The orientation of rondels of the

Neolithic Lengyel culture in

Central Europe
Emı́lia Pásztor1 , Judit P. Barna2 & Curt Roslund 3

The rondels – circular earthworks of late Neolithic Europe – have a repeated form highly
suggestive of deliberate design and symbolism. The concentric ditches are cut by two, three or most
often four causeways at right angles. Here the authors investigate the orientation of the causeways
in 51 rondels belonging to the Lengyel culture and conclude that they correlate well with the
sunrise. The idea of a solar cult receives some corroboration from patterns on contemporary
pottery.
Keywords: Central Europe, Carpathian Basin, late Neolithic, Lengyel culture, rondels,
orientation, sun

Introduction
With minor differences, the late Neolithic earthworks called rondels (Petrasch 1990: 418-9;
Trnka 2005), are contemporary and share a common plan: circular with entrance causeways
(Trnka 1991). They appear in several archaeological cultures of the early fifth millennium
BC, cultures which developed from the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) culture (Kalicz 1983-
84: 281-2; Neugebauer & Maresch 1995). The highest uniformity in the architectural
design of these earthworks is shown by those of the Lengyel culture, which is spread across
Transdanubia in the Carpathian Basin, in south Slovakia, in east Austria and south Moravia
(Figure 1). Their principal features are the single or multiple circular ditches, broken by two
or more openings (causeways), which provide entrances to the inner space (Petrasch 1990:
Abb. 26; Daim & Neubauer 2005). The arrangement of the causeways is often symmetrical
or nearly so. Generally there are no traces of structures within the enclosure, or if there are,
the buildings avoid the centrepoint.
The earliest examples were excavated in Transdanubia, Hungary, at Sé (Károlyi 1983-
84: 294-307; Kalicz 1998: 57-62, Abb. 21) and Sormás (Barna 2007). They are assumed
to be multi-purpose (Kovárnı́k et al. 2006), with a preference for a ritual interpretation
since in most cases the ditches and causeways show few defensive properties. The case
for a ritual function is also strengthened by small figurines unearthed close to or in the

1
Matrica Museum, HU-2440 Szazhalombatta, Hungary (Email: emipasztor@freemail.hu)
2
Balatoni Museum, HU – 8360 Keszthely, Hungary (Email: pbarnajudit@yahoo.hu)
3
Department of Astronomy, Gothenburg University, SE-41296 Gothenburg, Sweden
Received: 17 December 2007; Accepted: 20 March 2008; Revised: 1 May 2008
ANTIQUITY 82 (2008): 910–924
910
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

Research
Figure 1. Map of the sites listed in Table 1.

ditches (Podborský 1985: 210; Kalicz 1998: 65; Barna 2007) although the nature of the
rite is uncertain (Hansen 2007). In some cases (such as Bučany, Schletz, Tĕšetice-Kyjovice,
Svodı́n or Sé) the special finds lie in or near one of the entrances (all but one are eastern
or southern), strengthening the significant role of the causeways (Petrasch 2004; Podborský
2004; Ruttkay 2004; 2005; Kalicz 2007). Archaeological investigations have also suggested
that each enclosure might have belonged to a larger social community serving several
settlements (Kazdová &Weber 1990: 167).

911
 Table 1. Data of the investigated Lengyel enclosures, with four, three, two and several causeways. See Figure 1 for site locations where numbered.
Four causeways ˚N ˚E ˚S ˚W Reference

1. Würnitz-Hornsburg (Au) 353 86 179 262 Daim & Neubauer 2005

The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

2. Friebritz 1 (Au) 10 91 191 – Trnka 1991; Daim & Neubauer 2005
3. Stiefern (Au) 352 65 138 250 Daim & Neubauer 2005
4. Velm (Au) 70 Daim & Neubauer 2005
5. Gauderndorf (Au) 341 169 Daim & Neubauer 2005
6. Immendorf (Au) 14 101 206 281 Daim & Neubauer 2005
7. Kamegg (Au) 7 101 187 276 Daim & Neubauer 2005
8. Gnadendorf (Au) – 105 190 289 Daim & Neubauer 2005
9. Mühlbach am Manhartsberg (Au) 13 106 197 300 Daim & Neubauer 2005
10. Kleinrötz (Au) 25 115 209 295 Daim & Neubauer 2005
11. Pranhartsberg (Au) 32 120 214 296 Daim & Neubauer 2005
12. Steinabrunn (Au) 34 120 198 284 Daim & Neubauer 2005
13. Plank am Kamp (Au) 8 118 277 Daim & Neubauer 2005
912

14. Rosenburg (Au) 147 327 Trnka 1991; Daim & Neubauer 2005
26. Němčičky (M) 359 85 179 265 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
27. Rašovice (M) 350 70 160 250 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
28. Vedrovice (M) 354 80 174 260 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
29. Tešětice-Kyjovice (M) 355 82 178 262 Petrasch 1990
30. Běhařovice (M) 12 102 192 282 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
31. Cifer-Pác (Sl) 57 143 239 338 Kuzma & Tirpak 2002; Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
32. Ružindol-Borová (Sl) 25 – Němejcová-Pavúková 1997
33. Bučany (Sl) 20 115 199 295 Petrasch 1990
34. Žlkovce (Sl) 343 75 163 255 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
35. Horné Otrokovce (Sl) 45 120 (218) 314 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
36. Podhorany-Mechenice (Sl) 10 114 193 294 Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
37. Žitavce (Sl) 352 82 ? 262 Kuzma & Tirpák 2003
38. Šurany (Sl) 5 95(?) 185 280 Točik 1987
39. Svodin 1 (Sl) 55 (151) 231 335 Petrasch 1990; Němejcová-Pavúková 1995; Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
40. Svodin 2 (Sl) 45 (135) 225 313 Petrasch 1990; Němejcová-Pavúková 1995; Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004
 41. Sé (Hu) 75 Károlyi 1983–84; Kalicz 1998
42. Sormás–Törökföldek-I. (Hu) 75 180 Barna & Pásztor, in press
44. Nagykanizsa- Palin (Hu) 108 Tokai unpublished
Bylany (Cz) 350 80 170 260 Trnka 1991
Lochenice (Cz) 347 77 167 257 Trnka 1991
Polgár-Cs´oszhalom
´ (Hu) 41 124 203 295 Raczky et al. 1997; 2005
NE angle ES angle EW angle
Mean 89.2˚ 89.6˚ 179.7˚

Three causeways I. II. III.

Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

15. Porrau (Au) 347˚ 113˚ 218˚ Daim & Neubauer 2005
16. Oberthern (Au) 323˚ 100˚ 187˚ Daim & Neubauer 2005
Two causeways ˚E ˚W
11. Pranhartsberg (Au) 121 310 Daim & Neubauer 2005
17. Puch (Au) 63 239 Daim & Neubauer 2005
18. Hornsburg (2) (Au) 108 278 Daim & Neubauer 2005
Hornsburg (3) (Au) 71 259 Daim & Neubauer 2005
913

19. Michelstetten (Au) 70 240 Daim & Neubauer 2005

20. Schletz (Au) 75 245 Daim & Neubauer 2005
21. Simonsfeld (Au) 78 256 Daim & Neubauer 2005
22. Strögen (Au) 103 278 Daim & Neubauer 2005
23. Moosbierbaum (Au) 102 271 Daim & Neubauer 2005
24. Karnabrunn (Au) 105 295 Daim & Neubauer 2005
25. Ölkam 118 294 Daim & Neubauer 2005
EW angle
Mean 177.9˚

Several causeways I. II. III. IV. V.

26. Glaubendorf 2 (Au) 329˚ 82˚ 142˚ 198˚ 268˚ Daim & Neubauer 2005
27. Altruppersdorf (Au) 318˚ 225˚ Daim & Neubauer 2005
43. Sormás-Törökföldek II. (Hu) 340˚ 7˚ 255˚ 284˚ Barna & Pásztor, in press

Research
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

The Lengyel rondels and astronomy

Research into the possible astronomical significance of features found in the enclosures was
inspired by work done on the British henges, although these are some 1800 years later.
The study was also prompted by the fact that the axes of the four-causeway rondels are
nearly perpendicular to each other, suggesting the idea of orientation towards four cardinal
points. Although exact measurements of the sites did not correlate with the cardinal points,
interest in the possible astronomical significance of their design has not diminished. The
growing popularity of archaeoastronomy has given further impetus to the continuation of
such lines of research (Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004; Daim & Neubauer 2005: Teil 3). Most
of these investigations, however, are characterised by the very small number of monuments
studied.
The natural candidates for the rationale
of orientation were the sun, moon and
stars. The first investigations of some
Lengyel enclosures along with a few LBK
earthworks concluded that these were solar
orientations with a preference for the
equinoxes and the solstices (Iwaniszewski
1996: 18-9). At the Austrian Glaubendorf
2 rondel the equinoctial sun settings
could have been seen along the western
causeway (Neubauer 2005: 56; Figure 2).
Investigations of virtual reconstructions of
these enclosures have drawn attention to
the fact that other construction elements
such as openings or holes cut into the
Figure 2. Ground plan of Glaubendorf 2 (after Daim & palisades as well as poles could also have
Neubauer 2005). Scale = 100m. played a role in the observation of celestial
phenomena. In the case of the Austrian
Steinabrunn rondel, a pole has been argued
to have been placed on the left side of the south-east causeway in order that the Pleiades’
rising could be seen above it. It has also been alleged that there are monuments aligned with
bright stars, such as Antares or Deneb, or star constellations instead of the sun (Gervautz &
Neubauer 2005: 73).
Beside the sun and the stars, the moon also has been listed as a possible target for
alignment. The ground plan of the Slovakian site of Žlkovce, which is regarded as a ruling
and/or sacred centre (Pavúk 1998: 186), is said to be oriented to the southern minor
turning-point of the moon (Karlovský & Pavúk 2002). It is alleged that this phenomenon
was observed by looking from the south-eastern causeway and along the south-western one
(Pavúk & Karlovský 2004: Obr. 29). However, on the basis of the orientational values, this
palisade enclosure belongs to the set of sun-oriented monuments, as we shall see (Figure 3;
Table 1).

914
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

Research

Figure 3. The ground plan of Žlkovce, with structures aligned to the southern causeway (after Pavúk & Karlovsky 2004:
Obr. 4). Largest diameter = 82m; shortest = 67m.

The investigated rondels

The present paper focuses exclusively on the rondels of the Lengyel culture, which are
mapped on Figure 1, listed in Table 1 and the orientations summarised in Figure 4. The
orientation of the published plans, where checked on the ground, was found to be accurate
to within 1◦ . The orientation is measured in a clockwise direction from the north. The

915
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

Figure 4. Distribution of the orientations of the eastern causeways listed in Table 1.

causeways have been ranked according to the main cardinal point to which their orientation
was the nearest.
The orientation for each causeway was assessed separately, on the assumption that it was
its alignment (rather than the alignment of the line linking the causeway to a hypothetical
centrepoint of the enclosure) that was significant. The lack of any archaeological feature at
the centre supports this premise, as well as the maintenance of the causeway axis where it
crosses multiple ditch systems.
The builders of the rondels seem to have striven for symmetry in their ground plans. If
a rondel has four openings the axes are roughly perpendicular to each other. If the rondel
has only two causeways, they mark a diameter of the enclosure. This effort of the builders
to produce a symmetrical ground plan has allowed the authors to develop another premise,
namely that the direction of a single causeway had a significant meaning for the community
when they set out the monument. Other causeways were then added to give a symmetrical
design. Deviations from exact symmetry may be attributed to measuring or staking methods,
natural obstacles or in some cases the vast dimensions of the rondels.

The possible targets for orientation

The deviation in orientation between rondels is relatively small. In the case of the eastern
causeways, for example, it is + ◦
−19 , which suggests alignment with a very distant object,
such as a celestial body. If the target had been local, such as a sacred mountain, the variation
would have been higher. So the question arises as to which celestial objects could have been
used.
The primary candidate is always the sun, which as an essential element of life must have
played an important role in the life of a sedentary, agriculturally-based Neolithic community.
The regularity of the sun’s daily and yearly motions is easily appreciated and orientating
monuments or even graves to its position would not have presented major difficulties. We
argue here that the location of the sun at sunrise played an essential role in setting out the
directions for the causeways. This hypothesis is supported by the two-causeway enclosures
which are aligned in an east-west direction. If the builders used the rising sun as a reference
point for the eastern causeway on the day they began construction, their orientation would

916
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

fall between the summer and winter solstice sunrises. Taking an average geographical latitude
of 48.5◦ for the Slovakian and Austrian enclosures, the orientations of the eastern causeways
should fall within about + ◦
−38 from due east; for the Hungarian southernmost site of
Sormás with geographical latitude of 46.5◦ , the above mentioned value is approximately

Research
+
−36 .
◦

The orientations of 44 eastern causeways from the 51 enclosures investigated meet this
criterion. Five of the remaining seven have yet to have their eastern causeways excavated.
The orientations of only two, Cifer-Pác and Rosenburg, do not conform. This seems to be
also true for the eastern surveyed (but still unexcavated) causeway of Svodin 2 on the base of
symmetry. It has rather been argued that these three openings are aligned with the moon’s
turning (standstill) points (Pavúk & Karlovský 2004).
Although the moon has always played a significant role in human cultures according to
the historical and ethnographical sources, orientation to its rising or setting points at the
horizon is much more difficult than that of the sun because of its rapid and complex motion.
The further back in the past we go, the more uncertain the exact values of turning points
are. These calculations are quite reliable as far back as 2000 BC but values for the time of
the enclosures (4800-4500 BC) can only be conjectured. The motion of the moon raises
further problems for orientation. The moon cannot always be seen rising at the turning
points (Roslund et al. 1999: 109-10). Thus the expected event that has been awaited over a
period of 18.6 years loses its purpose and meaning. If the event is not observed on the very
date, 3 days later the difference is already 8◦ . This means that the Neolithic observers had
to know the exact day of the turning point in order to orientate a monument to it, which is
quite implausible.
A possibility for these sites is that they were still oriented with the sun, but sightings were
taken a few hours after it rose. Alternatively the sun might be used at its zenith rather than
its rising. If it was, the directions of the south causeways of the rondels should cluster closely
around the south, which is not the case. Although the rising points change between two
limits (the midwinter and midsummer ones) the south direction is always the same during
the year. Alternatively, the orientation might depend on a remembered direction, such as
the homeland in the case of the south-east orientation of LBK longhouses (Bradley 2001).
It has also been proposed that some orientations focus on stars (Gervautz & Neubauer
2005). Might a star, a constellation or their attached myths have been so important for
a social group that they orientated their monument to its rising or setting? The historical
and ethnographical written sources tells us what role the stars played in bearing or time
reckoning, but so far no monument has been found in Europe aligned with stars. With
respect to the Lengyel rondels, data from one or two monuments selected from a large group
of sites are rarely enough to verify such an astronomical orientation in Neolithic Central
Europe.
Assuming that a celestial phenomenon had so much influence on the life of a prehistoric
social group, that the community was motivated to integrate some aspect of its appearance
in the sky into their cult/communal structures, such a celestially motivated impact should
be reflected somehow in other archaeological features as well. While the sun can be
recognised clearly (see below), the moon is more uncertain and the stars are even more
elusive.

917
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

Additional evidence for a solar cult

The important role of the sun in the religious life of the Lengyel culture can also be
supported by other archaeological evidence, notably the motifs on pottery of the rondel-
building period (Figures 5-9). These take the form of colourful eye-catching circles assumed
to be solar symbols (Károlyi 2004). It has been argued that in the Bulgarian Neolithic the
principal sources for such symbolism were partly the colours of the natural environment
(Chapman 2003: 41). The major colours might have been based on the sky with a yellow
and/or gold sun and a blue background, the sea, the earth along with the additional features
of fire and/or blood (Chapman 2003: 43). Ethnographic and linguistic studies show that
basic colours can express certain universal human experiences of the surrounding world. In
many languages the words for yellow often denote warmth coming from the sun (Wierzbicka
1990: 115-25). The metaphoric meaning assigned to the colour of the objects by the local
ideologies might have played an initial role in producing the artefacts. This might be the case
especially with the fine painted pottery, which were created for special use. The significance
of colour symbolism in Lengyel culture is also strengthened by the fact that during the
early rondel building period, the red and yellow – the possible sun colours – are particularly
evident, which is not the case later. Prominent solar symbolism is also represented in the
assemblage of miniature vessels and sun discs with figurines which were discovered inside a
central house of the unique rondel at Polgár-Cs´ószhalom, Hungary (Raczky et al. 1996; here
Figure 5) The closest parallel to these decorative objects comes from Ovčarovo (Bulgaria),
where depictions of the sun can be found painted onto small altars (Todorova 1982; here
Figure 6).

Discussion
Arguments for the investigated Lengyel rondels, which are the most regular ones among
the Neolithic earthworks in Central Europe (Zalai-Gál 1990: 20), can be summarised as
follows:
r The direction of the rising sun offers a good interpretation for the orientation of the
regular ground plans with the symmetrically arranged causeways.
r If the orientations of the eastern causeways are plotted on a chart, some groupings can
be defined, but no midsummer/midwinter or true east preference can be demonstrated.
r The orientations of just three of the 48 investigated enclosures cannot be correlated
with the actual daily sunrise. If they used the sun, the setting out of these monuments
must have been performed one or two hours later.
r There is corroborating evidence from images on contemporary pottery, which may be
associated with solar symbols.
Most researchers suggest that the orientations of these circular earthworks might have
had a calendrical function as well. The rising or setting of celestial objects observed through
the causeways might have marked important days in their calendar (Gervautz & Neubauer
2005), such as the winter or summer solstice which might have signalled the middle of the
seasons but not their beginning as is the case today (Zotti 2005: 76-7, Abb 3.6). Although
early medieval Irish literature might support the existence of an ancient pan-Celtic calendar,

918
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

Research
Figures 5–7. 5) The sacral assemblage of Polgár-Cs´ószhalom (after the museum guide of the Hungarian National Museum).
6) Finds from the assemblage of Ovčarovo (after Todorova 1982: Figure 33). 7) The representation of the sun on a sherd
from Sé (after Károlyi 2004: 90.2. ábra).

which divided the year with the mid-quarter days the earliest evidence for such a calendrical
division comes from the medieval period (Hutton 1996: 408-11). The old Estonian and
Finnish computation of time had also four turning points during the year, but they might
have had connections with the weather not the sun’s motion (Vilkuna 1961: 80). Therefore
the apparent mid-quarter-day-orientation for some rondels (Zotti 2005) is most likely
nothing more than a coincidence.
Numerous ethnographical investigations report how many peoples favour the southern
direction as well, when the life-giving power of the sun reaches its highest point. The façades
of several structures inside the rondel of Žlkovce must have faced the southern causeway as
the extended long axes or walls meet at this gate (Figure 3; Pavúk & Karlovsky̆ 2004: Obr.
4). The southern entrance was also emphasised at the circular enclosure of Svodin 2 by a
deposition of fragments of clay figurines (Ruttkay 2004).

919
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

Figure 8a–b. Reconstruction of painted wares, Sormás-Török-Földek: a) Barna 2007; b) unpublished.

Figure 9. Bowls with red radial line paintings (after Daim & Neubauer 2005: Abb 1.20).

920
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund

There are indications that the sun was also acknowledged in burial rite. In the cemeteries
the deceased were often buried with their faces to the south or east. That was the case
at Zeng´óvárkony, Aszód (Kalicz 1985: 35-6), Veszprém (Regenye 2006: 14) and Mórágy-
T´úzköves (Zalai-Gaál 2002: 42).

Research
Solar symbolism might also have been integrated into the design of some settlements with
rondels. The tell settlement at Polgár-Cs´ószhalom surrounded by five ditches is considered
to be a sacred complex representing the relation of the Lengyel and the Herpály cul-
tures. The arrangement of the whole structure might symbolise a sun-orientated belief
system. The houses inside the rondel with their radial-arranged long axis faced the central
buildings, like the rays of the sun (Raczky et al. 1997). A similar house arrangement
was found outside the smaller rondel at Svodin as well. Thus the architectural design of
the rondel and the houses make up an architectural unit (Němejcová-Pavúková 1995). A
possible correlation between the south-eastern causeway of the Polgár-Cs´ószhalom rondel
and the mean direction of the houses of its outside one level settlement (Raczky et al. 2005:
Figure 3) might also strengthen the solar symbolism as the sun rises in this direction at winter
solstice.
Folk traditions and ethnographic records report a probable association between circular
enclosures solar cults and agrarian festivals (Dömötör 1983; Ujváry 1991). Eligius (Eloi),
bishop of Noyon (c . AD 588-90 to 659/660) commented on the midsummer festival: ‘Not
a single Christian should believe in pyres, assemble to sing, as these are the devil’s machinations.
No one is allowed to celebrate the midsummer, to build earthwork(s), to dance a dance, to
practise magic and to sing diabolic songs at St. John’s or any other saints’ festivities’ (Dömötör
1983 after Liungman 1938: II.525). It cannot be clarified what exactly ‘build earthwork’
means here as there is no more detailed description, but there is an implication that the
creation of (circular) earthworks for ritual/festive purposes had long tradition in prehistoric
Europe.
The multiple concentric circular ditches may have been intended to signify the Upper
World with several levels of a multi-tiered heaven described in later historical and
ethnographical sources (Krupp 1997: 55). The ground plan of the four-causeway rondels
also became a significant symbol itself, with certain relation to the sun (Green 1993). This
so-called cross-circle design was widely spread across prehistoric Europe. In the Carpathian
Basin for example, its continuous use can be detected on archaeological finds as late as the
early medieval period when they had a magic protective role (Sági 1967).

Conclusion
‘When we see cosmology derived solely from the alleged orientation of a building to a particular
star, when we see an entire ideology reconstructed from the style of a carving, and when we
see ancient religion reconstructed from a handful of figurines, we have a right to be sceptical’
(Flannery & Marcus 1998: 46). This is a useful caveat when trying to read signs of ancient
practice from material culture. The argument here is based on the high recurrence of
similar orientation among the rondel group, and its correlation with the sunrise. Indirect
corroboration may be derived from solar symbolism on pottery, and it has some interesting
echos in folklore. The results of this study support the argument that the sun, or perhaps

921
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe

the sunrise, played an important role in the life of the population, and that this belief was
integrated into the design of the rondels.
As well as remembering the original construction of the enclosure, the orientation of the
causeways might have continued to signal certain days or periods connected to important
festivals for Lengyel people. This conjecture receives a little support from European
ethnology. Exact dates in a calendar cannot be idenitified but it would be natural to initiate
the construction of such structures on an already consecrated festival in order to make the
event more memorable for the community.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Roslyn Frank, Maximilian O. Baldia, Nándor Kalicz and Bálint Érdi for their
valuable comments on the earlier draft of the paper, and Zoltan Török for drawing the map, and József Bicskei
for the photographs.

References GERVAUTZ, M. & W. NEUBAUER. 2005. Sonne, Mond

BRADLEY, R. 2001. Orientations and origins: a symbolic
dimension to the long house in Neolithic Europe.
Antiquity 75: 50-6.
BARNA, J.P. 2007. A new site of the Lengyel culture in
Sormás−Török-földek, in J. Kozlowsky & P.
Raczky (ed.) The Lengyel, Polgar and related cultures
in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe:
365-80. Kraków: Polish Academy of Arts &
Sciences.
BARNA, J.P. & E. PÁSZTOR. In press. Two Neolithic
enclosures at Sormás–Török-földek and their possible
geometrical and astronomical role (British
Archaeological Reports International Series).
Oxford: Archaeopress.
CHAPMAN, J. 2003. Colour in Balkan prehistory, in L.
Nikolova (ed.) Early symbolic system for
communication in Southeast Europe (British
Archaeological Reports International Series 1139):
31-57. Oxford: Archaeopress.
DAIM, F. & W. NEUBAUER (ed.). 2005. Zeitreise
Heldenberg: geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben –
Niederösterreichische Landesausstellung 2005
(Katalog des Niederösterreichischen
Landesmuseums, Neue Folge 459). St Pölten:
Berger.
DÖMÖTÖR, T. 1983. Naptári ünnepek-népi szı́njátszás
(Calendrical festivities – folk performances).
Budapest: Akadémia Kiadó (in Hungarian).
FLANNERY, K.V. & J. MARCUS. 1998. Cognitive
archaeology, in D.S. Whitley (ed.) Reader in
archaeological theory: 35-48. London & New York:
Routledge.
und Sterne, in F. Daim & W. Neubauer (ed.)
Zeitreise Heldenberg: geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben –
Niederösterreichische Landesausstellung 2005
(Katalog des Niederösterreichischen
Landesmuseums, Neue Folge 459): 73-4.
St Pölten: Berger.
GREEN, M. 1993. The sun gods of ancient Europe,
in M. Singh (ed.) The sun, symbols of power
and life: 295-311. New York: Harry N.
Abrams.
HANSEN, S. 2007. Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit:
Untersuchungen zur antropomorphen Plastik der
Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa
(Archäologie in Eurasien 20). Mainz: Philipp von
Zabern.
HUTTON, R. 1996. The pagan religions of the British
Isles. Oxford: Blackwell.
IWANISZEWSKI, S. 1996. Neolithic and Eneolithic
structures in Central Europe:
calendric-astronomical implications, in W.
Schlosser (ed.) Proceedings of the second SEAC
conference: 15-28. Bochum: Astronomisches
Institut der Ruhr-Universität.
KALICZ, N. 1983-84. Übersicht über den
Forschungsstand der Entwicklung der
Lengyel-Kultur und die älteste ‘Wehranlangen’ in
Ungarn. Mitteilungen der Östereichischen
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Ur- und Frühgeschichte 33-34:
271-93.
–1985. K´ókori falu Aszódon (Neolithic village of Aszod)
(Múzeumi Füzetek 32). Aszód: Pet´ófi Múzeum.
–1998. Figürliche Kunst und bemalte Keramik aus dem
Neolithikum Westungarns. Budapest: Archaeolingua.

922
 Emı́lia Pásztor, Judit P. Barna & Curt Roslund
–2007. The beginning of the prehistoric figurine
making in western Transdanubia, Hungary
(6000-3000 BC), in G. Ilon (ed.) Wonderful
beauties: human representations in prehistoric Eastern
Hungary. Szombathely: Directorate of the Vas
County Museums.
KARLOVSKÝ, V. & J. PAVÚK. 2002. Astronomická
orientácia rondelov Lengyelskej kultúry
(Astronomical orientation of the rondels of the
Lengyel culture), in I. Cheben & I. Kuzma (ed.)
Otázky neolitu a eneolitu našich Krajı́n: 113-27.
Nitra: Archeologický ústav SAV.
KÁROLYI, M. 1983-84. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen bis
1980 in der befestigten Ansiedlung von Sé,
Westungarn. Mitteilungen der Östereichische
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Ur- und Frühgeschichte 33-34:
293-309.
–2004. Napszülöttek. Savaria földjének ´ósi kultúrái a
rómaiak el´ótt (Ancient cultures of Savaria before the
Romans). Szombathely: Delta Univerzál.
KAZDOVÁ, E. & Z. WEBER. 1990. Architektur der
Lengyel-Rondelle im mittleren Donauraum.
Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte
73:159-69.
KOVÁRNÍK, J., R. KVĚT & V. PODBORSKÝ. 2006.
Europe’s oldest civilisation and its rondels: the real
story. Antiquity 80: http://antiquity.ac.uk/
ProjGall/kvet/index.html.
KRUPP, E.C. 1997. Skywatchers, shamans, and kings.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
KUZMA, I. & J. TIRPÁK. 2002. Štvornásobný Rondel v
Cı́feri. Archeologické Výskumy a Nálezy na Slovensku
v roku 2001: 108-10.
–2003. Rondel v Žitavciach. Archeologické Výskumy a
Nálezy na Slovensku v roku 2001: 78-9.
LIUNGMAN, W. 1937-38. Traditionswanderungen
Euphrat-Rhein: Studien zur Geschichte der
Volksbraüche, volumes I-II (Folklore Fellows
Communications 118-119). Helsinki: Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia (Finish Academy of Sciences).
NĚMEJCOVÁ-PAVÚKOVÁ, V. 1995. Svodı́n: zwei
Kreisgrabenanlagen der Lengyel-Kultur (Studia
Archaeologica et Medievalia 2). Bratislava:
Universitas Comeniana Bratislavensis.
–1997. Kreisgrabenanlage der Lengyel-Kultur in
Ružindol-Borová (Studia Archaeologica et
Medievalia). Bratislava: Universitas Comeniana
Bratislavensis.
NEUBAUER, W. 2005. Am Fusse des Heldenbergs: die
dreifache Kreisgrabenanlage Glaubendorf 2, in F.
Daim & W. Neubauer (ed.) Zeitreise Heldenberg:
geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben – Niederösterreichische
Landesausstellung 2005 (Katalog des
Niederösterreichischen Landesmuseums, Neue
Folge 459): 52-8. St Pölten: Berger.
923
NEUGEBAUER, J-W. & C.H. MARESCH. 1995.
Mittelneolthikum: die Bemaltkeramik, in J.W.
Neugebauer (ed.) Die Junsteinzeit im Osten
Österreichs: 57-107. Wien: Niederösterreichisches
Pressehaus.
Research
PAVÚK, J. 1998. Hlavnévýsledky výskumu sı́dliska
Lengyelskej kultúry v Žlkovciach (Substantial
research results of the Lengyel-culture site in
Žlkovce). Slovenská Archeológia 46(2): 169-86.
PAVÚK, J. & V. KARLOVSKY̆. 2004. Orientacia rondelov
Lengyelskej kultúry na Smery Vysokého a
Nı́zkeho Mesiaca. Slovenská Archeológia 52(2):
211-80.
PETRASCH, J. 1990. Mittelneolithische
Kreisgrabenanlagen in Mitteleuropa. Bericht der
Romisch-Germanischen Kommission des Deutschen
Archaologischen Instituts 71: 407-564.
–2004. Von Menschen und Hunden: Befunde aus
Kreisgrabenanlagen der Oberlauterbacher Gruppe
und der Lengyel-Kultur und deren
Interpretationen, in E. Studenı́ková & B. Hänsel
(ed.) Zwischen Karpaten und Ägäis: Neolithikum und
Ältere Bronzezeit: 295-308. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
PODBORSKÝ, V. 1985. Těšetice-Kyjovice 2. Figurálnı́
plastika lidu s moravskou malovanou
keramikou.Brno: Univerzita J.E. Purkyně.
–2004. Über das geistige Leben der Träger der
Lengyel-Kultur, in E. Studenı́ková & B. Hänsel
(ed.) Zwischen Karpaten und Ägäis: Neolithikum und
Ältere Bronzezeit: 271-83. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
RACZKY, P., W. MEIER-ARENDT, Z. HAJDÚ, K. KURUCZ
& E. NAGY. 1996. Two unique assemblages from
the late Neolithic tell settlement at Polgár-
Cs´ószhalom, in T. Kovács (ed.) Studien zur
Metallindustrie im Karpatenbecken und den
benachbarten Regionen: Festschrift für Amália
Mozsolics zum 85. Geburtstag: 17-31. Budapest:
Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum.
RACZKY, P., A. ANDERS, E. NAGY, K. KURUCZ, Z.
HAJDÚ & W. MEIER-ARENDT. 1997. Utak a
Múltba: Az M3-as Autópálya Régészeti Leletmentései
(Paths into the past: rescue excavations on the M3
motorway): 34-41. Budapest: Hungarian National
Museum & Archaeological Institute of the Loránd
Eötvös University.
RACZKY, P., A. ANDERS, Z. HAJDÚ & E.-GY. NAGY.
2005. Zwischen Himmel und Erde – Polgár-
Cs´ószhalom, eine Siedlung in Ostungarn, in F.
Daim & W. Neubauer (ed.) Zeitreise Heldenberg:
geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben – Niederösterreichische
Landesausstellung 2005 (Katalog des
Niederösterreichischen Landesmuseums, Neue
Folge 459): 203-10. St Pölten: Berger.
 The orientation of rondels of the Neolithic Lengyel culture in Central Europe
´
REGENYE, J. 2006. Ósrégészet ´
Veszprémben. Óskori
település a város alatt (Prehistory in Veszprem.
Prehistoric settlement under the town). Veszprém:
Veszprém Megyei Múzeumi Igazgatóság (in
Hungarian).
ROSLUND, C., J. LINDSTRÖM & P. ANDERSSON. 1999.
Alignments in profusion and confusion. Lund
Archaeological Review 5: 105-15.
RUTTKAY, E. 2004. Anthropomorphe Tonplastik von
den Lengyel-Siedlungen in Svodı́n, Slowakei, in E.
Studenı́ková & B. Hänsel (ed.) Zwischen Karpaten
und Ägäis: Neolithikum und Ältere Bronzezeit:
323-41. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
– 2005. Innovation vom Balkan – Menschengestaltige
Figuralplastik in Kreisgrabenanlagen, in J-W.
Neugebauer (ed.) Die Junsteinzeit im Osten
Österreichs: 194-202. Wien: Niederösterreichisches
Pressehaus.
SÁGI, K. 1967. Árpádkori varázslás régészeti emlékei
(Archaeological remains of magic of the Hungarian
early Medieval Age). Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok
Közleményei 6 : 55-88.
TOČIK, A. 1987. Beitrag zur Frage der befestigten und
Höhensiedlungen im mittleren und späten
Äneolithikum in der Slovakei. Študijné Zvesti 23:
5-21.
TODOROVA, H. 1982. Kupferzeitliche Siedlungen in
Nordostbulgarien (Materialien zur Allgemeinen und
Vergleichenden Archäologie 13). München:
Beck.
TRNKA, G. 1991. Studien zu mittelneolithischen
Kreisgrabenanlagen (Mitteilungen der
Prähistorischen Kommission der Österreichischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften 26). Wien:
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
924
– 2005. Kreise und Kulturen – Kreisgräben in
Mitteleuropa, in F. Daim & W. Neubauer (ed.)
Zeitreise Heldenberg: geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben –
Niederösterreichische Landesausstellung 2005
(Katalog des Niederösterreichischen
Landesmuseums, Neue Folge 459): 10-19.
St Pölten: Berger.
UJVÁRY, Z. 1991. Agrárkultusz (Agrarian cult).
Debrecen: University of Lajos Kossuth.
VILKUNA, K. 1961. Wochenrechnung und Teilung des
Jahres in zwei oder vier Teile. Finnisch-Ugrische
Forschungen 34: 43-83.
WIERZBICKA, A. 1990. The meaning of color terms:
semantics, culture and cognition. Cognitive
Linguistics 1/1: 99-150.
ZALAI-GAÁL, I. 1990. Die Erforschung der
neolithischen Kreisgrabensysteme in
SO-Transdanubien. Archaeológiai Értesı́t´ó 117:
3-23.
–2002. Die neolithische Gräbergruppe-B1 von Mórágy-
T´úzk´ódomb I: die archäologischen Funde und
Befunde. Szekszárd: Wosinsky Mor Megyei
Muzeum.
ZOTTI, G. 2005. Kalendarbauten? – Zur
astronomischen Ausrichtung der
Kreisgrabenanlagen in Niederösterreich, in F. Daim
& W. Neubauer (ed.) Zeitreise Heldenberg:
geheimnisvolle Kreisgräben – Niederösterreichische
Landesausstellung 2005 (Katalog des
Niederösterreichischen Landesmuseums, Neue
Folge 459): 75-9. St Pölten: Berger.