Marta, Liviu: The Late Bronze Age Settlements of Petea-Csengersima (Satu Mare, 2009)
III. Habitation of te Suciu de Sus Archaeological Culture
In these sites even the excised motifs on some vessels had been executed in a more simple manner than at Petea —Csengersima, resembling the ornaments obtained by carving at Boineşti and Culciu Mic321. The rim of some of the vessels from these setdements continues to be decorated with “wheat grain” 322 impressions, not yet being totally replaced by the strip of incised or hachured lines (ornaments HB and HC). If the finger-impressed appliqué belt seems to have an extended existence in the south-eastern area of the culture, in the case of the settlements at Diakovo and Kvasovo323 it very likely represents an element for early dating reported to the settlements at Petea—Csengersima. The earlier emergence of the four setdements compared to the settlement at Petea-Csengersima could be demonstrated by the presence of some vessels that are absent from these but are found at Boineşti and Culciu Mic, sometimes decorated in a very similar manner. In this sense there need to be mentioned:-the similarity between some bowls/ dishes with arched bodies from Culciu Mic324 with vessels from Oarţa de Jos325 and Diakovo326;-the analogy of a bowl with arched neck from Oarţa de Jos327 at Boineşti328;-the tall neck of the small beakers and cups from Culciu Mic and Boineşti (already inherited from the Suciu I phase) is still maintained in Diakovo (including the type that has a body “in the shape of a turban” 329). The taller neck of some of the cups from Oarţa de Jos330 seems to reflect this phenomenon;-the similarity between an amphora from Culciu Mic331 and the forms of the same type at Diakovo332 are obvious if we consider the undecorated cylindrical neck, the presence of four small handles under the rim, the incised spiralled ornament on the body or the ornament on the edge of the rim. From what has been presented it can be said that within the pottery of the setdements at Bicaz, Oarţa de Jos, Diakovo and Kvasovo, belonging to the Suciu de Sus II phase (Kacsó), there are elements of form and decoration inherited from the earlier phase/phases of the culture (Suciu I — Kacsó or Suciu I and II - Bader). These are absent from the pottery of Petea—Csengersima, a fact that seems to indicate that it developed during a more recent phase than the first group of settlements. The bronze finds discovered in settlements with earlier pottery offer further elements for a differential dating of the settlements from the Suciu II phase (Kacsó). The presence of a Cypriot needle {zyprische Schleifennadel) within the settlements at Oarţa de Jos — Vâlceaua Rusului and Bicaz — Igoaie was considered a clue for the dating of these settlements in a phase foregoing the Uriu- Opályi type deposits333. A date within a period prior to these series of deposits of the settlement at Kvasovo II (the 2nd phase) is indicated by the discovery within it of a knob from a bracelet with spiralled ends334. 321 Kacsó 2004, pl. 3/5-7,10, 15 (Oarţa de Jos), Kacsó 2005, pl. 1/6,11, 5/7 (Bicaz); Balahuri 1969,ris. 3/7 (Diakovo); Kobal' 2007, p. 5/9, 6/5. 322 Kacsó 2004, abb. 2/1,4-6, 2/5-7,10-12 (Oarţa de Jos), Kacsó 2005, pl. 1/1-2,19, 5/1-2,10-11, 6/9 (Bicaz); Balahun 1969, ris. 1/8-9,11,21, 2/8-9, 11, Balahuri 2001, 66/1-2,4-5 (Diakovo), Balahuri 2001, ris.71/1-2,4- 5,8,10. 323 Balahuri 1969, ris.2/1,4/7 (Diakovo); Balahuri 2001, ris. 71/9, 71a/12 (Kvasovo). 324 Bader 1978, pl. XLV/14. 325 Kacsó 2004, abb. 2./1. 326 Balahuri 2001, ris. 66/5. 327 Kacsó 2004, abb. 2/3. 328 Bader 1978, pl. XLVII/13,14. 329 Balahuri 2001, ris. 70a/15,21. 330 Kacsó 2004, abb.3/9,12. 331 Bader 1978, pl.XLVI/8. 332 Balahuri 2001, ris. 66/1,2,4. 333 Kacsó 2005, p. 53. 334 Kobak 2007, p. 492-993, ris. 7/17. 51
