The long-standing hypothesis about absence or low number of the settlements comparing them with burial grounds from the period of Avar Khaganate is no longer acceptable regarding to the results of recent research and excavations. While the settlement of Avar Khaganate period in Slovakia was the sole case in the 1930’s, number of new settlements has increased during the course of three or four decades by archaeological excavations. Ten settlement sites were known in 1988. Currently, the corpus of settlements from Slovakia contains 28 items with excavated features from the period of Avar Khaganate; other seven sites were found by surveys. The large corpuses are the most important. The aim of the present study is publication of features and material culture from the sites of Šaľa II (district of Šaľa), Úľany nad Žitavou and Pavlová (both in the Nové Zámky district). Publication of the corpuses widens the archaeological sources for the period of the 8th century AD. The settlements had no convincing traits of the status differences among the features or indications of their hierarchy, although the social stratification is observed in the Avar burial grounds. The sites with higher number of habitable features appear to be a dispersed form of settlement with several clusters of features. The excavated settlements have shown that settlement forms in the period of Avar Khaganate do not differ significantly from Slavic rural settlements. This is not the evidence of the “Slavic ethnicity” of the forms of settlements (probably only the evidence of origin of some phenomena in Slavic milieu), but only a confirmation of similar or identical economic interrelations in the rural settlement structure. The traits from the settlement sites are evidence of the identical economic basis for the existence of Avar and Great Moravian ruling elite. The overview of other sites from the south-western Slovakia shows that there was no general rule for the establishment or abandonment of the settlements in the break of the 8th and 9th centuries. The diachronic differences between the horizons of the 8th and 9th century’s pottery are not yet well defined and regional differences possibly occur.