Marisia - Maros Megyei Múzeum Évkönyve 30/1. (2010)
Articles
162 К. László at Sängeorgiu de Mure^-Dealul bunii19 and Lechinta de Mme§-Säli$te.20 The first type of rim corresponds to the “a” type submitted by M. Takács for the Little Hungarian Plain from northwestern Hungary, while the second one belongs to the “b” type. In the Little Hungarian Plain region, the first type is met along the 10th— 11th centuries and the latter one especially in the 11th— 13th centuries.21 The third shape of vessel, the bowl, is comparable with discoveries from Sängeorgiu de Mure$-Sub Ghera, but it has wavy lines decoration. It is quite rare in the settlements. In Hungary, conical vessels similar to a flower pot appear mostly in the 10th— 11th centuries.22 We find no pieces similar to the fragment with a button, in the Arpadian epoch. There is no evident chronological difference between the two lots of pottery.23 Taking into account the forms, the decoration and the analogies, the entire ceramic lot can be dated in the early Arpadian period. * * * Despite of the reduced number of pottery fragments and their extremely fragmentary state of preservation, we can formulate several conclusions. The fragments from G1 belonged preponderantly to medium sized jar-vessels and were slow turned wheel thrown. Two other type of vessels appeared in the lot of sporadic material: the ceramic cauldron and the bowl. The tempering material used was sand with less than 1 mm large pebbles and respectively with 1 to 3 mm large pebbles in the case of the large vessels, as mentioned above. The firing - with few exceptions, when it was of oxidizing type - was incomplete, of short time, and therefore the diverse colour range, from brick-red to dark brown with greyish core. The ornamentation is present only on the fragments of jar-vessels. Characteristic is the straight or wavy line stripe, the impressions and the oblique incisions. An exceptional case is the fragment with a button, never before encountered in the Arpadian epoch. The chronological sequence was established based on the shapes and the decoration, as compared to the analogies found. A serious impediment for the research was the scarcity of the material. Consequently, we can only propose a large dating, in the early Arpadian epoch. To conclude, we would like to mention that the purpose of this study is primarily to draw attention upon a lately identified and investigated point on the map of early medieval discoveries. 19 Lazär-Opri§ 1989, 96, fig. 4/8. 20 Protase ef a/. 1988,201 -202, fig. 13/9. 21 Takács 1993, 456-459, 478, pl. 13. 22 Wolf 2006, 51. 23 Excepting the second type, it could have a later dating.
