Horvath Veronika PhD student, 1st class, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty Respublic of Kazakhstan


«edu.e-history.kz» электрондық ғылыми журналы № 3(07), 2016

Тегтер: Early, Scythian, Hallstattian, type, Prescythian, Basarab, horse, trappings, ceramic, relation, wheel-turned, system, Hungary
Abstract:The article presents the scythian age cemetery from Eger-Nagy Eged, North Hungary. On the territory of the burial ground were found 61 grave and other different sporadic finds. On the basis of thesematerials it is possible to identify four cultural groups, which are characterized by: 1 - ceramic with Late Bronze - Early Iron Age traditions; 2 - ceramics under the influence of Basarab-culture; 3 - Hallstatt pottery, weapons and ornaments; 4 - several aspects of Scythian period, like iron axes, snaffle, wheel-turned pottery and Cypraea shells. The presence of these four cultural groups allows for a fresh look at the problem of the researching of the early scythian age. As well as, issues related to the horizon so-called "Gyöngyös-Miskolc-Diósgyőr-Ártánd", which consists of the articles of Hallstattian type and founds of the Vekerzug-culture, datedto the end of the 7th c. BC. This horizon belongs to a large system of local and regional relations, behind which can be supposed the representativemilitary characters of the early iron age elite. Keywords: Early Scythian, Hallstattian type, Prescythian, Basarab, horse trappings, wheel-turned ceramic, relation system, Hungary

At the beginning of the 21th century, the interest in the research of the early and middle iron age in Hungary (7-5th c. BC) has increased a lot. This phenomenon reveals itself especially in the process of materials of earlier, in the 1970s and 1980s excavated cemeteries like that of Nagy Eged at Eger. The rescue excavation of this cemetery passed in 1974 under the direction of Fodor L. muzeologist, in which 61 graves, many sporadic objects and some pits of an early iron age settlement were found [1, p. 71 – 79].

On the basis of all types of burials and objects, the cemetery can be divided into four territories: 1, The western – south-western territory, where the number of graves with stonepackages passed the rate of 50 percent. 2, Line of urn graves which are presented in U-form from the Grave 60. to Grave 49. 3, Inhumation graves next to the line of urn graves. 4, A wide place to east from the line of the urn graves and the inhumation graves 5, Some inhumation graves located on the north-eastern territory of the cemetery.

Fig. 1 – Map of the cemetery

On the western border of cemetery, two graves were found. A female skeleton in extended position lied in the Grave 1. and a very slightly contracted female skeleton lied on her left side in the Grave 2. Burials with extended skeletons were introduced in the scythian age, their number is smaller than that of contracted skeletons, althought the number of rites of the prescythian age burials show the opposite [2, p. 101-102; 3, p. 45.]. Some fragments of sporadic early iron age storage vessel, copper plate and grindstone were taken into the Grave 1. and a fragment of iron bracelet and iron pin with lob head were placed in the Grave 2. Only a shank of sheep was in the Grave 48. The placement of grindstone into grave is a tendency from the prescythian age in the graves with female extended skeletons. The stones were generally taken next to the shank or under the pelvis, sometimes to right side of the skeleton. In our cases the narrow place of grindstone from the Grave 1. is unknown. This tradition is survived in the scythian age, too [4, p. 145-146; 3, p. 44.]. The placement of meat into the grave is also a tradition connected to the Mezőcsát-culture, these phenomens can be often observed in the graves of both gender, with (Grave 6. at Ároktő-Dongóhalom) or without vessels (Tiszakeszi-Szódadomb) [5, p. 95.].

The number of burials with stonepackages was dominant on the western – south-western part of the cemetery. Near to the place of some prescythian realias, stonepackages covered the Grave 1. and 2. As opposed to the graves at Nagy Eged, the stonepackages were not employed in the prescythian graves of Heves and Borsod county, rather in the early scythian age cemeteries, like at Alsótelekes-Dolinka domb. Here, the stonepackages appeared at the end of the western part of the cemetery, in the cremation burials by strewing ashes, which is dated by weapon types to the end of 7th c. BC [6, p. 102.]. In the row of trenches V-VIII., some symbolical stonepackages were situated. This element of rite can be checked in the inhumation and urn burials, but its number gradually decreased to eastern territories of the cemetery. In the case of inhumation, especially the female contracted skeletons about 35-50 years get stonepackages. Their grave goods consist of fragment of vessels preserved local late bronze age-early iron age traditions.

The Grave 13. and 19. with stonepackages were situated on the southern edge of the cemetery, where the iron axe and iron rivet snaffle of Grave 19. and the iron weapons of the Grave 13. can be related to the scythian age. The earliest appearence of iron rivet snaffle of Vekerzug-type can be dated according to Kemenczei T. to the first half of 6th c. BC [7,p. 56-58.]. Recently the research dates them earlier in time, to the turn of 7-6th c. BC [8, p. 273; 9, p. 178.]. Two sporadic iron willow-leaf shaped spearheads without rib were present by the urn Grave 13, whose nearest analogies are known from the cemeteries of Hallstatt-culture in the 7-6th c. BC [10, p. 127-161.].

Fig. 2 - Iron rivet snaffle from the Grave 19.

Toward these urn graves, three cremation burials with strewing ashes were excavated, the Grave 35-36. with stonepackages and the Grave 51. was without it. In the first two graves, some fragments of ceramics related with an early iron age settlement came to the surface. A wheel-turned mug was placed into the Grave 51. Recently, the lower chronological border of the grey wheel-turned pottery is dated to the second half of 7th-the beginning of 6th c. BC according to the results of chemical and technological analizes of these ceramics from the middle Dniestr [11, p. 104-105; 12, p. 32-50.]. This way, the earliest wheel-turned ceramics could appear in the Carpathian Basin, like in the cemetery at Alsótelekes-Dolinka domb, at the end of the 7th c. BC [6, p. 130-131.].

Fig. 3 - Wheel-turned ceramic from the Grave 51.

Beside the cremation burials with strewing ashes, the Grave 47 of child were found with some fragment of Cypraea-cowries referring to eastern relations. These cowries were transferred here from the country of the Caucasus, by the scythian age population of the forest steppe zone at the end of the 7th c. BC [13, p. 64-69.]. A bronze bracelet decorated with snakeheads dated to the beginning of 6th c. BC. was taken in the inhumation Grave 5. Its earlier forms show, similary to the Cypreae-cowries, relationship with the Koban-culture [14; 15, p. 214-217.]. 

From the row of trenches V, trench 8. to the row of trenches XI, trench 4, the line of the urn graves is observed. The small part of their grave goods consist of the local types of vessels and scythian age axes, the other part of them from spearheads, bracelets and ceramics, cups of East Hallstatt-culture. Wheel-turned vessels did not turn up from neither graves. The analogies of cups with horned handles [Fig. 4.] can be found in the cemeteries of southeastern-Alpine territories from the middle of the 7th c. BC and in the cemeteries of West-Transdanubia and Great Hungarian Plain between the end of 7th-beginning of 6th c. BC [16, p. 154-159.]. A cup with tucked handle, with rundle body and decorated with smoothed ornaments came from the urn Grave 42. Száraz Cs. – who had collected the types of Basarabi-like vessels in Hungary – thinks, these vessels could arrived to the downhills of Northern Central Mountains about in the 8-7th c. BC [17, p. 206-210.]. However this cup could not take into the grave earlier than the middle of the 7th c. BC, which is prooved by the presence of iron spearhead lied near that.

Fig. 4 - Handmade cups with horned handle

The burials were suddenly broken off from the row of trenches IX trench 6-7. to the row of trenches XIII trench 11, here just some sporadic finds were found, like iron knives and an early iron age vessel with imitated cannelures. Hallstattian-type weapons and objects, in absence of precious documentation, were not concerned on this territory, but there are sporadic weapons, whose presence is very important for placing the cemetery in time. It should be mentioned, that here a lot of potential graves could be destroyed by systematic earthworks because in many cases the depth of graves was not so big enough.

It is divided into four chronological groups in the cemetery: 1, late bronze age-early iron age local ceramical traditions. 2, early iron age horizon with a mug of Basarabi-like and the prescythian characteristics. 3, Types of weapons, jewelleries and vessels of Hallstatt-culture. 4, Iron spontoons, iron rivet snaffle, wheel-turned ceramics, Cypraeae-cowries and bronze bracelet decorated with snakeheads connecting with the Vekerzug-culture.

The beginning and final period of the cemetery, therefore broadly, can be outlined by means of few prescythian remains and the scythian age finds. Overall the problems of relationship between the prescyhian and scythian age cultures became obvious, and their relations with the East Hallstatt-culture.

Recently, the middle european research calls HaB2/B3-C1 period as prescythian age, this is about 9th-the beginning of 7th c. BC, the influences of which can be detected vaguely in this cemetery. The determination of the constant preservation of traditions of Mezőcsát-culture, as in the case of the other similar cemeteries, here too is very problematic. The reason of this partly is, that 10 skeleton about 38 inhumations were destroyed by ploughing, that is why the fragmentary number of graves with skeletons is not adequate to draw concret consequences. Furthermore, the state and process of the prescythian age burials (146 prescythian age burials in front of more than 2500 scythian age burials) and the metalfinds related to this period is so less, that their precise dating is impossible. In correspondence with this fact and the presence of Basarabian mug and the appearance of hallstattian traits, the establishment of the cemetery can not be taken earlier than the 1st half-middle of the 7th c. BC [comp. with: 18, p.183.].

Fig. 5 - Bronze bracelets

From some urn graves, the characteristics especially of East Hallstatt-culture can be taken into consideration, like spearheads, bracelets from the Grave 28, trapezoid saggings and cups with horn handles. Their nearest analogies can be searched between the materials of tumulus in Transdanubia, like those of the 1st tumulus at Somlóvásárhely and the 2nd tumulus at Vaskeresztes [19, p. 119-131; 20, p. 72-90.] and from the eastern – southeastern-Alpine cemeteries [10, p. 127-161.]. In the 1960s, Párducz M, lately I. V. Bruyako supposed, that the influences of the East Hallstatt-culture can be detected almost from the second half of 7th c. BC on the Great Hungarian Plain in the horizon so-called „Gyöngyös – Miskolc-Diósgyőr – Ártánd” [21, p. 37-54; 22, p. 189-217; 9, p. 181; 8, p. 273.]. The finds of this horizon contains the main types of hallstattian objects of HaC period and the earliest tipical elements of Vekerzug-culture, as a result of which the lower chronological border of early scythian age in Hungary is placed to the end of 7th c., to the turn of 7-6th c. BC. [23, p. 432; 24, p. 514-515; 25, p. 29-30; 8, p. 270-273.]

Keeping these in mind, it could be fruitful to analize the hallstattian objects of other early scythian age cemeteries, like the cups with horned handles of Graves 316. and 345. at Tápiószele [26, p. 51-69.] or the fragment of „spotted” bracelet of Grave 2. at Sajószentpéter [27,p. 133.]. The analogies of these objects are carried outside the Carpathians, to West-Podolia, where fragments of „spotted” bracelets are known, dated to the end of 7th-at the beginning of 6th c. BC [28, рис. 2,4; 29, рис. 6,4]. 

The separation of periphery and the real territory of East Hallstatt-culture always challenges the researchers. Foremost P. Reinecke had talk about the relationship of the scythian and Hallstatt-cultures at the end of 19th c. [30, p. 1-10.]. The relationship of the hallstattian objects of ukrainian forest steppe, the Carpathian Basin and these of hallstattian sites of East-Austria were became evident since the spring of finds at Gyöngyös (Heves county, North-Hungary) [21, p. 37-54.]. After the excavation of Márton L., firstly A. Spitsin tried to outline the terminology of Hallstatt-culture with the help of ceramics with graphitic polished surface. He divided the vessels into two groups: the ceramics with polished surfaces and decorated with concentric circles constitued the first group, the second group was simply called „á la Hallstatt” or hallstattoid, referring to the imitations of worth quality of the vessels. He found the analogies of hallstattian vessels of forest steppe between those of Carpathian Basin and eastern-Alpine territories of HaB3-C period. By his realization, the Hallstatt can be determined as a cultural terminology whose characteristics dispersed in an added time on big territory and can be originated from one source [31, p. 155-168.].

Against the opinion of romanian and russian researchers [32, p. 151-170; 33, p. 33-37.], the hungarian and western-european archeologists do not so definitely consider Transdanubia and the territories situated to east from the Danube, part of East Hallstatt-culture. The materials of transdanubian tumuli, like these of the Great Plain, or as in the burials of East-Austria and Slovenia, are members of based on the local traditionnal late bronze age findgroups. Their formal varieties differ in the northwestern and eastern tumuli, as in the case of founds from eastern territories [19, p. 131; 34, p. 105-136]. That is why the chronological determinations of transdanubian tumuli and of the materials of the Great Plain, too, are very complicated. The first biggest fail is, that their datings went back to the chronology of south-german, eastern-alpine and slovenian materials of Hallstatt-culture, whose compositions and states of finds are also partly based on the yonder local traditionnal findgroups. On the other hand, according to interpretation of Figler A., the Hallstattian-type objects forms a very slim layer, which looks like similar, but in fact, they are variants by regions. Therefore, this factor complicates, too, the perfect dating [35, p. 26-28.].

Fig. 6 - Place of the cemetery in the relation system so called horizon „Gyöngyös–Miskolc-Diósgyőr–Ártánd” in the Carpathian Basin

Recently, E. Teleaga analyzed the late Hallstatt-period sites of southeastern-Alpines territories, North-Hungarian Great Plain and the territories without the Carpathians [Fig.6.]. It was conspicuous, that the most part of sites are located next to important strategical places [9, p. 181.], along commercial roads or near stations of iron ore. In this time, the iron became easily accesible, whose exploitation does not pretend attached so complex relation systems as in the case of bronze. At the same time, a warrior stratum appeared, whose weapons were considered significant status objects, nevertheless the mass production of iron objects is likely to have began only from the HaD/LTA period (from the end of 6th–beginning of 5th c. BC) by the recent archeometrical researches. Therefore, it is impossible to think about pregnant siderurgial activity on the northeastern territories of Hungary from the less dates of Ha C period [37, p. 54-104.]. The castellated settlement at Velem, which is situated among the east-west directioned commercial roads and the Amber road as significant commercial, metallurgical, redistributive and technological centre [38, p. 296-299.] or the materials of „Gyöngyös – Miskolc-Diósgyőr – Ártánd” horizon or rather the settlements along the middle Dniester, there are situated on very important strategical points. According to these territories, we can talk about the local and regional relations of the armed elite. This warrior stratum can be also identified in the early scythian age and late Hallstatt-period urn burials of the cemetery at Nagy Eged.

In the future, accounts of similar unexcavated or unpublished sites, like the tumulus at Regöly [39,p. 291-297.] or the settlements in north Hungary [40.] could help to understand the local and regional relation systems of the armed elit and can drive to new direction in the research of hungarian early and middle iron age.


1  Fodor L. Szkíta kori temető az Eger-Nagy-Eged déli oldalán. // Gyulai katalógusok X. Havassy Péter (ed.). – Gyula, 2001. – p. 71-79.

2  Patek E. Präskythische Gräber in Ostungarn. // MFMÉ–Miskolc,1966-1967. –p. 101-102.

3  Matuz E. Két preszkíta sír Kompolt-Kígyósérről. // Ősrégészeti Levelek – Budapest. – 2001. – №3.– p. 44-45.

4  Matuz E. A Szeged-Algyő 258. kútkörzet területén feltárt preszkíta temető. // MFMÉ SA – Szeged – 2000. – №VI. – p. 145-149.

5  Kemenczei T. Kora vaskori leletek Dél-Borsodban. // HOMÉ. – Miskolc, 1988. – p. 92-95.

6  Patay P., B. Kiss Zs. Az Alsótelekes-dolinkai szkítakori temető közöletlen sírjai. (Az 1962. és 1964. évi feltárás eredményei) (Die unpublizierten Gräber des skythenzeitlichen Gräberfeldes von Alsótelekes-Dolinka. (Grabungskampagne 1962, 1964)). // FA. – Budapest. – 2001-2002. – №XLIX-L. – p. 81-131.

7  Kemenczei T. Mitteleisenzeitliche Trensen von ost-mitteleuropäischem Typ im Alföld. Kelet középeurópai típusú középső vaskori zablák az Alföldön. // FA.–Budapest. – 1985. – №XXXVI. – p. 43-68.

8  Бруяко И. В. Ранние кочевники в Европе X—V вв. до Р. Х. Кишинев: Высшая Антропологическая Школа, 2005. – 290 p.

9  Teleaga E. Wiederentdecke späthallstattzeitliche Grabfunde aus Miskolc-Diósgyőr (Ungarn). // Dacia – Bucuresti. – 2010. – №LIV. – p. 177-195.

10  Hvala S. T., Dular J., Kocuvan K. Železnodobne gomile na Magdalenski gori. Eisenzeitliche Grabhügel auf der Magdalenska gora. Katalogi in monografije 36. – Ljubljana,2004. – p. 47-169.

11  Kashuba M., Levitski O. Early Grey Wheel-made Ware from East-Carpathian Region (On the Basis of Finds from Trinca-„Izvorul Lui Luca” Settlement). // Pontica – 2009. – №XLII. – p. 104-106.

12  Кашуба M., М. Дараган M., Левицкий O. Технологические новшества раннего железного века: перспективы из учения ранней гончарной сероглиняной керамики Восточного Прикарпатья. // RA – 2010. – №V (2).– p. 28-52.

13  Kovács L. Vulvae, Eyes, Snake Heads. Archaeological Finds of Cowrie Amulets. With malacological identifications by Gyula Radócz. // BAR International Series 1846. – Oxford, 2008. – p. 63-76.

14  Петренко В.Г. Украшения Скифии VII—III вв. до н.э. //САИ Д4-5. – Москва: Наука, 1978.

15  Reinhold S. Die Spätbronze- und frühe Eisenzeit im Kaukasus. // Universitätforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie. Band 144. – Berlin, 2007. – p. 55-251.

16  Tankó K. Horn-handeled bowls of the Central Europe Iron Age. // Celts on the Margin. Ed: Dobrzańska H., Megaw V. Poleska P. – Krakow, 2005. – p. 154-159.

17  Száraz Cs. Basarabi-Bosut díszítésű kerámialeletek az Alföldön. // MFMÉ SA – Szeged – 1999. – №V. – p. 206-210.

18  Chochorowski J. Ekspansja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy Srodkowej. –Krakow:Uniwersytet Jagiellonski, 1993. – 327 p.

19  Horváth A. A vaszari és somlóvásárhelyi Hallstatt-kori halomsírok. // VMMK.–Veszprém. – 1969. – №8. – p. 109-134.

20  Patek E. Westungarnin der Hallstattzeit. – Weinheim, 1993. – 250 p.

21  Márton L. Skytha sírleletek Gyöngyösön. // AÉ. – Budapest – 1908. – №28. – p. 37-54.

22  Párducz M. Graves from the scythian age at Ártánd (county Hajdu-Bihar). // AAH. – Budapest – 1965. – №XVII. – p.180-194.

23  Romsauer P. Bemerkungen zur Späthallstattzeit im Nordostalpenraum. // Die Osthallstattkultur. Ed: Jerem, E., LippertA. – Budapest, 1996. – p.432.

24  Teržan B. Auswirkungen des skytisch geprägten Kulturkreis auf die hallstattzeitlichen Kulturgruppen Pannoniens und des Ostalpenraumes. // Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropäische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000-500 v.Chr.). Ed: Hänsel B., Machnik J. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa 12. – München: Verlag Marie Leidorf Gmbh,1998. – p. 514-533.

25  Kemenczei T. Adatok a szkíta kor kezdetének a kérdéséhez az Alföldön. Beiträge zur Frage des Anfangs der Skythenzeit auf der Ungarischen Tiefebene. // FA. – Budapest – 2000. – №XLVIII. – p. 29-34.

26  Párducz M. The Scythian Age Cemetery at Tápiószele. // AAH. – Budapest – 1966. – №XVIII. – p. 39-82.

27  Kemenczei T. Studien zu den Denkmälern skythisch geprägter Alföld-Gruppe. //Inventaria Prehistorica Hungariae. – Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, 2009. – p. 122-173.

28  Ганiна О. Д. Поселення скiфского часу у селi Iване-Пусте. // Археологiя. –1965. – №XIX. – p. 107-115.

29  Ганiна О. Д. Поселення ранньоскіфської доби поблизу с. Залісся. // Археологія. – 1984.– №47. – p. 68-79.

30  Reinecke P. Magyarországi scytha régiségek. // AÉ. – 1897.– p. 1-10.

31  Спицын A. Скифы и Гальштатт. //Сборник археологических статей, поднесенный графу А.А. Бобринскому в день 25-летия председательства его в Императорской археологической комиссии. – Санкт-Петербург, 1911. – p.155-168.

32  Петреску-Дымбовица M. К вопросу о Гальштатской культуре в Молдове. //Материалы и исследования по археологии Юго-Запада СССР и Румынской Народной Республики.Ред: Кондураки Е. В. – Кишинев: Картя Молдовеняскэ, 1960. – p.151-170.

33  Смирнова Г.И.Гальштатский компонент в раннескифской культуре лесостепи Северного Причерноморья (по материалам Немировского городища).// РА. – 2001. – №4. – p. 33-37.

34  Jerem E. Zur Späthallstatt- und Frühlatènezeit in Transdanubien. // Die Hallstattkultur. Bericht über das Symposium in Steyr 1980 aus Anlass d. internat. Ausstellung d. Landes Oberösterreich. – Linz: Oberösterreichischer Landesverlag, 1981. – p. 105-136.

35  Figler A. Hallstatt kori halomsírok Nagybarátin. // Arrabona – Győr – 2010. – №48 (2). – p. 26-28.

36  Galántha M. The Scythian Age Cemetery at Csanytelek-Újhalastó. // Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém. – Budapest: Bibliothek d. Archäolog. Inst. d. UAW,1984. – p. 69-77.

37  Czajlik Z. A fémnyersanyagok őskori kohósításának nyomai a Kárpát-medencében. Traces of Prehistoric Smelting Workshop in the Carpathian Basin. // Archaeometriai Műhely – Budapest – 2012. – №2. – p. 97-102.

38  Párducz M. Western relations of the Scythian Age Culture at the Great Hungarian Plain. // ActaAntiqua. – 1965. – №XIII. – p. 296-299.

39  Szabó G. Ethno-sociocultural background of the oriental origin of the pannons of the Carpathian Basin in the early iron age. // Sak culture of Saryarka in the context of the study of ethnic and sociocultural processes of steppe Eurasia. The collection of scientific articles, dedicated to the memory archeologist K. Akisev. Red: Beisenov A. – Almaty, 2015. – p. 291-297.

40  Farkas Cs., Hrabák Z. Excavation of an Iron Age building with an ornamented floor at Tenk (southern Heves). Poster from the archaeological conference MOMOSZ in North Hungary.

Хорват Вероника

докторант 1 курса КазНУ им. Аль-Фараби

Алматы, Казахстан



В статье приводятся данные о новых результатах исследований раннего железного века в Венгрии, в частности, материалы могильника у Эгер-Надь Эгеда. На территории могильника найдено 61 погребение и различные случайные находки, на основе которых можно выделить четыре культурных группы, для которых характерны: 1 – керамика традиций эпохи поздней бронзы – раннего железного века; 2 – керамика под влиянием культуры Басараб и несколько аспектов предскифского периода; 3 – гальштатская керамика, оружие и украшения; 4 – железные топоры, трензель, сероглиняная кружальная керамика и раковины Cypraea. Наличие этих четырех культурных групп позволяют по-новому взглянуть на проблемы переживания древности предскифского периода, а также, вопросы, связанные с такназываемымгоризонтом «Gyöngyös–Miskolc-Diósgyőr–Ártánd», который состоит из предметов гальштатского облика и ранних вещей культуры Векерзуг в конце VII в. до н. э. Этот горизонт принадлежит к большой системе региональных связей, за которыми скрываются перемещения представителей элитной воинской культуры.

Ключевыеслова: раннескифский, Гальштатский тип, Предскифский, Басараб, конские узды, гончарная керамика, система контактов, Венгрия

Хорват Вероника

Әл-Фараби атындағы Қазақ ұлттық университетінің 1-ші курс докторанты Алматы, Қазақстан


(алдын ала есеп)


Мақалада Венгриядағы ерте темір дәуірін, оның ішінде, Эгер-Надь Эгед жерлеуге қатысты ғылыми зерттеудің жаңа нәтижелері туралы деректерді ұсынады. Қорым аумағында 61 жерлеу орындары және өзгеде кездейсоқ табылған олжалар негізінде төрт мәдениет топтарын анықтауға болады. Соның негізінде оларды төрт топқа жіктейді: 1 – кейінгі қола-ерте темір дәуірінің дәстүрлі керамикасы. 2 – Basarab мәдениеті мен скиф кезеңнің бірнеше аспектілерінің ықпалынан туындағын керамика. 3 – Гальштат керамикасы, қару-жарақ және әшекейлері. 4 – темір балталар, сұр-сазды айқышты қыштар және Cypraea жунғыштарды жатқызамыз. Аталған төрт мәдениет топтары көне скиф елдерінің өз бастарынан өткезген замандарына басқа көзқараспен қарауға мүмкіндік беріп отыр , сонымен қатар ол заман тізбегін «Gyöngyös–Miskolc-Diósgyőr–Ártánd» деп те атауға болады, VII ғасырдың соңындағы Векерзуг мәдениетіндегі галыштат бейнесінен құралады.Бұл тізбек аумақтық  үлкен желі байланыстарына тиесілі, бұнын құпиясы элиталық әскери мәдениеттің жасырын жатқандығы.

Түйінді сөздер: ерте скиф дәуірі, Hallstatt түрі, скиф дәуіріне дейінгі, Басараб,жылқы жүгені,жылқы әшекейлері, скиф, байланыс жүйесі, Венгрия

Сведение об авторе:Хорват Вероника (Венгрия) – докторант 1 курса по специальности «Археология и этнология» КазНУ им. Аль-Фараби.

E-mail: scythianworld@mail.ru

Пікір жоқ

Пікір қалдыру үшін кіріңіз немесе тіркеліңіз