Marisia - Maros Megyei Múzeum Évkönyve 31/1. (2011)
Articles
Preliminary Report on the Aerial Archaeological Survey in Transylvania (2009-2010) 9 type that is common in that period. It is very typical that the high, narrow hilltops or plateaus were fortified using the steep hillsides or cliffs as natural protection on three sides and the defensive line consisted of a simple rampart and a ditch in front of it (see, for example, the eponymous site at Ariusd/Erősd: László 1914, 381-386, fig. 3; Székely 1981, 39-42). The excavations carried out at Mainas Bäi proved that the settlement was also fortified with a second rampart in the outer side of the ditch, and, in a later occupation period, with a palisade (László 1993, 35-49, fig. 2-9). The site was also inhabited later by the Wietenberg culture (László 2011), but there’s no direct evidence of a fortification in the Bronze Age. A special variant of fortifications was spotted at $ieu Odorhei (Hu. Sajóudvarhely, Bistrita- Näsäud County) in 2009, where the trenches cut into the plateau were connected with another trench system, which has disappeared by now, but it is still shown by the discolouration of the soil and vegetation. Neither the chronology nor the culture is known to which these structures belonged, and the field surveys had no results in this particular case.3 A similar situation was observed at an unexplored site to the southeast of Zau de Cámpie (Hu. Mezőzáh, Mures County) in 2009, region where archaeological sites are abundant. The fortification of $ibot (Hu. Alkenyér, Alba County) belongs to a similar economical’ type, but we could not observe any trench and the palisade limits a longer part of the terrace over the Mures River. The fortification of Moresti (Hu. Malomfalva, Mures County) dated to several epochs, but mainly to the Migration period (5th-6th century AD) was intensively researched for relatively long period (Horedt 1979). In fact the settlement was occupied (and sometimes fortified) from the Prehistoric Ages to the Middle Ages. It consists of multiple concentric trenches, and the excavations revealed that the trenches were 8-18 m wide and 4.6-9 m deep. There was also an auxiliary trench on the northern side. The external trench was 1.5 m long and the second concentric one was placed parallel to this in a distance of 300 m. The total length of the second and third trench system was 2 km. The areas between the parallel trenches were inhabited (Lazár 1995, 264-266). The trench systems are well indicated by the present surface, while on the cultivated areas new sections of the defensive system could be identified by aerial photography. The fortified Late Iron Age settlement at jigodin-Kisvár tető (Hu. Csíkzsögöd, Harghita County) belongs to another type (Macrea Et Al. 1951). The site was inhabited earlier in the Bronze Age and its 6-8 m wide and 7.5 m high oval fortification line has decayed and today it is visible as a terrace flange only. At this particular settlement it was presumably important, that it was on the top of a larger mount next to the Olt River which allowed the control of the neighbouring areas. A similar strategic position is visible at Racu-Bogát-tető (Hu. Csíkrákos, Harghita County) also in the valley of the Olt River (Cavruc 2000, 214-215). There, the central part of the settlement is supposed to be established in the Iron Age in its present form - it was populated earlier in the period of the Wietenberg culture and the Gáva-Holihrady culture -, but the aerial photos show an external fortification trench, especially on the southern side. This trench seems to be earlier than the terraces and therefore it might be possible that it dates from an earlier period, probably from the Bronze Age or the Early Iron Age. A central terrace placed on a projecting hilltop is rare, but not a unique feature, such structures could be observed at Pintic (Hu. Szászpéntek, Bistrita-Näsäud County) in 2009 and at Vlaha (Hu. Magyarfenes, Cluj County) in 2010. One has to remark that the settlement structure described above does exist without a central terrace too, like at Sálicea-Égeres (Hu. Szelicse) in Cluj County, where the central, Copper 3 Two field surveys were done by Á. Tatár who found fragments of stone artefacts; but a precise dating was not possible.
