UDK 903'i(439"633/634":i33-5
Documenta PraehistoricaXXXIII (2006)
Eastern, Central and Western Hungary -
variations of Neolithisation models
Eszter Banfffy
Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, HU
banffy@archeo.mta.hu
ABSTRACT - Until recent times, the Carpathian Basin was regarded as a uniform zone of neolithiza-
tion. In the last few years it has become clear that at least three different types of transitions can be
distinguished in the Eastern Plain (Alföld) region: one in the Jäszsäg area with authentic Mesolithic
sites, one in the northern, one in the northeastern fringes of the Körös distribution area, and a fur-
ther one in the southern part of the Danube-Tisza Interfluve where the impact of the formative Vinca
culture must also be reckoned with. All regions differ from each other, concerning the contacts with
Mesolithic population and the phases of neolithisation. Regarding Transdanubia, the picture becomes
even more complex. The transition to the Neolithic obviously differed in each region: in the Drava
valley where the Starčevo presence was very intensive, in the marshland around Lake Balaton, in the
Räba valley lying close to the Alpine foreland, in the northern Transdanubian Danube valley and in
the Little Hungarian Plain. Rejecting the simplifying model the assumption of a mosaic-like series
of variations in the neolithisation process is offered. The process of Neolithisation is thus is far from
being unified in the various regions. This short study tries to seek different models of neolithisation
behind the differences.
IZVLEČEK - Do nedavnega so Karpatski bazen smatrali za enotno področje neolitizacije. V zadnjih
nekaj letih pa je postalo jasno, da lahko na področju Vzhodne ravnice (Alföld) ločimo vsaj tri različ-
ne tipe tranzicije: prvega na področju Jäszsäg, s prvotnimi mezolitskimi najdišči, drugega na sever-
nem in tretjega na severovzhodnem obrobju področja Körös, še enega pa na južnem delu Donavsko-
tiškega porečja, kjer je potrebno računati tudi z vplivom kulture Vinča. Regije se v procesu neoliti-
zacije med seboj razlikujejo tudi v odnosih med mezolitskimi in neolitskimi populacijami. V Trans-
danubiji je ta podoba še bolj kompleksna. Tu je neolitizacije v vsaki regiji potekala drugače: v Drav-
ski dolini, kjer je bila močno navzoča kultura Starčevo, na močvirnatem področju okrog Balatonske-
ga jezera, v dolini Rabe, ki leži blizu alpskega predgorja, v severni Transdanubijski donavski dolini
in na Mali madžarski ravnini. V članku zavrnemo poenostavljen model neolitizacije in ponudimo
domnevo o mozaični seriji regionalnih procesov neolitizacije.
KEY WORDS - Carpathian Basin; Neolithic transition; Körös, Starčevo; early and developed LBKgroups
The Pre-Neolithic period in the Great Hungarian
Plain (Alföld)
In Hungary, there is only one region where a settle-
ment niche, a series of authentic Mesolithic sites, has
been found, researched and proceeded. This is the
Jaszsag area, east of the Danube (Fig. 1) Here, two
phases were distinguished by the excavator, Kertesz:
besides the older Mesolithic Jaszbereny phase, a set-
tlement of the latest period was also identified at
Jasztelek. (Kertesz 1994a; 1994b). The environmen-
tal and historical reconstruction of this phase has
given basic new information about the phase im-
mediately preceding the Neolithic (Kertesz-Sümegi
1999; Sümegi 2003).
The north-eastern part of the Alföld
(Fig. 2) shows a fairly different pic-
ture from the mid-northern fringes,
at least in the present state of re-
search. The catchments of the rivers
Berettyö, Sebes and Fekete Körös
form a complex, articulated landscape
frequently dotted with marshes and
swamps. Although stone artifacts of
the Late Mesolithic - preceding the
times of permanent settlements - are
known from as far as Western Roma-
nia, no archaeological evidence of
any settlements has been found. The
palaeo-environmental analysis, how-
ever, was able to show up some evi-
dence for pre-Neolithic clearing and
forest burning activity from around
8400 cal BC, paths in the woodland
e.g. in the Batorliget marsh region as well as near
the village of Csaroda in a marshy area, the 'Nyires
lap' (Sümegi 2003.21-22, Fig. 1; Sümegi-Gulyas
2004. Ch. 3 8: Pollen and charcoal analysis). Around
8400 calBC Tilia lost its dominace and Quercus be-
came more typical (Willis et al. 1995), indicating
closed forestation due to a milder climate with more
precipitation. Dates for the mollusk fauna allow si-
milar inferences (Sümegi 2003.21). Given space for
sunlight, the growth of berries and especially hazel-
nut in the bushy-shrubby undergrowth were en-
hanced. Favorable changes in the landscape were
further intensified by small-scale bush clearing, as
findings from several European localities have indi-
cated (Gronenborn 1999; Zvelebil 1986; 2000). Pre-
Neolithic "Tardenoisien" groups of people may have
only temporarily settled in small ho-
mesteads, and moved on with the
shifts of the seasons accompanied by
the migration of wild herds along the
constantly shifting riverbeds. Maxim
(1999.27-30, 221-222) thus conclu-
ded from her examination of the li-
thics from Transylvania and the Par-
tium area that the river valleys and
the upland areas must have been in-
habited by a local population before
the first farmers reached this region.
Paul regarded the indigenous contri-
bution important enough to speak of
a "Präcrig" culture, based on analogies
with the Balkans {Paul 1995.62-67).
Fig. 1. The Northern part of the Duna-Tisza interfluve area (The
Jaszsag), with sites mentioned.
at the turn of the 7-6th Millennium BC. From this
time onwards there was a decrease in the ratio of
tree pollen in the profiles. This refers to a drop in
woodlands, accompanied by a wide-scale extension
of furrow-weeds, signifying human activities in the
landscape (Willis et al. 1995; Gal-Juhasz-Sümegi
2006). Besides forest clearings, traces of forming
"hunters' paths" in the woodland, as well as hints of
foddering animals with vegetation can also be ob-
served in the region (Sümegi 1998; 1999). Quite ob-
viously, and as radiocarbon dates of archeological
finds testify, this was a time when the first immi-
grants from South-East Europe settled on the water-
logged soils stretching between the rivers Szamos
and Berettyö. The flint assemblage from the pre-Neo-
lithic site at Tarpa-Marki Tanya can be considered as
The north-eastern part of the Alföld
underwent significant transformations
Fig. 2. The North-Eastern part of the Alföld and the adjacent Ermel-
lek region in Werstern Romania. a) preneolithic sites; b) Körös-
Cris sites; c) Early Alföld LBK (Szatmar II) sites.
archaeological evidence completing the scientific re-
sults (Kertesz 1994b).
The process of Neolithisation in regions of the
northern Great Hungarian Plain (Alföld)
Studying the main characteristics of Neolithic distri-
bution in the Balkan area, several archaeological tra-
ces point to the inference that the Neolithic infiltra-
tion into Moldavia through the Banat, and the Olt
valley, and Transylvania took a different path than
the variant advancing westward from the Mid-Bal-
kans, via the mouth of the Morava River. It seems
that the Alföld region has much in common with the
eastern type of Neolithic transition.
In recent decades, contradictory opinions have emer-
ged about the Alföld Neolithisation. First, it was ge-
nerally accepted that there were no people living in
the area in the late Mesolithic; thus the first farmers
arrived in a "vacuum" (Gabori 1981). In 1982 Mak-
kay came up with an entirely new idea. He ascribed
the peculiar northern frontier of the Körös and Star-
čevo cultures in the Carpathian Basin that contradict
any natural geographical obstacles, to the hostile be-
haviour of a local forager population (Makkay 1982.
23). In the late 80's the discovery of a real Mesoli-
thic niche (mentioned above) in the Jaszsag area be-
tween the Danube and the Tisza created the impres-
sion that Makkay was generally right in his postula-
ting an indigenous population, although at that time
he was not able to bolster his idea with any argu-
ments. It is also possible that this population was
not equally distributed in each Alföld region, not to
speak of the different activity in contacting the new-
comers. Up until now the Jaszsag is the only region
where the presence of this Mesolithic population
could be proven.
Concerning the early Neolithic development of East-
ern Hungary, research was intensive in the mid-20th
century, so that the first reports and evaluating stu-
dies appered in 1976 and thereafter (Kalicz, Mak-
kay 1977; Raczky 1988; Kurucz 1989; Nagy 1998).
Many decades ago, Kalicz and Makkay had already
noted that the sites of the old 'Szatmar group' in
North-Eastern Hungary at Nagyecsed, Tiszabezded,
Tiszavalk, Tiszacsege, Ebes, ibrany and Ciumesti
(Csomaköz) in the Berettyo and Szamos valley, in
the Ermellek area and in the Upper Tisza region can
hardly be understood without assuming intensive
contacts with Transylvania (Kalicz, Makkay 1972.
1 This nomination is now out of use.
78; 1977; Makkay 1982). At some sites (e.g. Nagye-
csed-Peterzug, Tiszabezded-Servapa), Körös elements
were more dominant than the Linear Pottery traits
in the early Alföld LBK (Szatmar II) assemblages
(Kalicz, Makkay 1977.20). Based on these features,
Kalicz and Makkay assigned these sites to their 'Szat-
mar I' group,1 together with the easternmost-lying
Mehtelek, and close to it, the Romanian Homorodul
de Sus (Felsohomorod) (Kalicz, Makkay 1972.92;
1977.22). Following his excavation of the Kotelek-
Huszarsarok site, Raczky noted that the assemblages
of the Szatmar II group "contained many formal and
ornamental elements whose origins could only be
explained through the Transylvanian branch of the
Körös culture" (i.e. the Cri§ culture) (Raczky 1983;
1986.31; 1988.27). Thus the idea was raised that the
Szatmar II group as the earliest phase of the Alföld
LBK would go back to the contact between late for-
mations of the early Neolithic: the Körös in the Alföld
and the Cri§ culture arriving from the East.
This hypothesis was then reinforced by analyses of
smaller regions, such as Nyirseg in North-Eastern
Hungary (Kurucz 1989; Starnini 1994). Early Alföld
Linear Pottery sites are lacking between this area
and westwards to Hortobagy. Kurucz noted that the
finds from the early sites on the Szatmar plain (up
to the Szamossalyi site) differed from the assem-
blages in more westerly areas to the extent that "any
genetic relations between the two seem very doubt-
ful" (Kurucz 1989.15). The later development in this
region definitely confirms this observation. In the
Middle Neolithic, this is the sole region occupied by
the "Esztar-Szamos region Painted Pottery group",
which is the only painted sub-group of the immense
LBK culture.
Between North-western Jaszsag and the North-East-
ern part of the Alföld, in the Upper Tisza region, there
is a contact area between the lowland and the Matra
and Bükk Mountains extends. (Fig. 3) Here, the strong
genetic relation between the early Alföld LBK settle-
ments and the Körös culture can be seen.
Domboroczki came to the conclusion that the LBK
formulation i.e. the Neolithic transition in this area
took place with practically no participation of groups
other than late Körös (Domboroczki 2001; 2005).
Domboroczki completed his observations by hypo-
thesising that local forager tribes that might have
lived on the edge of the Alföld most probably with-
drew to the mountains, and it was only in a later
phase of the East Hungarian Neoli-
thic that these groups began to merge
with LBK: namely, their traces would
be observed in the Tiszadob and Szil-
meg groups of the developed LBK
(Domboroczki 2003). Again, this in-
ference could be reinforced by the an-
thropological analysis of some graves
belonging to these groups (Zoffmann
2000). In connection with these
ideas, it is to be noted that the origi-
nal northern border of the Körös di-
stribution along the Szolnok - River
Berettyö line seems to collapse: new
Körös sites are found north of this re-
gion, even in the Upper Tisza area;
moreover, most recently one site, ob-
viously connected with obsidian mi-
ning, was detected at the foot of the
Tokaj Mountains.2 Again, this is data
that seem to bolster Domboröczki's postulations.
The later Alföld LBK groups, the Tiszadob, Szilmeg
and also the Bükk formations set out from the North-
ern Mountains. The location of their possible local
Mesolithic roots is a highly relevant assumption,
which claims good arguments. Before drawing any
conclusion on this question, however, some fields
should be considered in detail. Such questions are
signs of isolated development in pottery types and
decoration. Some decorative features seem to be
alien to the LBK heritage, while other new features
can also be found in southern Alföld groups, like the
Szakalhat, thus making their isolated highland ori-
gins questionable. Besides the basic studies and re-
port already mentioned (Kalicz, Makkay 1977; Ku-
rucz 1989; Nagy 1998; 2006), the proceedings of
some further new sites along the M3 motorway, such
as at Füzesabony, Mezoszemere, Mezokövesd and
Kompolt, have yielded some complementary infor-
mation (Domboroczki 1997; 2003; Kalicz, Koos
1997a; 1997b; 2000; Bänffy, Biro, Vaday 1997;
Bänffy 1999). For the earliest and developed LBK
phase, however, real highland sites are also known
(Csengeri 2003; 2004; Bänffy 2000a). The other re-
levant point is the exchange system which is seen
as the basis for contacts between the Alföld and the
assumed highland population. On this question the
research work by Bacskay and Birö are essential,
shedding new light on the raw material, provenance
and the typological features of chipped stone imple-
Fig. 3. The Northern part of the Alföld with the adjacent Bükk,
Mätra mountains. a) Körös sites; b) Early Alföld LBK (Szatmär II)
sites.
ments within the LBK groups. (Bäcskay 1976; 1982;
Bäcskay, Biro 1983; 1987).
A further link with the Körös roots of Alföld LBK in
this region is the development of cult objects. In re-
cent excavations of the northern Alföld, plenty of
peculiar animal figurines and those depicting fabu-
lous creatures (centaurs) have come to light (Füzesa-
bony: Domboroczki 1996; 1997; Mezokövesd: Ka-
licz, Koos 1997a; 1997b). These early LBK finds can
be directly traced back to the Körös culture (Dom-
boroczki 2003.39). This view seems to be comple-
ted by earlier cross-cultural cultic depictions, such as
bull figurines or four-legged altarpieces, that had al-
ready been considered to have lived on as Körös in-
fluences on the Alföld LBK (Kutziän 1944; Kalicz,
Raczky 1981). The famous flat figurines from Meh-
telek also seem to confirm the connections between
the south-east European type figurative art and the
early Alföld LBK, where flat, close to rectangular fi-
gurines also occur. It can be assumed that the survi-
val of cult object types may also involve the survival
of certain elements in the ritual tradition and cult life.
Further important indications of characterising dif-
ferent ways within the Alföld development can be
found when reviewing architectural traditions. The
Early Neolithic houses of South-East Europe were
small buildings. They were usually constructed on a
square, rather than a rectangular ground plan, and
they lacked an internal post structure, thus sugges-
2 I thank Pal Raczky's kind oral communication here. Janos Dani, archaeologist to the Deri Muzeum Debrecen also reported about a
northernmost lying Körös site.
ting a light roof. Clay was used more abundantly
than wood (Lenneis 1997; 2000). The spaces out-
side the houses were at least equally important as
the undivided intramural interior spaces, which ra-
rely contained a hearth. East of the Tisza River, the
Körös communities followed exactly this South-East
European tradition in house construction. Although
it has been claimed that the Körös houses actually
represent the earliest, central section of Linear Pot-
tery houses (Meier-Arendt 1989), I have found no
evidence to confirm this. The Szajol-Felsoföld type
houses or those from the north (Krasznokvajda) dif-
fer both in their form and in their orientation from
the north-oriented and heavy wood long houses of
the Central European LBK (Raczky 1977; Horvath
1989; Losits 1980).
Besides architecture, pottery, physical anthropologi-
cal analyses and similarities in cult objects, there is
one more set new results which make a direct Körös
impact on the formulation of Alföld LBK groups very
probable: this is new information on absolute chro-
nology. The new dates for the latest Körös and early
Alföld LBK (Szatmar II) period show a definite over-
lap (Whittle et al. 2002; Domboroczki 2003), thus
making direct contacts possible in this part of East-
ern Hungary.
In sum: on the Northern fringes of the Alföld there
are three regions where the phases of the Neolithic
transition have been cursorily examined. In the north-
western part: at Jaszsag, there is direct evidence for
late Mesolithic groups, but contact with the Körös
culture has remained hypothetical as yet. In the Up-
per Tisza region, where the Alföld meets the Matra
and Biikk Mountains, traces of a dyna-
mic Körös expansion have been ob-
served. According to recent data, no
considerable Mesolithic participation
formed the early Neolithic in this re-
gion. The forager groups may have
withdrawn into the highlands, contac-
ting LBK groups only in their devel-
oped phases - a working hypothesis
which requires further research. On
the North-Eastern fringe of the Alföld,
the existence of a Mesolithic popula-
tion could be partly shown by data
from the natural sciences (i.e. by an-
thropogenic impacts), and partly by
flint assemblages from different sites.
Direct contact with early Neolithic
tribes is probable, yet this still lacks
direct evidence. In this case, the ear-
liest Neolithic impact consisted much more of the
eastern, Cri§ branch of Körös culture, rather than its
Alföld variant. According to recent research, the three
areas mentioned here constitute three variants of the
Neolithisation process.
Preneolithic Period in Transdanubia (Figure 4.)
In case the existence of any pre-Neolithic (i.e. late
Mesolithic) hunter-gatherer groups are assumed in
Transdanubia, then these groups definitely had to
face wholly new ecological circumstances in the mid-
centuries of the 6th Millennium BC. In some periods,
Lake Balaton split into two or three smaller lakes,
with clear, cold water; when the climate turned war-
mer and wetter, natural dams were breached and
even the northern Tapolca Basin and valleys south
of the lake also became part of the lake. During these
periods, the lake flooded the north to south valleys,
to its south down to the Kapos River, occasionally as
far as the Drava valley (Cserny 1999). At these times
the Sarret bog, somewhat east of Lake Balaton be-
came a one-meter-deep lake (Juhasz, Sümegi, Zaty-
ko 2006, in press; Banffy, Juhasz, Sümegi, in press).
The water level of the lake was fairly low at the end
of the Mesolithic, rising significantly around 5500-
5400 calBC. The wetter climate and the rise in the
water level meant that lake shore inhabitants were
forced to move away from the lowest stream shores
and river terraces, and to follow the growing water
level along the shores of Lake Balaton (see also: Ju-
hasz, Sümegi, Zatyko 2006, in press). Despite the
lack of well researched Mesolithic sites in the region,
their presence in Transdanubia is partly reflected by
some evidence. Such a hint is the registration of pre-
Fig. 4. The Balaton region in Transdanubia. a) preneolithic sites;
b) Starčevo sites; c) earliest LBK site, d) prehistoric flint mine.
Neolithic forest burning. Traces of this activity were
observed at Szentgyörgyvölgy, near the Pityerdomb
site. The soil samples taken from the waterlogged,
marshy banks of the Szentgyörgy stream flowing by
the site indicated intentional forest burning around
8771 BP (7936-7821 cal BC) (Cserny, Nagy-Bodor
2006). The burnt organic matter and the low level
of erosion in the area suggest that forest burning
was repeated fairly often, about every 15-30 years.
This phenomenon is also shown in pollen data (Med-
zihradszky 2001; Füzes 1989; Zolyomi 1980; Nagy-
Bodor 1988; Juhasz 2002). The pollen profiles for
the Balaton Basin and the marshland of the Little
Balaton region indicate that there was a sudden in-
crease of hazel in the mid-6th century BC, and that
over one-half, 55 per cent of the ligneous species,
was hazel around 5600 calBC, i.e. in the period im-
mediately preceding the LBK (Juhasz 2002, see also
Juhasz, Sümegi, Zatyko 2006, in press). Botanical
analyses have shown that south-western Transdanu-
bia was a hazel refugium during the last glaciation,
and that it spread to other parts of the Carpathian
Basin from this area. Still, the sudden, large-scale ex-
pansion of the species can hardly be explained with-
out assuming active human manipulation of the en-
vironment (Banffy, Juhasz, Sümegi in press). It
seems likely that the growth of hazel was encour-
aged by forest clearance, by the creation of small
clearings where this warmth-loving species yielding
storable fruit with a high nutritional value could
thrive. A comparison of the frequencies of hazel and
cereals in the pollen diagrams is most instructive:
the two are inversely proportional. The increase of
cereal pollens is accompanied by a decline of hazel
in the sediments. As a further hint of a Mesolithic
presence, there was a pre-Neolithic boat find near
Keszthely, which was no doubt used when the shore-
line ran in that area, presumably still in the Mesoli-
thic (Bakay, Kalicz, Sagi 1966.76). As evidence clo-
ser to archaeology, microlithic trapezes and other
types of the late Mesolithic tool-kit, collected during
field surveys, have long been known from Transda-
nubia. Their dating, based on their typological traits,
has never been challenged (Meszaros 1948; Pusztai
1957; Dobosi 1972; Biro 1991). Most recently, a
thorough excavation was begun at the Regöly Meso-
lithic site, south of Lake Balaton. The preliminary re-
sults have yielded a great amount of stratified lithic
instruments, although intact settlement features have
not been found yet (Eichmann, Kertesz, Marton, in
press). The Kapos valley and the Vazsony basin, lying
north of Lake Balaton near the Szentgal mine, are
especially rich in finds of this type. The stone tools
examined to date were almost all made from red ra-
diolarite from the Bakony Mountains. Most recently,
a new project has the task of investigating some es-
pecially promising sites south of Lake Balaton, and
to clarify the late Mesolithic-Starčevo interaction and
LBK cultural development by excavation.3
The process of Neolithisation in Western Trans-
danubia
Recent research into the Neolithic of Western Trans-
danubia and the findings of three micro-regional re-
search projects made it more than probable that
western Transdanubia and the Balaton region were
part of a frontier zone in the mid-6th millennium BC,
the setting of the long interaction between indige-
nous hunter-gatherer groups and immigrant Starče-
vo communities from the south.
The probably already existing late Mesolithic horti-
culture (see above) was expanded with the cultiva-
tion of domestic plants after contact with Starčevo
groups (Berzsenyi, Dalnoki 2006), and indigenous
people also began to copy the immigrants' vessels.
The result of the interaction between the two groups
was the emergence of a genetically mixed population
that soon colonized northern Transdanubia along
the Marcal, Raba and Danube valleys, and later mi-
grated farther along the Danube to eastern Austria,
south-western Slovakia, southern Moravia and the
heartland of Central Europe, where they played an
active role in the transplantation of a sedentary,
food-producing lifestyle.
Adaptation to the changed circumstances was both
an option and a bitter necessity for each. The adap-
tation to the cool and wet Alpine-Atlantic climate of
Transdanubia, with is heavy snows in winter, must
have posed a serious challenge to the Balkan immi-
grants. Pityerdomb, Andrashida, and perhaps Brunn
II near Vienna, finds from which are rooted in the
Starčevo tradition, indicate that they were capable
of adapting (Banffy 2004; Simon 2002; Stadler
2005). On the other hand, a few Starčevo groups
also settled in the marshland around Lake Balaton
and on islets in the marshland, in an environment
that meant a similar challenge for farmers of south-
ern origin. The settlements at Gellenhaza, Vörs-Ma-
riaasszonysziget, Balatonlelle, and Tihany-Apati re-
3 The Kapos and Koppany valleys in southern Transdanubia are the primary targeted areas. Participators in the program (2006-
2009): E. Banffy, T. Marton, K. Oross, R. Kustar.
flect this different type of adaptation (Simon 1994;
1996; Kalicz, Virag, Biro 1998; Kalicz, Biro, Virag
2002; Regenye 2006, in press; Biro 2006).
It follows from the rise of the Balaton water level
that the one-time late Mesolithic settlements along
the lakeshore are now all submerged. A closer look
at the location of the plentiful early Neolithic sites
around the lake reveals that they lie directly along
the changed shoreline of the period, when the water
level was higher than the present one, in the marsh-
land or on islets in the marshland (Fig. 5). This settle-
ment pattern broadly corresponds to the Mesolithic
one. These settlements all lay in close proximity to
the water, in areas that were unsuited to agriculture.
It is therefore possible that the majority of the settle-
ments lying directly on the shore in the marshland
had in fact been occupied by adapting Mesolithic
hunter-fisher communities and those smaller groups
of Balkan immigrants chose to settle in this area un-
der their influence. If this was the case, it also implies
that relations between the Starčevo groups and the
indigenous population were essentially peaceful.
In spite of the fact that the settlements lay in an en-
vironment that was unsuited to cultivation, macro-
botanical finds from the earliest phase indicate a
surprising variety of species. As to the samples from
Pityerdomb, the number of remains was low for each
species, never exceeding twenty specimens (Ber-
zsenyi, Dalnoki 2006). The surprising variety (ein-
korn, spelt, common wheat, barley and edible goose-
foot), but low number of cereal grains would suggest
that the extent of cultivation in western Transdanu-
bia and the Balaton region did not exceed that of
Mesolithic horticulture - the range of plants cultiva-
ted and tended in the open areas between the hou-
ses and in the narrow zone along the shore was sim-
ply broadened with the species adopted from the
Starčevo communities, together with the art of culti-
vation. Thus, in the formative Neolithic phase, do-
mesticated plants may not yet have become the basis
of subsistence; instead, they seem to have been a
complementary source.
Mesolithic impact may well be assumed in early archi-
tecture. In the northern and western Starčevo distri-
bution, new features appear which already form a link
to LBK buildings. In spite of the lack of houses on the
Starčevo sites in Transdanubia, the presence of burnt
daub fragments suggest that these communities lived
in small- or medium-size houses (Kalicz 199387).
Fig. 5. The Western Balaton region (satellite photo) indicating the ancient shorelines and the earliest LBK
sites along.
In the earliest phase, early Central European LBK
houses were single roomed, with a southern and
northern part added at some later date. Extramural
activates were performed in pits, many of which had
some sort of protective roofing, especially in the
northern part. These phenomena can primarily be
explained by the climate, with cultural traditions
playing a secondary role only. It would appear that
the central section of the Central European Linear
Pottery houses evolved first. Timber played an in-
creasingly important role in the construction of these
buildings. The size of the two houses excavated at
Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb (Bänffy 2000b; 2004),
the combined use of timber and clay, and the north-
ern orientation appear to have been adopted from
the pre-Linear Pottery period. The long pits flanking
the longitudinal walls are first documented at this
site. We may therefore assume that both Mesolithic
and Starčevo influences played a role in the emer-
gence of Linear Pottery houses, as did the environ-
ment and climate.
Contacts can also be analysed by examining early
pottery in Transdanubia. Significant differences can
be noted between the pottery assemblages from the
late Starčevo settlements in western Transdanubia
and the Balaton region, and those from southern
Transdanubian and more southerly sites. This diffe-
rence, reflected in the finds from Szentgyörgyvölgy-
Pityerdomb and a number of other settlements, can
most likely be attributed to the cultural impact of
indigenous hunter-gatherer groups (Simon 1996;
2002; Bänffy 2004).
The examination and interpretation of cult finds
leads to a similar conclusion (Bänffy 2005). The ap-
pearance of the cult objects of the South-East Euro-
pean Neolithic in transitional assemblages, such as
the one from Pityerdomb, and, later, of their copies,
again indicates some form of interaction between
the two populations. There was no trace of the rich
diversity of the Early Neolithic statuary of the Bal-
kans either at Pityerdomb. This would suggest that
some of the cult paraphernalia were adopted and
used by the formative Linear Pottery communities,
while others were discarded. Neither can we reject
the possibility that certain elements of the cult in-
ventory were adopted or copied for prestige reasons,
as in the case of other Neolithic innovations, perhaps
as the reflection of an incipient social ranking in
these indigenous communities. It is my belief that the
local copies of cult objects and the drastic decline in
statuary can be explained by the cultural impact of
indigenous hunter-gatherer groups in the mixed po-
pulation forming the early Linear Pottery communi-
ties.
The survival of the Mesolithic lifestyle in the transi-
tional period can also be traced in the chipped stone
inventory. The rich lithic assemblage found near Vö-
röstö and Mencshely, two Linear Pottery sites in the
Vazsony basin by the northern shore of Lake Bala-
ton, is in the late Mesolithic Tardenoisien microlithic
tradition. A closer examination of the stone artefacts
reveal traces of sickle gloss on a few samples. There
are two possible explanations: the sickle gloss can
be attributed to their use in Mesolithic horticulture,
or the lithics came from an early Linear Pottery set-
tlement preceding the occupation in the classical
phase (Biro 2001; 2002b). An interesting observa-
tion is that the disappearance of this tool-kit coin-
cided with changes in settlement patterns and sub-
sistence at the beginning of the developed Transda-
nubian LBK, the Keszthely phase - the very period
when the occupants of the Transdanubian settle-
ments began to use the more simple range of tools
generally characterizing Linear Pottery cultures, re-
stricted to sickle blades and a few other types (Biro
1991; 2001; 2002a; 2002b).
The indigenous Mesolithic groups were clearly part of
the mobile hunter-fisher-gatherer population whose
stone tools and other remains have been found in
the Vazsony basin in the Balaton Uplands, in the Lit-
tle Balaton region, and in the Szentgyörgyvölgy area.
The interaction between the two populations prob-
ably meant that the two distinct lifestyles and sets of
values acted as a stimulus, while their mutual re-
liance on each other no doubt contributed to mini-
malizing conflicts, promoting peaceful co-existence,
or even the joint occupation of settlements.
This long-running process of gradual change suggests
that the statement that the so-called "Neolithic revo-
lution" i.e. the radical change in subsistence did not
happen in the initial phases of the West Transdanu-
bian Neolithic, but one phase later. In Transdanubia
the major change in lifestyles and subsistence pat-
terns occurred not at the beginning of the Neolithic,
as earlier believed, but some three or four genera-
tions later.
The problems of Neolithisation in Eastern and
Northern Transdanubia (Figure 6)
Among the fairly intensive LBK sites from County
Fejer, North-Eastern Transdanubia (Makkay 1970;
1978), the fairly intensive presence of only the deve-
loped phases can be confirmed. Among these, the
Bicske site is the only exception dated to the older
phase. It was named as the eponymous site for the
older Transdanubian LBK by Makkay. However, it
seems that it may not represent the initial, oldest
phase of the culture (Bänffy, Oross in press). There
are several regions in Transdanubia where both the
oldest, Sarmellek-Pityerdomb typed pottery, and also
the slightly later Bicske typed pottery, are present.
First, the possibility had to be maintained that this
phenomenon may well be treated as a geographical
difference, since there has not been abundant data
for assuming the opposite. In north-eastern Transda-
nubia, for decades the Bicske typed material had
been the only representative of the old LBK, before
a new site was excavated in by Kalicz-Schreiber and
Kalicz (Kalicz-Schreiber, Kalicz 1992; Kalicz, Ka-
licz-Schreiber 2002). Budapest-Aranyhegyi Road,
lying in the marshy plain of the Danube bank in
Aquincum, northern Buda. It was dated to the older
LBK phase. Interestingly enough, older LBK sites did
not grow with time and increasing research inten-
sity. The topographic description of the region of
Esztergom and Dorog (north-west of Budapest) con-
tains no hints of LBK sherds that could be dated to
the older phase (Horvath, Kelemen, Torma 1979).
As we shall see, along the northern banks of the ri-
ver i.e. in South-western Slovakia, the situation is
the same. Pavuk himself was unable to present sites
of this type either along the Danube, or in the Csal-
loköz area on his most recent, 1994 map (Pavuk
1994.147). The reason for this hiatus
remains enigmatic. The contacts of the
Linear Pottery sites in the Burgenland
and Lower Austria with Transdanubia
suggest that the main route of migra-
tion led through the Danube valley.
It is to be hoped that future investiga-
tions will resolve this issue.
In connection with these observa-
tions, Pavuk's hypothesis of Neolithi-
sation in South-western Slovakia is
worth mentioning. These views, es-
sentially unchanged for long deca-
des,4 can be rejected on the basis of
the following arguments. While ac-
cepting J. Lichardus' earlier "proto-Li-
nienbandkeramik" theory (Lichardus
1972), Pavuk made two claims (Pa-
vuk 1962; 1972; 1980a; 1980b; 1994).
The first of these was that Linear Pot-
tery society and lifestyle developed in south-eastern
Slovakia. The other, the more bizarre aspect of his
thesis, concerned the date of the emergence of Li-
near Pottery. Pavuk dissociated Linear Pottery deve-
lopment from the cultural and ethnic influence of the
Balkans, both in the Great Hungarian Plain and in
Transdanubia, the latter being the more interesting
of the two areas, owing to its proximity to Slovakia.
In his opinion, the transition and the first use of pot-
tery were not only entirely independent of the Kö-
ros-Starčevo culture and its possible effects on the
Nitra Basin, but actually began much earlier than the
generally accepted late Starčevo period, namely, in
the period corresponding to the early/classic Starče-
vo phase. Pavuk attributed the undeniable similari-
ties between late Starčevo and Linear Pottery to the
later, southern expansion of groups from the Nitra
Basin, during the course of which the Linear Pottery
groups interacted with the Starčevo communities of
the Spiraloid B phase in Transdanubia. He distin-
guished four sub-phases in the early Linear Pottery
phase of western Slovakia - the Nitra, the Hurbano-
vo, the Bina and the Milanovce phases - in order to
demonstrate the complexity and long duration of the
process (Pavuk 1980a.40-47). This categorization is
uncertain and controversial, to say the least, since it
is based exclusively on the manufacturing technique
and the (rather rare) ornamental motifs of the pot-
tery. Only at Bina were fine, biconical wares found;
the pottery from the other sites is dominated by
thick-walled household pottery.
Fig. 6. North-Eastern Transdanubia with the adjacent Gödöllo hills
and Jaszsag region to the east with early LBK sites mentioned.
4 Most recently in Zvelebil M., Lukes A. (eds.), LBK dialogues. Oxford 2004.
It is very difficult, if not downright impossible to set
up a finer typological classification and to distinguish
chronological horizons on the basis of coarse pot-
tery, a handful of mostly surface finds.5 Most of the
pottery in question was admittedly recovered from
smaller soundings and a handful of pits uncovered
during small-scale excavations; very few represent
closed assemblages and the "Hurbanovo phase" is ex-
clusively based on a few surface finds. The Nitra type
pottery can best be linked to the early Linear Pottery
in the Balaton region; indeed: the absence fine wares
and ornamentation can also be observed in assem-
blages of the type found in several sites, e.g. Sarmel-
lek, Revfülöp, Balatonszepezd, Tapolca-Plebaniakert
(Bänffy 2004.334-344). The Nitra Basin groups were
unlikely to have invented pottery making on their
own; a more likely possibility is that they adopted
this innovation together with other elements of the
Neolithic package from groups on the fringes of the
Starčevo distribution, or rather from those groups
born from the (intermarriage) mixing of southern
immigrants and indigenous groups. It would seem
that as a result of the cultural influences affecting
Transdanubia, the indigenous groups inhabiting the
northern part of the Little Hungarian Plain, too, tried
their hand at pottery making.
In a recent study, Petrasch (2001) examined the pro-
blem of the Linear Pottery 'homeland' from a demo-
graphically. According to his estimates, northern
Transdanubia, south-west Slovakia, the Burgenland
and Lower Austria, could at the most have had a po-
pulation of five thousand at the dawn of the Neoli-
thic. Petrasch concluded that this region was more
probably the first stop in the Linear Pottery expan-
sion, rather than its point of departure. He also no-
ted that Linear Pottery probably evolved in the Zala
and Bakony region and the southern part of the area
around Lake Ferto, i.e. western Transdanubia (Pe-
trasch 2001.17).
Most recently, it occurred also east of the Danube
that assemblages very similar to those from Buda-
pest-Aranyhegyi Road have been found. Apart from
very dense settelment in the developed LBK phases,
the site at Galgaheviz contained pottery fragments
of the oldest LBK phase (Kalicz, Kalicz-Schreiber
2002.29-30). Similarly, the oldest LBK vessel profile
comes from Ipolydamasd, unfortunately a surface
find (Torma 1993.111, site 9/4 and Pl. 1). Even with
the help of these scattered finds it is not possible to
answer questions about Neolithisation in north-east
Transdanubia. These data, on the contrary, raise
some new questions about the hypothetical contacts
of Transdanubian LBK and the Late Mesolithic/Early
Neolithic of the Jaszsag area, and also possible con-
nections to the Szatmar II group, i.e. the earliest LBK
in the Matra-Bükk fringes of the Alföld.
When contrasting this peculiar phenomenon to the
intensive Körös occupation of the Southern part of
the Duna-Tisza heartland, which suddenly stopped
south of the Jaszsag, a very new model of various
Neolithisation types start to form. Certainly, much
more data will be necessary even to make the ques-
tions more adequate, not to speak of the answers.
The possible causes of the differences
The first and most adequate answer for the different
modes of Neolithic transition, in other words, Neoli-
thisation models within a rather small geographical
area, could be found in the different ratios and com-
munication with local tribes (Fig. 7). There are two
regions, the Drava Valley and the fringes of the Al-
föld at the Bükk-Matra Mountains, where intensive
Southern immigration dominated over the possible
indigenous population, whose participation in the
Neolithic package was weak. The Jaszsag area repre-
sents the other pole, according to our present know-
ledge. Here the indigenous groups are clearly pre-
sent, but it seems that the real Körös sites, as well
as transitional settlements that could represent con-
tacts between the groups of different subsistence, are
scarcely present. We found two regions: Western
Transdanubia, including Lake Balaton and the north-
eastern edge of the Alföld (the Nyirseg), where it is
highly probable that indigenous foragers came into
contact with Starčevo groups in the first case, and
Cri§ groups, in the second case. There are no real
ideas as yet about the Neolithisation process in the
north-eastern Transdanubian and the Budapest area,
including the problem that the sporadic earliest
Transdanubian (Central European) LBK sites are geo-
graphically very close to the Jaszsag, but this only
compounds the problem. The second type of answer
should be sought in the ecological barrier hypothesis
(Sümegi, Kertesz 2001, Sümegi, Kertesz, Hertelen-
di 2002). In spite of the total misunderstanding va-
luations of this idea (Makkay 2003.34-37), this hy-
5 In contrast to the few dozen sherds categorized by Pavuk, Ottö Trogmayer examined tens of thousands of pottery fragments and
was still unable to establish the internal chronology of the Körös culture (Trogmayer 1968). The lack of an internal chronology
for the Körös culture is one of the great debts of Hungarian prehistoric research. M. Cladders' analyses of Linear Pottery wares yiel-
ded a similar result: in her opinion the differences can be traced to regional, rather than chronological differences (Cladders 1995).
pothesis about a Central European Agro-Ecological
Barrier (CEB AEB) is not a frontier dividing the two
groups of different subsistence modes from each
other. On the contrary, this barrier means that the
climatic situation would make the migration of Bal-
kan farmers increasingly slower, until reaching an
area in which for some species of the Neolithic pack-
age, including floral and faunal elements, it became
hard or impossible to survive. Such species could be
e.g. caprinae (sheep and goat) in the Western Trans-
danubian Atlantic climate, where in the wet winters,
with high and long-lasting snow; short-legged ani-
mals would sink into the snow, dying before the
spring of pneumonia and other disease. This all
means that people who migrated from the South
would have had to stop or move north or west much
more slowly than earlier. This is the negative im-
pulse. The ecological barrier also has a positive im-
pact on the Neolithisation process. This lies in the
longer time spent in one area, thus making it pos-
sible for small indigenous to come into closer per-
sonal, cultural and exchange contacts with the new-
comers. A typical area for this longer-lasting process
is the Balaton region, where co-existence is shown by
several direct and indirect archeological and other
evidence (Banffy 2000b; 2004; 2005).
A further, significant difference in the Neolithic tran-
sition can be observed between the two major re-
gions, the Transdanubian and the East Hungarian,
Alföld area. This difference can be more easily ob-
served when examining their persistence in the Mid-
dle Neolithic, which was caused by divergent modes
of Neolithisation. During the whole life of the LBK,
the distribution area remained roughly the same in
Fig. 7. Key areas of studying the neolithic transition within Hun-
gary. Regions marked in yellow: stronger Koros/Starčevo impact;
regions marked in blue: stronger Pre-Neolithic impact.
the East, with no extension during the developed
phases: from the Tisza to the Körös River regions
and the Partium. The process in Transdanubia was
just the opposite. Within a few generations, 80-120
years, the Transdanubian early LBK groups, i.e. a ge-
netic and cultural mixture of indigenous foragers and
Balkan farmers, had occupied a vast area covering a
major part of Europe between the Paris Basin and
south-east Poland. There must be diverse strategies
hidden behind these major differences.
The eastern group chose an inceasingly intense set-
tlement pattern, and agriculture that led to the for-
mations of real tell settlements. This process must
have happened together with an intensifying social
stratification, hereditary social ranking, the inten-
sive development of symbols and ritual life, and pra-
ctically with the formation of a pre-urban society
very similar to the Near Eastern model. Not unimpor-
tantly, it shows considerably more complexity than
the economy of the previous periods. Agriculture,
stock breeding played the main role, and, according
to the social rank that must have been formulated
by the Late Neolithic, all these activities must have
been organised to a formerly unknown level.
The Alföld Linear pottery groups had every opportu-
nity to exploit their rich soils and they were also in
a position to develop intensive exchange relation-
ships with their eastern neighbours. In other words,
they were able to keep their settlements flourishing
without migrations. This could be a prime reason for
intensive internal expansion and social development
without any changes in the Alföld distribution area.
Thus, the Alföld region may have had the function of
a "central site" from the Middle to the
Late Neolithic. Nevertheless, this pro-
cess seems to have had an end in its
gestation stage (Banffy 2002). The up-
permost layers on numerous tell settle-
ments show clearly how the mounds
were abandoned at the dawn of the
Copper Age (roughly around 4400 BC).
In Transdanubia, the keys to finding a
reason behind the rapid distribution
of the Western LBK are probably long-
distance exchange and cultural con-
tact. The causes behind the expansion
and the survival of the contact net-
works may have been based on simi-
lar reasons, but the position of Trans-
danubia was determined by the lack
of the Alföld conditions on the one
hand, some pressing contingencies and waves of mi-
gration on the other.
The expansion into the heartland of Central Europe
was so rapid that it left no typological differences in
the archaeological record (Quitta 1960; 1971), nor
can the successive phases be pinpointed with radio-
carbon dates (Gläser 1991; Lenneis, Stadler, Windl
1996; Bänffy, Oross in press). One obvious explana-
tion was to invoke rapid population growth for this
swift expansion, based on the examples from the an-
cient Near East. In his quoted study on the demogra-
phic data for the Early Neolithic, Petrasch shattered
any illusions about this theory, arguing that early
LBK population growth could have been no more
than 0.1 per cent (Petrasch 2001.18).
Another probable explanation is offered by Anthony,
when he writes of some positive triggers for migra-
tion, such as low population density, fertile soil, pro-
ximity to water, good climate etc. (Anthony 1992.
898). 'Push' forces, such as over-population or clima-
tic deterioration, can be rejected in the case of the
LBK expansion. In contrast, there is evidence for
each of the "pull" forces. If exchange relations can
also be created and maintained, an area of this type
usually attracts settlers. "Migration is a social strat-
egy" (Anthony 1997.22). Justifying this idea, the evi-
dence for communication and contact networks be-
tween Transdanubia and the regions to its northwest
can be reflected e.g. in the presence of Szentgal ra-
diolarite in Moravia, and in Germany, being only mo-
dest indications of these networks in the archaeolo-
gical records. Since there had to be a mutual interest
forming the basis of these contact relations, the pre-
historian would search for something the early Trans-
danubian farmers could be in need of, since north of
Bosnia there is no source of salt in the whole region
(Tasić 2000.39). This is not to say that the commo-
dity in return may not have been salt. This idea oc-
curs when examining the Bad Nauheim-Niedermör-
len settlement north of Frankfurt/Main (Schade-Lin-
dig 2002a; 2002b). The finds from this site reflected
surprisingly strong ties with Transdanubia. Bad Nau-
heim lies in an area rich in salt. Saile argues for the
early Neolithic exploitation of salt mines in Westpha-
lia and Lower Saxony (Saile 2001. 150-151). It is
therefore possible that this easily transportable and
valuable commodity, essential to diet, for food pre-
servation, and for animal husbandry, was exchanged
for various articles from the Danube valley.
One could certainly object that the rich salt area at
Hallstatt near Salzburg in the Upper Austrian region
lies much closer. However, the distribution of Early
Neolithic sites indicates that the migration route
led along the northern Danube bank, through the
Munich basin to southwest Germany. In this way,
the salt mines in Hallstatt were unknown and can
thus be rejected as a possible source. LBK communi-
ties of Transdanubia sought to acquire salt from re-
gions with which they were familiar, in part as a re-
sult of their pre-Neolithic contacts, and in part from
the knowledge acquired during their primary migra-
tions - in other words, from the northwest. This pro-
bably enhanced the importance of the Wetterau and
Aldenhoven region.
In spite of the many differences, some similarity can
also be noted between Neolithization in Transdanu-
bia and the Upper Tisza region. It has been repeat-
edly noted that riverside settlements in the area be-
tween the Great Hungarian Plain and the mountai-
nous region to its north acted as a kind of 'market-
place' for the interaction: the possible co-existence
and mixing of groups with different lifestyles during
different periods of the Neolithic and the Copper Age
in Hungary (Kalicz 1994; Raczky et al. 1994; Bänffy
1999). In this respect the northern Alföld fringes re-
semble western Transdanubia and the Balaton re-
gion, where interaction between different groups
was stimulated by the trade in Szentgal radiolarite.
In the Northern Mountain Range, the most valuable
raw materials were limnoquartzite from the Matra
Mountains and obsidian from Tokaj. The stone tools
found on early Alföld Linear Pottery sites and also
on Körös sites were predominantly manufactured
from these two rocks (Kalicz-Makkay 1976.23; Star-
nini 1994; 2000; 2001; Biro 2001; 2002b; Maxim
1999). If we accept the Mesolithic presence in the
mountains, it is not to exclude the possibility that
these precious raw material sources were controlled
by these groups both in Transdanubia and in the
Northern Mountain Range, and that the main cause
and incentive for the interaction was the trade in
these lithics. The indigenous groups presumably re-
ceived Neolithic technologies in exchange for the li-
thic raw material in the Great Hungarian Plain, too,
similarly to the situation assumed for Transdanubia.
In this sketch of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition
and early Neolithic formations, which appeared so
differently in small regions within Eastern and West-
ern Hungary, it seems that working hypotheses with
question marks are more numerous than answers.
Nevertheless, beforehand there were hardly any que-
stions put. This stage is, in my opinion, a step for-
ward that reflects the present state of research.
REFERENCES
ANTHONY D. W. 1992. Migration in archaeology: the baby
and the bathwater. American Anthropologist92/4:895-
914.
1997. Prehistoric migration as social process. In J.
Chapman, H. Hamerow (eds), Migrations and Inva-
sions in Archaeological Explanation. British Archaeo-
logical Reports S664. Oxford: 21-32.
BÄCSKAY E. 1976. Early Neolithic Chipped Stone Imple-
ments in Hungary. Dissertationes Archaelogicae 4. Bu-
dapest.
1982. A magyar holocenstratigrafia regeszeti dokumen-
tacios pontjai a Dunantulon. (Archaeological documen-
tary sites of Hungarian holocene stratigraphy in Trans-
danubia). A Magyar Allami Földtani Intezet jelentese
az evrol (Annual Report of the Geological Institute
for the year) 1980:543-552.
BÄCSKAY E., BIRO K. 1983. Kötelek-Huszarsarok 8. gödör
köeszköz-anyaga (Questions on the transition between the
early and middle neolithic in the Middle and Upper Tisza
region. Appendix. The lithic material). Archaeologiai er-
tesito 110:192.
BAKAY K., KALICZ N., SÄGI K. 1966. Magyarorszag rege-
szeti topografiaja (Archaeological Topography of Hun-
gary) 1. A keszthelyi es a tapolcai jaras. (The Keszthely
and the Tapolca district). Budapest.
BÄNFFY E., BIRO K., VADAY A. 1997. Üjkökori es rezkori
telepnyomok Kompolt 15. sz. lelöhelyen (Neolithic and
Chalcolithic finds from Kompolt, site Nr. 15). Agria 23:
19-57.
BÄNFFY E. 1999. Üjkökor, rezkor (Neolithic and Chalco-
lithic). In Vaday A., Banffy E., Bartosiewicz L., Biro K., Go-
galtan F., Horvath F., Nagy A. (eds.), Kompolt-Kister: uj-
kokori telep. Ujkokori, bronzkori, szarmata es avar le-
lohely. Leletmento asatas az M3 nyomvonalan (A Neo-
lithic, Bronze age, Sarmatian and Avar site. Rescue ex-
cavation at the M3 motorway). Eger: 13-170.
2000a. Szilväsvärad-Töröksanc. A Bükki-kultura leletei
(Szilväsvärad-Töröksanc. Finds of the Bükk culture).
Agria 35: 85-92.
2000b. The late Starčevo and the earliest Linear Pottery
groups in Western Transdanubia. In M. Budja (ed.), 7th
Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica 27:173-
185.
2002. A stuck process: urbanisation in the Carpathian
Basin. In K. Jones-Bley, D. G. Zdanovich (eds.), Com-
plex Societies of Central Eurasia from the 3rd to the
1st Millennium BC. Regional specifics in light of glo-
bal models. JIES monograph 45. Washington D.C.:
492-503.
2004.	The 6th Millennium BC boundary in Western
Transdanubia and its role in the Central European
transition (The Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb settle-
ment). Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 15.
2005.	Mesolithic - neolithic contacts, as reflected in ri-
tual finds. In M. Budja (ed.), 12th Neolithic Studies.
Documenta Praehistorica 32: 77-86.
BÄNFFY E., OROSS K. in press. The "oldest" and the "older"
phase of the LBK in Transdanubia. Römische-Germani-
schen Zentralmuseums Mainz Tagungen, Band 2. Mainz.
BÄNFFY E., JUHÄSZ I., SÜMEGI P. in press. A prelude to
the Neolithic in the Balaton region - new results to an old
problem. In Atti della Societaper la Preistoria e Proto-
storia della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, XVI.
BERZSENYI B., DÄLNOKI O. 2006. Archaeobotanikai vizs-
galatok - a Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb (Zala megye)
neolit koru lelöhely földmintainak elemzese (Archaeobo-
tanical investigations of the soil samples from the neoli-
thic site Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityerdomb, County Zala). In E.
Banffy (ed.), Archaeology and Settlement History in the
Kerka Valley, South-West Hungary. Antaeus 28:261-270.
BIRO K. 1991. Mencshely-Murvagödrök köanyaga (The
lithic assemblage from Mencshely-Murvagödrök). Tapolca
VMK 2: 51-60.
2001. Lithic materials from the Early Neolithic in Hun-
gary. In R. Kertesz and J. Makkay (eds.), From the Meso-
lithic to the Neolithic. Proceedings of the International
Archaeological Conference held in Szolnok 1996. Ar-
chaeolingua 11: 89-100.
2002a. Balatonalmadi-Vörösbereny - Lithic material
in the Transdanubian LBC site. In E. Banffy (ed.), Pre-
historic Studies. In memoriam I. Bognar-Kutzian.
Antaeus 25:119-168.
2002b. Advances in the study of early neolithic lithic
materials in Hungary. In E. Banffy (ed.), Prehistoric
Studies. In memoriam I. Bognar-Kutzian. Antaeus
25: 237-241.
2006.	in press. Üjabb adatok a Starčevo-kultura köanya-
gahoz: Tihany-Apati. New data to the lithic material of
the Starčevo culture: Tihany-Apati. Ösregeszeti Levelek
- Prehistoric Newsletter 7.
DOBOSI V. 1972. Mesolithische Fundorte in Ungarn - Me-
zolithikus lelöhelyek Magyarorszagon. In J. Fitz (ed.), Ak-
tuelle Fragen der Bandkeramik. Akten der Pannonia
Konferenzen 1: 39-60.
CLADDERS M. 1995. Die Tonware der ältesten Bandkera-
mik. Unterschung zur zeitlichen und räumlichen Gliede-
rung. PhD dissertation, University of Frankfurt/Main 1995.
CSENGERI P. 2003 (2001). Adatok a Bükki-kultura kera-
miamuvessegenek ismeretehez. A Felsövadasz-vardombi
települes leletanyaga (Data to the pottery of the Bükk cul-
ture archaeological finds from the settlement at Felsova-
dasz-Vardomb). Hermann Otto Muzeum Evkönyve 40:
73-105.
2004.	Adatok a Cserehat öskori települestörtenetehez
(Data to the prehitoric settlements of the Cserehat). In
E. Nagy, J. Dani and Zs. Hajdu (eds.), MQMOSII. De-
brecen: 43- 59.
CSERNY T. 1999. Environmental geological investigations
of Lake Balaton (Hungary). A Magyar Ällami Földtani In-
tezet jelentese az evrol. Annual Report of the Geological
Institute for the year 1992-93:131-137.
CSERNY T., NAGY-BODOR E. 2006. Geological-palynologi-
cal research at the fothills of Alps. In E. Banffy (ed.), Ar-
chaeology and Settlement History in the Kerka Valley,
South-West Hungary. Antaeus 28:155-174.
DOMBOROCZKI L. 1996. The excavation at Füzesabony-
Gubakut. Preliminary report. In R. Kertesz, J. Makkay
(eds.), From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Proceedings
of the International Archaeological Conference held in the
Damjanich Museum of Szolnok, Sept. 22-27, 1996. Arheo-
lingua 11. Budapest: 193-214.
1997. Füzesabony-Gubakut. Üjkökori falu a Kr. e. VI.
evezredbol (Neolithic village from the 6th Millennium
B.C.) In P. Raczky, T. Kovacs, A. Anders (eds.), Utak a
multba. Az M3-as autopalya regeszeti leletmentesei.
Paths into the Past. Rescue excavations on the M3
Motorway. Budapest: 19-25.
2001. Települesszerkezeti sajatossagok a közepsö neo-
litikum idöszakaböl, Heves megye területeröl (Charac-
teristics of settlement patterns in the middle phase of
the New Stone Age from the area of Heves County. In
MQMOS I. Debrecen: 67-94.
2003. The radiocarbon data from Neolithic archaeolo-
gical sites in Heves County (North-Eastern Hungary).
Agria 39: 5-76.
2005.	A Körös-kultura eszaki elterjedesi hataranak pro-
blematikaja a Tiszaszölös-Domahaza-pusztan vegzett
asatas eredmenyeinek fenyeben (The problem of the
Northern extension of the Körös culture in the light of
the excavation results from Tiszaszölös-Domahaza. Ar-
chaeometry Workshop, e-journal published by the Hun-
garian National Museum 2005(2). On-line www.ace.hu
EICHMANN W. J., KERTESZ R., MARTON T. in press. Meso-
lithic in the LBK heartland of Western Hungary. Römische-
Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz Tagungen, Band 2.
Mainz.
FÜZES M. 1989. A földmiveles kezdeti szakaszanak (neo-
litikum es rezkor) növenyleletei Magyarorszagon. (Archeo-
botanikai vazlat) Die Pflanzenfunden in Ungarn der an-
fänglichen Entwicklungsphase des Ackerbaues (Neolithi-
kum und Kupferzeit) Archäobotanische Skizze. Tapolca
VMK 1: 139-238.
GÄBORI M. 1981. Az ösember koranak kutatasa Magyaror-
szagon (1969-1980) (Researching the period of Ancient
Man in Hungary). Papers from the II. class of the HASc.:
99-109.
GÄL E., JUHÄSZ I., SÜMEGI P. (eds.) 2006. Environmen-
tal Archaeology in North-Eastern Hungary. Varia Archa-
eologica Hungarica 19.
GLÄSER R. 1991. Bemerkungen zur absoluten Datierung
des Beginns der westlichen Linienbandkeramik. Banatica
11: 53-64.
GRONENBORN D. 1999. A variation on a basic theme: The
transition to farming in Southern Central Europe. Journal
of World Prehistory 13(2): 123-210.
HORVÄTH F. 1989. A survey on the development of neo-
lithic settlement pattern and house types in the Tisza re-
gion. In S. Bökönyi (ed.), Neolithic of Southestern Europe
and its Near Eastern Connections. Varia Archaeologica
Hungarica 2: 85-101.
HORVÄTH I., KELEMEN M., TORMA I. 1979. Magyarorszag
regeszeti topogräfiäja (Archaeological Topography of
Hungary) 5. Esztergom es a Dorogi Jaras. Budapest.
JUHÄSZ I. 2002. The palynographic reconstruction of
the Late Glacial and the Holocene periods of County
Zala, South West Hungary (Reconstruction palynogra-
phique de Tardiglaciaire et de l'Holocene de la region
de Zala, Sudouest de la Hongrie). PhD dissertation, Uni-
versities of Marseille-Pecs.
2006, in press. The pollen sequence from Balatonede-
rics. Palaeoenvironmental studies in the Balaton Up-
lands. In I. Juhasz, P. Sümegi and C. Zatykö (eds.), En-
vironmental Archaeology in Transdanubia. Varia Ar-
chaeologica Hungarica 20.
JUHÄSZ I., SÜMEGI P., ZATYKO C. (eds.) 2006, in press.
Environmental Archaeology in Transdanubia. Varia Ar-
chaeologica Hungarica 20.
KALICZ N. 1993. The early phases of the neolithic in We-
stern Hungary (Transdanubia). Poročilo o raziskovanju
paleolitika neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 21:85-135.
1994. Wenden des Spätneolithikums im Oberen Theiß-
gebiet. Jozsa Andräs Müzeum Evkönyve, Nyiregyhäza
36: 263-290.
KALICZ N., KALICZ-SCHREIBER R. 2002. Die Verbreitungs-
grenze der frühneolithischen Kulturen in Transdanubien
(Westungarn). Preistoria Alpina 37: 25-44.
KALICZ N., KOOS J. 1997a. Mezökövesd-Mocsolyas. Üjkö-
kori telep es temetkezesek a Kr. e. VI. evezredböl (Neoli-
thic settlement and graves from the 6th Millennium B.C.).
In P. Raczky, T. Kovacs, A. Anders (eds.), Utak a mültba.
Az M3-as autopälya regeszeti leletmentesei = Paths into
the Past. Rescue excavations on the M3 Motorway. Buda-
pest: 28-33.
1997b. Eine Siedlung mit ältestneolithischen Hausres-
ten und Gräbern in Nordostungarn. In M. Lazic (ed.),
Antidoron. Completis LXV annis Dragoslavo Srejović
ab amicis collegis discipulis oblatum. Centre for Ar-
chaeological Research/University of Belgrade, Faculty
of Philosophy 17: 125-135.
KALICZ N., S. KOOS J. 2000. Települes a legkorabbi ujkö-
kori sirokkal Eszakkelet-Magyarorszagröl (Eine Siedlung
mit ältestneolithischen Gräbern in Nordostungarn). Her-
man Otto Müzeum Evkönyve 39: 45-76.
KALICZ N., MAKKAY J. 1972. Probleme des frühen Neoli-
thikums der nördlichen Tiefebene. Alba Regia 12: 77-92.
1976.	Frühneolithische Siedlung in Mehtelek-Nadas.
Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts
6: 13-24.
1977.	Die Linienbandkeramik in der Großen Unga-
rischen Tiefebene. Studia Archaeologica VII.
KALICZ N., M. VIRÄG ZS., BIRO K. 1998. The northern pe-
riphery of the early neolithic Starčevo culture in south-
western Hungary: a case study of an excavation at Lake
Balaton. In M. Budja (ed.), 5th Neolithic Studies. Docu-
menta Praehistorica 25:151-187.
KALICZ N., RACZKY P. 1981. The precursors to the "horns
of consecration" in the Southeast European Neolithic. Acta
Archaeologica Hungarica 33:5-20.
KALICZ-SCHREIBER R., KALICZ N. 1992. Die erste frühneo-
lithische Fundstelle in Budapest. In M. Garašanin, D. Srejo-
vic (eds.), Hommage a Nikola Tasić. Balcanica 23:47-76.
KALICZ N., T. BIRO K., M. VIRÄG ZS., 2002. Vörs, Maria-
asszony-sziget. In Z. Bencze et al. (eds.), Regeszeti kutat-
äsok Magyarorszägon 1999 (Archaeological investiga-
tions in Hungary 1999). Budapest: 15-26.
KERTESZ R. 1994a (1996). The Mesolithic in the Great
Hungarian Plain: A survey of the evidence. In R. Kertesz
and J. Makkay (eds.), At the Fringes of Three Worlds.
Hunter-gatherers in the Middle Tisza valley. Szolnok:
5-39.
1994b. Late Mesolithic chipped stone industry from
the site Jasztelek I (Hungary). In G. Lörinczy (ed.), A
kokortol a közepkorig. Von der Steinzeit bis zum Mit-
terlalter. Studien zum 60. Geburtstag von Otto Trog-
mayer. Szeged: 23-44.
KERTESZ R., SÜMEGI P. 1999. Teöriak, kritika es egy mo-
dell: miert allt meg a Körös-Starcevo kultura terjedese a
Karpat-medence centrumaban? (Theories, critiques and a
model: why did the expansion of the Körös-Starcevo cul-
ture stop in the centre of the Carpathian Basin?). Tisicum
11:9-23.
KURUCZ K. 1989. A Nyiri Mezoseg neolitikuma [The Neo-
lithic of the Mezoseg, Nyirseg region]. Nyiregyhaza 1989.
KUTZIÄN I. 1944. A Körös-kultüra (The Körös Culture).
Dissertationes Pannoniae II/23. Budapest.
LENNEIS E. 1997. Houseforms of the Central European Li-
near Pottery culture and the Balkan early neolithic - a
comparison. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika neoli-
tika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 24:143-149.
2000. Hausformen der mitteleuropäischen Linearband-
keramik und des balkanischen Frühneolithikums im
Vergleich. In St. Hiller, V. Nikolov (eds.), Karanovo III:
Beiträge zum Neolithikum in Südosteuropa. Wien:
383-388.
LENNEIS E., STADLER P., WINDL H. 1996. Neue 14C-Daten
zum Frühneolithikum in Österreich. Prehistoire Europe-
enne 8:97-116.
LICHARDUS J. 1972. Zur Entstehung der Linearbandkera-
mik. Germania 50:1-15.
LOSITS F. 1980. Neolithische Siedlung in Krasznokvajda.
Folia Archaeologica 31: 7-34.
MAKKAY J. 1970. A kokor es a rezkor Fejer megyeben.
(The stone age and the copper age in County Fejer.) Fe-
jer megye törtenete I./1. Szekesfehervar.
1978. Excavations at Bicske. I. The Early Neolithic -
The earliest Linear band Ceramic. Alba Regia 16:9-60.
1982. A magyarorszägi neolitikum rendszere es fej-
lodesenek fobb vonäsai (The system of the Hunga-
rian Neolithic and the main features of its develop-
ment). Akademiai Kiado, Budapest
2003. Ösregeszeti kutatasok magyarorszagon - az ujkö-
kor es a rezkor (Prehistoric archaeology in Hungary in
recent years. The Neolithic and the Copper Age). Jösa
Andras Muzeum Evkönyve, Nyiregyhaza 45:27-60.
MAXIM Z. 1999. Neo-Eneoliticul din Transilvania. Mini-
sterul Culturii Muzeul National de Istorie Transilvaniei.
Bibliotheca Musei Napocensis 19.
MEDZIHRADSZKY 2001. The holocene sequence of Ke-
szthely-Üsztatomajor, Hungary. Annales Historico-Natu-
rales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 93: 5-12.
MEIER-ARENDT W. 1989. Überlegungen zur Herkunft der
linienbandkeramischen Langhauses. In S. Bökönyi (ed.),
Neolithic of Southestern Europe and its Near Eastern
Connections. International Conference Szolnok-Szeged
1987. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 2:183-189.
MESZÄROS Gy. 1948. A Vazsonyi-medence mezolit- es
neolitkori települesei (The mesolithic and neolithic set-
tlements in the Vazsony Basin). Veszprem.
NAGY E. Gy. 1998 (1995-96). Az Alföldi Vonaldiszes ke-
ramia kulturajanak kialakulasa (Die Herausbildung der
Alfölder Linearbandkeramik I-II). Deri Muzeum Evko-
nyve: 53-150.
2005. Adatok az alföldi vonaldiszes keramia kultura-
janak települestörteneti kepehez a Felso-Tisza-vide-
ken [Data to the settlement history of the Alföld LBK
in the Upper Tisza region]. PhD thesis, Budapest,
ELTE, Institute of Archaeology.
NAGY-BODOR E. 1988. A Balaton pannoniai es holocen
kepzödmenyeinek palynologiai vizsgalata (Palynological
study of Pannonian and holocene deposits from Lake Ba-
laton). A Magyar Allami Földtani Intezet jelentese az ev-
rol (Annual Report of the Geological Institute for the
year) 1986:535-568.
PAUL I. 1995. Aspekte des Karpatisch-Balkanisch-Donaulän-
dischen Neolithikum (Die Präcri§-Kultur). In Vorgeschicht-
liche Untersuchungen in Siebenbürgen. Alba Iulia: 28-
68.
PAVÜK J. 1962. Gliederung der Volutenkeramik in der
Slowakei. Studijne zvesti 9:5-20.
1972. Neolithisches Gräberfeld in Nitra. Slovenska Ar-
cheologia 20:5-105.
1980a. Ältere Linearkeramik in der Slovakei. Sloven-
ska Archeologia 28: 7-90.
1980b. Problem der Genese der Kultur mit Linearkera-
mik im Lichte ihrer Beziehungen zur Starčevo-Cri§ Kul-
tur. In J. Kozlowski and J. Machnik (eds.), Problemes
de la neolithisation dans certaines regions de l'Eu-
rope. Actes du colloque international Krakow-Mogilany
1979. Wroclaw: 163-174.
1994. Zur relativen Chronologie der älteren Linearke-
ramik. Nyiregyhazi Jözsa Andras Muzeum Evkönyve
36:135-149.
PETRASCH J. 2001. "Seid fruchtbar und mehret euch und
füllet die Erde und machet sie euch untertan": Überlegun-
gen zur demographischen Situation der bandkeramischen
Landnahme. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 31:
13-25.
PUSZTAI R. 1957. Mezolitikus leletek Somogybol (Mesoli-
thische Funde im Komitat Somogy). A Janus Pannonius
Muzeum evkönyve: 95-105.
QUITTA H. 1960. Zur Frage der ältesten Bandkeramik in
Mitteleuropa. Praehistorische Zeitschrift38:1-38; 153-
188.
1971. Der Balkan als Mittler zwischen Vorderem Orient
und Europa. In F. Schlette (ed.), Evolution und Revo-
lution im Alten Orient und im Europa. Das Neolithi-
kum als historische Erscheinung. Berlin: 38-63.
RACZKY P. 1977. Szajol-Felsöföld (asatasi jelentes). Ar-
chaeologiai Ertesito 104:263.
1983. A korai neolitikumbol a közepsö neolitikumba
valo atmenet kerdesei a Közep- es Felsö-Tiszavideken
(Questions of transition between the Early and Middle
Neolithic in the Middle and Upper Tisza region). Ar-
chaeologiai Ertesito 110:161-194.
1986. Megjegyzesek az "alföldi vonaldiszes keramia"
kialakulasanak kerdesehez [Remarks on the question
of the formulation of the "Alföld Linear Pottery" cul-
ture]. In Nemeth Peter (ed.), Regeszeti tanulmanyok
Kelet-Magyarorszagröl. Folklor es Etnografia 24. De-
brecen: 45-59.
1988. A Tiszavidek kulturalis es kronolögiai kapcso-
latai a Balkannal es az Egeikummal a neolitikum,
rezkor idoszakaban. Ujabb kutatasi eredmenyek es
problemak [The cultural and chronological connec-
tions of the Tisza region with the Balkan and Aegean
at the time of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic. Recent
research results and problems]. Szolnok.
RACZKY P., MEIER-ARENDT W., KURUCZ K., HAJDÜ ZS.,
SZIKORA Ä. 1994. A late neolithic settlement in the Upper
Tisza region and its cultural connections (Preliminary re-
port). Jozsa Andräs Muzeum Evkönyve, Nyiregyhäza 36:
231-240.
REGENYE J. 2006, in press. A Starčevo-kultura települese
a Tihanyi-felszigeten (A Starčevo culture settlement on
the Tihany peninsula - Lake Balaton, Western Hungary).
Osregeszeti Levelek - Prehistoric Newsletter 7.
SAILE TH. 2001. Salz im Ur- und frühgeschichtlichen Mit-
teleuropa - Eine Bestandaufnahme. Bericht der Römisch-
Germanischen Kommision 81:129-234.
SCHADE-LINDIG S. 2002a. Idole und sonderbar verfüllte
Gruben aus der bandkeramischen Siedlung "Hempler" in
Bad Nauheim-Niedermörlen. In H.-J. Beier (ed.), Varia
Neolithica II: Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mit-
teleuropas 32: 99-115.
2002b. Idol- und Sonderfunde der bandkeramischen
Siedlung von Bad Nauheim-Niedermörlen "Auf dem
Hempler" (Wetteraukreis). Germania 80: 47- 114.
SIMON K. 1994. Frühneolithische Kultgegenstände bei
Gellenhaza, Kom. Zala. In G. Lörinczy (ed.), A kokortöl a
közepkorig. Von der Steinzeit bis zum Mittelalter. Stu-
dien zum Geburtstag von O. Trogmayer. Szeged: 53-65.
1996. Ein neuer Fundort der Starčevo-Kultur bei Gel-
lenhaza (Kom. Zala, Ungarn) und seine südliche Be-
ziehungen. In F. Drasovean (ed.), The Vinca culture,
its role and cultural connections. Museum Banaticum
Temesiense, Timisoara: 59-92.
2002. Das Fundmaterial der frühesten Phase der Trans-
danubischen Linienbandkeramik auf dem Fundort Zala-
egerszeg-Andrashida, Gebarti-tö, Arbeitsplatz III. In E.
Banffy (ed.), Prehistoric Studies in memoriam I. Bog-
när-Kutziän. Antaeus 25:189-203.
STADLER P. 2005. Settlement of the Early Linear Ceramics
Culture at Brunn am Gebirge, Wolfholz site. In M. Budja
(ed.), 12th Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica
32: 269-278.
STARNINI E. 1994. Typological and technological analysis
of the Körös culture stone assemblages of Mehtelek-Nadas
and Tiszacsege (North East Hungary). A preliminary re-
port. Jözsa Andräs Muzeum Evkönyve, Nyiregyhäza 36:
101-110.
2000.	Stone industries of the early neolithic cultures in
Hungary and their relationships with the mesolithic
background. Quaderno. Societa Preistoria Protoistoria
Friuli-Venezia Giulia 8:207-219.
2001.	The Mesolithic/Neolithic transition in Hungary:
the lithic perspective. In R. Kertesz and J. Makkay
(eds.), From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Proce-
edings of the International Archaeological Confe-
rence held in Szolnok 1996. Archaeolingua 11: 395-
404.
SÜMEGI P. 1998. Az utolsö 15000 ev környezeti valtoza-
sai es hatasuk az emberi kulturakra Magyarorszagon (En-
vironmental changes in the last 15000 years and their im-
pact to human cultures in Hungary). In G. Ilon (ed.), A
regesztechnikusok kezikönyve. Szombathely: 367-397.
1999. Reconstruction of flora, soil and landscape evo-
lution, and human impact on the Bereg plain from late
glacial up to the present, based on palaeoecological
analysis. In J. Hamar and A. Sarkany-Kiss (eds.), The
Upper Tisza Valley. Tiscia Monograph Series, Szeged:
173-204.
2003. Preneolitizaciö - egy Karpat-medencei, kesö me-
zolitikum soran bekövetkezett eletmödbeli valtozas
környezetregeszeti rekonstrukciöja (Pre-neolitization -
the environmental historical reconstruction of a change
in lifestyle occurring during the late Mesolithic in the
Carpathian Basin). In E. Nagy, J. Dani and Zs. Hajdu
(eds.), MQMOS II. Debrecen: 21-32.
SÜMEGI P., GULYÄS S. (eds.) 2004. The Geohistory of Bä-
torliget Marshland. An Example for the Reconstruction
of Late Quaternary Environmental Changes and Past
Human Impact from the Northeastern Part of the Car-
pathian Basin. Archaeolingua 16:2004.
SÜMEGI P., KERTESZ R. 2001. Palaeogeographic characte-
ristics of the Carpathian Basin - an ecological trap during
the Early Neolithic? In R. Kertesz and J. Makkay (eds.),
From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Proceedings of the
International Archaeological Conference held in Szolnok
1996. Budapest: 405-415.
SÜMEGI P., KERTESZ R., HERTELENDI E. 2001. Environ-
mental change and human adaptation in the Carpathian
basin at the Late Glacial/Postglacial transition. In E. Je-
rem, K. T. Birö (eds.), Archaeometry. 98. proceedings of
the 31st symposium Budapest, April 26 - May 3. 1998. Ar-
chaeolingua Central European Series 1 - British Archaeo-
logical reports IS 1043. Oxford: 171-177.
TASIC N. 2000. Salt use in the Early and Middle Neolithic
of the Balkan Peninsula. In L. Nikolova (ed.), Technology,
Style and Society. Contributions to the innovations be-
tween the Alps and the Black Sea in prehistory. British
Archaeological reports IS 854. Oxford: 35-40.
TORMA I. (ed.) 1993. Magyarorszäg regeszeti topogrä-
fiäja (Archaeological Topography of Hungary) 9. A Szobi
es a Vaci Jaras. Budapest.
TROGMAYER O. 1968. A Körös-csoport barbotin keramia-
jaröl (The "barbotine" pottery of the Körös group). Ar-
chaeologiai Ertesito 95: 6-12.
WHITTLE A., BARTOSIEWICZ L., BORIC D., PETTITT P., RI-
CHARDS M. 2002. In the beginning: New radiocarbon
dates for the early neolithic in Northern Serbia and South
East Hungary. In E. Banffy (ed.), Prehistoric Studies. In
memoriam Ida Bognär-Kutziän. Antaeus 25: 63-117.
WILLIS K. J., SÜMEGI P., BRAUN M., TOTH A. 1995. The
late Quaternary environmental history of Batorliget, N-E
Hungary. Palaeogeography, Paleoclimatology, Palaeo-
ecology 118:25-47.
ZOFFMANN Zs. 2000: Az Alföldi Vonaldiszes Keramia Fel-
sovadasz-Vardomb lelohelyen feltart kettos temetkezese-
nek embertani leletei. Herman Otto Muzeum Evk 39:
103-115.
ZOLYOMI B. 1980. Landwirtschaftliche Kultur und Wand-
lung der Vegetation. Phytocoenologia 7:121-126.
ZVELEBIL M. 1986. Mesolithic prelude and neolithic revo-
lution. In M. Zvelebil (ed.): Hunters in Transition. Cam-
bridge University Press. Cambridge 1986: 5-15.
2000. The social context of the agricultural transition
in Europe. In C. Renfrew and K. Boyle (eds.), Archaeo-
genetics: DNA and the population of Europe. McDo-
nald Institute monographs. Cambridge: 57-79.