Pop, Dan: The Middle Bronze Age Settlement of Petea-Csengersima (Satu Mare, 2009)
IV. Conclusions
relations between Suciu de Sus I - Wietenberg II, III - Otomani II, III117, Mad'arovce etc. The beginnings of the Suciu de Sus archaeological culture most likely date from the Reinecke Bz A2 or Bz B phase continuing to the Reinecke Bz C stage. IV. Conclusions The Suciu de Sus I settlement at “Határátkelő” is spread only over the western terrace, in the area located west of the Erge brook. It wasn't superimposed by the Suciu de Sus II settlement. Several features of this phase were investigated in this area of the site. It could be concluded that neither in Csengersima, nor in any of the Suciu de Sus sites were delimited the cultural phases by horizontal stratigraphy. The settlement at Csengersima ''''Határátkelő” is important because until the present time it is the most investigated site of the early Suciu de Sus culture in the area which was occupied by this culture. We estimate that approximately 80% of the settlement surface that belonged to the Middle Bronze Age has been investigated, and the rest of 20% remained not investigated in the western part of the terrace. That was the result of the excavation method and of the nature of the archaeological research in the settlement. Preventive archaeological excavations carried out here in 1998 and 1999 yielded 1867 features that belonged to several ages, of which 82 belonged to the Middle Bronze Age. 62 features that belonged to other eras (50 of the Roman Age, nine of the Late Bronze Age, two Early Mediaeval Age and one which comprises mixed materials of the Late Bronze Age and of the Roman Age) uncovered pottery of the Suciu de Sus I. There were a total of 144 features that illustrated the extent of the Middle Bronze Age settlement. Out of the 27 sites that belonged to this phase of the Suciu de Sus culture only the settlement at Solotvino was excavated to an extent of 30% of the settlement area118. The settlements at Culciu Mic119, Boineşti'20, Lăpuşel121, Medieşu Aurit “Şuculeu"'22, Kvasove II123, Diakovo “Kişerda” and “Mondicitag” were little invastigated124. As in the case of the settlements at Solotvino or Lăpuşel, the Bronze Age layer was strongly affected by the subsequent habitations. A similar situation was found in the specific settlement at Cesengersima which was strongly influenced by the habitation dating from the Roman times. The cultural layer was between 25-40 cm thick and it provided a great quantity of ceramic and several fired clay objects. Both houses and graves, and especially the ceramic material, were similar to those found in other sites of the Suciu de Sus I culture, marked by small regional rather than chronological differences. For example, the settlement at Csengersima resembles more this culture's sites from the Someş Plain rather than those in the eastern and north-eastern area. We refer here to the presence of ribbed pottery in a very low number in the western area and to its massive presence in the eastern and north-eastern areas. This aspect remained the same during the second phase of the archaeological culture125. A powerful influence of the Ottomani culture in the western area has been noticed, unlike in the northern and western areas where the Wietenberg influences have prevailed. Pending completion of research of the ceramic material found in the settlement at Csengersima and until the finishing of the comparative analysis with the other sites it can only be assumed that the settlement at ‘Határátkelő” dated from the Reinecke Bz. B1, B2 period, and the habitation there might have ceased after a flood. 117 Bader 1978, 73-77; Bader 1979, 20-26; Hiittel 1979, 32-46; Kacsó 1995, 96-97; Pop D. 2003, 91-92, nota 69; Vasiliev 2002,41-43; Kacsó 2007a, 51-52; KobaF 2007, 592. 118 Vasiliev, 2002,31. 119 Bader 1978, 65. I2() Bader 1978,65. 121 Stanciu 1994, fig. 2. 122 Bader 1978, 16, 64-66, 68,75, 126 no. 55. 123 Kobal’ 2007, 583-599. 124 Balaguri 1974, 25-47. 125 Marta 2004b, 41. 24
