Marta, Livius et al.: The Late Bronze Age Settlement of Nyíregyháza-Oros „Úr Csere” (Satu Mare, 2010)
II. Daniel V. Sana - Liviu Marta: The Fortification System of the Settlement
It must also be said that a complex on the site 26 (complex 28), located just a few meters away, to the north of the ditch, seems to belong to Gáva culture. Other several such discoveries occur only 200-300 meters away, in the site 2714. Therefore, although all the materials recovered from the ditch, both bronze and pottery, plead for its assignment to the Hajddbagos-Cehăluţ Group, we still have reservations in this respect until the entire settlement is excavated. Because of the few data on the existence of such archeological complexes within the area of the cultural group Hajdiibagos-Cehăluţ, the functionality of the ditch that borders the northwest side of the Oros settlement is uncertain. The existence of a fortification within this group was considered only for the height settlement of Şimleu Silvaniei “Observator” (Romania), but the things are still not fully clear15. Approximately 7 km away from Oros settlement (such distance considered measured in a straight line), on a north-west direction, in a settlement dated to the same chronological period, two sectors of trenches were found, with a relatively small depth and an opening which does not exceed 220 cm. They, in addition to a potential defensive role, are assigned possible day-to-day functions: water drainage from the settlement area or the enclosing of some cultivated areas16. The last interpretations were previously considered for the settlement of Polgár-site 29l7, which, from the perspective of the ditches, it is also a rare case for the period HaAl on the Tisa Plain. The existence of some fortifications, situated in swampy areas, is documented in northern and eastern Hungary and northwestern Romania, but their construction is dated, based on the few excavations, during Ha B-C period18. But impressive fortifications, in size and system design, are already known for this period, as belonging to Gáva and Kyjatice cultures of the north of Hungary19, Slovakia20, Transylvania21 and Trans-Carpathian Ukraine22. Even if most of them are located in higher areas, controlling the access routes, data on fortifications located in lower, plain areas, have increased lately23. 14 Gindele et alii 2004, p. 257. 15 Pop et alii 2007, p. 359-360; Pop et alii 2010, p. 179. 16 Nagy 2007, p. 130. 17 V. Szabó 2002, p. 83; V. Szabó 2004, p. 144. 18 Hellebrandt 2003, p. 220; Hellebrandt 2004, p. 172, 186. 19 Matuz-Noväki 2002, p. 7-25. 20 Furmánek-Veliacik-Vladár 1999 p. 120-121, PI. 58. 21 Teleac (Vasiliev et alii 1991, p. 23-31); Dej, Subcetate, Bozna, Ciceu-Corabia, Şona (Vasiliev 1995); Şimleu Silvaniei (Sana 2006, p. 51-52); Călineşti-Oaş (Marta 2010, p. 175-182). 22 Balahuri 1972, p. 12-13. 23 Sântana (Hügel et alii 2010, www.cimec.ro/Arheologie/cronicaCA2010/cd/index.htp), Corneşti (Heeb-Szentmiklósi-
