Marisia - Maros Megyei Múzeum Évkönyve 1. (2019)

Sándor Berecki, Sándor József Sztáncsuj: A Neolithic Settlement from Ernei

A Neolithic Settlement from Ernei

33

Most of the vessels described above, as well as their decorative procedures and motifs are common forms in the contemporary settlements of the Starcevo-Cri§-Körös cultural complex, in the territory of the Carpathian Basin and its neighbouring regions as well. As analogies we can mention the globular vessels and storage pots discovered in the Körös-sites in Eastern Hungary: Ecsegfalva-Szte 23,2 Endrőd-Site 3/119,3 Hódmezővásárhely-Kotacpart-Vatatanya,4 * Szarvas-Site 8/23,5 etc. and Western Romania at Dude^tii Vechi.6 Similar Cri$ settlements can be mentioned in Transylvania from Gura Baciului,7 * Le\-Várhegy,* More^ti-Podei,9 * * Оспа Sibiului-Triguri,10 Ora§tie-Dealul Pemilor," §eu§a-La Cárarea Morii,12 Turia-Si/oA:;13 in Banat at Cuina Turcului III14 or in Moldova at Trestiana,15 Valea Lupului,16 etc. Their spreading usually is not related to a certain chronological or evolution phase. Conical bowls are also characteristic forms in all stages of the culture (see for example Ecsegfalva-Szte 23,17 Hódmezővásárhely-Kotacpart-Vata-tanya,1* More§ti-Podei,19 Оспа Sibiului-Trzgwrz,20

Ostrovu Golu II—III.21 Due to their general spread, these forms do not have a more accurate dating value. Byconical and carinated vessels are an exception, since they are more typical for the younger stages.22 * The biconical bowl with slightly profiled rim (PI. IV/1) has analogies especially in settlements like Le\-Várhegy,2i Ощйе-Dealul Pemilor,24 Trestiana,25 etc. assigned to stages III— IV of the Starcevo-Cri§ culture from the Eastern Carpathian region.

Finally, a special find, a fragment of a so-called altar or clay lamp can be mentioned. The fragment has a shallow bowl shaped upper part and remains of two cylindrical, truncated feet. The vessel was modelled briefly from thick paste tempered with sand and waster. This artefact is also a leading form, with several variants, in the Starcevo-Cri§-Körös complex,26 although larger versions similar to the variant from Ernei are not too common. Parallels can be mentioned from Endrőd-Szfe 3/3927 or Imeni.28

According to the most widespread chronology of Gh. Lazarovici29 which is based on

2 Oross 2007, fig. 27.2; 21; 23.

3 Makkay-Starnini 2008, fig. 311-314.

I Kutzián 1944, pl. XXI/3-5; XXII/2, 3; XXIX/6, 7.

5 Makkay-Starnini 2001, fig. 46; 61; 67/1; 69/1.

6 Kutzián 1944, pl. XXI/1, 2.

7 Ciutä 2005, pl. LX/1-4.

8 Zaharia 1962, fig. 14/19, 20; 15/6-8.

4 Lazár 1995, pl. XLVIII/2, 9, 12,13.

10 Ciutá 2005, pl. XXXII/7; XXXIII/1; XXXVII/1-5.

II Luca-Pinter 2001, Taf. 3/5-7; 5/3, 6/1,2.

12 Ciutá 2005, pl. LXXV/5-12.

13 Ciutá 1997, pl. XI.

14 Lazarovici 1979, pl. VII/B-5.

15 Popu?OI 2005, fig. 83-84; 96,98, 108-111, 115.

16 Marinescu-Bílcu 1993, pl. 3/5.

17 Oross 2007, fig. 27.12/1,3.

18 Kutzián 1944, pl. XXI/4.

19 Lazár 1995, pl. XLVIII/3,6.

20 Ciutá 2005, pl. XXXIV/2, 3.

21 Lazarovici 1979, pl. VII/A-2-4, 10-15; VIII/A-1, 2, 5, 8-10.

22 Lazarovici 1993, 245.

23 Zaharia 1962, fig. 5/15; 6/8-14.

24 Luca-Pinter 2001, Taf. 4/6.

25 Popu?oi 2005, fig. 59/1-3, 5; 68/2; 98a/3, 8; 98b/l-5.

26 Oross 2007, 509.

27 Makkay-Starnini 2008, fig. 89/1; 90/1.

28 Unpublished find in the collection of the Székely National Museum.

29 Lazarovici 1969; 1977; 1979.