A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve LIV (2015),

A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve LIV (2015), 275–292.

Archaeological research at the Twin-barrows near Onga (Northeast Hungary) in 2015 Krisztián Tóth*–Ádám Szabó**–Balázs Homoki* *Herman Ottó Museum, Miskolc–**Hungarian National Museum, Budapest

Abstract: Along the Hernád valley in Northeast Hungary, a group of barrows can be observed on the left terrace of the river. The southernmost group of this cluster stands near settlement Onga called Zsolcai-halmok, or Twin-barrows. In recent years due to ongoing natural science investigations like aerial photographs and magnetometer surveys other presumed graves with circular ditches were discovered in the area of these barrows. In August 2015, we opened two probes on the northernmost hypothetic grave chosen by the results of the magnetic survey. The aims of this paper to introduce the historical sources of the barrows, newer geophysical survey and the method of the excavation. Keywords: barrows, geomagnetic survey, excavation

Onga village is situated between the Sajó and Hernád rivers, 4-5 kilometers from them, 6 kilometers from Miskolc to the east in Northeast Hungary (Map 1. A–B). The settlement is on the northern part of the microregion called Sajó–Hernád plane, which is an alluvial plain between 89.5 and 160 meters above sea level. The terraces of the rivers above Szikszó blend into the alluvial terraces, which are built from gravel to west from the Sajó and more fine sediments to the east from the same river (DÖVÉNYI 2010, 214). Where the mountains and the loess and loess-like sediments of the terraces connect, chernozem brown forest soils were formed which mechanical composition is generally loam (DÖVÉNYI 2010, 217). The area of the microregion is a herniation of the Great Hungarian Plain into the mountains; so the northern part where Onga can be found is also surrounded by mountains. The archaeological site called Zsolcai-halmok (mounds of Zsolca) is situated on the western edge of the terrace between the two rivers, 1 kilometre from Onga to the west (Map 1. C). Both barrows rise from their environment around 5–5.5 meters high, making them well identifiable landscape elements. Their tops are badly disturbed. The surrounding ditches can be well observed on the ploughed fields around them. Despite their impressive size, literature barely dealt with them. In 2008, landscape ecological research was carried out

on their 0.8 hectare surface. The publishers classified the mounds as so-called kunhalom (cuman barrows) and assumed they could be tell settlements from the Bronze Age (NOVÁK–NYILAS–TÓTH 2009, 161). Although their extension is rather small, a number of protected species are located in the area; simultaneously, the effects of the surrounding agricultural areas can be strongly detected in its fauna composition (NOVÁK–NYILAS–TÓTH 2009, 171). Their fauna is vulnerable due to the small size and the low numbers (NOVÁK–NYILAS–TÓTH 2009, 172). Later, within the framework of his thesis Péter Klein examined the barrows in terms of comparing paleo soils. Soil drillings were performed during the investigation. They developed the drilling gauge at the upper third of the northern mound and the results were subjected to laboratory tests (KLEIN 2012, 39). It turned out that on the barrow, chernozem soil has developed; however below that was paleo soil with properties typical to that of forest soil. On the basis of this information, it can be presumed that at the time of the construction of the mounds a temporary soil was characteristic for the environment, bearing forest soil properties (KLEIN 2012, 39). In 2012, the results of the complex investigations conducted on the mounds were published along with the geomagnetic measurement of the northern barrow (TÓTH–PETHE–MOLNÁR 2012, 897–904).

276

Krisztián Tóth–Ádám Szabó–Balázs Homoki

In 2013, Eszter Ládi dealt with the geomorphological survey of the mounds in her thesis; therefore we have more accurate dates about them. The relative heights of the twins standing 30 meters from each other are 6 and 5.8 meters, their ground-space are 5024 m 2 and 2826 m2 and their bodies join with steep sides to 2.5–3 meters deep surrounding ditches (LÁDI 2013, 26). She also took soil samples from the body of the eastern barrow and its ditch and from the field north from the mounds. She assumes based on the tests that the main body of the barrows are made from the soil of the surrounding ditches which later may have been filled up with meadow soil and soil from the barrow (LÁDI 2013, 26). This means that the largest part of the body of the barrow came from the ditch, above which a thin recent topsoil layer can be found, while fossil buried soil and in 380–400 centimetres deep bedrock are located underneath it (LÁDI 2013, 26). Based on their carbon-14 dating of the soil’s organic content on the basis of all carbon and humic acid, the time of the barrows’ construction could be placed between 6th–5th century BC (LÁDI 2013, 26). In 2014, the results of the complex investigation, with a bigger surveyed area by magnetometer were published (TÓTH–PETHE–HATHÁZI 2014, 11–20). From an archaeological point of view, the most interesting result came from the geomagnetic measurement. The survey was conducted with GSM-19 Overhauser type magnetometer. It turned out that probably more graves with circular ditches are located to the north and east from the northern barrow; moreover another one was discovered to the west of it that can be interpreted as a funeral site. According to the publishers these burials based on morphological issues can be dated to the Roman Period and belonged to the Sarmatians (TÓTH–PETHE–HATHÁZI 2014, 18). Specific investigation of the twins from an archaeological point of view has not happened yet. In 2015, Zoltán Czajlik published an aerial photo about their territory, based on which he assumed that there was another barrow to the southwest of the twins that could have been ploughed (CZAJLIK 2015, 62, Abb. 6). In this article he checked the magnetic anomalies on the aerial photo and emphasized the importance of research on the burials around the mounds (CZAJLIK 2015, 64). In the valley of the Hernád river a number of sites with barrows are known (Megyaszó, Pere), however only the Baksa mound near Megyaszó had been excavated in 1869 (HAMPEL 1870, 254–257; RÓMER 1870, 60–62). The low results of this excavation cannot help with the archaeological dating of that barrow. Our

small excavation aimed to get information about the dates of the surrounding burials around the twins of Onga in August, 2015. Topographic dates The first map1 (Map 2), which shows the barrows is a work of an unknown author from the second half of the 18th century (1767), who marked them with the Latin word colles (mounds). This map probably originates from the period when possession around them started to divide in the second part of the 18th century. In 1771, János Lossontzi made a map2 about the possessions where they could have been derived from. This map is marking both barrows with the word collis near the Miskolc–Onga road (Map 3). Both mounds can be well observed and the shape of the northern one is a little bit oval. There is another map3 from Lossontzi about the same area from the Archives of Heves County, Eger (Map 4), which was made one year later in 1772. The land had been measured out and the mounds belonged to László Csizmadia, Mihály Huszár és Mihály Pato. The barrows are almost the same as on the earlier map. On another map4 from the beginning of the 19th century we can find the depiction of both barrows named Colles Ongaienses (Map 5). This map is very schematic, mainly referring to the roads but terrain objects can be seen as well. The northern mound was depicted slightly oval and larger in size. The twins are known as Geszteiheg y (hill of Geszte) on the number XXXIX-44 map of the Second Military Survey (Map 6). The two piles are recognizable on it and they are visibly distinct from each other. However, unlike other maps the barrows’ positions were inverted. The smaller one is located southwest whereas originally it is on the southeast. On the number 4766-3 map of the Third Military Survey is the first time the name Zsolczai halom (Map 7) is used. There is an elevation point (134 m) on the southeastern smaller barrow. The observed elevation is not far from the truth and their location is also very precise.

1 2 3 4

MNL BAZML 15-6 BmT 271. MNL BAZML 15-6 BmT 124. MNL HML Fkpt 83.2. MNL BAZML 15-6 BmT 39.

Archaeological research at the Twin-barrows near Onga (Northeast Hungary) in 2015 Geomagnetic survey The geomagnetic survey was carried out to the north along the road, running west-east direction north from the mounds, this is due to the vegetation which only allowed us to work there (Map 8. A). The piles were surrounded by corn in August, 2015. We used MAGNETO® DLM 5 channel device with fluxgate sensors made by Sensys company. Using a magnetometer we can detect up to 0.2 nT resolution of the fine changes of the earth’s magnetic field. The purpose of this method is to search for magnetic interference in the top layer of the soil, which can be connected in archaeological perspective to traces of human activities. It is important to note that the top layer of the soil has a greater magnetic effect than lower layers, which is due to biological (bacterial activity), physical (fragmentation) and chemical (transformation of rocks) processes (KVAMME 2006b, 214; BECKER 2009, 134). Taking these characteristics of the soil into account we are able to detect places where they filled a deeper pit with soil with greater magnetic effects, or where they have taken material, clay for use. This means we can find ditches, foundations, kilns, graves and different kind of pits. However, the presence of fire, such as furnaces, burned traces of houses and fired building materials could be an important clue because they can be detected by their higher magnetic effects (KVAMME 2006b, 216–218). It is important to mention that iron objects can cause strong dipole anomalies (with two apparent poles, the positive peak appearing as white and the negative peak as black coloured). It is important to mention imported building materials as well, because sometimes their effect differ from that of the background and this could make them visible on the anomaly map, like the presence of volcanic rock for instance (KVAMME 2006b, 220). For research we used 5 pieces of FGM-650 type fluxgate gradiometers. There are two fluxgate magnetometers in each probe, which are placed 650 mm from each other. The soul of a fluxgate magnetometer is a soft iron core, which is surrounded by two contrary coiled wires with the same number of passes. The instrument is sensitive to the magnetic field component which is parallel to the iron cores. During the survey the sensors are held vertically and the vertical component of the total magnetic field is measured. There are many benefits of using gradiometer configuration such as removing the time dependant natural changes in the magnetic field as well as total magnetic field and low frequency components – slowly changing effects like

277

large scale geological effects. As a result of using this configuration only the near surface anomalies will be visible on the anomaly map, essentially it works like a high pass filter. The operation of the gradiometer configuration as follows. During the measuring the upper and the lower positioned fluxgate magnetometers in a sensor also measures the magnetic field. The theory of the falloff rule is used which says that the strength of the magnetic field is proportional to the inverse of the third power of the distance (KVAMME 2006b, 222). This means that the near surface anomalies cause stronger readings on the lower sensor than the higher one. The field computer connected to the sensors subtracts the higher positioned magnetometer’s data from the lower one. This step removes the total field, time dependant natural effects and slowly changing geological anomalies (low frequency components). The second step involves dividing the differences by the distance between the vertically separated magnetometers. This step transforms the anomaly map to a gradient map which shows the changes in the near surface magnetic field. The penetration depth depends on the depth of the source but it is generally about 0.75–1 meter. The sensors’ distance from the ground can affect the penetration depth. When we assembled the instrument we put the sensor into a plastic cartridge with 0.5 meter separation from each other. This meant that the track lines were 0.5 meter from each other. The sampling density along the track lines was set to 0.1 meter. The result of the survey is a colour coded anomaly map which shows the changes of the vertical magnetic component of the magnetic field near surface. For processing the measurements we used Magneto®Arch, Golden Software Surfer, Snuffler and Gwyddion programs. Before beginning data processing, it must be emphasized that every filtering and processing step used to remove unwanted anomalies from the anomaly map will damage or may remove archaeologically interested anomalies as well. To prevent anomalies from being filtered, the income and outcome maps have to be compared at every processing step. As a first step of processing the data must be transferred from the memory of the instrument to the PC with Magneto®Arch. Other than data transfer, the program also has other important functions like filtering the heading error and the drift. However, sometimes the measured data ends up being staggered, which is an error that originates from the operator. This happens if the operator was not moved at constant pace so the tracks are slid – anomalies at the edges of the tracks

278


are slid along the track (KVAMME 2006a, 241). After de-staggering the map there are other noises that have to be taken care of so that subtle anomalies could be made visible. Such noises include point like magnetic anomalies and ploughs. To eliminate these spike-like extreme measurements – which may only be indicated by one measured point or one pixel at a raster picture we use Snuffler, which has a diverse and useful toolbar. Among them, there is a “de-spike” function and high cut – low pass filter. After finishing the processing with Snuffler, the measured data is ready to be interpreted, but regular lines – plough marks – are still visible on the map (Map 8. C). The presence of plough marks on the anomaly map are the furrows and ridges that represent lesser and greater amounts of topsoil (KVAMME, 2006a, 238). It is possible to eliminate them due to their orientation and regularity using Fourier methods (KVAMME 2006a, 238). There are many free programs on the Internet which are suitable for the Fourier transformation, filtering and recovering transformed data. We would like to highlight a program for transformation called Gwyddion. This program was originally designed for SEM (scanning electron microscope) data processing. In order to make measured data appropriate for the program the anomaly map must be interpolated as a regular grid (KLAPETEK et. al. 2015, 37). The main goal was to eliminate plough marks – as it can be seen on the map it is not so disturbed. On the final filtered picture you can notice that the horizontal and vertical grooves are gone, but the contours of the anomalies remained (Map 8. D). We fitted the anomaly map published by Tóth and others (TÓTH–PETHE–HATHÁZI 2014, 19, Fig. 4) to our anomaly map, from which we have digitized the circle ditches and most possible burials (Map 9. A–B). We identified 29 circular ditches in total, which currently seems to be placed in three groups; furthermore we digitized the ditch of the northwestern mound. Thus together with the two barrows – assuming that the second one also has a similar ditch – we documented 31 burials with circular ditches, however anomalies located between them suggest the existence of other graves without ditches. We can find the entrance of these fosses in the south in most cases like at the big barrow. The diameters of the circular ditches in the northern group are between 9 and 16 meters. The largest one has two fosses and the diameter of the outer one is 17 meters. We only know about one grave to the west of the northern barrow at this moment and only a part of it belongs to the surveyed area, but its diameter is

around 25 meters. In the eastern group the graves are located in a row and they are similar to each other in their size, the diameters of their ditches are between 9 and 10 meters. Based on the survey in the north line of the eastern group several fosses could have been dug into each other. On the south of this eastern group we can detect two bigger fosses, but with their 11 and 11.5 meter diameters they are not substantially different from the rest. The excavation We carried out the excavation north from the northern barrow on the geomagnetically surveyed area between the 10th and 18th of August, 2015. The assumed burials were on the southwest part of this area; due to the new survey we knew their exact positioning. We selected the northernmost and smallest circular ditch with 9 meters in diameter (Map 10. A). We marked out a 10 meters long and 1 m wide searching trench (Trench I) with RTK GPS, which intersected the anomalies of the circular ditch and the central one. We had to work with pickaxes because of the low humidity of the loamy humus (S1). We could register the loamy subsoil at 35 cm deep, in which the grey-brown spots of the circular ditch (S2) in both north and south end of the trench and another one (S3) in the middle have been detected. We found more recent ceramic fragments in the humus, while some prehistoric sherds (Fig. 1. 1–2) came to light at the southern part of the ditch. After cleaning the trench we created orthophotos with a Nikon 1v3 camera to document the spots (Map 10. B). During the excavation of the circular ditch we found more black pottery fragments in the infilling, but their locations did not show any regularity. In the northern part of the ditch we found a red wheel made pottery fragment along a prehistoric sherd (Fig. 1. 3), and on the bottom of this part of the foss burnt bones were also revealed. The walls and bottom of the ditch were steep and curved, 100–110 cm wide and 70 cm deep from the top of the humus (Map 10. C). During the excavation of the spot in the middle, we also found burnt bone fragments. The depth of this (S3) was 10 cm from the cleaned surface, where we encountered the yellow, loamy subsoil. Its wall was splay and its bottom was flat in Trench I. Because the middle spot (S3) clearly went out the trench, we opened another one (Trench II) to the west from the first one. It was 2 meters long and 2.5 meters wide. We also managed to register this patch in here and then documented using orthophotos. It did not deepen more than Trench I, just at its northern part,

Archaeological research at the Twin-barrows near Onga (Northeast Hungary) in 2015

Fig. 1. 1–2. Prehistoric ceramics from the southern part of the circular ditch, 3. Red wheel made pottery from the northern part of the circular ditch 1. kép. 1–2. A körárok déli részéből előkerült őskori kerámiák, 3. A körárok északi részéből előkerült vörös, korongolt kerámiatöredék

279

280


where its infill was a little bit different, more brownish. Its bottom was 80 cm deep from the top of the humus. Unfortunately, some burnt bone fragments were discovered in it (Map 10. D). During excavation we also carried out the metal detector survey in the area of geomagnetic measurement, however, only some recent scrap metal was found. Unfortunately, this short excavation could not clearly prove that the circular ditch belonged to a burial or not, and doubts remained regarding its age as well. Summary The geomagnetic anomaly map published in 2014 and the archaeological excavation carried out in August 2015 proved that not only the Twin-barrows, but also the area around can be considered an archaeological site. Thanks to scientific research consummated in recent years we can certainly say that the mounds are artificial objects. The geomorphologic survey and the soil drillings clearly demonstrated that they have been ditched around and the geomagnetic survey also revealed that these ditches are opened from the south. This survey around the northern mound showed the existence of further graves which are mostly similar in structure to the biggest pile: some of the circle ditches are opened from the south. Three separate grave groups can be observed around the northern mound to the west, north and east. As the mounds have not been affected of archaeological research, it would be important to clarify some fundamental issues. In which period could have these hills been built? Can it be proved archaeologically that their circular ditches originate simultaneously with them or were they added to the mounds later? When did cemetery groups form around the barrows of the northern mound? What is their relationship to the twins and to each other? In order to clarify some of these important questions we carried out a geomagnetic survey on a one hectare surface to the north from the northern barrow of the Zsolcai-halmok (barrows of Zsolca), near the village called Onga. The measurements detected some potential graves with circular ditches and we opened two searching trenches on the northernmost ones. In these we were able to find the circular foss and the potential grave in the middle shown by the measurement. These phenomena were 35 cm deep, so one can easily explain their strong magnetic effect on the survey, because they were in the range of the penetration depth of the instrument. Mainly prehistoric pottery fragments were found in the encircling ditch, but in its northern part a

red wheel made sherd was revealed. Although dating these objects can be difficult, we have an assumption about the wheel made one, as this technology was available for the Sarmatians during the Roman Period. But currently this could only be potential evidence for that the ditch framework was not built before the Roman Period. The feature unearthed in the central part showed some regularity; however, except for a few burnt bones we found little signs of a burial. Although knowing the degree of how disturbed Sarmatian cemeteries can be, we could assume that this is a highly disturbed burial. It would be worth continuing the excavation and geomagnetic survey in the future to gain clear evidence on the date of origin of the circular ditches and possible burials. The short research in 2015 can only be regarded as the first step in the study of the twins, which we want to continue in the future. As our next step, we would like to carry out a geomagnetic survey on both the barrows and their environment on a total surface of 10 hectares. In possession of this, we could see more precisely how many cemetery groups we can count around the mounds and what kind of grave structures are characteristic of certain groups. Following this, we would like to examine the burial with a quick excavation situated to the west from the northern barrow, because it shows the strongest and largest magnetic anomaly. At the same time, we also want to investigate the burial with circular trench from the eastern group that showed the strongest magnetic anomaly and an anomaly with no frame, which can also presumed to be a burial. Acknowledgments

We would like to thank to Tamás Bodnár (MNL BAZML) for the historical maps and Gábor Bakos (HOM) for performing metal detection. We would also like to thank the help of Borbála Mohácsi (Eötvös Loránd University), Ádám Lisztes (University of Pécs), József Simon (HOM), Ádám Juhász (HOM), Ágnes Király (HOM) and Csaba Medve (HOM).

Abbreviations

HOM – Herman Ottó Museum MNL BAZML – The Hungarian National Archives, Archives of Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County MNL HML – The Hungarian National Archives, Archives of Heves County

Archaeological research at the Twin-barrows near Onga (Northeast Hungary) in 2015 Bibliography

Becker, Helmut 2009 Caesium-magnetometry for landscape-archaeology. In: Campana, Stephano–Piro, Salvatore (Eds): Seeing the Unseen: Geophysics and Landscape Archaeolog y, CRC Press, London. 129–135. Czajlik, Zoltán 2015 Luftbildarchäologische Forschungen im Komitat Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén (Ungarn). In: Szathmári, Ildikó (Hrsg): An der Grenze der Bronze- und Eisenzeit. Festschrift für Tibor Kemenczei zum 75. Geburtstag, Budapest. 53–66. Dövényi Zoltán (ed.) 2010 Mag yarország kistájainak katasztere. MTA Földrajztudományi Kutatóintézet, Budapest. Hampel József 1870 Jelentés a sz.-István-baksai Baksi-féle halom ásatásának folytatásáról. Archaeologiai Értesítő II. 254–257. Kvamme, Kenneth L. 2006a Data Processing and Presentation. In: Johnson, Jay K. (ed.): Remote sensing in Archaeolog y: An Explicitly North American Perspective, The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 235–250. 2006b Magnetometry: Nature’s Gift to Archaeology. In: Johnson, Jay K. (ed.): Remote sensing in Archaeolog y: An Explicitly North American Perspective, The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 205–233. Klapetek, Petr–Nečas, David–Anderson, Christopher 2015 Gwyddion user guide. URL: http://gwyddion.net/ documentation/user-guide-en/ (Retrieved 25.01.2016).

281

Klein Péter 2012 Mag yarországi kunhalmok paleotalajának összehasonlítása. BSc Thesis, Manuscript. Szent István University, Gödöllő. Ládi Eszter 2013 A Zsolcai-halmok geomorfológiai és talajtani felmérése. BSc Thesis, Manuscript. University of Debrecen, Debrecen. Novák Tibor–Nyilas István–Tóth Csaba 2009 Tájökológiai vizsgálatok a Zsolcai-halmok löszgyepein. Tájökológiai Lapok 7 (1). 161–173. Rómer Flóris 1870 A sz.-istván-baksai halom ásatása. Archaeologiai Értesítő II. 60–62. Tóth Csaba Albert–Pethe Mihály–Hatházi Ágnes 2014 The application of earth science-based analyses on a twin-kurgan in Northern Hungary. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 9 (1). 11–20. Tóth Csaba Albert–Pethe Mihály–Molnár Mihály 2012 A Zsolcai-halmok komplex földtudományi vizsgálata. In: Nyári Diána (ed.): Kockázat – Konfliktus – Kihívás, A VI. Magyar Földrajzi Konferencia, a MERIEXWA nyitókonferencia és a Geográfus Doktoranduszok Országos Konferenciájának Tanulmányai, Szeged. 897–904. Online sources: Magneto® Version 3.X software guide, downloadable from homepage of Sensys after registration (pp. 58–64). URL: http://www.sensys.de/index.php/en/ (Retrieved 25.01.2016) Producing An Archaeological Geophysics Report. URL: http://www.sussexarch.org.uk/geophys/georeport.html (Retrieved 27.01.2015).

282

Krisztián Tóth–Ádám Szabó–Balázs Homoki Az ongai ikerhalmok 2015-ös régészeti kutatása

Kulcsszavak: halmok, geomágneses kutatás, ásatás A 2014-ben publikált mágneses anomáliatérkép és a 2015 augusztusában végzett régészeti feltárás bebizonyította, hogy nemcsak az Onga melletti halmok esetében (Zsolcai-halmok), de körülöttük is régészeti lelőhellyel számolhatunk. Az elmúlt években végzett természettudományos kutatásoknak köszönhetően biztosan állíthatjuk, hogy az ikerhalmok mesterséges létesítmények. A geomorfológiai felmérés és a talajfúrások egyértelműen bizonyították, hogy körülárkoltak, a geomágneses felmérésből pedig az is kiderült, hogy az árok délről nyitott. E felmérés az északabbi halom körül további árokkeretes sírok létezését mutatta, melyek többségének szerkezete hasonló a legnagyobb halomhoz: a kerítőárkok egy része szintén délről nyitott. Az északi halom körül három különálló sírcsoportosulás figyelhető meg: nyugatra, északra és keletre. Mivel a halmokat eddig régészeti kutatás nem érintette, fontos volna néhány alapvető kérdés tisztázása. Mely korszakban épülhettek a halmok? Régészetileg bizonyítható-e, hogy a kerítőárkuk egy időben készült a halmokkal, vagy később keletkezhetett? Mikor jöttek létre az északi halom körüli temetőcsoportok? Mi a viszonyuk az ikerhalmokhoz, illetve egymáshoz? E néhány fontosabb kérdés tisztázása érdekében 2015 augusztusában 1 hektáros felszínen geomágneses felmérést végeztünk a Zsolcai-halmok északi halmától északra. A felmérés által kimutatott árokkeretes síroknak vélt anomáliák közül a legészakabbira nyitottunk két szelvényt. Ebben sikerült megtalálnunk a mérés által is kimutatott kerítőárkot és az annak közepén található feltételezett sírt. Mivel ezek a jelenségek 35 cm mélyen találhatók, így könnyen magyarázható erős mágneses hatásuk a felmérésen, ugyanis ez a mélység bőven a műszer behatolási hatótávjában található. A kerítőárokból főleg őskori kerámiatöredékek kerültek elő, azonban az északi részről egy vörös, korongolt töredék is napvilágot látott. Habár e tárgyakat keltezni nehéz, azért a korongolt darabról mégis megállapíthatjuk, hogy e kerámiatechnológia a római korban a szarmatáknál volt jelen. Ám ez jelenleg csak arra lehet bizonyíték, hogy az árokkeret a római kor előtt nem készülhetett. A központi részen előkerült objektum némi szabályosságot mutatott, azonban néhány kalcinálódott csonton kívül kevés jelét találtuk temetkezésnek. Habár ismerve a szarmata temetők rablottságának fokát, akár feltételezhetjük, hogy e temetkezést is erősen megbolygatták. A 2015-ben folytatott rövid kutatást mindössze első lépésnek tekinthetjük az ikerhalmok vizsgálatában, melyet szeretnénk folytatni a jövőben. Következő lépésként mindkét halom és környezetének területén, összesen 10 hektár felszínen szeretnénk elvégezni a geomágneses felmérést. Ennek birtokában pontosabban látnánk, hogy összesen hány temetőcsoporttal számolhatunk a halmok körül, illetve milyen szerkezetű sírok jellemzőek az egyes csoportokra. Ezután rövid ásatással az északi halomtól nyugatra található temetkezést vizsgálnánk, mivel ez mutatja a legerősebb és a legnagyobb mágneses anomáliát. Ezzel egy időben a keleti csoportból is szeretnénk megkutatni a legerősebb mágneses anomáliát mutató árokkeretes temetkezést, illetve egy árokkeret nélküli anomáliát, mely feltételezhetően szintén temetkezés lehet. Tóth Krisztián–Szabó Ádám–Homoki Balázs


Map 1. A. Location of the site in the Carpathian basin, B. Location of the barrows in Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County, C. The two barrows and its environment on digital elevation model 1. térkép. A. A lelőhely helyzete a Kárpát-medencében, B. A halmok elhelyezkedése Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén meg yében, C. A két halom és környezete digitális domborzat modellen

283

284


Map 2. Unknown author’s map about the barrows and its environment from 1767 2. térkép. Ismeretlen szerző térképe a halmokról és környezetükről 1767-ből

Map 3. János Lossontzi’s map about the barrows and its environment from 1771 3. térkép. Lossontzi János térképe a halmokról és környezetükről 1771-ből

Archaeological research at the Twin-barrows near Onga (Northeast Hungary) in 2015 285

Map 4. János Lossontzi’s map about the barrows and its environment from 1772 4. térkép. Lossontzi János térképe a halmokról és környezetükről 1772-ből

286 Krisztián Tóth–Ádám Szabó–Balázs Homoki


Map 5. Unknown author’s map about the barrows and its environment from the beginning of the 19th century 5. térkép. Ismeretlen szerző térképe a halmokról és környezetükről a 19. század elejéről

287

288


Map 6. The barrows on map no. XXXIX-44 of the Second Military Survey 6. térkép. A halmok a Második Katonai Felmérés XXXIX-44 számú térképszelvényén


Map 7. The barrows on map no. 4766-3 of the Third Military Survey 7. térkép. A halmok a Harmadik Katonai Felmérés 4766-3 számú térképszelvényén

289

290


Map 8. A. The exact location of the geomagnetic survey, B. The raw anomaly map of the geomagnetic survey, C. The geomagnetic survey filtered by Snuffler, D. The geomagnetic survey filtered by Gwyddion 8. térkép. A. A geomágneses felmérés pontos helye, B. A geomágneses felmérés nyers anomáliatérképe, C. A geomágneses felmérés Snuffler programmal szűrt állománya, D. A geomágneses felmérés Gwyddion programmal szűrt állománya


291

Map 9. A. The georeferenced geomagnetic survey from 2015 and the earlier published one (TÓTH–PETHE–HATHÁZI 2014, 19, Fig. 4) on digital elevation model, B. Interpretation of the anomalies of the possible graves 9. térkép. A. A 2015-ös és a korábban publikált (TÓTH–PETHE–HATHÁZI 2014, 19, Fig. 4) geomágneses felmérések georeferálva digitális domborzatmodellen, B. A feltételezett sírok mágneses anomáliáinak értelmezése

Map 10. A. The anomaly of the northernmost grave selected for the excavation, B. The ortophotos of the excavated features georeferenced on the anomalies, C. Interpretation of the excavated features’ ortophotos, D. Digitized surface and section drawings of the two trenches 10. térkép. A. A feltárásra kiválasztott legészakibb temetkezés anomáliája, B. A kibontott objektumok ortofotója georeferálva az anomáliákra, C. A kibontott objektumok ortofotójának értelmezése, D. A két szelvény digitalizált felszínrajza és metszeteik

292 Krisztián Tóth–Ádám Szabó–Balázs Homoki

A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve LIV (2015),

Recommend Documents