Marta, Liviu: The Late Bronze Age Settlements of Petea-Csengersima (Satu Mare, 2009)
VI. Annexes
The archaeozoological description of the faunal material. Elisabeta Berendi The faunal material found at Petea-Csengersima was litde in quantity as well as in number of species734 735. This aspect was the consequence of the site’s acid soil that allowed poor conservation. However, the analysis of the preserved, scanty material tried to reflect73’ reality to the best possible, and the provided data is very important since there is little archaeozoological information from the Upper Tisa Basin. The distribution in number and percentage of the Late Bronze Age species is as follows (in the following, the questionable human remain will not be taken in consideration): Species No% Bos taurus 189 36,27 Sus scrofa 25 4,79 Ovicaprinae 18 3,45 Equus caballus 20 3,83 Canis familiáris 83 15,93 Indet. (large mammals) 98 18,8 Indet. (medium size mammals) 36 6,9 Indet. 51 9,78 Homo sapiens? 1 0,19 Total 521 100 Table 1. The distribution in number and percentage of the species at the Petea- Csengersima site Presentation of the archeo^oological material 1. Suciu de Sus culture Species No% Bos taurus 183 37,11 Sus scrofa 23 4,66 Ovicaprinae 18 3,65 Equus caballus 19 3,85 Canis familiáris 83 16,83 Indet. (large mammals) 89 18,05 734 Consulted literature for determinations: Boessneck et. al. (1964), Morlan (1983), Pales et. al. (1971), Schmid (1972), Vitt (1952). 735 Consulted literature for final structure: Bălăşescu et. al. (2004), Haimovici (1987). 181 I
