 Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to discuss in my paper the term agglomeration in context of early medieval archaeology from the east central Europe. The term agglomeration is there very popular specialist in the early medieval archaeology used this term for the description of the way mostly fortified settlements which cumulate plenty of various central functions such as power protection, crafts, or cult and trade. At the very beginning I should demonstrate what we speak actually about. It is believed that the great example of early medieval agglomerations from East Central Europe are so-called great Moravian central places. Great Moravian was very interesting polite which had risen on the east edge of the Frankish Empire at the beginning of the 9th century AD. Great Moravian belongs to the basic pillars of the identity of current nations and states in the region. What makes this history interesting also for the general public. The backbone of the great Moravian settlement structures are large settlements we call agglomerations among them the most important is Pohansko, Mikulčice or Stare Město. The populated area of these sites is comparable with the most important places of contemporary Europe such as Regensburg, Heiterbu or Kern. The term agglomeration or fortowns is used not only by Czech or Slovak archaeologists but also by the German scholars such as Sebastian Brötcher. From the early medieval roots grew up some contemporary big cities such as the capital of the Czech Republic Prague. The main question which should be answered is can we really use the term agglomeration for such kind of settlements. Some scholars are doubtful about this. This is one example one of the anonymous reporters who work for the journal medieval archaeology. He or she rejected my older paper about this topic with the argument that the term agglomeration has no clear definition and it is not appropriate to the description of such sites. This critic should be the reason why we need necessarily a definition of what constitutes an agglomeration in the early medieval central. Generally the settlement agglomeration should be an extended populated area with central functions and with link sub-urbs such the definition in Wikipedia Webster. Czech archaeologists use very similar criteria in their description of great Moravian agglomeration. I have here some new examples from Lumier Polaczek, Ludzie Galuška or me. We can summarize the main attributes of early medieval agglomeration according to the Czech researcher Czech scholars. The agglomeration should be the waste populated area. They should be the formation of several settlement positions, production facilities and burial grounds with churches. They should stay on the top of settlement hierarchy and should be very complex center and perhaps also fortified settlements but it is a little bit controversial topic. I can give you now some several examples of these attributes from the Great Moravian Million that fills this populated area. Thanks to large-scale excavations we have enough information about the populated area of Great Moravian agglomerations which reach tens of hectares up to 100 hectares. Archaeological excavation are extended in the last time by massive magnometry survey. Thanks to the large-scale excavations as well geophysics we can also identify the inner structure of the agglomerations for example here in Pohansko. The inner area of Great Moravian agglomerations was very systematically built up by regular settlement structures in case of Pohansko by plots or yards. The density of the settlements feature changed during the time, depend on the grow or this line of the local population. At the beginning of the 10th century the Great Moravian Society collapsed and this huge agglomeration disappeared. One other type of inner structure we know for example from Mikulčicev from the sub-arp of Bailey where the layout consists of rows of buildings. Illimitable agglomeration consists of several settlements positions such as sub-arbs, craftsmen's quarters, church, precincts with graveyard or residence building of the elites. A very good example is the agglomeration in Staremnesto where the waste-populated area was divided in various zones with different functions for the craftsmen area areas of power. On several places archaeologists excavated the churches with very rich graveyards. In the other parts of agglomerations indicate the finds of tools or half-finished products the handicrafts are activities for example the jewellery production. A very similar situation was discovered in Mikulčicev where the whole infrastructure including bridges, gates or roads was preserved in archaeological context. The many churches were dislocated along the road which was obviously the main axis of the whole agglomeration. More than two thousand graves were concentrated around or in the vicinity of churches but also on the other places. Tools and huge concentration of crucibles indicate in Mikulčicev industrial and craft production. Pohansko the other great morevin agglomeration in Pohansko or from Pohansko we now two churches one inside the fortification one outside in the unfortified suburb. The Pohansko craftsmen produced in the smithies the chain mails as well as other barrier and equestrian gear. In the suburb in the south of the agglomeration we now a very interesting finds from this part of the agglomeration we now weapons and ponds and stirrups such kind of finds come comes not only from settlements feature but also from graves. These finds are scattered on the whole area of south suburb where we suppose the dwellings of barriers and their families. The illegal agglomeration stood on the top of the settlement hierarchy. They are surrounded by agricultural settlements which constitute the hinterland of the agglomeration. This concentration dots are actually the villages, agricultural villages from the surrounding of the centers agglomeration. The typical features in the villages from the agricultural hinterland are storage pits for grain and sanctum have sweet stone owners. The grain pits are generally missing in the agglomerations itself. These places were actually more consumption sites but more to this topic will be the next paper from Karin. The illimitable agglomerations were very complex. We can find here the materialization of all levels of the illimitable society from the yoke on the top to the peasant on the button. I can show you only one example. This is the magnate court from Prohansko which could be according to our interpretation a seat of Moravian yoke. It should be his palatium imitation of the Karin gene fault. Do we have any alternatives to the term agglomeration for these sites? For example the German archaeologist in referring suggested the terms fort or fortified centers or even hill forms. If we discarded the fact that the majority of the discussed sites appears in the flat plain and not on the hill we have to question also the characterization by the fortification. The illimitable agglomerations were fortified of course as we see of the example of Prohansko. But according to new dendrochological dating the fortification was built in the very late stage of the existence of these settlements. Our new knowledge differs from the previous dating of the sites so it means this agglomeration were in the first stage unfortified and at the end fortified. Let's come to the short conclusion. If I should resume my paper I can say that the term agglomeration is quite suitable for the large urban settlements with central function in the East Central Europe. These settlements are more complex than the simple hill forts or strongholds. They were all not all the time fortified but we cannot call them medieval cities. Thank you for it.