A first partition into phases for the Otomani culture was proposed by I. Ordentlich in 1970, valid on the territory of modern Romania². His sequence was based on his own older work³, the studies by J. Hampel⁴, K. Horedt et al.⁵, A. Mozsolics⁶, I. Nestor⁷, D. Popescu⁸ and M. Roska⁹, as well as the stratigraphies from Otomani "Cetăţuia", Otomani "Cetatea de pământ", Sălacea, Socodor, Tószeg, Vărşand and others. He concluded three phases (I-III), which he dated to the Early (I = Reinecke A1-A2), Middle (II = Reinecke B1-B2; transition II-III = Reinecke B2-C) and Late (III = Reinecke C-D) Bronze Age. I. Bóna later¹⁰ came to a similar tripartite chronology, using mostly hungarian finds. A short time after this T. Bader again treated the evolution of the Otomani culture in his dissertation on the Bronze Age in northwestern Romania¹¹. In general he accepted the model of Ordentlich, but added a last phase, IV, which he dated to the Reinecke D period of the Bronze Age on account of connections to the groups of Berkesz-Demecser¹², Egyek¹³ and Hajdúbagos¹⁴. This last stage has not been generally accepted and some of the finds attributed to this phase by Bader have now been placed in new cultural groups¹⁵. The understanding of the situation in the developed Middle Bronze Age and in the Late Bronze Age of western Romania and eastern Hungary has been further complicated by the proposal of the cultural groups Bădeni III-Deva¹⁶, Biharea¹⁷, Csorva¹⁸, Igriţa¹⁹ and Pişcolt-Cehăluţ²⁰. Since most of these phases and "groups" have several common aspects I would like to follow just two details here, under special consideration of the transylvanian material²¹. On the one hand I mean an arcade and curve motive, that appears in the developed Otomani culture and, secondly, a certain kind of channeled knobs, which may also be explained from Otomani tradition.
The first decoration that is presented here consist of incised arches and curves, whose corners are filled with hatching. The ornament is mostly found on open bowls with an outward curved profile. The arches, with long points, usually begin on the shoulder of the vessel and stand in opposition to inverse curves on the lower part of the bowls (fig. 1; fig. 2). The rim is often drawn to four small lobes, such as are well known in the carpathian tumular culture and the Piliny- and Cruceni-Belegiš-cultures²². This fact already gives a chronological position in the stage Hänsel MD III (= Reinecke B2, Mozsolics B III/IV) or later. In the Otomani culture bowls with this arcade motive are known from phase III in the eponymous settlement of Otomani "Cetatea de pământ" (fig. 1, 1)²³. Other examples from clear Otomani contexts have been found in Andrid A²⁴, Békés²⁵, Gáborján-Csapszékpart - layers II-III²⁶, Tiream (fig. 2, 3) or Vărşand²⁷. The ancestors of this decoration may be seen in isolated hatched arches or curve (sometimes in combination with spirals), which also appear on other pottery forms in older Otomani phases²⁸, so that there can be no doubt concerning their origin in the Otomani culture. Further south, in the Mureş culture, fragments of imports are known from the latest layer at Pecica (fig. 2, 5)²⁹, whose late date (Reinecke C-D) is among others, confirmed by the stratigraphical position and the combination with sherds decorated with small pits surrounded by dots³⁰. Wether this type of bowl (including the specific decoration) was still used in phase IV of the Otomani culture does not become clear from these finds. This is indicated, however, by some imported examples in Transylvania, where fragments of this type have been discovered in contexts with Wietenberg C and D pottery³¹. I refer to the sites of Aiton "Locul lui Poţu" (fig. 1, 2-3), Ciceu-Corabia (fig. 1, 4. 7-9. 11; 2, 11), Derşida - layer 5 (fig. 2, 4), Deuş³², Deva³³, Gilău (fig. 2, 6), Gârbău (fig. 2, 2. 7. 9), Lopadea Veche (fig. 2, 8), Măhăceni³⁴, Mintiu Gherlii (fig. 1, 12), Nicula (fig. 1, 10), Straja "Fîntîna Barnii" (fig. 2, 10), Unirea (fig. 2, 1) and Viştea (fig. 1, 5-6). The beginning of the Wietenberg C stage, partly synchronous with Otomani III, should be sought at the transition from Reinecke B2 to C, while the Wietenberg D stage, parallel to Otomani IV and the Igriţa-complex, exists well into the Reinecke D periode³⁵. The bowls with arcade and curve decoration should then be dated into the stages III and IV of the Otomani culture and the time of Reinecke B2 until D (beginning?). This chronological position corresponds to the general view taken by the romanian archaeologists, but seems too late in comparison to the opinions in Hungary and Slowakia³⁶. One possible explanation for this would be a survival of Otomani-forms in an area, where finds of the Tumulus culture hardly appear³⁷, since the bowl type discussed here is spread only along the eastern and southern edge of the older Otomani distribution (fig. 7). We may also mention, that in some of the romanian sites, the late Otomani material is connected with vessels that clearly show influences of the Tumulus culture (fig. 4, 1a-b; 5, 1a-c)³⁸.
The second aspect, I wish to treat on this ocassion is detemined by channeling and channeled knobs. The transylvanian material, which is my starting point, again comes from contexts with Wietenberg C and D pottery, partly the same contexts as the arcade-decorated bowls discussed above: Bădeni (fig. 3, 5)³⁹, Chintelnic (fig. 3, 3; 5, 3-4), Cicău (fig. 4, 2), Ciceu-Corabia (fig. 4, 1a-b. 3-5. 7. 9. 11. 13), Cluj "Mănăştur"⁴⁰, Cluj "Someşeni" (fig. 4, 6), Corpadea (fig. 3, 1), Cugir⁴¹, Deuş⁴², Deva (fig. 3, 2)⁴³, Hunedoara (fig. 3, 8)⁴⁴, Măhăceni⁴⁵, Nicula (fig. 5, 8. 10. 12), Unirea⁴⁶ and Viştea (fig. 3, 6-7. 9). The motive this time is not limited to bowls, but also appears on one-handled cups or larger vessels. The ornament evolved from older spiral-knobs of the Otomani culture. The development from spirals in phases I-II to spiral-knobs in phases II-III, knobs with channeled arches above in phase III (-IV) to knobs with channeled curves below in phase (III-) IV (fig. 6) may be followed logically⁴⁷. In the actual distibution area of the Otomani culture such late channeled knobs may be found at Békés "Várdomb"⁴⁸, Cehăluţ⁴⁹, Crasna⁵⁰, Otomani "Cetatea de pământ"⁵¹, Pişcolt⁵² , Streda nad Bodrogom⁵³, Suplacu de Barcău⁵⁴, Tiszaalpár⁵⁵ and Vărşand⁵⁶. A separation of this pottery from the Otomani culture, as has been sometimes done in Hungary (and is sometimes still sustained) or results, even more unfounded, from the proposal of the Pişcolt-Cehăluţ and Bădeni III-Deva groups, appears absolutely unnecessary and even creates the false image of interruptions in a continuous cultural development. Further south similar finds come from Sântana (fig. 5, 2a-b. 5)⁵⁷ and the settlement of Susani "Deluţ"⁵⁸, where they are placed in the later part of the Bronze Age. The high foot of the bowl from Sântana is quite interesting in this respect, since it also has ancestors or analogies further north in Tiszafüred⁵⁹, Streda nad Bodrogom⁶⁰ and Šafarikovo⁶¹. The material from Egyek, Hajdúbagos and Berkesz-Demecser contains pottery identical to that discussed here⁶² and could perhaps be included in the late phase of the Otomani culture, that I consider characterised by the dominance of channeled decoration. For the dating of this phase, especially the knobs with channeled curves below, I may again point to the connection with late Wietenberg pottery and vessels with dot-surrounded pit ornaments. Some other elements of the pottery from the mentioned sites also indicate a late date, such as the horizontal channeling on the conical neck of larger vessels (fig. 4, 4. 10), that will become typical in the early Hallstatt period⁶³. Contacts to the Tumulus culture (see above) and to the Piliny culture, as may be observed in the vessels from Ciumeşti - grave 6 and from Otomani "Cetatea de pământ"⁶⁴, confirm the late position of these finds. The discoveries from Egyek, Hajdúbagos and Berkesz-Demecser are generally accepted as late⁶⁵. Finally the chronological position is underlined by the bronze objects from Crasna⁶⁶ and Suplacu de Barcău⁶⁷.
Summarising, just the two elements discussed here demonstrate that the Otomani pottery continued its evolution during the Koszider period and probably even after that. Some details could have contributed to the formation of Final Bronze Age and Early Hallstatt phenomena⁶⁸. Wether we name these finds as phase IV of the Otomani culture or with other denominations is only a question of terminology. Taking account of the fact that the evolution does not show any radical interruptions, it appears unnecessary and even misleading, to separate the material culturally.
In this respect finally the question may be raised, what exactly we mean archaeologically by "culture", "group", "aspect", "local group", "variant" etc. Two proposals are made by me: firstly we can avoid the problem by simply speaking of ceramic styles (especially since most "cultures" in eastern and south-eastern Europe are only defined by pottery); secondly we should take account of settlement forms, funerary habits, tools and weapons and possibly other aspects (as far as they are seizable spiritual-religious expressions, social structures etc.) when defining "cultures". Only if several of these elements come together and can be defined in a clear temporal and geographical space should we really use the term of "culture". In this order of ideas, isolated objects in foreign cultural surroundings (so-called imports/exports⁶⁹) can not be used for the definition of the distribution of such cultures.