P. 1
e. banffy, lengyel

e. banffy, lengyel

|Views: 303|Likes:
Published by Mateja Hulina

More info:

Published by: Mateja Hulina on May 20, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less








The Cover Photograph represents

lour Neolithic Altarpieces from SW-Hungary excavated by E. Banffy (Photo: R. Fenyvesi)

ISBN 963 8046 16 3 HU - ISSN 1216-6847


Nil 1'1111 III thix publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, " III 111111.1 III 1111\ 1,"111 III h 1(11)' means, electronic, mechanical, digitised, photocopying,

I 111.11111' III 111111 I wiSt' without the prior permission of the publisher.


J'( '1IAEOLINGUA ALAPITVANY II 1250 Budapest, Uri utca 49

Wonl Processing and English Translation by the Author \{ .viscd by Lyn Sellwood and Laszlo Bartosiewicz Desktop Editing by Rita Kovacs

Lay-out by Erzsebet Jerem

Printed by AKAPRINT Budapest CJ722795


1 . Introduction 7

2. New finds from Hungary 1 I

2.1. Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi rnezo 1 I

2.2. Hah6t-Szart6ri I. 1 1

2.3. Balatonmagyarod-Hldvegpuszta I I

2.4. Other unpublished pieces " " .1 I

3. Catalogue of geometric and zoornorph ic altarpieces of

the Lengyel-Moravian Painted cuiture ..

4. Typological features "

4.1. Common features of geometric and zoomorphic pieces within 111\ Lengyel area. Changes in types and distribution luring Ill· L';lI"

classical and late periods..... "


4.2. Altarpieces in other neolithic cultures ". " .. "

Early Neolithic " ,," I.'

Middle Neolithic " " Ii)

Late Neolithic 1 I

Problems in the Chalcolithic ". 1/

Conclusions 11 I)

5. Contextual analysis 5

5.1. A technical argument. Why not oil lamps? 5 \

5.2. Contextual argument :)fl

5.3. Parailel finds from Southeast Europe with well

observed archaeological contexts 57

6. The place and function ofthe altarpieces within late neolithic ritual life .()·I

6.1. Neolithic "sanctuaries" .() I

6.2. Cult corners in dwclliu I IiOll.~VS .•

"" .. " " " 72

6.3. The place and rUII .tiou or 1111111 Pll'''('', \\ rlhin l\llll~,l''' " " 15

7. Concluxio» " .

• '" " "" II)

I. Introduction

The peculiar clay objects I shall discuss in this study have always belonged III tile category of interesting small finds, occurring in different regions of the 1.11 icly extended late neolithic Lengyel-Moravian Painted culture. Publications lit such finds are known since the second half of the last century.

Geographically, the Lengyel and the Moravian Painted cultures, being I loscly related to each other, extend from the Moravian Plain through Eastern vustrin (Niederosterreich and Burgenland), Southwestern and Middle Slovakia III the whole area ofTransdanubia. The southern border of the Lengyel culture, I ',pl'cially in its latest phase even crosses the river Drava and reaches the ',101\ (lilian part of Croatia. Using the relative chronological sequence adapted 1111 the Carpathian Basin, the Lengyel and the related Moravian Painted Ware I ulturc covers the whole late neolithic development of the region (in Austria,

~' , this period is called Middle Neolithic). The final phase of the culture sur\ ill'S into the Early Chalcolithic, being coeval with the Eastern Hungarian 11,;;q)()lgar and the Balkanic-Lower Danubian Karanovo Vl-Gumclnita culIIIIV'-, In absolute terms the beginning of the culture can be put at about IX()() nc (calibrated), while the latest phase ends at approximately 4300 n(' (I.illhraled).

/);.1'11';17111;011 of th!: 11'11,1:1'1'1 A 11I/,{1\ ';(/11 l'ainted Ware culture

111\' Iillkl'ts di.'l'II.·.·vd II 'I • 1111' 111I1d(' llil'l:l ,tlleil' si/,l: 1'~lllg 's ill II)()SI C(lSl:S 11I,t" I'VII ,I :111(\ I.~ l:111. 'I'll' 01 i iiuul lt ntn xc 'illS In l c rectangular: cubic In, the \'lllli,'1 pluiscx, while in the \:11 'I' pllilse or the culture the flat I'cctangul~r lorm 11 '\ 11I11l' , 111\)1" frequent, often with applied pedestals Meanwhile, a sub-gloup '1\1\ll'IIIS ill (he 'HI'Iy phase with animal heads on a rect~ngular body, or even ,,1111 II 'olllpl,tely /'0 morphic form, Each subtype frequen,tly has, small 111I11)(11~,1i "11I)h,~ on the corners, edges and also in the middle ot the Sides, An 1\ '1\ 11101" important common feature is the round and usually shallow depres=

III11 III llii,; middle or the upper surface, which tYPically extends between 2,) 0I11i1 ,I 'i 1.:111. Apart from the [act that this depression is one of the features that ,dlll\\" I pologic,II comparison between geometric and zoomorphic pieces, It ,d',11 ~,','IIIS to be essential Irorn a functional point of View, This depression must 1111\ \' il' '11 in lISC, and this could be a final reason why the objects were

PII'P:III'I!, ,,'" G- '

IIII' IlItl'l'('sl raised by this type of object eVidently has ItS advantages, as,

1111 \ I 111.l1111I'IIIII'·d or unpublished to a lesser extent than e,g,mass produc~sot 1111111 1\ ( IlloIllily, Ill:llly or them appear a~ stray finds or even If~h~ nal~le 01 the III I 1111111 ,III''' 111I:rL' is no dcscriptron of the house, pit 01 other feature, not to 111.iI iii 1111111 Illlll,' lying in the vicinity, In fact thesepieces hav,e vel:: ch~rac\ \I II 1111111\1", ',llIlli,; can he considered to be of artistic value, therefore, no

1111\\11 1111 I III 1I111',1:11Il: 's or their discovery they can be SUitable for a typolo-

II 11 IIld Ii .II I1I1 1111 :II't historical analysis, "

Iii Idill I III IIIl' objccrs discussed here _ withil:, the spectrum of cel:mlc

II I I lill 1111111 '\ Id 'lit. Till: Iwo extremes of clay finds enc~mpass ~:1 th~ on~ II II II rl Ii I lid I ,I dll111 'sl ic pottery which clearly belongs toll nds of pro 1 ane

11 illlll Ilill III' -lnborntc lcmale figurines should on the other hand un-

I lllli dl Iii II r,lld 'd :IS cull ic material. When speaking about fragments, 11111)1 III \\ II I', '\ ulcn {I cons idcred to be broken by chance - 111 the case 0 f 11'1111111, IlItl'llllIlIli" hrc.ik ing is generally assumed (1-I()CI(rvt/\NN 1965,14-23, I \ rill 1 I!)IH) I) III, with further literature), Within this scale altarpieces do not 11t!\ I .I 1\ ,\I d\'1 ill 'd I1I<1cc, As to its most positivistic a,pproach th:y are called

1\ 11111'11\11 1111)'1.' Iliillgcgcliilk" (RUTTK/\ Y 1976b), oil lamps (ZALAI-GAA! 11)1) I 1\ 111111111111:1' literature).

\1)',011111: proo I' 01' () cultic status for these objects is still absent. I call them

lI/flll'/lil'I'I's 1111 tIVIl reasons. lirstly, I shall refute the suggestion that the objects 111111" 11:1"1.' served <1~ oil lamps, and also that they could have been hU,ng, ',,', 1111(\ly. till' .malysis or the "ill situ" pieces with well observed archae.ologlcal 111111 ':-.I~, showx similaritic« to the generally accepted cultic mater~al 111 m~ny

" It, ' ',,,, .l have been used within dwe ll iug

II"'I'I'''\'., III Illy IlPIIlI()II, :I arptcccs III us ct '


IIIJII~\',~ ill ;) \'\:il Silililill 111 II 'III 1 Ill"" 1I1l11S' models, C1llthrnpolllorpili' VL',~,~ 'Is I'll , 1lllIllCly, lor uon-prulnru- Pili I'll,' 'S,

III Ihis sludy I usc thlj 1111j1\)od oltypology. As a first step it is essential II III II-l' :I synchronous c mparison 01' different rezions within the Len »)/ci .ir 'I'

I I ' b ,

1\ 11'1" :I (arpreces occur. Similarly, the distinction of pieces belonging In Iii '

I ill 1\1, classical and late phases must precede any other analysis ill (I'd 'I' 10 11I\I\l\v, changes In the Size, form and decoration and perhaps the antcccdcnr , 01' III' object III middle neolithic cultures, Typology in this study is not an aim hili 1,1111 '\' il means for ach ieving a better grouping and throu zh th is a h 'II VI'

1111IiL'l'standlllg of their possible function, b

(' 'I'~ainly, both geometric and zoomorphic pieces can be analysed froru Ih" 11111111°,1 ,Vie,:, of their decoration (incisions, paintings), the realistic or nhslrll'l 1\ II)' 01, ~?rmlllg the animals etc" and have been treated as art objc 'ts, III llil', \\,1\, ~Iillerent outward forms of early art (?) call be studied with Illc \ivll) III 1llllrplcccs.

()11 theoth~r hand, r dare not declare these objects to be art pro.Iu: hili 1111

I II ' , art historians do; for this reason r shall not treat them <IS ohivvi'. dlll,lId 1111 I11I art historical analysis sensu stricto Firstly, I assurn tlilli'l\\'llIllllll ,III" ,11,11 '~llithic cult objects always had a concrete meaning, and sc '111\dl\. 111111 1I11 Illl':llllllg was closely connected with the form and decoration (nll1l 1\ I I II II Iii.- :Ied In the lack of decoration and coarse quality of some pi '\'1,)1 /11111 IIII.~IIC value - I.e. elaborate modelling - may have been connecter! I :11111 I II 11I1 1IIl'I I I ion-profane function, than with consciousness of any artist i ' VIIIIIl'

l lowcver, there is one thing that cannot be answered either with Iii,' hvlp III 1\ Ililingy or of art historical studies, This is the question of the function III I u hcr publications (e.g. MESZAROS 1962, KUTZIAN 1944,65, PITTIONI 11),),1

I I X I S/I) one can read either that they might have been oi I lamps or t 11<11 the ' , 1lll',ldcl"ed them to have been small altarpieces, But these are ideas ba: cd Oil 1111 II' phantasy, depending on what seemed most logical to the authors,

l hc problem of function - if ever - could only be solved, or at least part Iy 111',I\I.'red With the help of closed archaeological contexts, It is easier to ,~ilY II 11011 ,lhi,;Y could not be used for, than making any positive assumptions,

III,IIS: I~ can be seen that the typological ordering is not the find goal. The 11111',1 Iruitfu] way forward is to concentrate on the closed archaeolooi "11 I Illlil.':-.ls in, order to learn something about how and where they had been ~s~d (,II k-:I.~t lor the last time), This is exactly where the above mentioned

1III\'I'e,~1 ing small finds" are at a disadvantage as compared to finds or less Illlvll'st: Namely, in many cases, especially in older excavations, these objects 1\ 1'1\' picked out [rom their context, "lid were published not only withou:



tlcx 'rihing their exact position within a feature, but often without publishing the surrounding finds as well. These publications make the further analysis difficult, not to speak of numerous cases where the lack of any other finds, inclu ling pottery, makes the typological ranging of the find also impossible.

The possibilities and difficulties mentioned above determine the process of :111:11 sing the finds: first of all we must define the types within this find group, II~I the features common to the geoilletric and zoomorphic pieces and try to ,111;Jnge them by geographic distribution as well as chronological order. A con- 1l',\tUiJi analysis must follow then, based on pieces found within houses, pits or III graves in order to exclude some interpretations and to suggest other possibilu ics. In our case the material available for such an analysis is rather meagre. Of 1I1l)I'C than one hundred pieces collected from the Lengyel-Moravian painted c irclc only a few proved to have closed contexts, (this, incidentally, reflects the average percentage of other finds regarded as belonging to the ritual sphere). Slill, it is only possible to set out from well observed contexts, as said before, uthc:: methods are not suitable for learning about function.

linally, we can extend the study in two further directions. First, we need to observe the possible parallels relating to both the pieces themselves and then (11111 'xis in the earlier Neolithic of the Carpathian Basin. This enlarges the IlIlId'rs of our possibilities when interpreting the finds. Secondly, there has III ('11 SOllie work done on cult objects recently, specifically on altarpieces ill the rJlldltilic and Chalcolithic of the region, which might also be of help (BANITY Il)l)tl I) I ;1, /,/\1 .r; I-G;\;\ I 1995).

I should like to thank both Dr. Elisabeth Ruttkay (Naturhistorisches r-.III ,1'11111. Vienna) and Dr. Nandor Kalicz (Archaeological Institute, Budapest) 1111 IIIL'II advice and generous help in collecting data 011 the Lengyel altarpieces.

. Nc·w fiuels 1'1'0111 111I1\~aryl

_,I. /,alas/,entbal{I/,s-S/,(\lilil ' 'yi lIlezt) 2.2. l lahot-Szartori I.

2 ... 13a latonmagyarod-Hidvegpuszta

2.4 Other unpublished pieces (Patvarc, Zalavar-Mekcnyc, /,alaliiv(l)

2,1, Zalaszentbalazs-Szokihegyi mezo

Two altarpieces were discovered in 1992 in the debris 01' hOIlSl' :, (( 'at No.1, 32,33). They are similar in size, and both have a small hcmisphvi iV1l1 til' pression in the middle of their upper surface. Both pieces have i'llill IIIL II I'd holes in their corners, and four small knobs next to the holes, Till' (lllll'l I', 111,1 h,1 ve been suspended through these four holes, or, as corns much 1111111' I" 1 I I he perforations were designed to take strings with wh ich :1 Sill til I I , II I covering the roundish depression in the upper surface was ;lIlill'I"'II, (111'11 ill

hoth finds had tubular supports whose diameter was rou ihlv I ill' ',,11111 I II11I III

the depressions.

One pedestal has survived intact. It is short and cyl i 1111 I i. :11. .uul III1 I I 1111 II ililTers [rom the other such supports applied on pottery di,'l'11\ II tllIl • Id"l" gyi mczo, which are tall and approximately beaker-shaped, III /11111 lilt I I' d and slightly conical.

Only traces have survived of the other tubular SliPPOl'1. 1'''"1,"1 ,dd, 1111 traces clearly show that it was broken off on purpose, prior t() lil' III ill' 111 lilt object. The potter obviously made no effort to obliterate the traces III 111l' \I' moved support from the soft clay, which he could have done with il SI11I1I111Iill ' :-1 ick or a thin layer of clay. Instead, he produced two round concentric d 'JlI"~ ~i()lls in the place of the removed support. The imprints 01' his nails sho\\ hi"

III the course oftwo finished rnicroregional projects in South Wesl Ilullgar ,Ix-IIV""II I 91ltl and 1993 altarpieces were round in an extremely high 1111111bcl' lit V:IIIIII!" excavated Lengyel settlements. Actually, these finds gave me 11lL' lil'st illlplllw Iii cullcct the published fin Is [rorn the whole l.ellgyel-MIII'<lviilll P:liIIIL'd culuuv » 1\l'1\ I'll\,' :ill:ll'llicces discussed ill this par: arc <III unpul lixhctl. Thix is III,' 1','i!M1II 11'11\ I giVL' i! more derailed description, contrasted 10 puhlishcd lillds il1citllkd III 1111' (':II:duglll,', TWIl ul' the sites, II;Jl1(lt ,111(/ /"d<ls/,cnlh,J!;'I/,S, ill'C' III I 011'11 \,',\(':1 VIII 11111', III 11:J!:llllIlIlIilgY:II'\')(I. ilS iI 1111.:111111.:1' ofthe (cam I gol I Ill' I.c'ngy,'IIII<I"'ri:J! Ipi 1'1"111(':1111111 Iii" ill II 'I' :i1I:1l'pi' ','S 11','1',' 1(lIlIlti ill excavations Ivd hy N, I':diu, M 11111111,'11 .11111 I.' i{vdi\, whn kindly gllvv me pl'l'lllissioJ1 10 puhlis]: lil,'111 Ii,'''',



vllllll~' II) SIIII)()11i nw I I IIIl' ~111'lill'L' lind still k .cp til, \.'1l11l'Vlltll' dl'Pll'ssiollS. W\' dll tlol "IIOW th ' J'i:IISOII,~ 1\)1' rhis modification. (as we 1I;IVi: 110 explanation vitli'l I'm the 11<':1.)(/ to ;llIply tubular support to a suspended object. It will be one 1I1~111111 'Iii a J,lillSt the theory or suspending the altarpieces). In any vent, these rluu pice 'S with tubular support could serve several different purposes.

III ndd ition, a small clay lid and a fragment of a similar piece were found 111"idv houses 2 and 3 (Cat. Nos. 38, 39). The size of the lids ~ 3 to 4 ern "III"" III ';II1S that they could have fitted over the top of the circular dl 11Il'''S i011 ill t he top of the altarpieces. The small roundish th icken ing on the i "FI' ill' till' fragment resembles the knobs on edges of altarpieces. The four , 111111'1', II r t 11<.: I ids were perforated al ike, wh ich may strengthen the assumption ,1/ I.! .tl'lllllg 111<':111 on the upper surface of altarpieces.

III 1'111 I, till' 'C further objects were discovered in different refuse pits at the

III ()II\' III these was an intact altarpiece (Cat. No. 34), the second was a II 1)'111i lit lrum another similar piece (Cat. No. 35). Furthermore, we hit upon a 111)'1111111 1111111 II larger altarpiece, which is unique both in terms of its style and tlllIlI'll'dllllS ( 'Iff. No. 47). It has no known parallels in the Lengyel culture, or in till 11l'lliltlli' I I' chalcolithic cultures of the whole region.

I II, 11';I);\Il1ent referred to above (Cat. No. 35) comes from the corner of an ,lillll pice '. The pierced vertical hole in its corner is clearly discernible. AIllillil .h the object was broken along the edge of the small depression in its ruiddlc, the similarity between this and the other two altarpieces could still be l' unblishcd on the .trength of its thickness, the position of the round depres~1()1l, Iii' perforated hole, and the knobs applied to its corners. The absence of lis .cntral section prevent us from determining whether it also had a tubular ~\IJ1p(111 nttnchcd to it.

Till' illinct altarpiece (Caf. No. 34) is different in size and proportions, and \ vi itx l'slilhlisll 'd typical features are the same as those of the other two. This Illlin't is I) CIII tnll, lrom which the height of the tubular support is 3 ern, while tli' cuhiforu: ;i1tar measures 6 ern x 5 ern in size. The round depression in its liliddk is approx imulcly 2 ern in diameter, i.e., it meets the "canonised" stand!lld,~ I'hc altarpiece is also typical in having the prescribed tiny round knobs IIpplll'd In (he 'd 'cs or the cube. Traces of the red paint which originally cov-

11.'11 Iii\.' who II.: surface 0 I' th is object have surv ived. There were no reconstructuhl,: jllltll'I'I1S Oil the altarpiece as the red-painted pottery wares were similarly nil 1llllil.'L'OI'nt .d at /,alas/.entbal{lzs-SzoI6hcgyi rnezo. Although the proportions III llils pi .cc differ [rom those or ih ' other parallel altarpieces discovered at ~'Ii'lli'lll -g i III '/.0, it call xl ill hl: J' -I:lt 'd to the other Lengyel altarpieces in terms Iii 1111 its I)tll 'I' 1":III1I'\.'S, includm (ils tubular support.

!\ stray find i'I'OIII tilv h.lllll' hill" II.' 'OV 'I' -ti durin , fill »ulicr (I <)X /) '11111 paign of fieldwork by M. 1\llIldt'll' « 'Iff. N(). 37), was similar to the compl 'I ' (II tarpiece discussed above ( '(If. No. 3-/.). Although Cat. No. 37 is sorucwhul smaller, the two finds arc comparable in almost every re pect (both have sl1:11 low central depressions, vertical perforations, knobs on the edges and also short pedestals). The main difference is that Cat. No. 37 has a slightly bcll shaped support while that of Cat. No. 34 is essentially conical.

Another fragment of a flat rectangular, brick-shaped altarpiece was lound by M. Bondar on the floor level of a dwelling house (Cal. No. -/.()).

A somewhat peculiar fragment is also known from Zalaszentbalazs. It was also found by M. Bondar, in a refuse pit (Cat. No. 41). This piece has vertical perforations and an unusual rim bending outside.

Finally, a fragment of a fairly unique find was uncovered in another refuse pit (Cat. No. 47). It must be a part of a larger object. Traces of a bowl can be seen on its upper surface, though the bowl itself is missing. On the bottom or I he fragment traces of a broken pedestal can be observed wh ich do not exceed the sizes of low pedestal applied on the other Zalaszentbalazs altarpieces, although in this case it seems to be apparently too small to support an object ( f tllis size.

The reason why this piece can be compared to altarpieces is still not to be ~Ollgltt in the pedestal, but in the fact that the object had four longish exton,1(lIIS, protruding horizontally in four directions. These extensions must have I'I'L'II so long that they had to be supported with the help of four sticks or twigs 11i:1I II.:n their negative imprints in the baked clay, clearly to be seen on the 111 O"CII surface of the fragment. Certain Iy, we can on Iy guess whether the cross-

1IIII1cti extensions terminated in some kind of figural representations. Such (1 11\ jllli hcsis could perhaps be supported by the analogous zoornorph ic appl icaIIIIIIS, auachcd an irnal heads from all phases of the Lengyel culture.

2.2. Hah6t-Szart6ri 1.

III Iii' same district, approximately 2 kilometres from Zalaszentbal.izx :1 '/1 ',/111\ 'd Lengyel house was discovered in 1989. Based on reconstruct i hi\' I 1\ I IH. or pottery, the rind complex must belong to the early phase or tlil.' 111/1111', which is a plausible context for a small, almost cubic altarpiece (( 'at. I' I) I hix 11(I,s iI ... mall, shallow, circular depression in the middle of the upper 1111.11 I III\., object was pierced on the four corners of its surface, however, th '

1IIII,i1IH'II(lI':1tioll was not successful as the hole emerges at the sides. In three

1111 .Iii\" ~\lIlll' traces ofsmall roundish knobs can be observed


_,J, l3alnlonll1agyar6d-II idvegpusztu,

An obj "I comparable 10 those from Zalaszentbalazs, accompanied by unIl:lilll,t! pottery shcrds, came to light from a Late Lengyel pit at BalatonIllilgYHn')d-llidvcgpuszta in the adjoining Kisbalaton recion (1984 Obiect

• t> b ,J

N(I, 1'\ I. The Lengyel finds from Hidvegpuszra will be published by the author) ( 'III. No, -12). Pit N r. 13 I yielded a fragment of a flat quadratic piece with the 1l'l'llll'<lIions and the round hole in the middle. On its bottom very similar • iruular traces can be observed to that of one Zalaszentbalazs altarpiece « 'at, No. 33). These traces of breaking may also indicate a pedestal.

1\1 the site of Hidvegpuszta a number of other related objects came to light :I~ well: in 1981, a cubiform piece was discovered in Feature No. 79 (Cal. Nil / l ), while Pit No. II contained a brick-shaped altarpiece which is different III ,('\'l'r:1I respects from the Szolohegyi mezo finds, although this also has \ 11111 :11 Iy pierced as well as round knobs in its corner (Cal. No. 43).

W" have to make mention of two further brick-shaped altarpieces here, by a 1/1111 111':11 communication of the excavators, L. Horvath and .I. Barna. These 111\111 h II .rc discovered in 1993 in a Late Lengyel context at Kapolnapuszta 11111I1'l'1I 1l,IIatonmagyar6d and Zalakornar. One of them is believed to have 111111111111 .d in an animal head in its original form. (These finds are being evalu- 011,,<1 h I .I. Barna, a researcher at the Balaton Museum, Keszthely.) To my 111(llVledge, none of these altarpieces had a tubular support, one of them may 111IVl' :111 applied animal head.'

2.4. Other unpublished pieces

2.4. I . Zalavar-Mekenye

1\ I'nlgillentary cubic altarpiece was found in a site belonging to the second, I 1.1"'.i(':1I phase of the Lengyel culture (Cal. No. J6) The shallow hole in the 1IIIdlili :111<1 the vertically perforated edges are not missing. (Unpublished, by 1IIId IH'llllissi()n of the excavator, N. Kalicz).

2.4.2. Patvarc

, 11111 .ccr.uigular altarpiece, standing on four legs was found at the site of 1'.11\ .I" ill Northern Hungary (Cal. N(). :2 1). A shallow depression in the middle

fI,.., 11li,;SC finds are still unpublished Ilwv 111l' 1101 included in th Catalogue.


11/ 111(' I!J)P" SI~I'III'\'1 111111 111,.11\111 l ho IllId "'llIlId,~ 1)11 IUIII 111\\ Ivl'" \\1111 111111)1, IIIl 1111 sid's !lilt! 1111 Iii· Ii '''\ (1IIIIlIildi:illVd. hy kind IlI.'l'IIIiS,'illll (II IIII IIIV:II(1I', N. I IlIiC/,),

2 .. 1, \. /,:ilnliivi'

l'his altarpiece (C 'at. No. -/0) is (I stray rind 1'1'0111 111' 1{1l1l1:1I1 sil' Iii

,dldClvi'l, adjacent to the river Zala. It would appear thai a villa buill nil I' II v SIlL' IlIliI l)l'I..'1I 'lit 11110 prehistoric settlement layers from which the lind d 'I II -" 1111'1 is II l'r(1~lllent 0,1' a cubic, rectangular piece, which probahl Iwd II d('\'\1 111111' III III' middle of Its upper surface. The preserved upper 'd" i: d 'llll:111 d 1\ IIIi 1>:11':111'1 ellis, similarly to a pot type which frequently oc 'til'S ill, '111111111\-1 11.111 dnnuhiau late Lengyel settlements (1-1. SIMON 1987, I~;\NI:I ~ 1')1)(111) ()II III1 1111110111 or the fragment some traces of other broken j'JilI'IS '1111 Iii' lill',1 I \ I d I )111 I~ roun lish, becoming narrower towards the middl " whi '1111101\ 11111111 Illtil IIIi nlturpiccc stood on a pede .tal. Another round broken sllll:wl' 1111 III I'" 1111\ hnvc llI'igin<i1ly been a knob. Thus, it can be sugg<.;sll'd Iilnl 1111 111i~'1lllllll" 111111' IH.'I,llllg:" 10 the Lengyel culture. In addition its 1I1:IIL'I·jlll. lllhl\\I 1,,011 III"

1111.1l v, lis lnbric tempered with micacious sand, (Il1d I JlIlIII 'II Iii ",,11111 ill

11111111 1(\ 1\ dille in the later phase of the culture. (Unpuhlixlu-c]. 11\ 111111 I" 1/111 11111111 Ill, excavator, F. Redo).

J. {'atalogllc of geullIcfric and zoomorphic altarpieces of the Lengyel-Moravian Painted culture

!\pilrl from the hort enumerations of pieces discussed in the Chapter 2, the ('Iii II 10 I III.: is necessarily restricted to pub I ished finds.


Early Lengyel (I)

( irntttettic'

I. l lahor-Szartori I. (Fig. 1,1)

'ubi lorm, from a destroyed Lengyel prt III associanon with some small xh 'rtls belonging to the early Lengyel culture, no possibilities for closer d -finition. Shallow hole in the middle of the upper surface, perforations on 11l1' I()tlr .orncrs, though not reaching the bottom, emerging at the middle of 1111' ',ltI~'S, Traces of knobs in the middle of the sides. H.: 2.6 ern (BANFFY II )1)( 1.1 1

I II 111\ Iii, III Y

( 111111111111 1111~lllIl'IlI;ll'y, vertical perforations at the edges, shallow hole In lit 1111""/1 lu ukcn ucroxs at the hole (DOMBAY 1960, PI. 91, Fig. 7).

I II 111\11111111\

l ln! 11111111'"/111, vertical perforations at the edges, shallow hole III the 1111""/1 /I I I III (l)()rvIi1i\Y 1960, PI. 91, Fig. 8).

/1 II '11\ 1111111\

1,,\\ 1\ /llIdll(,1I1 1(1!'1I1, C1 roundish hole in the middle, decorated with incised \ 1111 ,lIlllll.'S, II.: 11.5 ern (DOMBAY 1960, PI. 91, Fig. 10).

, I lll)',\ 1,1 (Fi,~. 1,2)

('lIllillll'Ill, fragmentary, shallow hole in the middle, no visible traces of kIHIlls.ll.: 11.5 em (MESZAROS 1962, Fig. 1).

() I ,l'II).!,Yl:1 (Fig 1,3)

('llhil(lI'Ill, shallow hole in the middle, no knobs, vertical perforations at the 'dgl's. l-our sides fully decorated with incised lines imitating meanders. II.: (I. I em (M (:S/;\ROS 1962, Fig. 21 I).

I. S;'ll'piI is-Ujbcrck-puszta (Fig. 1,4)

1:1;11 quadratic, shallow hole in the middle, lour arrow-formed projections 1111 lit.: lour edges, each with a vertical perforation, originally painted with


l'I'IISI'd rc I paint. Pn,'"dd \ 1IIIIl'S 11(1111 a grave. II.: 2.5 CI11; 131'.: IU{ 'Ill (M(:s/.AIWS 1962, I:i ' .• ,II h),

H (; (ire

Cuhiform, shallow hole in the middle, H.: 4.5 ern (ZALi\I-Gi\;\I, 1995, I:ig. 19)

I) !\szo I (Fig. 2,1)

Cul ic, slightly rounded, knob on the run, shallow hole III the middle (I I\I,ICZ 1985, Fig. 70/3).

III !\ S l.t)d

( 'ubic, shallow hole in the middle (KALlCZ 1985, 73).

II Sile unknown, County Tolna

Cubiform, horizontal perforations on the edges, horiz ntall jll'IIIII,Illd knobs on each side, shallow hole in the middle (ZALi\I-(; AI II) /1) H() I:ig. I 1/3).


I ) /, .ngovarkony (I)

/,()omorphic, four legs, hollow, traces of red paint. l-rom /',1 )\ t ~ ,I 'I I

Ingether with 5 vessels and pairs of wild boar tusk. Grnv« 1IIId (llil~ll\

I W>O, PI. 60, Fig.1).

I 111/,1'/1(/1

I \ /,L:llg6va.rkony

l lnusual form, triangular, with a wide shallow (lei rcssion Oil IIIl' Illp II.: '\ ern. (DOMBAY 1960, PI. 91, Fig. 6).

Classical Lengyel (II)

, tI'rJllw/,.ic

I I S/(.;nna (Fig. 6,1)

C'uhiform, fragmentary, shallow hole in the middle, vertical perforations al I he xlgcs. Br.: ca. 4.5 ern (ZALAI-GAAL 1979-80, Fig. 15/3).

I I I' iq)()Sv{II'-Olaki dCd6 (Fig 6,2)

('llhil()),)ll, slightly narrowing towards the base, shallow holc in the mid II -, \ l'I'1 ical perforations at the four edges. H.: ea 3 ern (Zi\L/\I-Gi\/\I, I 979-XO, 1,/,. 17 IX).

1(1 /:J!:Jv:'lr-Mckenyc (Fig 6,3)

('llhi .. sliglilly conical, vertically perforated, shallow hole 111 [he middl ' (Unpublished excavation, by kind permission of N, Kalicz),


I! f\11'lr'lgy 'l'i'l/,ki\dollih (Fi,'.!" n,5)

1:1111 1\' '1:111 iulnr Ionu, shallow hole in the middle, v 'l'li .nll perforated kllllh' oil til' rOlli' sides. Strn lin I. II.: 4.3 ern (Z!\L!\I- ;1\;\1, 1005, Fig. 6),

I H f\ IIIii'I , 'l'ill'lildolllh (Fig n,-I)

('I!I)iL', sll:dlow 1101' in the middle, knobs on the edges horizontally p'llo1'l1t 'd. knobs 011 the sides perforated both vertically and horizontally, II I'V, or r 'd pnillt over th whole urface. H.: 6,3 em (ZALAI-GAAL 1995, 1"lg, 0),

I I) M t'li :'Il'!' -'I' (b',k II I I 111 b (Fig. 7, I)

l'lnt rc 't:llIgulur Conn, fragmentary, shallow hole in the middle, small \L'lli ':111 perforated knob on the sides, originally four legs. H.: 5.2 ern (I', 1./\1-(,1\;\1,1995, I:ig. II).

I() Mt\n'l).!, -'I'('lzkiklolllb

I{l' 'Itlll).!,lIlul', polished, fragmentary. Two legs and the hole In the middle Ilil'S .rv xl, II.: 4.0 em (ZI\I.!\I-G!\AL 1995, Fig. 13).

Pili VII r ' (lii,l!,. 7, J)

1"lnl rc .tnngular form. tanding on four legs. Slightly conical. Round hole in till' iuiddl " knobs on the sides and on the legs (Unpublished excavation, by I llltilll'lllll."sioll (Ii' N. Kalicz).

1,,111/, III Illfl

111111/'\ IllIki'ttllllllh

11111111(1)11111 1IIIIIIiliF n male animal. Four legs, head broken, shallow hi' 1111 fltl lilt I. jI('llol'nkd knobs on the sides. From grave No. 43: grave or a 'III '1 I ,I h ! Ililll., spondylus bracelet, a spondylus belt consisting or 6. I" III I I 11'11 1 I )('lld Ill' 'k 1;1 ' '. II.: 10.5 em (ZALAI-GAAL 1985, Fig. 8/ I a-b).

1111 II" III Illdl III II I (Fig. 7,2)

1111111111 JIlt It • 11'11 ',llll'lI t ary, perforated knobs, two shallow holes on the back.

II I I) 1111 (/,/\1./\1-(1/\;\1,1995, Fig. 5).

f\ 1111 oI~'\ I i'l/ki'I(illll1h

uuuu u phi,'. J'r:lglllented, coarsely elaborated, cylindrical hole on the back, 1111 I~ ·tllll ';III(iroid decoration on the front part. Traces or crusted red paint.

II. ,I,X CIII (1',/\1 ,I\I-G!\;\I , 1983-84, PI. 12, Fig. I).

~ f\ It'II';'11\ I-'I'i'l I',ki)d 0 III b

111I111IOI'plii', I'ra uncntary, coarsely clabc rated, rectangular, two xhallnw It(lks 1111 Iii' back, head and knobs broken. II.: 10.0 em (/'/\1,;\1-( ;1\/\1, I I)()~, I'ig, I).


'II f\ It'II':'I'y-TLizk6dollliJ

/1)(lIl1orphie, rounded (lil (IIi: cd '0S, stray find. L.: 6.5 em (/"1\1,1\1-(,/\;\1,

II)'h. Fig. 8).

/ f\ It'lI';'I!:\y- Tuzkodornb

/1)(IIIIOrphic, fragmentary, polished surface, vertically perforated t:til <unilar to a typical Lengyel spouted handle, shallow hole on the back. Strll luid. H,: 4.3 ern (ZALAI-GAA.L 1995, Fig. 9),

M 1'1 1';\ g;y- Tuzkodornb

11)(ll1)orphic, fragmentary, polished, horizontally perforated kn bs 011 llil' ."tles and under the tail, broken across the shallow hole on the back SII'1I\ I I III I. H.: 10.5 em (ZALAI-GAA.L, 1995, Fig. 10).

//1,\ //11 I

I f\ It''r{lgy- Tuzkodorn b

('Vlindrical, standing on two legs with circular terminals, pOII·,11I Ii II 11 knobs each on the front and on the back. H.: 8.3 ern (/..1\1/\1 (, \ \I 11)'1 I'i t. 12).

II f\ It"I'{Ig;y-Tltzk6domb

II)(lIllOrphic, a four-legged small bowl. H.: 4.0 Clll (/.1\1/\1 ( , \ \1 IIjK'

1'1. 123, Fig. 3).


I{tlunciish, slightly conical, with a hole on its top. II.: 5.5 CIII (Z \1 \1 I! \ I

I'NS, Fig. 15).

Late Lengyel (Illa,b)

1'1 IIIIII'/I'ie

! I:t I :ls/.entbalazs-Sz616hegyi mezo (Fig. 11)

1'1:11 quadratic, pierced on the four edges of the surface, shallow round hole jilt Ii ' m idd Ie, short cyl indrical pedestal. From House 2, from rcrna i ns o I' ;t tircplnce. H.: 5.7 ern (BANFFY 1996b).

l:tlas/,cntbalazs-Sz616hegyi mezo (Fig. 12)

lint quadratic form, pierced aton the four edges of the surface, shallow liok III Iii' middle. Remains of what was probably a short pede. tal, brok 'II J'(,(1I11 111\' base before firing, marks of the potter's fingers an I nails vixihlc, lrum l Iuuxc 2, from rests ora fireplace. H.: 3.2 ern (BANIIY 19%11).

l,tI:!. I 'Iltbnl~ll'.s-S/.i)I()hegyi mczQ

( 'uluc, low conical P .dcstul. Truces of red crusted pain: 011 lite whul,' "llllt'L', '.'rom refuse pit Nr,. ,II,: 1:2 .m (II;\NI''!'V I 996h).



"l, I IIII,~/\,IIII I II 'llS , '111\1 dll'I'\ I IIWII" (Fig /.1, /)

1"1 1).!,111l'111 (Ii' I II Ii \1111111 illl' I'I~"" pi 'I" 'd ill Ill' 1\111/' vdt'v,', Ill' sll:tllo\\ 11111' ill III\.' Illiddl ' or I Ill' IIPI' 'I' SIII'I:! ' , is visible. 1"i'OllI I' ,I'IIS ' pil No, I II: '1,1 l:11I (IIANI"I"Y I()%h).

,11 IlIlmu. '1IIh,tI:I/.s-S/.t)lt\!1egyi 111(.:%.6 (Fig 13,-1)

('lIilie, i'l'agm'lIlary, deep hole in the mi Idle, incised line' on the sid', 1\11111111111 n indicating an incised frame, from house J. II.: 4 ern (f3ANI.'I'·Y I IIII (I il ),

'/ l:dlls/.clll hnli'I/.s-Sz6It\hegyi rnczc (Fig /5, I)

('lIhi .. 1'1':1(2,111 .nrcd. shallow hole in the middle, vertically p rforatcd, knohs I1I1 Iltv 'dg's :111(\ in the middle or the sides. Low, slightly bell- .hapcd 'Oil

I ':d p '<I .stnl. Struy rind from the area of the settlement (BONIJAI~ 1996).

;X /,III:IS/, 'Ilthltl{I/.s-Sz6Ibhcgyi rnczo (Fig J 3,2)

I' 'l'tn" .ular .lay plate, probably a lid, knobs and I erforations on the edg 's, (k'si 'II ,t! to i'il over the shallow hole in the middle of an altarpiece. 3.6 x ,I I em; 'lh.: 0.'1 ern. From house 3 (BANI'TY 1996b).

,I) In Ilis/ 'IIth:t!;'lzs-Szolohegyi mezo (Fig }3,3)

1{\'I'lllllgltl:11' 'In plate, probably a lid fragmentary. Knob and perforation Oil 111\' ,'dl-' -. 'I'h.: OJ em (I3ANI.'I·Y 1996b).

III I 1I11,.I'lllhill(1/,~ S/.i\li\liegyi mezo

I I 1'1111111 pillil:lhi i'I'OIl1 a flat rectangular piece. Knob on the side. lron:

II11 1111111 \1'\('1 I1111 house (BONDAR 1996).

II I" I 111111,1101." '/1"11\11 " i IlIe%.6 (Fig J 5,2)

I III II I I 1111'111,11 II11 'Ill '111. l'rojccting rim with vertical perforations. From :1

I III 1111111 HIli \11 I')l)()).

II tlllllIlIllIlIl'\ IIllll II idv~' 'l'"sztCl (Fig J 6,2)

I /I 1111 III Id 01 1111 qu.ulrul ic piece, shallow hole in the middle of the upper

II111II \ I II II ,t! I' 'I'i'ol'al ions at the edges, knobs on the corner. Fro II I

I 111'.1 I'll Nil, I \ I (Unpublished, excavation of L. 1-IOI~vAIII, forthcorninu 1'1I1t111 1/11111 11\ I" n;\NI·I.'Y).

II II,tloIlllllllliI!'ynl'l'l(/-llfdvcgpuszta (Fig. /6, J)

I IIIF,IIIl'lIt (II II 1'Ia! roctangular piece, perforations and knob on ils cd 'I.'. 11(1111 pil No. I I (Unpublished, excavation or I,. IIOI{vATII, forthcomiru, IlIlI)livalilll! hy I':. nANII.'Y).

II II:ilnllllllll:l),!,Ylln'ld-llfdvcgpusl'.ta (Fig /7, /)

/\ppIlI\illl:lkly cuhi lorm, coarsely elaborated, shallow d .prcxsiou on llil' "PP'I S\lI'I:llT, knoh ill lite middl ' of on . side, Ira' ·s 01' v 'rt i .nl perl'ol'nt i(lll,~


(Iii, Ill" I I I 111111 I'll 1(1(1:,',111",1'),1'1(1111 I'll N(I /1), II .. 1,/ 'Ill (Unpuh I Iii I I 11\11111111 (til III)! v, III, 111I11"'llllllllg publtc itinu hv I~.IIANFI.'Y),

lilt I 1/11 I' \ "1111 Ii II Ii (I ,",1; l ', )

I Iii 1\1 l uuh: (III 1111' 'til', ','i lilld (III Iltl' i'1(k.~, ~IIIIII(IW 111I1v In tile IIliddl'

111111 \1111 II)H,I, 1/1'1, I \111'/ IIJIII, l"'I,I,'i·. I),

,,"11\11 (/ ',I' 18, I)

I I I 11111'11111 II "!""I nuu y, 1t1l111lW, '/'1'11' 'S (II' Ii knob 1111 lit' eel ic or 11ll' 111111 1111 II III , Iii ,I illlill(l l1l'd.-,'11i1. llpp'!' rin: 'III willi Ii .hnsc I ornament.

II I IllId (1I111'1I1111"lll'd, Ii I k inrl jll'l'lIlissillll or I". RI·:I)(»).

I /,,,1

ill II IIIII,tI" ','/i'ili'llll'~' Ii III ,t,i') (Iii,'.!,. 1<))

II I I1111 III Iii II lollI' 'I pi"', 11'11 "S or :1 howl, low p ,tI '''11I1, "lIl'i/lllI!.tI 1"1'1111111, III 111111 dlll'I'I\(III', j11'l)hahl with anima l h 'ntl Il'Jlllillal (II Nil 1"'I,!lI)


1//1 /I II

I'" 111111111 (/'II! I, /)

111111111111, \1'1'111 nllv jll'II()I'lIkd, ho!c ill the middl " incix 'd s '1IIi-11l '1lIltllllld

" 11111111111 1111 III' lour sidl'S. II.: 11.'1 CI1I (RI':INI)I, Diss. III \ l , II I d II \111111\1.\1 I'S('II I'!/(I, II _ I, /{II i'l'1,;\Y I <)7(), I"ig. _IS).

1IIIIIIIti \111101)"'11 (/"ig I,/)

(1111111\1'1111 /1,1 '1IIl'IIIIIIY, Ivd paint (111 lit' '1I1ir' xurlacc (1'1 rTIONI 195/1,

I I I" Hilitoill \\III{ M/\l1 S('II 11)/(1, Pi. I(), I:ig. 1//1 a- .).

I till 11.1('111, 1I:lllIlIlItil'iI (FI,I' . .:, ))

t 11/111111111 \I'II((,It! p'II(1I'IIII(IIiS lit III~' '(/ 'I.'S, shullovv Ih)I' ill the middle, I" 111111111 tI 1111111" III 11Il' Ililddlv or I Ill' sid 's, incised mcnudroid decoration 11\11111 .1111', (NI 11(,1 11/\111 1\ I\II,\I{I S('II IIIX, X·I, 2()2, PI. .... 1'1).

I till 11./1 III ,'\'111111/1111111'11

t 11/11/111111 \1'111\'111 pl'llllllIll(IIl,~ III IIII' 'd~'l'~, shnlluvv lilli, ill the middl '. I ""1111111 /1(1\11 I' Ruuknv /111' IIlllvVI \\Il'~ jlllIlIll'd Il'd! pel's. conun.)

NIII,III\l11 j! 1\1 \1(\ ,<;1'11 II)XI X,I 1'1 /(1)

t /'111/1 II ("tll'('IIII'III"'1I (/'i.I', ',I)

1",,1111111, \1111l,t!lll'lllllilllllll',.l1 till ,dj'l'. dl'l'll IlIiI(' III the middle.

, ,

, 1

II, 1'111 (l'IIIIIINI 11),1, IIH, 1'1. '),In, NIIII,III\IIII(I\II/\I\I:-WII

1\1 (i I(lX, I(I/X, 1'/ hi,)

('I:IS.'ll':ill.!.:llgyd (II)

( /1'(11111'//'1/'


('IIIlit', I'rllgIlH':IlUII'y, vertically perforated, shallow hole In the middle (111111' Y len(), PI. XIII),

WI'III .insdorf (Fi.~, 8,-1)

('\lhillll'lll, vertical perforations HI three edges, deep hole in the middle, ill'i.'vt! 111\:1111droid decoration on Ihe s ides, from a pit, as .umc I to be n 1llllhllls(l'illiul pil)(.II':ll,In:A 19R9, 171, Fig, II ),

W '1IIl' i nsdor!' (/"i~, 8,3)

1\\\1 11111 I' 'S, 111, whole Lipper part is slightly hollow, perforate I knobs Oil VII '11 sid' (RIJ I I'I(A Y 19R. -84, PI. 10, Fig, I a-b),

W~'I/,I -inxdorf (Jiig, 8,/)

(ubic. i'1':11'111'llied, shallow hole in the mi I lie, vertically perforated, 111\ I~('d mcnndroid lines on the ides put in a frame, stray find (SII:c;rvII,:'111 11)1)1), 1"1/', \ 1 /).

'vi, I I Ii 'II I ',til II I

I 1,11111'111.11 \ III) pink, vertically perforated, fragment or a possible leg (or 1111 111111111 Ii 1111111111') Ill) OIlC side, Probably a lid for covering the central

111.11 1111 Illjl 111 uluu picccs. Traces of red paint (NI:nl~IIAY 1976, In,

1 I I H)

I III till I 1

I 111'11111111 II I'll ('III -rl, hole III the middle, incised decoration on its sidl' INII \\1 111/', 1/, I·i t. ~ n,


III1 I1111II1 II (pltn'l' Sunrovka)

1111111111 phil, P I'll hil hi I forming (l dog, Four reel, hollow, II.: 7 ern (1'1/111 \Y I ()I)I), I"ig, I),

I.~ll c l.cngyc I (III)

( /1'(1/111'/"'1'

I " 111/ 1111111 I pil \\ illl lilli' 1111/)/111111'" \\ 1111' ( )111'1 r-lill I (II I' I \)()l). l() I:

II I I' 1IIIIINII,:IIIf\lIl1l 1,\11' II)HII, I'll'. 1/10)

1 I 11111 h (/ 1,1; '(),')

iii II I111 '1111/11111\ ',llldlo" Illill' III IiiI' liliddil'. h,\\ I'(IIIIL' Pl'dl'hl r], 1"111111 II

I' 111111111 111111 1IIIIId \\ Ill' ( )111'1 Nllll\i:11 I%(). \() : I"i" III I. 11111 INI,

II I1I11 1\11 II)X'I 1'1/'. \/I()).

11111 11/"1/11111

111111 '1111'01 dlllildl' I'llhil(lIlll, v '11i ',,1 P 'l'II\I':lIioll,':1i IIII' '11'1·· .• 1\\\1 I/ldl 1111/1' IIjlll 'I 1'111, sll'lIy i'illd (WAI.l NI':I{ I (IXI). 1"iF IX)

I , Iii 11111 II'

Ii IIh1\\ IlId· III I ill' lliiddl' (WIJI{MIlI{ANI) I HI .1'1. 1/\),

SI ()V /\1( 1/\


I II ( "1'\ I II) (/,'/,1: I, I)

II 1"11111111111/1" 11111\' 'dl'I'S, kllohs III the mickllu (ll IIII' ·Id· 111I1hl\

1111111 1111I1d" (11)( 'II 1 %'), I,'i " /11 In,

II11 (', II~'\ 1 II) (/"1,1; I, I)

111/ 1111/1 1111\ 1I/IIIl', 1H'II'OliIIL'd III III' -(I, 'S, probnh] ,"1 VIII' II' II 1111 II I 11/1 1111111\\ Ilid ' II11 1111 1I11:ll'pi .' • ('I'()( 'IK 1(1), I:i ' .• 11 1'1)

I II II 11111 Ii ,III "(/",1: I, 'l)

II 1111/111111111/11 :11 Illl' ('d)',v,'. d' 'P lillk ill 111, mid Ill', II.: ·1, I 'III 1'111111

1 I I 1IIIII'Id II pil, Ill)' 'IiiI'I wit]: lillii" than 011' IIHlIlSlIlHI SIIL'ld '. 1\\(1 I I IIFIIIIII'" 1IIId ~ill' -x, poxxihly II hollil'(ls (riurnl pit) (1,';\1'1 .V I I II' III)

II I 11111'11\1" ("",1: I, /)

II I" 1111111111111' III IIII' 'd"" Ii' 'P !III I ' ill Ill(: middle. II : '1,1 'III 1'111111

I 11111111'111111 I'll, I(II'L'III'I' whh 1111l1\' 11111/1 IIHIIIS:1I1(1 slil'/'<I";, 1\\11

111 Iii 11/ 11~'1I1II1I'" 111(1 '.dIL,(,~; ( 'hlpp'" ';111111' ill '11'11111 '111. ). IHlh·,i/lh II I ,. (11111111111) (I \1'1 ,-. II)H(I,I"jg. ·1/1)

1IIIId1", /,11111' ,"

I 1/1111'111111, jil'l I !II' Il\'d II Iii· l'dt'l"'. IH"1111 111'<1 111(11", IIi! III' 'oIdl", 11111\111111'1 1%(",II,I'j" 1(1,1/)

(iI) ,'il' ','(Shill'li (Fig _ 0,1) ('lIhil', xli iluly I'lIIIIHll.:d L:dg 'S, xha l luw hoi' III I"~ middle, low L: tli,l(ll'iL'1I1



Classical Lengyel (II)

( ieometric

(19. Santovka (Szanto) (Fig. 9.1)

Cubic, knobs on the sides, perforated at the edges, shallow hole In the middle. H.: 4.1 ern (PAVUK 1981, Fig. 6411, PAVUK 1994, 172-174).

70. Saruovka (Szanto) (Fig. 9,2)

'ubic, knobs on the sides, perforated at the edges, shallow hole 111 the middle. 1-1.: 3.9 CI11 (PAVUK 1981, Fig. 64/2, PAVUK 1994, 172-174).

f I, Silnlovi<a (Szanto) (Fig. 9.4)

Cubic, shallow hole in the middle of the upper surface, knobs on all edges, v '1'1 i 'n lIy perforated through the knobs. H.: 3,2 em (PA VUI<. 1981, Fig. 64/3, 11/\Vt'IK 1994, 172-174).

f 1, Vl.'lk" Kostolany (Nagykosztolany)

('Ilhie, perforated at the edges, shallow hole in the middle (NOVOTNY 1957, PI. ()/9).

/ \, V 'Iku Ko tolany (Nagykosztolany) (Fig. 9,6)

Rectangular plate, perforated at the four edges, with small knobs projecting from the corners, probable lid for the central hole of an altarpiec (NOVOTNY 1957, PI. 611).

7/1. I omjatice (Kornjatj-Tomasove (Fig. 9,5)

'ubic, standing on four low legs, shallow hole in the middle, knob hanging down 011 the other side, proof (voucher) extending on one side similarly t( Illill of,1 chair (TOCII( 1978, PI. 150/2).

7S. I omjaricc (Kornjatj-Tomasove (Fig. 9,3)

Cubic, i'nlgmcnl ofa leg, hollow on the back (TOCIK 1978, PI. 151/2).

'/(1. l\ol1ljal icc (Komjatj-Tornasove

'ubic, fragmented, shallow hole in the middle (TOCfK 1978, PI. 151/3).

Tl, I omjaticc (Kornjatj-Tomasove

I~' 'Iangular, fragmentary, with two flat legs, deepening in the middle, k nohx Oil the legs and on the sides (TOCfK 1978, PI. 151/ I).

I()()/IIIJ/ 'j) h ic

tv: S<lIII()vkii (Szanto) (Fig. 10,4)

/,()(lIllorphic, in the form of a two-headed bull, with four legs, vertical perforations, hole on the back. Probably from a grave. II.: 7.5 em (P/\V!'II Il)'/{I, I'ig. 63, P/\Vl'JI( 1994, 172-174),

:1111 ovka (Szanto) (Fig. 10,2)

/()(lI11orphic, in the form of a bull, knobs on the legs and in the middle or Illl' sides, two holes on the back. 1-1.: 15 em (PAV1';K 1981, Figs ol-():::, I' \VI'II\. 1994, 172-174, Fig.5/2).

Ii "i1III()vka (Szanto) (Fig. 10,1)

oomorphic, in the form of a bull, "head denoted by a simple projeeliol''', 1111\' on the back. H.: 4.1 ern (PAVIJK 1981, Fig. 65, PAVUK 1994,172-17(1),

V('lke Kostolany (Nagykosztolany)

uomorphic, fragmentary, shallow hole on its back (NOVOTNY 1957, 1'1 //7),

I .uuj.uicc (Komjatj-Tornasove (Fig. 10,3)

'Iilillorphic, fragmentary, schernatised, a knob (tail?) on one edge, xha llnvv IlIlk()lIlheback(TocfK 1978, PI. 151/8).


Late Lengyel (III)

I, II / ilti:

I 11111/1111

III 11111 irph ic, schcmatised, hollow (NOVOTNY 1958, PI. 26/2, V!';\I)I\I I 1'111'11 ',\ I <nO).


Early Lengyel (I)


II Iii I (F',I!, t. /)

,,1111 ,1111I11lW hole in the middle, ,I series of' knobs vertically ill ils lour Iii , 111\ I',l''' III ';llldroid dccoral ion on the sides (P()I)I\()I~SI\. Y 1970h, ':?,X'I,


III 1 ('''/,1: /,))

11)\ \ I'll il'lIl1y perforated .11 the edges, d .cp hole in the middle. illl'isl'd

11111111111 livVI)llIli(111 ou rhc ,~idc,,, (J<./\/I)()V/\ I ()X(), I:ig, 1:::/11),

II' l

Ji II \1'1111' Illy 1ll'1'IOI'iIil'd ill Ilw v<iI',l'S, SIII;III illlk ill IIIL' Illiddk

I III Ifi.ll I 1')1 II H), I (I,),

III I (/' 1,1' /, I)

II \1'1111,11" 1)(,1'1111'II",d II Ill' I'dl"'" ',111111 Il\dl' ill 1111' IIliddll'

I 11I1t\1I I It) 1 l , (1(1(1, I,'il', 1 /XII (I).

)-;X. Tesetice-Kyjovice (Fig 4,4)

Cubic, vertically perforated at the edges, deep hole in the middle (PODBORSI<Y 1970,284, Fig. 8/1, PODBORSKY 1971 [1972J, PI. 27).

)-;9. Tesetice-Kyjovice (Fig 4,5)

Cubic, fragmentary, vertically perforated at the edges, two small shallow roundish holes near each other on the upper surface. Traces of red paint in the holes (KA7,DOvA- K()SIUI~IK 1993, 11-29).

II uunorphic <I() I ~()sovice

/,()()Illorphic, shallow hole on its back (SEDO 1986,49-60). 1)1 SII"licc

/,()(lIllorphic, in the form of a bird, deep hole in the middle of its back (P()I )llORSKY 1985, 130, Fig. 81, PODBORSKY 1989, Fig. 5/g).

I) I l'osroupky-Hradisko (Fig 5,5)

/,()(lIliorphic, two heads near each other, round hole in the middle of il,~ 11:II.;k, (I knob forming a phallus under its belly (PODBORSK Y 1970, 235-3 I (), I,'ig, 10/20, PODBORSKY 1989, Fig. 5/h).

() \. .lurorncl ice

/,()()morphic, a wide hollow opening in the middle of its back (PODBORSln 1985,212, Fig. 82, PODBORSKY 1989, 184, Fig. 5/c).

(jll, Lcsunky (Fig. 5,4)

/,()ol11orphic, legs broken, large hole in the middle of its back, traces of rvd and yellow paint (KOSTURIK 1980, Fig. 6, KOSTURIK 1986, PODBOI{SI( v 19H!), I H4, Fig. 5/4 and PI. -l/s).

()~, .lc.. 'f:llly-Marsovice (Fig 5,1)

/'()(lIllorphic, head and tail broken, deep round hole in the middle of its bn ," (ll(lI)ll<msid 1989, Fig. 5/a).

1)(" 1IIIIhokc Masl'tfl<y

l.ool11orphic, fragmentary, shallow hole In the middle (POJ)BOI{SK Y 19K'), l,'ig.5/h).

III, I\os()vice (Fig 5,6)

/,()olllorphic, two-headed animal, deep hole in the middle 01' its hilL" (11()I)I(()I{SI<Y 1989, Fig. 5/i).

IIX, l lor.ikov (Fig. 5,2)

/'(HlIIl(ll'phic, fragmentary, two small shallow hoi's Oil its hll('1 (11()III\()I{sd 1()X5, 120, 180,I,'ig. HO, P()I)IH)J(Sld I ()W>, I,'i I, 5/1'),


III I I -ninice (Fig 5,3)

uomorphic, fragmentary (PODBORSI<Y 1989, Fig. 5/i).

Late Lengyel (III)


IIII1 II(ll'kovany (Fig 21,1)

I Ill, rectangular, shallow hole 111 the middle (PODBORSI<. Y I no, I I I I 1/7).

I 1(,1111, strayfind IIIIIIIII()-( /'na i Ill)- N eusti ft

( uluv with rounded edges, vertically perforated, broken along one cduc, ",""IW hole in the middle, standing on small feet (PALU/\IWI 190 ,::',1\ I I 1 I () ),


I /I il

I I oIlllllF('j .h -urlorf

I 1111\\. ',llglilly rounded like a barrel, vertically perforated, deep hole III (\1\' IllIdll\l' (M;\IIm 19M, Fig. 9, SUB 1976).


I I tllll' N()l\ii I IlIt:I-i'lcs/ow(I,'ig 21,3)

II1I 1l'llllIll'lilnl', 1'l'ilglll(;lItilry. Stan ling on four legs, round hoi' ill tit, II 1,j,1I1 I tI lit' IIPP'I' surface. I,'I'( 111 grave No. 1325 (K/\M II':NSI(/\ 11'111\\'.1 111)()(),I,'i', IMI).

I I Ii "" N II II 01 I III t II Jl II: S zo W (Fi,l!., - I, - )

II I 1111111 1111111 :1 Ilnl 1\:(;!illl/2.It!:1r 1'0111'-1 'gg'd piece. Knob Oil til, 'd)·\.' I II iJ 11\\,',1 \ II) IX, I,'j " :;/11),

I I II "\I r~il" 1\ 1111t:1 Jlk,'/(lW

1111 '1111 III 11(1111 :1 I'l'l't:lIlgullll', rO\lI'-II.:g 'L'tI piece ( ,()I)I ()WSI' ,\ I () IH. II)

II 1'1111111,1111111 n Ivvtnlll,III!ii'. Iour-Ic 1 ',I'd JlI('(I.' ( ,(1111 ()WSI ;\ I')/H. I d I', I)

107. Krakow-Nowa Huta-Pleszow

l-ragment from a four-legged rectangular piece (GOf)L()WSI(A 1978, Fig. 5/g).

lOX. Krakow-Nowa Huta-Pleszow

Fragments from a rectangular, four-legged piece (GODLowSKA 1978, l·ig.5/h,i).

'\ /

filII/' I I';III'~I' I,('II,\!,.I'('/ siles with (1/1(11'1'(('1'1'.1'

(1'111' II utulw! '.I' '11"1' iril'lIlic',Ii with ('(/{II/Ii,I:1I1' 1111111/11'1'.1')


4. Typological features

I, I . ommon features of geometric and zoomorphic pieces

\ 1111111 t he Lengyel area. Changes in types and distribution during the early, classical and late periods

III f I'" .rnl, c il lamps or altarpieces are considered to have well defined I \I 1111~ti 'S. In order to be able to compare geometric and zoomorphic pieces II, III II other, an I to provide evidence why I consider them to belong to one I 1\ Pl'. I shall e ·tablish the following typological criteria:

III \ .IlL' nlwn S made of clay.

III II uuninunn size is 4 x 4 x 3 em, rangll1g 111 height to no mol" Ih:1I1 111111

11111 '/111' pi' . 'S C(l11 either be cubic or flat rectangular.

III '!llf',II!!II 1(1I'111 seems to be cubic. This form was found on 25 oc ':lsi(1I1,~ III I I I I II 'VV I 1:1 .rs, from different regions of H ungary (e.g. I\s/.6d. 11:11 1111, II 11\ 1111111 ): Austria (Poysbrunn, Falkenstein, St. Poltcn-Gnlg 'III -ulu-n) 111\ .Ikl!! (c.g. Svo lin, Bratislava-Dubravka, Nitriansky Hradok j ns \\vll

" 1IIIII'\'I:lII).;lIlar variant become more frequent in the second Iialrol III'

111111/' Iii' especially in the later phase (e.g. in Zalas/.'lIllml;'11

111111 F\ I 11I'I,i\ ()I" nalalollll1agyar6d-I-([dvegpuszta in Hungary; 111' IIIHls III I I,d 11\\ N()\v:1 l luta-Plcxzow in Little Poland). An inrcrcstiug xul:

IlIiI I 1IIl' 11:11 rcctuugular altarpiece with a small and low, C( nica] (II' 111\1111' " I,vd,'st:d. It only occurs in sites belonging to the latest phase ill III \ ,'.t 1lllIiI',nl' and ncighb: uring Burgcnland (with two pieces from /1111 Ii),

I III lul. • .I tlill~'1' 'Ill I J1L.: seems 10 appeal' ill the laic phase or the I, 'II' l'l

iii 1111 1111 1\ P' hnx onl hC'1I repros .ntcd by thr 'C pi 'C 'S cr. hUI rnlill "111111111 11,'s Ill' Iii, southwestern urea or the culture: OIiC lrom III,' 111111111 III' IIi' St 'I' 'rsh:1 .h (( 'at. N(I. ()I), 011' 'OIlI'S i'r()111 /.III:lS/. 'III Ildldll'~'\ I III 'Ii\ and rill:! II , Iii' slra find i'rolll /.:llaliivi\ wcarx WI')

lid 1\ 1\ 11"1").'11'111 I\'IIIIII\'S, 'I'hcsc baxicnll cuhilonn pk 'l'S loul, rntlu-r lil«: \' ill Ilidl 'II 111111 ~I()()I. liilVilig iI l'Ii:I.~vd (11'11111111'111 (III llil' ,~Iililill'y I':lhwd III 111\ /1111\\ Il'dgl'. Sill'" pil'l'l'" IIIIV\' (1I1h II\'VIIIIl''' ill IiiI' :11\(1\11' III III tI I' 1'11111


,I. r-;lost of the zoomorph ic pieces are essentially geometric inform and the :lniIllal heads or tails are applied to this.

"'. ;\11 pieces of both types have shallow, roundish holes ill the middle of their ~llr["(lcc. In most cases there is one, four pieces have two two geometric and I,lin zoomorphic examples belong to this. The diameter of the hole ranges Iwlwcen 1.8 and3 em. Their depth is in most cases less than 2.5 ern.

(I 1,I1(lhs occur very often, irrespective of tile general frequency of applying klllliJ,~ on the accompanying pottery. This is valid also for the form of the l,jI()h,~: in some regions and phases, for instance, rather small longish knobs IV'I'L.' applied on vessels, in others large: round ones or knob-on-knoh 1111plil:;Jlions, not to speak of the prominent Knobs of the latest Lengyel phase, "li/',JIII hanging down from the rim. Meanwhile, as said before, the knobs Illlpli -d on altarpieces remain small and roundish in all regions and phases.

11ll' position of the applied knobs also demonstrates similarity between ,"'Ollh.:1 ric and zoomorphic pieces. I n the case of cu bic and flat rectangului i111:1rpieccs, wherever knobs are applied they are placed on significant parts, 1111111 'lyon the four edges of the upper surface in each case, often on the foui 'dges of the base. In addition they are very often placed on the exact centre ni' III(; four sides.

;\Pl1lied knobs occur frequently on zoomorphic altarpieces too, although t!II,,'\ iJllpl,,'ar rarely on other forms of zoomorphic ceramics. What is more, they :111 posiliolleci at similar significant points to those which occur on geomcu i: piecl's, e.g. on the edges of the longish rectmgular bodies. In many cases till kl1llhs occur on thejoints of the four legs, and they are sometimes applied Oil IIIL: middle 0[" the body side, i.e. the belly, exactly as on ge 1111.:11 H iJli:II'pki.:l.!s.

g, II~rlor:Jli()11 i,~ another common feature of tile two types of altarpieces. MII',I 1:1)1111111)l1ly we find (our vertical perforations on the four edges, mack: b I Ii ,~III:1i1 Iwig or vegetable stalk. In case there are knobs on the edges, III ".I kllllll.~ :11\': often perforated together with the whole object, but somelilllc:" I1I1 l'~sl Ill' the knobs is perforated, too (e.g. Cat.No. 22).

III(' pl'rroralion is in 1110s1. cases vertical which makes archaculogistx lilllt! 111:1/ IIIV objects Illighl have been hung. Tlis is, however, problematic IHIIII 1111111 11l\.' typological and from functions points of viiew. l~el11Hillilll' III 1\llidllgy, some objects arc perforated not(only) at the lou I' edgcs, hili 111\ ",WI:i1 1III1er k unhx, 100 (Cat. No 22). Furtherll1ore, the pL:rlill'lIl iun I ',(1llll'l imcs not vert i ':Ii hili oblique, approaching 111)ril',\III1::iI :llId 11111:-> 111111,111 '


Iii lillJl' 'I impossible to hang. Another argument against suspension is the II I 111111 SOIllC altarpieces are applied with pedestal supports on their base.

1111 dh :l.ssllming that the Lengyel altarpieces are but a variant of a common I I I I IVJl' occurring from the Early Neolithic to Late Chalcolithic in a large II JlIII \, il would be rather odd to consider none but the Lengyel pieces to be II

I 11)1' the 1110st part, belong to the late phase of the Lengyel culture, and till illl racteristics of the other altarpieces are appl ied with pedestals, too 11.\' i., 33, 34, 35, 37, 60, 61). This feature would be inappropriate 1IIIIIIIl'l'ss:lry if the objects were intended for suspension.

tlill Ilvlm in the consideration of these objects from a functional poinl I I" the association between some of the geometric altarpieces and II 111\ plutcs, or lids. These plates are of a size to fit exactly over the .1 Illlil'" ill the upper surface of the altarpieces. The plates are always I II d .II :III lour edges (Cat. Nos. 38-39 from Hungary). If we a, sum ' III Iii I. I rpic .cx were suspended, there would be no requirement for lit'

I 1.1\ 11111' I() be perforated. It seems reasonable to suggest thai Ill' III II/ 1111' liol ' in the upper surface - whatever it was - was covered with I 111.111',111)1 nlways with burnt clay lids like the ones discussed her" hili

I 11I11 1ll:llcl'i:ils could also have been used for this purpo e. 'I'll' lid·.

II II'iIlJlillll 10 nl low attachment to the altarpiece with some kind or IIII\.' I" 1III lill' PI' .scncc of the pierced holes - not only the vertical, hili II Idtilillll' :11)(1 horizontal perforations - on the applied decorative sidl' It 1111\\ lule these lids give an explanation about the functi n )/' til ' II d I 111\ lids themselves.

1111111 \[11111 I'nllll animal heads and knobs already discussed, other I tI 1IIi,IIillii se<':111 10 he relatively casual. Concerning all the inner "I 1111' culture, incised or painted decoration does not occur

I. I

doll 1')lII'~ 111\' sometimes incised with meander or serni-rneandroid 1111\\1 \1'1, ill the period when the pottery was often yellow, red, I lid II I [1,111111.'<1, I hav ' 1101 found (II1Y dcscripl inn or (In early paint .([

III IIII' ',lllilid [l11:1,~ , wh 'II 111()IIOl,;lirOIII<': while pa int is often used

I I dll 11111111111 IV' IIL'Vl'r ['illd Illis wh i h, j1i1ilil Oil nlt.upic ·CS. TIIl.!y ;\I'L.'

I II lilt 1',l'd \\ 111I IIIL';llldl'()id jllJllvl'lls (l', " t 'i«, N(). ;'/)' SOIIIl'lilll\.'S 1/11111111111111111' I vII [llIilllllll' 111,'11 (l1)Sl'l'vvd 1111/ Iii, 1111')\ 'sl r:llill is xt il] I I 111111" IJlllllllliJli,'is 'd pk 'v,',


I Ill' liI',1 phil:," Iii 1111' II II \ I 11111111 I 1!III'1i 11111,<1 "IIIIPIIiIIIl'd" 1111111 I I Iii 1'/1,'1 ill SIlIIIIII\\",1 1111111' 11\, 1\1' 1'11'1 1IIIIIIIIy lillt! 1I'I\'vs (II' \'1(1',1 I 1111111\1 '111'0111' !,:lilll Will 'II IIPII 'III', III 1'" 10 hnv ' h.: 'II lIs~'d ill 1111 IV I)' IllIl III I'PVl'I' 'illt '\' Ill, .ntir (lUll'l III 11111\'1 ',III In ' , Ill' II\(,: v 'ss 'I. 'I'li ' aluu pili I 11)(1, e.u. Ct«. Nos, .1-1. 35, -1.1, Sf), "PP'II' 'illlL!\' 10 he lIl1(1..: 'oml xl III 111 III p:11111 '<I ill Illis W:ly.

l-uurllv, ill I.;Olllplclilig. this section on gL!IH;ral typolo ,i ',11 ohscrvntiou-, \. 11111'.1 l' pl;lill III, typological characteristics which allow III' 10111 pI! I' '1IIIII>I'd iii th ' "Unusual" catcg ry to be considered ax ;ill;ll'pi "l'S. III 1111 ,)',1' III t 'ctt, Nos. / .30.3/,32, the general proportions and the 1'(1111\(1111'"

III Iii' IIl1ddk of the UPI er surfac were the main rCaS()11. III III' 'iiS' III ( III

" I, ullhouuh (he i'ngment seems ( be from () laq.!,L!1' oi1.i "1, \IV Iliid I

•• III', Iii 111/ 'I' 'sling coincidences with altarpi ccs. Fil'sll , 111' hody Iii Illl III!JIII 111111-01 have been rectangular, with four projc .t ioux, jlll',',dd 111I11111"lill~' ill animal hea I.. Secondly, as the broken traccx illlli'II11 I 111I1I1dl.11 howl was applied to Ih upper surface. Concerning siz' ;111\1 1111111 1111' liI!Jl' 'I lind tl very similar pedestal to those or other altarpi 'C 'S 1(1111111 III 11i11l,~l'S 1111 I nlso ill the same pil at this settlement. Traces 01' crust ,t! 1'\:11 11,)1111 11111\1' surfuc is also a feature that all of these had in COmmon.

III 'It the altarpiece from Ocsod-Kovashalom is somewhat 'arlil'l ,I' II \'IIIIII.'S lroru an early Tisza culture layer, it can be still compar '<I II) III' /,:lI:I~';; '1Ithal{\I.s finds 011 the basis or the I roport ion nlld S(lill' III Ii. I iypolo Ii 'ill features, such as the low bowl on the upper pari, the knol», I11I !,l'(I'Slill nud the .rustcd red paint (13;\NI:t:Y 1986a, Fig. 2, R/\(,/,I'Y \')1\ I:i).\. -7).

Iii, dislril))lli(lIIS pi' lilfcrcnt types and their frequencies in differ ~lIt pllll"1 :1I('IIIIIIII;II'I/,cll ill Iii' following table:


", 'j'
. ,
'" ."
1 1
" it
M 'I'll' above; pall 'I'll IlIilkl'S ,""11 ' basic inference posxihic, Iliu .. t IIi' nil, some words about distribution uud rc iioual differences.

When regarding the different regions it ean be seen clearly that the

outhcrn area of the Lengyel culture was richer in finds of altarpieces than the Moravian Painted Ware region par excellence. Forty-seven pieces are known 1'1'0111 Transdanubia (plus 2 unpublished finds from Balatonrnagyarod-Kapolnap"sl'.la, a geometric and a zoomorphic piece. These finds will be published by J. 111I1'Ila, therefore they are included neither in the catalogue, nor in the table). ('Ililipared to Hungary, Burgenland and Lower Austria has 16 published .rllnrpicces which is about one third of the number from Hungary. The situation III Slovakia and Moravia is similar (20 and 18 pieces. Only one geometric find Iid'. been published in Bavaria, and fragments of probably 6 altarpieces lx-longing to the late, unpainted phase are known from Little Poland.

Map 2. Classical Lengyel sites with altarpieces (The numbers are identical with Catalogue numbers)

Naturally, one; could 1:.1, \\1I"tI1l'1 til 'Il' 111'0 Illany unpublished pieces ill these regions that migh: hn.'i' 1111 rltcr til' above ratio. There might be SOIlI' pieces that have not b ell puhlixh 'd yet bUL they would probably be recent! round objects. As mention d before, altarpieces have always been in the focus or attention: numerous works have dealt with them, they were sometimes published even separately, torn out of the whole find material. The distribution of objects across the different phases of the culture is also of interest. (8)(' utaps Nos 1-3.) Within Transdanubia the occurrance of altarpieces is approximately equal in each period: 13, 18 and 16 pieces respectively. Ilowever, this is not the case in Slovakia, Lower Austria and Moravia, where the custom appears almost to have been discontinued by the late, unpainted phase. Across the three regions, only 4 objects come from the late, unpainte I phase in contrast to the 50 earlier pieces.



Map 3. Late Lengyel sites with altarpieces.

(The numbers are identical with Catalogue 17I1/'/'Iher.\)


'l'lli,~ difference is even more :-Il'ikllig II \\l' 11!Ill' 1IIIli Illlllllli I1I1II 111 ~ pieces h.'I(lIlging 10 the middle phase, the clnssicul ,,~I'i()d iii !\m:1111I 1111(1 pHrti .ularly III ,'-)lovaki8 mostly belong to the bcginnillg or the phase. '111i:-, ill Ilullgarian IVIIIIS, i:- the transition between Phase I and II: e.g. the rich find complex of ,'llillovka, being later than the initial phase, but earlier than the white painted l Il1s,~il::i1 period.

III this way we could also redivide the three phases into two: early and late.

III til .sc terms, the custom of making and using altarpieces evidently belongs to tli' curly period in the whole Moravian Painted Ware circle (Austria, Slovakia, 1\1(II'tlvin), but survives in Transdanubia till latest times, it will be perhaps even

tll)llp,L'r in Southwest Transdanubia. The possible causes of this will be dl',lll~sl'd below'.

Wililin the two types of altarpieces zoomorphic pieces seem to be less

1P.llllll'lllll. Namely, zoomorphic altarpieces are also fewer in number than the 1'1'1)1)1 -iric examples, represented by only 25 pieces from more than one 1IIIIHII'\:d. Unfortunately, zoomorphic altarpieces cannot be well used for finer 1I1111ysl.!s 10 judge whether they rather occur in a certain region or time period, II ' .uusc H lmost half of them come from two sites, namely Moragy- Tuzkoves lilt! Santovka and ten further pieces come from a certain small area in the vicinity of Brno.

Two things can be clearly observed about the time span of zoomorphic pieces. First, they do not occur in the latest phase 'I Secondly, the finds both I rom Santovka and Moragy-Tuzkoves belong to the earl iest part of the second (classical) phase if the tripart division is used. In this way - if we divide the lcngycl culture into two periods - an early and a late one: all zoomorphic pieces evidently belong to the first, older period.

Animal representation is otherwise not alien from the Lengyel-culture as it 1111t! been in use fro;11 early neolithic times. What is more, animal figurines and iltarpicces with animal heads occur parallelly with geometric altarpieces Ill' iinning with the Koros-Starcevo-Karanovo I period.

1,1.'1 liS have a glance at animal representations within the Lengyel culture. \lIillllll sculptures standing on their own are perhaps less frequent but they 11111111I 'vur as applications on different types of pottery. We could mention the

d I' ('II:I()I~r IV.2.: Problems in the Chalcolithic

I ,\ possihle exeption is the unpublished find from Balatonmagyarod-Kapolnapuszta, IIIVllli()ll<.:d in the distribution table, which I have not seen yet. As the excavator I" I I orvath observed, the stratigraphy is uncertain, but it is possible that the find ,'lIIlleS 1'1'0111 8 late settlement context.

well-known "hen" or nil !\s'I/)(1 gr:IVl' wh 'I" the whole pot is appearing in III ' form of a hollow bird figure (K/\I,I('/. Il)X5, I:ig. 75). Other hollow vessels forming an animal are known from Slovakia (e.g. the piece of the "Luzianky" phase from Abraham - NOVOTNY 1962, Figs. 42-43). Apart from such rarit ics they more often occur in the form of handles especially applied on clay lids. The lid handle of Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo, probably forming a twoheaded ram, has good northwestern parallels within the Lengyel culture (BANITY 1996b). The same types of animal heads, sometimes considered to be ram (STANKOVIC 1986, Fig. 1111,2, 13/1), sometimes bull representations (PAVlJK 1994) can be seen 011 zoomorphic altarpieces. They normally are not very realistic - in some cases it is impossible to define the species represented.

Therefore, it can be said that on Lengyel zoomorphic altarpieces the animals are formed similarly to those of other types of animal representati ns occurring in the culture. In other words, there is no typological difference between an animal figure occurring on a clay vessel and that on an altarpiece.

Comparing the above statement to that said earlier, namely, tll:11 typologically there is no basic difference between geometric and zoomorphic pieces, the conclusion can be drawn that we have to deal with a special lypL' (II object in different forms of outward appearance, but it is impossible to Illilk" 11 difference between these types by means of typology. Thus, at the present sl:II\' of our analysis we have to deal with different forms of one and the same type (II object, the altarpieces.

4.2. Altarpieces in other neolithic cultures

After defining the Lengyel altarpieces a uniform object type the next stc] will necessarily be to look somewhat further in time and space in order to sec whether this object existed in other cultural circles, too. Having identified nine features of altarpieces (see above) it would be appropriate to look for similar objects that have as many common features as possible.

Being aware of the genealogical connections between the Lengyel culture and the Linear Pettery circle it is reasonable to look for possible antecedents and parallels there first. Further on, knowing that the Linear Pottery culture developed from (at least in the Carpathian Basin and in Southeast Europe) the sirong: impacts of the early neolithic Karanovo I - Cavdar-Pernik-GalabnikSlnrcevo-Cri~-Kbrbs cultural circle it seems also obvious to search for possihl ' early neolithic parallels, too.



IIIL' '1iSloIII or Ilinking clay a llarpi 'C 'S .. 1:111', .II IliI 111111 111111' ,I, III ' 1',L'llcral 1111111<1\1 'Iioll or ceramics, i.e. they do not oc '111' \\ 1111 III ",ilIIIIIIL 1I11t! '!'ill I or in Iltv vnl'1 1:lyers or Lcpenski Vir. Beginning with Ill, l'i'illLl lind Prcscsklo \ ulturc, the early Neolithic in Mainland Grec c (Thcssaly), we find that a low IILllllh 'I' or such objects were in use (TI-IEOKI-IAI~IS 1981, Fig. 63-64).

(IOillg larthcr to Bulgaria, a few related zoomorphic pieces have been 111I111ti. l'hcsc are, as in the case with the find in the Pernik Museum not L'''~ 'Ill inlly naturalistic, only two drooping knobs on the front and the back. mark III' uuiuurl head and tail. The small conical beaker on the back. of the piece must IlL' III 'III inned here ("Jungsteinzeit in Bulgarien" No. 70).

Among geometric altarpieces we both find triangular ones, as at Marica and l'c-ll Knranovo: 4 examples and a further one from Muldava ("Jungsteinzeit in IIlilgtlricn" Nos. 26a, 26b, KANCEV 1973, Fig. 10, GEORGIEV 1961, PI. 7/1 a-c, 1)1.' I'I·;V 1968, Fig. 8/2). There are also a few rectangular ones. These latter IISII:l11 have four legs but they rather form a small piece of furn iture than an nnimul (Pernik, Quarter "Lenin": "Jungsteinzeit in Bulgarien " No. 68, (i:tltthnik: "Jungsteinzeit in Bulgarien ' No. 69). Both triangular and rectan~',Itli\r pieces have in common a round hole in the middle of the upper surface. litis is sometimes surrounded by a rim and in this way they form a transition hl'lw' 'II the circular depression and bowls.

III III' Sl,lI'cevo culture of the Middle Balkans a great number of altarpieces 1111 111(!IVI1, IlIillly of them strikingly similar in typological features to the late 1IIIillillii I l'lIgyel finds. The pieces from Donja Branjevina are rectangular, II" III)' " hnwl ill the middle of the upper surface. They stand on four legs which IIltI" '''"l1l1y he those of animals or of small "tables". In this way they unify I II "Ii 111\'111 types of altarpieces. What is more, small roundish knobs applied

I I 1111 ncrs increase the similarities (Donja Branjevina: 7 pieces, I I \~~""II 1%8, PI. 111, 15/2, 41a, 41d, 7/1, 7112, 8/1,1111).

11I1 11.11 rectangular find from Mostonga not only has four short legs and a Ii dlllll IlIl\\ I in the middle, but it is perforated at the four corners as well (I I 1\1 \~N I 1968, Fig. 15/4). The problem with the perforation here is the 1111 dl',1 II',S .d above in the case of pedestalled Lengyel altarpieces: as in the I I 111 01 pvticsl<llled object, it seems superfluous to perforate an object in order 1" 11.1111' II, if it is provided with legs or a pedestal. The perforation here also 11111 \ 1111 vc served another purpose. Perhaps these pieces were also covered with ',111111.' urunnic material which was tied to the altarpiece with a string - as I have ~llg '\.'~lcd in the case of the Lengyel finds.

Nine fragmcnrs 110111 1111111111111 1111i1 1 other pieces puhlishcd I'mlll 'lccic/Kragujcvac show III' lilljllii Ilill L' Itl llil:-> object type in the Sial' 'VI) culture: they all belonu 10 I' .ctnn rulnr pi' '1.:.', sometimes with knobs al IIIL' edges, and a round bowl in (he middle of the upper surface (KOIWSI';(' KOROSEC 1973, PI. 1311-5, 1317, 1311 0, GALOVIC 1962, PI. 2/6, 8/5-8).

In Transylvania, where the Cris variant of the Starcevo cultural circle occurs, the same altarpieces are known in great number as it has been known lor several gecades from the monograph of I. Kutzian (e.g. from the followin ' locations: Obessenyo/Dudestii Vechi, Nagyvarad/Oradea, Biharszeruandras/ Sintandrei, Tordos/Turdas and Nandorvalya/Valea Nandrului: KUTZI;\N I ()/I'I F:1. 15/5,3517,8,11,36/3,9,10,11,12,16, 16/5,6, 52/6,7). The nine finds I'mll:

Obessenyo, the piece from Biharszentandras and from Nagyvarad all rcpr 'S 'III the flat. rectangular variant standing on four low legs and having a sililllo\\ depression or a flat bowl in the middle of the upper surface. On two finds '\ 'II small roundish knobs are applied on the corners, on some others the eel ' 'S 111111 corners are emphasised with incised semi-rneandroid or zig-zag lines.

Recently, similar finds came to light from the Transdanubian Slfll'l'l'V!l culture (H. SIMON 1994). The site at Gellenhaza lies close to the late L '11 ' I\'I settlement of Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo where 13 altarpieces WL'i L' found. The Gellenhaza finds can be put to the category of flat rectangular, I(HII legged altarpieces. The flat bowl type is also present.

Enumerating some examples of early neolithic altarpieces it is impos 'il I' to neglect the well-known find from Lanycsok, Southwest Hungary, also beI~n.ging to the Transdanubian Starcevo culture (KALlCZ 1977-78, ibid. 1990). I his find can roughly be inscribed into a cubic form, there is a small round hole in the middle of its upper surface. The edges are emphasised with incised lines. It stands on four low legs, again forming a transition between furniture leas and those of some living creature. This latter possibility cannot be exclud, because (In the four corners of the upper surface - where round knobs are usual Oil Lengyel altarpieces - four stick-like heads are placed. According 10 il'o excavator N. Kalicz, these heads could well be female representations (I 1\1 1(' I 1990, PI. 11,79-80). The vertical incision on the front of the altarpiece \\lii! II ~'iln be considered a representation of a female genital - seems to supper: llil', Idea. No matter hbw unique this find appears,' there are several features, iv 'II II

II hilS a close parallel in a retarded Starcevo milieu of Porodin: a rectanuulnr altarpiece with the pubic incision on the front and with two heads, which, however, \1.'1.'111 10 be rather birds than female representations. The round hole on the Lanycsok


III II reduced form, which allow it to be grouped with other ( '1I1'1y) neolithic 1I11:II'pie .cs: ils rectangular form, incisions on the edges, knob-like heads on the 111111 '1)1'1) 'l'S a nd the round hole in the midd Ie belong to general features of illlIl'pie ' 'S whereas the four low legs are rather typical of the Karanovo I-Il- 1 1)111:-, Sial'(; .vo circle.

t\ 11111)1 .nrly neol ith ic altarpieces are undecorated. The rest, the decorated I !III '" h:IVL' most commonly incisions on the sides and on the edges, 11111,1101''»>111' lite rectangular form in this way. The patterns are usually straight I111I 1/' 1:1/' lilies and, most commonly of all, meandroid lines. These sorts of Iii 1111.1111111 11'1101 very typical for the early neolithic pottery as the vessels are 111111111111\ I~·d. white or black painted, sometimes red slipped. In the Karas Iltllllll II h 'I" painted ware occurs less frequently, incised straight lines and 1,11 111I1I111l' d -cortuion, i.e. several small plastic knob appl ications, become 11111111',111 'I) popular over time. Therefore, it can be said that similarly to our I 11/',\ l,l nliurpicccs the decoration of early neolithic altarpieces seems to be 11111', -r vutiv " or it would follow a partly independent tradition from the 11,','1)),111 iOI1 or ordinary domestic clay vessels.

Middle Neolithic

!\ i'I (:1' the Karanovo-Starcevo-Koros-Cris period, three more-or-less inde-

Ill"lHivlll1 developing kinds of altarpieces can be distinguished in three

dill '11'i111'L' liOI)S ofMiddle and Southeast Europe.

III III\' l lnlkun Peninsula in the Sesklo and the Karanovo III-Vesselinovo 111111111 1111111VI'IIII.'i altarpieces were made, of types partly rooted in the Early Nlldlllill \1'1 1)ldillg to M. Gimbutas a small rectangular four-legged table in I \I ill "I, 1I1I11Id ill n "house shrine" together with seated and standing II 111/111 dlld ',I,lIll' vessels. The small table had a shallow depression on its 11j'l"1 lilt ((tlr-.IIIIII/\S 1980,GIMBUTAS 1989a, Chapter 7: Fig.7.58.1, 7.63.1,2,

'I I II' l,e'(I) III' rectangular, four-legged type occurs at the Acropolis of

1111 II' \1' \l11/\N/\SS()I'()l)I,OS 1981, Fig. 5). A very similar piece to that of

" Jill 111111\':. 11'0111 Tsangli (PAPATl-IANASSOPOULOS 1981, Fig. 6). Another II uu II f'/'I d 11111 1" .rangular "vessel" also comes from the settlement of Tsangli ( I111 11\ II \I{IS 197], Fig. 13). Three middle neolithic, four-legged, painted 1"1 ~ I'f, .II \' ,lIpl\ II in a more recent work by Theokharis (Tl-IEOKHARIS 1981, Fig. II I I, itlld :1 lnruc number of similar finds were published from earlier and more

IllId 111I'1l~ into " larger but shallow depression on the Porodin altarpiece (GRBIC 1960, 1"1', ),11»),


recent cxcnvnt ion« III 1IIIIlidllili (11\1 \I \II:, ,'/\lI';I,I,t\I(I()11 I()XI, 1)1. lIN.

471 I -(), 4 ~I I , I.' i " .1.1/', \. \ ' I I \ I,)

!\ similar objc ,t Wllh 111111111 III I ,II I 1II'IIII()VO ill layer III ( il';OI{(;II';V IWII, PI. 11/1), while the l:,II'I' 11'1 lithic II':ltiitioll or using trian iular altarpieces still survived, as reflected hy tile finds (rom Kazanlyk (TOD()IWV t\ 1975, Fig, 1,_), The tradition of using small rectangular, often cubic altarpieces lives on. Examples of cubic altarpieces are known from .Jasa Tcpc (OFII:V 1(51), Fig. 80111, 80112) but this site also provided some extraordinary form " SOI11!.: of these altarpieces (OCTLV 1959, Fig. 80/2-6), looking like a chair with a bnck can be compared with those from Komjatice/Tornasove in Slovakia (sec ahovc, Cal. No. 74), wh i Ie another triangular piece represents a rare variant, dccorntcd with hand les wh ich may be representations of abstract an ima I horns (G I':()I\(; II \ 1961, PI. 14/3). Most recently a similar object belonging to the earliest pil:l,'\' III the Linear Pottery culture i.e. the Szatmar II. group, was found ill Me/.ilki I (",Ii Mocsolyas, Northeastern Hungary, the Szatmar 1I group (due to k iud 111111 cornrnun ication of the excavators J. K06s and N. Kal icz).

The finds from Kolshit in Albania reflect the UI1 '1Ial1g 'd 1()I'Ill, 11'11 published fragments all belong to the retarded, middle n .olif hic phase III II", Starcevo culture: tlat rectangular, four-legged altarpieces with n nat be \VI (II 01 shallow depression on the upper part. In some cases incised /,ig-I,:lg lines can J" seen on the edges (KORKUTI 1983, Fig. 10/1-10).

In Pelagonia the same retarded Starcevo objects are kllown,uch as rectangular altarpieces, with knobs on the edges and corners. Some have lcus on which a whole series of knobs was applied. This phenomenon is also known in Lengyel contexts (GRBIC 1960, Fig 16/5-9). Another piece lrom Porodin is considered to be a "three-legged ritual vessel" with a shallow roundish depression on the top iPraistona va Makedonia 1976, Fig. 248). The same typ wit h four legs is known from Vrsnik where it was found in associai ion with a rOlll'legged rectangular piece, having rneandroid incisions on the sides (I'm isto I'll I va Makedonia 1976, Fig, 85, 96).

Within the Vinca-Tordos culture extending widely ill I imc ,111<1 SJlIII'1 several altarpieces came to light. Some of them represent the more truditinunl form, others appear as a V inca invention, although the (lriglll:1i 1<'::ltllll", 1111 these latter piedes can be sti II observed. The three 1'l'il/-!,lllL'ilis Ii 111111 I III I':elenikovo represent the four-legged type with a shallow (iL-pr'SSiOII 1)11 1111' surface, and with incised meandroid patterns on the silks ( i;\I,()VI( II)() l 7/1-3). Similarly, the triangular altarpiece from Pavlovac will: :t knob Oil 11ll' edge Illay well belong to an earlier phase on the basis of its I pological features (SI;\IIO 1967, PI. 84). The find from Zitkovac is also a kg fragment or :III


llillil pi .cc, yCI, ils (II' '1ll'tI /1)1111 IIlId Ill, incised pattern placed within a frame do IItll luivc any antecedents ill I he l~nl'ly Neolithic (TASIC: 1958, Fig. 3 a-b).

lrorn the eponymous Villeil 11.:11 settlement numerous finds were published Ii', "miniature vessels" (Li~TICA 1967), but considering the typological features !l1~ '1IS,~(;d in detail above, some of them can probably be included in the 1 II 'gory or altarpieces. These finds are smaller than the average 5-12 ern in Ill'i)'111 :IS they normally do not exceed 3 em in height. However, features such /I', three or lour legs, incised patterns on the sides of one piece and a shallow 1\vj1I'L'ssioll on the upper surfaces as well as some knobs on the edges make this 1I"~lllllpli()n plausible (LETICA 1967, Fig. 6/8, 6/9, 6/11, 6/12, 6/17,5/21) Also 1111111 (he tell Vinca some finds were published by M. Vasic, that were originally II uixid .rcd to be altarpieces. According to S. Stankovic, who gave a thorough 1111:" Isis 01" these finds, only from the eponymous site 132 altarpieces are 11I1)WIl, while his whole catalogue of Vinca culture altarpieces consists of 212 11I1'L'L's! (STANKOVIC: 1986, 89). The author divides the Vinca altarpieces into ',1'\11'11 groups of which three can be considered "geometric", and one is 1l11lllllll'phic. lie also distinguishes a form that can be called a "miniature piece Iii lurniturc". I am not in agreement with Stankovic, however, in the point that III I Ill's ' rillds should be interpreted as altarpieces as well (BANFFY 1990-91, ('lllljll'l' \, I .) together with the very special Vinca type: a sitting anthropoIIl1l1jlllll' li).!,lII'ill(; holding a bowl on the lap." As the present study is focused on IIIIJI I I', I ()II'~i(li:rl'd In be altarpieces that occur in the Lengyel culture, I cannot

111111111 IIIl' 1'11)i1II'1I1 or inlerpreting this piece.

1',1111111111' I() l'ruistorijska Vinca as recorded by Vasic, the altarpieces both I I, til' III 1111 r'1'lllIll'lric and the zoomorphic type. In layer I, nine zoomorphic 111111'1\' I 111111 '.111'11 i'l'1IgJl1ClllS are shown (V ASIC: 1932-26, Vol. 1.,66, Fig. 113, I I til II 1'1', 129, 108). Also flat rectangular pieces are shown with III I, ,III ilil I'lip'~ nnd small bowls or a depression on their upper surface

II It) II III. Vol. II., Fig. 512,523, PI. 111).

1I1I 1IIIII',ylvnllinn facies (variant) of the Vinca culture is also rich in "111111" ii', lli~' publications of M. Roska and later that of E. Cornsa demon-

II III (I{II"I,,' I ()/II, COM$A 1980). The finds of the site Tordos resemble the I II h 111'1" IIIi ic predecessors: they are provided with four low legs; three of III1 III ""VI' :1 f'lul bowl on the upper surface, others have shallow depressions in 1111 ',Illlll' pl.rcc, Incised meandroid patterns may be observed in two pieces

I, 1\11 l'\lr:llIJ'dillilrily elaborate, black polished piece of this type, representing a jill' '.llillll IVOIlI(lIl silling on a clay platform and holding a round bowl on her lap, is in IIIl' 111111:'111:,,1 Museum or I:ine Arts (I3ANIIY 1985).

(ROSI(A 1941, liig. ()H/IH, I)HI!. 1>11'1, ()lII(), 99/17, 98/6, ()S/12, <)7/1, ()S/S), From the Vinca 131-11- l:i I 'rs ui' the site Parae/Parts three i)IiClrpi' .cx ill'V known, one with three, the others with four legs, and all with " ,,11:llImv depression on the upper part. It is worth mentioning that a sanctuar \ViiS excavated at the site Parta. The rich find material included large sculprurcs o!' "zod and zoddess" but without any altarpieces. They all came from or 111.::11' 1(1

b b '

dwelling houses (LAZAROVICI 1972, Fig. 1,2,3, LAZAROVICI 1989, 1,;\/./\1«( )VI( 'I

1991, Fig. 22, 23).

Certainly, in the eastern part of Romania, the people of the 1301i111-V:HlilSIIII and Hamangia cultures also used similar objects. The find [rom (\'11111\ lid I represents the flat rectangular type of altarpiece with incised /',ig-/,iI).!, lilll", 1111 the lower edges (BERCIU 1966, Fig. 3/3, COM$A 1980, Fig. j). III nddlillill .I flat rectangular piece is known from Vadastra with a sha llow (kpn ",,>11111 1111 II" upper part (BERCIU 1966, Fig. 38/2, COM$A 1980, Fig. 4), The ;\ldl'lli 111111 11,1 four legs and a flat bowl in the middle of the upper slirlil ,~, (( '11r--I'.l' 1111'11 Fig. 7/1).

Having reached the Carpathian Basin and by this 'cntrul 1'1111'111 II .II III necessary to say a few words on the formation of the Lin ':11' 1'11111 1\ Ililllll' III general. Namely, the middle neolithic cultures mentioned 111111\1 I III til il considered as direct inheritors of the earliest period 01' n!-!.l'il.'11111111' III 11111" of the Linear Pottery culture can certainly also be derived 11(1111 1I1I 111111111\ circle. However, researchers have to face several prob lcmx, l'l'F,llIdlllf' II" \\11\ of this impact. It has remained an open question yet, how :11)(1 \\IIVll' I' 11111\ III change happened. It is also still a problem how it was possihll.' 111I sill II II 1111111" formation to spread over the enormously large area between I '::lSk'I'1i 111111);:1" and France or Northern Germany. Originally, a small zone ()I' 1I1HlIII IWII hundred kilometres in Transdanubia has been thought to have he 'II 111' transmissive area, where the late Starcevo culture may have contacted SOI1I('; post-meso I ith ic groups (KALlCZ 1991, 1993). However, sites of the C,I 1'1 i 'sl Linear Pottery culture were found in the northern and western part, several thousand kilometres of Transdanubia (KAUFMANN 1982)1 Furthermore, the largely extended culture used strikingly similar settlement structures, house forms, pottery and other objects already in the oldest phase! The phen0Il1CIHIl1 offalling into several groups only happened in the younger phase. This prol:~'S,~ is therefore difficult to imagine as having set out from a small area in the SOI!!11 remote from the geographic centre of the culture (LUNING 1989,416-420).

This problematic background does not make our task easy to look lor IIIL' possible closest parallels and antecedents of Lengyel altarpieces. As compared 10 other cultures in the Linear Pottery circle the number of altarpieces is


',III pi I 111,11 low, 'l'llis 11I:i1,(;S any comparison difficult, (;SP -c inl!v ill Iii, CilSC or /'('1111Il'11 il' idlnrpi" 'S, albeit they arc present from the oldcs: phusc or the 111111111' ux the lind from Eilslcben proves (KAUFMANN 1982, 85, Fig. 9/1). ';111111' IIH)lllllI'pllic pieces arc known from the earliest phase of the Alfold 1 1111':11' !I()II 'J', i.c. the Szatrnar II group (see Tiszacsege-Homokgodor, 1 \ I 1('/ M 1\ 1\.1' A Y 1977, Fig. 4/8 a-b, and the recent fi nd from Mezokovesd, .III mdill ' I() Iii, kind oral communication by N. Kalicz).

II j, inter 'Still' to note that both the two flat rectangular, four-legged finds .111(1 1111' I(HlIllorphic pieces belong to the oldest horizon of the Linear Pottery 11111111(' (l'ljl.,;/,d-I',(ldlovicc: TICIIY 1962, Fig. 14/4; Bifia: PAVliK 1980, Fig. 1411, I' \ VIII II>X I, I:ig. 60). Perhaps slightly younger, but still belonging to the older 1111111(111 ()r 111, culture is another rectangular piece from Croatia. It was found in 1111' M:i1() 1 orcnovo- .culernent of Tornasica (DIMITRl.IEVIC 1969, PI. 19/7).

(), l liickmnnn, Icaling with the whole ritual find material of the Linear 1'1)111'1 I .ulturc, mentions some hollow zoomorphic figures, that he also brings 111111 '()IlIH; 'lion with the southeastern Vinca culture and interprets as objects Il'llIll'd I() typical neolithic altarpieces (e.g. the find of Nieder-Weisel/Germany

111111111' lrcun a 'wine burial and interpreted as a bothros - HaCKMANN I II / 1, II), I),

110111 d -cor.uion the same can be said as in the case of early neolithic 1111.11111(,((", :1 ircat number are undecorated, on the rest some serni-meandro id 1111 I 11111', 11111 Ill' ohs .rvcd, although this pattern was not common on decorated l"tll'l

Late Neolithic

III, II ,dlllill 1,1'11' <.:I culture which has produced more than one

II 11111\\ II ,ill.l1 jlll'l'l'S is rightly regarded as rich in such finds. Never-

II I 11111 II 11111(111 ' phenomenon: in settlements of other contemporary III II jilt 'I IH, IIIIVL' been round in equally high numbers.

III 1111 /I,dl,11I pl'llillsula the custom of preparing altarpieces seems to

11'"111 II III 111, 1 nruuovo IV-Kalojanovets phase and in the Maritsa culture 11111.1111'\1\ Y ), IO(l,' Numerous triangular, rectangular as well as zoomorphic lillll , till' known from this period, On the site of Sitagroi a zoomorphic dill JlII'l't' was lound with a bowl on its back (RENFREW - GIMBUTAS 1969,

,\ lthou ih ill Ilulgarian literature these phases are referred to as Early Chalcolithic, I I 1'1'P Iii.' l lungarian terms here as these phases can be regarded as being parallel to the 11'11"\1,1 culture, covering the Late Neolithic in Western Hungary.

I~ig. ,611). ()11i1'1" \\,'Il' 111111111 II 11111" 11111 (illlti("dill n, (:I! 11'1 ill \ 1!lIl', Fig .. ; NII,-()I,(I\' 1!l/(), 1'1' II; Nil III (IV 11J/'1, 1:11', lin II) 1111111\,1 1\llI' III altarpiece which III ,'III:, ill 111(' 111('1\ i,' III :1 1',l'llIlll"ll'il' 1II!IIIglilili 1111111 \\ 1111 III applied animal hvud un 1111' 1111 dl' (.111,'111 1'l'pl'/I'lllv<iiv 'i'(II)(11 (IV,\ 1'1111. 1'1. 1/1 ).

In the Middle Ilnl":lm, Illl' 1(11111)..'. 'I' jllI:ISl' IIi' Illl' yillill ('liI[IIII' kll I111 especially rich 11\111 Illnkl inl llilill i'1'()11I n qu.uuit.uivc :111(1 (Jlllilil:111 l' 11111111 II/ view. From IIIl ',Ik 1\111 ulu ill I)l'in~'\lllin (M:I' -donin) 1111 T 1('111111 '111.11 altarpieces WI,' 111111111 \\ 1I11 "Ilolls on III' 'd icx :lllil uu Iill' ,-;id 'i,. 1)111' \\ 1111 tI

round hole ill IIIl' 111111111>" Ill' IIIi' IlpJll'l' surlucc (SIr-.I(I~1 \ I II HJII I I

TODOROVIC 1(1/11, I,j, 'i, I, (1(», These lcnturcs nlld IiiI' Jllllllllillilll' 111.111 them extraordinru Ii, ',11111111 III SIIIII ' I, 'Il)..!, 'I finds, l'Spl't' III II , III tlu '11\111 'I I phase. Some su 111~'1' I '1'lilllFlillIl' 1'1'11).\111 'Ills (II"' known 111)111 ('Iii ,I (1111 11111" on four legs, aru 11111'1 10, 11111 I1l1d both hnvc Iwo (rinu '111111 v '1/11 ,iI II III I IJIJdll I tions on the sid .. , I hI' llill<l pil.'l'l' is ill III' lorm orn 1111 11',1111 '11111 Idolli lilt perforations (KII \NII I I III! I. I,'ig, 1/11- .), SOIlH.: 0111 'I IIIIFIIIIIII ,1/ 11111111111 I

pieces were alsu 111111111111 llil. sill' (1\.11 AN( lSI' I SIr-.!! 1"1 \ 11111I1i'11 II 1'/

Fig. 18, 25).

S i m iI ar fru F I Ii( 'III. III 1'" 11111)' 111111', It liIl"-1 ' , ,'d pu: I". ill 11111' tI II , 'I I

Vitosevac (KRSIII 11)(,1,1)1,1/1, \) IIlld iI Jill 1'1 ofIhc 1IIIIIIl'IIIII,IIIIII 11111111111 site Predionica, \\ 1111 1111 i~l'd jllll':tlki and III .nndrnid l in '., ( I \1 11\ II 1'1,1) PI. 77/5,78/5,71'/11, /11./';., 1M', /()/1), !\1l()11, 'I' 'J'(lI1P Ill' rc 'lilllI'lIlll1 1111111111 I from Predionicn 1111 Id 1111 ('lnhul'IIl ' I' 'l'I(ll1glillll' Ill' trinn uilur 1111111 1111I111 111,1 animal heads illi 'IJlpll'd un Iltv 1111' -c 1Il1gl's, Till' slwllll\\ dVllIl' ,',11111 IIlId incised meandn III I I ill nlwlI IS II\,' observed (iAI,(IVI( 1()5(), 1'1. /X/I, l ll ), 78/3,78/4,77/1 II/I, IMI, 17/,1, IX/(I), On the scmi-zoomorph ic pi 'T 111111111 at Medvecinjak Iilill hllllll\\ plll'I'~ (il' '(II:1ll'" with ~pil';lIoid ill 'iSII)IIS ~1!h~11 lute for the knoh- 1111 III\, l'llilll'l~ IIi' Ihl' llinllgllinl' 11I)(1 , III the Illiddll,.' 01 Illl' upper part there I' • .I ""111111' .ylindricul howl ( iAI (lVI(' I W/\ I:ig, 1), 'I III) rectangular aluu ju l~' /111111 (:1\1(111' should Iils() ill' Illl'llli(lllL'd I"'IV, uru- I', undecorated with II JI 'dl'~Ii1I, lh ' 11111 'I' lin,s 1\\\11' I 'gs. lIill ' P '11(lI:11 illll~ 1111111 ',1111' rim towards the ·,11.11111\\ dI'JlI'l',s,..,il)J1 IIlld lids pi 'l'(' is illL'isl'lI willi 111('IIII<illll(l motifs on the sidl", 1111" Ilil IiiI' Iv~',,,, (S I ,\I II I I () I ,1'1, II)

As the Pre. 11111/1'111 ;111(1 1'1\1 h ('\1 '1Ikili 1IIIII/Ilii 1111'> 11l1'I11'<I /111111 III' Eastern "Notenlupl ' JlIiIl"V 111111' I ,llIl'lIl 1'llIll'l\' 1'llIlllll' lilt' 1111111 jlll'll", /(1111111 e.g. in Tirpesti I till Ill' Ill'lIll'd II', Llilly 1111',1' 11I11:lliI'l', III IIII' 1l'1I~'\l'l 111111111 also having slnllll' 11111'111 l'lliil'l\ 11Il'll'dl'III', ()III' /1.11 11'1'1:111/'111:11 111111 iJll 11 xcrics or knoln 1(11111' IiiI' "'lIk, .1111111\1'1 1(1111 111'1',1'" jllI'll' 11,1:, 01).1,11111 1\\11 prll,ieclillg, 1\:1111111 Iii 1'1111111',11111111 '1111 ( II~I'. \ II)X() II' 111/ X) !\ '01111111


ruundish 11 I 1;ll'l'i ,\, ,'IJlIHIIlIP Iill 111111 11\\ 111" \\ I iI,'o tound together with 1111111 'I' )lIS I 'g I'l'ii 'Ill '1lIH Ii 11111 II II I 1111111111111 ill II pice ',' inxidc a house at I'II'P ',,'Ii, Masl ol'llles\.: II" 1'1' I ',111'111' III' ill\ 111 ue I with parallel incised lines (Mi\I\INI':SlIJ-13il.(,IJ I()XI, I:i/" II II), I1111 (I, 11'1/10-12), Onc piece among the Tirpcsti rinds is especial] 1'1,.'11111''' ihlv, sin '~' h 'sid's Il(Ivillg IQLlr legs and a

lin l low bowl in the middle (lI'IIi' upper ,'111'1':11":1.: it is :ds() perforated on all four "\lI'1! .rs, like the Lengyel rinds (M/\I{INI':S(,IJ-I~il,(,11 Il)~ I, I'ig 114/17 a-b),

Further to the west, the heirs )1' the !\11'<:ilci I,inc;lr Pottery tradition, the ,'/ilkidhM and the Tisza cultures differ strongly from the Vinca circle as regards their cult sculpture, including altarpieces, The Vinca altarpieces - similarly to lcmnlc I'igurines of the Vinca culture - represent one of the most important gl'llups of neolithic altarpieces both from the quantitative and qualitative points 01' view. In the northern neighbourhood, however, the custom of producing .iltarpieces is almost absent."

III 1983, an interesting clay object was uncovered in the early Tisza culture luv 'I' of the tell settlement at Ocsod-Kovashalorn (BANFFY 1986a, Fig, I, I )\( 'I,I\. Y 1987, Fig. 27)_ At first glance it seems an unusual 15 ern high pedesIldl'd vessel with a support perforated on four sides and ending in a flat "lilt Illl'lll, where an omphalos-like feature and double knobs in each hole can be III) .rvcd. I have discussed these phenomena and compared them to other .uuph.iloi in neolithic Southeast Europe elsewhere (BANFFY 1986b)_ Now if we .t pprouch th is object with the framework of the typological features of neol ith ic .iltnrpicces in mind, we find that this "vessel" can well be compared to these in '. -vcral respects. First of all, the lower part of it can be regarded as a rectangular, quasi cubic altarpiece, having a bowl on the upper surface, Furthermore, Illis bowl has four knobs placed symmetrically on the rim, and each knob is v '1'1 ically perforated. The object is painted with crusted white-on-red paint both (Ill ils inner and outer surface, with lines and meandroid patterns.

The monumental "altars" from Hodmezovasarhely-Kokenydornb should n lxo be mentioned here merely on the grounds that their proportions are similar In average pieces: a rectangular, almost cubic lower part with a bowl applied to 111i..: upper surface (BANNER - FOLTINY 1945, PI. 6/5, BANNER - KOREK 1949, 1'1. X/X-9)

K Sill1il;lrly, there is a great difference between the enormous quantity of Vinca ligill-ilies and the Tisza sculpture which are smaller ill number, yet, the Tisza culture pi 'l'L', ;II-C almost always unique finds often considered to be representations 01' real f',lItis, Ill', more frequently, goddesses - cf the famous "sickle god" from Szcgvarl'I'I/,k(\vcs (II' 111l' "VCI1IISCS" (II'I Iodmczovasarhely-Kokenydomb).

I'll 1111'111,' ill 111 ' Chalcolithi«

It is ,a fact thai 111 ' Ilisl ph:ls . 01' the Lengyel culture continued into III' 1'1'.'1 phase 01 t~le Can :ILhi<l1l Larly Chalcoluhic, which is represented hy 111' Pl'ol • Tiszapolgar and l_,szapolgar horizons in the Great Plain, and the Guru 'IllilaKaranovo VI I:onzon to the southeast. In this latter region the IYI ',' or altar~leces survive till the last phase of our Chalcolithic and the Larty 13 I'() I 1/, ' Age 111 the ~alkans, namely, the Ezero-Cotofeni-Baden complex. In I~'I.~I 'I'll Hungary all forms of altarpieces disappear at the beginning of the Tiszapolg{li' culture. Another part of the problem is, that in the Carpathian Basin not onl the altarpieces but also female figurines, house models and other types 01' eli! ) sculpture vanish suddenly_ In Transdanubia, one can observe a similar br ak, yet, this Occurs one phase later, namely, after the Lengyel culture. This phenomenon can clearly be demonstrated on the basis of recent excavations 01' Late Lengyel and the forthcoming Balaton-Lasinja settlements in Southwest

Hungary (BANFFY 1996c), '

To throw at least some 1- 01 t tl bl f I'

Ib 1 upon une pro em 0 t liS asymmetrical

development, a short review of the possible prehistoric causes should be drafted

The rich Neolithic and Chalcolithic heritage of Eastern Hungary has always been researched more intensively than that of Transdanubia, Therefore, the relative chronology, the sequence of cultures and their characteristics are LIIIdoubted_ly clear. Furthermore, good sources for paralleiization are at disposal concernll:~ the Tisza and Lengyel II (wh ite painted ware) phase; moreover, synchronltle,s ?etween the middle chalcolithic BodrogkeresztLII- A phase and the Balaton-Lasll1Ja culture. Owing to the late Lengyel project at Zalaszentbala.z' and surroundings ~nd also to some other West Hungarian excavations the last, unpainted ,phase of the Lengyel culture could well be parallelized with the early Tiszapolgar culture, This synchrony was also confirmed by calibrated radiocarbon dates (gained from both charcoal and bone remains; HERTELENDI 1996)_

Not only the existence of neolithic altarpieces, but also a number or settlement fe~~ures, pottery and lithic instrument types suggest a retard d neolithic tradition at the time of the Early Copper Age in Transdanubia_ This delay may have been caused by many factors; here I shall mention some Ihnl .night contribute to the situation

Geographical factors alone cannot be used as a simple explanation 1'01' Ihi..: "h(lckwarclness" of Tran--da,llll,hiil which Iii ,~ west of the Tiszapolgar area. N;llllely, In the Middle Nc()IIIItIL', :11 lit", rirnc 01' the Linear Pottery culture, Ihis


1I'I',illll \\ilS Illl I'ss 11(11111',11111 1111111 II 111.11111 \llllId vqlliv:tli.:nt in tile Great 1IIIIII'II1'i(lii 111:li1L l)iITc'I'l'II"('~1 l 11111111 III I 11\ IIII( Ii ',II 1IIIpi ,

(lill til' 11Ick or III ,till (il11I'\ i'. '''II'~'1 ,It. Ihnl 'I'rnusdanubia may be

'11i1l1lll1illllt' to rthcr reginl1s ill tlli~ 1l11:1~' NIIIII'I, ;11 the time of the I illIll'l'ill1lv;\ and Tiszapolgar copp 'J' Wid 'old horizous there are hardly any I'IIIIII~, l'ill' metal use in the I'inal plHISC or tile Lengyel culture. This 11.11 kl\III'<!IICSS is still evident (at least to some extent) in the so-called third 111111'1'1 horizon of the Middle Chalcolithic (KALlCZ 1982,7). In this period the 111111\'11111 lrom eastern Hungary is much richer than that from Transdanubia. \I'dlt lrorn the lack of any late Lengyel and Balaton-Lasinja cemeteries - the t\I'" Iii site Irorn which 1110st gold objects come in the TiszapolgarI IlIdlllpll'll',s/,tllr period - the western CsMord-Stollhof type deposits occur so I III h IlInl \VI.: even know of copper imitations of the golden pendants (e.g. in

,11.11,11 II:tsiis/.iget - M. VIRAG 1986, or the new find of a similar piece of 1IIIIIIsln:ld-II')rnle-DIECKMANN 1987, STRAIIM 1988).

SlllilC researchers also take ecological factors into consideration. According III II. 'lodorova (TODOROY A 1989, 27), a strong cl irnatic change took place at Iii, '11(1 or the Neolithic (in Hungarian terms): it was the warmest time phase ~IIl!." Ill' last glacial period, This would have had an effect on all European I 'l,illllS: although the sea level rose 3-5 m (see also MORRISON 1968,92-98), lhv iuland steppe regions - probably together with the Great Hungarian Plain - Ill' ':111 tn desiccate. As the soil became dry and hard to cultivate, especially with IIl'olitllic instruments, the importance of animal keeping grew and gradually IlIlIk the place or agriculture.

This process, quite well documented in Eastern Hungary, affected l'rnnsdanubia to a lesser extent, owing to its different, hilly landscape, more 1IIIII1id climate and rich vegetation, Due to these factors, the desiccation there 111:1)' have been Icss intensive. Therefore, the Lengyel population was probably II()t' under pressure to stop or reduce plant cultivation for the sake of a more 1IIIIhi ic stock-breed ing way oft ife. A Ithough some hidden traces of a slow move III\\nrds (\ chalcolithisation can be detected at late Lengyel settlements (BANFFY 11)1).1. I <)<)6c), the retarded development in this case is obvious.

Till' idea of preparing and using some altarpiece-like objects emerges "IHIt':I<lil:illly in the Late Chalcolithic althouuh to an even lesser extent than the

, ' b

',lIl1ti:lt' revival of clay figurines. In case the cultic interpretation of small two-

luuullccl I~ilden jugs are ignored (BOUZEI<. 1985, 75), from the late chalcolithic 11:1I\v11 Coiofeni circle there is onlv the Cheile Aiudului altarpiece which be

, ~

Illl'lIt toned here (C1UGUDF:AN 1983, 173, Fig. 82).

The bcginnin 1 ul IiiI' ,'(lIll1il'll,~t 1':III'OPUIIl Early 13rOIl/,(; Age is I' 'PI' 'S 'lit 'Ii by cultural discoutinuii will .h can be traced in a number 01' ways, illcl(l(\illl' the sudden disappearance ,)1' cult objects; although these objects arc so 'OIIlIlI()11 in some of the preceding periods that they can almost be regal' led as III:lS, products. In the Carpathian Basin all kinds of plastic art became restrict '(\ to some coarsely made human and animal figures from the Transylvanian Gl inn Ill-Schneckenberg, the Hungarian-Croatian Sornogyvar-Vinkovci cu ltur 'S :111(1 later the Hatvan culture in Northeastern Hungary. Only one region 01 Southeastern Europe seems to preserve the chalcolithic traditi ns wil l: 11 marvellous plastic art partly born from Balkanic violin shaped idol (Tlllrvlf\11 1977, 416-418, Pattern 184), Within this context it is no surpri e that ,III 1'1111\ Cycladic rectangular, 14 x II ern marble object shows some features 01' 1':1111('1 altarpieces: it has a slight depression on its surface and it is v 'rti 'nih I" I forated on the four corners (provenance unknown, Early Cycladic I II. 11111\t II 1977, Cat. No. 327). Another rectangular marble palette (13 x () VIII) III, I raised rim and thus a shallow depression on the surface, with similn: I I I1II I perforations on the four corners. The surface has traces () I' I'l'(l 11,11111111 1 I further parallel to numerous Lengyel and other earl ier pice 'S (JlI I 111'1101111 I 1111 known, Early Cycladic I, THIMME 1977, Cat. No. 329). Fill:i1I). II ',111111 III I (height 12.5 ern) with its seven hollow containers around <I (iL'PII''' ,1\111 III Iii. middle of the surface strongly suggests a sacral function, ,III illtl'IPIIIIIIIIII reinforced by a building (house?) model applied on one side 01 till' IIIIJ\ I I (Melos, Early Cycladic II, THIMME 1977, Cat No. 3600-/)). Tllis 1:lltL'1 III11 I I showing typological and most probably functional correspondences \\ 1111 neolithic and chalcolithic altarpieces, may be cautiously interpreted as :I SlIII !II link to later periods, where such objects were used for votive purposes xu 'Ii :IS food offerings or libation (NILSSON 1950, 117-154, especially Figs. ] ()-/II. BOUZEK 1985,70-75, especially Figs. 33-35).


On the basis of the differences outlined above the original middle neolithic twofold picture seems to survive in the period of the Lengyel culture, the l.at ' Neolithic: the great importance of altarpieces in Southeast Europe on the one hand, scarce finds with a stress of partly other typological features on the oth .r.

In the light of the above drawn picture it is no wonder that the altarpicc 'S ofIhe Lengyel culture reveal far more contacts with the ·outhern (Middle Balcauic and Southea t Europ '<Ill) .ulturn] gl'llllpS in several respects.


I'll ',I h, II~ \\ l' l,)11 01 I 1111 1111 I Iii dlill II' I \) lin' "II ',,\1 door" neighbouring ,)ll'll III lliv SUllllil'II'I, 11111111 I 1111 I1I111 tllIllllIlI:1I1 lcngycl culture, has the III ,Ii ",I 1111111111.:1' III :lIllIlllIll I, 111111111" 1111 I .I', l'l III I purcd to the 16 published Ilin .... III Austrin, _() III ,'111\111 III, II III f\11I11I\ Iii, I in Southern Germany and IIIIIIII\' () ill I .iulc Pol.uul.

SI'I.·ulldly, we can itlL'll1 il SOIIII.: lcatur 'S appearing on Lengyel altarpieces \\ 111\'11 SL'L'III I() go back In the early neolithic Balkan tradition and also seem to 1111\ . cont inucd steadily throughout several centuries until the Late Neolithic, 11I1 ",(, 11 rc <IS lollows: geometric (cubic or nat rectangular) forms; geometric 1111111 comhincd with animal heads; knobs on the corners and in the middle of

Ilk ... I hi bowls, or the same bowls which are sunk into the body, resulting in 11.1111)\\ ruundish depressions; incised lines or meandroid patterns On the other h.uu], 1111.' regular vertical perforations on the edges seem to be a typical feature Iii I l'lIgy 'I altarpieces, rarely occurring in other periods and areas.

Willi regard to the Lengyel culture itself, there is another remarkable I" ohk-m we have to face, namely, the sharp difference between the so-called 1':!"II.'J'Il lind western part. In the case of the ritual find material, there are large, III "il1:II') cemeteries east of Lake Balaton (e.g. Zengovarkony, Moragy, Aszod, .., 11'\ "II/Svodin), but there are no traces of any burials (except some peculiar

III ,Iv lilies with ritual contexts) in the western part Female figurines occur 11'111l' Ircqucutly in the area of Western Transdanubia, Burgenland, Lower

\11.,11 i:1 ;11\(1 (he Moravian Painted Ware circle, These figurines all belong to 11111\ :1 IL'w types and were apparently produced according to a strict canon In Illl' l';lsll'l'Il parr, on the contrary, figurines are rare, but these almost all belong III dli I 'l'l'lll types.

S urpris i IIgly, these differences are not reflected in the distribution of :lililljliL','L'S, <IS they occur in both areas. It is relevant to this study to ask two 1j111'"li1111S about the altarpieces: I) why do they still occur at a period when all '.!III tlnr pieces have vanished in the neighbouring Tiszapolgar culture? 2) why til I Illn become more common as we approach the southern border of the I l'1I ') "I .irclc?

11\ means 01- comparing different typological features in the first part of this ,( II<" I I ricd to prove that the cubic, flat rectangular and zoornorph ic rluu pi "'L'S, occurring in the Lengyel culture, are different outward forms i.e. dillpl,\ variations of one and the same object type. Moreover, I also tried to ',1111\1 Ih:ll thix object type is not a unique phenomenon within the Lengyelf\ 1111 nvinu l'aintcd Ware circle - it is rather part of a huge tradition beginning in 111l' \,:11'1\1 ncol ith ic Balkan peninsula and spreading with the earliest neolithic 111\ 'III ions, Illrough the Starccvo-Koros cultures to the Carpathian Basin, and


with the transll1issioll (1(1 I I1II "'S,'!.·I' c: 1'111) 10 Linear Poll 'ry cultur 'S, II is III be stressed that the I":lillres which nrc only typical 01' the Lcngycl-Mornvinn Painted Ware circle represent no more than a subtype within the group or neolithic objects interpreted as altarpieces.

The number of altarpieces suggests that this custom was practised intensively in the Southern part of the cultural area and became gradually less and less important towards the north and the west. After the first horizon 01' altarpieces this tradition reached its heyday during the long centuries of Vinc" life in the Mid-Balkans.

The large number and probable importance of altarpieces found at Southern Lengyel sites seems to reflect the great influence of the Vinca culture in this area. As this Vinca impact became weaker in the Slovakian, Austrian and Moravian areas of the culture, the altarpieces became fewer in number, too.

In this way, Lengyel altarpieces may represent the final period durinj: which the earlier neolithic practice of using mass-produced small clay !l11:1I pieces can be observed, After this period, in the course of the South 'II.~I European Chalcolithic, these objects become sporadic finds although they slill survive in the Bronze Age in one single region: Thessaly, the Cycladic Islill\d~ and Crete.

When considering the chalcolithic development of the objects, a problem emerges which cannot be solved without assuming at least some changes in ritua I I ife.

Earl ier [ tried to emphasise the phenomena wh ich might reflect a certa i II survival of neolithic cult traditions even in areas such as the Carpathian Basin where figurines, house models, altarpieces and anthropomorphic vessels suddenly disappear (BANFI'Y 1990-9Ib)_ In support of my argument I noted the existence of offerings, bothroi and construction sacrifices, the possible anthropomorphic character of perforated copper and golden pendants etc., and finally commented on the geographically limited area of the vacuum. In the chalcolithic Southeast European culture, namely, there is no break, the Cucuteni-Gumelnita-Karanovo VI cultures continue producing all kinds of cull objects, including altarpieces.

Generally, the above thoughts can be still accepted as this process with great probability went on during the Calcolithic. However, a cult object type is standing now in the centre of interest, which type does disappear at the time of the early Chalcolithicl (This naturally means a certain change.) As all ritual objects discussed occur in sites of real settled communities, this transformation could perhaps be plausibly explained by the climai ic changes mentioned above, resulting ill the abaudoucru 'II( Ill' sl 'ild .'elll -mcntx. II is also possible 10

, 111111l'\'1 III' Iii ,II i'1'L'qlll'lll \ !II illllll'l 11'1> witl: stronger effects from the south- 1.1',1 nnd Iii' nhs 'II" (II 1(1\\1'1 IIIIIIIIH'I with gradually diminishing southern 1111I'ilvh Ill' Middle l~lIl'()p .nn. 1.1111'111 1'1111 'ry and Post-Linear Pottery (Aichbuhl, ;111\\ I~'h 'nlillgcn, Stichbaud, Mi .h .Isbcrg, Rossen, Munchshofen) tradition. I \iI' problem xti II rema ins, however, that the chalco I ith ic cultures of the t \ II plilliiall 13asin, the Tiszapolgar, Bodrogkeresztur, Balaton-Lasinja cultures, I1I11 III ~p 'HI- or the Baden complex, have extremely strong southern contacts!

I 'h , instrumentarium of typology is apparently insufficient for supplying III 111'1 1(IIII1(\C(\ explanations. Therefore, it seems to be necessary to look for IIIi 'I liSp 'cis or analysis, too.

5. 'outextual analysis

The typological features of a find can be observed straightforwardly: each object, even fragments, is suitable for such a study. With the help or thix method it has been possible to draft the distribution of altarpieces with common typological features as well as indicating their possible origins, cultural contacts and eventual survival.

The whole study would miss its goal, however, if we did not po .c the question: what were these objects used for?

While remaining within the confines of methods appropriate to archaeology, it is possible to suggest some plausible fields for the use of these objects and also firmly exclude some other interpretations.

The following common features of altarpieces suggest that they might hav ' been used in a fairly similar way. The size is that of a small vessel. All of them are portable objects, not fixed or built in. The consistent form, the repetiti n or zig-zag or meandroid decoration and the knobs on the edges and the m idd I I' the sides can be indicative of a strong tradition, remaining unchanged over the lives of different cultures. No matter what form or subtype it belongs to, each altarpiece has a hole or at least a slight depression in the upper surface. Thi feature seems to be of greatest importance. It can be regarded as a sine qua nOI1 condition for defining an altarpiece.

5.1. A technical argument. Why not oil lamps?

It has been a tradition among researchers of the Lengyel culture to call the discussed clay objects oil lamps. In what follows I shall attempt to disprove thi - first, by means ofa technical argument.

The typical circular shallow depression, occurring on all objects of thi type is thought to have contained some oil or animal fat. However, thi depression is, in most cases, too small and shallow to hold enough fat or oil to keep a flame alive for more than just a few minutes. Even in the case of most elaborate pieces, despite all perforations and knobs, there is never a sign - a hole, depression, or even a sort of incision - of being intended to take any sort of wick or thread.

Furthermore, two pieces, coming from a dwelling house at the site Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi rnezo were suitable for another analysis. The objects were not washed after recovery and Iii' ar 'hi! .obotanist F. Gyulai looked f I'

\ I

II~l' IIi' huruinj, 1111\111 I 1111111I.111J1l ' \1 I III Jilll).!, 10 his analysis, the tiny 111'1 V'; Ill' cha l'l' used 1111 1\1)' 1111111 \\111 hili II -<I secondarily on the whole ,\llllIl'l' 1l1'111l: oh.il: 'I. As IlI11" l1i('\'\", \\\'IV Ivill~ ill the debris fr0111 a fireplace, 1\1', I~ 11\11 surprising. I I \1\ V .v 'I, IIllvl :1 VVI')' thorough microscopic analysis in 1lIIIililliliion with computer .valuutiou. no hu I'll I I~lt or other organic remains or 111\ 11':1 .cx or burning could be observed on the surface of the small round ll'jlll'Ssiolis. Whatever material was put into these depressions, it did not need 111111111)2,.

liunlly, a new altarpiece from the well-known site Tesetice-Kyjovice was

1"\hli~ll(;d recently (KAZOOVA - KOSTURIK 1993, Cat No. 89). According to 1iL' publication, traces of red paint were visible inside the two round Il'jlll'ssions on the surface of the object. This painting can either mean that III,jll:llly the whole surface of the altarpiece was painted red, which remained 1111, ill the depressions - or that the painting was restricted merely to the small ivpl'l'.·sions. In both cases any function as an oil lamp or anything connected ~\ IIIi burning can obviously be excluded.

5.2. Contextual argument

Now having produced an argument against an interpretation of the objects I, \\11 1:IlI1PS, it is time to look for positive indications as to their use. This leads 111111111111 In (\ consideration of the provenances in which they occur and 11I11H'llIlIlI'l', 11 detailed examination of their exact context and of other objects

1111,,1111 II the were associated. All this is called the archaeological context of I 111111 111.11 li\iI ' reveal how the objects were used, or at least how they were I I d III 1111 III~I instance.

\1 1111'. Pllilll our task gets hard. The more suitable the finds are for I" dlll'lI ,iI I -xcurch, the poorer the most of them are as subjects for a \11111 IlI,iI .umlysis. Clearly, each object had an archaeological context 111'111 dll, V\ CIl stray finds (in a negative sense). All finds must have come I' III 1IIIIId I I I).!,S, lrom settlement levels between two houses, a sacrificial or a 1111,1 JIll, lrom ;1 grave or from a burial place outside a grave. The problem is [lioll 01 Iligli percentage of altarpieces come from earlier excavations where they \\~ 1\' 11L':IiL'd as rinds of special interest. Thus they were torn out of their 111'111:11 context, and separated from the everyday finds with which they were 1','dH'I:IiL'd. In Ihis way some sensational objects were gained, suitable for all

11111" Ill' :11'1 liistoricai and typological studies, everything, indeed, except a

, 101111 WI I f'r:lI\.'I\i\ 10 Dr. CiYlliai 1'01' his help in this analysis.

functional assessment. In many cases the circumstances of discovery were 11(11 precisely observed; in other cases the excavator did observe them hut considered it unnecessary to give any details in the publication.

Thus, from more than one hundred altarpieces of the Lengyel circle I have found only 22 for which the contextual details are recorded. Among the 'G rinds both geometric and zoornorph ic pieces occur, from all phases of the culture.

Five of these altarpieces were found inside dwelling houses. The cubic piece from Hahot-Szartori came to light from a house destroyed by a lal 'I' Baden settlement, so I was not able to observe its exact position within 111' house (Cat. No. J). Similarly, house 3 in Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo wax partially destroyed (Cat No. 36). The fragments of a cubic piece and n perforated I id were found under the remains of burnt wattle and daub walls, bill it was impossible to locate them more closely.

I had more luck in the case of house 2 of the same settlement, Zalaszcntbalazs. Two flat rectangular, pedestalled pieces were lying on the floor level, together with a large quantity of household pottery, right on the edge or a roundish area with burnt ashy deposits (Cat. Nos. 32, 33). The edge of this area was defined by strongly burnt wattle and daub pieces. This was clearly a fireplace. As both pieces were vertically perforated, it would sound plausible to believe that they were hung over the fireplace.

However, as I already mentioned, it is also possible that the perforations were used in covering the holes in the upper part instead of hanging. In this case the objects were designed to stand on pedestals. If the Zalaszentbalazs pieces in house 2 were 110t hung over the fireplace, they must have been placed close to it. This is certainly important information concerning their function. Although of 109 Lengyel altarpieces known, only 8 from Hungary and 2 from Austria were fitted with pedestals. Others, including zoomorphic pieces, stand on short legs. The surfaces of bottoms are never conic, roundish or uneven which means that each piece is suitable for being placed on the ground. When considering not only the Lengyel objects but all their parallels from Middle and Southeast Europe it is noticeable that almost all pieces are standing on a pedestal or three or four legs, although they are also frequently pierced on their edges or knobs. In this way, it sounds more plausible that perforations on altarpieces may have served for fixing a clay or organic lid on their upper surface instead of suspension.

As to the hypothesis of "oil lamps" the following contextual argument can he added: no matter whether the altarpieces were hung over the fireplace or placed close to it, it is cas 10 sec llial IIICl'c is 011' place in a dwelling hOIiSG where there is no n 'cd Ill' liFl1i 111I1Ill'1I tlil':li' 'n surrounding a fireplace.

I IIIIIH'I'IIIOII.:, Iii' 'plnn'}, III III "lliP 111I 11111',1 1lllporl:11l1 parts ill ally ancient 11\"11111).; IHlllS(')S (sc uluuul 1111 11111 dllll' III 1\ NI:I:Y 1990-9Ia, especially In '1llIplL'r ,'l, _09-217), 'I'll' III situ IlIld', 01' /,l1lasLentball:)zs reinforce our

1"'01l1llptillll that the altarpic T.' Sllllllid Ill' I'q,!,:lI'll '<.1 as cult objects. .

A I'r:lg1l1cnt or a cubic pi' 'C as IV ,II <IS a small, perforated re.ctangular lid I\ld 1111' rr(lOll1ent of this latter were also round inside the dwelling houses 2 Ilid 1 ( '(/1. No.1. 36, 39). In these cases, however, it was impossible to locate IIIVIIi. ;IS they were all lying in the settlelllent debris mixed with burnt wattle

111(1 (\;11111 over the floor level.

l'hirtccn altarpieces were found in different settlement pits. At least t~1ree

II them were assumed to be sacrificial pits, bothroi. One comes from 'W '1/,Ieinsdorf (Cat. No. 54) and two from Bratislava-Dubravka (Ca:. Nos. 66, rl ), According to the short descriptions they are regarded as bothroi ra~her ~n llil' h:lsis of some other accompanying finds which are consi?er~d to be ritual In hnructcr. The other two important" characteristics of saCrIfiCial pits: unusual 'II' .umstances of deposition and traces of repetitive use (sterile layers between \\0 similar layers) were not present. The pit in Bratislava-Dubravka was ,"Iangular, filled with more than one thousand sherds, silices and two 'II iurincs (FARKAS 1986). Possibly, the presence of figurines made the

cuvator assume that the feature was a bothros. In the case of the ('I/,kinsdorf altarpiece - apart from assuming that the provenience place ,was 11IIIIlms _ (URBAN 1989, 171), no further details are available from

I 111111" It inns. \dlllillino that the inferences might be ill-founded relying on defective

b . .

h ,I 111'1111I1S, it must be remarked that considering a pit to be a ritual deposit

Ill\d, IIl'VIIlISC of the presence of so-called cult finds seems insufficient and 1111 1Illllllivillcing. Setting out from this, the presence of an altarpiece found 111 11111',1 pll could also lead to the pit being interpreted as a bothros, as these dip I '" ,II,' assumed to belong to the category of cult finds, too! ~ertall1ly, as II Idllllll.'d already, there might have been some other ritual circumstances ,1111 Ii have not been mentioned in the publications.

III ' lcatures described as refuse pits do not essentially differ from the three

liuthrui" discussed above. At Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo we have [uund n group of such pits dug in a certain distance from one group of dwelling 1\IIl.SI,;S with a contemporary path leading to them. The irregular roundish pits 1\('1\' filled with household pottery, both coarse and fine ware; sheep and cattle \11m's were found near the bottom and also some burnt organic remains. Pit 2

" t\(,(,llrdill:,',IO the definition ore. Colpe; COLPE 1970.

also contained an intact, pcdcstnllcd, red-painted altarpiece (( 'III. No, 3·1), I 'Ill' object was thrown away intact together with kitchen waste. Similnrly, another fragment was found in a large refuse pit, in which the handle 01' a lid ill tilL' form of a two-headed ram was also thrown (Cal. No. 35)

There appears to be no difference between the altarpieces lou lid insid« houses and those discarded into refuse pits or even the stray find Ihllil Szolohegyi rnezo. The above mentioned finds were all made, used and t\Jrll\\ II away in settlements.

Although the graves in the Lengyel culture are often dug within settlements, the very few altarpieces found in them still might be cOllsidl.'ll'i1 somewhat different: in use from the group discussed above. The pi' '(' deposited in graves are either zoomorphic (as in Zengovarkony, Mt')J'iI '\ Tuzkoves Grave No. 43 and in Santovka Cal. Nos. 22, 78), or belong III 11i(' unusual subtype (as in Sarpilis-Ujberekpuszta Cat. No.7).

When speaking about grave goods within the Lengyel culture, we nrc 1':1 '~'d with even greater difficulties than in the case of settlement finds. The Lel111 'I Moravian Painted Ware cultural circle appears to be divided into two )l'llilPS along a north-south line. Several differences define the two groups, arnonu which one difference is the contrast between the well-known large cemeteries of the Eastern group and only the few scattered, special burials known from the Western part. The people of this latter group apparently practised a different. probably non-skeletal burial rite, which did not leave any archaeologically observable phenomena. Even in territories such as the Little Balaton area. where a huge late Lengyel settlement was excavated I I, while the whole surrounding land was demolished by dam buildings, not a single skeletal remain or any burnt human bones were found. The number of altarpieces which occur as grave goods changes also in the eastern group quite strongly. The problem of Lengyel cemeteries or graves, not to mention grave goods, goes beyond the framework of this study. Here I only wanted to address the probable reason why altarpieces found in Lengyel graves are low in number.

5.3. Parallel finds from Southeast Europe with well observed archaeological contexts

Among the enormous quantities of neolithic and chalcolithic altarpieces ill the Carpathian Basin and Southeast Europe, unpublished pieces exceed til(': number of published finds. Regarding this latter group, only a small pcrccnrag '

II 'I'IH.: finds will be publishc I by I~, n{IIIII'y,

\\d'. dl'S\.'l'illL'd 111(11()II,dll, \\ 1111 til I.lti·, Iii IlIv .ir '\IIIlSlaIH.:l:S or their recovery 1)1 11\l' .' 1(1 ol)jl: 'Is I lin"\' ',llldl 'il 11111, 1/ \V .rc J1llhlished with archaeological \'llItll':-.ls. Tile ;11111111 'I' or Sill", \\ II11 ',II\'II rillds is even smaller.

I d() 11(11 regard the sill1pk 11Il:1 or all altarpiece, appearing within a colkl'li()11 or rinds from a settlement sire, as indicative that it necessarily came 11\\111 all arl:hacological context. Contcxtual finds in the broadest sense are those 1111I11 inside dwelling houses and from refuse pits belonging to houses. It counts ,I', :1 special context when the exact place within a house is indicated, e.g. a \ \ \III 'I' ()I' a fireplace, mentioning all associated finds.

('crlilinly, 1\10st of the finds from known contexts are said to have come 1111111 dwcl ling houses without mentioning the exact places of provenance. The l':lllil:sl examples are those from Lepenski Vir, with eight altarpieces described 110, "Allare aus den Hausern" Nos. 7, 19,20,23,37,40,44,45,54 (SRI::J()VIC

I (JI\ I:ig. 19/a, 19/b, 40, 42, 47, 49, 61, 73). Most of these pieces have the l,pic:11 round depressions on the upper surfaces. Three further pieces are 111\'111 ioncd as "sanctuary finds" (SRE.lOVIC 1975, Fig. 30,32,23), although it is 111)1 quite clear why these buildings are considered sanctuaries, or why they are rlixtinuui: hed from other houses on the site. In my opinion, the whole site of I l'P 'I;ski Vir appears to be a highly unusual settlement and could in is entirety Ill' SL'l'1l as "sacred". This opinion is based not only on the peculiar trapezoid 1\l111Sl'S .md the skeletons buried in a similarly strange trapezoidal postures, but Itl ,\1 1\11 lite urcat number of special stone figures and other cult objects, and the till h,Il'll/Il()logical results and their analysis by S. Bokonyi (BOKONYI 1969, 1 'I/O) I iL: round that besides a huge quantity of fish, only a restricted number Iii "tid nnimal species were consumed in Lepeuski Vir, while at other sites of IIIi I IllI'llski Vir culture along the Lower Danube a broader range of animal I" III n VII domesticated dog and swine occur (in: SRE.lOVIC 1975, 162-163,

III t I I I / )

'"Iltlilrly, five altarpieces and some more fragments, were found inside a. I II \ (', (1 house in La Ploienesti (Romania, MANTU - MANTU - SCORTANU

11)1)1, IiI. 19/1-5). All of them were decorated with incised lines. On four 111\'\'l',~ lite depression on the surface could be observed, and on the legs of two 1IIIIIIdisit knobs were applied on the edges.

III II somewhat more exact description it appears that three pieces from the \ 11:!iv\)lilhic Karanovo VI period were found in certain "cult areas" within huu I.'S. An altarpiece from the chalcolithic site of Vinic a (Bulgaria) was found III ~11t.:1t (l position. A rectangular, four-legged object with a depression in the llppl'r p:lrl lay in a corner of dwelling house No. 12, which had two rooms. This

corner was plastered with clay, and wax separated from the rest of the room hv

two small vertical walls (RADUNCI':V/\ 1976, Fig. 25/1,5,18). .

The find from Razgrad (Bulgaria) was lying on the upper floor or a twostorey house together with several figurines and house models and some "cull vases" filled with clay beads (GIMBLJIAS 1980, 46-47). The find complex excavated by T. Ivanov is interpreted as a "sanctuary" by M. Gimbutax, although the first 11001' apparently served as a workshop, according to the description in the site report. I do not wish to touch upon the question of the existence of "sanctuaries" in pre-bronze age periods here, I would only suggesi that the Razgrad find complex may have been placed in a cult area; a situation for which there are many parallels. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that ill the site of Dolnoslav, most probably an independent "cult" settlement of the Karanovo VI period in Southwest Bulgaria, the remains of numerous buildings were found with a large number of un ique objects and phenomena, such as large clay platforms, human and swine bones which, according to the excavator A. Radunceva, represent sacrifices. Furthermore, 40 ern high painted and incised Gumelnita figurines and a life-sized human head made of clay were recovered (GENov - RADUNCJ::VA 1985, RADUNCEVA 1991). Yet, there is no indication that any clay altarpieces occurred at the site, although these altarpieces almost count as mass produced items in other Gurnelnita-Karanovo VI settlements. The same can be said about the "sanctuary" of the late neolithic Banatian site Parae/Parra (Romania), where a building serving for purely ritual purposes was found, wh ich contai ned two life-size "zod-and-soddess" -fi zures

Co Co Co

and numerous other finds interpreted as having cultic status, but no altarpieces

(LAZAROVICI 1989, 151-152). This absence can perhaps be taken to affirm the assumption that altarpieces were generally used in dwelling houses of normal settlements.

Some finds have very clearly defined proveniences. Some altarpieces are mentioned as having been found in the vicinity of fireplaces. Certainly, the fireplace, which preceded houses themselves, remained a central part of the room, where cult objects occur more frequently than in other parts of houses. Apart from one example from Lepenski Vir (SREJOVIC 1975, Fig. 19/b), some \\ ell-known triangu lar altarpieces of the Tisza cu lture were also found near fireplaces. From H6dmezovasarhely-K6kenydomb, a site which produced the 1:1l110US anthropomorphic vessels called "Venuses", three such objects are said 1\1 have been laid beside the fireplaces of dwelling houses (BANNER - FOLTINY 11),15, V1I9,I-b, B!\NNI':I~ I<()I~I:K 1949, VIII/R,9, 4/4).

II seems surprixinj; Ihill I'VI:tllVL'1y Il'W alt.upicccs are mentioned as having \'lIllle lrorn scll\t:III'1I1 pli'. h\'ltllll'lli I Itl !tilliS'S. Slarting out from Ill'


assumption that only a few were lying inside houses and the rest must have come from refuse pits it seems obvious that in most cases the exact provenience, e.g. a refuse pit, was not given by the excavator because it "vas thought to be unimportant. From the older phase of the Linear Band Ceramic culture, from Ujezd-Zadlovice, one such altarpiece is mentioned (TICH~! 1962, Fig. 14/4), the painted "sanctuary model" with horns and an omphalos form in the middle from the late neolithic site of Ocsod-Kovashalom (Hungary) also came from a settlement pit (BANFFY 1986a, Fig. 2, RACZI<.Y 1987, Fig. 27). The pit find from Aba-Felsoszentivau-Angyihegy (Hungary) may be parallel with the Zalaszentbalazs altarpieces or it may also be slightly younger, belonging to the early Balaton-Lasinja culture (MAKI<./\ Y 1970,38-39, Fig. 24/4).

In some cases similar pits are interpreted as bothroi, like the one from the early Vinca site of Zitkovac (Yugoslavia), in which an altarpiece was found (TASIC 1958, Fig. !lII3 a-b).

It cannot be considered an accident that - apart from the few zoomorphic grave finds of the Lengyel culture already discussed - there is only one altarpiece described as grave good from the whole Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Middle and Southeast Europe. This find can almost be treated as marginal, since it belongs to the late Chalcolithic Cotofeni culture of Romania, already designated Early Bronze Age in the Balkan chronology. This altarpiece from Cheile Aiudului lay in a grave together with a vessel filled with grain (ClUGUDEAN 1983, 173, Fig. 82). On the basis of the extremely scarce occurrence of altarpieces in graves, we can perhaps suggest that in these scattered examples the altarpieces did not belong so much to the burial rite, but rather represent the equipment of the dead person, together with some other objects that he had used in his life. In other words, the few pieces found in graves do not disprove the interpretation of the altarpieces as basically settlement finds.

Thus, the few pieces with precise archaeological contexts from the Neol ith ic and Chalco I ith ic of Southeast Europe would not contrad ict the interpretation based on the analysis of Lengyel altarpieces. We can conclude that this object type, occurring from the earliest Neolithic to the end of Chalcolithic in almost all cultures living in Middle and Southeast Europe was produced ill settlements, used within dwelling houses and after use was most frequently thrown into normal rubbish pits together with broken pottery and other sorts of kitchen refuse. Why, on the one hand, may they still appropriately be regarded as cult objects, and how, on the other hand, do they lose that quality, in order to be discarded?





Er'_ II



t:: 0) "0

'" co

N .", ....

~ o CO





, Oil .... o .;::

~ N o ;C

CO ~



::: -


t:: 0) "0

'" CO

N .", ....

~ o CO

N .", .... 0)

o CO

6 '0






'" >











o > o c:





N 0) Vl


o > OJ 'u ....






t:: 0) "0

'" CO

N .", .... 0)

o CO



- Vl

t:: 0) ..<: u .... ::l u..







'" ><.J

.S >

c ~ '0



0) Vl


.... '" 0)



Vl :0 .... :0


.... ·ttl,

E' '(;J

N C/l

~ ;;

- -: s:

N ·ro .... 0)

o CO

_ -,:;'nrr.

.: _'"'IV

0) ..<:

u Oil 0) .... ..0 0)


.E '" uCO .;:




.S:! > o

"" > 0) ~

~ o c -e "0


o -,

'0) C/l

"0 c: ro ..0 ..<: u


o > 0) «» ....




.... 0) ..0




, 0 Oil "0 .... c: 0) 0) ..0 _

E ::l

.~ ~

CO..o o

c..o '" >"0

'" 0)

o E



4- 0- o ..>0: c: 0)

'0 Z


c: -=rOl. ~ _'_'\1\1

..c: .S:!

- Vl

t:: 0) ..<: u ....

. ?

c: .r


l'urnllcl Soulh 'asl 1\III'Ojll'dll N Idllllll' !llill'PI -c 'S ) I
(site numbers in till: ()\'dVI (11 11\('1111011111') t, \ ) ~(.
l'III':lIIOVll (1\(;) 36. Azmak (8G)
1 I 1'1l'llski Vir(YU) 37. Gradesnica eBG) I \
,\'~kl(l ( :I{) 38. MogiJa (YU)
11~'I'IIi" (1\(;) 39. C:uka (YU)
[\ IIII(\:IV,I (1\(;) 40. Vitosevac (YU) (
SI:lI'L .vo (YlJ) 41. Gradac (YU) \
I )Ollj[l 111'<llljevina (YU) 42. Tirpe~ti (RO) I" \,.
X Mtl:-;Itll\ ':I (YU) 43. Ocsod (1-1)
!) Il'L I L' (Y II ) 44. Hcdmezovasarhely (II)
10 11:tl'llllii 'il (YU) 45. Tibava (SLO)
II 1)11<1 :~I i (RO) 46. Hornstaad (D) r' "?
I) 1'1I1(1:t~ (RO) 47. Cheile Aiudului (RO) ,\
I\.( )I'nd 'il (RO) 48. Tesetice (CZ) I,
1·1 (; 'I 1('11 II i'lI,a (II) 49. La Ploienesti (RO)
1'1 I i111 '~a')k (II) 50. Vinica (BG)
III kldlkiollll:ar 'ala (GR) 51. Razgrad (BG)
I I I, IIllgli ( iR) 52. Dolnoslav (BG)
II< I' 1I'IIIIilIi ( liZ) 53. Aba-Felsoszentivan (II)
1'1 III'. I 1'('PI' (I It;) 54. Nea Nikornede ia (GR)
I III "It I I ( I I\f\NIA) 55. Tiszafoldvar (1-1)
l'IHIIi/II) (VII) 56. Madjari (YU) ~
VI dill (VII) 57. Anza (YU)
'111I.t (YII) 58. Cascioarele (RO) r;::t
I II 111111VO (YlJ) 59. Fi.izesabony (1-1)
1'11\ luvnc (VII) 60. Szarvas (H)
I111 II\,II '(VI!) 61. Sabatinovka (UKR)
I I I'll (II (I{(») 62. Szolnok (H)
')\ (\'IIIIIVO(l:l (I{O) 63. Stara Zagora (BG)
H) 'I'i.'/ll 'SL' , ' (II) 64. Veszto (1-1) II 'Iltl ,OOkm
, , -'
10 M 'Ii'lkilv -sd (II) 65. Herpaly (H) ,J.' "
I I, l'ljod (SI.()) 66. Gorzsa (1-1) 1\ ~
I I 1\111:1 (S I.(») 67. Ovcarovo (BG)
1\ 1'11111:I.:i 'II « 'RO) 68. Szegvar (H) rl' 'I ?
\ 1 NI ,t! 'I wicxc] (I)) 69. Tiszadob (H)
\ '1, , . 1111 ',I 0 i « II () 70. Rakamaz (H) \ 1/1' / /1/.1111/'111101/ ,11,,/, "/11/'1'/11/111 ,t/III '" , III

(). TIll' plll(,(' mul 1'1111('/ 011 01 UII' 11/:11 ph-('(IS with in 1:11(' IIl'ol Ih ( I (uul lltu

Ilvlll' 11111.\' nwnrc o!' the dini .ulti -s, I :1111 i'IIIIViIICt.:d that our knowledze ,ilHillt till IlIII\.'''1 ,~llIdi 'd with ilrclwcologil.:tililldli(l<is remains scanty and casual IIltllll\lt :i!klll(ltilig un interpretation. Such nttL'lIlpts at reconstructing certain 11111 ,11 tl\ Illl'S usunll occur in theoretical works or the history of reliuions and till II00wd Ilil l'lassi .nl III tlls and descriptions or rituals as well as ~n ethno'1.1I,i111 (1:lllIlIl'ls, ()Il the contrary, prehistoric studies that use the method of

I II/lvl till' pice 'S (11':1 cult object type and analysing it typologically - usually 1.111 tlll\ illl\.'I'L'IICi.'S 'Oil .crning its ritual background. (Or, if this is ever ,illvlll(ll,'d, tllis 11Iigilt 'VCII be worse, because typical commonplaces including (1111,1',1'" "Ill h :IS ":lgril)'i,1I1 cult, fertility rite Ior the Mother Goddess" etc. are 11111',1 h IIII.'II! i(lllL'ti wi t houl any .i usti fica: ion, merely by a sort of common 11111',\'1\1) ,

1111.' l'lllIl'ctioll iliid interpretation or mother goddesses is just a harmless 1111I"'t IIII' till.' ,~L',\lI<d impulses or old men". This sentence, attributed to V. G. ('lIl1d(' (1\(lt .... SI.'V;\IN 1<)7{), 18X), givcs voice to (111 opinion shared by many I 1II'lt', III till' livid, titough perhaps in a less biting manner, and has influenced 11111',1 1111 III ,11111i!I\S to nvoid working with the so-called cult material. Because 111111 I tI FII'ilt numlu-r ()I' IIIlSOUIi I interpretations it has become a widely held 11(111\11111 111011 ill l'll' ,l'lIt there is little hope or solving any of the questions of , II I I I II I ,Ii II I 1111",

1111 1111 II I," 11I1!/,1l'11I which has not been tully explored. Namely, two I d I ul: 111.111 II,d '1st :1I1t! «It least) two levels of interpretation. The first

1111111 1I11l1l d"iilllll!, with idols, female and sometimes also male

tl 111111 iii II tltl' 1111 'Ipn.'tntion of childrcns toys can be discounted, thanks III 1111111111111, \1\ II 1I11'>nll.'d archaeological contexts. In this case it must be

111111 ,I d 1Ii.ll thl' plllhklll or whether these all represent real personified 1'""tll .. I' .11111 'lid., (:I" sll'gL'stL'd by M. Gimbutas, (jtMBUTAS 1982, J989), or 1111' III II l.ltlll'l "\ IlIhllls Ill' different l'iclds or attributes of the numinosum the


11.111111 uul 1.1. I. ill:ltill' sacred" (an idea first elaborated by R. Otto, OTTO 11)11 \) III II Ill'IIIL'!' th 'Y were perhaps poliluncriunal (an opinion of P. Ucko Ilid I ' I I 1:lI:JI:lv, l)n,:() I%X, 'I';\I,;\I,;\Y 19X1) is almost impossible to ,,,,, I III I" r rud- IIII' wluch there arc IHI written SOIlJ'CCS.

III IiiI.' ',L'L'(l11(1 L':I.~', it i~ pnxxihlc t() attempt to interpret some practical cult III III II"", I II "t (II all, this sort or technical reconstruction does not necessarily .(1,,11 II Itll 11:I"il' qlll'StlollS III rcli ,iOI1 :111(1 Illythology. Nevertheless (although

('. ({vlilil II ',11'111111111'.11111 Itl 11111'11111' I IIL~HIL'" Iilvs 1(1 ncof irhic 1l1l!.'S, is 11111\ 11l'1I·L'~I:ildl 111'd, 1'1 NIIII \\ II)HI. (II, I{I,'NIIII \\ II>X:=;, I), S111111'tilill' ,'1111 Ill' ,,:lid :11 :1 !l'111I1I1 ill In vi ,\11 111'11.' 'I Ill' '1I1'J'illg ill llilill neolithic, cluilcolithic. 111111 l,lIl'tllL:I' 1111 III 11111111' 1'1' .urd later periods, ill. playillg idcnt icnl t l(lulugiL';d kntlll'l'~ 1"'111' 1111111(\ III VL'ry similar arclitlL'ul()gical contexts, can ill 1111 probnbilu , II,' ',lIltilhk I ill' such a comparison.

. '~'hi," IlllIlI:-lllll'Ii()11 even allows certain .h.uiges to take place ill tlil' rcllgl~lII. 11.l111'IIIIIIHI ill which these objects wcr used. Principally, tile I'itlli!l pracucc 1IIIIId 11\' cuntinuous across different ar .haeological periods nlth\)III./1 SIlI1lL' P;II t , ill Ii;, (lll'ittltli meaning might have changed during the ccnturivs, ;llld there 111.1\ IIls11 hnv ' he .n certain geographical differences. This means tllilt I am not 1'11111' Iii i 11\/(11 v ' myself in questions 01', lor example, to wha! ';-.t'lll the Sta~\\ \11 11'11 'ilIlIS lili: differed from that or the Lengyel culture or til' chalcolith« \ 1111111\'" ill tilL' Balkans. I merely assume that we can reconstruct similar illl 11.l111Illf'II.'1I1 contexts within these periods where similar objects were

used. 'I'lli'I liI'II' 'h 111:1) provide evidence of similar cult practices. '

AC<':PI.lIII' III III\' c.ulicr experiences and studies, I think we arc able III identify ~II1 II 111'1\'1'(., With the help of these finds we can search for lit' practical II III I t Il'~ III tilL' 11i.'01 ith ic ritual more successfully.

BL':-;idl" IlIlIl',\' II11Hkls (BANFFY 1986a, n;\NFFY 1990-9Ia, 21<1-217), altarpiece- I .III III 1I1('lll<kd in this category. The form of these finds and tli 'il typological 1\ iltllll' "'('''Hie some fields of USL' nnd suggest other posxihl« 1,1Inctlon~ \-,,, 1I111tvi III 1:1 ,t, exactly a consideration of these objects prirnaril lrorn a 111111 111111,,1 tiIIHI(l()illt reveals that they arc akin, not only to objects ill the period • .(1,1 II', 'I'd III I ilL' present study, but also to object types throughout the BI'OI.I/I \,'1 .Il1d IIllil til' Iron Age of Southeast Europe, to the early Grcc], civilisation ()II IIII' hi! is III ritual practice, well documented in the works or antique ,111111111, IllId-, III numerous similar objects with perforation and one ill' two round: ,II til (II \ ',filiI, (III the upper surface (I"I,I!,. 33), certain rituals could caxily he II I 1111 ,llllllvd 111I:se reconstructions WCI" proposed by researchers Ill' tile Brou/, \~'1 1111 IIII' hilsis of similar archaeolouical contexts and finds witli Ihc S'IIll!.' 1\1"1/11)'11111 1'111111' 'S (NILSSON 1950, Chnpter III, KAln:TS()lJ II)XI. I 'IX, I-'i~, I \ I 1() liu. 2 \, RI:NI'RI~W 1981, (17 "7<>, Fig. 13, B()lJ/,I':K I ()X'1,

70-75). "'III' I lilt III' 'd~:l1I n ltar" reads llil' I'il'st cntence or M. P. Nilxxons

" Ill,' II \"."1' ," III II t I ( N C' I () C I) I I 7 I

_" .,1(111'1'1", ",,';S()N 1, ) \\ rich clearly reflects I ill'

11,"ll1lvlll'\' III I. illll(lnrilll' 11111111' ;\)'1' rituals to those or lnicr

il p(lrllilritill (ll'l'illd,~,

, Yet, ill 1111 11.111'01111111 llL'tWL'l.'1I till' 1111111 I \1'1 1IIlIIIliL' ('liillclllithil: iI ~:'1) ill 111111(1 SI.'I'III' III 11.1\1' IllwII 11111111)' 1'11.111'.\11111111 II "I I dlllllll' 'Iket o!' slIg 'l'skd


,II'lllwl"lll (\'I'lidlll , two Or III, Plllldllll', 1111 Ii Illlill 1111', ,'l' -piicism well- 1",lllIdISill'<i l:il'slly, iI sort or cu l! 1I1'11 I IlIvlil I III III IIlIII II III Ille beginning of IIII' 1 'iii h I \ ron i',U !\gu in several points lilt! '\'d, ',IIVIl :I~ '1ltiltgl..:s in settlement II PI", IIIL' V:lIlisilillg 01" painted pottery 'I', Sc .ondly, ill (.;Ol1lrilsl to neolithic 11111 Jllm' -x which were always in dwelling houses, in the Bronze Age separate H 1I11111ill'i 'S occur more frequently. This makes experts quite uncertain in 11111'ljll'l.'lill " .vcn these neolithic finds with close earlier parallels to Bronze Age I' IlIljllI: i<i .utificd as altarpieces, and used for domestic cult purposes.

11'llllsili 'I' the altarpieces, and within this category the Lengyel finds - now 1lllp\'lltil proven to be a subgroup of the widely extended pre-Bronze Age ,dldlill " 'S to have been employed in some way in the cult life of neolithic ,1'llklll'llls.

I )L'Sjlill' Il1<1ny similarities both to everyday pottery on the one hand, and to I I Ii I IIIIII~ Ii kc I"iguri nes on the other, altarpieces differ from these types of finds III ~1I111 ' I' 'sp .cts. Namely, most of their features are intercultural. In this respect ,dlill pi" 'S 'an become better and closer parallels to the long-existing pre- 1i1',llll i ' Illol ils such as meander or spirals, to the use of ochre in graves 01' to the

11I1I-'d d "oration than to forms and other decorations on ceramics, which is \1'1\ cultur specific (often within a phase of the culture).':' In the case of IIllo1lll1I'Vl", Illis stability of typological features is exactly the reason why jllll III~'I', \':111 uppropriately be sought in different periods. The other reason, as

Illdlll 11111" IS 111 ' similarity of places of provenience, and of associated finds- 1IIItlii I \\llld" 111':11' .hacological context of altarpieces.

II III ,d',ll hL'l'll established above, that almost all finds come from I lilt 111I III 1111, I" vulid not only in the Neolithic and in the Copper Age but rl " "II IJlII I IIIIIIHI~ 1\ .crtain difference does, however, emerge - bronze age 1111'1111 I I I I II 11', 'd both in separate sanctuaries and in domestic cults I Nil II J II) II) I I ()), These domestic rituals are not thought to have been I'I I" 111111" 11\ Iii Ivsls they must have been part of the cult I ife in the 111\1 1111 III 1111111' plucc in dwelling houses, a probable heritage from the It 1"111111

I ill H 1'1 vllislul'i:Jlls do speak about sanctuaries, shrines or sometimes even dlllill "ll'lIlpl 's" ill ncolithic-chalcolithic times. In the following, I would like to 111111111111 ~;\llil ' circumstances that make these statements doubtful. I consider

I' \, III 11!'III'iIICS, "idols" are usually also specific of their culture, except some later 111"'" Ilkv lite violin shaped figurines or the hollow-headed "Ringidole", that occur in ',I'VI'ldl lullmal formations of the Chalcolithic and the earliest Bronze Age - 11111 I ~1i\NN I %(),

neolithic buikliuus whu l: dlt! 11111 '011\( 1111 Iillillllliull II) 11(' ('11111111111111\ hllildings rather thnn ,':1111'111111 , \llllltllll 'h, ill III) upiuiuu, II '1l111111L' '1111 Ilk \Vas acted out within e:1 -h (\\\1'111111' 111111"1' 1)\ 111l' illli:lIlil:lllt. III 'lllSl'''l'~', 111111 ihix custom lived 011 till the 1I11l1i/V 1\ ',I' 1111" -v 'I! IHtL'I', illl(1 '1:lssi '1IIIillll' II, III the lollowillg discussion I shall tl\ til SIIPllilltllll'SL' sl:11 .rucutx.

6.1. N .oiithi ' "S:l11 .uuui 's"

Only a few neolithic buildillgs idcut ilicd itS S:111'llI:Jl'il'~ (l.c, \lllilll 1111 excavators have identified as cxclusivclv culric ones), have I ':I'ill'Ii II', III 1111 literature.

From the earliest Neolithic period, the trap 'I',oidill 1I01lS 'S ill I '11\.'11 II II

ilS discussed above, have descrv ,<II ;iI I racl '(\ .utcution (SIU'.I()VI(' I ')f) I), 1<)/'" 198 I). Wh i le research has not Ill;ll1i1g .d I 'I 10 1"(';OIISII'II'[ I he II nil IIIIi I 11\ Ii structures of these buildings, the '.\ .avntor Ill' Iii' sil ' h .licvcx 111111 til ') 11101\ well have been uncovered ill their origiunl 1(lnli. lhc I' 'd PlIilll 'II 11':1J1 '/llId:II rammed floors of the buildings have survived PI';I ,ti 'ilil 1IIld:II11:lgL'II, 1\ '11)11 some of the stonework fireplac 'S inside the houses the L'X .avators hi: IIPI)II human skeletons with contracted lcux, I' 'S 'Illhlillg to the Irap 'mid:" 1(11'111 (11 111l' buildings. This geometrical pattern, which ill 1:1 'I was ruther till '01/1/11011 III preh istory, was also discern i blc Oil I he fish-mouth 'd stone heads /(11111(1 1I1l1SII) inside the buildings. To all app .aranc 's, as said I '1(11' " this S 'til .mcnt W:IS IIIlI inhabited by its users. Besides bones 01' unimuls, with PI' 'Slimed 'Iill associations, the only finds indic.uivc 01" IiI" iii the site w 'I" Iisl: 1'l:111;liIIS, 'l'lu: rugged wilderness of the river Danube nnd the 11IOIlIli:liIIS around IIIIISI have presented an excellent place for U 'ling Ollt "S,I 'I' 'd I1l1d 1'c;II'I'III" (I 'liollS, till' "rnysterium trernendum". On th ' grounds 01' til' archn 'ologie;II .vid 'I! ' , :11 0111' disposal, we can presume thai III' huildin 'S were 1101 used <IS dw .Iliu 'S, 11IIt were regularly visited. Considering the I P 'S nnd Ill, IIIIIOUIlI ill" fin Is, Ih ' sil ' may not have been visited only I'm bur ill' l'l'I'l'llloIJi 'S, hlll also Oil SOIIl ' ollil'l' occasions, when ritual food was L'llilSIIIIIVd, Till' sill' is [hilS S:I .rcd: PI' 'SIIIIIl'S II distance from the actual settlements; I('qllllv~ Iii, pr ox uni: 01' tli' dl'l'l'!Is'li ancestors and finally is associated with 1lllllhlnt! ;IL'IIVIIIl',~ slll'li :IS 1.:()IlSIIIIIIII~' special food, erecting special ,'tlllll' I.llllplill ", IllId pl'tll:lJlS (l111'1' uctivitiex beyond archaeological int .rpr '/11111111 NlliH' 1111111 ',1' Illl\ III ',', 'I)JII<I Ill' 1111Id' ll\

I; cl". Lares uncl l'cn.u 'S livruu ill /(011/1111 dill 11111·111111 I 11111 III '1'1111 11/ IIII' '.III VIVid

01" Illi~ .ustom 10 Clll'islillll 111111 '" ,,111\1 1111 " 111111 11111111" 1111', hl'l'll d 11111'1

importuu: plll'l ill 'II ~1l1H'111{l1l11 Ii 1111 , I' I Ii 11111 111111,111\ 11111111111111111'1" l'IIVI'1I

I ',III/'ll' PVI~()II ()I' hy one :,1111111 1IIIIIIh 11:1,1 1111 i1IIIIIIIIIi'lIhli'Il'liI 11':ll'l'S ul' 111111111111111)' lii'v, The huildill',s \.':111 In' 111111111111 d 11,111111111111111\ 1lIlIldili/'S, IISl'd 1111 l'\l'IJI~ which <lI'U illlJ)OI'IIlIlI sill W,', III 1111 lill' III II Ili/'VI /"lilIlJllli' people. 1I111Il' 1(\1111 or ini: iai ion rile, 1\11' L',\IIIIIP'"

I dll'IISSl'd Ihis example ill SOIIli.' 1il'llliI 1111 111l' plllllllSl' n!' describing the 1111('1111 lUI community buildings. SII .h i.',\III11PiL'~ '1111 I)l' lililiid ill the carlv \lllllllIiilll sih.;s like Cayonu HI1(I the so-called "skull-house" ill Ncvali <,'()J'i

(III-' \II)\\'()()I) 131{f\IDW()()I) Il)L, 11/\IJI'TM/\NN 1993). The "shrines" or (.'illal

1111\ Ilk Ids() auxwcr these criteria: representations or the hieros gUII/O,1 (the hoi 111/1111.1111111), hirl h, mother with child, the bull jJW'.I'.jJ/'() toto symbolising Iii' III.tI(' J>lllL'I'(.;lllive power and the dead buried under the inner walls: the oul 1111'.',1111' .'oIII'U or the life cycle, initiation, may have also been enacted within Iill", , hlliltlillgS (MI~LI,A;\II,I 1962. HiI-d, ()il,b.d: MI,:I,I,;\/\ln 196.1, 1l)'I-d. 27 W. 11'( d 1\1111,;\/\1\1' 1964, 24<1-d),

I'll,' di:- .ovcry in the earl I ()()()s or lite "sanctuary" al Ne;1 Nikumcd 'iii ill i\l.lll't!l)llia produced a real sensation (R()I)I)I.'N 19()2, 19M). I{egrclluhl • IiiI' I II It! dill ill' [rom the early ncol i I h ic Protoscsk 10 period have rcma i ned pili I h 11111)11) 'cxxcd, 1IIId rhus the xitc is known only from prcliminury rcpm l: \1 l III d IIIF In Iii\.' excavator, tour hu i ld i ngs surrounded a ri rlh one idcnt i li,,'d i1~ .t .1111111 I Iii., ",.,111 inc" is discussed in the reports. The hundreds of I'OIIIHI l'l:1\ ,11'111 I , ill ,lll\ cuxl inxidc the huildill),!, require lurthcr explanation. The SllllPl' I 111111\\1 11101\1 III 111111 it rcvcal-; neither profane nor religious charactcristu :

Ii,,\ I I I Illl 1111J1'l h lying xcpar.ucd in the building, made hy man pL'I~(l11 11\1/111 111111111\ 11\ \ II .ious, riuty well have been a requisite used somehow ill Iltl' 1111/1.1111111 III lacr, initiation has neither a purely profauc nor il Pllll'h II II II II I ,dliioug/l il hax sOlllething or both. ;\ number or l'iglll'IIIl"

II dill III II 1I11II1 IiiI' site' S(\il1L' or them might have come lrom the l' '1111.d 1111 1111 dl.llll1l'L'CS ;11'1.' said 10 have come from here, Meanwhile, I Ii 1\ I II III .II 11\ III~" 11/ ll'lIhic nltnrpicccs with small roundish holes ill lit ' IIIHltll\

I" 1111111111,1\ \ l lu-v arc said 10 have come from IIIU sculcrucn] ()I NI.I

II 1111\1 .111.1 1111/ 1I1ll'1 prohilhly not i'rolll the central hllildillg. hili 1111111 ,1\\1 lluu: lillll~l'" otherwise (hey would have been pllhlisitvd ill 1'(l\ld\ II

II 1111\1 , II

1111', '.lllllllillll itn:-; survived ullclwngcd ill the Middle Nco l ith i,: llil' ltu ' 1'.111 h (11lVll IllIildlllg in Tisz:lllildv:'lr-'I'C'gl:II..!,YI'II· (l lununr ') ,\ il h 1111 Villi 111111\'11,11 11111 11\l' 1111('11(11' \I,dls daubed \I illi lr:qlL'/oid II111d ll:ikL's :111<1 1111 IIJlplll·1I 111111

II I)I,IIIIII!':, :llld couuuunicat ic u: Il~ I) Wurdlc, l'lllll:IVI I\:I~ 1II<Idv IHI"c,IIIII' 111111111 Ii I ~llllill, l wish ro express 111:1111-:, I()I' lit,' kiII(I11,'"S ol'holit (II 111l'11I1i\'11'

IIVlld dccor.u ion ucnr II IlIl'JlI.II \ 'dl'~'\', III Silldlllr intcrprctntinu (courtesy (l1'I!tl' \'\l'ilValor. ;\. Va III ), I Ill' luukliu ' id .m ificd ax a "sanctuary" ill l'ilr:'1 '/1':11 (II (Rom.inia) has been discussed curlier. 'I'll sum up, this can be iulcrpr 'Icd :IS II three-roomed house also serving as a dwelling, while one m01l1 'OlllillllVd. Ill:~idcs other cult finds, two large clay sculptures, a bull-headed 1IIIde IIIHI ii, pregnant female mate (LAZAROVICI 1989). We can assign cult sigllilicall 'i.' \lllh III Ihis inner room, which has also yielded clay depictions of the Sun 1IIId IiiI' L rcsccnt.

Recently, a bu i Iding stand ing among three dwell i ng houses ill 1\ lliti Jill I (Mnccdonia) was identified as a "Cult house" (S;\NI:V I <Jill<. I ,..,,) I , I\II()SK/\I.I,VSK/\ - SANEV 1989). It was called a temple by llli.' ~'\l:l\ till 11 \ Sllllev, for three different reasons. I. The inside or the huildiru: \\ I tll\ It/I tI lVilli a narrow wall into two more-or-less separate paris, ;\ llilld Jltlil 11/ 1111 building must have been left open like a courtyard. In the 1111) 11111111', It/II L'I;IY platforms, identified as altars or sacrificia I ta b lex II l'll' 1IIIIIId t II)HS, 29). 2. Among the finds a large vessel reprcscntiuu :1 111111111Ii' I

( ioddess" was found, applied to a hollow, rcctanuulni "L'tli Iii I 1'1 uskoi, a rare pottery type from th is period, were a lso COliS IIll'llil III II I ( used 1'01' rituals, 3. Broken fragments of household POlkl) r(1\\ Il d 1111 ",1 \I 111

several large patches, Accord ing to the excavator, I hcsc v ',~"l'I', tI \ III 1111

IIIIISI have been broken intentionally.

The building was contrasted to the other three houscx l' l,J\ .111" 1\ III II material of the middle neolithic Anza-Vrsnik group was found. III /\'11 lid I" II II building belonging to the same retarded Starcevo grouping 01' I) '111'11111.\ 111111 \ cry similar features to the "cult house" of Madjari (such as plnSIl'll'd I I" L'( instructions) came to I ight. On Iy the large female sculpture and t IlL' IIS/., 1,1 lurmcd vessels were missing from the inventory (GARASANIN nll,lll/\ II)XH) ;\ clay plastering was partly transformed to a place for grinding cereals, /1111 . the excavators think that the original "cult house" was later re-used 1111' domestic habitation (op.cit, 40),

The inventory of the building can be distinguished sharply from those (II' tilVL!11 ing houses, Portable clay altarpieces - otherwise a very common Oh.i"'l'l 1\ pc in the Pelagonian Middle Neolithic - were not indicated, It is also II 1:ll'l II111I lite Madjari "cult building" did not contain any tools, fireplaces or 01111.'1 I' quisitcs of everyday life. Furthermore, not only were altarpieces missing, hili 1111 cult objects typical of dwcl liug h()lISL'S xuch as rigurines, house models ()I '.\l\lill pieces or furniture were 1lIl'lllilllll'd . itlu-r. l luwcvcr, il great Illll11IK'1' III' 1111\111 weiglils or similar CI:I) Ilillll h 1\ Ill/ III d pill' II\\(I the similarly lnr u: 11111111111 (II' hrok '1\ potter /11111 \ 11\ III tI 1111 1111111 1I111ell' I 1 \I I'll I:! I l ilc ill llil'


/ I

IlIlildill' 111'1)(1, ,~ihl " These oh,i "ts, II,~ \\1'1111' III IIIHII'. IIldil'i11l' SIlII1' n .Iiviticx Ih:1t III" 1It'lvd II lilll'llllllily,

( (111,~\"'qllelllly, the site or Madjari may I' 'PI' 'S 'Ill II 1)(,;olill1i, settlement with 1111l'(, 11\11'111:11 dwelling houses and one cormnun ity building erected at a central ',/1111 III /,1.:ll:l1ikovo house I miuht have been originally a cornmunitv buildinz

~ bob

II IIIi l'i:Jy plnli'onns described above, but later it may have been rebuilt and used )',11 dlWllill).!. house.

l'lll' dcrnilc I 'Illalysis of a number of middle and late neolithic "sanctuaries" 11:1', I ('V(;:I led t 1i;1 tin those houses where one or two rooms were used for da i Iy \ uuuuunn l purposes only the third room contained objects with cult "',',IIVllitIOIIS, including small clay altarpieces. Examples for this are known 11(1111 S 'skin, lrorn the "shrine" near Akhilleion/Farsala (GIMI3UTAS 1980), and ill..,\) Ih)1l1 Cascioarele (DUMITRESCU I 965a, 1965b).

Mention must be made here of the settlement of Dolnoslav (Bulgaria), Ill'I\1I1 'illg to the Karanovo Vl-Gurnelnita culture. According to A. Radunceva. Iii, -xcuvaror, this settlement was built exclusively for cult purposes (IC\llIINc"I':V/\ 1991). In one of the houses there were a number of clay phalloi h ill)' Oil 11 'lay bench beside the wall. A small pit in front of the bench has

Ivldl'<! Ill' skeleton of a piglet. A life-sized male head made of clay was IIJlJllil'd 10 11i(; wall, the eyes were filled with whitish-yellow powdered lime I II' .III '~ II numb 'I' of eultic finds, the excavator hit upon some 700 figurines dill III ' 111\' III sl s 'nSIlJ1S or excavation. No altarpieces have yet been published 1111 IJII\ I \llIINI'I.'V/\ 1985).

\\ II II iii', II 'ill I 111 ' ritual nature of this settlement, it is firstly to be noted II111 II11 I I II 1I11I IIIIS d 'di 'Hied her life to cult finds and may thus be inclined I, II 'lillI', \'l'lIll .x" Oil the basis of preconceived notions. Secondly, it is

d 1'1" I 11111 Iii II Iill' lilld mntcrial of the ongoing excavation would modify or II 1111 I till Jlll'IIII', Oil the basis of the data known at present it is also 1'" IIdl 111111 I Ill' \)11 .-Icvcllcd settlement served partly cult purposes (phalloi, II II 111111' IIlld 111111.'1' k i lids or seu lpture) and partly profane ones (tankards, corn II ,1'/111' 1111I1l' IIH)I.~), R<ldunceva also said that one of the houses appeared to 11,)\ I' IH'\ II ',\'I on lire with a pinioned man in it, shortly before the whole ,I 1111'111\,111 II:I.~ :I bandoncd The new houses were bu i It some 100 metres from 1I11 1)1 Ii III 1, ... 111 V S i lc. Whether these phenomena are ritual, profane or both, they .11\ 111,11111 '~lilli()lIs ofthe activities and rites ofa whole community.

('llIlsl'qll(;lllly, the terms used in literature to identity these buildings as ,dlvlll,Iil:I) "shrine" 01' "sanctuary" may not be correct. The term "temple", III1\ll'\ 1'1,1\ hich \VIIS introduced by M. Gimbutas and adopted subsequently by a

1111/' I liI\ 11111/1" II I'd 1)11 the I III '1'1 i" IIl1p III P 'OJlIe (han

1IIIIIlhl.!r of her rollo\\vI", I III 11\ 1111 111'1111.', II' .ousidcrcd eOITe'1. '1'1)(: wurt] "temple" refers 10 ant iqui: (111111 ('1111.,11111) s.mctuarics that served I()I' worship IIl1d other purely rcliuioux 11 'Iivili 'S, "'I unenoi" i.e. eparatcd 1'1'0111 III'il environment, in contrast 10 domcst ie hou .es of profane character.

In the Chaleolithic of the Carpathian Basin, some distinct cult pine's luivc II 'en identified; these have been found in the last two decades. They ar pnlill coeval with the Tripolje-Gumelnita-Karanovo VI horizon (FU/,eslllhlill liszanana - SZ. KALLAY 1990), partly one phase younger (Sl./\I~V \" M/\!<.I(/\Y 1980-81). This was a period when the traditional pattern of 11111,111\, neolithic settlements changed to many small short-live I, Pl'llVi."IIIII,d xculcments, a consequence of the increasing importance of animal lill'lllill' III the Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur cultures the above mentioned sill" circular ditches with a bothros and in one case an omphalos form ill III' III1t1dll

may have continued the tradition of community buildings. /\lllIollgll IIII",\, lind complexes are too sporadic to draw a well-based conclusion, 111<.: Iii 'I 111111 the chalcolithic cult places represent a missing link between neolithic huildrn " erected for communal purposes and the late chalcolithic and early bronze ngl' sanctuaries cannot be excluded. At present these sanctuaries are 11IOSti represented in Anatolia and the Near East (Kusura, Mersin, Beycesultan ctc.). From a consideration of their architecture and finds inventory, these latter buildings are certainly "temenoi", i.e. they are distinct from of their profane, domestic mil ieu and therefore can be rightly called sanctuaries. If I h is suggestion proves to be correct, the neolithic buildings erected for communal purposes may well have served as an archetype for "temenos" -type bu i Id ings, i.e. real sanctuaries of the Bronze Age.

Consequently, I consider it acceptable in all respects to establish that ih ' neolithic assemblages identified as "shrines" or "cult sites" served not cult but community purposes. I would also assume here that these communal buildings (a Iso) served as venues for in itiation ceremon ies. It would appear well-j usti ficd to introduce the term "community building" instead of "sanctuary" in the Neolithic. This new notion would rest on the assumption that there were certain rites (initiation, joint agricultural activities like sowing, harvesting, rainmaking) which could not be practised by individuals, only by a community. /\1 sites where this place cannot be identified by archaeological means, we have l',,'cry reason to presume that these a Iivitics were practised in the open ail', :1 behaviour which was common amon I Illosl later Indo-European tribes. 'I'll' enclosed roofless wattle-and-daub (,;(111.'11'11 'Iillll, pnssihly (I temporary sheller of Ti.s/,al"(ildvilr, belonging 10 I ill' I:llv 111'111111111 ,'/11"(1111:'11 .ulturc, could perhaps rcpr .scnt a transition.


() .. " ('1111 ((11111 i', 11111\\1 111111' IIlIII.,I'1i

Wl' l':IIIIIOI ignore the slillislklll IlIvl III1II (lId) II I'll culric buildinzs have Iii' 'II 1)),()lIghl to light at the hundreds o!' I 11 oro I I ,illy excavated neolithic and I Ii:lil'ulilili ' settlements in Mid lie and Southeast Europe. This fact is all the 1111111.' ,~ll'i"illg since there are thousands or figurines and altarpieces cominz I1II111 :III over the area which prove that cult life did exist. The Lengyel culture ,1/1111l' hux Yielded more than one hundred small clay altarpieces, none of them tll'~ I ill 'd as "sanctuary' finds, but almost all coming from settlements. From 1IIIi'I II .o l ith ic and chalcolithic cultures in the area discussed I had earlier Ildlvel '(/ ahuos! 300 published altarpieces, which can be estimated as no more thnu .., 1111 oj' "II the finds, which remain unprocessed in museum deposits or in J111\,llll' collections (BANFFY 1990-9Ia, 209). This shows that the main scene of 11111 Iii', \V,IS the settlement, the dwelling houses

Iii' 70 square metre house unearthed at Sabatinovka (Ukraine) belonued to llil' 'l'ripolj~ culture. The site produced a large number of figurines (~I,\I i\1{I:VI(' 1960,290-301, GIMBUTAS 1982, 73, 26). A house model found at IIII~ Sill' shows a similar dwelling house with objects of every-day-life (mill~II1IIV"' • ..;Image vessels), while figurines were grouped in one corner on a clay 111'11111 l'hix separation of cult finds within dwelling houses can be observed at

1'\ 1'1111 siles. In H number of buildings interpreted as "shrines" only a part can III' I 1lrll':ll'Icrised with cult finds and phenomena (Akhilleion, Sesklo ill Greece, ( 11,'1111,)11.'11' ill Romania etc.). Elsewhere, similar buildings were mostly con- 1111 II tI III I I)' domcst ic houses on account of the household pottery, personal III 111111'1111'" 111\(1 other non-sacral objects recovered there, even though they also 111./1 Ii .ilr.u pice .x, figurines or house models in explicitly cult settings.

l'IIIt11l ilIIIIIS in which such buildings are described, may belong to very ,/111111111 uvo lithic and chalcolithic cultures. The Koros buildinz unearthed at

, b

lit/III I /:111<1:1 (Hungary) was also defined as a dwelling house (Ki\UCZ -

I' \1 I \ I ()I{()-I{ I, 1981). It has yielded several idols and also a number of bull 1111111 ',llIljwd clay altars. Consequently,. the house must have served both sacral

I \' 11111 nud profane, i.e. domestic purposes, The two buildings uncovered at th~ :111111 /,agnril-Ilospital site, belonging to the early neolithic Karanovo I-II

11111111" .outaincd, besides tools and household wares, a bucraniurn near the IlIl'pl:ll'l'. ximilur to that from Szolnok-Szanda (OIMITROV - RADEVA 1980). In loIlll~';l'lIlhitl;'I/S the Lengyel altarpieces were placed close to the fireplace. In Illl",l' 1":IS 'S we have every reason to presume that the non-profane part of the 1lIlIldilil' WilS the fireplace area.


;\ late neolithic IH)w,l' III III' I'll s '1I1elllent Veszto-Magor has survived almost intact (1-11:(II':Jll'JS M/\I\.I\.i\ Y I <')S7). The "sacrificial assemblage" (p. 87, I'ig. 3,4) that has come to light from behind an inner dividing wall includes a number of strangely-shaped vessels, a fragment of a large seated sculpture and three decorated altarpieces . .Judging also from the quantity of other objects piled up at this area, we may well presume that this corner of the house was regularly used for cult purposes.

The site of Veszto somewhat antedates the Herpaly tell settlement. The dvvelling houses found there which have internal divisions and their environs have produced several cult objects and phenomena. Most significant among these were the aurochs horns placed under house floors before the buildings were constructed, as well as clay bucrania applied on the wall and on top of fireplaces, and also the omphalos-shaped altar (KALlCz. - RACz.I<.Y 1984, KAUCZ - RACZI<. Y 1987, I 10, Fig. 7,8). The three-roomed bu ild in~ of Gorzsa was coeval with the Herpaly house. It also had a cult area behind one of the partition walls, and has yielded fragments from a large-sized, unfired clay sculpture (HORV AT 1-1 1986, 1987, Fig. 6, 30).

Excavating a house at the late neolithic site of Tirpesti (Romania), S.

Marinescu-Bilcu discovered a complete "genre scene" represented by a group of clay objects standing on the floor level (MARINEscu-BfLCU 1981, Figs. on p. 95, 103-105, COM)A 1980, Fig. 6/1-8). Thirty-four figurines and idol fragments were scattered over this area, together with several miniature chairs and tables. Althouzh the excavator defined the assemblaze as a shrine we have

~ b'

every reason to consider it a cult corner within a dwelling house, because

another room of the house contained ordinary household material. The arrangement of Tirpesti and also the probable function of the objects can clearly be related to those found at Ovcarovo (Bulgaria, TODOROVA 1983).

As the reader will note, all the examples referred to in the above paragraphs are taken from very recent publications. This is because evidence for the presumed existence of the "cult corners" needs to be sought in the latest and consequently most accurate excavation reports. Accordingly, Lengyel altarpieces could be more easily identified with oil lamps before some pieces were found near fireplaces. This is also a datum illustrating the importance of the exact archaeological context with regard to determining the function of the clay altarpieces. Comparable assemblages to those from the cult areas of domestic houses were often considered as "sanctuaries" in the earlier excavations. The majority of' cult corners were ohxcrv ," ill divided houses, but this may only IllCHI\ that in those places lit' W '1" 'lIsivl' 10 observe. Thus, two fr quem rnixlakcx could be avoided:

till' 1',,1'1111111'11 \'Ilit (lill('(I', \\1'1(' 11111 11111"1111111111', 1I1I1)jlg III her lin Is of ('\('1\11 1\ 11',1'.111

(1111 111111·, dill, I~, II 1111'. PI'lIIIIJlI 111l' '\1' 1\ 111111 I() draw iI ucneralised 111111111'"11111 liliit Illl' 1\ "Iill' hllildill ' WII.' II.' 'd IIlI '1I1i purposes alone.

1'\'111 IpS It L' 11(11l'11i'i'yill)' thin 's to .xtr '11l'S if we presume that altarpieces 111111 (11111'1 "illd,~ 01 '\111 ohi ~(;Is (;o!l1ing fr0111 settlements and not comins from 11111111(11 (II v. I, louudutiun llJ'il:rillgs were once parts of cult corner assemblages II 1111111 ""t'1l1l1 I Il(lII.'l·s, Whcu they are deposited on house floors we can ((1(1'''''('1 1111'111 liS I ·qllisil<.:s 01' the last domestic rituals before the house was 1\11I1I1/I',I1\,d III lillIIJl(/( n ·d. 111 other cases, when they come from settlement 11'\1,1" (II 1t'111.~1· JlilS ill 111·1' .ulcrnent they may have been used earlier for cult (\ ('IIi'. Iliid IWI ' dis '1I1'd'd :d'tcrwards. Nevertheless, even a part of multi- 11\ 'I 'iI ,'!1I1'1 iii 'illl pils '1111 .oniain the inventory of one fulfilled ritual in each III II, II \ '(',

I dill l'OIIVIIII'vd lillIl III' large amount of altarpieces and other cult objects 111111111 III ill'\llililie " '111'111 'II(S speak for such an assumption: they must have IW('I\ JlI l'jllil I'd, used 1111(/ dis .ardcd periodically.

lilt' 11111\1111'1' Ill' Slim ·i '1\(1 researched and recorded cult corners is still too '1l1Idllll I'liidill' II' In I' .liuhl reconstruct or typify them. Therefore, the exposi- 11I1II In 111\1 1',1111 111(11" 111:111 II preliminary attempt.

III '01111,11' 11111111 IlIlII.' '.' the cult area was most probably situated in a corner.

III 1111' 111111111111 1111 'I' IIHIIII houses the cult area is most commonly located in '11111111111 11111 Id' 11111111.'. As seen in several cases, the proximity of fire must II '11111\1 III III 11I1j1l111.1111 p:lr( from the frequently occurring altarpieces, other

III I IIIIIII~' 11('lliS were the omphalos (i.e. "navel of the world") 1111\ 1'1111111 '111.', npplicd to the floor, bucrania, female figurines of

1111111 I III Ilid 'III dll,. Illd somelimes the remains of some organic material

11111 I II II .il- 111 1II'ili. I'llI' cull corner must have been the venue of the ""1111111111 ' 1('111'11111" «+iviti 'S, acted by a small group of family members III dl d\l' 11111 ' Iltlil', ''i, M .nnwhile, the sharp spiritual border between sacred

11111 1"11/ III 1\ 1111'11/ I{II' Inter periods may not have existed in the archaic

1IIIId III~ I II!I.~ lip' oj' domestic ritual which predominates in neolithic

.lllllllIl'lI'" '>II (1l1glI dil'J"l's 1'1'0111 the religious practice of later periods I 'In'l ,,,11\ I1111 III' Iii· nnriqui: no: to speak of the division between profane

( 11111 1'1111111' lliv I !'IIiISil ion ill'IIWl'll IIIL: sacred and the profane sphere, further about 1111'11 1 I'IIWII/ l'lillllt"\'" i.r. jllolillll' Hilll holy periods see particularly the works of ~I I 1 II I ill' 1,'111\1>1 1')'iX. I I}(, I). 1<J7X,lIlIlialsoALTIZER I97S,Chapter I.

lomcstic sctt lcm 'Ills jll llilill I'd III II! ' ~'jlil'illl:d Iii, "llldl IllIl Is 'xpl' 'ssi(lIl, only in churches, so I pi 'III 1l1'llil' Ilisl two millennia.

6.3. The place and function of altarpiec s IV III Ii II hu ises

Our last question concerns what, precisely, the Iillorlli 'L'l'S .ould be Ils·d for. The problem is that even with the amount of inl(ll'1llnti(111 n vailablc :i111llil cult corners in dwelling houses we walk on thin ice wh '11 II' 'iii I, to rc .onsu u. I the possible ritual activity for which these objects would huv ' hVCl1 11 ' • 'SSIIi \ Thus, we must concern ourselves only with the cull IIcliviliL's ihcmx 'Iv'~ Ilid avoid speculating about their exact religious content (possihk: Ciodd c: ":l". 111 Gods).

It is possible to assemble data on archaeological 1":11111' ,. lind '0111 '\111011 phenomena in order to interpret altarpieces at the abnvc III -utioncd I' '1lllil(l1 level. One can then check the result against the abundant I h 1'1lJ'1' I ical Iii 'r:lIlIll' ancl see whether there is any coincidence. In other words, I he sccond.u question is the following: to what extent is it possible lor iI I pological ,111(/ contextual analysis of an archaeological find type, in 0111' ':ISI' III . ultarpicccs, 10 become a source for the theoretical history of religions'!

Let us begin with one of the basic problems enCOIIIJ( .rcd ill I his study: the question of intact and fragmentary occurrence.

Neolithic and chalcolithic figurines are found almos: up to hundred percent in fragments. At the site of Vinca, for example, thcr III" hard Iy any intact figurines among more than 1300. At a first glance il SIX'IlIS logical thai, similarly to ceramic items, this destruction was causer] b the use of the figurines. This raises, however, two other problems: we have 10 .ixsume that the figurines were in use, and, consequently, that the frnuntcntx o f a damaged figurine should be found near each other, e.g. in one r '1'liS' pit. However, fragments that came to light in the same context, lyiu I 'los' 10 each other, hardly ever fit together! What is more, there are several ',\:llllpl 'S of different fragments from a single figurine occurring at a considernhl . distance from each other (e.g at Vinca), or, as at Hluboke Masufky where Ill' \Y 're carefully, most probably intentionally, buried II' different pils II ':11' each other (HaCKMANN 1965, 14-23). O. I lockrna 11 11 also argues II ',nillsl Iii , breakage 01' these objects being accidental, II' draws 1IIIl:IIIion III Iii . hI'( "'11 legs of the "God with si .k lc" I'r()11l S/'FV:'II 'I'i'l/ki I'V~. lliough ,~l'\vrlll Il'il' 's of repairs can be ohx 'r""t/ lIil Illl' ..,11111' lii-, IlIilll'll "'I'" \lCI"' 11111 Il".I(II('ti l-i gurincs ma have I "II hili" 'II i'llllll Iii 11111,1 1111111 111\11.1 111 l'IJiIIIlIIl Illl", their effective power lcl] 111'111 iii 11111111 ,,,"11 II I III I 111i' 11'11li1111~ld 1111'. 1'11\ V '1' w '1" still

1'lllliI 'l'ItIIS, ill lit' l'II!;\' 111111'1111111 lit II II lid dg' :Ji'l 'I' using them must have

Ill'lulI/' 'd I() lit' 'ss 'II ' , o!' 1111' 11i11

'l'llis id<.;iI icts problcmnu, \\11111 dJlplll'd 10 altarpieces. Compared to II 'III'illes, nliurpicccs arc more ,Vltlllill 111111111 III ;1 Iragrnentary form. In the case Iii L'llhi' <llld other geometric pi' .cx, this is perhaps partly because. of the '''1 'II u h inherent in the form, which has no vulnerable projections. Animal',III'III,:d altarpieces are more often found without the head or tail part: this also 1111 'hi he n result of their shape. Similarly, the legs of the three or four legged 11II' 'l'~ <II" often missing. It is interesting to note that the few pedestalled ,I/llIflli 'C 'S, imitating the common pedestals of the Lengyel culture, are applied III II 'lI:<ldy way because they appear seldom to have broken The exceptions are 11111 cx.unplcs from Zalaszentbalazs and Baiatonmagyarod, both belonging to IiiI' 1111 'sl Lengyel phase, For an unknown reason the original pedestals of these 1\\11111 'C<';S were carefully removed before firing the object.

lurthcrrnore, I have not found any relationship between the provenience of II Ii lI('t :lllti tragmentary altarpieces. At my own excavations in Zalaszeutbalazs, lilli' o!' the two pieces lying near the fireplace of house 2 was fragmented. The 1IIII'st nl t:l rpicce, however, with red painting on its entire surface was til rown 111111 II r .fusc pit. The missing parts broken from many pieces are typically to be 111[1'1 JlI' .tcd as consequences of use.

l'hix i: a common point with figurines. It is apparent that altarpieces, like II ',III incs, were not made purely as decorative items, but were kept in use, as " t 1Vl' jlill:t ieipating objects in some series of action in the cult corner. However, Ill' 1':lllllot assume that altarpieces were broken intentionally. In contrast to II 'III iII'S, they might not have been regarded as possessing the same sacred 11I11\V1 They can rather be considered important requisites for domestic cult 1\1'111'., 1\ ithout carrying the ritual power of human sculpture. After some 11,,,.,1:11 .vcntx they are apparently thrown away, even in an intact form, which ',111111 Ihill altarpieces were not worth being ritually damaged before disposal. III ',I 1111" cases, however, sl ightly damaged, broken pieces were conti nued in 11',1' II is thus possible, that the main function of altarpieces was to contain "llillvliJill,l!. Ih,ll was really important.

II IS :J I.~() i ntcrcsti ng to consider whether it has any importance that the 1\ IIPlp, ~ll':J I features of altarpieces remained fairly conservative through "1111'11'111 cultures and centuries, although during these periods all other kinds of 11I1111'I'\, did cliilllgc dramatically, being only typical for one culture. This may ',11111111 JlVl'Il:1p,~ contradictory to the assumption that altarpieces themselves were Id 'Vl'1111<!:JI'1 importance as compared to whitt they contained. Through 11i11l1.~:III(/S or mi lc : and through several c 'III uri 'S each archaeological culture


\ hanged its building Ii' 'lilll\lll\" II', lillll"\' 1111'1ns. 011 the basix or the .olour, levi .ation. surface, we call tL'1I whut culture a single pottery i'ragmcnt belongs Ill, not to speak of vessel types. l.vcn cult objects can be assigned to their cultural backuround. One culture uses linear decoration or barbotine, others usc crusted painted motives, black polished or red burnished ware - all typical I'm the culture they are made in. Nevertheless, on altarpieces similar distinctions can be made, i.e. a stray find can be almost perfectly ranged in time and space. Still, the typological features such as the hole, the geometric form, the four perforations on the edges, the small round knobs live on from the Early Neolithic.

Comparison with very functional objects cannot be avoided here. A spatula

made of a rib bone, a tankard, a vessel in the form of a strainer or a cremation urn must show similar characteristics across space and time simply because or their function. Can we assume that somewhat similar, strict, functional regulations made altarpieces of different periods alike? Could the explanation bet::> a 'functional one or one belonging to a cult custom as yet unknown - for the creators and. users of all the altarpieces the traditional form was apparently very important for some reason,

Another question for discussion seems to be the difference between finely elaborated and coarsely made altarpieces and the relation of these to their proveniences. Before drawing any conclusion about a similar function for altarpieces in different periods and areas, we have to see whether differences In the quality of their elaboration reflect any difference in their use. In other words: did altarpieces with polished or painted surfaces or incised decoration serve the same purpose as roughly made and poorly fired pieces?

I have made the analysis of figurines in an earlier study (BANFFY 1990-91, Chapter 3.1) A study of the whole corpus of settlement finds revealed that the ratio between finely and coarsely made figurines was almost identical. In following the same exercise with altarpieces we get a very similar result. In the late Lengyel settlement of Balatonmagyar6d both the elaborate piece and the coarsely made one were thrown into refuse pits (Cal. Nos. 42, 44, Figs. 16,2: 7,/). The occurrence of finely and coarsely made pieces together in one archaeological feature also means that we cannot explain the good or bad quality with the more or less talent of the potter. Moreover, we often find finely made pieces together with kitchen refuse, but - as in house 2 of Zalaszentbalazs - the intact and the broken altarpiece were used together.

All this 111:1 he taken to 111 '<Ill the: rol/owillg: in contrast to the conservative typological J'VIIIIIIl',', 111' Ijilitlit\' Ill' l1il:ti'j)il'l' 's wax not important for neolithic people. (\'1 t:lllll\ II \'1111 I til Ill' I, ,111111'" 111111 lill .ly and coarsely elaborated

/lll'l'I'" \WI'l' Illildl' Jill' dim.'ll'lll 1111" 11111' "111111111 11111 vvcnrs. 'I'his would l (III '111 'wvll willi Ill' nssllillpllllli 11/ 111 tl Illp 1111 dill JIll' 't', IiiI' different events II II1III1 (lie Y '{II"S cycle, II hyporl: 'sis ill 1111 II I1I1111 111\' 1111 ',' 111111111<.:1' of refuse pit Illld" l,'lI 1'1 her on, this hypothc 'is would III ':-.IJ'IIIII'dllllll'il w ,II with some basic II)lpnlll'ses about the acrcd and profane rime periods, assumed by some Ilisl()J'itills of religion (OTTO 1963, ELlAI)I: 1969, Chapter 3,4,7, 1976, 1978, ('1i:1J11'r I-X). However, even the description or published altarpieces is too .. "vlch n,~ yet (not to mention the huge amount of unpublished pieces) to verify llils possibility. All what we can state for sure is that, besides the form of IIllnrpi<.:ces, the content of the depression on their upper surfaces might have pl:1 xl ,I most important role.

And finally, the size and form of the shallow hole in the surface of it/lill'pi<.:ces as well as the fact that they could be covered by lids that were fixed III Ill' hole with strings, suggest some possibilities for what the contents might IIIIV' been. The action of burning can be excluded, as discussed above. A small II II inu 11 I or some solid or liquid material may have been placed in this tlvpr<.:ssion. Although this latter possibility cannot be excluded, it seems rather IIlilikely that the depression contained some liquid. Namely, ill many neolithic illid chalcolithic cultures a particular form of cult vessel occurs which 1110st pmi1nbly was designee! to take liquid. These are the types of rectangular or boat

, .. llilJ1<.:d vessels with several perforations on one side and sometimes even vll:IIIII<.:ls leading to the holes (e.g. Rakarnaz, Buj, Ocsod, Tiszadob - J6SA IXI)(), ISIV;\NOVITS - LORINCZY 1986, site Nr. 30, PI. XI, RACZKY 1987,

I II', 11), A 'cording to analogies from later periods they may very probably Ild\ t' VI vcd tor libation. ThLlS, it seems more plausible that the depression on 1III dlllll'V ()J' altarpieces may have rather been made for a small amount of

JlI \ ~ 111'1 hs or some grains or cereal. In any of the cases the very little amount ,JIll III II Iillmv iI ny practica I interpretations. Whatever was put in the holes and 111\ 11\ Ii II Ilh lids, was no longer intended for an every-day purpose. It must 1111\ I 111'1'11 nl'll:recl to some forces standing outside the family but still imagined III III jll "~l'lIl on the settlement. In this way, the votive, offering function of ,ililil jlll'l','S is probable. Judging from the number of altarpieces and lids III I 111111112. in 1110st settlements, these offerings did not last for long. They had to 111'1 "IIi"l'iy replaced by new altarpieces with new contents.

I. ('ollelusioll

To sum LIP the aims "lid conclusion of til is study tile following can be s,;lid:

I intended to analyse an object type occurring to a different Ic~r .c ,"I, nl] l.cngyel area '. After the typological analysis I compared them WI.11l SIIIII~III object types from neolithic and chalcolithic cultUl:es in the Carpat.hltln 111,1.'111. Middle and Southeast Europe, and moreover, With almost identical oillvll Irorn the Southeast European Bronze Age, the function of whi .h Il:ls 1111 ' II" been established. Finally. on the basis of all of these approaches I hnvv 11'11'11 III cxcl ude some sorts of interpretations, and rneanwh i Ie present S )111 ' possil II I III

concerning the function of the objects. '.

The temporal and spatial connections of the Lengyel altaq, I "es,lllV\' (lu-u been discussed. About the interpretation of these objects the lollowiuu 'Jill III

said: . I 1'1

In some points, concerning some problems, we did gel fur: icr, Il'

traditional interpretation of the altarpieces as oil lamps has been rll.l~d out. Meanwhile, the following assumptions seem to fit the available material 1I10st closely: In the consideration of all other forms of neolithic altarpieces, Ill' reconstruction of the inventory with i n the "cu it corner" of domestic houses:.1 he definition of the regularly repeated form of cult activities: and the pos~blt: function of altarpieces and their highly assumable correlation With cyclical time

periods. .. .'. ,

The rest is silence. It has to be confessed that neolithic cult objects can be

used only to a limited extent as evidence in arguments for or against th,~ structural or the social and psychological approach to ancient rituals. In oth~1 words, we can provide some information about cultpractie.es 111 the Neolithic and Chalcolithic, but today we cannot describe their religion yet. One small

consolation is, that a negative result can also be an important result. r

This present state of relative ignorance may not last for long. I'he new interdisciplinary approach within archaeology gives us new hope, and there arc possibilities in two directions. Firstly, exact analytical techniques. provided by researchers of hard science (such as archaeobotany, or soil chemistry) help LIS to define the archaeological context from many new points of View, as yc: unknown. Secondly, the new co-operation between prehistory and sClel.1c' hini!:s us to face with the possihilily or realising interdisciplinary eo-opcratloll, and ~ross-check ing with in the I rad i I iOIl" I 1111111:111 sciences such as tl~: 11Isto~/ 01 rel iuious, anthropology. so 'i,J\ Jls 'Ii(llon', linuuisric psychology. I hcsc 11~ld,~ also belong to interdisciplinnry Il'St'II\,!J1 II i', III 110 importance Illal hlsi oricul


1'11/\1)1 .. M. I()()I)

I Ill' <)11 'Sl. IliSI()J'Y (111(1111" 1111111' III II 111'11111 ( 1111 1II'Il. 1'.11;\1)1':, M. 1976

1':lllel'l1s ill comparative rcl iginn. l.undou.

1,'1 IAI)I':, M. 197))

( ivsch ichtc del' religiosen ldeen Frciburg-Brcisgnu.

1';\1'1 AS, '1..1986

!)i· altcste Besiedlung durch Trager der Lengyel-Kultur im Raum des Ill'nli laver Tores. In: lnternatiuonales Symposium iiber die Lengyel-Kultur, NllVC Vozokany 1984.61-67.

(;AI ()VI(:, R. 1959 I'rctlionica. Prstina. (,AI ()VIC, R. 1962

Ncolitsko naselje u Tecicu kod Rekovca (Station neolithique a Tecic pres Krngujcvac). Zbornik Rad. Nar. Muz. 3, 31-46.

<,AI ()VI(:, R 1967

/l'ienikov(). (L' agglomeration neolithique de Zelenikovo pres de Skopje.) /,i1()1'nik Nar. Rad. Muz. 5, 127-152.

(iAI,()VIC, R 1975

Ncolitska ritualna grupa iz Smederevske Palauke (La groupe neolithique rirucl de Smederevska Palanka, Medvednjak). Zbornik Nar.Rad.Muz. 8, _1-29.

(;AIZASANIN, M. 1973

l'I'i1istorija na tlu SR Srbije. Beograd.

(,AI{ASANIN, M. - BILBIA, M. 1988

I(lI":1 I vo Zelenikovo (Das Haus von Zelenikovo) MacActaArch 9,

\ I II [ .

(;[':N()V, N. - RADUNCEVA, A. 1985

I) -riodat na hipotesite. Otecestvo, 12. Nov. 1985.

( i I ':() 1« I[ EV, G. l. 1 961

['II[llirgruppen del' Jungstein- LInd der Kupferzeit in del' Ebene von l hrnzicn (Sudbulgarieri). In: Europe a la fin de I'age de pierre, Praha, ·1') [()O.

(II':()I{( ;[LV, C/. I. 1962

;\/11I:ISI\:II(( sclixna mogila kraj Stara Zagora. Arhco!o 'i:1 (Sofia) 4/1,59-64.

(;IM[~IJTAS, M. [I)H()

The temples ()['( )Id l'IIIUp'. AI'l'liilL'olugy 33/6. (IIMBUTAS, M. 198~

The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe. Myths and cult i mages. London.

(" M BUT AS, M. 1989a

Akhilleion. A neolithic settlement in Thessaly, Greece. Los Angeles.

(ilMBUTAS, M. 1989b

The language of the Goeleless. London.

(;ODLOWSKA, M. 1978

Grob kultury lendzielskiej z Krakowa-Nowej Huty, Stanowisko [7 (Pleszow). Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 1. 30, 1978.

(;I<.B[(:, M. 1960

Porod in. Bitolj.


Ein Kultgebaude in Nevali Cori. In: Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotarnica Alba Palmieri dedicata (eds.: M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, M. Mellink). 37-69.


Veszto-Magor. A settlement of the Tisza culture. In: The Late Neolithic of the Tisza region. Budapest-Szolnok, 85-103.

I lEI LING-SCHMOLL, l. - KAUS, K. K. 1989

Urgeschichtliche, rornische unci mitrelalterliche Funde unci Fundstatten in Stegersbach und Umgebung. Marktgerneinde Stegersbach, Festschrift, 39-49.


Cal ibrated radiocarbon dating of Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo. Antaeus 22, 105-107.

1I0RV ATH, L. 1984

Elozetes jelentes a Nagykanizsa-Inkey-kapolna rnelletti lelohely feltarasar6J. Zalai Gyujtemeny 18, 17-25.

1I0RV ATH, F. 1986

Aspects of Late Neolithic changes in the Tisza-Maros region. SzBAME 13, X9-95.

[lOR V ATH, F. 1987

l lodmezovasarhely-Gorvsn. A s 'III .mcn: (\1' the Tisza culture. In: The Laic 11 .olithic or the Tisz» I' 'giol\, IIlld/lJl ''It S/PII)()", 'l [.116.



'>\111111", Illd llllllll'lldil~llll.' ,I)i'() V I,d -Ill Iii I !I II Ii I 111',11 Jllillilkis lor mythology an I lilli/I'll Ii culture. PI'l.:llIS/lll'lt; ol),I"l'I,' Ii 1\ 1111\ llih 1111111gL' conunstcd 1.0 written ~ll\III'I'S, N,i1 II 1\.:1 ': :1 written rex: is n lr '1I(Iy 1II'Vt",'HlIIi I rill 'rut! and represents an 1IIIvi pi 'InilOl1 01 l.il~IS by its author. AI' '/in '(lllIgl 'nl rillds, however, speak for 1IiI'III',L'lv 'S, A nusmtcrpretation is alwa S Ill' ill' .hacologist's fault. This is l ' '11i:1JI,~ another reason not to neglect, but to continue the research of J11,,111.~1()I·i' 'Iill objects and activities.

ALTIZER, Th. J. J. 1975

Mircea Eliade and the dialectic of the sacred. Westport/Connecticut.


Art and culture ofthe Cyclades (ed.: J. Thimrne) Karlsruhe 1976.


Paradirni. Heidelberger Akadernie del' Wissenschaften. lntemation.rl ' 1111\'1 akadernische Kommission fur die Erforschung der Vorgcschiclue 111', Balkans. Monogr. II. (ed.: V. Milojcic). Mainz.

BANFFY, E. 1985

Trois fragments d' idole de la civilisation Vinca. Bulletin du Mlls~'1' d ", Beaux-Arts, Budapest 64.

BAN FFY, E. 1986a

House models from neolithic Hungary - Attempt at a general int rprcta: iOI>' In: Archaeological "objectivity" in interpretation, Prel. Vol. to World Archaeological Congress, Southampton-London, Vol. 2.58-65.

BANFFY, E. 1986b

Cultic finds from the Middle Copper Age of Hungary - connections to Southeast Europe. In: Archaeology and fertility cult in the Ancient Mediterranean. Papers presented at the first international conference on "Archaeology of the Ancient Mediterranean", Malta, 2-5 Sept. 1985. Ed.:

A. Bonanno Amsterdam, 69-77.

BANFFY, E. 1990-91a

Cult and archaeological context in Central and Southeastern Europe in thc Neolithic and the Chalcolithic. Antaeus 19-20, 183-250.

BANFFY, E. 1990-91b

Continuity or discontinuity: Some questions on the transtition from the Neolithic to the Copper Age in the Carpathian Basin. Antaeus 19-20,23-32.

BANFFY, E. 1994

Transdanubia and Eastern Hungary in the Early Copper Age. JAMI~ 36, I 291-296.

BANFFY, E. 1996a

Neolithic and Copper Age settlements at Hah6t and Zalaszentbalazs. Antaeus __ , 5-50, I'ls. 9-/17.


11(\NI'lY, I' .. 1()l)(,h

l,'lIlly Chulcnlithic s 'lIl'lll 'Ill :11 /,1111, I III I! illll" ~;lld(dl 'P II III ''''il. Antaeus 1.\ 11_10_, !,Is. 77-114.

II NI,'I"Y, I':. 1<)96c

,'UIIIIi W 'si Transdanubia as a I11C lia[ing area. The cultural history of the 1"OII'ly lind Mid lie Chalcolithic. Antaeus 22, 157-196.


{'I.inhh ;lsal<lS a hodrnezovasarhelyi Kokenydornbon (Neuere Ausgrabung ill I l\iikcllY lomb bei Hodmezovasarhely.) FolArch 5, 8-34.

1\ NNlm • .I. I(OREK, J. 1949

N ')2. I .dik CS otodik asatas a hodmezovasarhelyi Kokenydornhnn (Les L':1I11jlilgIlCS IV et V des fouilles pratiquees au Kokenydornb c1e 11('ldllle:r,i)v,\s,\rhely.) ArchErt 76, 9-25.

11111( 'I{ I. D. 1966

('1111111'<1 IIH11langia. Noi contributii. Bucuresti II< )NI);\I( M. 1996

A S 'Illelllcnl 01' the Lengyel culture at Zalaszentbalazs-Szoloheb,rYI' "


11111 'liS __ , 51-70, Pis. 50-76.

II()ISSI,'VAIN, I~. 1970

I '11111/ ivc typology, chronology ancl distribution of the human fizurines of I ,I 1'111 1"11)'( P' and the Near East in the early farming levels. In:b Acres du Ill' (\lilgr's lntcrnaticnal c1es Sciences Prehistoriques et Protohistoriques, 1%11 ( -" , .I, Filip) Prague.

)II II I I I· ,I I () X

I Iii \1'Pi'llll, Auaroiia ancl Europe: Cultural interrelations 111 the second 11111111111111111 1\ '. Praha.

111)1 I )N~ I. ,',11)6<)

\ 1I'J11'II.~ki Vir-i ostelep gerinces faunaja (The vertebrate fauna of the IlIl·1i 11:lori ' SCi tlcrnent at Lepenski Vir). ArchErt 96, 157-160.

/I()/ ()N I. S. 1970

1\111111:11 I' 'lila ins from Lepenski Vir. Science 167, 1702-1704.

IIIU\I/)W()()f), R. - BRAIDWOOD, L. 1982

PI' 'hi .. toric village archaeology in Southeastern Turkey. The eighth nrillcuuium n "site at Cayonu. BAR IS 138.

II \

('ILJ(iUI)I:AN, II. 19X1

Funeral ancl magi' PI'IIl:Iil.:·s ill III' "Illclerics of the Cotofcni cultur '. 111:

Valcamonica Symposium III. (Ed.: L. Anati), Capo di Ponte, 169-176.

COLPE, C. 1970

Theoretische Moglichkeiten zur Identifizierung von Heiligtumcrn IIlId Interpretation von Opfern in ur- und parahistorischen Epochcu. Iii Vorgeschichtliche Heiligtumer und Opferplatze in Mittel- un I Nord '11I'PJli! Bericht uber ein Symposium in Rheinhausen bei Gottingen in lcr '/, ,it V(III 14. bis 16. Okt. 1968. (ed.: 1--1. Jahnkuhn). Gottingen.

COMSA, E. 1980

Despre obiectele de mobilier din epoca neolitica de pe teritoriul ROlli 11111'1 Pontica 13,32-56.

DETEV, P. 1959

Materiali za praistorijata na Plovdiv (Materiaux de la prchistoire lit' Plovdiv). Gcdisnik na Nar.Arh.Mus. Plovcliv 3,3-80.

DETEV, P. 1968

Praistoriceskata seliste pri selo Muldava. Godisnik na Nar.Arh.Mux. Plovdiv 6, 9-48.


Ein bernerkenswerter Kupferfund aus der jungsteinzeitlichen Seeufersiedlunz Hornstaad-Homle I am westlichen Boclensee. Arch. Nachrichten


aus Baden 38-39, 28-37.


Das Neolithikurn in Syrrnien, Slawonien und NW-Kroatien. Archlug. 10, 39-76.


Neolitnite zilista v Stara Zagora M.P.K. 3, 7-20.

DOMBA Y, J. 1960

Die Siedlung lind das Graberfeld bei Zerigovarkony. ArchHung 37,



Les principaux resultats c1es c1eux campagnes de fouilles clans la station neolithique recente de Cascioarclc. SCIV 16,215-238.

DUMITRESCU, V. 1965b Cascioarele. Archacolou II<.

I I ( ')(' I MAN N. ( ). I % ~

i'vivIISl'lili 'lie Dnrsl '111I11' 'II III iiI I 111111111 111111111111 II I 1111111' . .lb, R(;%M 12, I \·1.

II( )( 'I' M/\NN, O. 1969

Rill,k()pl'i'iguren del' Jungstcinzcit ill S(ltiOSI'IIj'()P:1. .lb, RGZM 16,1-16.

II!)( 'I' M/\NN, O. 1972

/\lldelllllngen zur Religion und Kultus in del' baudkerarnischen Kultur. Alba 1'L',l.!,i:1 I~, I ~7-209.

II SIMON, K. 1987

N 'olil 6s rczkori telepulesek Tekenye hataraban. Zalai Muzeurn 1,7-46.

I I . ..., I M () N, I . I 994

1'1'111\11 .ol ithische Kultgegenstande bei Gellenhaza. Korn. Zala. In: A ki\k(II'II')I" kozepkorig. Von del' Steinzeit bis ZUIll Mittelalter. Studien ZUIll (",hurlslng VOII 0 Trogmayer. (eel.: G. Lorinczy), 53-65.

I V /\N()VITS, E. - LORINCZY, G. 1986

I'v ,l':·u.eli 6satclsok es leletek Szabolcs-Szatrnar rnegyeben. In: Regeszeti 1.111111111:'111 10k Kclct-Magyarorszagrol. Folkl6r es Etnografia 24. Debrecen.

II 11I1(" • I:. II)X9

WI'I/II'III.~d()l'r. lundberichte aus der jungeren Steinzeit. FO 28, 171.

II 1\ \~~I )VI(', II. 11)~2

1'11111101 (:11\/1, l lor-Bcograd

II I I )i1)1)

,/"IHIiI ""(11111 "yei Muzeum os- es kozepkori targyainak ismertetese.

N\ IIIT\ /1111


1\ 1111 III uml 11:III(IIVerker. Braunschweigisches Landesmuseurn, Wunstorftli/id II)XI: Solin 1992.

\11('1 N,I!J77-78

I I III uud sparncol ithische Funde in der Gemarkung des Ortes Lanycsok (Vru lu-riclu ) . .IPMC221978(1977),137-158.

/\1 I( 'I. N. 19X2

1\ 11:11:11 illl-I ,CIS i nja-kultura torteneti kerdesei es fernleletei. Arch Ert 109, l I I.

I I( 'I .. N. II)X5

I i'lk(\l'i 1';1111 Aszodon (Neolithisches Dorf in Asz6d). Asz6d.


I /\ 1.1 ( 'I,. N, II)I)()

/:1'01111 'olilliis 'Ill', 'Ivdllliit ,llllld' IIIIS,' ldw 'SIUllg:11'I1. 11'11, l sudap ·sl.

I, /\ I,l ('/" N. 11)1) I

IkilrLigc 1:111' I '1111111is dcr Kuplcrvcir im ungarixchcn Transdanubicu. Ill:

Die Kupfcrzcit als historischc I:poche (cd.: .I. Lichardus). Bonn, 347-_ 87.

I· /\I,!CZ, N. 199

'1'111: early pha .es of the neolithic in Western Ilungary (Transdanubin). JlllI'ocil ... v Sioveniji 21,85-135.

I'/\I,! 'Z, N.-M/\KKAY,J. 1977

Die Linicubandkeramik in der Grofsen Ungarischen Tiefebene. Stud Arch VII, Budapest.

I /\L!CZ, N.- R/\CZKY, P 1980-81

Siedlung der Koros-Kultur in Szolnok-Szanela. MittArchlnst 10- 1 I, 13-24.


The PI' cursors to the "horns of consecration" in the Southeast European Neolithic. ActaArchl-lung 33,5-20.

I· /\I,! '1'., N. - RACZKY, P. 1984

Prel i 111 i nary report on the 1977-1982 excavations at the Neol ith ic anel Ihollze Age tell settlement at Berettyoujfalu-Herpaly. Part I: Neolithic. /\cta/\rchHung 36,85-136.

I'AU 'Z, N.-RACZKY, P. 1987

Hcrcttyoujfalu-Herpaly. A settlement of the Herpaly culture. In: The Late Neolithic ofthe Ti za region. Budapest-Szolnok, 105-125.

/\MII;NSKA,.I. - KOSLOWSKI,.I. K. 1990

I':ntwieklung unci Gliederung der Lengyel- LInd Polgar-Kulturgruppen In Polen. War zawa-Krakow 1990.

I' /\!ZI:TSOU, A. 1981

The peak sanctuary of Mt. Juktas. In: Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean IlrOI1/.e Age. Proceedings of the First International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1980. (eels.: R. Hagg and N. Marinaro ). Slockholll1,137-153.


I.rlvcllici, statuctc i amulet i Sil loknlitcta Donja Branjevina kod Dcronja. ( hl~,ilci.

N ( 'IW, M, II)'! \

l'uustoric 'ski i allti 'Ili 1IIlIt '\ jill \ 1111111 II III 1'Illti NIlV:1 i'.agol"l. Nova III'tH'11.

l II,'MANN, I). 1982

1.11 -iu 'II '\1 l.rgcbnissen del' Ausgrabungeu im l Icrcich des linienbandk '1'11111 is 'hen Erdwerks bei Eilsleben, Kreis Wanzleben. In: Siedlungen del' 1'1111111' iui: l.inearbandkeramik in Europa. Nove Vozokany 1981. Nitra, (II) I) I ,

II )()V;\, I;, 1980

I ):lIsi lokality s Moravskou Malovanou Keramikou starsiho stupne na III ncuxkou (Other localities with Moravian Painted ware of earlier stage in tit' vi .inity or Brno). Zbornik Praci filos. Fak. ved v Brne E 25,9-56.

I /\/I)()V;\,I:.-KOSTURIK, P. 1993

\:,II)I's 'hung del' neolithischen Lokalitat bei Tesetice-Kyjovice in den .I rhrt-n Il)X6-1990. Arh. Ustav Akadernie ved Ceske Rep. v Brne, Brno, I I ) I),

II ,\N( )SI( I, n, 1977

Nl'ltillskll IliI,'L'lh<l (uka ka] selo Topolcany. MacActaArch 3, 27-42.

I II \N(),'I I, II. SIM()SKA, D.-TODOROVIC,J. 1978

~~I \\ .tIl It 11'1110 Ij 'It! .x .avations in the settlement Cuka at Topolcany near 1'1 iii II f\ I 1\ \ I III 1'~'1i II, <) - 32 .


, 11 II' 1(1\ '., III: The Late Neolithic of the Tisza region. Budapest-

II flO

I Knlshit (L'habitat neolithique de Kolshit). Iliria 13,

I i( I 1'1 I 1\ 111111111 I 1'1 II ')I I I 1 , I I ) I' II • I I I I) XO

111(111 11111111 ,~IIIOI'iIVskou malovanou kerarniku neolitickeho sidliste LI

IillllIlI 'II '\: II. It 1,1 ornik Pracy ... v Brno E 25,57-64.


II SIIII', de I' Kultur mit rnahrischer bernalter Kerarnik. SzBAME 13, 1 \ \ _ 1.1 (),

I' RS'I'It', D. 19611

Agglomerali II 11 "oli(ill III' 11 V iroscvac pres de Razanj. Zbornik Rad. Nar.Muz. 4,51-6 .

KUTZIAN, I. 1944

A Koros-kultura (The Karas culture). DissPann 11/23, Budapest.


remnants of animals from the neolithic

Madjari near Skopje (Yugoslavia).

Preliminary analysis of bone archaeological site Tumba MacActaArch 10,55-67.


Parta (Die neolithische Ansiedlung von Parra).

Asezarea neolitica in Tibiscus 2, 3-26.


Das neolithische Heiligturn von Parta. In: Neolithic of Southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern Connections. Szolnok-Szeged 1987. Varia ArchHung II. 1989,149-155.


On the developed neolithic architecture in Banat. Banatica 11, 87-118.

LETICA, Z. 1967

Miniature vessels from Vinca. Zbornik Rad. N. Muz. 5, 77-126.

LUNING, J. - KLOOS, U. - ALBERT, S. 1989

Westliche Nachbarn der Bandkeramischen Kultur: Die Keramikgruppen La Hoguette und Limburg. Mit Beitragen von J. Eckert u. Chr. Strien. Germania 67/2, 355-420.

MAIER, R. A. 1964

Die ji.ingere Steinzeit in Bayern. Jahresber. Bayer. Bodendenkrnalpflege 5, 9-27.


Ob ideologiceskih predstavleuiah u tripolskih plernen. Odesskoe arh. obsestvo zapiski. Odessa 1(34),290-301.

MAKKA Y, J. 1970

A kokor es a rezkor Fejer megyeben. Fejer megye tortenete 1.11. Szeke - Ichervar.


Line Kultstatte del' Bodro ik 'I' ','/.1111' I' ultur III Szarvas und Fragcn dcr sakralcn l lugel. MittAr '111111'1 I () II. II ~ ~ t,


I\I/\NI'II,(',M, MANTlI,A, ,'('()III\r~IJ,J 11)1)1

1)lIll' ill k)J.!.;tI\ll'~1 CLi asczarcn SUII'll'Y<1 ('liI",I,11 I'illivil '~Ii,.illd. Vaslui. SCiV II/l.I(I(J-I77.

1\1 l'INI':S('tl-I~II,CU, S 1981

l'll'p '~Ii. lrom prehistory to history In Eastern Romania. BAR IS 107, ( ):",I()I'd.

1\11,'1.1.1\ A R'I', .1.1962

I ':,\l'lIYnl ions at Catal HUyiik. Anatolian Studies 12,41-65.

1\ II 'I I ,A A In,.I. I 963

I~, .nv.uions at Catal Hiiyuk. Second preliminary report. Anatolian Studies Il./I~-I03.

1\11,1 J.AART,.I. 1964

I: l'nv;lliOl1s at Catal Huyuk 1963. Third preliminary report. Anatolian ,'llldies 14,39-119.


A S/, 'kSI',{lrdi Muzeum agyagmecsesei. A Szekszardi Balogh Adam M(I/L'IIIII 'I'udomanyos Fuzetei.

1\1\ )j'I'IS()N. I. A. 1968

l'l'lllll\'(' ',Vii level changes in the Saliagos area since neolithic times. In:

I (1\ 1111111', III SnliilJ.!.os near Antiparos. (Appendix I). By J. D. Evans and 1,'111111'\\ 1111\(11))1,92-98.

~I II,/'. I I !!l o

1/1 111/11111 11,/1'1 -k /,nlavar-Basaszigetrol (Middle Copper Age finds from til II 1111 11',/1 .vl). Arch.(~rt 113,3-14.

11\111 \ 'I 11)i'1!

I I "111.dll1l, l/undhcrichte aus der jungeren Steinzeit. FO 15, 178.

~III!" II 111,1' MAI\ESCH,Chr.1976

II II~'\ 1'11\ '1'IIIIlik nus Siillfried. In: Forschungen in Stillfried 2, 9-23.

I III II 1\ III ,:I{-M A R LSCH, Chr. 1978

IiiI', nculirhischc Fundrnaterial von St. Polten/Galgenleithen, Niederoster- 11'11'11, Mill. d. Anthr. Ges. in Wien 108,50-73.

NIIII( il':IIAlIl,:R-MARESCH, Chr. ]983-84

('llIllllologie der Befestigungs- und Kultanlagen des Mittelneolithikums in N( ) :lltll:llI(\ del' Grabungen von Falkenstein-v Schanzboden" und Friebritz. 1\1111. d. ()A 1". tJr- u. Fruhgesch. 33 .. 34,189-207.


NIKOLOV, B. 1970

Idolnata plastika 01 x. Gradcsnica (La plastique des idolcs du village Gradesnica). Arheologia (Sofia) 12/4,56-68.

NIKOLOV, B. 1975

Seliste ot starija neolit pri s. Gradesnica, Vracanski okrit (Site de neolithique ancien pres du village Gradesnica, departernent Vraca ). Arheologia (Sofia) 17/1, 25-40.

NIKOLOV, B. 1979

Praistoricesko seliste pri s. Borovan, Vracansko. lzv. na Muzeite ot severozapadna Bulgaria 3.

NIKOLOV, B. 1981

Praistoriceski zrtven ici ot gl ina. Iskusstvo 198] 19-] O.

NILSSON, M. P. 1950

The Minoan-Mycenean religion and its survival in Greek religion. Second, revised edition, Lund.

NOWAK, H. 1972

Wetzleinsdorf. Fundberichte aus derji.ingeren Steinzeit. FO 11,26-27.

NOVOTNY, B. 1957

Sidlisko ludu s malovanou kerarnikou moravskoslovenskou vo Velkych Kostolanoch (Die Siedlung des Volkes mit gernalter mahrischerslowakischer Keramik in Yerke Kostolany). St.Zvesti AUSA V 2, 35-45.

NOVOTNY, B. ] 958

Siovensko v mladsej dobe karnennej, Bratislava.

NOVOTNY, B. 1962

Luzianka skupina a pociatky rnalovanej keramiky na Siovensku, Bratislava.


Die Lengyel-Kultur in Burgenland. St. Zvesti AUSA V 17,301-313.

OTTO, R. ] 963

Das Heilige. Ober clas Irrationale in der Idee des Gottlichen lind sern Verhaltn is ZUIl1 Rationalen. I\IJ i.inchen.

PALLlARD!,.I. ]903

Die neolithischen Ansiedlungen mit bernalter Kerarnik in Mahren und Niederosterreich. Mitteilungen der Prahistorischen Kornmission del' Kaiserlichen Akedernie del' Wisscnschaficn. Wien, 1,237-264


Neolithic and Cycladic Civili,'nlloll Alill'IIS,


11,\ I I ! II • I I IIH I

I II 1111' I "I I ii, () III 'II I \ I', I 11111" I I I I I 1 , 'l"lll I 1'111 i I 1'(' Ii / \ I ) , I' ,\ III. 1 II)H()

\111'II'I,III,':III)llllIlk -rnuul ill d 'I, '111\\' Ikl'l, SlllVI\I"1J 1/1 ,2(,') \(,/


I 1llll'lIil' II liVI)1 doh '''0111\:1\11 '.i (I\I'S SllIVnl'11 Auriqun) 1111111,,11\\ 11 1',\ VIII, I 11)1).J

; 11I11)\'kll, I ,'illl.' h 'd '\11 '11di.' 1"llll(lsl 'II . dcr I ,l'II' l·1 Kuluu III Ikl • '11\\111 I I \11111 1111 'I,I()/I /I.

I'll II!)N I, I( II)~/I

I II ' • ... llill'lill· dl.'S i ,'I'IT'i 'Ilis '11\:11 1\:IIII1I'S, Wi '11.

!'()I)IH)I',', ,V,I1)70

,'11I111l~1I' slnv v 'Skllllill kullur IS Moruvxkuu Mnlovnnou I Vlllilliklill (I Ii I ~',I'p,l'll\\ 1111" 1'\lISl'llllllgSSlllIlti clcr Kultur Init III iii i.'l'livi 1Il'IIIIdili I ·lIllllIk). SI(1v;\r'1i 1'1'>1_, _15-) 10.

1'()llIl!lI'SKY, V, Ill'll

V, /111111 111ll'VII'l\l' flSI i IlS:ld S moravskou runlovnuou /,1'11111111 11[1

II '.1'11 kli I 'I(lvki ,It v 1'01.:' I C)7 1 (ol, 1'. ZI10,iIlIO) ( :ndlllllg d '~ 111'/1",11 'II II 1l'lk'l "1'1 NII'(iL'I'IIIS.'III1).!, mi: nuihrischcr hl:IIIIIIIl:1' Kl'l'llIllik III Il",,'11! I

I \1"\111'11111 III/I (lk/ .. ZIIO.illlO), Prchlcd Vvxk um /11/1 (11)/2) j()

1'1)1 1I1!)/ ~ I· ,,V II)X

II' I III I I \,IIIVI',' 2, lIi'lImlni plnsiik» lidu S 1I1000IIVskllil 111111)\' 1111 II


/'111111111' ,I /1)1(1)

NI ,,1111111 III I 1I11'dlll-li dL'1' Ikviilk TUrI' im Illillil'iscil'l\ (I 'Im'1. III

I I 111'i11i1 IIlld I 1111 ill III' Illld i'l'ilil icschi .lulich 'I' Z .ir. II -rl iu. II II) I

1'1 ll't 1 ',I II) 'I!

~IIII" III I h'Y\' hlll'g:lI!. (iodisllik .. .Sofia.

1'1 \I ""I'I,\ VA MI\I\I':I)()NIA

(III '1".1 Ii II iii' Milk 'd()Ili .ns). Skop,i , 1976.

1,\( 'II Y,I' II)XI

( II ',1111 I Ilv'I.'lllIlolll. 111: 'I'll' 1.:11' N .olithi ' IIi' til, 'i'i.'I.1I I' '/,illll, 111I!i1l1" ,',,111111",(,1 Xl.

\{ 1>lIN('I,'VA, A, I()'I()

",,('II 1,'11 -ulituo S 'Ii::'t· i II ·"mjlo!. Ril/.k()pkj i PI'(HI~Vllllill VI., '1!l1.I,

1{I\DlIN('I:VI\, 1\,1991

1 III'/: 'r vorlaufig r Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen in Dolnoslav. In: Die 1 upfcrzcit a ls hi torische Epoche. (Symposium Saarbri.icken-Otzenhausen 19!{X) (ed.:.I. Lichardus) Bonn, 107-110.

1~J;lNI)L, R. 1937

Die Donaulandische Kultur in Niederosterreich. (Diss.) Wien.

IZI~NFREW, C. 1981

The sanctuary at Philakopi. In: Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the First International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1980. (eds.: R. Hagg and N. Marinatos). Stockholm, 67-79

RENFREW, C. 1985

The archaeology of cult. The sanctuary of Philakopi. British School of Archaeology at Athens, Suppl. 18. London.


Excavations at Photolivos. Arheologikon Deltion 24.

RODDEN, R. J. 1962

Excavations at the early neolithic site at Nea Nikornedeia, Greek Macedonia. PPS 28, 267-288.

IZODDEN, R. J. 1964a

A European link with Catal Huyuk: Uncovering a 7th Millennium settlement in Macedonia. ILN, II and 18 April, 1964.

RODDEN, R. J. 1964b

Recent discoveries from prehistoric Macedonia: an interim report. Balkan Studies 5,109-124.

ROSKA, M. 1941

A Torma Zsofia-gyujterneny. Kolozsvar.

RUTTKA Y, E. 1976a

Beitrag zum Problem des Epilengyel-Horizontes ll1 Osterreich.

Arch.Austriaca, Beiheft 13,285-319.

I\LJTTKA Y, E. 1976b

Die Keramikforrnen der Lengyel-Kultur in Osterreich. FO 15, 141-148.

1\ lJTTKA Y, E. 1983-84

ZusHllll1lenfassender Forschunuxstand dcr Lengyel-Kultur in NO. Mitt. d. ()I\ r. Ur- u. Fri.ihgesch. 33- II, . I .~'I(),

Ij I


1'1111'1' A ,I':, I()()()

1';111 'I'i 'r).!. ·11i1.1 dcr I, '11g lvl·1 lilllll III', !lll'il '11'i '11, VB I lorn, Nie ler( sl '1'1' .ich. F() 29, 91-96.

NI';V, V. 1988

Ncolirxko svctiliste od Turnba vo Madjari, Skopsko (Neolithic temple at 1IIIIIhn ill Madjari, Skopje region. Preliminary report of the excavations in 1 (>X I). MacActaArch 9, 1988,9-30.

.'I,'I)(), o. 1986

I.tloll1orrn i nadobka kultury s moravskou malovanou kerarnikou z Bosovic. /.hornik Praci Univ. v Brne E 31,49-60

,l1l'(;MI':TII, 1:.1990

W '1/,1 .insdorf. Fundberichte aus der jungeren Steinzeit. FO 29, 189. ,'Irv]( )SI(A, I). - KITANOSKI, B. - TODOROVIC, J. 1979

N 'olitsl a naselba vo selo Mogila kaj Bitola. MacActaArch 5,9-30. '1{1':.I()VI(',I).I969

"II ' rootx or the l.cpensk i Vir culture. Archlug. 10, 13-22. '1'1.11 IV"'" 1).1975

I 'pl'IL~ki Vir, (S .rbian edition: Beograd 1969) Bergisch Gladbach. 'd . I I() I ( " I) II) X I

II Iii 11·,11 VII M 'IlS .licnbilder einer fruhen europaischen Kultur. Koln~ If III III II

I II) 1\ 1%/

111111111 l<tI(/, Nar. Muz. 5, 57-76.

III III II 111111'1 III Nnrorlni Muzcj.


II 11111 I I PII)·,IlIHlIll()rl'lli poklopci iz Vince (Altars and prosopornorphic lid 1111111 VIII\ I), II ·ogrild.

II 111\1 ('iii. II)KX

( 1111" ululukum 1111(/ Mctallikum: Kupferzeit und fruhe Bronzezeit in Sud- 1\ 1",It!Vllhl'lilnnd und in del' Schweiz. Rassegna di Archaeologica 7, I h IIp

~;lll\, I., I (>I()

/111' Miln '1IsltMcner Gruppe in Bayern. In: Die Anfange des Neolithikums VIlIII Orient his Nordeuropa. (Ed.: H. Schwabedissen) Fundamenta 3/3 Part Vii Korhingcichcndorf, Ki:iln-Wien, 1-121.

S/ .. KAlLAY. A. 1990

Die kupferzeitliche Ringanlage von Fuzesabony . Jschr. Miucldcutschc Vorgesch. 73,125-130.

TALALA Y, L. E. 1983

Neolithic figurines of Southern Greece: their form and function. PhI) diss .. Indiana University.

TASIC, N. 1958

Zitkovac i neki problemi relativnog hronoloskog odnosa neolitsk ih i eneolitskih naselja na Kosovu i u Dolini Ibra (Zitkovac und einigc 1:1'<1 ~l'11 del' relativen Chronolozie del' iungeren Steinzeit und des Aneolithikums jill

b . b

Kosovogebiet und irn Ibartal). Glasnik Mus.Kosova i Metohije 3, 14-49.

THEOKHARIS, D. 1973 Neolithic Greece. Athens.

THEOKHARIS, D. R. 1981 Neolithikos politismos. Athina.


Idols. In: Art and Culture of the Cyclades. (ed.: .1. Thimme). Karlsruhe, 414-576.

TICHY, R. 1962

Zur altesten Volutenkerarnik in Mahren. PamArch 53, 301-305.

TO(:IK, A. 1969

Erforschungsstand der Lerigyel-Kultur in del' Siovakei. St. Zvesti AU SA V 17,437-454.

TO(:IK, A. 1978

Rettungsgrabung in Kornjatice-Tomasove. AVANS 1977 (1978), 266-272.

TO(:II(, A. - L1CHARDUS, J. 1966

Starsia faza slovensko-moravskej 111 a lovanej kerarn i ky na j uhozapadnorn Slovensku (Altere Phase del' slowakisch-rnahrischen bernalten Keramik in del' Sudwestslowakei). Pam Arch 57, 1-90.

TODOROV A, H. 1975

Praistoriceskoto isskustvo v nashite zemlj i. Sofia.

TOI)OROV A, H. 1978

The Eneolithic ill Bulgaria. BAR IS SlIppl 49.

TOI)()IZOV A, H. 1983

Ovcarovo. Razkopki i proucvnnin I ,Solill,

I ()I)( )I'()V A, II. I ()XI)

1:111 Korrcl.uiousv .rsu 'II 1\\ 1',111 II I 11111.1\ I I IIIIIi'lllll icn und prahistoris '11 'II Angabcn. In: I as All '(lllllilklllll lilid III' IIOI1l:Sle Bronzezeit (C 14 H)()()-~()OO B ) in Miuclcuropa: kultur 'II' und eill'()l1ologische Beziehun'VII. Pruchistorica XV, Praha, 25- .. g.

11('1 o, P. 1968

Anthropomorphic figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with L'(llllparalivc material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece. 1,1 indon.

I\SI(", M. 1932-36

1)1' .istorisk a Vinca I-IV. Beograd.

VII ,I )()MI':e, V. 1928-29

() moravske neoliticke keramika malovane. Obzor Preh. VII/VIII, 1-43.

VII I)(HVII:C, V. 1957

I' pociatkou osidlene lidu s neolitickou malovanou kerarnikou na Morave (/(1 den A nfangen del' Besied lung Mahrens durch das Vo I k 111 it del' Ilvolilltischen Bernalten Keramik). AR 9, 664-677.

VI, \);\R,J.-KRUPICA,O.1970

Ncxkorolcngyelske keramika z Brodzian (Spatlengyelkeramik aus III'O<i/:tIlY). SlovArch 18/2,353-371.

W \I I NI':R. E. 1989

I 1lIIIIlililiS '11. lundberichte (IUS der jungeren Steinzeit. FO 28, 163.

\\ III [\IIII{ NI), G. G. 1875

(1111t I \llI'g'schichtliche Funde in Gleichenberg. Mitt. des NaturwissenI 11,111111'1,,'11 V cremes flir Steierrnark, Jahrgang 1875, Graz.

I ( I \ I I. 1979-80

I I'II~'\ I'll kultura a Del-Dunantulon. SzBAME 10-11,3-58

\I ( 1,\ 1\ L, I. 1983-84

"p'l"c der lengyelzeitlichen Forschungen in sudlichen Trans- 1101111")\('11, Mill.d.OA f. Ur- u. Fruhgesch. 33-34, 327-345.

I \I ,\I ('A;\I.,1. 1986

II IlIill:1 rcluio logische F orschungsmogl ichkeiten aufgrund spatneolith ischer (1IitiK'rgrllppen in SW-Ungarn. SzBAME 13, 139-154.

/AI AI-(,A;\L, I. 1995

A l.cngycli-kultura "agyagmecsesei" (Die Tonlampchen der Lengyel- 1\.1111111'). ArchErt 120,3-36.



Acta.Arch 1-1 ung AnSt Arch.Austr ArchE:rt ArchHung Archlug ArchKorr

= Acta Archaeologica Hungarica. Budapest = Anatolian Studies (London)

= Archaeologia Austriaca. Wien = Archeologiai Ertesito. Budapest

= Archaeologia Hungarica. Budapest = Archaeologica lugoslavica. Beograd

= Archaologisches Korrenspondenzblatt.


= Archeologicke Rhozledy (Praha)

= Studie Archeologickeho Ustavu Ceskoslovenske Akadernie ved v Brne (Praha)

= Archeologicke Vyskumy a Nalezy na Siovenskou (Nitra)

= British Archeaological Reports.

International Series (Oxford)

= Dissertationes Pannonicae (Budapest) = Folia Archaeologica (Budapest)

= Fundberichte aus Osterreich (Wien)


Arh. Ustav Akadernie ... v Brne



DissPann FolArch FO

Fundarnenta = Fundarnenta. Monographien zur Ur- und

FrLihgeschichte (Wien-Koln)

GMKM = Glasnik Muzeja Kosova i Metohije


Godisnik ... Plovdiv = Godisnik na Plovdivskija Arheologiceski

Muzej Plovdiv (Plovdiv)

Godisnik ... Sofia = Godisnik na Narodnaja Muzej v Sonja


ILN = Illustrated London News (London)

IPH = Inventaria Praehistorica Hungarica


.I b. Bayer Bodendenkmalpflege = Jahresbericht der Bayerische Bodendenkl11alptlege (M iinchen)

.lb. RC;ZM = Jahrbuch des Rbmisch-Gerll1anischen

I.Cnlr;tilllllsClitn (Mainz)

.IMY .Inhn:,'SL'hriJ't ri'lr Miltcldeutsche VIII Il't:l'illL'iliv (l ln l lc/Saa lc]



~11I,,1\ 'liI;\reh ~Iill;\r .hlnst

~IIII, d. Anthr. Ges. in Wien

Mill, d. ();\ f Ur- u. Fruhgesch.

1\11. jI, K. 1111111;\ rch

J1(iI'()~il() ... v Sioveniji

(lil/Ol'I'rel1. ,;('IV

; Illv!\ I'd 1 .llld 1'('11

'.1 ,\lI,'!\V

II ~ II,

11111 \11'111 1IIIIg

11111 II II 1\ 1'1 \( 1

11111 lid I(ud, Nar, Muz.

111',11 ,\llIiI I' ~ 111/1'11111 ,":vkiinyvc (Nvlll'" 1111/11)

.II1III1S P:IIIII()IIIIIS Mi'I/,(,;UI11 Lvkonyve (Pees) = Maccdoniac Acta Archacologica (Prilep)

= Mitteilungen des Archaaologischen instituts del' Ungarischen Akadernie del' Wissenschaften (Budapest) (later: Antaeus)

= Mitteilungen del' Anthropologischen

Gesellschaft in Wien (Wien)

= Mitteilungen del' Osterreichischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft fiir Ur - und Fruhgeschichte (Wien)

= Muzei i Pametnitsi na Kulturata (Sofia) = Parnatky Arhcheologicke (Praha)

= Porocilo 0 raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sioveniji (Ljubljana)

= Proceedings of Prehistoric Society (Cambridge)

= Obzor Prehistoricky (Praha)

= Studii ~i Cercetari de Istorie Veche


= Siovenska Archeologia (Bratislava) = Studia Archaeologica (Budapest)

= Studijne Zvesti Archeologickeho Ustavu SAY (Nitra)

= A Beri Balogh Adam Muzeurn Evkonyve (Szekszard)

= Varia Archaeologica Hungarica (Budapest) = Zbornik Pracy Filosoficke Fakulty Brnenske University (Brno)

= Zbornik Radova Narodnog Muzeja (Beograd)




Fig I. Early Lengye/ culture SW I///(/ I~{/,\'Iern Transdanubia.

I. Hahot-Szartori I. (Ban/f); 1900(/) ('(II N{) I ,'.! I,('II,I{II('I (Meszaros 1962, Fig I.) Cal. No5, 3. Len/J,Y!'/ (A 111,1' ti/'rls It)(j', I'/,\! II) Cat. No.6, '

4. Sarpilis-Ujberekpus /11 (AlI'1 urus /1)(, ',1'/1' '1/ Il) t 'ut. N().7,






Fig. 2. Early Lengyel culture, NE Hungary and Austria.

/,1' lid (1\ alicz 1985, Fig 70/3) Cat. No 9, 2. F alkenstein-Schanzboden (NeugebauerA 111/'I'Scl, 1983-84, PI. 5/15) Cat. No. 5U, 3. St. Polten-Galgenleithen (Piuioni 1978. 1'1 III( I, Neugebauer-Maresch 1978, PI. 6/5) Cat. No52, 4. Poysbrunn (Reindl 1937, Neugebauer-Maresch 1976, PI. 2/1, Ruttkay 1976, PI. 2/5) Cat. No.48.




Fig. 3. Early Lengyel culture, Austria and Slovakia.

I. Sullfricd-Auhogen (Pittioni / os t. /51-/55, Neugebauer-Maresch /976,

PI. 3Na-c) Cat. No. 49, 2. ,)'\llId;1I ({'nl'IA /I)ril), /-'ig 4/13} Cal. No 64.; J Svodiu (/'o6k /969, Fig 4//5) "a: No.ti>, / ltruttsl, II , I l uthruvka (Farkas 1986, !-'ig. 4//) Cui, No.67.; 5, Bratislavu j),d'I'I/I'AII (I'tl/AIII' 1II8(), /"ig, 4/7) Cal. No.66,







': :-'.' .': .

, ,

I ,,' •

"":!;,I:,'i, V;j), 5

.'. .' ': ", ; :.:- ;;' ~ '.- :.:' ',,::

• \ '."., .' I I '. f " • ~_ :. '

" :'/:;:~;.rJ V<{:·< ~:,y "'::: ; , , .

.,,', I " • >, :;': ;'~:: ,<.: ' .. ,' ,: ~

Fir!, 4. Early Lengyel culture, Moravia,

,\'11'1,/1('(' (I'(nlho/'sk)) /C)70, 284, Fig 8/2) Cat, No84, 2. Strelice (Kaidova 1980, 1",1:, I j.1) Cat, No, 85 , 3. St/elice (Vil domec 1957, Fig 278/16) Cat. No 87., 'l'c',\'('/ic('-KJljovice (Podborsky 1970, Fig 8/1) Cat. No 88, 5. Tesetice-Kyjovice

(Koi dova-Kosturik 1993, Fig 12110) Cat, No,89,





I / I I



Fig 5. Early Lengyel culture, Moravia,

I, .l ezerony-Marsovice (Podborsky I 98!), Fig 5/a) Cal. No. 95. 2. llorakov (P()(lh()r,Iki" I WW 5/j) CuI. No 98, J Klentnicc (I'()rlh()r.l'k,I' 1985, Fig, 80, Podborsky I WN, rig, 51c) Cal. No. !)9.' -I. I_d/il/ky ("'II,i'/"N/' I ()8(), I"iy., 6, Podborsky I 98C), FI,\!" 5/d. 1'1, -lis) ('11/, N(),9-1" 5, POS/OIIII/'I' 1I"(/lII"'/'1i (I '0 clh (11'.1' 11\', 11)7(), "",\!" 10/20, {'()(Ihor.l'/'I" ICJiW I:i,\!" 5/1,) c.« No,i.}_,: () 1I0,\'(lI'ICI' (1',1,//1,,1\/1\' IIJ,'!(), 1:,,1: ./i) c:« N(),!)7,




.:': o..

. .' ,






Fig 6, Classical Lengyel culture - Eastern Transdanubia.

I :..,>I/I/fl (Zalai-Gaal 1979-80, Fig. 15/3) Cat, No,14, 2, Kaposvar-Olaki di/la (1IIIui-(;aci/ /979-80, Fig. /7/8) Cat. No, 15,; 3. Zalavar-Mekenye (excavation of N 1\111;(':, unpublished) Cat. No. 16.; 4. Moragy-Tiizkodomb (Zalai-Gaal 1995, f,",l!, JO) ('fit. No. 18., 5, Moragy- Tuzkodomb (Zalai-Gaal 1995, Fig. /6) Cat. No, 17


Fig. 7, Classical Lengyel ('111111('(' 1~1f,\'1('{'f/ Transdamtbia and NE Hungary.

I. Moragy- T/i:/«J(/lIIlIh (1((1111 (,'I/lil 11)1)5, 1'·i,l!,. / I) Cat. No, /9,,' 2, M6rcWy-7't'i:klftfllflfh (/{{/Iff /1111/ / IN't, n,li .) ('al. No. 23.,' 3. Patvarc (C,I' '(/I'II/llIiI 11/ N /\11111 , IIl/flflh/18ftl'd) ('III. N(),2/,







Fig 8. Classical Lengyel culture. Austria.

t iuulhausen (Wallner 1989, Fig 38) Cal. No 62, 2. Wctzl einsdorjtSiegmeth I !J9(J, 1"i,l!" 337) Cal. Nu. 56., 3. Wetzleinsdorftlcuukay 1983-84, PI. I (J, Fig I a-b)

c.« NoS5, 4. Wetzleinsdof t.Iedlicka 1989, Fig 1/3) Cat. No. 54.





';';:" r "

. , .. ' ~


Pig. 9. Cl assicat Lengye] GIII/ure, Slovakia.

f. Santovka (Pelli/lk 198 I, l,'i,l!" (,./11: /'1/11/1/( I !J(N, h'g .flo) Cat. NO.09, 2. Sontovk a (Povuk /981, l,'i,l!" () /1.\ 1""'11/, 1')1) I, /,'i,I:, Ih) ('1//, No, 7{),:]. Komjatice-Tomasove (Tocik 1978, N /51 ') (',// Nil ~ / , .... "I///fll'/,'1 il'uviil. 1'181, Fig. ().:II], Pavn« 1!J9-1, 172-17-1) (,(1/, Nil 'I, 1 "rlill/ril/Il '''''"11''\'1' (/"1'11, II) '8,/'1. 1501]) ('1/1. NII,7-1,: () "1'/'/11' I\'II/rl/III/l ( rl\'IIII/\ /1) 1 /'/ (1/) ('(/{ N(J,73.

Fig. / O. Classical Lengyel culture, Slovakia.

I SIIIII(Jvka (Pavlik /98/, Fig. 65) Cat. No80, 2. Santovka (Pavlik /98/, Fig. 6/-62, l'uvttk / c)C)4, Fig. 5/2) Cat. No. 79, 3. Komjauce- Tomasove (ToCik /978, PI. 151/8) ('III Nil. 82., 4. Santovka (Pavlik 1981, Fig. 63, Pavlik 1994, Fig. 5/1) Cat. No. 78.




I,'il' // /1111' //'111'1'1'/ ,'///1111'1', , .... 'IV I/II11gury.

Zalaszentbal.tzs ,\: ('i/,illl',I'I'IIII" ;.; (/1')11//1' II)UM" /,/ II / 70) Cal. No.32.




Fig. 12. Late Lengyel culture, SW Hungary /1I1111'::'('1/1!J0Iii::',I-S::.6/rihegyi mez/i (Ban/f)) 1996b, PI 112/271) Cal. No.33







Fig" 13. Late Lengye] cIIIIIII'e, SW l l ungary.

I. Zalu,'::.el/l!J(I/(i::'.I'-.c,,·::,(JlrillC,I!,I'i 11/(':/; (/JII'!ll.i' I I) I) ()h , !'I 11112(6) Cal. No35.

2. /.0111.1':('1/111(1111 ,I' .\' 11111111'.1:1'111(("/; (!llill//!' I ()I)(i/I. 1'1 1(111233) Cal. No,38"

3. /.(I/n,I(·l/t/I((ltI I , ..... 11/11/11'.1'1'11111' ,', (111/ii//I' I ()i)(lh. /'1 11I{)/176) Cal, NII3!),: -I, /.(1111,1' ('1/111111" \ ,',' ,11,11" I'll il/,' ,1 (11,111/11' I ()I)ft/I, 1'1 I ()(III 77) ('1/1, NII,3{),




L- __ -L __ ~~ __ ~ __ ~ ~

Fig. 1-1. Late Lengyel culture, SW Hungary. /(/III.\'"c'l!lho/c':s-,')':()I/ihegyi tnezo (Bc/nlfj' J996b, PI. J J 3) Cal. No. 34.


'~:rl c; :.'~'~~~ ??~~: v-~~~,~::r'I~_-~ C;.~y~~; ~~ ':., S:~·:i:):/;:·:~-·;'ccy.f ::-;_5~'- I

- -




Fig. 15. Late Len,l!yel culture, SW 111I1IglII)'.

J. Zalaszentbalc,:s-,)':I)llill(',l:1'1 11/('-11 (/Jill! IIII' I ()W!, 1'1 01/1 () I) Car. No.3 7.: 2. Zalaszentbatir:s ,..,. /il/illl'.I:I'IIIII· 1'1 (/llll/tllll /')f)fI, II n I) ('u/. No.41,





----_ ... /-'"






","J.,l<:£.~=~-. - - - - - - - - .J.

/ ... :'-

- - - - -::.' ,

'. I

".' .:


1"1,1:, I () 1,11/(' 1,(,II,f!,ye/ culture, SW Hungary.

1I''',I/UIIIIIII,I:I'I/I'IIi/ llidv, :/111,\':/11 (evcavauon ofL. Horvath, unpublished) Cat. No.43., 1/''',I/OIIIIIII,I:I'(ll'lld l llilv, :/)/1.1':10 (escavation ofL. Horvath, unpublished) Cat. No.42.

II ~

Fig. 17. Late Lengyel culture, SW Hungary.

l . Balatonmagyarod-Hldvegpuszta (excavation ofL. Horvath, unpublished) Cat. Nu.44: 2. Nagykanizsa-fnkey kapolna (Horvath 1984, /7-25, Kolle: 1991, Fig. 1) Cat. No,45,

------ ........



, I I












\ \

\ I

\ /

\ .:'


Fi,~. 26. II ltarpieces of the Linearbundkeramik regions.

/ 'f'lilllll.i/cu (lJimilrijevic 1969, PI. 19/7),2. Bina (Pavuk ;980. Fig Nil).

III' d /xutlovicc (Tichy 1962, Fig /cI14): 4. 8;'1a (['([vzik 1980, Fig /412a-h). 5. Ellsleben (Kaufmann 1981, Fig. 91/)




\ 1.1--


Fig. 27. Late neolithic altarpiecesfrom the Tis:a regioll.

I. Szegvar- TZ'fzk6ves (Korek 1987. Fig. 27): 2. Ocsod-Kovashalom (NIII' 1,,' I liS'"'.

Fig. 2/); 3. Gorzsa (Horvath 1987, Fig 3D): 4. Ocsiul A(JI'(/I/'II/'\III

C (U(ill/!.i' /980(1, Fig. 2, Rack), I ()8~, I-'I,I~ , )









- -- --... ........


8 Fig. 28. LaLe neolithic altarpieces, SE Europe.

I, .Iasa Tepe (Georgiev 1961, Fig 1413),2, Tordos (Rosko 1941, PI. (9117).

Ciradesnica (Nikolov 1975, Fig. 141a); 4, Gradesnica (Nikolov 1975, Fig. 141/)), 5. Vinca (Letica 1967, Fig. 5121); 6, Vinca (Letica 1967, Fig. 6117),

7. Vinca (Letica 1967, Fig, 6112), 8, Pavlovac (Stalio 1967, Fig. 814),

9, Zelenikovo (Galovic 1967, Fig. 712).


Fi,\!" 29, l.ate neolithic: alt arpicccs, ,)'/~' 1';III'OIJe.

1i1l1'li!,!1I1 (Nikolov /979, -/5 I'igll/): 2, /)('11(' lillI',\!, (II I (Nikolov 19r'\/, 1.1 I'i,(:/'/ In-low], I 11I'l'lIi('(/ (Nik olov IWII, 13,11'/111('1(111'), I AlilsllI'/ (Korki«! I (M.!, 1-'1,(: /(j'S),

1 A II/'(//I() I'll ((;('III',\!,it'I' IWII, 1,",1: II) I), (I 1'1/111'11 (Nllr/III/I"('I'1I 11)7(,,1,'/,1: IJ J(»), , .It/,I'II FI'I!c' (Ttulornv« 11)78, 1'1 I l ), 8 /l1'1'1' /1111',(:/111 (l'oIU/I' II) If!, 1,",1: 111))






Fig 30. Late Neolithic altarpieces, SE Europe.

/)l'IIg/l.)eni (Comsa 1980, Fig /713),2. Brailita (Comsa 1980, Fig 711),

I, 'f'il,/!(,.I'li (Comsa 1980, Fig 618, Marinescu-Bilcu 1981, Fig 113114), "1(11'11 (( '()/II,)CI 1980, Fig 1117); 5. Mogila (Simoska-Kitanoski- Todorovic 1979, Fig, 69), 6. Grodac (.)wlio 1972, Fig, ]()I_{)(I-I),



I I)




Fig 31. Late Neolithic altarpieces, Mia-Balkans.

I. Predionica (Golovic 1959, Fig, I-II./): 2, Prcdionica (Galovic 1959, Fig 7(15): 3. Prcdionica (Galovic 1951), h,l!" 701 I): I, "i/(),i'('v(lc (KI'.I'li(; 196-1, Fig 713),

5, Predionicu ((,'lIllil'"'' /1))/), n,I:, 7715):

6. .Iackov !?id ("I'I'III.I'IIIi'II/ I'r! AtriA I 'till I II/II ''. I"i,\!" 125),








-, \


/'Il' 11 ('I I I' ,

,,' -, III CO ithic al/mjJieee\' Car) /1 '

Ihll 1"('I.\'/~\:(,lIfivGin tMakkav 1970 F", ! a.110/1 BaslI? and the Balkans.

\' 1) 1 J, If!, 2414) ) HIli 'k L' 'k

, , Hlldllo Glava (.!ovanovic !982, Fi , (9 ~',' 1,\ 0-, tpnt (~ave!c'ik !982.

/' II!, 3112) 5 R d. ct g ,), 4, BubanJ Hum (Crarasanin ! 97J

, "u na ava (Jovanovi/. ! 982, Fig 27) ,







i'ig, 3J Altarpiecesfrom the Aegean Early and Middle Bronze Age,

I. l'ltaistos (Bouzek 1985, Fig, 3-112): 2, Phaistos (Bouzek 1982, Fig 3512), I Provenience IInknIJIVII (Ar! and ('II//II/'(' IJt//Il' Cyclades, 325, Fi,\!" 327):

I l'ltaistos (Bouzek f<)85, n,\!,. l'i/(J), t inurnut (Nilsson /95{), Fig 37118):

() (i()III'IIt'S (/IIJII:('k 1 vs«, 1,'1,1' / VI), 7 AlIIII/1i (NilSS(}/I 1 ()5(), hg 19),

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->