Eura sian Pre his tory, 5 (2): 67–76.

A NEW LOOK AT THE RA DIO CAR BON CHRO NOL OGYOF THE SZELETIAN IN HUN GARY

György Lengyel1 and Zsolt Mester2

1 Uni ver sity of Miskolc, In sti tute of His tor i cal Sci ences, De part ment of Pre his tory and Ar chae ol ogy,3515 Miskolc-Egyetemváros, Hun gary; bolengyu@uni-miskolc.hu

2 Károli Gáspár Uni ver sity of the Re formed Church, De part ment of An cient His tory, 1088 Bu da pest,Reviczky u. 4/c, Hun gary; h8009mes@ella.hu

Ab stract

The Szeletian is widely known as a tran si tional in dus try be tween the Mid dle and Up per Paleolithic. Szeleta Cave, theepon y mous site, is lo cated in north east ern Hun gary in the Bükk Moun tains and is the only site in Hun gary that pro duced14C dates for Szeletian lev els, ly ing be tween 43.0 and 11.0 ka 14C BP. In this pa per we crit i cally re view the 14C sam ples ob -tained at Szeleta and dis cuss the age of the Szeletian in Hun gary. In our eval u a tion of the data we fo cus on stra tig ra phy, the com po si tion of lay ers, and the ar che o log i cal con text of the sam ples.

IN TRO DUC TION

The age of the Sze letian is of key im por tancefor the un der stand ing of the Mid dle to Up per Pa -leo lithic tran si tion in East ern Cen tral Europe (All- sworth-Jones, 1986; Svo boda and Simán, 1989;Ad ams, 1998). Sze leta Cave rep re sents the onlysite at which the Sze letian has been docu mentedin two dis tinct phases and, con se quently, most re -search on the Sze letian in Hun gary was fo cusedon this site. As a re sult of this, Sze leta Cave pos -sesses about one- fifth of the to tal of ra dio car bondates avail able for the Hun gar ian Pa leo lithic.

Ac cord ing to schol ars who have been work -ing on Sze leta (Ad ams, 2002; Ad ams and Ringer,2004, Ringer, 2002a, 2002b), the chro nol ogy ofthe Sze letian in Hun gary seems to be well es tab -lished be tween ca. 43.0 and 22.0 ka 14C BP.

Here, we claim that the pro posed ab so lutechrono logi cal frame work for the Sze letian withinthe re gion re sults from the un criti cal in ter pre ta -tion of sam ple prove nance in terms of both stra -tigraphic and ar cheo logi cal con texts. There fore,we criti cally evalu ate the ra dio car bon dates fromSze leta Cave, ac cord ing to mod ern stan dards forthe in ter pre ta tion of sam ple con text and va lid ity

(Wa ter bolk, 1971; Pet titt et al., 2003; Vermee-rsch, 2005) by con sid er ing the 1) stra tigraphic in -teg rity of the sam ples, and 2) their ar cheo logi calcon text, in or der to shed light on cru cial prob lemswithin the age es ti mates for the Hun gar ian Sze -letian.

SZELETA CAVE STRA TIG RA PHY

Sze leta Cave, some 60 m in length, is lo catedon the east ern side of Bükk Moun tains, at an ele -va tion of 349 m a.s.l. (Fig ure 1). The cave is di -vided into four parts: the “Hall” is situ ated im me -di ately north of the “En trance”, the “Main Corri-dor” opens to the north west of the “Hall”, and the“Side Cor ri dor” is situ ated to the west (Fig ure 3).

Szeleta cave was first ex ca vated be tween1906 and 1913 by Kadi³ (1916), then in 1928,1936, 1947, 1966, 1989, 1999 by sev eral schol arsin clud ing in ter na tional teams (Mester, 2002;Ringer, 2002b; Ad ams and Ringer, 2004).

Kadi³ il lus trated 11 lay ers among which 9were of Pleis to cene age (Kadi³, 1916), la beledfrom bot tom to top (Fig ure 2). The lay ers weredis tin guished ac cord ing to color, con tent and stru- cture. The most com plete se quence of lay ers was

re cov ered in the Hall, where the ex ca va tionreached the bed rock (Ta ble 1). The cave fill wasthe thick est here (12.5 m), thin ning out to wardsthe cor ri dors to as lit tle as 2 m. In the Main Cor ri -dor the ex ca va tion did not reach the bed rock anddid not go deeper than layer 2, thus the thick nessof fill is un known in this part of the cave. In theSide Cor ri dor the bed rock also was ex posed tosome ex tent at the rear. The En trance was ex ca -vated down to layer 3. The nine Pleis to cene lay ers were not found in the same or der in each part ofthe cave (Ta ble 2). It is re mark able that in theseearly years of Paleolithic re search in Hun gary

Kadi³ paid at ten tion to fea tures that bear in for -ma tion on the for ma tion of the cave sed i ments.For ex am ple, Kadi³ re corded the type ofedge-weather and the de gree of weath er ing oflime de bris and bones.

Some lay ers of the cave fill were fur ther di -vided into sub- layers. In the case of layer 3, threehearth lev els (3a, 3b, 3c) up to 0.25 m thick ness,two in the Hall (3a, 3b) and one in the Side Cor ri -dor (3c), were con sid ered. In Layer 2, two 0.2 mthick dis tinct hori zon tal de bris lev els in the cen terof the Hall were sepa rated (Lay ers 2a, 2b). Stonetools from Layer 2 in the Hall were ex clu sivelyas so ci ated with those two de bris lev els 2a and 2b.De bris in Layer 2 in the Main Cor ri dor was foundscat tered in the sedi ment.

SZELETA CAVE LITHIC IN DUS TRIES

The first ex ca va tions be tween 1906 and 1913re moved about 2,500 cu bic me ters of sed i mentand re cov ered a to tal of about 2,000 items, in clud -ing re touched tools, debitage, cores and knappingde bris (Kadi³, 1916; Szeleta Ar chives at theHungarian Na tional Mu seum). To day, 1,364lithics can be as so ci ated au then ti cally with thePleis to cene fill sed i ments (Ringer and Szolyák,2004).

The lithic as sem blages of Szeleta Cave werefirst clas si fied as “Solutrean”, and at trib uted to

68 G. Lengyel & Z. Mester

Fig. 1. Lo ca tion of Szeleta Cave in the Bükk Moun -tains (NE Hun gary)

Ta ble 1Lay ers of Szeleta af ter Kadi³ 1916

Layer Color Thick ness [m] Con tent

9 0.2 bat guano

8 0.2 cal car e ous tuff

7 black 0.7 hu mus

6 grey 0.5-1.0 clay, sharp stones of small size

6a, 6b light yel low 1.0-2.0 boul ders

5 red dish brown 0.2-0.5 clay, mostly sharp and a few abraded bones and stones

4 dark grey 0.5 clay, fifty per cent of the bone as sem blage and the stones are abraded

3 light brown 1.5-3.5clay, three or ganic rich hearth ho ri zons in Hall (3a, 3b, 3c), heavyabra sion on bones and stones and also on flint artefacts

2 dark brown 2.5-6.0clay, two de bris lev els in Hall (2a, 2b), a few an i mal bones, mainlyabraded, high phos pho ric acid con tent

1 red 1.0 clay, sim i lar to "terra rossa"

"creek" sed i -ment

2.0 silt and peb bles

the Up per Paleolithic (Kadi³, 1916). Kadi³ dis -tin guished three types of “Solutrean”: an “EarlySolutrean” from Layer 3, an “In ter me di ateSolutrean” from Layer 4, and a “De vel oped Solu-trean” from Lay ers 5, 6, 6a, and 6b. The “EarlySolutrean” was char ac ter ized by rough, ir reg u larleaf points, while the “De vel oped Solutrean” waschar ac ter ized by fine, reg u lar lau rel leaf points.The “In ter me di ate Solutrean” com prised bothtypes. This di vi sion rep re sented a lin eage be -tween the “Early Solutrean” and the “De vel opedSolutrean”. As Kadi³ claimed, the Solutreanphases of Szeleta be sides the bifacial tools werechar ac ter ized by other Up per Paleolithic typessuch as blades, burins, end-scrap ers, bor ers, and afew backed blades and a Gravette point. The in -dus try from Layer 2 was de scribed as in de ter mi -nate.

Af ter World War II, the clas si fi ca tion for thePa leo lithic oc cu pa tions at Sze leta was changed.First, the Cen tral East ern Euro pean lau rel leafpoint in dus tries were de fined in de pend ent of theSo lutrean, and Sze leta Cave was cho sen to be theepony mous site of what is to day known as the“Sze letian” (Prošek, 1953). Then new stud ies byVé rtes at trib uted Layer 3 to an “Early” Sze letian,Lay ers 4 and 5 to an “In ter me di ate” Sze letian, and Layer 6 to a “De vel oped” Sze letian (Vé rtes, 1965:

138). Gábori (1964, 1990) em pha sized that the“De vel oped” Sze letian in dus try with out leafpoints re sem bled the Aurig na cian and, in ad di -tion, showed Gravet tian in flu ence in the pres enceof backed bla de lets and a Gravette point. In thenew clas si fi ca tion, Layer 2 was as signed to theMid dle Pa leo lithic Mouste rian (Vé rtes, 1965).Ex cept for the In ter me di ate Sze letian, this clas si -

Ra dio car bon chro nol ogy of the Sze letian in Hun gary 69

Fig. 2. Lon gi tu di nal sec tion of Szeleta Cave, af ter Mottl’s un pub lished draw ings of 1937

Fig. 3. Lo ca tion of the ex ca va tion trenches of Vértes(1968) and Ad ams and Ringer (2004) in Szeleta Cave

fi ca tion of the lithic as sem blages with leaf pointsis still in use to day.

Con cern ing the “mak ers” of the Sze letian,Allsworth- Jones (1986) and Svo boda and Simán(1989) have claimed that the Cen tral Euro peanSze letian rep re sents the prod uct of Mid dle Pa leo -lithic Ne an der thals that went through an ac cul -tura tion pro cess around the Mid dle to Up per Pa -leo lithic tran si tion, ex plain ing the pres ence ofUp per Pa leo lithic types within the Sze letian asdue to ex ter nal in flu ences of the Aurig na cian.Svo boda and Simán (1989) ar gued for in ter ac tionbe tween Ne an der tals and Mod ern Hu mans byhigh light ing the pres ence of an em bed ded Aurig -na cian oc cu pa tion level in the up per part of the“Early” Sze letian (Layer 3c) (Svo boda and Si-mán, 1989: 301). In ad di tion, Simán (1990) wentdeeper into the ques tion of the evo lu tion of theSze letian phases, and sug gested, on tech no logi caland ty pologi cal grounds, that the “Early” and“De vel oped” Sze letian were un re lated stages. Si-mán (1995) fi nally stated that the “De vel oped”Sze letian in deed rep re sents a Gravet tian in dus trywith laurel- shaped leaf points. Con trast ing theseviews, Ringer claimed that the Sze letian is theUp per Pa leo lithic de riva tive of the Mid dle Pa leo -lithic Bábonyian; there fore the “Bábonyian-Szeletian com plex” was pro posed to dis tin guishthis line age (Ringer et al., 1995). Be sides theBábonyian and Sze letian, de fined on the pres ence

of “fos sil mark ers”, Ringer dis tin guished sev eralother oc cu pa tions, such as the Tau ba chian, Mid -dle Pa leo lithic and even Up per Pa leo lithic agedMouste rian, Janko vi chian, Aurig na cian, andGravet tian, span ning from the Last In ter gla cial tothe Last Gla cial Maxi mum (Ta ble 3) (Ringer,1989, 1993; Ringer et al., 1995; Ringer andMester, 2000). Con trary to the in ter pre ta tions out -lined above, and based on com para tive lithic stud -ies of the caves of Sze leta and Istállósko, Ad ams(1998) sug gested that the Sze letian and the Aurig -na cian were the prod ucts of the same Up per Pa -leo lithic popu la tion.

Re cent re in ter pre ta tion sug gests that the ar -che o log i cal se quence of Szeleta has been largelymis un der stood. The cul tural “fos sil mark ers” dis -trib uted through out sev eral lay ers of the stratigra-phic se quence at Szeleta re flect se vere post-depo-sitional dis tur bances and in di cate that Szeletashould not be con sid ered the type site of Szeletian lithic assemblages.

SZELETA RA DIO CAR BON DATES

Sam pling of or ganic re mains from the Hun -gar ian Szeletian for ra dio car bon dat ing be gan inthe 1960s by Vértes (Geyh et al., 1969). Af terVértes, Ad ams and Ringer (2004) were in volvedwith ra dio car bon dat ing of the Szeletian. To datea to tal of 10 ra dio car bon dates are known from

70 G. Lengyel & Z. Mester

Ta ble 2Dis tri bu tion of lay ers in the cave

af ter Kadi³ 1916

Layer En trance Hall Main cor ri dorSide

cor ri dor

9 - - + +

8 - - + +

7 + + - -

6 + + + -

6a, b + - - +

5 - - + +

4 + + + +

3 + + + +

2 unexcavated + + -

1 unexcavated + unexcavated -

"creek"sed i ment

unexcavated + unexcavated -

bed rock unexcavated + unexcavated +

Ta ble 3Dis tri bu tion of lithic “fos sil mark ers” in the

Pleis to cene stra tig ra phy of Szeleta af ter Ringerand Mester, 2000

Ar chae o log i cal“fos sil

mark ers”6 6a/b 5 4

3upper

3lower

2upper

Gra vet tian + + + + +

Aurig na cian + + + + +

De vel opedSzeletian

+ + + +

EarlySzeletian

+

Jankovichian + + + + + + +

Mous terian + + + + + + +

Taubachien + +

Bábonyien + +

Szeleta Cave (Ta ble 4). Nine dates can be di videdinto two groups ac cord ing to their sam ple prov e -nances: two from the junc tion of the Main andSide cor ri dors in the Hall, and seven from thetrenches at the Entrance.

Among the ten dates one 41,700 14C BP(GXO-197) was ob tained from a bone sam ple ofun known prov e nance. The only avail able in for -ma tion is that the sam ple was se lected by Vértesfrom the fau nal re mains of Kadi³’s ex ca va tionand the bone was re trieved from the top of thelight brown Layer 3 (Geyh et al., 1969).

Dates from the Hall

In the Hall of Szeleta, Vértes took a bonesam ple in 1966 from the dark brown Layer 2, lo -cated just above the bed rock (Vértes, 1968: 384)and 6 me ters be low the orig i nal sur face, re sult ingin an age of 43,000 ± 1100 14C BP (GrN-6058;Vogel and Waterbolk, 1972: 62). Ac cord ing toVértes this date is as so ci ated with the low est oc -cur rence of the “Early” Szeletian (Vogel andWaterbolk, 1972: 62).

An other sam ple, again on bone, was taken in1999 at the bor der be tween Lay ers 2 and 3 in atrench dug par al lel to that of Vértes’ ex ca va tion.The sam ple pro duced the sim i lar date of 42,960 ±860 14C BP (ISGS-4464; Ad ams, 2002; Ad amsand Ringer, 2004; Ringer, 2002b).

Dates from the En trance

Dur ing the 1966 ex ca va tion, Vértes ob servedthree lay ers at the En trance: a gray, a gray ish

brown, and a brown one, that were cor re lated toLay ers 6, 4, and 3, re spec tively, of Kadi³’s ex ca -va tions (Vértes, 1968). Vértes sam pled a bonefound 3 m be neath the orig i nal sur face from thegray layer (claim ing cor re spon dence to Kadi³’sLayer 6), re sult ing in an age of 32,620 ± 400 14CBP (GrN-5130; Vogel and Waterbolk, 1972: 62).

At the En trance, Ad ams and Ringer in 1999con tin ued ex ca vat ing the 1966 trench of Vértessouth wards. In 1999, five dates were ob tainedfrom the lay ers of the En trance. In the cor re la tionof the sam pled lay ers to the stra tig ra phy of Ka-diæ’s ex ca va tion there was no com plete agree -ment be tween Ad ams and Ringer. Of the fivesam ples only the strati graphic po si tion of the firstwas in ter preted as be ing in ac cor dance. This sam -ple, a bone, taken from 0.7 m be neath the ac tualsur face, from a layer that was cor re lated withLayer 6a of Kadi³, gave an AMS date of 22,107 ± 130 14C BP (ISGS-A-0131; Ad ams, 2002; Ad amsand Ringer, 2004; Ringer, 2002b). The four otherdates were ob tained from deeper lev els of the En -trance stra tig ra phy. Two of these four sam ples,one char coal and one bone, were taken be tween2.50 and 2.60 m be neath the ac tual sur face andpro vided ages of 26,002 ± 182 14C BP (ISGS-A-0189) and 25,200 14C BP (ISGS-4460), re spec -tively (Ad ams, 2002; Ad ams and Ringer, 2004).In the first pub li ca tion of these dates, Ad ams(2002: 53) at trib uted the sam ples to Kadi³’sLayer 3, while Ringer (2002b: fig 2) first cor re -lated both sam ples, and then only ISGS-A-0189(Ringer’s 2nd foot note in Ad ams, 2002), withLayer 4. No ex pla na tion was given why Ringer

Ra dio car bon chro nol ogy of the Sze letian in Hun gary 71

Ta ble 4Ra dio car bon dates of the Szeleta Cave. ISGS-A codes in di cate ap pli ca tion of AMS method

Lab no 14C age BP Ma te rial Ex ca va tion Area Layer Ref er ence

GXO-197 >41,700 bone un known 3 Geyh et al. 1969

GrN-6058 43,000 ± 1100 bone Hall 2 Vogel & Waterbolk 1972

ISGS-4464 42,960 ± 860 bone Hall 2/3 in ter face Ad ams & Ringer 2004

GrN-5130 32,620 ± 400 bone En trance sec tion col lapse Vogel & Waterbolk 1972

ISGS-A-0131 22,107 ± 130 bone En trance sec tion col lapse Ad ams & Ringer 2004

ISGS-A-0189 26,002 ± 182 char coal En trance 3 Ad ams & Ringer 2004

ISGS-4460 >25,200 bone En trance 3 Ad ams & Ringer 2004

ISGS-A-0128 11,761 ± 62 bone En trance 3 Ad ams & Ringer 2004

ISGS-A-0129 13,885 ± 71 bone En trance 3 Ad ams & Ringer 2004

Un known 37,260 ± 760 un known En trance 3 Ringer 2002b

al tered the strati graphic at tri bu tion of sam ples. Inthe most re cent pub li ca tion of Szeleta dat ing, Ad -ams and Ringer (2004) con nected both these dates to Kadi³’s Layer 3. About 10 cm be neath the for -mer sam ples, two bones from a thin hearth fea ture were dated, re sult ing in ages of 11,761 ± 62 14CBP (ISGS-A-0128) and 13,885 ± 71 14C BP(ISGS-A-0129; Ad ams, 2002). Ad ams (2002: 53) cor re lated this hearth to the “hearth” of Kadi³’sLayer 3b. In con trast to this, Ringer claimed thatthe hearth is to be at trib uted to Layer 3c ofKadi³’s ex ca va tion (Ringer’s 3rd foot note in Ad -ams, 2002), which in deed was re cov ered in theHall and did not ex tend to the En trance area of the cave (Ringer and Szolyák, 2004). Re gard less ofstrati graphic at tri bu tion, both dates are sig nif i -

cantly youn ger than those from 10 cm above,which is likely due to post-depositional con tam i -na tion (Ad ams and Ringer, 2004). From the 1999En trance trench, Ringer (2002b: 50) pub lished afur ther date of 37,260 ± 760 14C BP from the topof Kadi³’s Layer 3, but un for tu nately did not in -clude a lab o ra tory code or any more de tailed sam -ple de scrip tion.

DIS CUS SION

Strati graphic con text of the dates

Layer 2It was ear lier claimed, based on pe trog ra phy

(Vértes, 1959: 85), that Layer 2 was formed fromre de pos ited ma te rial of an older layer that is oth -

72 G. Lengyel & Z. Mester

Fig. 4. Re con struc tion of the state of ex ca va tions in the En trance of Szeleta Cave be fore 1966 with the sec tionsof Vértes (1968) and Ad ams and Ringer (2004)

er wise not pre served at the site. De cades later,based mainly on the ar chae o log i cal as sign ment ofLayer 2 and the lower part of Layer 3 to a Mid dlePaleolithic of Taubachian and Bábonyian types, aLast Inter gla cial age was as sumed by Ringer(Ringer 1993: 129, 2002b; Ringer et al., 1995;Ringer and Mester, 2000). If this at tri bu tion wereac cepted, then the great age of these lay ers wouldrule out the pos si bil ity of any ra dio car bon dat ingand would in val i date any such date ob tained from these lay ers. Ev i dence against an Ox y gen Iso topeStage 5 age for Lay ers 2 and 3 at Szeleta in cludethe ver te brate mam mal re mains of both lay erswithin which cave bear bones dom i nate and othergla cial spe cies such as mam moth and rein deer arealso pres ent (Kadi³ 1916; Vörös, 2000: 190).This spec trum of fau nal re mains cor re lates to Ox -y gen Iso tope Stage 4 of Suba-lyuk Cave (Mester1994: 52, fig. 2.17.).

The sin gle date from Layer 2, 43,000 ± 110014C BP (GrN-6058), came from a sam ple takenfrom the junc tion of the Hall and the Main Cor ri -

dor. Here, Layer 2 was 1 m thick, while a few me -ters away it thick ens to a max i mum of 6 me ters.Al though the sam ple was taken from just abovethe bed rock, it re mains un known from whichstrati graphic po si tion within Layer 2 the sam ple is derived.

The date of 42,960 ± 860 14C BP (ISGS-4464) lacks a clear geo log i cal con text since thesam ple was taken from the in ter face of Lay ers 2and 3, which is marked by a clear un con formityre sult ing from of a ma jor hi a tus in the strati -graphic se quence. Thus, the strati graphic in teg rity of this date is to be re garded with scepticism.

Layer 3

Layer 3 ap pears to have suf fered great estfrom post-depositional dis tur bances. For ex am -ple, all bones and lime stone de bris found in Layer 3 have heavily weath ered sur faces. Sim i lar abra -sion can also be ob served on the lithics, which ap -pears as post-knapping abrupt pseudo-re touch.

Ra dio car bon chro nol ogy of the Sze letian in Hun gary 73

Fig. 5. Re con struc tion of the state of ex ca va tions in the Hall of Szeleta Cave be fore 1966 with the sec tions ofVértes (1968) and Ad ams and Ringer (2004)

Also, the sur faces of the artefacts and the ridgesbe tween the flake scars are of ten weath ered. Theweath er ing of all ar chae o log i cal ma te rial in Layer 3 most likely re sults from cryo tur ba tion (Kadi³,1916; Allsworth-Jones, 1986), de scribed also as“cryodeformation” (Ringer, 1988). In ad di tion tocryo tur ba tion, Szolyák’s study of the “hearth lev -els” (Layer 3a, 3b, 3c) (Ringer and Szolyák,2004) dem on strates that the hor i zon tal ex ten sionsof these hearth fea tures ex tended up to sev eralme ters and were most likely due to an cient wa terflow in the cave. The post-depositional dis tur -bance of this layer is also ev i denced by thechronometric range and re versed se quence ofdates in the En trance trench. It is thus clear thatsam pling “in situ” ma te rial from Layer 3 for ra -dio car bon dat ing is and was im pos si ble.

Un cer tain geo log i cal con text

The strati graphic in teg rity of two dates fromthe En trance, 32,620 ± 400 14C BP (GrN-5130)from Vértes’ ex ca va tion and 22,107 ± 130 14C BP (ISGS-A-0131) from the ex ca va tion of Ad amsand Ringer, can not be as sumed. Re con struc tion of the lo ca tion and the vol ume of the ex ca vated ar eas (Fig ures 3, 4, 5) in the En trance in di cates that thearea be tween the cave mouth and the val ley slopewas last ex ca vated in 1913 (Mester, 2002: 70, Fig. 16). The ex ca va tions in 1906–1913 re moved theup per 2 m of the cave fill (Lev els I–IV) andstopped at the top of Layer 3. The lo ca tion of the1966 and 1999 En trance trenches falls ex actlywithin this ex ca vated area. Thus, their stra tig ra -phy should start here in Kadi³’s Layer 3, with outany over ly ing lay ers be ing ev i dent. Nev er the less,the 1966 and 1999 sec tions re veal lay ers con tain -ing large lime stone blocks above Layer 3. It isknown from Mottl (1945: 1553) that the sec tionsof Kadi³’s ex ca va tions at the En trance were col -lapsed to the ex tent that they could not be cor re -lated with the orig i nal draw ings. Since this areawas not ex posed again, and Vértes em pha sized inhis re port the lack of a fine sed i ment frac tionamong the stones but did not rec og nize that thiswas due to the re cent in fill ing of the area, the up -per mem bers of the 1966 and 1999 ex ca va tionsmust rep re sent part of the sec tions that col lapsedsome time be tween 1913 and the 1960s. Con se -quently, the dates of 32,620 ± 400 14C BP

(GrN-5130) and 22,107 ± 130 14C BP (ISGS-A-0131) most likely de rive from mixed strati graphic ma te rial dat ing to dis pa rate pe ri ods.

Ar chae o log i cal con text of the dates

Al most all of the dates dis cussed here lackclear ar chae o log i cal con texts. For ex am ple,Vértes did not find any lithics in the sam pled lay -ers dur ing his 1966 ex ca va tion (Vértes, 1968:382–383), and the ar chae o log i cal ma te rial fromthe 1999 ex ca va tion, ex cept one ob sid ian bladelet core found 20 cm above the sam ple dated to 26.0ka 14C BP (ISGS-A-0189; Ad ams, 2007: 65),remains unpublished.

One date linked to ar chae o log i cal ma te rial,GXO-197 ( 41,700 14C BP), was ob tained from asam ple of Kadi³’s ex ca va tion of the up per part of Layer 3. Un for tu nately, this date, as men tionedabove, has no rel e vant prov e nance, and thus could be as so ci ated with any part of the cave whereLayer 3 was ob served and with any ar ti factsfound within this layer. Pre vi ously, all lithicsfrom Layer 3 were as so ci ated with the “Early”Szeletian (Vértes, 1965; Allsworth-Jones, 1986),and then with the “Early” Szeletian and Aurig na -cian (Svoboda and Simán 1989). Since Ringer’sre cent re view of the lithic ar ti facts from Kadi³’sLayer 3 high lights the pres ence of sev eral “fos silmark ers” (Ringer, 2002a, b; Ringer and Mester,2000), the GXO-197 ( 41,700 14C BP) date couldbe linked with Mous terian, Jankovichian, “Early”Szeletian, Gra vet tian, and Aurig na cian ar ti facts.

The sam ple from Layer 3 dated to 26.0 ka 14CBP date (ISGS-A-0189) by Ad ams and Ringerwas found in close as so ci a tion with the pub lishedob sid ian bladelet core. The use of ob sid ian forlam i nar pro duc tion in the ter ri tory of Hun gary ap -peared first in the Early Gra vet tian con text ofBodrogkeresztúr-Henye, lo cated in north east ernHun gar ian Zemplén Moun tains, and has beendated to ca. 28.0 ka 14C BP (Dobosi, 2000).There fore the as so ci a tion of an ob sid ian bladeletcore with Mous terian type im ple ments (Szeletianand Jankovichian leaf points) in Layer 3 must, asshown by Ringer, re sult from mix ing be tweenthese and Gravettian lithic assemblages.

Ad mix ture of dif fer ent types of lithic tools isnot ex cep tional to Layer 3. Each dated layer con -tains a mix ture of re mains from at least four

74 G. Lengyel & Z. Mester

Paleolithic cul tural en ti ties (Ta ble 3). Al thoughRinger and Mester (2000) claim the con tem po ra -ne ous and/or al ter nate pres ence of sev eral Up perand Mid dle Paleolithic cul tural en ti ties in Szeleta, the taphonomy of the lithics, in clud ing refittingsbe tween Lay ers 4 and 6a in the En trance by one of us (Zs. M.) (Ringer and Mester, 2000: 266) im plythat ar chae o log i cal cul tural interstratifications are best ex plained by post-depositional dis tur bancesthat ver ti cally dis placed ar ti facts be tween lay ers(e.g., Bordes, 2003; Villa, 1982). These data em -pha size the fact that none of the dated sam ples arede rived from secure, in situ archaeologicalcontexts.

CON CLU SION

At Szeleta Cave, ev i dence for the pres ence ofsev eral Paleolithic “fos sil mark ers” within a sin -gle layer in di cates ex ten sive strati graphic dis -place ment of ar ti facts over thou sands of years.The agency of dis place ment in the cave, as yet un -known, also dis placed or ganic re mains that wereused for ra dio car bon dat ing, as ev i denced for in -stance by the wide range of dates from 41,700 toca. 11,000 14C BP within Layer 3. In such a case,it is im pos si ble to as sign dates to specificarcheological entities.

Un cer tain cor re la tions be tween lay ers ex ca -vated re cently and those ex posed by Kadi³ arealso of sig nif i cance. Such un cer tain ties are bestrep re sented by the 1999 ex ca va tion, dur ing which the ex ca va tors could not agree how to cor re latethe sam ples taken for 14C dat ing with Kadi³’sorig i nal stra tig ra phy.

Based on the ap par ent mix ture of both or -ganic and lithic re mains, and se ri ous un cer tain ties in link ing 14C dates to geo log i cal and es pe ciallyar che o log i cal units, none of the ra dio car bon dates can be se curely as so ci ated with any oc cu pa tion ofthe cave. Tak ing also into ac count the rig or ous re -quire ments for tak ing and se lect ing sam ples for14C dat ing (Waterbolk, 1971; Pettitt et al., 2003;Vermeersch, 2005), we claim that at pres ent theab so lute chro no log i cal po si tion of the Szeletian in Hungary remains unknown.

Ac knowl edg ments

We wish to ex press our thanks to László Kordoswho kindly per mit ted use of plan and sec tion draw ings

of Hun gar ian caves that are kept at the Hun gar ian Geo -log i cal In sti tute. We are grate ful to the two re view ersof an ear lier draft of this pa per for their con struc tivecom ments and to the ed i tors of this vol ume for im prov -ing our Eng lish text. This study was sup ported by the“János Bolyai” Re search Fel low ship of the Hun gar ianAcad emy of Sci ences.

REF ER ENCESAD AMS B. 1998. The Mid dle to Up per Paleolithic

tran si tion in Cen tral Eu rope. The re cord from theBükk Moun tain re gion. BAR In ter na tional Se ries693, Archaeopress, Ox ford.

AD AMS B. 2002. New ra dio car bon dates from Szeletaand Istállós-ko caves, Hun gary. Praehistoria 3,53–55.

AD AMS B. 2007. Gulyás ar chae ol ogy: the Szeletianand the Mid dle to Up per Palaeo lithic tran si tion inHun gary and Cen tral Eu rope. In: J. Riel-Salvatore,G. A. Clark (eds.) New ap proaches to the study ofEarly Up per Palaeo lithic ‘tran si tional’ in dus tries in West ern Eur asia. Tran si tions great and small. BARIn ter na tional Se ries 1620, Archaeopress, Ox ford,91–110.

AD AMS B., RINGER Á. 2004. New C14 dates for theHun gar ian Early Up per Palaeo lithic. Cur rent An -thro pol ogy 45, 541–551.

ALLSWORTH-JONES P. 1986. The Szeletian and thetran si tion from Mid dle to Up per Palaeo lithic inCen tral Eu rope. Clar en don Press, Ox ford.±

BORDES J.-G. 2003. Lithic taphonomy of the Châtel-perronian/Aurig na cian interstratifications in Roc deCombe and Le Piage (Lot, France). In: J. Zilh±o, F.d’Errico (eds.) The Chro nol ogy of the Aurig na cianand of the Tran si tional Technocomplexes. Dat ing,Stratigraphies, Cul tural Im pli ca tions. Trabalhos deArqueologia 33, Instituto PortuguÃs de Arqueolo-gia, Lis bon, 223–244.

DOBOSI V.T. (ed.) 2000. Bodrogkeresztúr–Henye (NE Hun gary), Up per Palaeo lithic site. Hun gar ian Na -tional Mu seum, Bu da pest.

GÁBORI M. 1964. A késoi paleolitikum Mag yar-országon. Régészeti tanulmányok III, AkadémiaiKiadó, Bu da pest.

GÁBORI M. 1990. Aperçus sur l’origine des civili sa -tions du Paléolithique supérieur en Hongrie. In: C.Farizy (dir.) Paléolithique moyen récent et Paléo-lithique supérieur an cien en Eu rope. Rup tures ettransitions : examen cri tique des doc u ments archéo- logiques. Mémoires du Musée de Préhistoire d’Ilede France 3, Ed. A.P.R.A.I.F., Nemours, 103–106.

GEYH M. A., SCHWEITZER F., VÉRTES L.,VOGEL J. C. 1969. A magyarországi würmi eljege- sedés új kronológiai adatai. (Neue chronologische

Ra dio car bon chro nol ogy of the Sze letian in Hun gary 75

Angaben zur Würm-Vereisung in Ungarn.) Föld-rajzi Értesíto 18, 5–18.

KADI� O. 1916. Ergebnisse der Erforschung derSzeletahöhle. Mitteilungen aus dem Jahrbuch derkgl. Ungarischen Geologischen Reichsanstalt 23,161–301.

MESTER Zs. 1994. A bükki moustérien revíziója. CSc.The sis, Bu da pest, manu script.

MESTER Zs. 2002. Ex ca va tions at Szeleta Cave be fore 1999: Meth od ol ogy and over view. Praehistoria 3,57–78.

MOTTL M. 1945. Bericht über die Ergebnisse der Gra- bungen der Jahre 1936/38, sowie über die Tätigkeitder Vertebratenabteilung der kgl. ung. Geol. Ans-talt. Jahresberichte der Ung. Geologischen Anstaltüber die Jahre 1936-1938, IV. Band, 1553–1585.

PETTITT P. B., DAVIES W., GAM BLE C. S., RICH -ARDS M. B. 2003. Palaeo lithic ra dio car bon chro -nol ogy: quan ti fy ing our con fi dence be yond twohalf-lives. Jour nal of Ar chae o log i cal Sci ence 30,1685–1693.

PROŠEK F. 1953. Szeletien na Slovensku. (LeSzeletien en Slovaquie.) Slovenská Archeologia 1,133–194.

RINGER Á. 1988. Pos si ble cor re la tions be tween loessand cave de posit stratigraphies for the Up per Pleis -to cene in Hun gary. In: M. Pécsi, L. Starkel (eds)Paleogeography of Carpathian Re gions. Pro ceed -ings of the Pol ish-Hun gar ian PaleogeographicalSem i nar, Tata, Hun gary, Oc to ber 16-22. Geo graph -ical Re search In sti tute of the Hun gar ian Acad emyof Sci ences, Bu da pest, 65–85.

RINGER Á. 1989. L’origine du Szélétien de Bükk enHongrie et son évolution vers le Paléolithique supé-rieur. Anthropologie (Brno) 27, 223–229.

RINGER Á. 1993. Északkelet-magyarországi geomor-fológiai szintek és régészeti adataik. Felso-pleisz-tocén folyóteraszok, löszök és barlangi üledékekkronosztratigráfiai rendszere. CSc. The sis,Miskolc, manu script.

RINGER Á. 2002a. The chronostratigraphy andpalaeo-humanecology of the Mid dle and Up perPalaeolithic in North east Hun gary, be tween 130,000 and 10,000 BP. Praehistoria 3, 39–46.

RINGER Á. 2002b. The new im age of Szeleta andIstállós-ko caves in the Bükk Moun tains: a re vi sionpro ject be tween 1999-2002. Praehistoria 3, 47–52.

RINGER Á., MESTER Zs. 2000. Résultats de la révi-sion de la grotte Szeleta entreprises en 1999 et 2000. Anthropologie (Brno) 38, 261–270.

RINGER Á., SZOLYÁK P. 2004. A Szeleta-barlangtuzhelyeinek és paleolit leleteinek topográfiai éssztratigráfiai eloszlása. Adalékok a leletegyüttesújraértékeléséhez. (The top o graphic and strati -graphic dis tri bu tion of the Palaeo lithic hearths and

finds in the Szeleta Cave. Con tri bu tion to re-in ter -pre ta tion of the as sem blage.) Herman Ottó MúzeumÉvkönyve 43, 13–32.

RINGER Á., KORDOS L., KROLOPP E. 1995. Lecomplexe Bábonyien-Szélétien en Hongrie du nord- est dans son cadre chronologique et environne-mental. In: Les in dus tries ´ pointes foliacéesd’Europe centrale. Actes du Colloque de Miskolc,10-15 septembre 1991. Paléo – Supplément n° 1,Juin 1995, 27–30.

SAÁD A. 1929. A Bükk-hegységben végzett újabbkutatások eredményei. Archaeologiai Értesíto 43,238–247.

SIMÁN K. 1990. Con sid er ations on the “Szeletianunity”. In: J. K. Kozlowski (éd.) Feuilles de pi erre.Les in dus tries ´ pointes foliacées du Paléolithiquesupérieur européen. E.R.A.U.L. 42, LiÀge,189–198.

SIMÁN K. 1995. La grotte Szeleta et le Szélétien. In:Les in dus tries ´ pointes foliacées d’Europecentrale. Actes du Colloque de Miskolc, 10-15septembre 1991. Paléo – Supplément n° 1, 1995,37–43.

SVOBODA J., SIMÁN K. 1989. The Mid dle-Up perPaleolithic tran si tion in South east ern Cen tral Eu -rope (Czecho slo va kia and Hun gary). Jour nal ofWorld Pre his tory 3, 283–322.

VERMEERSCH P. M. 2005. Eu ro pean pop u la tionchanges dur ing Ma rine Iso tope Stages 2 and 3. Qua -ter nary In ter na tional 137, 77–85.

VÉRTES L. 1959. Untersuchungen an Höhlensedi-menten. Methode und Ergebnisse. Régészeti Füze-tek Ser. II 7, Mag yar Nemzeti Múzeum – TörténetiMúzeum, Bu da pest.

VÉRTES L. 1965. Az oskokor és az átmeneti kokoremlékei Magyarországon. A Mag yar RégészetKézikönyve I, Akadémiai Kiadó, Bu da pest.

VÉRTES L. 1968. Szeleta-Sym po sium in Ungarn4.–11. Sep tem ber 1966. Quartär 19, 381–390.

VILLA P. 1982. Conjoinable pieces and site for ma tionpro cesses. Amer i can An tiq uity 47, 276–290.

VOGEL J. C., WATERBOLK H. T. 1972. Groningenra dio car bon dates X. Ra dio car bon 14, 6–110.

VÖRÖS I., 2000. Macro-mam mal re mains on Hun gar -ian Up per Pleis to cene sites. In: V. T. Dobosi (ed.)Bodrogkeresztúr–Henye (NE Hun gary), Up perPalaeolithic site. Hun gar ian Na tional Mu seum, Bu -da pest, 186–212.

WATERBOLK H. T. 1971. Work ing with ra dio car bondates. Pro ceed ings of the Pre his toric So ci ety 37,15–33.

76 G. Lengyel & Z. Mester