See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/306105920

Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (northern

Hungary)

Article · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

4 163

1 author:

A. Markó
Hungarian National Museum
22 PUBLICATIONS   166 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by A. Markó on 15 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 PRAEHISTORIA vol. 9 (2008)

RAW MATERIAL USE AT THE MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC SITE OF

VANYARC (NORTHERN HUNGARY)

András MARKÓ*
Abstract
At the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc a large sample of chipped stone artefacts were collected and excavated
in the last years. On typological grounds the industry is characterized by bifacial and leaf shaped tools. In the
raw material spectra, beside the dominating local limnic quartzite variants, the high ratio of the Szeletian felsitic
porphyry should be stressed: one third of the assemblage was made of this rock, coming from 95 km as the crow
flies. Quartzite, nummulithic chert and radiolarite pebbles from the nearby outcrops were used at the site in
smaller quantities.
The paper deals with the use of the different raw material types, based on the preliminary typological, technological
and refitting studies of the excavated assemblage.

One of the most characteristic chipped stone raw
materials in the Carpathian Basin is the felsitic
porphyry (earlier ‘glassy quartz porphyry’ or
‘Szeleta raw material’), with a single geological
outcrop, lying on a territory of 1.5 km2 at
Bükkszentlászló, near Miskolc. Around the
source area the rock was intensively used during
the whole Palaeolithic period and it was the
characteristic raw material of the Szeleta cave
and culture. Furthermore, single pieces were
found in the s.l. Micoquian assemblages of the
Jankovich cave (Gábori-Csánk 1994: 105) and
Korolevo (Koulakovska 2001: 209), lying at
a distance of 160 and 175 km from the source
area as the crow flies. The maximum extension
of the use of the raw material is known from
the Slovakian and Moravian Szeletian (Bárta
1979; Oliva 1991: 324; Čermáková 1993: 9)
industries.
Recently dozens of new Palaeolithic localities
were discovered by amateur archaeologists
in the Cserhát Mountains, northern Hungary.
About 30 of them yielded Middle Palaeolithic
type bifacial industries with a ratio up to 30%
of felsitic porphyry, originating from about
95–100 km from this region. Significantly, not
only ready-made tools were found, but a large
amount of flakes and chips as well. Although
this greyish green stone is easy to identify
even on macroscopic grounds, the provenance
of artefacts from seven archaeological sites
of the region was verified by Prompt Gamma
Activation Analysis, too (Markó et al. 2003;
Kasztovszky et al. 2008.).
The main task of the first excavations of a
Middle Palaeolithic site in this region was to
clarify the stratigraphical and chronological
position of the artefacts. Additionally, as the
recent revision works of the Szeleta cave (e.g.
Ringer & Mester 2000: 265–266) suggested,
mutual connections can be indicated between
the raw material groups and the archaeological
industries, i.e. certain, earlier not identified
assemblages or industries can be characterised
by the used raw material types. That is why our
second point of interest at Vanyarc became the
documentation of the possible differences in the
spatial distribution of the local and imported
raw material types.
The excavations
For answering these questions, small trenches
were opened near Vanyarc, on the top of the hill
Szlovácka dolina (Markó 2007). The 62 square
meters, excavated since 2003 yielded nearly

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
*
Hungarian National Museum, H-1088 Budapest, Múzeum krt. 14–16. E-mail: markoa@hnm.hu

71
 András MARKÓ

2000 lithics, marked by numbers [xyz] in this Among the raw material groups of the
article. As the fieldwork finished in 2007 and excavated assemblage (Table 1), the limnic
the detailed study of the material is under way, quartzite variants dominate, including jasper.
this report is only preliminary in nature. The different pebble types, such as quartzite,
radiolarite and siliceous pebbles or the burned
Concerning the stratigraphy, the single artefact silex played only a subordinate role.
bearing layer was found in a reddish brown,
decalcified fossil soil, lying immediately below It is especially important that during the
the present-day humic level, sterile from an excavations impressive numbers of felsitic
archaeological point of view. Because of this porphyry (650 pieces ) were found and more
imbedding sediment, no organic remains have than two thirds of them belong to the chips and
been preserved; the excavated charcoal grains, small fragments of flakes. Furthermore, in the
remains of deciduous trees (determination by last season a clear find concentration of this raw
A. Grynaeus, cited: Markó 2007: Table 1.), are material was excavated in the squares h-i/1–2
considered as recent intrusions. (Fig. 2b). Although the technological studies
have not been finished yet, the on-site core
N %
reduction of the felsitic porphyry is indicated by
limnic quartzite 1209 62,03%
two conjoining cortical blade-like flakes (Fig. 3.
Jasper 18 0,92%
[2055+1971+1973]). The refitting of two chips
Burned silex 54 2,77%
from the concentration shows the rejuvenation of
felsitic porphyry 650 33,35%
quartzite 14 0,72% the working edge (Fig. 3. [2082+2093]). Finally,
siliceous pebble 3 0,15% the intentional removing of a flake from the
radiolarite 1 0,05% largest simple scraper of felsitic porphyry was
Total 1949 100,00% also reconstructed (Fig. 4 [522+328+897]).

Fig. 1. Sources of raw material types used in Vanyarc.

72
 Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (Northern Hungary)

Fig. 2. Spatial distribution and reduction refits on the artefacts of limnic quartzite (a)
and felsitic porphyry (b) in the trench of Vanyarc, grid: 1 m.

73
 András MARKÓ

Fig. 3. Reduction refits on artefacts of felsitic porphyry

(the number of artefacts in [square brackets] are marked on Fig 2.).

Altogether 26 retouched pieces of felsitic
porphyry were found, which is an unexpectedly
high number in itself. Ten of them are bifacial
tools: knives (Fig. 4 [255]) or carefully
elaborated and mainly fragmented leaf shaped
implements (Fig. 4 [60], [609] and [403]),
worked by wechselseitig-gleichgerichtete
Kantenbearbeitung (WGK: Bosinski 1967:
43). Another diagnostic piece, a Mousterian
point was thinned on the ventral part from its
right edge (Fig. 4 [140]). Among the unifacial
tools beside the mentioned large side scraper
with the refits, we should stress the presence
of a retouched Levallois flake, and a tool with
an end-scraper-like proximal truncation (Fig. 4
[515]).
The most important sources of the dominating
limnic quartzite lye 8–10 km from the site
both in south-western and eastern directions
(Fig. 1). There are some differences between the
macroscopic features according to the different
outcrops (Markó 2005), however, because
of the extremely varied texture and matrix as
well as the intense patina formation, the exact
provenance of the archaeological artefacts can
be determined only in the case of the largest
pieces. The Cserhát-type limnic quartzite is
generally quite poor in quality; accordingly,
until now 52 refitted breaks were documented
of this raw material.
Almost all of the retouched pieces were also
broken (e.g. Fig. 5 [196+218]), in so far as 15
pieces belong to the group of undetermined
small retouched fragments. Probably this is why
only few bifacial tools: an ‘in-situ’ fragmented
knife (with 11 conjoining angular and pot-lid
fragments), a half–product (Fig. 5 [1638]) and
a large tool-fragment were found. However, the
surface collections, carried out at the site and
the neighbouring hills yielded finely elaborated
bifacial and leaf shaped pieces of this raw
material, too.

74
 Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (Northern Hungary)

Fig. 4. Vanyarc – Szlovácka-dolina 5. Retouched tools of felsitic porphyry.

The unifacial tool types, like the simple and
double side scrapers (Fig. 5 [61+234], [22]),
or the end-scraper-like proximally truncated
tool (Fig. 5 [353]) do not differ from the felsitic
porphyry items. The only form absent in this
later assemblage is the oval-shaped end scraper
with high working front (Fig. 5 [196] + [218]).
The excavation plan of the limnic quartzite
artefacts (Fig. 2a) shows several small,
workshop-like find concentrations with a series
of refitting. The majority of the pieces from
these clusters are small chips and fragments of
flakes, making three quarters of the total limnic
quartzite assemblage.

75
 András MARKÓ

Fig. 5. Vanyarc – Szlovácka-dolina 5. Retouched tools of limnic quartzite.

Although the largest part of the reduction
refits on raw material are conjoined flakes
(Fig. 6 [70+493]) and retouch chips (Fig. 6
[1591+1565]), at two series the last stages of core
reduction could be reconstructed (Markó 2007:
Fig. 6). In the case of a characteristic yellow
patinated variant, the spatial fragmentation of
the reduction was documented: the majority
of the pieces of this raw material were found
in a relatively closed space at the border of the

76
 Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (Northern Hungary)

Fig. 6. Refitted pieces of limnic quartzite (the number of artefacts in [square brackets] are marked on Fig 2.).

excavated area, with the exception of the first Finally the artefacts of quartzite, radiolarite and
two flakes, excavated about 3 m from here nummulitic chert pebbles are represented only
(Fig. 6 [1273+507+778+779]). by 1 % of the excavated assemblage. Whereas
their possible source, the Late Miocene

77
 András MARKÓ
(Sarmatian) fluvial sand formation wedges
out on the slopes around the site, this region
is only the westernmost occurrence of the
‘Sarmatian Delta’, reaching until the northern
periphery of the Bükk Mountains (‘Sajóvölgy
Formation’: Hámor 1985: 262–264). Therefore
the provenance of the excavated pieces can not
be exactly identified. Interestingly, the wholly
cortical flakes of this raw material class are
absent, which means that the pieces arrived at
the site in an at least partly prepared state. On the
other hand, the blank production is documented
in this case, too: a large core of quartzite
conjoined by a flake, not plotted individually.
Among the retouched tools a small double
scraper of nummulitic chert pebble is worth
mentioning; another important flake tool, with
characteristic ventral thinning at the distal end
is known from the surface collections.
Relations between the
raw material groups
During the excavations at Vanyarc, the artefacts
of different raw materials were found in the
same level. However, the observations on the
open-air plateau sites e.g. around the Bükk
Mountains (Simán 1985), in the Oaş region,
north-western Romania (Bitiri 1972), or in
Nižny Hrabovec, eastern Slovakia (Kaminská et
al. 2000) may call for caution: pieces from very
different periods may be found together in the
same stratigraphical position. Additionally, the
presence of small charcoal grains in the culture
bearing level of Vanyarc, probably of Holocene
origin, undeniably casts certain doubts (c.f.
Adams 2000: 177). However, the taphonomical
studies, based on the refitting data, with two
exceptions showed only a few centimetres
(<13 cm) of postgenetic dislocations. Our
observations during the excavations (Markó
2007) also showed that the layer and the artefacts
were excavated in an only slightly disturbed
position. Moreover, at least five cases when
the fragmentation happened during the core
reduction and retouching activities, or when
the fragments were worked after the breaks
(Fig. 5 [61+234]) are interpreted as syngenetic
78
taphonomic events (after Kolesnik 2003: 106,
107).
Concerning the analysis of the excavation maps,
the spatial distributions and the find concentration
of felsitic porphyry visibly overlap the workshops
and the find scatter of limnic quartzite artefacts
(Fig. 2). Furthermore, conjoining flakes of the
latter material were found on two opposite sides
of the felsitic porphyry workshop, and inside
this concentration two small chips (one of them
was not plotted individually) were refitted too.
As from a typological point of view the same
diagnostic forms were performed on both the
local and imported raw material types, all the
available data show that the assemblages of
different materials are contemporaneous.
Discussion
The majority of the formal tools of the excavated
assemblage and the Vanyarc-type industry
belong either to the bifacial and leaf shaped
forms or to general Middle Palaeolithic types. A
quick overview of the technological traits, such
as the presence of the Micoquian-type shaping,
shows that they originated in the same period
(for the detailed discussion see: Markó 2007).
Even the end-scrapers, retouched on the whole
contour of thick, oval-shaped transversal flakes
differ from the typical UP forms, and the blade
tools or the burins are altogether absent.
Since the study of Roebroeks et al. (1988) single
pieces of exotic raw material are not unusual in
Late Middle Palaeolithic assemblages. In eastern
Hungary and Slovakia, these connections,
spanning over 300 km across the Carpathians
(Féblot-Augustins 1997: 146–149) are indicated
by the presence of different ‘northern’ flint types
in the Bábonyian, Charentian and ‘transitional’
assemblages (Adams 2000: 175; Mester 2000;
Kaminská et al. 2000: 68).
Another direction of the raw material
circulation, running along the mid-mountain
range is illustrated by the presence of jasper in
Sajóbábony – Kövesoldal (Ringer 1983: 28–
 Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (Northern Hungary)
29, 58–62, Abb. 68), by the above-mentioned
felsitic porphyry imports in the Jankovich
cave and Korolevo (Gábori-Csánk 1994: 105,
Koulakovska 2001: 209) or by the obsidian in
the Pilisszántó Rochshelter II (Dobosi & Vörös
1986: 30, Fig. 3, 3–4). The connections detected
between the Middle Palaeolithic assemblages
of the Cserhát Mountains belong to this group,
however, the raw material use observed in
Vanyarc shows a unique pattern. The most
striking feature of the excavated material is that
one third of the assemblage and 40% of the tools
were made of long-distance rock. Furthermore,
the data on the reduction refits, the presence
of large flake fragments and about 30 cortical
blanks of felsitic porphyry demonstrate the
flake production at the site, even in the absence
of cores. On the other hand, the high ratio of
chips, scattered on the total excavated surface,
and of direct refits in the workshop shows the
maintenance of the working edges.
These results seem to refine the picture according
to which the ratio of imported lithics and the
pattern of raw material procurement show a
sharp change at the transition from the Middle to
the Upper Palaeolithic (Mellars 1989: 366 – c.f.
Simán 2006). In this regard it is interesting to
note that on the Aurignacian site of Acsa, lying
only a few kilometres from Vanyarc beside the
dominating local limnic quartzite, the ratio of
imported raw material types, including felsitic
porphyry, is less than 2% (Dobosi 2008: 156).
With regard to the classical eastern Slovakian
Aurignacian sites, the overwhelming majority of
the artefacts were made of the Korlát-type limnic
quartzite, coming from a southern direction
from a distance of 20–40 km (Kaminská 1991:
28–31, 2001: 91–94). This connection shows
the same pattern of an approximately N-S
direction which was revealed in the case of the
assemblages in the Topl’a valley (Kaminská et
al. 2000), and suggested by the above-mentioned
‘northern’ imports in the small Middle and the
Early Upper Palaeolithic assemblages of north-
eastern Hungary (Simán 2006: 455–456).
79
In short, the pattern observed in the assemblage
of Vanyarc differs from that expected after the
theoretical assumptions on Middle Palaeolithic
behaviour or that found at the Early Upper
Palaeolithic sites in the Carpathian Basin.
Finally, we should take a closer look at another
possibility. The elevated ratio of the extralocal
raw material types in some Middle Palaeolithic
assemblages in Belgium (Di Modica 2005: 105,
128), in the Moravian Szeletian (Oliva 1991:
323), or in the Magdalenian in the Rhein valley
(Floss 1994: 336) was explained by the absence
of high-quality rocks in the vicinity of the sites.
However, around the limnic quartzite outcrops,
lying 8–10 km from Vanyarc, huge workshop-
sites were identified and partly excavated
(Csongrádi-Balogh & Dobosi 1995; Markó
et al. 2002). The source of a higher-quality
variant, present in the excavated assemblage
and possibly at some later prehistoric sites
too (Biró 1988: 89, note 18), was identified
around Buják, about 8 km east of Vanyarc.
Further to east, at the southern foot of the Mátra
Mountains, as a result of Neogene postvolcanic
activity, a fascinating richness of siliceous rocks
is available.
Conclusions
The most important results of the first excavation
of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the Cserhát
Mountains can be summarised as the follows:
First of all, based on the stratigraphical,
planigraphical, typological and refitting
studies, all the artefacts, both of local and of
exotic raw material types, belong to a single
Middle Palaeolithic assemblage, observable by
archaeological methods. The high ratio of felsitic
porphyry verifies the data from the surface
collections and the careful observations prove
that this raw material was worked locally.
Secondly, in the case of Vanyarc, the generally
north-eastern – south-western direction of
raw material circulation could be traced
up to about 100 km. We should stress that
the surface collected assemblages from
Galgagyörk and Legénd (Markó et al. 2002;
 András MARKÓ
Markó & Péntek 2003–2004), which belong to
a distinctly different archaeological industry –
the Bábonyien (Ringer 1983), led to the same
conclusions: both the linear pattern of raw
material circulation, pointing towards the east,
and the elevated ratio of the felsitic porphyry,
together with the presence of chips and flakes
were more or less uniform in all the sites studied
until now. Minor differences were found only
in the use of Mátra-type hydrothermal raw
materials and the obsidian by the Bábonyian
industry. This ‘short-term stability’ in the raw
material strategy of the late Middle Palaeolithic
shows a more or less perpendicular axe to the
‘long term’ one, observed in Eastern Slovakian
river valleys (Kaminská et al. 2000).
The raw material use of the Cserhát Mountains
and especially the excavated assemblage of
Vanyarc may be interpreted as imprints of a
group of ‘behaviourally modern’ humans (e.g.
Mellars 1989: 366). Taking into consideration
that there are other ‘modern’ elements in certain
Middle Palaeolithic industries in the Carpathian
Basin, such as the flat pebble with incised lines
from Érd (Gábori-Csánk 1968: 158–159), or
the non-utilitarian polished mammoth lamella
from Tata (Vértes 1964: 141), we suggest
that care should be taken to avoid simplistic
generalisations developed in other territories.
To use the documentation of the excavations
at Vanyarc as a starting point, the relatively
thin culture bearing layer with small find
concentrations, short and incomplete series of
reduction refits and very few, broken cores,
indicate a short, episode-like occupation of
the site. In contrast with the above-mentioned
interpretations, we suggest that the reason of
this raw material management, unusual in the
Middle Palaeolithic period, may be found solely
in the mobility of human groups and the special
nature of the sites.
Acknowledgements
The base maps used for the article was prepared
by Balázs Holl (Hungarian National Museum),
the artefacts were drawn by Katalin Nagy.
80
Bibliography
ADAMS, B., 2000. Archaeological investi-
gations at two open-air sites in the Bükk
Mountain region of Northeast Hungary.
In: J. Orschiedt & Weniger, G-Ch. (eds.),
Neanderthals and modern humans –
discussing the transition: Central and
Eastern Europe from 50.000 – 30.000 B.P.
169–182. (Wissenschaftliche Schriften des
Neanderthal Museums 2)
BÁRTA, J., 1979. K problematike proveniencie
surovín na výrobu štiepanej kamennej
industrie v paleolite Slovenska. Slovenská
Archeológia XXVII, 5–15.
BIRÓ, K., 1998. Lithic implements and the
circulation of raw materials in the Great
Hungarian Plain during the Late Neolithic
period. Hungarian National Museum,
Budapest.
BITIRI, M., 1972. Paleoliticul în Ţara Oaşului.
Studiu arheologic. Bucureşti, Centrul de
Informare şi Documentare în Ştiinţele
Sociale şi Politice.
BOSINISKI, G., 1967. Die mittelpaläolithischen
Funde im Westlichen Mitteleuropa. Köln-
Graz, Böhlau Verlag (Fundamenta A4.).
CSONGRÁDI-BALOGH, É. & DOBOSI, V.,
1995. Palaeolithic settlement traces near
Püspökhatvan. Folia Archaeologica XLIV,
37–59.
ČERMÁKOVÁ, Z., 1993. Listovité hroty z
lokality Ořechov II. Sborník prací filozofické
fakulty Brněnské Univerzity E 38, 7–14.
DI MODICA, K., 2005. Le Trou du Diable
(Hastière-Lavaux, prov. Namur, Belgique):
stratégies d’exploitation des ressources
lithiques au Paléolithique moyen.
Anthropologica et Praehistorica 116, 99–
147.
DOBOSI, V., 2008. Acsa: new open-air
Aurignacian site in Hungary. In: N Z.
Sulgostowska & Tomaszewski, A. J. (eds),
Man – Millenia – Environment, Studies in
honour of Romuald Schild. 151–159.
DOBOSI, V. & VÖRÖS, I., 1987. Chronological
revision of the Pilisszántó – Rock-Shelter
II. Folia Archaeologica 37, 25–45.
 Raw material use at the Middle Palaeolithic site of Vanyarc (Northern Hungary)
FÉBLOT-AUGUSTINS, J., 1997. La circulation
des matières premières au Paléolithique –
Synthèse des perspectives comportementales
I–II. Liège. (ERAUL 75.)
FLOSS, H., 1994. Rohmaterialversorgung im
Paläolithikum des Mittelrheingebietes.
Bonn, dr. Rudolf Habelt GmBH
(Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum,
Forschungsinstitut für Vor- und Früh-
geschichte, Monographien 21.).
GÁBORI-CSÁNK, V., 1968. La station du
Paléolithique Moyen d’Érd – Hongrie.
Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó.
GÁBORI-CSÁNK, V., 1994. Le Jankovichien,
une civilisation Paléolithique en Hongrie.
Liège (ERAUL 53).
HÁMOR, G., 1985. A Nógrád-cserháti kutatási
terület földtani viszonyai / Geology of the
Nógrád-Cserhát area. Budapest (Geologica
Hungarica, Series Geologica 22).
KAMINSKÁ, L’., 1991. Význam surovinej
základne pre mladopaleolitickú spoločnost
vo východokarpatskej oblasti. Slovenská
Archaeológia XXXIX, 7–58.
KAMINSKÁ, L’., 2001. Die Nutzung von
Steinrohmaterialien im Paläolithikum der
Slowakei. Quartär 51/52, 81–106.
KAMINSKÁ, L’., KOZŁOWSKI, J. K.,
KAZIOR, B., PAWLIKOWSKI, M. &
SOBCZYK, K., 2000. Long term stability
of raw material procurement systems in the
Middle and Upper Palaeolithic of Eastern
Slovakia: a case study of the Topla/Ondava
river valleys. Praehistoria 1, 63–81.
KASZTOVSZKY, ZS., BIRÓ, K., MARKÓ,
A. & DOBOSI, V. 2008. Cold neutron
Prompt Gamma Activation Analysis – a
non-destructive method for characterization
of high silica content raw materials.
Archaeometry 50, 12–29.
KOLESNIK, A. V., 2003. Tafonomičeskaia
variabel’nost’ pamiatnikov srednego
paleolita Donbassa. In: Kulakovska, L.
(ed.), Variabel’nist’ seredn’ogo paleolity
Ukraini. 106–115. Sjiax, Kiiv.
KOULAKOVSKA, L., 2001. Le complexe
bifacial à Korolevo (couche II-A) – In:
Cliquet, D. (dir.) Les industries à outils
bifaciaux du Paléolithique moyen d’Europe
81
occidentale, Actes de la table-ronde
internationale organisée à Caen (Basse-
Normandie – France) – 14 et 15 octobre
1999. 209–211. Liège (ERAUL 98).
MARKÓ, A., 2005. Limnokvarcit a Cserhát
hegységben. Archeometriai Műhely 2/4,
52–55. (http://www.ace.hu/am/2005_4/
AM-2005-4-MA.pdf).
MARKÓ, A., 2007. Preliminary report on the
excavations of the Middle Palaeolithic
site Vanyarc – Szlovácka-dolina.
Communicationes Archaeologia Hungarica
5–18.
MARKÓ, A. & PÉNTEK, A., 2003–2004.
Raw material procurement strategy on the
Palaeolithic site Legénd – Káldy-tanya
(Cserhát Mountains, Northern Hungary).
Praehistoria 4–5, 165–177.
MARKÓ, A., PÉNTEK, A. & BÉRES, S.,
2002. Chipped stone assemblages from
the environs of Galgagyörk (Northern
Hungary). Praehistoria 3, 245–257.
MARKÓ, A., BIRÓ, K. T. & KASZTOVSZKY,
ZS., 2003. Szeletian felsitic porphyry: non-
destructive analysis of a classical Palaeolithic
raw material. Acta Archaeologia Hungarica
54, 297–314.
MELLARS, P., 1989. Major issues in the
emergence of modern humans. Current
Anthropology 30, 349–385.
MESTER, ZS., 2000. Sur la présence du silex
de Świeciechów dans l’Abri de Sólyomkút
(Montagne de Bükk, Hongrie). Praehistoria
1, 83–93.
OLIVA, M., 1991. The Szeletian in Czecho-
slovakia. Antiquity 65, 318–325.
RINGER, Á., 1983. Bábonyien – Eine mittel-
paläolithische Blattwerkzeugindustrie in
Nordostungarn. Budapest (Dissertationes
Archaeologicae Ser. II. No. 11).
RINGER, Á. & MESTER, ZS., 2000. Résultats
de la révision de la grotte Szeleta entreprise
en 1999 et 2000. Anthropologie XXXVIII/3,
261–270.
ROEBROEKS, W., KOLEN, J. & RENSINK,
E., 1988. Planning depth, anticipation and
the organization of Middle Palaeolithic
technology: the „Archaic Natives” meet
 András MARKÓ

Eve’s descendants. Helinium XXVIII/1,

17–34.
SIMÁN K., 1985. Paleolit leletek Sajó-
szentpéteren. Herman Ottó Múzeum
Évkönyve 22–23, 9–20.
SIMÁN, K., 2006. Tradition, laziness – curiosity,
innovation. In: Körlin, G. & Weisgerber,
G. (Hrsg.), Stone Age – Mining Age. Der
Anschnitt, Beiheft 19, 455–464.
VÉRTES, L., 1964. Die Ausgrabung und die
archäologischen Funde. In: Vértes, L.
(Hrsg): Tata, eine mittelpaläolithische
Travertin-Siedlung in Ungarn. 133–249.
Budapest, Akadémiai kiadó (Archaeologia
Hungarica XLIII).

82

View publication stats