Pop, Dan: The Middle Bronze Age Settlement of Petea-Csengersima (Satu Mare, 2009)
III. Archaeological inventory and interpretation of the Middle Bronze Age features
and especially the Suciu de Sus finds within other cultures. M. Roska thinks the Suciu de Sus material is characteristic of the Late Bronze Age and of the Early Iron Age. He changes his mind regarding their dating and includes the discoveries of the plane necropolis from Suciu de Sus in the Copper Age based on a copper axe that was found in this necropolis84. I. Bóna thinks that the beginnings of the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture can be dated at the end of the Bronze Age III (according to his chronology), contemporary of the Early Otomani, Vărşand and Füzesabony cultures85. A. Mozsolics dates the Suciu de Sus culture in the IVth period, according to his chronology (Reinecke C-D), and thinks that it stops with the beginning of the Gava culture86 87. N. Kalicz has taken into consideration the materials until the end of the 50es and thinks that the beginning of the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture could be dated around the end of the Middle Bronze Age, when the Otomani culture ended, and that it is contemporary to the Egyek culture (after the discovery from Igrici Matata), ending at the end of the Late Bronze Age . Most of the sites which N. Kalicz assigned to the Suciu de Sus culture have been then assigned by T. Kemenczei and T. Kovács to the Berkesz-Demecser group and think that the independent development of the Suciu de Sus culture in the western area ends with the Middle Bronze Age (Reinecke C) and is followed during the Reinecke D period by the Berkesz culture88. T. Kemenczei has started from the Suciu de Sus imports from Igrici Matata and Méra Fő and dates the first phase of the Suciu de Sus culture from Hungary at the end of the Middle Bronze Age in Hungary Bz. 3b (Reinecke B| ), and the second phase at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age (Reinecke C / B2-C). He then has rectified the dating of these finds and fits them into the first part of the Late Bronze Age in Hungary (Bz. lb = Reineckc B2)89. K. Horedt, after having analyzed the pottery of the Late Bronze Age from Transylvania, he concludes that this culture can be dated in the Bronz C-D90. In 1966, D. Berciu mentioned, without arguments, two phases of the Suciu de Sus I and II and dated them in the period of transition to the Iron Age91. N. Chidioşan has published the finds of the Suciu de Sus from Crişana, then he concludes that it began in the Bronze C and ended at the beginning of the Iron Age92. S. Dumitrascu carried out investigations at Girişu de Criş “Alceu ’’ and has concluded that at least one phase must be assigned to the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture during the Middle Bronze Age93. New points of view with respect to dating and chronology have been stated when the research results from the sites of the Suciu de Sus have been published: Boineşti, Culciu Mare, Culciu Mic, Lazuri, Medieşu Aurit “ToguI lui Schweizer", Lăpuşel, Mesteacăn, Oarţa de Jos, Oarţa de Sus, Vad, Medvedivce, Diakovo, Kvasove, Solotvino, Skrabské şi Zemplinske Kopcany. Once T. Bader published his first article summary in 1972 on the Suciu de Sus finds in the north-western Transylvania, he noticed the fact that “it is early to speak about phases of development of the Suciu de Sus culture”. He assumed in theory three phases of development: the first phase was dated from the end of the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, the second phase was dated in the Middle Bronze Age and a questionable third phase could be dated in the Late Bronze Age94. The completion of the archaeological research in the tumulus necropolis from Lăpuş allowed new hypotheses on the development of the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture. Thus, the author of the research, C. Kacsó published a part of the archaeological material of that necropolis in 1975 where he considered that the first phase of the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture was represented by the flat necropolis at Suciu de Sus village, and the second tumulus necropolis was represented by the first phase of the tumulus necropolis from Lăpuş (dated in the Reinecke D. Bronze Age). In what concerns the first phase established in the development of the necropolis from Lăpuş, it must be noted that on one hand there are many common elements with the Suciu de 84 Roska 1940 21-22; Roska 1942, 90-91. 85 Bóna 1961, 17. 86 Mozsolics 1960, 123. 87 Kalicz 1960, 11-12; Kalicz 1970,23-31. 88Kemenczi 1963, 182-183; Kovács 1967,46-58. 89Kemenczei 1963, 182-183; Kemenczei 1984, 28-39. 9(1 Horedt 1967, 144. 91 Berciu D. 1966, 210, 148 fig 12; 209 fig.24. 92 Chidioşan 1970,307. 91 Dumitaşcu 1967, 75. 94 Bader 1972,532. 20
