Distribution patterns of ceramic imports document on a more secure chronological basis the period preceding or contemporary to the appearance of the permanent Phoenician settlements, between the eighth and seventh centuries bce. Phoenician pottery, in particular red-slip ware (e.g., plates and cups, tripod bowls, amphorae), is often found at Iron Age Nuragic settlements and sanctuaries, particularly in west-central and southern Sardinia, the foci of the Phoenician colonial settlement on the island (see later, this chapter). Unlike typologically Levantine metal objects, Phoenician pottery can be found both at large villages and at smaller sites. Its function is generally associated with either consumption or ritual practices, as for instance evidenced by forms such as plates and cups for dining, and tripod bowls for ritual use. The preference accorded to certain types of ceramic ware, such as red-slip ware, and forms, such as tripod bowls, can be related to their “exotic” aspect, as they were unusual within the traditional Nuragic ceramic repertoire (Hayne 2010).
Chronologically, the earliest imports dating between the late ninth and early eighth centuries bce do not come from the southern and west-central part of the island where the Phoenicians established their permanent settlements, but from the coastal village at Sant’Imbenia, in northwestern Sardinia. The site at Sant’Imbenia, conveniently located on the shores of the sheltered bay of Porto Conte, is crucial for our understanding of the social and commercial dynamics of the early period of contact between Phoenician and local groups. The settlement shows typical features of Iron Age Nuragic sites, such as the presence of houses made up of various round and rectangular buildings grouped together around a courtyard (Garau and Rendeli 2012). Early imports include Phoenician red slip, domestic wares, and amphorae (Oggiano 2000), and Greek fine ware. Among the latter, a Euboean pendent semi-circle skyphos is possibly the oldest example of this ceramic form in the West, as it is traditionally dated between the late ninth and early eighth centuries bce (Rendeli 2005). The substantial amounts of Phoenician pottery—in particular domestic ware—that are not matched by imports at any contemporary Nuragic sites suggest that groups from Phoenician background settled at least seasonally at this site. Its location, providing access to the fertile Nurra Plain and its mining resources, is probably one of the main reasons for its importance, which made Sant’Imbenia one of the main nodes of the Early Iron Age Phoenician network in the western Mediterranean.
While the strategic importance of the Sant’Imbenia site in the Phoenician quest for metal is archaeologically documented by the content (copper ingots) of a Phoenician amphora found at the site, equally important is evidence of changes the local community underwent because of strong interaction with the newcomers. Particularly informative in this respect are innovations within the traditional ceramic repertoire and technology, well exemplified by the appearance of a new ceramic form, the “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphora (figure 34.1). This type of artifact bears strong similarities with contemporary typologically Phoenician amphorae, but in most cases, “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphorae were produced according to traditionally Nuragic manufacturing techniques that combined a range of primary hand-forming techniques with slow wheel shaping (De Rosa 2014). This form has been recently identified at a number of Nuragic settlements on the island, and its local production has been ascertained on archaeometric basis at the sites at S’Urachi and Su Cungiau ’e Funtà in west-central Sardinia during the eighth century bce (Roppa 2012). Along with askoid jugs, “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphorae have now been increasingly identified in the central and western Mediterranean, in particular at Carthage and at Phoenician sites on the Iberian Peninsula. Because of their frequent association with Nuragic askoid jugs, a ceramic shape which has been frequently related to wine consumption, it has been suggested that wine was traded in these amphorae (Botto 2015), even though no specific analysis has been carried out yet to determine their content. However, on the basis of evidence from Sant’Imbenia itself and a “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphora containing copper found off Sardinia’s eastern coast (Sanciu 2010: 4–5) it is likely that also metal was traded in this amphora type.
Figure 34.1 “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphorae from S’Urachi (drawings) and Sant’Imbenia.
Source: Photograph from De Rosa and Rendeli 2010: fig. 1.
The archaeological importance of the “Sant’Imbenia”-type amphorae is crucial for understanding early phases of the Phoenician diaspora on Sardinia between the late ninth and eighth centuries bce, as well as their interactions with local communities. The use of a typological Phoenician shape may in fact imply that local communities wished to convey their products to the transmarine western Mediterranean market at that time managed by the Phoenicians (Hayne 2010: 155–56). In turn, this sheds light on the role Nuragic Sardinia’s communities played in the Phoenician trade network, viz. that of commercial partners. In that respect, the lack of permanent Phoenician settlements on the island until at least the mid-seventh century bce—with the exception of Sant’Antioco (see later, this chapter)—may be explained as evidence of the vitality of Nuragic communities in the Early Iron Age, and the existence of some sort of symmetrical commercial partnership between some Nuragic communities and Phoenician merchants. In turn, this means the Phoenicians resided, at least seasonally, at indigenous settlements, as documented by the case study at Sant’Imbenia.
Mid-Eighth to Seventh Centuries bce: The Phoenician Settlement on Sardinia
Based on the existing archaeological documentation, the establishment of permanent Phoenician sites on Sardinia dates—with the exception of Sant’Antioco—to the second half of the seventh century bce (Bernardini 2008; Madrigali 2014). The southern part of the island, particularly the Sulcis region, and the Gulf of Oristano area in west-central Sardinia were the main foci of Phoenician settlement.
Phoenician Settlement on Southern Sardinia
The Phoenician site at Sant’Antioco—a small island just off Sardinia’s southwestern coast—dates from the second quarter of the eighth century bce, as shown by evidence from the settlement area located on the northeastern coast of the islet (Bartoloni 2004). Material from the tophet sanctuary is a few decades later, dating to the second half of the same century (Bartoloni 1988). Excavations in the settlement area have revealed the urban layout of the site’s early phase, composed of juxtaposed rectangular buildings facing both sides of a road. Walls were made up of mudbricks on top of stone foundations, and floors consisted of pressed earth. The tophet was located on a low hill to the southwest of the settlement. Finds from both the settlement area and the tophet included Nuragic pottery, as well as eastern and colonial Phoenician and western Greek imported pottery. These materials show the broad trans-Mediterranean trade network Sant’Antioco was part of in the Early Iron Age, and possibly points to the mixed ethnic background of its inhabitants (Bernardini 2009; Pompianu 2010).
The earliest evidence of colonial settlement in southern Sardinia is matched by sporadic burial evidence from San Giorgio di Portoscuso, located on Sardinia’s southwestern coast, close to Sant’Antioco. There, rescue excavations yielded Phoenician incinerations and associated grave goods, including an amphora possibly made on Sant’Antioco, as well as traditional Nuragic pottery (Bernardini 2000a).
The later inland settlements at Monte Sirai and Pani Loriga have been traditionally associated with groups of settlers from Sant’Antioco. The former is located on a flat plateau overseeing the southern coast of the island, visually connected with Sant’Antioco. Excavations at Monte Sirai have brought to light the major Punic phase of the settlement, dating to the fourth through third centuries bce, while the earliest Phoenician ceramic material dates to the late eighth century bce and only few structural remains date not earlier than the late seventh century bce (Perra 2001). The chronology of Monte Sirai is matched by evidence from the hilltop site at Pani Loriga, located about 15 km west of Sant’Antioco. The grave goods from incineration burials date to the late seventh century bce, while excavations at the settlement have so far onl
y brought to light the Punic phase, dating to the late sixth and early fifth centuries bce (Botto et al. 2010). The presence of preexisting nuraghi at both hilltop sites may explain the circulation of Phoenician pottery before the earliest archaeological evidence of colonial settlement.
A little farther from the Sulcis colonial compound, on Sardinia’s southern coast, are the Phoenician settlements of Nora, Bithia, and Cagliari. Among these settlements, the most conspicuous documentation comes from Nora. Sporadic finds include the famous Nora stela, whose debated chronology ranges between the ninth and eighth centuries bce, and large amounts of pottery from excavations dated between the eighth and seventh centuries bce. That early chronology is only partially matched by settlement contexts, as evidence of settlement at Nora during the late seventh and sixth centuries bce is only temporary, documented by postholes probably related to huts built of perishable material. More elaborated and permanent structural remains along with the appearance of the tophet date only to the late sixth–early fifth centuries bce (Bonetto 2009: 75–76). Pottery from the settlement area, and Phoenician and imported material from incineration burials, however, shows that individuals from Phoenician background settled at least temporarily at Nora as early as the seventh century bce (if not earlier). The overall archaeological documentation concerning Nora might point to the existence of a place of worship at a trading post which functioned as a seasonal stopover throughout the Phoenician period (Bonetto 2014).
Dating to the late seventh century bce are data from Bithia and Cagliari. From Bithia, only the incineration necropolis and tophet are known, which have yielded grave goods pointing to strong interaction with local communities and involvement in trading sea routes, particularly those connecting Etruria (Bernardini 2000b). Evidence from the settlement area comes from Cagliari, where rescue excavations at the modern-day city have revealed rectangular buildings dating to the late seventh century bce (Tronchetti et al. 1992). The earliest inhumations at the Tuvixeddu cemetery appeared only later, in the Punic period, from the late sixth century bce.
Phoenician Settlement in West-Central Sardinia
The second cluster of Phoenician settlements on Sardinia is located by the Gulf of Oristano. The earliest colonial sites in the area include Tharros and Othoca, both established in the second half of the seventh century bce: the former at Cape San Marco, which encloses the Gulf of Oristano to the north, the latter on the gulf’s northeastern coast. On the southern shores of the gulf, Phoenician, Etruscan, Greek, and Iron Age Nuragic pottery collected from surveys carried out at the later Punic and Roman settlement of Neapolis documents at least the involvement of the southern sector of the gulf in the Phoenician network between the late eighth and sixth centuries bce (Garau 2006).
Both Tharros and Othoca have yielded archaeological evidence of Phoenician settlement dating from the late seventh century bce, from funerary contexts and the tophet (Tharros) and from the settlement area (Othoca). At both sites, however, older Phoenician materials dating between the mid-eighth and seventh centuries bce have been collected, along with Iron Age Nuragic pottery. This may be related to the existence of preexisting Nuragic sites within, or close to, the settlement area. While on the Tharros peninsula it is unclear when the village at Su Muru Mannu, the nuraghe Baboe Cabitza and the site at S’Arenedda were abandoned (Bernardini 2005: 87), at Othoca, the Iron Age Nuragic villages at Sant’Elia, and particularly at Is Olionis, were located in close connection to the Phoenician settlement (Nieddu and Zucca 1991: 48–49, 120). Because of such close connections, and since firm evidence of Phoenician settlement dates only from the late seventh century bce, the presence of earlier Phoenician material at both sites may be better related to trade between local communities and Phoenician groups. From this period, we possess early burial evidence and material from the tophet at Tharros, as well as settlement contexts at Othoca. Available burial evidence from Othoca dates to the early sixth century bce. Two incineration cemeteries have been identified at Tharros, respectively, to the south and to the north of the cape (Bernardini 2005). While the southern funerary area later developed as Tharros’s main cemetery in the course of the Punic period, the northern necropolis was in use only through the late seventh and sixth centuries bce (Del Vais and Fariselli 2010).
Phoenician Settlement in Eastern Sardinia
To the core areas of Phoenician settlement within southern and west-central Sardinia, we need to add some evidence of settlement on the eastern coast, particularly from the sites at Olbia and Cuccureddus di Villasimius. At the modern-day city of Olbia, located at the base of a sheltered bay in northeastern Sardinia, rescue excavations have yielded Nuragic, Greek, and Phoenician material ranging between the middle of the eighth through the sixth centuries bce. While there is no structural evidence of settlement at the site until the Punic center developed in the fourth century bce, distribution patterns of Iron Age pottery might suggest the existence of a trading post or intense relationships between an indigenous settlement and foreign merchants. Based on the chronology of Phoenician (mid-eighth–late seventh centuries) and Greek pottery, in particular Ionian imports (late seventh–sixth centuries), it has been proposed that two distinct phases of Phoenician and Greek control over Olbia existed. These two phases have been related to two distinct Tyrrhenian networks, one leading to the Italian peninsula managed by the Phoenicians and the other connecting to Corsica and southern France managed by the Greeks. The development of the Greek network has been framed in the context of the contemporary Phocaean enterprise in the Tyrrhenian Sea, which led to the establishment of the Greek settlement of Massalia at modern-day Marseilles, traditionally dated to 545 bce (D’Oriano 2010).
Ritual evidence from the sixth century comes from the small sanctuary at Cuccureddus di Villasimius, on Sardinia’s eastern coast. The sanctuary was composed as small cellas fenced by a precinct. Material usually related to ritual activities, such as oil bottles of Phoenician, Greek, and Etruscan tradition shows both the cultic function of the site and its involvement in the contemporary trade routes. The sanctuary was destroyed in the late sixth century bce (Marras et al. 1989).
Mixed Communities
In recent years, closer collaboration between archaeologists working at Phoenician and Nuragic sites have started to shed new light on the complex nature of the relationships between local communities and newcomers, and to unravel new scenarios of mobility, co-residence, and cultural interaction during the Iron Age (e.g., Bernardini and Perra 2012; van Dommelen and Roppa 2014). While the presence of Nuragic material culture at most Phoenician burial and settlement contexts has been traditionally interpreted as evidence of the inclusion of individuals from Nuragic background in the colonies’ social fabric, less attention has been traditionally paid to Phoenician mobility beyond the conventional intra-colonial links and sea routes connecting the western Mediterranean maritime network.
To be sure, most sites which from the late seventh century bce developed typical Phoenician cultural traits (as shown in the previous section) have yielded evidence of preexisting Nuragic settlement. Although Iron Age Nuragic chronology is highly problematic (Ialongo 2014), the circulation of Phoenician pottery predating firm evidence of Phoenician settlement at those sites may be related, on the one hand, to trade contacts between local communities and individuals from Phoenician background who at least temporarily inhabited these Nuragic centers, as might be the case at Othoca. On the other hand, the existence of seasonal Phoenician stopovers which functioned as trading posts may explain the presence of early Phoenician material at sites such as Nora. Either way, all these sites developed prominent Phoenician material culture, the features of which differ substantially from those of Iron Age Nuragic culture and which have been traditionally interpreted as the bases of Phoenician colonization in the island.
This apparently straightforward colonial dynamic is complicated by a number of archaeological contexts that have emerged at a number of indigenous sites, in particular at nuraghe Sirai and S’Urach
i, respectively, in southern and west-central Sardinia. At these sites, the inclusion of Phoenicians within the social fabric of Nuragic settlements and the development of culturally mixed communities have been documented from the late seventh century bce, a chronology which matches the contemporary appearance of most colonial settlements on the island.
The archaeological record from nuraghe Sirai best documents the complex cultural dynamics at work in this period. At this site, located at short distance from the Phoenician settlement at Monte Sirai, the complex nuraghe and adjacent village were enclosed in the late seventh century bce by a defensive rampart made of juxtaposed small rectangular rooms. At the same time, rectangular buildings were built against preexisting round huts in the village area (Perra 2005). Strong interaction between the local community and the groups of Phoenicians who settled at nuraghe Sirai is evidenced by artisanal work, as shown by patterns of pottery and glass production. A ceramic kiln has been recently found just outside the fortified perimeter, whose plan and typology closely matches examples from the Phoenician motherland and from the colonial world as well. Archaeometric and typological analysis of locally made pottery show that Phoenician shapes predominate stylistically. This points to the development of hybrid, mixed production practices, which merged technological and stylistic aspects of Nuragic and Phoenician ceramic traditions (Gradoli 2014). As for glass production (for which the Phoenicians were well known), excavations have shown the technology was unknown to Nuragic communities. Excavations have so far focused on a limited portion of the large settlement, but have yielded evidence of settlement until the second half of the sixth century bce, when the site was abandoned, as the nearby Phoenician site at Monte Sirai grew in importance in the regional settlement hierarchy (Perra 2014).
The Oxford Handbook of the Phoenician and Punic Mediterranean Page 76