A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Archaeologica 5. (Szeged, 1999)

Florin GOGÂLTAN: The Southern Border of the Otomani Culture

As regards pottery forms and their ornamentation, assemblages with a household pottery comparable to the ceramic inventory from Socodor have been reported from the early tells at Békés (BANNER-BÓNA 1974. PI. 3. 8-10. PI. 4. 15. PI. 14. 11. PI. 15. 1. 7, PI. 17. 12-14. PI. 28. 19-20. PL 29. 11-13. PL 30. 12. 16-18 etc.) and Bakonszeg (MÁTHÉ 1988. Pl. 6. 18-22 etc.), as well as from Värsand (POPESCLJ 1956, Fig. 68), Berettyóújfalu-Szilhalom (MÁTHÉ 1988, Pl. 31. 5-6. 10. Pl. 32. 11-12, 14 etc.), Berettyóújfalu-Herpály (MÁTHÉ 1984. Fig. 3. 8. Fig. 5. 4. Fig. 7. 5. 17. 9. 14), and Esztár (MÁTHÉ 1988. Pl. 39. 6, 12. Pl. 40. 9). In contrast, the household pottery from levels 3-4 of the Gáborján settlement (MÁTHÉ 1988, PL 43. 8-14. PL 44. 2-8. PI. 45. 12) show a completely different ornamental repertoire, suggesting that assemblages which Romanian and Slovakian archaeologists have labelled 'Otomani culture' was influenced by another culture complex. It seems likely, therefore, that the forms and decoration of the household pottery of the Otomani culture were influenced by the Gornea-Orlesti group or the early Hatvan culture. The semi-fine and fine wares offer considerably more information for the cultural classification of the Socodor tell. The most common forms at Socodor include bowls and large pots decorated with incised trinagular patterns or fluting (Fig. 1. 1-4; Fig. 7. 2). D. Popescu noted that this bowl type appeared in the first two levels (POPESCU 1956a. Fig. 7. 6, Fig. 11. 9. Fig. 13. 7, Fig. 15. 5, Fig. 16. 6, Fig. 34. 11 etc.). This vessel type is not usually found in Early Bronze Age assemblages, being a typical product of the Middle Bronze Age. Its southern origin is indicated by the high number of such finds from Cornesti (Fig. 10. 1-2)

15 and Foeni (Fig. 13. 2). Its presence at Värsand is logical, considering the short distance of about 15 km between the two sites (POPESCU 1956. Fig. 70. 7-9). In contrast, I have been unable to identify comparable bowls among the finds from the tells lying north of the Crisul Alb river. Even if comparable bowls were used in this area, they are not included in the typological chart of the pottery from the tells in the Berettyó (Barcäu) valley (MÁTHÉ 1988, Fig. 22). Fragments of such bowls may come from pedestalled bowls with high fenestrated pedestals, such as the specimens from Cornesti (RADU 1972a, Fig. 2. 2) and Socodor (CIUGUDEAN 1997a, cat. no. 155). These bowls are also lacking in the Otomani culture. Another form which is common at Socodor is the amphora with ansa lunata handles (Fig. 2. 3, 6) (POPESCU 1956a. Fig. 28. 2. 10; CIUGUDEAN 1997a. cat. nos 145-148), considered to be a southern type; it is typical for the Vatina culture. The finds from Cornesti (Fig. 11. 1-2, 4) (RADU 1972a. Fig. 3-6) and Foeni (Fig. 14. 1) suggest a similar conclusion. The Vatina type small amphorae appear to have been very popular and they appear in widely differing cultural contexts, for example at Värsand (BONA 1975. Pi. 136. 22, PL 140. 17-21) and also in the Mures culture: Deszk-A (FOLT1NY 1941, Pl. VI. 12; BONA 1975. PL 90. 16); Szöreg (BONA 1975. PI. 111. 1). The published pottery assemblages from the tells in the Berettyó (Barcäu) valley suggest that this vessel type is lacking in this region (MÁTFIÉ 1988, Fig. 22). In spite of the great number of ornamented and unornamented cups, this vessel type is insufficient for a reliable cultural identification (Fig. 2. 1, 4-5; Fig. 4. 1-8; Fig. 5. 1-5; Fig. 6. 1-2, 4). These cups occur in all of the Bronze Age tell cultures (Fig. 11.3, 5),

16 as do unornamented bowls (Fig. 6. 5-6). Speaking of ornamentation, it must here be noted that the ornamental repertoire of incised patterns (Fig. 3. 2-5; Fig. 7. 3-5), channelling (Fig. 2. 2; Fig. 3. 6-7; Fig. 6. 3; Fig. 7. 1; Fig. 8. 1-2) and appliqué ornaments (Fig. 1. 2; Fig. 7. 3-5) repdemonstrated that these finds postdate the Nyírség group as defined by Nándor Kalicz (KALICZ

1968, 63-77) and the Berea phase of the Nir culture as defined by T. Bader (BADER 1978, 30). The question still remains as to the date of the end of this group. In the lack of a relevant stratigraphy, only indirect evidence can be used. The import from febea, recoveredfrom a Soimus context, woidd suggest a development parallel to the Early Bronze II (lib?) in Transylvania (ANDR1JOIU

1992, 26, Fig. 7/14; CIUGUDEAN 1996,109). In eastern Slovakia, imports -from a no doubt later period - - have been reportedfrom the Oborin and Streda nad Bodrogom sites (BÁTORA 1981, 12, with earlier bibliography) andfrom the Valaliky cemetery (BÁTORA 1983, 227, PI. VI/

1. grave 18). They appeared in a Kost'any context, in the classical phase of the culture (phase 2). Still, as we have noted, finds comparable to the phase represented by broom brushed, tree bark and textile ornamented pottery are known from northwestern Romania, M'hich point to the Early Bronze III phase in western Romania, Transylvania, and Oltenia. That is why we would assign the finds of the Sanisläu group to the Early Bronze lib and, perhaps, to the beginning of the Early Bronze III (BT Ilia). 15 See also RADU 1972a, Fig. l/la-b; 10. 16 For a similar view, cp. MÁTHÉ 1988, 34-35. Cp. also BADER 1978, 45-46, 52.