a relatively short period because of the formation of a continuous impermeable horizon at the base of the kurgan (in the fossil soil the mount was built on). The washed-down material filled all the pores in this horizon. The small water body in the kurgan was separated from the groundwater and the ion-transport was blocked. We can assume that similar processes could occur in other kurgans of the Great Hungarian Plain too. That is why the investigation of soils and waters of these constructions could help us to get a better understanding of the climatic and environmental history of this period. REFERENCES CITED Frisnyák, Zs. 2001. Árvizek, szabályozások. Kronológia. História. [Floods, regulation of rivers. Chronology. History.] http://www.tankonyvtar.hu/historia-200102/historia-2001-02-arvizek Fügedi, U. 1999. The incorrect calculation of rank correlation by some statistical programs. Ann. Rep. of the Geological Institute of Hungary, 1992–1993/II. (1999), Budapest, 159–161. Fügedi, U. 2009. Az apajpusztai agrogeológiai mintaterület anyagvizsgálati eredményeinek geokémiai feldolgozása. [The geochemical examination of the sample-test results from the

196

Groundwater movements and its geochemical properties around and in the CsípĘ-halom kurgan

Tab. 1. Expectable values and variability of the main cations and anions (mg/L) in the water of the two wells Cs-1 (N = 36) Cs-2 (N = 35) ion medium absolute medium relative medium absolute medium relative median median difference difference (%) difference difference (%) Na 118.00 52.30 44.30 609.00 35.50 5.80 Ca 64.60 4.65 7.20 31.30 4.16 13.30 Mg 46.15 2.76 6.00 54.75 4.38 8.00 Cl 82.20 15.26 18.60 475.00 42.90 9.00 HCO3 677.71 43.69 6.50 988.20 71.80 7.30 SO4 27.25 11.59 42.50 143.00 22.00 15.40

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Tab. 2. Main cations and H2SiO3 (mg/L) of groundwater in borehole Cs-1 No of samples Na+ K+ Ca2+ Mg2+ Fe3+ NH4+ Ȉ Cations 4 170 1.50 65.3 46.5 0.085 0.515 286 4 164 1.43 62.4 47.0 0.060 0.280 275 5 170 0.58 64.1 45.2 0.030 0.160 278 2 168 1.22 64.0 47.2 0.040 0.285 281 3 162 1.05 70.3 48.7 0.160 0.250 281 2 158 0.385 64.8 45.6 0.105 0.370 270 2 182 2.72 70.0 47.7 0.060 0.290 303 4 169 1.62 67.3 46.0 0.150 1.680 283 2 164 0.30 65.4 45.1 0.115 0.315 275 2 183 1.34 65.8 43.6 0.050 0.280 264 4 170 0.64 62.4 43.9 0.095 0.320 278 2 176 1.32 57.3 41.6 0.050 0.615 277

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Tab. 3. Main anions and the total dissolved components (mg/L) of groundwater in borehole Cs-1 ClHCO3SO42NO3NO2PO43Ȉ Anions Total 68.4 655 52.8 3.20 < 0.1 0.140 762 1064 88.0 680 38.2 1.00 < 0.1 0.165 803 1105 81.2 659 27.2 2.00 < 0.1 0.060 799 1086 83.4 705 23.4 8.70 2.06 0.135 822 1118 91.4 702 26.9 4.80 2.20 0.070 829 1120 78.9 674 26.2 2.32 1.12 0.105 783 1068 109.0 660 39.0 28.10 0.90 1.200 838 1156 85.2 619 31.4 1.46 1.71 0.220 761 1052 82.8 690 25.4 2.11 1.08 0.075 801 1091 80.8 692 26.9 3.73 < 0.1 0.028 804 1115 83.4 714 34.9 1.98 0.89 0.065 833 1124 113.0 628 28.2 4.30 < 0.1 0.135 774 1063

197

H2SiO3 16.0 14.8 14.0 14.2 15.8 15.4 16.0 17.0 17.0 17.7 16.8 12.9

L. KUTI.; U. FÜGEDI; A. BOROS

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Cr 1.87