![[Landing on Motya]](http://data.docslib.org/img/9060b1d4f67101ba26ca21156e059ec2-1.webp)
MOTYE
[Quaderni di archeologia fenicio‐punica/CM 04]
[Landing on Motya] The earliest Phoenician settlement of the 8th century BC and the creation of a West Phoenician cultural identity in the excavations of Sapienza University of Rome – 2012‐2016
[by Lorenzo Nigro & Federica Spagnoli]
Under the aegis of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana Superintendence of Trapani
[with the editorial contribution of Daria Montanari, Federico Cappella]
ROME 2017
Università di Roma «La Sapienza» Missione archeologica a Mozia
MOTYE
[Quaderni di archeologia fenicio‐punica/CM 04] www.lasapienzamozia.it
Una collana sottomessa a revisori e a un comitato scientifico dedicata all’Archeologia di Mozia e alla cultura fenicia e punica nel Mediterraneo.
A peer‐review series dedicated to the Archaeology of Motya and the Phoenician and Punic culture in the Mediterranean.
QAFP/Colour Monograph è la collana di volumi a colori connessa alla serie “Quaderni di Archeologia fenicio‐punica”, dedicata alla pubblicazione dei risultati delle indagini archeologiche e degli studi condotti dalla Missione archeologica a Mozia, la città fenicia e punica della Sicilia Occidentale. Le ricerche a Mozia sono condotte in convenzione con l’Assessorato Regionale dei Beni e dell’Identità Siciliana, secondo la convenzione stipulata con la Soprintendenza Regionale BBCCAA di Trapani.
QAFP/Colour Monograph is the colour monograph series related with “Quaderni di Archeologia fenicio‐punica”, the series devoted to the publication of results of archaeological investigations and studies carried on by Rome “La Sapienza” Expedition to Motya, the Phoenician and Punic city in Western Sicily. Researches at Motya are carried out under the aegis of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni e dell’Identità Siciliana according to the ongoing agreement established with the Regional Superintendence of Trapani.
Lorenzo NIGRO & Federica SPAGNOLI Landing on Motya. The earliest Phoenician settlement of the 8th century BC and the creation of a West Phoenician cultural identity in the excavations of Rome «La Sapienza» University ‐ 2012‐2016
(= Quaderni di Archeologia fenicio‐punica/Colour Monograph 04)
Copyright 2017 Missione archeologica a Mozia
Università di Roma «La Sapienza» P.le Aldo Moro, 5 ‐ 00185 Roma
Tutti i diritti riservati. È vietata la riproduzione di testi e illustrazioni senza il permesso scritto della Missione archeologica a Mozia pp. 124; 29,7 x 24 cm; illustrazioni a colori
ISBN 978‐88‐98154‐00‐5 ISSN 1824‐4017
Excavations at Motya are funded by Sapienza University of Rome – Grandi Scavi d’Ateneo
AKNWOLEDGEMENTS A special thank is addressed to officials and colleagues of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni e dell’Identità Siciliana: the Superintendent of Trapani, Arch. Paola Misuraca (and her forerunners Arch. Giuseppe Gini, Prof. Sebastiano Tusa), the Responsible of the Service Beni Archeologici of the same Institution, Dr. Rossella Giglio, and to Dr. G. Mammina, who followed and strongly supported the works at Motya. Our deepest and heart‐felt thank is also addressed to G. Whitaker Foundation, Palermo, which offered its generous hospitality and help to the Expedition on the island: to the President, Prof. Paolo Matthiae, the Secretary, Dr. Maria Enza Carollo, all members of the Council of Administration, and to all the personnel working on the island (Dr. M.P. Toti, F. Sammartano, V., A. e G. Parrinello, G. Piacentino, S. Lombardo, S. Larice, G. Pocorobba, as well as to our cooks, E. and A. Lombardo and their families, to Mr. M. Ottiveggio and N. Monteleone and their families. To the Rector, Prof. E. Gaudio, the Vice‐Rectors, the members of the Sapienza Research Board, the Dean of the Faculty of Letters, Prof. Stefano Asperti, and the Directors of the Dept. of Sciences of Antiquities, Prof. Enzo Lippolis, and Oriental Studies, Prof. Matilde Mastrangelo of Sapienza University, the Expedition Team is extraordinarily grateful for constantly supporting our research at Motya, as well as to the personnel of the Secretariat of the Dept. IISO (Dr. Claudio Lombardi). The field‐directors of Area C South in years 2012‐2016 were E. Gallo (2012‐2014) and F. Zielli (2015‐2016).
On the front cover: artist’s watercolour showing a Phoenician vessel landing on Motya. Università di Roma «La Sapienza» Missione archeologica a Mozia
MOTYE
ᾬκουν δὲ καὶ Φοίνικες περὶ πᾶσαν μὲν τὴν Σικελίαν ἄκρας τε ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάσσῃ ἀπολαβόντες καὶ τὰ ἐπικείμενα νησίδια ἐμπορίας ἕνεκεν τῆς πρὸς τοὺς Σικελούς:
(Thucydides VI, 2.6)
Landing on Motya. The earliest Phoenician settlement [Contents] MOTYE
Contents
0. INTRODUCTION: PHOENICIANS AT THE WORLD’S ENDS p. 3
1. THE EARLIEST PHOENICIAN LANDFALL: MOTYA IVA (800‐750 BC) [Lorenzo Nigro] p. 4 1.1. A favourable environment p. 5 1.2. A protected landfall p. 6 1.3. Wells and dwellings p. 7 1.4. The earliest cult place near the springs ‐ Shrine C14 p. 8 1.5. Warehouse C8 – the ‘Funduq’ p. 10
2. THE POTTERY REPERTOIRE OF MOTYA IVA (800‐750 BC) [Federica Spagnoli] p. 24 2.1. General features p. 24 2.2. Phoenician pottery: Red Slip and Plain Ware p. 25 2.3. Levantine Transport Amphorae p. 31 2.4. Impasto Ware p. 33 2.5. Cypriot and Levantine Imports p. 35
3. RISE OF A HARBOUR CITY [Lorenzo Nigro] p. 44 3.1. The expansion on the Acropolis p. 45 3.2. The earliest Temple (C5) p. 49 3.3. The Temple of Astarte in Area C p. 54 3.4. The Temple of a healing god p. 57 3.5. The earliest Phoenician necropolis p. 59 3.6. The earliest Tophet p. 70
4. THE POTTERY REPERTOIRE OF MOTYA IVB (750‐675 BC) [Federica Spagnoli] p. 74 4.1. Motya IVB pottery repertoire p. 74 4.2. Phoenician pottery p. 74 4.3. Impasto Ware p. 84 4.4. Motya Transport Amphorae p. 85 4.5. Cypriot, Carthaginian, and Greek Imports p. 86 4.6. The pottery repertoire of the Archaic Necropolis p. 95
5. MOTYA IV: A CERAMIC HORIZON IN TRANSITION [Federica Spagnoli] p. 99 5.1. Phoenician imprinting: Motya IVA ceramic repertoire p. 99 5.2. Aegean connections and hybridization. The development of a local identity p. 101
[1]
Landing on Motya. The earliest Phoenician settlement [Contents] MOTYE
6. MOTYA IV: BUILDING UP A WEST PHOENICIAN COLONY [Lorenzo Nigro] p. 104 6.1. Starting a colony: population, demography and economic basics p. 105 6.2. Urban layout and architecture p. 107 6.3. Public buildings p. 108 6.4. Industrial installations and productive activities p. 109 6.5. Trade, imports and luxury goods p. 110
7. MOTYA IV AND THE CREATION OF A WEST PHOENICIAN CULTURAL IDENTITY [Lorenzo Nigro] p. 111 7.1. Motya IV chronology and Phoenician colonial waves p. 111 7.2. Cultures in mediation p. 112 7.3. Different models p. 112 7.4. A new mixed culture: the Phoenician in the West p. 113
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY p. 114
Period Absolute Area C – Kothon Acropolis Temple of Tophet MOTYA Dating Temples of Baal (C14, C5) and Areas D, L Cappiddazzu Astarte (C12), Building C8 I ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Phase 13 ‐ Virgin soil with remains of human frequentation IIA 1650‐1400 Phase 13 Phase 15 ‐ ‐ Phase 12 ‐ Area D ‐ I/Area L IIB 1400‐1250 Phase 12 Phase 14 ‐ Remains of prehistoric Area D ‐I/D – III/Area L burials IIIA 1250‐1100 Phase 11 Phase 13 ‐ ‐ Phase 11 Area D ‐I/D ‐ III Area L IIIB 1100‐900 Phase 10 Phase 12 ‐ /800? Area D ‐ I/Area L IVA 800‐750 Phase 9 Phase 11 ‐ Erection of the Tophet Early cult installations (pits) in the southern limit: M.3267 temple area (Shrine C14); Wells; Building C8 IVB 750‐675 Phase 8 ‐ Phase 10 ‐ Phase 1 ‐ Phase 10/stratum VII Refurbishing of Bld. C8; Remains of the first Phoenician Pits and cult First use of the urns field Erection of Temple C5 and C6 settlement (Area D ‐I/D ‐ III) installations VA 675‐625 Phase 7 ‐ Phase 9 ‐ Phase 2 ‐ Phase 9/stratum VI Reconstruction of Building C8 Use of the western sector of Archaic Second use of the urns field the Acropolis Temple Erection of the Square Refurbishing of Temple C5 (Area D ‐I/D ‐ III Shrine VB 625‐550 Phase 8 Phase 8/stratum V Refurbishing of Building C8 Third use of the urns field c. 550 Phase 6 ‐Destruction Destruction Destruction Destruction
[Tab. 1 ‐ Periodization of Motya in the prehistory and in the early Phoenician periods]
[2]
[0.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Introduction] MOTYE
0. Introduction: crossing Herakles’ Pillars, and colonizing the Atlantic coast of Andalusia (Botto 2014). Phoenicians at the World’s Ends Motya, on the western tip of Sicily, is an extraordinary observatory of such phenomena ith the Thera explosion in c. 1600 BC and the W and, after 15 seasons of excavations (2002‐2016) sudden collapse of the Minoan civilization the sea by Sapienza University of Rome and the Regional gates of West Mediterranean were opened to Superintendence of Trapani, offers a plea of fresh Levantine and Egyptian seafarers. Since then, the data to outline Levantine and Phoenician route of the great islands crossing the ‘middle contribution to the Mediterranean civilization. sea’ along the 35°‐37° parallel was run over by vessels in search of new resources, peoples, lands 0.1. Method and even ideas. Prehistoric archaeology in the This book is a synthesis of 15 years of excavations Iberian Peninsula, the Baleares, Sardinia, Sicily, in seven different areas of the island of Motya Southern Italy, and Malta has painstakingly (Zones B, C, D, F, L, Tophet, Necropolis), which demonstrated that what Levantine seamen bump targeted the earliest strata of ‘Phoenician’ into were distinguished cultures (Dietler ‐ Lopez occupation (Motya IV: see tab. 1, p. 2). Results of Ruiz eds. 2009; Knapp ‐ Van Dommelen 2014). previous expeditions in the “Cappiddazzu” Zone Thus, the narration of the flame of civilization and other sparse finds have been also integrated enlightening the Mediterranean from the Levant into the study. Stratigraphy, finds seriation (“Ex Oriente Lux”) should be partially revised. (already worked out by A. Ciasca), and Explorers and, then, settlers, were not exporting architecture have been matched together and civilization in the land of Barbarians or plotted in order to reconstruct the extension and Troglodytes, as successive historiography liked to the most prominent features of the earliest narrate, but they were contaminating themselves Phoenician settlement on the island. Pottery has with other original and complex cultures. undergone a detailed study of types, fabrics, Nonetheless, what this expansion of the East revetments and decorations, including towards the West generated was a new petrographic characterization. Sensors and civilization. It came out from exchange, photo‐sensors have been used to identify vessels assimilation and mediation. Distances and and strata contents. Other chemical and physical barriers, since then, existed more often between analyses (gas chromatography, XRF, SEM) were disciplines and different chapters of the same also used to identify ancient materials, as well as book (e.g. the Hittites, the Phoenicians, the to characterize soil samples. Results of individual Sardinians, Tartessos, etc.), than between studies on each specific piece of evidence, overlapping ancient cultures. including a demographic model useful to properly Early explorers of 2nd millennium BC, hence, calibrate finds relevance are published in widely contributed to the creation of a shared specialized journals. culture across the Mediterranean (Tusa 2016). The volume begins with the environmental However, their enterprises and goals are not setting of the colony (§ 1.1.); then the earliest comparable to what took place from the 11th to stage of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC) is thoroughly the 8th century BC. illustrated (§ 1.2.‐5.), with its pottery assemblage During Iron Age IB‐IIB (1136‐701 BC; Nigro 2014a, (§ 2.), which is highly representative of the initial 263, tab. 1), while Syria‐Palestine was being organization of the settlement. Chapter 3 deals progressively submitted by the Neo‐Assyrian with all different contexts of the earliest city Empire, the harbour cities of the Levant, flourished in period Motya IVB (750‐675 BC), and stimulated by socio‐political upheavals occurred chapter 4 provides a detailed discussion of its in the Aegean and in Anatolia, were protagonists pottery repertoire. The interpretation of ceramic of three major waves of expansion to the West (§ finds is offered in a separate format in chapter 5, 7.1.). This phenomenon brought at least 300,000 as well as the final essay about the different people (out of an overall population of about 2 features of the colony (§ 6.), and its cultural millions) in four hundred years to migrate from meaning in the Mediterranean scenario (§ 7.). the Levantine coast to the West. Phoenicians Let’s get us aboard of the Phoenician ship and definitely extended the limits of the ancient cross the ‘middle sea’ to land on the southern Word, by navigating to the farthest West, shores of Motya…
[3]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1. The earliest Phoenician The frequentation of the area continued until the end of the 10th century BC, almost one century landfall: Motya IVA (800‐750 BC) before Phoenicians’ arrival. Then, a gap apparently existed in the life of the island during Recent archaeological investigations demon‐ the 9th century BC. However, the absence of strated that Motya was a regular stop over the archaeological material relating to this time sea‐route crossing the Mediterranean east‐west elapse cannot be automatically considered a already in the 2nd millennium BC (fig. 1). positive evidence for an occupational hiatus. Levantine and Mycenaean seafarers used to rest When the earliest Phoenicians landed on the in the Marsala Lagoon before continuing their sea southern shore of Motya for establishing their journeys to Sardinia, Baleares and the Iberian settlement this region of the island was desert. Peninsula, as well as towards the Aeolian Island Why they landed on there, and who precisely and central Tyrrhenian Sea (Nigro 2016). were they? What were they bringing with them At those times, Motya hosted a prosperous from the East? Which was their social indigenous village, which continued to live, with organization? How did they settle, in which several transformations and at least four major dwellings and with which commodities? How did stratigraphic phases (Motya IIA, IIB, IIIA and IIIB) their earliest settlement use to live? until the end of the 10th century BC (Nigro in Which was the impact of Phoenician newcomers press). on the environment of the Marsala Lagoon? And, In the area of the Kothon, i.e. the southernmost which kind of relationships did they establish region of the island, the earliest occupational with the local indigenous population? layers date back from the 12th century BC, as it These are the questions we try to answer in the has been suggested by radiocarbon dates and following pages of this book in the light of recent some rare find (Nigro 2016). archaeological excavations by our expedition.
[fig. 1 ‐ AERIAL VIEW OF THE ISLAND OF MOTYA IN THE MARSALA LAGOON, LOOKING WEST]
[4]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.1. A favourable environment fishes, birds and produced graze for animal breeding, by contrast with the high level of As stated above, Motya had already been a stop salinity in soil and sea waters of the surroundings. over the sea‐route crossing East‐West the This warm and humid environment populated by Mediterranean before Phoenicians’ landing. This small arboreal essences was a very favorable was due to its strategic location at the habitat for fishes and birds reproduction (fig. 2). westernmost tip of Sicily, overlooking the Sicilian They were a precious subsistence resource for Canal, and to its extremely favourable human communities populating the Marsala environment. An island not far away from Sicily Lagoon and the island of Motya. We still know within a fairly protected lagoon, with calm very few about the vegetation of Motya before seawaters, near the mouth of a river (the Birgi Phoenicians’ arrivals. Wild olive tree (Olea river, which flowed into the sea just north of the europaea sylvestris, fig. 3), common fig (Ficus Lagoon), freshwater, salt, cultivable land, a non‐ carica), and lentisk (or mastic tree of Chios), as hostile local population, where all elements well as wild fennel and several asters, including attracting human presence since early prehistory chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla), and oxeye (Nigro 2016). daisy, spontaneously grew on the island. The presence of drinking water fostered a Conversely, grapes, several varieties of barley and variegated flora and fauna which after human wheat, legumes (chickpeas, lentils, broad beans, intervention started to be transformed into a chickling), the domesticated olive tree, the dwarf warm and comfortable habitat (Nigro 2013a, 41). palm‐tree (Chamaerops humilis), other fruit‐trees A distinguishing feature of the Motyan (cherry, plum, pomegranate), and even aloe vera environment was the clayish marl bedrock were imported and extensively cultivated by its forming its ground soil. It has plastic and ancient Levantine and Phoenician colonists. waterproof properties, which prevented the phreatic aquifer from being infiltrated by sea‐ waters. The latter was, however, able to spill out as a consequence of the sea pressure following the lagoon tides, a phenomenon which might be easily give rise to religious interpretations, as reported by Strabo for Cadix (Strabo III, V:7‐8). Moreover, freshwaters spilled out also under the seawaters from the sea bottom, attracting fishes and other marine species, as well as birds. Abundant presence of freshwater also attracted
[fig. 2 ‐ SPONTANEOUS VEGETATION AT MOTYA IN THE AREA OF [fig. 3 ‐ A GROVE OF DOMESTICATED OLIVE TREES ON THE ISLAND THE KOTHON: FLOWERS AND PLANTS BELONG TO A OF MOTYA SURROUNDED BY SPONTANEOUS PLANTS OF WILD MEDITERRANEAN ‘SUB‐TROPICAL‐LIKE’ TEMPERATE CLIMATE] FENNEL AND AN IMPORTED PEACH TREE]
[5]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.2. A protected landfall However, Phoenicians excavated new canals into the bottom of the lagoon, leading boats all Before Phoenicians landing on Motya, the south‐ around the island to its northern and more western quadrant of the island looked like a protected seashores, which gradually became its gently sloping hill, rich in vegetation, with a commercial docks. shallow depression some 30 m inland of the As regards the way of landing or securing boats, seashore, where the phreatic aquifer emerged one has to remind that at those times the sea creating a small pond. The banks of this pond had level was around 0.8 m lower than nowadays, been frequented since the prehistory, even that means a seashore with a length of roughly though the indigenous village at those times only 15 m encircling the island available to park boats occupied the central raised part of the island. and to attend to fishing activities. Aside fresh drinking water, Motya offered Moreover, the plastic clayish bottom of the another basic advantage to its settlers: the lagoon itself allowed to easily fix wooden poles lagoon assured a safe and wind shielded place to used to secure boats. The clayish soil of Motya anchor ships and boats. Its relatively huge was also suitable for producing mudbricks and dimensions made it impossible to reach the pottery, while marl limestone was easy to be cut island without being sighted well before the and to be laid into trenches excavated in sandy or landing. marly topsoil to work as building foundations. Furthermore, the access to the lagoon was not at The pond was regularized and its waters were all easy, for its shallow waters made it necessary drained in order to dry up swamps and marshes, to enter the canals leading to the island; this and collect ground waters into a series of wells occurrence was exploited by Phoenician arrayed between the pond and the sea. newcomers to enhance its defences. As far as it is known, Motya was devoid of any The original way to approach the island led to the defense system in its early stages of life (Motya southern seashore, not far away from the earliest IV‐V, 800‐550 BC), and the Lagoon itself dwellings and the springs area (fig. 4). guaranteed its protection.
[fig. 4 ‐ RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EARLIEST PHOENICIAN LANDFALL IN THE AREA OF THE SO‐CALLED ‘KOTHON’ AT MOTYA, WITH THE SEASHORE USED AS LANDING PLACE, THE WELLS AND DWELLINGS QUARTER, THE WAREHOUSE (C8), THE SPRINGS, THE POND AND THE NEARBY TH TEMPLE; PHASE 9, BEGINNING OF THE 9 CENTURY BC]
[6]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.3. Wells and dwellings The superstructures of these dwellings were made of yellowish‐gray mudbricks, with poor The earliest settlement arose on a slightly rising wood inserts for openings and ceilings. Other bump of clayish marl bedrock overlooking the installations were spread over the small mound southernmost sandy beach of the island, the just to the west, overlooking the pond created by nearest berthing place for a sailboat entering the the springs (Nigro 2013a, 42). Marsala Lagoon. Also oldest structures excavated by the British The newcomers cut off and regularized the Expedition in the southernmost portion of the summit of the bump and dug a triple array of area (rooms 23, 24, 25, 26) underneath the later wells into the regularized clayish marl bedrock city‐walls, including a well (Well 3), possibly with an average depth of around 2.5‐3 m (Nigro belong to the latest reconstruction (Phase 8) of 2010a, 8‐14). The mouths of these wells were the same earliest village (Isserlin ‐ du Plat Taylor lined with medium size riverbed stones in a well 1974, 52‐53, plan III). refined and tied up masonry. At the edge of the Two markedly larger buildings were built to the marl layer towards the sea‐shore some east, an open cult place (Shrine C14), and a ephemeral dwellings were built, with walls made warehouse (Building C8: Nigro 2013a, 44‐45), of a single line of unworked stones, extending which were the two poles of the rising town. also on the seashore (fig. 5).
[fig. 5 ‐ WELLS AND DWELLINGS REMAINS IN AREA C SOUTH‐WEST: IN THE FOREGROUND STRATIGRAPHIC SOUNDING SHOWING THE TWO MAJOR PHASES (9 AND 8‐7) WITH THE RECONSTRUCTION OF WELL 1 MOUTH IN PHASE 8; IN THE BACKGROUND THE REGULARIZED CLAYISH MARL PAVEMENT OF THE EARLIEST (PHASE 9) SETTLEMENT, L.1650]
[7]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.4. The earliest cult place near the side‐wall, overlooking the landfall on the island. springs – Shrine C14 The cella was 7.35 m (14 cubits) long and 3.67 m (7 cubits) wide; possibly there were benches An open cult place was set up around 20 m inland along its sides, which were removed by just aside the main spring of fresh water, on the successive refurbishing. The overall length on the eastern side of the pond. It included a rectangular inner space (9.975 m = 19 cubits) was subdivided shrine, several cult installations, an obelisk‐like into two: the easternmost part of the room stela, baetyls, a sacred well, a main drain flowing hosted an adyton (2.1 x 3.67 m [4 x 7 cubits]), into the pond, a secondary drain for pouring separated by a mudbrick partition wall. The door liquids, and at least three major favissae or votive to the adyton opened across the northern side of pits for different kinds of offerings (fig. 6). the partition wall, with a threshold paved with The area of the sanctuary was slightly raised and two slabs, and in front of a funnel shaped paved with beaten and smashed clayish marl installation also made of stone slabs, which apparently taken from the regularized bump served as ‘mundus’ (a hole where to pour where wells and dwellings were installed. Scanty libations). Aside this sacred hole there was a remains of a stones alignment marking the limits shallow altar, measuring 3 x 2 cubits (1.57 x 1.05 of the sacred compound were identified, as well m), also made of limestone slabs. A drain, from as some steps presumably serving as markers of the back side of the altar flowed through the rear the sanctuary borders (Nigro 2010a, figs. 25‐26). wall of the building into the space outside of it to The shrine was an elongated building measuring the east. On the northern side of the altar, a thin 11.02 x 4.72 m (21 x 5 cubits), with a relatively carinated stela was standing with a plastered monumental entrance, 2.1 m wide, opened to hollow underneath, apparently used for burning the south, at the western end of the southern incense or other sacred perfumes.
[fig. 6 ‐ RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EARLIEST SHRINE (C14), WITH CONNECTED CULT INSTALLATIONS, ERECETED BY THE POND OF FRESH WATER TH IN THE CENTRAL REGION OF AREA C ON THE SOUTHERN QUADRANT OF THE ISLAND OF MOTYA, PHASE 9, BEGINNING OF 8 CENTURY BC]
[8]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
All the spaces around the shrine hosted cult or to suggest a relationship with astral or installations. Around 5 m north‐east of the corner transcendent deities Nigro 2010b, 22‐23). In of the building, the temple spring spilled out. It some cases, such stones were found drowned was given a built‐up mouth and a canal carrying into the pit itself. its water straight to the pond. Just aside the head of the spring to the east, an oval pit was used to discharge votive material, or to ritually bury small stelae, baetyls, or, barely, anchor stones. Just south, along the western side of the temple, an altar made of mudbricks was standing with two small circular holes at its feet. They might have been intended to pour ritual liquids or could have hosted sacred poles, totems, or baetyls. The altar was located few meters from the canal flowing into the pond. The space just south of the main façade of the [fig. 7 ‐ OFFERING PITS FOR DEPOSITING BROKEN VESSELS, shrine was chosen to host the most remarkable ANIMAL REMAINS AND CHARCOALS, SOUTH WEST OF SHRINE C14] cult installations: a sacred well was drilled and lined with unworked riverbed stones in front of the temple entrance; it was accompanied by an obelisk‐like stela, flanked by a square slab. From the latter, a sunken canal flowed westwards to the pond, ending in a drain made by two elongated carved sandstone blocks. East of the obelisk two square slabs embedded into the floor suggest the presence of other self‐ standing monuments, as like as a wooden baetyl, possibly supporting a divine idol. In between the obelisk and a base, there was a shallow hollow in the floor, paved with small flat stones, with a long drain cut into the floor and lined with sundried mudbricks, descending towards the south‐east. This drain was tangent to an area where a roughly round pit 2.3 m wide and around 0.2 m deep hosted a depositional space where metal [fig. 8 ‐ OFFERING PITS FOR BROKEN VESSELS, ANIMAL REMAINS and mineral offerings (iron and copper slags, AND CHARCOALS, SOUTH‐WEST OF SHRINE C14] broken nails or spikes, minerals with smoothed or shining surfaces) were buried inside small pits, covered with stone pebbles. These kinds of offerings hint at a chthonian deity, a lord of netherworld. Not far from the pit there were some paved platform, and holes in the flooring, possibly belonged to betyls (fig. 7). The third major cult compound was a large (5 m) and deep (0.5‐0.7 m) depression located south‐ west of the shrine some meters in the bank of the pond (fig. 8). Inside the depression, a series of offering pits were excavated for depositing broken pottery vessels, burnt part of sacrificed animals, small beads, iron slags and charcoals (fig.
9). Upright unworked stones or baetyls were also [fig. 9 ‐ METAL OFFERINGS (IRON SLAG AND BRONZE HOOK), displaced with the pits as to signal their location FROM PIT F.1687]
[9]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.5. Warehouse C8 – the ‘Funduq’ Nevertheless, its plan and its stratigraphy could be confidently reconstructed. The original A few meters from the southern seashore of the building was erected in Phase 9 (Motya IVA, 800‐ island, just east of the area occupied by the 750 BC) and lasted in use with minor adaptations arrayed wells and sparse dwellings (§ 1.2.), the in Phase 8 (Motya IVB, 750‐675 BC). It was, then, Phoenician newcomers erected a larger building, reconstructed with a modified layout and a called Building C8 (Nigro 2013a), at an elevation slightly different orientation in Phase 7 (Motya V, only 1.2 m higher than the sea level at that time. 675‐550 BC). It was founded on the edge of the clayish marl The stratigraphy of Building C8 (fig. 11) was bedrock, where the latter is overlaid by the sand preserved with an overall thickness of maximum of the beach. Building C8 had a rectangular plan 0.7 m – from +0.5 m above the sea level down to and an extension of around 234 square meters ‐0.2 below it – due to successive cuts and erosion (13.12 [= 25 cubits] x 18.85 [= 34 cubits] m), that and to the levelling occurred with the erection of means from four to six times the extension of a the Circular Temenos in Phase 5 (after 550 BC). It, regular dwelling at the site. thus, could illustrate only some major moments 1.5.1. Stratigraphy in the life of the structure: The remains of the building were drastically razed ‐ Phase 9 (800‐750 BC): foundation of the building at the mid of the 6th century BC with the erection and its earliest use (ending in a cut due to Phase of the Circular Temenos (fig. 10) and the overall 8 floors refurbishing); this phase is mainly transformation of the Sacred Area of the Kothon represented by foundation trenches, walls and (Nigro 2010a, 38‐40). They were, thus, sealed floors; layers testifying for the earliest use of the under the floor inside the sanctuary of Baal. spaces were preserved only in some points,
[fig. 10 ‐ AREA C SOUTH AT MOTYA WITH PHASE 5 (MOTYA VI, 550‐470 BC) CIRCULAR TEMENOS CUTTING THROUGH THE RAZED STRUCTURES OF BUILDING C8 OF PHASE 9 (MOTYA IVA, 800‐750 BC)]
[10]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE where successive reconstructions and clearing off had not encountered them; ‐ Phase 8 (750‐675 BC) is basically illustrated by new pavements or revetments, and some small architectural transformations affecting the entrance room with the addition of a small buttress made of vertical slabs to the western wall. Layers of utilization were found almost in all rooms of the building, sealed by a dense stratum of burnt material, as the life of Building C8 ended in Phase 8 with a fierce conflagration. The destruction layer included for the first time Proto‐Corinthian pottery (Nigro 2013a, 50). The Warehouse was fully reconstructed in Phase 7 (Motya V, 675‐550 BC), with a different orientation and successive repairs in pavements and walls (Building C15). Also Phase 7 ended in a violent destruction, which was followed by levelling activities on collapse and burnt layers (Phase 6, around 550 BC), as a preparation for the erection of the Circular Temenos in Phase 5 (550‐ 470 BC). With the erection of the city‐walls the seafront just south of the building was severely obliterated. A well and other dwellings, however, [fig. 11 ‐STRATIGRAPHY IN AREA C SOUTH UNDERNEATH PHASE also extended towards this direction (fig. 12). 5‐4 (MOTYA VI‐VII, 550‐397 BC) CIRCULAR TEMENOS]
[fig. 12 ‐ AERIAL VIEW OF AREA C SOUTH WITH THE REMAINS OF THE WELLS AND DWELLINGS AREA AND, TO THE EAST, BUILDING C8 OF PHASE 9 (MOTYA IVA, 800‐750 BC)]
[11]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.5.2. Architecture The 0.42‐0.55 m thick foundation walls of the building were laid in trenches dug into the clayish marl bedrock 0.6 m wide and 0.3 m deep. They consisted of irregular local limestone fragments in the lowest courses upon which small riverbed flat stones were overlaid to support the superstructure made of greyish mudbricks (fig. 13). Bigger stones or blocks were set into the work as headers in order to reinforce or even [fig. 13 ‐SECTION THROUGH A FOUNDATION WALL OF BUILDING emphasize walls and openings (fig. 14). C8 SHOWING THE BUILDING TECHNIQUE.] The building was oriented NNE‐SSW following the orientation of the shrine (C14) further north (§ The plan of the building (fig. 15) combined three 1.3.), thus suggesting that the two major sectors: a front double row of rooms, with a constructions of the settlement were coherently central entrance (L.4436); a series of three conceived by the same ruling entity. parallel long rooms, displaced transversally in the
[fig. 14 ‐ AREA C SOUTH: REMAINS OF FOUNDATION WALLS OF BUILDING C 8 OF PHASES 9‐8 (MOTYA IV‐V, 800‐675 BC). IN THE FOREGROUND, VESTIBULE L. 4438; IN THE BACKGROUND, STOREROOMS L.4430 AND L.4450, FROM THE SOUTH‐WEST]
[12]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE rear east wing (L.4444, L.4430, L.4450); and a eastern wings (fig. 16). Two symmetric facing square courtyard to the west (L.4452), serving doors introduced respectively L.4417 to the three rows of rooms south, north and west. western wing, and L.4419 to a pillared room Architecture may suggest functions distribution (L.4454), a small storeroom (L.5120), and a inside Building C8 by considering its inner staircase (L.5134), as the frontal sector had circulation and structural features (Nigro 2013a, possibly two storeys. 53‐54). From the main entrance (L.4436) at the A wide passage in the northern side of L.4438 centre of the southern façade of the building, (fig. 17) gave access to the westernmost of the facing the seashore, a vestibule (L.4438) three rectangular storerooms (L.4444). introduced into the western, northern and
[fig. 15 ‐ DETAILED PLAN OF BUILDING C8 IN PHASE 9 (MOTYA IVA, 800‐750 BC); BLUE LINE: LIMIT OF ACTUAL EXCAVATION; LIGHT BROWN LINE: LIMITS OF CIRCULAR TEMENOS OF MOTYA VI‐VII (550‐397/6 BC); LIGHT GREY LINE: LIMITS OF WALL. M.2480 OF PHASE 7 (MOTYA V, 675‐550 BC)]
[13]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
[fig. 16 ‐ ENTRANCE OF BUILDING C8 WITH L.4436 AND [fig. 18 ‐ STOREROOM L.4430 DURING THE EXCAVATION OF VESTIBULE L.4438, FROM THE SOUTH] PHASE 8 REMAINS, FROM THE NORTH]
This elongated pièce measured 6.72 x 1.8 m. In In central stretch of the eastern wall (M.4423) a the northern part of the room, a shallow platform protruding bench made of two bricks was added paved with flat small stones with circular hollows in Phase 8 (fig 18). On the same side of the supported amphorae and pithoi. A 0.7 m wide storeroom, a central door (L.4418), 0.74 m wide, door (L.4414), opening in the eastern side, gave was preceded by a shallow step, as the well access to the second rectangular room (L.4430), refined floor of the third store room, L.4450, was measuring 6.82 x 2.44 m (fig. 16). L.4430 was at at an elevation 0.2 m higher than that of L.4430. higher elevation (+ 0.12 m) in respect of L.4444, Broad room L.4450 had roughly the same slightly sloping towards the south. The northern dimensions of L.4430 (6.85 x 2.44 m), but it was third of the room was paved with pebbles and found in less good conditions having been more pressed chalk while the south‐east corner was drastically razed by successive building activities. occupied by a stone lined installation. In the In some cases, the stones of the foundation walls south‐west corner of the room, a noticeable had been plundered and the plan of the room concentration of pottery vessels (mainly Red Slip could be reconstructed only basing upon the open shapes, § 2.2.) was found. remaining negative trenches (fig. 19).
[fig. 17 ‐ PASSAGE BETWEEN VESTIBULE L.3348 AND [fig. 19 ‐ MUDBRICKS IN WALL M.4423 BETWEEN STOREROOM STOREROOM L.4444, WITH DOOR L.4414 (TOP LEFT)] L.4430 AND L.4450, FROM THE SOUTH]
[14]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
The floor was made of pressed limestone marl existence there of a sort of bench made of with several repairs. A line of small stones in the mudbricks. north‐west corner of the room suggests the
[fig. 20 ‐ AREA C SOUTH, GENERAL VIEW OF BUILDING C 8 WITH IN THE FOREGROUND STOREROOM L.4430 DELIMITED BY RAZED REMAINS OF WALLS M.4413 (RIGHT) AND M.4423 (LEFT); IN THE BACKGROUND, ROOMS L.4454, ENTRANCE L.4436 AND VESTIBULE L.4438, FROM THE NORTH]
[15]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
Walls in the eastern wing show different widths (fig. 20). The entrance rooms and the south eastern sector (L.4436, L.4438, L.4454, L.5120 and L.5134) are delimited by reinforced walls 0.8 m thick (M.4429, M.4415, M.5113 and M.5133). Also partition walls (M.2490 and M.5135) in this sector are thicker (0.52 m), and only the wall separating pillared hall L.4454 from L.5120 is 0.42 m wide. Moreover, the south‐east corner stone of the building at the joint of M.5113 (façade wall) and M.5133 (east wall) is a big (1.05 x 0.8 m) limestone boulder (fig. 21). This evidence suggests that such rectangular portion of the building had a second storey, a reconstruction also corroborated by the presence of staircase L.5134. Conversely, other sectors only consist of the ground floor.
[fig. 21 ‐ THE SOUTH‐WEST CORNER OF BUILDING C8]
[fig. 22 ‐ RECONSTRUCTED PLAN OF BUILDING C8 WITH THE ENTRANCE WING, THE THREE PARALLEL STOREROOMS, THE CENTRAL COURTYARD AND THE STAIRCASE TO THE UPPER FLOORS ON THE ENTRANCE WING]
[16]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
From vestibule L.4438, door L.4419 introduced hypothetical artist’s reconstruction has been put into the western wing of the building, which was forward (fig. 23), showing the main two‐storey organized around a central open space (L.4452), block at the south‐east corner of the building, paved with crushed limestone and small pebbles. serving also as headlight for boat navigating into Though it has been only partially explored, an the Lagoon, the three flanking storerooms to the circular ashy impressions detected on the ground north‐east, and the courtyard with rectangular suggested that a tannur was standing in its north‐ rooms with flat walkable roofing around it. west corner. This suggested to reconstruct the Raw materials (e.g. salt, purple, iron, sulphur), space as an approximately square courtyard (4.9 items (mudbricks, nets, baskets), tools (iron x 4.7 m), flanked to the south, west and north by sickle, bronze ring, grinding stones, sails, rectangular rooms (fig. 22), of regular dimensions tapestry), plants and animals (sheep, goat, (4.7 x 2.85 m) like excavated room L.4454 in the donkey, tortoise, dove, dog) illustrated were east wing. The western longer side of this wing actually found in the dig, while, in the possibly also hosted a guard‐room with a second background, the pond successively transformed entrance opening towards the wells and dwelling into an artificial pool (the so‐called ‘Kothon’), and quarter to the west. Finds from this area of the the sacred area of Temple of Baal, are visible. building hint at food preparation and other In conclusion, architecture and finds of Building ordinary life activities. C8 are similar to those of some major communal Though further digging is necessary to clarify the or aristocratic structures erected by Phoenicians layout and the inner circulation of Building C8, an in the West (Lopez Castro 2006, 86, fig. 6).
[fig. 23 ‐ RECONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING C8 SEEN FROM THE SOUTH: REPRODUCED PLANTS ANIMAL AND OTHER FINDS WERE ACTUALLY FOUND DURING THE EXCAVATIONS]
[17]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.5.4. Finds It belongs to a common typology known in Items retrieved on the floors of Building C8 were Phoenicia from many archaeological contexts, grouped in sparse spots of the rooms, kept safe including the famous specimens from Rash‐ where later cuts and intrusions had not Shamra/Ugarit and Byblos. The upper part of the destroyed or removed them. Ceramic material is pierced stone has a slimmer profile to let it thoroughly illustrated by F. Spagnoli in § 2., with possible to wind the rope up around it (fig. 25). special focus on typologies, chronology and cultural interconnections. More information can be added about pottery distribution over the building. Of the three dominating classes, Red Slip, ‘Impasto’ Ware, and Storage Ware, the first one was mainly collected in rooms L.5122 and L.4430 (south‐west corner); the second one, was more regularly distributed over the rooms of the building, with concentrations in courtyard L.4452 and the adjacent rooms (trays and portable ovens); storage jars and pithoi were found mainly in storerooms L.4444 and L.4450. It is hard to draw some conclusions from such an evidence, though it may be compared with the distributive picture of tools and objects illustrated below in order to infer the functions of different spaces (Nigro 2013a, figs. 8‐9). A pierced sub‐parallelepiped stone (fig. 24), found erratic by previous expeditions in the area of the South Gate, was possibly an anchor stone, left aside the main entrance of the building.
[fig. 25 ‐ ANCHOR STONE MADE OF LOCAL SANDSTONE (‘CALCARENITE’) WITH A TWISTED UP ROPE]
Other stone implements, possibly connected with sailing, where found in the entrance room and in the central vestibule L.4438. One is a spool with smoothed traces of consumption, possibly used on a boat for letting a thin rope run, or as polishing pebble (fig. 26).
[fig. 24 ‐ ANCHOR STONE MADE OF LOCAL SANDSTONE [fig. 26 ‐ LILAC STONE SPOOL OR SPACER FOR ROPES (‘CALCARENITE’) FOUND NEAR THE SOUTH GATE] MC.12.119]
[18]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
A flint blade made of a dark transparent vein of this stone was also found in the building (fig. 27). Even though the nearest source of flint is in the Sicilian coast, it may be arrived from the Near East, where the choice of this peculiar kind of stone looking like obsidian is well‐known.
[fig. 29 ‐ BRONZE AND IRON FRAGMENTS FROM BUILDING C8 (MC.12.46; MC.13.15)]
A small bronze fishing hook (fig. 30) and two stone net‐sinkers (fig. 31) recall one of the basic resources of the new settlers and reflect ordinary life in the earliest landfall.
[fig. 27 ‐ A DARK TRANSPARENT FLINT (MC.12.117) FOUND IN STOREROOM L.4430 OF BUILDING C8]
Cuts on the flint blade tip seem to have been provoked by a metal blade, thus testifying a re‐ use in a post‐prehistoric phase (?). It was presumably used in fish processing. [fig. 30 ‐ BRONZE FISHING HOOK MC.12.47]
Faunal remains also confirm this picture.
[fig. 28 ‐ OBSIDIAN DRILL MC.14.81] An obsidian drill (fig. 28) was found in the Phase 9 layer but it may be residual from pre‐existing Prehistoric strata. Along with these flint and obsidian blades, some metal fragments (bronze and iron) were found (fig. 29), belonging to nails, pivots or hooks used [fig. 31 ‐POTTERY DONUT‐SHAPED NET‐SINKERS (MC.12.110; in boats. 120) FROM BUILDING C8]
[19]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
Possible burnt remains of a net were found in the An iron sickle (fig. 34) suggests that the earliest blind room underneath staircase L.5134. Such settlers used to cultivate some plants for their fishing tool was basically used together with fish needs. Pollen analyses and paleobotanical and crab traps made of local giant cane (Arundo samples show that barley and wheat were donax). Moreover, a fragmentary bovine long cultivated on the island in this period. worked bone is possibly part of a tool for Moreover, the retrieval of several grinding stones repairing fishing nets and traps (fig. 32). made of vesicular basalt (fig. 35) may be connected with cereals processing. Several of such volcanic stones were probably imported as ballast into Phoenician ships.
[fig. 32 ‐ WORKED BONE (MC.15.96) POSSIBLY PART OF A TOOL USED TO REPAIR FISHING NETS]
A limestone elongated oscillum (fig. 33) may be also related with nets or other maritime activities. It might also be used as counterweight in a door.
[fig. 34 ‐ IRON SICKLE MC.14.114.]
[fig. 33 ‐ OVOID SHIELD‐SHAPED OSCILLUM MC.12.135 FROM ROOM L.4438]
[fig. 35 ‐ VESICULAR BASALT STONE FRAGMENTARY GRINDING STONE FROM ROOM L.4444]
[20]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
Among other interesting finds a table‐stone used Along with these items illustrating ordinary life in as mortar and whetstone (fig. 36), possibly in the earliest settlement on Motya, a meaningful association with red ochre (a fragment of which number of quite extraordinary imported objects was also found in the building, fig. 37), may points to the international links of the seamen illustrate other domestic activities performed in travelling on Motya, and exhibits the trade the courtyard. capability of the earliest community. The expanded rim of an Egyptian calcite elongated alabastron (fig. 39) was found in storeroom L.4444.
[fig. 36 ‐ QUARTZITE WHETSTONE MC.12.142]
[fig. 39 ‐ RIM OF A CALCITE EGYPTIAN ALABASTRON
(MC.14.114) FOUND IN STOREROOM L.4444]
It reminds us the green serpentinite fragment of [fig. 37 ‐ CLUMP OF RED OCHRE MC.13.24] a polished Egyptian Old‐Kingdom amphora (fig. 40), retrieved in the nearby excavation of the British Expedition lead by Prof. Isserlin, which A hemispherical pumice tool (MC.15.89; polisher) probably originated from the west wing of the may be also included among such items showing building (even though it was re‐used in Phase 5 the variety of productive activities performed in sacred well F.2950: Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012, fig. 10). Building C8. The finding of a pottery spoon (fig. 38) made of a local clay fabric is noteworthy. Such distinguished item is a typical feature in Late Prehistoric (Motya III, 1250‐900 BC) and Early Phoenician (Motya IVA, 800‐750 BC) contexts, and its retrieval is quite rare (other pottery spoons from coeval contexts were found in the lowest layers of nearby Temples of Baal [C14] and Astarte [C12]).
[fig. 38 ‐ FRAGMENTARY POTTERY SPOON FROM PHASE 9 [fig. 40 ‐ FRAGMENT OF AN EGYPTIAN OLD‐KINGDOM VASE BUILDING C8 (MOTYA IVA, 800‐750 BC)] MADE OF SERPENTINITE]
[21]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE
1.5.5. Faunal remains A goat horn (fig. 44) is compatible with the Numerous faunal remains found in the strata of Levantine subspecies of this animal (Capra Building C8 provide interesting information aegagrus hircus), even though the actual concerning the earliest Phoenician settlement at provenience of the individuals consumed at Motya. A major piece of evidence is an Motya in Phases 9‐8 is not surely determinable. epistrophy of Bos taurus L. (fig. 41), an animal which may have reached Motya only from the facing Sicilian coastal region. Its presence testifies to the complexity and integration of the diet of the earliest inhabitants of the colony.
[fig. 44 ‐ GOAT HORN MC.12.RF.44 FROM THE SOUTH‐WEST CORNER OF STOREROOM L.4430]
This animal is also witnessed by teeth and mandibulae found in courtyard L.4454. A small fragment of tortoise’s carapace or ventral shield (fig. 45), in spite of its dimensions, bears a major information, as it highlights the presence [fig. 41 ‐ BOVINE (BOS TAURUS L.) EPISTROPHY (AXIS) of an animal apparently widely spread over MC.11.RF.61] Motya during Period IVA‐B. The allogeneic provenance of such species is certain, even Mollusca are very common in the faunal though each animal may have been brought to repertoire from Building C8. All of the main Motya from other different regions: Sicily, North species attested to were eaten, with the Africa, and the Levant. noticeable exception of the murex (fig. 42).
[fig. 42 ‐ MOLLUSCA SEA‐SHELLS FROM BUILDING C8]
A certain divergence may be represented by a specimen of Venerupis corrugata which is a typical edible mollusk (fig. 43).
[fig. 45 ‐ TORTOISE’S PLASTRON MC.12.RF.45]
One of the most rare finds from Building C8 is the tooth of a killer whale or orca (Orcinus orca) (fig. 46). Was it an exotic heirloom of Phoenicians’ seafaring on to the Atlantic Ocean? This porpoise [fig. 43 ‐ VENERUPIS CORRUGATA MC.13.RF.26] is at the top of the marine animal hierarchy and
[22]
[1.]
Lorenzo Nigro [The earliest Phoenician landfall] MOTYE its presence in the early faunal assemblage at Motya, actually, hints at long distance navigation. Nonetheless, it has a symbolic meaning as relic of a terrible marine monster, one of the manife‐ stations of the sea‐god, Yam, defeated by Baal in the terrible struggle described in the cycle of Ugarit texts. The tooth was apparently included into a pendant, as the central bead of a necklace or a bracelet. This faunal find, thus, points to the farest seafare of the earliest Motya community, visited by seamen reaching the Ocean after having crossed the whole Mediterranean. Another very interesting retrieval is the point of [fig. 46 ‐ TEETH OF AN ORCA MC.12.RF.45] the main beam of a red deer (Cervus helaphus) antler (fig. 47), a local small size ungulate, widely It hints at the praecox relationship established spread on the western cusp of Sicily since with the local indigenous population, which did a Prehistoric times and beyond. large use of such and animal (Nigro 2015a, 237).
[fig. 47 ‐ POINT OF THE MAIN BEAM OF A RED DEER (CERVUS ELAPHUS) ANTLER MC.13.RF.1 FROM ROOM L.4444 IN BUILDING C8]
[23]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2. The pottery repertoire of distribution shows the gradual extension of inhabited area; 2. different wares illustrate both Motya IVA (800‐750 BC) the relationship between settlers and natives, as well as the links between them and the For a long time the ceramic repertoire of the homeland. We attempt to give an answer to such Archaic Necropolis1 of Motya and some archaic points in the light of the analysis and comparison tombs obliterated by later city‐walls2 were of the ceramic repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 considered amongst the earliest evidence of BC) and Motya IVB periods (750‐675 BC). Phoenician presence at Motya. Those 2.1. General features assemblages included both Phoenician vessels, The earliest Phoenician pottery assemblage3 of mostly locally produced, and Greek Proto‐ Motya IVA broadly consists of three main groups Corinthian vases, suggesting a dating to the last th of wares: imports from Phoenicia (basically Red quarter of the 8 century BC. In 1978, in the light Slip Ware), locally manufactures pots (mainly of the discovery of an Euboean cup with pendant Impasto Ware) and Levantine transport circles during the excavation of the tombs under amphorae. Some importations belonging to this the city‐walls, Antonia Ciasca dated back about corpus from Cyprus are noteworthy, as well as thirty years the chronology of some graves, some rare Sardinian vases. Vessels and amphorae particularly the incinerations found inside Tower typologies show strong affinities in respect of 4 (Ciasca 1990a, 120‐121). Most recent Levantine Iron Age IIA repertoires4. Actually excavations by Sapienza University of Rome techniques and shapes of Red Slip, Plain Ware demonstrated that a presence of Phoenician th and transport amphorae are borrowed from the ceramics is noticed at Motya since the 10 productions and types spread over Phoenicia at century BC, and increases at least at the th the time, while Impasto Ware including storage beginnings of 8 century BC, when a stable jars look kin to indigenous repertoires of Western settlement arose on the island (Nigro 2016, fig. Sicily (Spatafora 2003). Red Slip Ware consists 20; Nigro in press, note no. 7, figs. 8‐9). Sapienza almost exclusively of imports from the Levant, as excavations reached the earliest Phoenician a local production of Red Slip Ware is attested occupational levels (logically preceding the only from the following Motya IVB period (§ 4.2.). establishment of the necropolis) in two different As far as chronology is concerned, Motya IVA regions of the island: in Area C South – the layers do not include Greek pottery, largely ‘Funduq’ place – Building C8, and in Areas E and D attested in the following period, so that a dating – on the Acropolis. to the first half of the 8th century has been Spatial and temporal distribution of early claimed (Nigro 2013a). The lack of Greek imports Phoenician pottery on the island may depict a has a historical and chronological meaning as the more clear picture of early Phoenician Motya, arrival of Phoenicians in Western Sicily antedates which reflects some basic historical question the spreading of early Greek ceramics in the last affecting central Mediterranean at the turn of the third of 8th century BC5. How their arrival could be millennium: 1. settlement growth in the earliest dated back is, at the present stage of research, Phoenician colony: early pottery types beyond what can be established on the basis of pottery finds. Some earlier Phoenician 9th of even th 1 Materials from the Necropolis were annually published 10 century ceramics may have reached the by Vincenzo Tusa between the 1964 and 1978 in volumes island with Levantine vectors during Iron Age I. Mozia I‐IX. Recent studies on pottery from the Necropolis in Famà ‐ Toti 2005 and Spagnoli 2012. 2 First excavated by Joseph Whitaker at the beginnings of 20th century (Whitaker 1921, 137) and by Benedict 3 A preliminary study of early Phoenician repertoires of Isserlin in Sixties’ (Isserlin ‐ du Plat Taylor 1974), the city‐ Motya in: Nigro 2010a; Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012 (pottery walls were extensively explored by Antonia Ciasca in from the wells area south‐west of the Temple); Nigro years 1974‐1992 (annually published in Rivista di Studi 2013a (pottery from Building C8 in Area C South). Fenici). Along the north‐eastern path Ciasca uncovered 4 See for example the Iron IIA ceramic repertoire of several tombs overlaid by the city‐walls. Some of them Khirbet Qeiyafa in Palestine: Kang ‐ Garfinkel 2009, 144‐ were dated to the end of 8th century BC (Ciasca 1978a, 145. 234‐240, 1980, 238‐249; Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 326‐333; 5 The Phoenician presence in Sicily preexists the Greek see § 3.5.). colonization, as stated also by Thucydides: Thuc. VI, 2.6.
[24]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2.2. Phoenician pottery: Red Slip and Plain Most common shapes are plates, bowls and Ware drinking cups as beakers and chalices (this may Early Phoenician pottery found in Motya IVA also depend on their easier preservation). basically includes Red Slip (RS), and Plain Ware 2.2.1. LRS Plates (P ‐ Plate 1) (PW), with a distributive prevalence of the former Plates are widely represented in the repertoire production. showing a variety of typologies: Levantine Red Slip (LRS) Ware is the most typical LRS‐P1 ‐ Plate with a short indented rim. This typology is one of the most representative shapes production of this phase. It is characterized by a 6 thick and dark red coating (2.5R3/6 Dark Red), of early Phoenician layers at Motya (fig. 2) . shiny and smooth at the touch. Fabrics are dense and hard with many small inclusions of siliceous and calcareous minerals (fig. 1).
[fig. 2 ‐ LRS‐P1 ‐ PLATE WITH SHORT INDENTED RIM MC.06.1592/25]
Such plates characterize contemporaneous levels of Tyre (Bikai 1978, pl. XV: 9; 2003, 233‐234) and 9th century levels of Levantine cities (Yadin et al. 1960, pl. LXIII: 32; Stern 2015a, 436‐437, pl. 4.1.2: 5, with high pedestal). As Levantine specimens, also this plate leant on a pedestal and had thick
[fig. 1 ‐ MAGNIFIED SECTION OF RED SLIP WARE BOWL walls. The variant with rounded rim is also 7 SHOWING THE PECULIARITIES OF THE FABRIC (MC.11.2491/19)] attested to, with a thick RS coating (fig. 3) . The type is widespread throughout coastal northern th 8 Those intrinsic factors, that characterize the Red Levant during the 8 century BC . Slip pottery shown below, allow to attribute them to the earliest Phoenician occupation of the island, and to support the thesis of a Levantine production. In this perspective, morphology does not seem enough to establish date and provenance of RS finds, as shapes and typologies are more conservative than technology. The identification of the above mentioned petrographic characteristics allows us to distinguish the earlier from later RS productions. Decoration is another element for chronological attribution. As the earliest Phoenician Red Slip production of 10th and 9th centuries BC in the homeland (Kang ‐ [fig. 3 ‐ LRS‐P1 ‐ PLATE WITH ROUNDED RIM Garfinkel 2009, fig. 6.3), also ceramic specimens MC.11.2491/17] from Motya in the same period (IVA) are not completely coated with red slip, and they show large plain bands and lines, and are often painted 6 MC.06.1592/25. with concentric black circles or lines highlighting 7 MC.13.4441/27, MC.09.2466/1. the shape turns. 8 Lehmann 2015, 118, pl. 2.1.5: 13. The larger plate MC.11.2491/17 can be compared to specimen from Tyre stratum V (around 760 BC, Bikai 1978, pl. XVIIIA).
[25]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
LRS‐P2 ‐ Straight‐sided shallow plate. Largely 2.2.2. Carinated Bowls (CB ‐ Plate 2) attested in this phase (fig. 4)9, it belongs to a Four main types of CB can be distinguished, with typology widely diffused in Phoenicia during Iron a sharp difference in attestations among them. Age IIB10. This type of plate has a flat base and a LRS‐CB1 – ‘Samaria‐like’ bowl. Small size bowls slightly splayed simple rim. with a sharp carination, vertical rim, and thin walls (fig. 6) are kindred to the s.‐c. Samaria Ware bowls, a diagnostic Iron IIA type of the Levant (Stern 2015a, 436). As its earlier Levantine prototypes (Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 138, pl. 2.2.2:22‐23), Motya IVA specimens are coated by dark‐red slip and exhibit a sharp carination14. Otherwise, they show occasionally a painted decoration with concentric circles on the interior.
[fig. 4 ‐ LRS‐P2 ‐ STRAIGHT‐SIDED SHALLOW PLATE MD.05.1401/19]
LRS‐P3 ‐ Shallow plate with curved rim. The type (fig. 5)11 has close parallels with specimens found in the earliest Phoenician levels of Cadiz12 and Sulky13, and descends from a Levantine prototype (Lehmann 1996, 365, pl. 6).
[fig. 6 ‐ LRS‐CB1 ‐ SAMARIA‐LIKE BOWL DECORATED WITH CONCENTRIC CIRCLES MD.05.1401/43]
LRS‐CB2 ‐ Shallow carinated bowl. It has similar but not identical size (slightly larger) in respect of the Samaria‐like bowl, from which it possibly descends. [fig. 5 ‐ LRS‐P3 ‐ SHALLOW PLATE WITH CURVED RIM MC.11.2491/14] The rim is somewhat inclined inwards generating an acute angle (fig. 7). In the Levant, the type is 9 MC.10.2477/14, MD.05.1401/19, MD.05.1404/20, attested to in Iron Age I assemblages plain or MC.06.1776/21, MC.10.2478/9, MD.09.2246/1, with a bichrome decoration (Mazar 2015, pl. MD.09.2246/8, 1.1.2: 1‐3). 10 The typology has a long‐lasting period of attestation at In Iron IIA, this type spreads over, becoming one Tyre: Bikai 1978, pl. XIX: 20 (stratum VIII ‐ 850‐800 BC); pl. of the most representative shapes of Red Slip X: 11 (stratum III ‐ 740‐700 BC); Lehmann 2015, 117, pl. (Lehmann 2015, 115, 117, pls. 2.1.1: 1‐6, Iron IIA; 2.1.5:19‐20; Tappy 2015, 191, pl. 2.3.1: 14, 16. 11 MC.11.2491/14, MD.07.2206/3, MC.13.4441/25, 2.1.4: 1‐4, 6, Iron IIB), and it continues in Iron Age MC.11.1786/79. IIB with some minor morphological variations. 12 Torres Ortiz et al. 2014, 58, fig. 4: f (Período II, end The shallow CB is largely attested in Central and of 9th‐ first half of 8th century BC). See also: Gonzàlez Western Mediterranean colonies, since the Prats 2011, 598, fig. 4: 34842; Ruiz Mata 2002, fig. 3, n. 40. 13 Pompianu ‐ Unali 2016, fig. 5: RS 281. 14 MD.07.2219/54, MC.11.2491/32, MC.06.1776/23.
[26]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE beginning of Phoenician expansion (Lopez Castro The main production centers were in Phoenicia et al. 2016, 73‐74, fig. 6: 11; Gonzales de Canales (Anderson 1988, 128‐133), but the type spread et al. 2008, 636, fig. 4: 4). across the regions of a strong Phoenician Motya IVA specimens show a dark red slip on influence, as the coastal region and Upper their inner surface15. Most of them are also Galilee18. Early imported specimens are present decorated with black painted concentric lines on in Motya IVA assemblage, showing a thick red the interior and outside over the carination16. coating on the inner and outer surface of the Plain Ware specimens with a polished surface are bowls19. barely attested to17. LRS‐CB4 ‐ Carinated bowl with high everted rim. This is possibly the most popular type in Motya IVA, even though it belongs to the Phoenician fine table service. The bowl has a pronounced (sometimes transformed into a ridge) low carination, a high flaring rim, and a disk or slightly rounded base (fig. 10)20.
[fig. 7 ‐ LRS‐CB2 ‐ SHALLOW CARINATED BOWL WITH PAINTED DECORATION MC.06.1661/1]
LRS‐CB3 ‐ Shallow bowl with flatten carination and slightly everted short rim. This type (fig. 8) is medium size and usually made of a fine fabric (fig. 9). It first appears in the Levant during the [fig. 10 ‐ LRS‐CB4 ‐ CARINATED BOWL WITH HIGH EVERTED RIM Iron Age IIA, being largely present in Iron Age IIB MC.11.2491/15] horizon (Stern 2015a, 436, pl. 4.1.2: 16). The surface finishing is a thick stick‐burnished Red Slip inside and outside on the rim, especially on the upper part of the body above the carination21. Carinated bowls show a high deal of
18 Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 138, pl. 2.2.2: 24.
Homeland prototypes for this shape are exhibited by the th [fig. 8 ‐ LRS‐CB3 ‐ SHALLOW BOWL WITH FLATTEN CARINATION Megiddo 9 century BC (stratum VB) inventory AND SLIGHTLY EVERTED SHORT RIM MC.11.2491/29] (Finkelstein ‐ Zimhoni ‐ Kafri 2000, fig. 11.23:14) and Hazor stratum IXa (Yadin et al. 1960, CLXXVII: 5). The Red Slip shallow type is also present in earlier assemblages of 10th ‐ 9th century BC Khirbet Qeiyafa (Kang ‐ Garfinkel 2009, fig. 6.3: 15‐17). The typology is attested in central and western Mediterranean colonies from the middle of 8th century BC: Peserico 2007, 272‐273, fig. 108. 19 MC.11.2419/28, MC.11.2491/29, MC.11.2491/30, MC.12.4427/26, MC.06.1776/5, MD.05.1402/22. 20 MC.08.2345/4, MC.08.2345/6, MD.07.2219/16, MD.07.2219/11, MC.11.4404/10, MC.11.2491/15, MD.05.1401/44. In the homeland this shape appears in Hazor stratum IXa (Yadin et al. 1960, pl. CLXXVIII: 26‐31) and reaches its maximum diffusion in stratum VI (Yadin et [fig. 9 ‐ MAGNIFIED SECTION OF CB3 MC.11.2491/29] al. 1960, pl. CLXXXI: 1‐5); For Carthage see Vegas 1999, 143‐144, fig. 33, Form 4.2. 15 MD.04.1112/88, MC.06.1661/1, MC.11.4510/17. 21 The typology is inspired to the so called “Samarian 16 MC.06.1661/1, MD.04.1112/88. Bowl”, a Phoenician production chiefly widespread in 17 MD.09.2219/2. Palestine in 9th and 8th centuries BC (Bikai 1978, pl. XIX: 1,
[27]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE standardization, although occasional variations in 2.2.3. Deep bowls (DB ‐ Plate 3) the rim shape and inclination usually occur22. LRS‐DB1 ‐ Straight sided bowl. Small and medium‐ Decoration consists of black lines painted on the sized bowls usually have a simple rounded rim Red Slip, embellishing the interior and (fig. 12)28. The typology is attested to in the highlighting the shape, with a couple of Levant in Red Slip and in Plain Ware with concentric lines on the bottom, and one or a burnished surface since the beginnings of the couple of lines on the walls (fig. 11)23. CB4 can be Iron Age (Mazar 2015, 9‐10, pl. 1.1.1; Bikai 1978, dived into two dimensional groups according to 26‐28, pl. XV: 4). Specimens found at Motya have their diameters: large size which ranges from 24 a red coating or light brown burnishing (Munsell to 29 cm, and small size, from 15 to 20 cm24. They 7.5YR6/4) sometimes associated to a painted usually have a disk base occasionally showing a decoration. shallow circular groove25. This peculiar shape of the table service is also very common in Southern and Central Levant during Iron IIA26, and its increasing distribution follows the establishment of Phoenician colonies in the West from the beginning of 8th century BC onwards27.
[fig. 12 ‐ LRS‐DB1 ‐ STRAIGHT SIDED BOWL WITH BURNISHED SURFACE MD.16.1112/49]
LRS‐DB2 ‐ Hemispherical bowl. Shallow hemispherical bowls with round sided thin walls,
[fig. 11 ‐ LRS‐CB4 ‐ CARINATED BOWL WITH HIGH EVERTED RIM usually red slipped inside, rarely monochrome MD.05.1404/44] decorated with a wavy line on the exterior, are also represented in the early assemblage29. stratum VIII, second half of 9th‐ beginnings of 8th century Mainly diffused in Iron Age II contexts in the BC). Levant with Red Slip inside and outside, the type 22 Moreover, some local specimen shows some original is attested to in Iron Age I Levant with a black or features, especially in the dimensions and in the internal red painted decoration (Mazar 2015, 9). decoration. Bowls MF.09.2678/20, MF.09.2679/7, A transitional type (fig. 13) which exhibits in‐ MD.09.2219/12, have a more curved wall and outturned turned rim and bigger dimensions might be rim in respect of other items. They represent a typological variation: Tappy 2015, 191, pl. 2.3.1: 20. regarded as a forerunner of the later local 23 This decorative scheme is illustrated by the complete hemispherical bowls (§ 4.2.2., MRS‐DB1). plate MC.13.4446/11. 24 Yadin et al. 1971, pl. CCX: 5, stratum IX‐X (Iron Age IIA, second half of 10th‐ beginning of 9th century BC). 25 MC.08.2345/6. 26 In the homeland this shape appears in Hazor stratum IXa (Yadin et al. 1960, pl. CLXXVIII: 26‐31) and reaches its maximum diffusion in stratum VI (Yadin et al. 1960, pl. CLXXXI: 1‐5) Phoenicia: Bikai 1978, pl. IX: 9. Southern Levant: Herzog ‐ Singer‐Avitz 2015, 218‐219, pl. 2.4.9: 12. th In respect to deep plates completely slipped of 10 century BC, plates of 9th century have the slip only on the [fig. 13 ‐ LRS‐DB2 ‐ RIM OF A RS HEMISPHERICAL BOWL interior and on the rim: Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, (TRANSITIONAL TYPE) MC.11.2491/22] 138, pl. 2.2.2: 20‐21. The typology is diffused at Cyprus in a later period: Bikai 1987, 417‐418, pl. XVII (Kition 28 MC.07.1685/71, MC.11.2491/46 (wavy line Horizon 750‐700 BC). decoration). 27 Vegas 1999, 143‐144, fig. 33, Form 4.2; Peserico 2007, 29 MC.12.2491/2, MC.13.4441/40, MC.13.4441/26, 284‐285. See also Nigro 2013a, 47, notes nos. 46‐48, with MC.06.1771/3, MD.16.1112/52. Bowls with wavy line bibliography. decoration: MC.13.4442/5.
[28]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
The latter is characterized by a Red Slip coating 2.2.4. Chalices (Ch ‐ Plate 3) on the upper part of the outer surface up to the LRS‐Ch1 ‐ Chalices have straight or slightly curved rim, sometimes also on the inside30, while Motya sides with rounded rim, low carination, and IVB hemispherical bowls are usually decorated by rounded bottom with a disk‐shaped base (fig. black painted lines (Nigro 2010a, 30, note no. 92). 16)33. Early specimens show the Red Slip outside This typology is also present in the 8th century BC and a red band inside. in the Phoenician repertoire (e.g. Tyre strata VIII‐ IX: Bikai 1978, pls. XVIIIA: 7, XIX: 25; Núñez Calvo 2011, 283, fig. 4: b). LRS‐DB3 ‐ Bowl with everted rim, straight sides and flat base form a neatly different group. They are red slipped (fig. 14) or plain (fig. 15)31. The typology is spread over Phoenician coastal centers and Cyprus32, as well as Central and Western Mediterranean.
[fig. 14 ‐ LRS‐DB3 ‐ BOWL WITH EVERTED RIM ML.07.46/3] [fig. 16 ‐ LRS‐CH1 ‐ CHALICE MC.08.2345/4] At Carthage it characterizes early layers of the This type of drinking vessel is common in Iron Age Tophet (Núñez Calvo 2011, 83, fig. 7, C1), the 34 necropolis (Lancel 1982, 337, n. 8, fig. 548, IIA northern Phoenician centers . From this A.142), and residential quarters (Vegas 1999, 143, shape probably descends the handmade deep fig. 32: 1, Form 4.1; 2000, 356, fig. 3: 10‐11). carinated bowl with a plain out‐turned rim, In Iberia the type is attested to at Cadiz (Torres thicker walls and low carination attested in the same early layers of Motya. It is occasionally Ortiz et al. 2014, 56, fig. 4: d), Huelva (Gonzales 35 de Canales et al. 2008, 636‐637, fig. 5: 4), and in manufactured in Impasto Ware (fig. 17) , the West Andalusia (Ramón Torres 2010, 221, figs. 1: fabric is reddish coarse and low‐fired, and 6. 3: 37‐38, 1) in early 8th century BC. surfaces are entirely coated with a thin dark‐red slip laid with a soft or spongy rag (Nigro 2013a, 47‐48, fig. 11: 11‐12).
[fig. 15 ‐ LRS‐DB3 ‐ BOWL WITH EVERTED RIM MC.13.4446/27] [fig. 17 ‐ IW CHALICE MC.12.2491/83] 30 MC.11.2491/22, MC.11.2491/23, MC.11.2491/24, MC.11.2491/31, MC.13.4427/8, MC.07.2206/64 (not 33 MC.08.2345/4, MC.13.4441/21, MC.11.2491/25, illustrated) MC.11.1786/78 MF.09.2678/14, and MC.12.2491/49; 31 MC.13.4442/13, MC.08.2409 I/82, ML.07.46/3, MC.13.4441/24, MC.13.4442/3 and MC.13.4446/19 with MD.07.2246/5, MC.13.4446/27 (plain). red monochrome decoration. Other specimens not 32 Chapman 1972, 169, fig. 28: 302 (Qrayé); Badre 1997, illustrated are: MC.12.4427/17, MC.12.4427/16, 87, fig. 45.4 (Beirut); later attestations at Kition: Bikai MC.13.4446/17. 1987, 43, pl. XX: 552 (Kition Horizon, second half of 8th 34 Lehmann 2015, 118, pl. 2.1.5: 18, with bibliography. century BC). 35 MC.12.4427/30, MC.12.2491/83.
[29]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2.2.5. Jugs (J ‐ Plate 4) the first Phoenician settlement (fig. 18)41. This LRS‐J1 ‐ Neck‐ridge jug. The Red Slip neck‐ridge style also announces the Bichrome‐style Ware jug with black painted decoration is the most (BsW), a peculiar production of the following numerous jug type in the Motya IVA period Motya IVB (§ 4.1). assemblage36. The shape has peculiar traits: 2.2.6. PW Large bowls (Lb ‐ Plate 4) relatively large neck, thin walls, and reduced rim. The earliest Phoenician assemblage also includes Typological antecedents can be found at Megiddo plain ware as large bowls employed as serving V (VA‐IVB), where a neck‐ridge plain amphora dishes or used for the preparation of foods. with similar neck and globular body with rounded PW‐Lb1 ‐ Large bowl with shallow body and base is attested in 10th century BC37. In 9th century thickened everted rim. This type of large bowls BC, a similar type, with ridged neck and a (fig. 19) is widely attested to Levant since the end thickened everted rim, globular body and ring of Late Bronze Age especially on the Northern base, is attested to at Tell es‐Sarem/Tel Rehov Syrian coast and inland (Badre ‐ Gubel 1999‐ (IV)38. 2000, fig. 39: K ‐ Level 5; Heinz et al. 2010, 62, note no. 80, pl. 8). Specimens found at Motya have homogeneous dimensions, ranging from 28 to 30/32 cm42.
[fig. 19 ‐ PW‐LB1 ‐ RIM OF A LARGE BOWL WITH SHALLOW [fig. 18 ‐ PHBW‐J1 ‐ NECK‐RIDGE JUG MC.08.2372B/1] BODY MC.12.2462/13]
Three neck‐ridge jugs show a bichrome PW‐Lb2 ‐ Large bowl with interior beveled rim. decoration39 with a pair of black painted lines on This second type is rarely attested to in Motya 43 the neck and on the body, as frame of Red Slip IVA . Early comparisons can be found in the bands40. Jug MC.08.2372b/1 could actually be the homeland in the northern coastal plain (Lehmann first attestation of Phoenician Bichrome Ware at 2015, 117, pl. 2.1.4: 13) and inland, at Megiddo th Motya, perhaps related to a period that precedes (Harrison 2004, pl. 4: 1, Stratum VIA, late 11 ‐ early 10th century BC) and Hazor (Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 137, 146, pl. 2.2.1: 12, 9th century BC). 36 MC.12.4427/26, MD.07.2219/80, MD.05.1402/22, MC.13.4441/31, MC.06.1776/5. Plain Ware jugs are attested to: MD.07.2219/80, MC.13.4441/31. See also Spagnoli 2007‐2008, fig. 3. 37 It was found in a filling layer (Stratum IV Filling) and it 41 Comparisons in the Levant: Jamieson 2011, 8, 16‐17, could be later: Lamon ‐ Shipton 1939, 160, pl. 22: 129. fig. 5:2. Up to the recent discoveries at Huelva and 38 Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 142, pl. 2.2.14: 10. Motya, the Phoenician Bichrome Ware was not attested 39 MD.07.2219/95, MC.08.2409 I/83, MC.08.2372b/1. to the western colonies: Ciasca 1987, 8‐9. See also § 2.5. 40 A similar decoration is on the jugs from Tyre al‐Bass 42 MD.07.2246/7, MD.07.2219/59, MC.13.4446/6, (Núñez 2008‐2009, fig. 6b) and on slightly later jugs from MC.12.2462/28. Carthage (Docter 2007, 56, no. 138a). 43 A specimen was found in Building C8: MC.13.4441/52.
[30]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2.3. Levantine Transport Amphorae In archaeological literature, attestations in (LTA ‐ Plate 5) Western Mediterranean are dated back not th 47 The early Phoenician repertoire includes several before of 7 century BC . However, new data transport amphorae, mostly preserved in rims from recent excavations in the earliest and handles (Nigro 2013a, 49, note no. 66). They Phoenician foundations revealed the presence of this transport amphora already in the 9th‐8th strictly reflect the typologies of the homeland, as 48 no local types are developed during Motya IVA. century BC . Motya IVA levels of occupation give LTA 1 ‐ Torpedo jar. The majority of finds of this back a conspicuous group of Torpedo jars: clays class44 belongs to the Torpedo jar45 or sausage‐jar are buff‐beige or pink with a dark gray core, type (Amiran 1970, 238), the most widespread suggesting that they were imported from the Phoenician transport amphora attested without Phoenician coast (Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, interruptions from the 11th century BC to the end 142; Stern 2015a, 438‐439; Regev 2004, 340). of 8th century BC (figs. 20‐23). Torpedo jars appear beyond proper Phoenicia mainly in the North46 (Syrian Coast and inland: Riis 1982, 299; Badre ‐ Gubel 1999‐2000, 129, fig. 5: b) and in Upper Galilee (Tell Keisan: Briend ‐ Humbert 1980, 207), and at Cyprus (Gjerstad 1948, fig. XLIV: 10, pl. LVI: 28).
[fig. 20 ‐ LTA 1 ‐ TORPEDO JAR MC.11.2491/62]
44 MC.13.4441/69, MF.09.2691/15, MC.09.2246/12, MC.11.2491/63, MC.11.2491/62, MC.12.2491/47, MF.09.2681/3, MD.05.2206/95, MF.09.2691/16, MD.05.1401/83, MC.10.2951/23, MC.16.5108/11. [fig. 21 ‐ LTA 1 ‐ TORPEDO JAR, 9TH‐8TH CENTURY BC] 45 Patricia Bikai included the Torpedo type within the Tyrian typology Sj9, actually combining various types of transport amphorae (Bikai 1978, 64‐68). A Levantine Sj9 47 Ciasca 1978a, 238, note no. 34, pl. LXIV: 3; Niemeyer ‐ amphora was found in the sea of Sulky (Sardinia): it has a Schubart 1975, pl. 18: 632. The majority of the 8th century carinated rounded shoulder, cylindrical body with a jars retrieved into Phoenician and Greek colonial centers narrowing under the shoulder. This amphora is probably of Central and Western Mediterranean, often associated one of the most ancient Levantine imports in Central to local made Phoenician pottery, belongs to the ovoid Mediterranean: Botto 2006, 9‐10, fig. 2. ‘Canaanite’ type. 46 The major diffusion of Torpedo jars on the North 48 As Cadiz and Huelva: Torres Ortiz et al. 2014, 53, fig, corresponds with the specialized production of Hole‐ 2:g; Gonzales de Canales et al. 2008, 631‐634. See also mouth jars on Southern Levant: Ciasca 1985, 324. Utica: Lopez Castro et al. 2016, 74, fig. 6.
[31]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[fig. 22 ‐ LTA 1 ‐ TORPEDO JAR MC.12.2491/47]
[fig. 24 ‐ LTA 2 ‐ OVOID JAR, 9TH‐8TH CENTURY BC]
On the other hand, the contemporaneous presence at Motya of ovoid Canaanite types exhibits the deep Levantine roots of the newcomers’ community, and prepares the ground for successive developments, when ovoid amphorae are locally produced while Torpedo jars progressively disappear. This bidirectional
process seems more meaningful if compared to [fig. 23 ‐ LTA 1 ‐ TORPEDO JAR MC.16.5108/11] Carthage, where the sequence of amphorae types follows an inverse path51. LTA 2 ‐ Ovoid jar. The inventory of transport amphorae includes also few ovoid jars, a very common Levantine type (e.g. Zukerman ‐ Gitin 2016, 103, fig. 4.14 ISJ2) characterized by a slightly inverted and ridged rim and short neck49. Amphorae retrieved in Motya IVA layers belong to a renowned variant of the more ancient Hippo Jar (figs. 24‐25)50, a type that, originating in 10th‐ 9th century BC, continues in the Levant during the 8th century BC (Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 141). The amphorae assemblage of Motya IVA gives the cue for some diachronic considerations: on the one hand, the importation of Torpedo jars reflects a typological trend of the homeland, [fig. 25 ‐ LTA 2 ‐ OVOID JAR MC.12.2491/46 where the Torpedo type became predominant replacing the ovoid type of Canaanean tradition. 51 An overview on Carthage transport amphorae, 49 MC.12.4427/24, MC.12.2491/45. especially for the Early Punic I and II Period, and 50 MC.12.2491/46 (with three incised lines on the distribution over the Central and West Mediterranean in shoulder): Stern 2015a, 440, pl. 4.1.8: 5. Bechtold ‐ Docter 2010, 91‐94, tab. 3.
[32]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2.4. Impasto Ware (IW ‐ Plates 6‐7) Cooking and storage pottery, as well as some types of Table Ware, are conversely borrowed from the local indigenous repertoire. The lacking of the typical globular cooking pot, commonly widespread in the Levant from the beginning of Iron Age (Spagnoli 2010, 46‐51), suggests that Phoenicians settlers made use of local cooking types, which include also open shapes like basins, 52 53 trays (figs. 26‐27) , vats (figs. 28‐29) and [fig. 28 ‐ IW VAT MC.12.2491/35] 54 bowls (fig. 30).
[fig. 29 ‐ IW VAT MC.11.2491/87)]
[fig. 26 ‐ IW TRAY MC.12.4427/21]
[fig. 27 ‐ IW TRAY MD.16.1112/69]
[fig. 30 ‐ IW BOWL MC.11.2491/69 WITH SINUOUS PROFILE AND BURNISHED SURFACE]
52 MC.12.2491/25, MC.12.4427/21, MD.16.1112/68, MD.16.1112/69. 53 MC.12.2491/26, MC.12.2491/37, MC.12.2491/35, MC.12.2491/87 (with ledge handles), MD.07/2246/8 (smaller), MC.08.2345/12 (pigñata pot). 54 MD.05.1402/6, MD.05.1402/13, MD.05.1402/11, MD.05.1402/10, MC.11.2491/80.
[33]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
These Impasto Ware shapes were used for food processing, cooking and table service, while medium size jars with flat base, made of the same ware, were employed for temporary storage (fig. 31)55.
[fig. 32 ‐ IW BOWL (MC.11.2491/37) WITH RED‐BURNISHED INNER COATING IMITATING PHOENICIAN RED SLIP]
Two IW drinking cups58 reproduce the Phoenician chalice (LRS‐Ch1, § 2.2.4.) with the local technique and style, and two IW small plates59, with straight sides and disk base, closely resemble to a popular Phoenician typology60. The imitations of Phoenician shapes by local potters suggest a remarkable familiarization and also an early contamination between oriental and [fig. 31 ‐ IW JAR MC.12.2491/40] indigenous pottery traditions, involving, in the
long run, a long‐lasting presence of Impasto Ware Moreover, one may distinguish within the IW of through the following periods. Motya IVA period some shapes that move away from the classical indigenous IW repertoire (Plate 6). A distinctive type of small bowl with a sinuous profile (figs. 32‐33, Plate 7)56 shows a different surface treatment, more similar to a red burnishing and a shape resembling as the rough replica of a common 9th century BC Palestinian bowl type57.
[fig. 33 ‐ IW BOWL MD.07.2219/36+17+31]
55 MD.05.1402/29, MD.05.1405/55, MC.11.2491/68, MC.12.4427/13. An accurate and exhaustive description of IW od Motya IVA period in Nigro 2013a, 48‐49, fig. 12. 56 MC.11.2491/37 and MD.07.2219/30, with a red burnished treatment were apparently refined with the slow wheel. Other items (MC.11.2491/65, MD.07.2219/31, MC.11.2491/69, MD.09.2287/5, MC.11.2491/80, MF.09.2687/23) have a similar shape 58 MC.12.4427/30, MC.12.2491/83. and a brown‐beige polished surface. 59 MD.05.1407/5, MC01102491/67. 57 Nigro 2013a, 48; Finkelstein ‐ Zimhoni ‐ Kafri 2000, fig. 60 It is the thick‐walled coarse ware bowls with a dark red 11.20: 4 (Megiddo stratum K‐2/VA‐IVB). Earlier or reddish brown slip, first appeared in the Levant in the comparisons at Tell ‘Arqa: Charaf 2008, 147‐149, pl. 4: a‐ 10th‐ mid 9th centuries and continued to the end of 8th b). century BC: Stern 2015a, 436, pl. 4.1.2: 1‐3.
[34]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
2.5. Cypriot and Levantine Imports Cypriot Bichrome Ware (CBW) is attested to in Motya IVA pottery assemblage includes several this period with an amphora found in Area D. The Cypriot imports. Numerous fragments of Cypriot fragment shows a complex geometric decoration White Painted Ware (fig. 34) were found consisting in black lines framing a red band, and a 63 scattered in early Phoenician levels belonging to multiple stem motive on a pinkish slip (fig. 36) . both open and closed shapes as craters and jugs. This Iron Age Cypriot production [Cypro‐ Geometric IB‐II], with a decoration descending from the Late Bronze Age pictorial tradition (Doumet‐Serhal 2008, 26‐29), is mostly widespread in the Levant during the Iron Age II. It is characterized by a matt white surface and a geometric decoration with simple bands and cross‐hatched lozenges61.
[fig. 36 ‐ CYPRIOT BICHROME WARE AMPHORA MD.05.1401/33]
CBW imports are attested to the Levant since the mid of 9th century BC. They are similar in many respects to the White Painted Ware of Iron Age I, but decoration has two colors, the red painting tending toward purplish or light red (Gilboa
2015a, 485, pl. 4.2.2:8). [fig. 34 ‐ CYPRIOT WHITE PAINTED WARE JUGS Two fragments of Phoenician Bichrome Ware64 MC.10.2491/3 AND MC.10.2481/1] were also found in Building C8. A jug‐flask (fig.
37)65 shows a part of the decoration with The Cypriot White Painted (wheel‐made) III is 62 concentric circles, painted red and black on a attested to this period with a large bowl (fig. 35) matt‐beige surface. showing a linear decoration painted in black and brownish‐red, belonging to a very early horizon dating from late 9th to early 8th century BC (Doumet‐Serhal 2008, fig. 67).
[fig. 37 ‐ PHOENICIAN BICHROME WARE JUG‐FLASK MC.13.2477/3B]
63 MD.05.1401/33: Doumet‐Serhal 2004, 76, no. 12. 64 Antonia Ciasca already noted that “ugualmente molto
[fig. 35 ‐ CYPRIOT WHITE PAINTED (WHEEL‐MADE) III BOWL sintomatica è l’assenza di una forma particolare e assai MC.13.2477/3] riconoscibile […] la fiaschetta schiacciata lentoide (pilgrim flask) mono‐ o biansata, abitualmente accompagnata da decorazione a cerchi concentrici sulle due facce”. She 61 Another fragment from the early phase of the Temple suggested that this absence could be linked to a later of Astarte: MC.10.2783/8. As comparisons, see: Doumet‐ chronology of the first settlement of Phoenicians at Serhal 2008, 44, fig. 66, Sarepta (Cypriot Withe Painted Motya in respect of the diffusion and chronology of Wheel‐made II), end of the 9th‐ 8th century BC; Gilboa Bichrome Ware in the Levant: Ciasca 1987, 9. 2015b, 486‐487. 65 MC.13.2477/3b. For Levantine parallels, see: Stern 62 MC.13.2477/3. 2015a, 441, pl. 4.1.13.
[35]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
A second jug (fig. 38)66 showing a linear decoration painted black and red on a pink surface, was found in the dwelling quarter on the south‐western slopes of the Acropolis (Area D).
[fig. 40 ‐ RED‐MONOCHROME PHOENICIAN JAR MD.05.1401/28]
[fig. 38 ‐ PHOENICIAN BICHROME WARE JUG JUG The decoration of this vessel shows a couple of MD.16.1112/76] painted lines and the upper part of a palm‐tree, a typical motif of the early stages of this Phoenician Walls inclination and decoration suggest it is as a production (10th‐9th centuries BC). Other few strainer‐spouted jar, a typical Phoenician shape fragments belonging to this production are 67 attested to Motya IVA in PW (fig. 39) . ascribable to jugs or jars with a simple linear Red‐ Monochrome decoration alternating bands and lines (fig. 41).
[fig. 39 ‐ PW STRAINER‐SPOUTED JAR MC.15.4468/14]
A painted jar, retrieved in the same area, is a rare example of Red‐Monochrome Phoenician [fig. 41 ‐ RED‐MONOCHROME PHOENICIAN JAR SHOULDER production (fig. 40)68. MD.16.1112/17]
66 MD.16.1112/76. 67 MC.15.4468/14: comparisons in Bikai 1987, pl. VIII: 119; Núñez Calvo 2011, 282, fig. 3: f. 68 MC.05.1401/28. The vessel can be included into the tradition of Bichrome Ware. A discussion of this issue may found in Stern 2015a, 435‐436, 441, note no. 11, pl. 4.1.15.
[36]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[37]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[38]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[39]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[40]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[41]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[42]
[2.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVA (800‐750 BC)] MOTYE
[43]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3. Rise of a harbour city involving both the northern and southern sacred areas, as well as the waterfronts to the east, north and south. In the time elapse of three or four decades, the The expansion of the earliest settlement followed original settlement by the springs of the Kothon, two different trajectories: across the core of the on the southern shore of the island, spread over island, climbing up the eccentric acropolis, and the shallow mound occupying the central and along its eastern and northern coast, were eastern portions of Motya, i.e. the acropolis. several installations overlapped the pre‐existing Excavations in Zones B, D, E and L illustrated this prehistoric necropolis. A north‐south main road quick growth of the inhabited area in Period axis, connecting the two major public poles of the Motya IVB (750‐675 BC, fig. 1), which was rising city with the acropolis, was thus first accompanied by some major building activities established.
[fig. 1 ‐ MAP OF THE ISLAND OF MOTYA WITH THE EXPANSION OF PERIOD MOTYA II‐III, IVA AND IVB.]
[44]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.1. The expansion on the Acropolis 3.1.1. Area B: the south‐west flank The eccentric mound occupying the eastern Area B, on the south‐eastern slopes of the portion of the island, created by the ruins of acropolis was excavated by A. Ciasca and M.L. several stratified Bronze Age villages, was the Famà in 1987, 1989 and 1991 (fig. 2). These natural area of expansion for the Phoenician excavations remained, unfortunately, largely settlement arisen on the southern shore of unpublished, however, basic information Motya by the springs of the so‐called ‘Kothon’ concerning the earliest layers of occupation was (Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012, 2‐3). Thus, the built up collected by our expedition, which resumed area progressively extended northwards, archaeological work in that zone of the island in overlaying the sloping flanks of the acropolis and 2008, digging there for four seasons until 2011. reaching its flat top. Underneath the 6th‐5th century BC main street The southern slopes of the acropolis were already running approximately east‐west, flanked by the occupied during prehistory, and, for this reason, block occupied by the ‘House of the square well’, Phoenician settlers, before establishing there, earlier strata were uncovered showing a regularized the emerging ruins, razing bumps and completely different NE/SW orientation of filling up pits. This activity was especially buildings, adapted to the concentric and radial illustrated by excavations in Areas B and D, where streets of the earliest Phoenician acropolis. levelling and filling were succeeded, in the Houses dating back from the 8th and 7th century stratigraphic sequence, by the erection of the BC were preferably made of unworked riverbed earliest Phoenician structures, towards the mid of stones laid on two rows of 0.5 m wide walls. They the 8th century BC. had small and densely displaced rooms, but all of In the following centuries, the slopes of the them were equipped with wells and cisterns. acropolis underwent several reconstructions until The earliest Phoenician strata reached in two the mid of the 6th century BC, when the urban soundings date back to the second half of the 8th layout of the city was reset in monumental way. century BC.
TH [fig. 2 ‐ AERIAL VIEW OF AREA B WITH 5 CENTURY BC MAIN STREET AND SURROUNDING BUILDINGS INCLUDING THE ‘HOUSE OF THE SQUARE TH TH WELL, AND, AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT THE PRECEDING 8 ‐7 CENTURY BC STRUCTURES; LOOKING NORTH‐EAST]
[45]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.1.2. Area D: Soundings I and III materials were found as stray finds in Sounding III. While Motya IVB ceramics were collected on Area D is located on the western slopes of the L.2250, i.e. the floor laying upon the regularized acropolis, bridging the 5 m difference in elevation top of previous strata (fig. 3). Only small portions between its flat top and the shallow marshland of of built up structures were excavated, exhibiting Area C. Erosion transformed the acropolis flanks a technique similar to that known from Building into gentle slopes, concealing prominent ruins of C8. the prehistoric settlements. Sapienza Expedition Conspicuous Motya IVB materials were retrieved excavated four deep soundings, conceived as in Sounding I, at midway on the slope, where a 5 step trenches transversally oriented in respect to m wide waste pit was excavated. Ceramics, but the slope. They illustrated the development of also ashes, charcoals, and animal bones were the prehistoric community of Motya through the useful for an integrated study of the early ages, from Period Motya II (Middle Bronze, 1650‐ Phoenician settlement on the acropolis. Tuna 1250 BC) to Motya III (Late Bronze and Early Iron fish, sheep and goats, pig, deer, doves, donkey, Age 1250‐900). Cypriot and Levantine imported dog and tortoise are the most common animal ceramics, as well as Aegean and Mycenaean species either consummated or exploited by the pottery, weapons and objects are thus well inhabitants of Motya in this period. Some of them attested to in Motya (Nigro 2016). The earliest were of Levantine origin (goat, dove, pig and dog, Phoenician ceramic stuff, conversely, appears perhaps also tortoise and donkey), while other associated with Cypriot imports in period Motya were Sicilian (deer, sheep, wild boar). Carbonized IIIB (Early Iron Age, 1100‐900 BC) (§ 2.5.). seeds from the pit show that figs, chickpeas and The earliest strata of Phoenician occupation were lentils were part of the diet of Phoenicians, as brought to light in Soundings I and III. Motya IVA well as barley and wheat.
[fig. 3 ‐ SOUNDING III IN AREA D, SOUTH‐WESTERN SLOPE OF THE ACROPOLIS, SHOWING MOTYA IVB PHOENICIAN LAYERS, FROM THE WEST]
[46]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.1.3. Areas E and L: the Acropolis earliest Phoenician installations and, what seems more noteworthy, a street showing a radial In 2007 a rescue excavation was carried out in orientation in respect of the acropolis east slope. Area L on the top west of the acropolis on an area This datum has been matched with that grasped of around 30 m2. A 5 m deep sounding was by our expedition excavations in the main street excavated reaching prehistoric layers and of the 19th century village. identifying the earliest Phoenician strata (fig. 5). The road network on the acropolis consisted of A substantial wall (M.54) was uncovered with two main streets crossing north‐south and east‐ connected floors (L.50). west the summit of the acropolis with a radial In Area E, rescue excavations carried out by the series of lanes descending its flanks (fig. 4). This Superintendence of Trapani, identified the layout (fig. 6) seems an adaptation of a well‐
[fig. 4 ‐ MAP OF THE ISLAND OF MOTYA SHOWING THE ROAD NETWORK OF THE SITE IN MOTYA IVB PERIOD]
[47]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE known urban model of Phoenicia and Palestine, continued in direction of the so‐called exemplified by centres like Tell Keisan, Tell en‐ ‘Cappiddazzu’, where a second cult place was Nasbeh, possibly also Sidon, and Biruta (modern erected (§ 3.4.), and reached the north coast of Beirut), or by other foundations in the West, like the island. Dwellings and installations expanded Carthage, Sulky, and, later on, Kerkouane or counter clockwise for half a kilometre to the Monte Sirai. north‐west (Area F, Nigro 2004, 24; 2011, 49). The expansion of the town towards the north The northern seashore was, in facts, characterized by an edge uprising of the limestone bedrock, which assured a safe place for building (or burying), and an easy access to the phreatic aquifer through the excavation of wells. One has, moreover, to point out that the same area of the island was a burial place (and possibly a sacred area) already during prehistoric times, as several finds demonstrated (e.g. Spatafora 1980‐ 1981), including complete vessels retrieved in well 10 by V. Tusa (Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 339‐340, note 55). For all these reasons, during Motya IVB, this northern crescent was occupied by the expanding city to host several different functions: a second commercial and more protected dock; an industrial quarter connected to the latter (Area K), the necropolis (Area N), the Tophet (Area T), some sparse dwellings (Area F), and, of course a second sacred area, that of the so‐called [fig. 5 ‐ STRATIGRAPHY DOWN TO THE EARLIEST PHOENICIAN ‘Cappiddazzu’, with a temple dedicated to god INSTALLATIONSOF MOTYA IVA IN AREA L ON THE ACROPOLIS] Melqart.
[fig. 6 ‐ AERIAL VIEW OF THE ACROPOLIS AT MOTYA CONCEALING THE REMAINS OF THE PREHISTORIC SETTLEMENTS ARISEN ON THE ISLAND TH TH BETWEEN THE 17 AND THE 10 CENTURY BC]
[48]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.2. The earliest Temple (C5) holy of the holies on its eastern short side. Here the adyton, which lasted in use also in Phase 7 The transformation of the earliest landfall into a (Motya V, 675‐550 BC), hosted a rectangular proper town also envisaged in Area C Phase 8 altar, with a small stela before it, flanked by a (Motya IVB, 750‐675 BC) a major reorganization ‘mundus’, a funnel shaped hole embedded into of the open cult area of the so‐called ‘Kothon’ the ground for pouring libations down directly into a built up religious compound including two into the netherworld (fig. 8) (Nigro 2010a, 25‐26). temples (Baal’s and Astarte’s), the holy spring, a Three upright monuments were arrayed at sacred pond and an offerings’ field aside it. The regular intervals along the main east‐west rectangular shrine (C14) of Motya IVA was, thus, (actually 20°‐110°) axis of the central courtyard: comprised into a larger rectangular building an obelisk and two pillar‐stelae (the obelisk and a (Temple C5), consisting of three parallel rooms stela were broken; the third baetyl was missing: east‐west oriented, and a fourth transversal Nigro 2009, 255; 2010b, 19‐21, fig. 10, Nigro ‐ space to the east (East Wing; fig. 7). Actually, this Spagnoli 2012, 8). Two libation holes were scheme was borrowed by the so‐called “Four identified, one between the obelisk and the Room Building” of the Levant (Sharon ‐ Zarzecki‐ central stela, and the other at the centre of the Peleg 2006; Nigro 2010a, 79, note no. 12), with southern cult space. The obelisk has two hollows several adaptations and modifications, possibly at its bottom on its west side (fig. 9), and a single also influenced by the Cypriot sacred square hole on its eastern face (fig. 10). The architectural tradition of the “Tripartite Pillared former ones were possibly devoted to libations or Building” exemplified by temples of Kition to keep small offerings for a short term, while the Bamboula (Nigro 2012a; 2013a, 53, note no. 89, second possibly hosted inscribed dedications with bibliography). written on metal plaques or on perishable The main square space inside the building was supports like vellum paper or papyrus. The subdivided into three parallel rooms east‐west southern façade wall of the temple was founded oriented. They were from north to south: the on a line of ashlar local sandstone (‘calcarenite’) cella with its raised adyton, which was blocks carefully cut (fig. 11), while the rest of the refurbished above its predecessor Shrine C14; a walls adopted a mixed technique with regular central open space with several cult installations; monolithic pillars alternated to skilfully and a vestibule flanked by a cult room. intermingled fieldstones. Temple C5 is one of the The cella was a rectangular room with a wide earliest examples of such pillars building entrance in the south‐west corner and a raised technique which distinguishes Punic architecture.
[fig. 7 ‐ DRAWING RECONSTRUCTION SHOWING TEMPLE C5 OF MOTYA IVB (750‐675 BC) WITH ITS MAJOR CULT INSTALLATIONS, THE EARLIEST SACRED POOL, THE HOLY SPRING AND THE ADJACENT FAVISSA, FROM THE SOUTH]
[49]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 8 ‐ THE HOLY OF THE HOLIES IN TEMPLE C5 OF MOTYA IVB (750‐675 BC): RECTANGULAR ALTAR WITH A SMALL STELA AND A BURNING INSTALLATION BEFORE, FLANKED BY THE FUNNEL‐SHAPED STONE SLABS BUILT HOLE FOR POURING LIQUIDS UNDERGROUND]
[fig. 9 ‐ CULT INSTALLATIONS IN THE TEMPLE OF BAAL FIRST ERECTED IN PHASE 8 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC) AND KEPT IN FUNCTION UNTIL THE END OF LIFE OF THE BUILDING; THE ORIGINAL SACRED WELL HAD A CIRCULAR MOUTH, PRESERVED UNDERNEATH; FROM THE WEST]
[50]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 11 ‐ THE SOUTHERN FAÇADE WALL OF TEMPLE C5 OF MOTYA IVB (750‐675 BC) MADE OF CAREFULLY DRESSED LOCAL LIMESTONE BLOCKS; IN THE FOREGROUND THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING; FROM THE SOUTH]
[fig. 10 ‐ CULT PILLAR‐STELAE AND OBELISK IN THE CENTRAL COURTYARD OF THE TEMPLE OF BAAL, FIRST ERECTED IN PHASE 8 (MOTYA IVB 750‐675 BC) ARRAYED ON THE MAIN EAST‐WEST AXIS OF THE BUILDING; FROM THE NORTH‐EAST]
[51]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
This is beautifully visible in the northern wall of made of ashlar blocks. This structure was the temple (M.1691: Nigro 2010a, 19, figs. 13, successively dismantled or embedded into the 18), where three superimposed courses of stones quay of the 6th century BC basin. Actually, some are overlaid by its later Phase 5 reconstruction stretches of its original walls are still visible (fig. (Motya VI, 550‐397 BC). 13). It was made of regular local limestone In the south‐west corner of southern wall, a (‘calcarenite’) ashlar blocks 1 cubit (0.52 m) wide monumental entrance, made of 1 cubit‐wide and 2 cubits (1.05 m) long, which in many cases carefully dressed local sandstone blocks, was were re‐employed in the 6th century pool (Nigro framed by two protruding antae (fig. 12). 2014b, 74, figs. 100‐101, pl. II).
[fig. 12 ‐ THE MONUMENTAL ENTRANCE TO THE TEMPLE OF [fig. 13 ‐ BLOCKS ORIGINALLY BELONGED TO THE WESTERN BAAL ERECTED IN PHASE 8 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)] ENTRANCE OF THE TEMPLE OF BAAL (750‐675 BC)]
Although this monumental gate was rebuilt at The offerings area just west of the temple was least two times during the four century‐long kept in use in this phase (fig. 14), albeit many pits history of the temple (Nigro 2004, 68‐70), the were filled up and only baetyls marked their four blocks forming the threshold and the two presence (Nigro 2010a, fig. 16). A beaten clayish protruding antae were kept in their original marl soil floor was laid sealing burnt offerings and placement (Phase 8, Motya IVB, 750‐675 BC). votive pits (fig. 15). On the opposite south‐ When the level of the floor inside the entrance, in eastern corner of the building, a paved area the temple vestibule, was raised, and even when encircled a restricted other depositional field the open space outside was paved with layers of (figs. 16‐17), where metal slags (iron and lead) pebbles and pottery sherds, threshold L.1 and minerals (micaceous stones) were buried into preserved is configuration. small holes in the ground (fig. 18). They were Two more doors were at the middle of the possibly votive gifts to a hypostasis of god Baal eastern and western sides of the building. The ruling over netherworld. Chthonian offerings western door opened towards the nearby pond consisting of metals and minerals were usually of fresh waters, which was given a pool‐like wharf accompanied by charcoals and ashes.
[52]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 14 ‐ VOTIVE PITS WITH UPRIGHT STONES IN THE OFFERINGS [fig. 15 ‐VOTIVE PITS OBLITERATED BY PHASE 8 (MOTYA IVB, FIELD WEST OF TEMPLE C5 (MOTYA IVA, 800‐750 BC] 750‐675 BC) CLAYISH MARL FLOOR]
[fig. 17 ‐DETAIL OF SMALL PITS FOR CHTHONIAN OFFERINGS METALS AND MINERALS IN THE SOUTH‐EAST NAVE OF TEMPLE C5 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[fig. 18 ‐IRON SLAG FOUND IN ONE OF THE SMALL PITS [fig. 16 ‐ CULT SLABS PAVED SURFACE AND SMALL DEPOSITIONS OF CHTHONIAN IN THE SOUTH‐WEST NAVE OF TEMPLE C5 (MOTYA OFFERINGS IN THE SOUTH‐EAST AISLE OF TEMPLE C5 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)] IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[53]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.3. The Temple of Astarte in Area C Motya (Shrine C12 [Motya IVB‐VB, 750‐550 BC], Temple C6 [Motya VI, 550‐470 BC] and Temple C4 Not far away from the Temple of Baal, further [Motya VII, 470‐397/6 BC]), undergoing several inland, a second cult place has been discovered, transformations, which hamper a full which was also founded in Phase 9 (Motya IVA) investigation of its earliest architectural layout. or even earlier in prehistoric times. Nonetheless, Shrine C12 had a rectangular plan (8.3 x 4.1 m), the earliest building we have been able to with the longest axis north‐south oriented. The reconstruct so far belongs to Phases 8‐7 (Motya main entrance was a 1.65 m wide door framed by IVB, 750‐675 BC). It has been named “Shrine C12” two pilasters, supported by blocks jutting out and its dedication to Astarte is suggested by two from the temple eastern wall. This suggests that inscriptions found in Phases 5‐4 layers (Nigro the building opened towards a street or an open 2015a, 240, figs. 16‐17). place.
Inside the mono‐cellular shrine, the cult focused on a podium built against the southern short wall. The temple interior or cella was characterized by the presence of benches, built both on the eastern and western sides against its walls. In the filling on the floor of the building (L.5046) a small bronze earing and a bronze miniature pinecone were found (fig. 20), which might have belonged to a cult figurine.
[fig. 19 ‐ SCHEMATIC PLAN OF SHRINE 12 IN AREA C NORTH (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC] [fig. 20 ‐ BRONZE MINIATURE EARING AND Actually, the Temple of Astarte in Area C was PINECONE FOUND IN SHRINE C12 POSSIBLY reconstructed three times during the history of BELONGED TO A CULT FIGURINE]
[54]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
A spherical unguentarium or ‘inkbottle’ was also retrieved on the floor against the northern side of the western bench (fig. 21). It is handmade and possibly imitates a pomegranate. The overall plan of the building and its inner features (fig. 22) point to a comparison with the shrine excavated by J.B. Pritchard at Sarepta, (Pritchard 1975, 13‐18, figs. 2: 33‐34) ascribed to a tradition which also counts the temple of Tell Judeidah in the ‘Amuq (Matthiae 1993). The space between the Temple of Astarte and the Temple of Baal was occupied by the holy spring (near the latter), and a series of cult installations: offerings compounds, favissae and, a porch attached in Phase 7 to the southern side
of the Temple of Astarte, with a podium [fig. 21 ‐ SPHERICAL UNGUENTARIUM/’INKBOTTLE’ underneath it, and a favissa, consisting of a round MC.16.5046/1 OR POMEGRANATE VESSELS FROM SHRINE C12] 0.7 m deep pit, sealed by a big limestone block.
[fig. 22 ‐ GENERAL VIEW OF PHASE 4 (470‐397/6 BC) CIRCULAR TEMENOS CLOSING WALL W.1749 CUTTING THROUGH THE EARLIEST STAGE OF THE TEMPLE OF ASTARTE (SHRINE C12) OF PHASE 8 (750‐675 BC); LOOKING SOUTH‐WEST]
[55]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 23 ‐ POTTERY SPOON OR VOTIVE LAMP MC.10.2783/1]
Inside it, together with burnt animal bones and sea‐shells, a pottery spoon was found (fig. 23) which belongs to a long lasting Sicilian prehistoric tradition of sacred objects, possibly connected [fig. 24 ‐ ANCHOR STONE M.4379 EMBEDDED INTO THE LOWER COURSE OF THE TEMENOS WALL M.2703] also to Sardinian/Nuragic lamps (Bartoloni 2005, 270; S. Tusa 2008, 72‐73). On the opposite northern side of the temple, the identification of a late 2nd millennium BC anchor stone (figs. 24‐25) embedded into the lower course of the Circular Temenos, which since the mid of the 6th century BC encompassed the Sacred Area of the Kothon (fig. 26), suggested that such a piece of evidence, witnessing late 2nd millennium BC Levantine sea‐journeys to Motya, might have been dedicated into the nearby Temple of Astarte or its prehistoric forerunner. The stone, 0.52 m wide and 0.46 m high, has a 0.14 m wide circular hole with an iron ring inside, possibly installed secondarily to better fasten the rope securing it to the ship. A secondary small hole served to free the anchor when it got stuck [fig. 25 ‐ ANCHOR STONE M.4379 WITH THE SMALL SECONDARY into the sea bottom and to refloat the ship itself. HOLE AT THE BOTTOM LEFT]
[fig. 26 ‐ GENERAL VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR TEMENOS FROM THE NORTH‐EAST WITH IN THE FOREGROUND THE ANCHOR STONE EMBEDDED INTO THE STRUCTURE AND, JUST EAST OF IT (LEFT) THE REMAINS OF THE TEMPLE OF ASTARTE]
[56]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.4. The Temple of a healing god With the expansion of the city towards the north in period Motya IVB a second sacred area is established in the zone nowadays called “Cappiddazzu”, set upon an uprising spur of the clayish marl bedrock, where the phreatic aquifer was also easily reachable. This sacred building was discovered and excavated by Vincenzo Tusa (Tusa 2000; Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2004, with previous literature). The earliest phase, which can be dated to the first half of the 8th century BC (Motya IVA, 800‐750 BC), consisted of a cult compound with sacred pits containing burnt offerings. The site was chosen because of the easy access to drinking waters in the phreatic aquifer, guaranteed by a well, which possibly existed since prehistoric times. [fig. 28 – SCHEMATIC PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF “CAPPIDDAZZU” Towards the end of the 8th century BC (Motya IN ITS EARLIEST LAYOUT OF PERIOD MOTYA IVB (750‐675 BC) ]
IVB, 750‐675 BC), the first sacred building was erected. Its plan has been inferred by matching [fig. 28 ‐ PLAN OF THE EARLIEST SACRED BUILDING OF different reports after a close observation of “CAPPIDDAZZU” (PHASE 2, MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)] monuments and stratigraphy (fig. 27).
[fig. 27 ‐ GENERAL VIEW OF THE EARLIEST STRUCTURES OF THE “CAPPIDDAZZU” SHRINE, PHASE 2 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC), SUPERIMPOSED BY THE MONUMENTAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE MOTYA VI‐VII TEMPLE (550‐397/6 BC); LOOKING WEST‐NORTH‐WEST]
[57]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
As like as Temple C5 (§ 3.2.), it had an almost slabs, with a technique which closely reminds square general layout (fig. 28), being subdivided that of Phase 8 buildings in Area C (Building C8 into four rooms: a courtyard to the south, a and Temple C5; §§ 1.5., 3.2.). The same slabs vestibule, a cella (to the north), and an elongated were used in the central courtyard hinting at cult entrance wing to the south‐east, where the main performed with waters from the central well. north‐south street passed by. While there is no doubt on the dedication to the Phoenician god Melqart of the successive monumental reconstructions of this temple (Nigro 2009, 245‐251), the same attribution it is not proved for its earlier stages. The centrality of the well and the slab paving, as well as some peculiar finds, may in facts indicate that the god worshipped in the earliest “Cappiddazzu” Shrine was a healing god, like Reshef or Shadrafa, successively assimilated to Melqart when the city underwent a political transformation towards a monarchist model between the 6th and the 5th century BC. Among finds from the earliest temple’s layers there are lamps, incense burners, Red Slip carinated bowls and juglets. An obelisk, found discarded in the area west of the temple (Zone KK), may have belonged to this earliest temple, as it is quite similar to that of Temple C5. A terracotta head of a ram also retrieved in the early layers (Tusa 1964, 38, tav. XXVII). [fig. 29 ‐ THE CIRCULAR WELL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COURTYARD OF THE EARLIEST SHRINE OF “CAPPIDDAZZU”]
Successively, in the 7th century BC, the shrine was enlarged by adding a further transversal wing to the north. There were two entrances: one from the south, which introduced into a slab‐paved forecourt with a circular well in the middle (fig. 29), and another to the east, opening into an elongated vestibule (possibly a porch). The rectangular cella was entered from the courtyard through a 1.65 m wide door located in its south‐western corner and it was characterized by the presence of a hewn block with a cup‐mark for libation just inside (later on, an offering pit [bothros] was sunk into the floor). The cult focus was on the opposite south‐eastern short side of the elongated cella, where the simulacrum most probably stood on a basis consisting of a rectangular block set into a raised platform (fig. 30). The walls of the earliest Shrine of “Cappiddazzu” (vernacular for “the big hat” as it was called due to a local Motyan legend), were made of medium [fig. 30 ‐THE CELLA OF THE EARLIEST SHRINE OF “CAPPIDAZZU” WITH size unworked riverbed stones and flat limestone CULT INSTALLATIONS SEEN FROM THE NORTH‐EAST AND ABOVE]
[58]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.5. The earliest Phoenician necropolis This re‐use possibly witnesses Phoenicians’ awareness of indigenous burial places and An appropriate burial place was one of the basic funerary traditions. Actually, the newcomers had needs of the earliest Phoenician community taken their brides from the local Sicilian settled on Motya around 800 BC. The northern population (which, successively, will be labelled coastal strip of the island was chosen for this ‘Elymian’). Those women had become a vital and function, possibly as a remembrance of its decisive component of the new colony (Delgado prehistoric destination (Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 332‐ 2016, 62‐63), bringing their customs into the new 334; Vecchio 2013). Middle Bronze Age tombs, born Motyan society. This is possibly also often hosted in caves or pits obtained exhibited by the inclusion into earliest burials of regularizing natural cavities, were in facts indigenous pottery pots, small jars and painted distributed on the edge of the uprising bedrock trumpet‐neck amphorae, used as urns (see crowning Motya on its north‐eastern (fig. 31) and below). north‐western sides. Phoenician and prehistoric burial places, thus, overlapped along the northern bedrock edge of the island (fig. 32). About two centuries later, the same coastal strip underwent the construction of the city‐walls, which drastically cut through a series of cemeteries, subverting tombs and burials. For this reason, proper cemeteries were identified by archaeologists only in those stretch of the island perimeter where the city‐walls were set inside the bedrock edge, such as in the area of the so‐ called ‘Archaic Necropolis’ (Ciasca 1990a, 117‐ 118; 1990b, 7‐8). The earliest dead in Motya were incinerated and [fig. 32 ‐ PREHISTORIC ‘GROTTICELLE’ TOMBS UNCOVERED buried in small caves, rock‐cut or cists pits dug in UNDERNEATH THE WESTERN CHAMBER OF TOWER 1 IN THE the bedrock. In several cases, they re‐occupied EARLIEST DEFENSIVE LINE OF MOTYA REUSED FOR EARLY prehistoric ‘grotticelle’, i.e. tomb cavities or burial PHOENICIAN BURIALS IN PERIOD MOTYA IV (800‐675 BC)] pits which had hosted Bronze Age inhumations.
[fig. 31 ‐ MAP OF THE NORTHERN COAST OF THE ISLAND OF MOTYA SHOWING THE BEDROCK UPRISING WHERE PREHISTORIC AND PHOENICIAN BURIAL PLACES WERE OVERLAPPED]
[59]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.5.1. Cremation and burial gender was possibly indicated by the urn cover: a Excavations all around the city‐walls and in the pointed lid for men and a flat lid or a area of the ‘Archaic necropolis’ provided plentiful hemispherical cup for women. evidence about the funerary custom of the early Phoenician community. J.I.S. Whitaker, V. Tusa and A. Ciasca brought to light 400 tombs, the other expeditions (P. Cintas, B.S.J. Isserlin, Rome Sapienza and Palermo Universities) around 50 tombs. The number of burials so‐far excavated in the so‐called ‘Archaic Necropolis’ is 220, among which at least 30 date from Motya IV (800‐675 BC). To this major group other sparse burials dating from the same period discovered along the city‐walls can be added. Cremation was the dominating funerary custom of the early Phoenician community, even though inhumation is also attested to (§ 3.5.2.). The overall panorama after Sapienza most recent excavations seems more articulated than it was previously thought (Spagnoli 2007‐2008; Vecchio 2013). Different rites and burial places not only reflect social complexity, but also the mixed cultural composition of the colony. Cremation was practiced by burning dead bodies on pyres made with lentisk (Pistacia lentiscus) and evergreen oak (Quercus ilex) wood. [fig. 33 ‐ OVOID ‘CANAANITE’ TRANSPORT AMPHORA USED AS Incinerated bodies were put into pottery vessels CINERARIUM IN TOMB 180 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)] serving as cineraria or in stone boxes (cists and carved blocks: Vecchio 2013, 45). Basically, three kinds of vases were used, possibly referring to different groups of deceased: a) Transport amphorae (§ 2.3.); b) Painted amphorae (or crater‐amphorae) of Phoenician tradition with carinated shoulders or barely neck‐ridge; c) Trumpet‐neck amphorae either of local Phoenician Painted Ware or of Impasto Ware; The first type of cinerarium, the transport amphora, could belong to one of the two major typological groups of the ovoid old‐fashioned ‘Canaanite’ type (fig. 33) (Toti 2002, pl. I) or the carinated‐shoulders‐‘Torpedo’ type (fig. 34). Both types were connected with trade and navigation and were apparently preferred in the case of male deceased (seamen?). This type of cinerarium is used for 40% of all incinerations. Weapons, when present, are usually associated with this kind of urn. The urns of the second kind are medium size amphorae (or crater‐amphorae) with painted decoration, both of the type with carinated‐ shoulders (fig. 35) or neck‐ridge (fig. 36). The [fig. 34 ‐ CARINATED‐SHOULDERS TRANSPORT AMPHORA USED AS CINERARIUM IN TOMB 148 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[60]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
The third kind of crematoria is the trumpet‐neck or flaring‐neck amphora of indigenous tradition (possibly descending from Mycenaean prototypes) made of local Phoenician Painted Ware (figs. 37‐38; BsW: § 4.2.6.) or of Impasto Ware (§ 4.3.) (fig. 39).
[fig. 35 ‐ CARINATED‐SHOULDERS RS BAND PAINTED AMPHORA WHITAKER COLLECTION INV. 1672 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[fig. 38 ‐ TRUMPET‐NECK PAINTED AMPHORA CINERARIUM WHITAKER COLLECTION INV. 6556 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[fig. 36 ‐ NECK‐RIDGE PAINTED AMPHORA USED AS CINERARIUM FROM TOMB 5 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[fig. 37 ‐ TRUMPET‐NECK PAINTED AMPHORA USED AS [fig. 39 ‐ IMPASTO WARE TRUMPET‐NECK AMPHORA FROM CINERARIUM FROM TOMB 133 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)] TOMB 11 (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[61]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
Urns were buried either in a rock‐cut pit (58%) or pebble was set upright near the pit to memorize in a square cist made of limestone slabs (26%), its precise location within the cemetery (fig. 41). or, later, in a single block of stone carved inside In several cases (6%) ‐ as stated above ‐ small (8%), hosted in a pre‐existing or specifically caves already used for prehistoric burials were re‐ excavated bedrock cavity (fig. 40). A stone block employed. The space all around the cist or the or a slab was usually used to close the burial pit urn itself, thus, was used to displace the other or the cist and, often, a baetyl or an elongated pieces of the funerary set, such as jugs, mugs,
[fig. 40 ‐ A STRETCH OF THE EARLIEST CITY‐WALL (M.2) CUTTING THROUGH THE ‘ARCHAIC NECROPOLIS’. ALL DIFFERENT KINDS OF BURIAL CUSTOMS ARE ILLUSTRATED: INCINERATION IN ROCK‐CUT PIT, SARCOPHAGUS, SLABS‐MADE CIST, CARVED SANDSTONE BLOCK, AND INHUMATION IN A RECTANGULAR PIT. TOMBS 177, 179 AND 180 DATE BACK FROM MOTYA IVB PERIOD (750‐675 BC)]
[62]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE pots, bowls and plates with offerings (figs. 42‐45): red wine, perfumes, ointments, cooked or burnt small birds or ovicaprines’ fractions.
[fig. 41 ‐ TOMB EXCAVATED BY J.I.S. WHITAKER WITH A BAETYL [fig. 44 ‐ THE URN‐AMPHORA AND THE FUNERARY SET OF TOMB MARKING THE BURIAL PIT] 180 (MOTYA IVB, 720‐700 BC)]
[fig. 42 ‐ TOMB 179 LEANING ON CITY‐WALL M2] [fig. 45 ‐ TOMB 180 WITH THE URN‐AMPHORA AND THE OTHER PIECES OF THE FUNERARY SET DISPLACED INTO A ROCK‐CUT PIT]
In some rare cases (20) weapons, generally made of iron, were also included into funerary sets, possibly to signify the military status of the owner of the tomb if not his rank. They are spearheads, daggers, swords and in one case a javelin (V. Tusa 2012). It is possible that bronze weapons were also used as funerary fittings, even though due to the nearness to the sea and the composition of [fig. 43 ‐ THE FUNERARY ASSEMBLAGE OF TOMB 85 (MOTYA the soil they were not preserved. IVB, C. 720 BC) WITH THE TIP OF A IRON SWORD]
[63]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.5.2. Inhumations: small caves and the Levantine coast – apparently inspired by their sarcophagi Egyptians neighbours. This somewhat exceptional In some more rare cases, the earliest Phoenician funerary treatment was actually reserved to inhabitants of Motya adopted inhumation for special personages, possibly the members of a burying their dead, laying their ultimate remains local aristocracy (Lopez Castro 2006). down in underground cavities, or composing At Motya, sarcophagi were systematically reused, them within engraved monolithic sarcophagi. a custom attested to also in Phoenicia, and this Actually, inhumation was the favourite burial may give an alternative reason why those actually custom of the indigenous population living on the found occupied commonly hosted burials dating th th island before Phoenicians and practiced by early from the 6 or 5 century BC. This was Phoenician brides. A certain deal of cultural traditionally explained with the renewal of compromise was, thus, necessary between the inhumation in the Punic word, which occurred in two components of the new colonial society. the same period, even though it was not Nonetheless, burying inside a stone‐cut necessarily linked to the use of sarcophagi sarcophagus was an ancient tradition of people of (Vecchio 2013, 58). Residual remains (human
[fig. 46 ‐ SMALL CAVES USED FOR BURIALS IN THE PREHISTORY AND IN EARLY PHOENICIAN PHASES (MOTYA IV, 800‐675 BC) UNDERNEATH THE WEST CHAMBER L.6034 OF TOWER 1 (MOTYA VIA, 550‐520 BC), WITH A SARCOPHAGUS OVERLAID BY PARTITION WALL M9]
[64]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE bones and ceramics) belonging to original Their sparse distribution, isolated (like the so‐ depositions have in several cases (like the one called Whitaker’s sarcophagus) or in groups all excavated by A. Ciasca underneath Tower 1) around the ‘northern burial crescent’ of the suggested an earlier use in the 8th and 7th century ancient colony, may furthermore indicate a BC of these coffins (Spagnoli 2007‐08, 336, fig. spatial organization in familiar cemeteries. 10). Moreover, a progressive reduction of Nonetheless, in the first stages of life of the sarcophagi’s size through time is evident: 8th and Phoenician colony, inhumation was extremely 7th century BC specimens were bigger than those rare and it was adopted by re‐occupying ancient more commonly produced when inhumation had prehistoric burial caves (‘grotticelle’). gained a certain popularity in the 6th and 5th Actually, as stated above, the ‘burial crescent’ century BC, often composed by juxtaposed was used continuously during the first two reused slabs. centuries of life of the city (8th‐7th century BC), so that when the city‐walls were first erected in the same area, a large part of burials and tombs spread over this portion of the island were destroyed. Some of them occasionally escaped a complete destruction been kept at least partially under their foundations. This especially occurred inside the rectangular towers of the earliest defensive line (M2), as in the case of the two small caves excavated by A. Ciasca underneath the west chamber (L.6034) of Tower 1 (fig. 46), some 20 m north‐west of the East Tower. Human remains were found in these small caves, as well as pottery fragments including 8th century BC Red Slip types (fig. 47). Burial pit F.6035 excavated by Sapienza Expedition also yielded human bones and ceramics inside (fig. 48), showing that a
th wider range of vessels was associated to such [fig. 47 ‐ 8 CENTURY BC RED SLIP TREFOIL‐MOUTH JUG AND kind of burials. When the original burial cave NECK AND RIM OF A MUSHROOM‐RIM JUG FOUND IN T.6033] T.6033 was reused, its north‐eastern side underwent a rectangular cut in order to allocate a sarcophagus, later on re‐used and re‐displaced just above the cave (fig. 49). It was, then, overlaid by the separation wall (M9) between the two chambers of the tower (Ciasca 1980, 249‐250, pl. LXXXI, 1‐2), thus providing a stratigraphic evidence and a possible terminus post quem for the earliest defensive line of the city (Ciasca 1980, pl. LXXXI, 3; Spagnoli 2007‐08, fig. 9).
th [fig. 48 ‐ BEGINNING OF 7 CENTURY BC POTTERY VESSELS [fig. 49 ‐ DETAIL OF THE SARCOPHAGUS DISCOVERED BY A. FROM PIT BURIAL T.6035 UNDER CHAMBER L.6034 IN TOWER 1] CIASCA EMBODIED IN PARTITION WALL M.6045 IN TOWER 1]
[65]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
Another highly representative burial place was Phoenicians had piously gathered in the already excavated by A. Ciasca underneath the western existing funerary structures human remains chamber of Tower 4, on the northern side of the collected all around the area from pit and cave island. Here, a round 0.9 m‐wide structure, burials that they intended to reuse. The circle possibly a prehistoric funerary circle (Vecchio was then sealed by means of thick layer of 2013, 48‐51), was found filled up with burnt soil pottery fragments and clay. Six 8th‐7th century BC and human bones (fig. 50). incinerations were, then, sunk into the southern portions of the round structure (fig. 51), suggesting a symbolic continuity between the Phoenician and prehistoric burial place (Spagnoli 2007‐08). One of these tombs (T.164: Ciasca 1979, 209, pl. LXII, 1‐3), a female incineration, was characterized by the presence of indigenous ceramics: a big Impasto Ware trumpet‐neck amphora was employed as urn (fig. 54) accompanied by a piñata‐pot (fig. 52) and a painted neck‐ridge jug (fig. 53). IW vessels shows the indigenous component of the earliest community at Motya, as well as its location inside the prehistoric funerary circle possible points to a relationships with more ancient depositions.
[fig. 50 ‐ MOTYA III (1250‐900 BC) FUNERARY CIRCLE EXCAVATED UNDERNEATH THE WEST CHAMBER OF TOWER 4]
[fig. 52 ‐ FOUR HANDLED IMPASTO WARE PIÑATA‐POT MM78/97 FROM TOMB 164 SUNK UNDER TOWER 4]
[fig. 51 ‐ MOTYA IV TOMBS 164, 169, 170, 171, 172 PLACED [fig. 53 ‐ CYLINDRICAL NECK‐RIDGE PAINTED JUG MM78/95 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PREHISTORIC CIRCLE] FROM TOMB 164 SUNK INTO TOWER 4 CIRCULAR STRUCTURE]
[66]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 54 ‐ TRUMPET‐NECK IMPASTO WARE AMPHORA MM78/96 WITH INTENTIONALLY BROKEN HANDLE USED AS URN WITH DISCOID LID (MM78/96/1) FROM TOMB 164 SUNK INTO THE PREHISTORIC CIRCULAR STRUCTURE EXCAVATED BY A. CIASCA UNDERNEATH TOWER 4]
[fig. 55 ‐ AERIAL ZENITHAL VIEW OF THE NORTHERN FORTIFICATION LINES AT MOTYA SHOWING I‐II AND IV CITY‐WALLS CUTTING THROUGH THE SO‐CALLED ‘ARCHAIC NECROPOLIS’. A PREHISTORIC BURIAL PLACE WAS LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF TOWER 4]
[67]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 56 ‐ COUPLE OF IRON SPEARHEADS (MM78/160 WITH CENTRAL RIDGE AND MM78/162 WITH CURVED BLADE) FROM TOMB 172]
[fig. 57 ‐ DOMESTIC AMPHORA MM78/163 WITH CARINATED SHOULDER AND PAINTED DECORATION USED AS URN IN TOMB 172, AND THE ACCOMPANYING POTTERY INVENTORY: MUSHROOM‐LIP JUG MM78/159 WITH RED SLIP AND BLACK PAINTED DECORATION; TREFOIL‐MOUTH PIRIFORM JUG MM78/156 WITH SIMILAR COMBINED RED SLIP AND BLACK PAINTED BICHROME DECORATION; SINGLE‐HANDLED GLOBULAR POT MM78/158. THE FUNERARY SET INCLUDES ALSO BOWL MM78/155 AND PLATE MM78/157 SHOWN ON FIGS. 59‐60]
[68]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
mouth piriform jug for red wine, and the mushroom‐lip jug for aromatized olive oil (as funerary ointment) were both embellished by a an elegant bichrome decoration (BsW) combining a Red Slip band over the rim and the upper part of the body with black horizontal lines. The couple of jugs was part of a table set also comprising the slightly carinated bowl (fig. 60), that actually is a natural complement of the trefoil‐mouth wine jug for drinking, and the plate for a food offering (fig. 59). The funerary meal had been ideally prepared into the single‐handled globular pot (fig. 57, bottom right), which is the [fig. 58 ‐ BROKEN IN HALF IRON KNIFE (MM78/161) WITH ENCRUSTED FRAGMENT OF A TEXTILE (SIMPLE LINEN WEFT AND most relevant western addition to the original WRAP) FROM TOMB 172; THE SHAPES OF THE PEDUNCLE AND OF Phoenician funerary ensemble (§ 4.6.). Tomb THE BLADE SUGGEST THAT THE KNIFE BELONGED TO A CURVED T.172, thus, puts together a refined cinerarium, CEREMONIAL TYPE] accompanied by a complete table service, with some relevant weapons, stating the high rank of Another tomb, Tomb 172, belongs to the same its owner (a priest, a commander or a judge?). group sunk into the pre‐existing prehistoric funerary circle. It dates back to the end of the 8th century BC, and is characterized by distinguished funerary outfits, including two iron spearheads (fig. 56) of two different typologies, and a ceremonial knife which was found broken in half and wrapped into a linen, still encrusted on its handle. These weapons make the burial particularly noteworthy. The two different spearheads belong to parade types, one with asymmetrical central ridge, similar to a bayonet, the other with a tapering triangular point. They combined rank stating with possibly an apotropaic purpose, as commonly attested to also at Motya. The knife belongs to a long‐lasting Levantine type used for slaughtering sacrifice animals quite often associated to burials (Doumet‐Serhal 2008, 9, figs. 6‐8).
In Tomb T.172, the urn was a domestic amphora [fig. 59 ‐ PLATE MM78/157 FROM TOMB 172] of the type with horizontal shoulder and carination, made of a fine yellowish‐buff fabric. The short vertical neck, the shoulder, and the maximum diameter exhibit a simple linear black painted decoration, while the area below the carination is occupied by a single wavy band (fig. 57). The handle of the amphora was broken for the sake of symbolically reconverting it to the function of cinerarium. Just over the kept part of the broken handle the remains of a textile were preserved similar to that found on the knife. The ceramic inventory associated to the incineration was perspicuous (figs. 57, 59‐60): the [fig. 60 ‐ SLIGHTLY CARINATED BOWL MM78/155 FROM TOMB two Phoenician funerary markers, i.e. the trefoil‐ 172]
[69]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
3.6. The earliest Tophet or beatyls, the forerunners of later stelae. Why they conceived it with such a layout is a The establishment of the Tophet around the mid largely debated topic in Phoenician archaeology th of the 8 century BC was a major endeavour of (Ciasca 2000), the discussion of which falls the Phoenician community settled on Motya. This beyond the goals of the present volume (see e.g. special sanctuary devoted to host the combusted Bartoloni 2012; D’Andrea 2014). After A. Ciasca’s remains of dead infants was located, like the magnificent fieldwork, which is now on the way nearby necropolis, upon a raising bedrock spur of its final publication, Sapienza Expedition to overlooking the north‐western seashore of the Motya and the Superintendence of Trapani island (fig. 61). (Giglio 2012; Nigro 2012b) resumed excavations The Tophet arose gradually from a burial field in several spots of the sanctuary (during seasons with connected installations to a structured 2009‐2014), further clarifying its stratigraphy and sanctuary. Nonetheless, since its beginnings, it chronology, as well as its plan during the 10 comprised four basic elements: constructional phases distinguished (matched ‐ a sacred precinct, enclosing the sanctuary and with the 8 strata identified in the field of urns: the field of urns (delimited by walls M5, P5, A3, Nigro 2013b, tab. 1). These data have shed new and T1: Ciasca 1992, 117; Nigro 2013b, 40‐42, light on the Tophet at Motya and in the figs. 1‐3); Phoenician world, helping in the reconstruction ‐ a sacred well (P1) reaching the phreatic aquifer of the overall mosaic depicting the most peculiar with a large round mouth; western Phoenician identity institution. ‐ a central shrine built on a podium (Ciasca 1992, The earliest stratigraphic phase of the Tophet 119) with subsidiary structures to the west (Phase 10/stratum VII of the field of urn), (Ciasca 1992, 118), including a burning place; coincides with period Motya IVB (750‐675 BC). ‐ the depositional field for the urns, containing The pottery sequence of the urns (Orsingher the burnt remains of children or, in some cases, 2016, 286‐288) is a precious source also for the of small animals (small birds and lambs). Urns reconstruction of social and religious phenomena were usually accompanied by mnemonic stones of the colony. The earliest cineraria were buried
[fig. 61 ‐ GRAPHIC 3D RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EARLIEST TOPHET SANCTUARY IN MOTYA – PHASE 10/STRATUM VII (MOTYA IVB, 750‐ 675 BC). MONUMENTS AND FINDS ARE AS THEY WERE DOCUMENTED BY A. CIASCA AND RENEWED 2009‐2016 SAPIENZA EXCAVATIONS]
[70]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE just on the northern edge of the bedrock and size: the amphora with trumpet neck (figs. 64, they were almost all handmade vessels, including 72); the amphoroid crater, and the domestic indigenous Impasto Ware containers: rough amphora with carinated‐shoulders (fig. 68, upper vases, piñata‐pots or tumpet‐neck amphorae left). Later on, at the beginning of the 7th century (figs. 62‐63, 67 foreground). The coarse BC, the neck‐ridge jug (figs. 65, 71) conquests a treatment of these vessels, as suggested by primary role as Tophet favourite cinerarium Ciasca, aimed at stressing the link with the together with the single‐handled globular pot. mother‐earth, also highlighted by the deposition of the urns in virgin soil or directly in bedrock (Ciasca 1983, 617‐619; 1992, 181‐183).
RUMPET NECK AMPHORA WITH RED PAINTED METOPE [fig. 62 ‐ IMPASTO WARE URN – PIÑATA‐POT FROM THE TOPHET [fig. 64 ‐ T ‐ DECORATION USED AS URN IN THE OPHET STRATUM – STRATUM VII NORTH] T – VII]
[fig. 63 ‐ IMPASTO WARE URN – AMPHOROID‐CRATER FROM [fig. 65 ‐ NECK‐RIDGE JUG WITH METOPE DECORATION ON THE TOPHET – STRATUM VII NORTH] SHOULDERS USED AS URN FROM THE TOPHET – STRATUM VII]
Further south, slightly later crematoria in the The carinated‐shoulder amphora reaches a wide same stratum (VII) were conversely wheel‐made popularity in the time span 720‐675 BC, usually and exhibit a combined Red Slip and red painted occurring, like in the necropolis, with a metope decoration. Urns were inspired by at least three decoration on the shoulders framed by Red Slip types of amphorae, replicated in a 1/3 reduced bands.
[71]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
This style, first developed in the motherland and in Cyprus, was labelled ‘Phoenician Geometric’ by A. Ciasca, who also suggested a relationship with Sulky and Carthage where it had first spread over. It possibly testifies earliest Greek influx on Phoenician productions. Seemingly, in the latest stages of stratum VII, that means in the southern part of the field of urns, imitations of Greek [fig. 68 ‐ MINIATURE VESSELS FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII] skyphoi (red slipped or painted: fig. 67, top right) appear among the ceramic sets accompanying A somewhat rare complement to early Tophet urns (§ 4.2.6.). Other diagnostic ceramic finds depositions are miniature vessels (fig. 68), from the early stages of the Tophet are plates replicating types, like the Impasto Ware and bowls serving as urns covers (fig. 66), usually amphoriskos, the mushroom‐lip jug or the chosen among types not exceeding 10 cm of double‐spouted lamp, actually accompanying diameter (§ 2.2.3., fig. 14). incinerations in the necropolis. This may hint at a funerary meaning with relations to anointment and lightening for the afterlife. Full size lamp are also found in stratum VII (figs. 69‐70), in some cases also serving as urns covers. Vessels found in the field of urns, as well as pottery from other areas of the sanctuary show a relatively restricted selection of shapes and a recurring presence of special wares expressly produced for the Tophet.
[fig. 66 ‐ BOWL M78/157 FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII]
[fig. 67 ‐ DIFFERENT KINDS OF URNS (LPW, IMPASTO WARE, GREEK SKYPHOS IMITATION) AND COVERS FROM THE TOPHET FOUND IN STRATUM VII/PHASE 10, SOUTHERN REGION OF THE DEPOSITIONAL FIELD (MOTYA IVB, 750‐675 BC)]
[72]
[3.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Rise of a harbour city] MOTYE
[fig. 69 ‐ LAMP MT72/223 FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII]
Greeks imports make their appearance later, in [fig. 70 ‐ LAMP MT72/316 FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII] Phase 9/Stratum VI (Motya VA, 675‐625 BC). Carthaginian imports are instead present since An ideological construction giving losses among the beginning, again stressing the western the youngest members of the community a vivid Phoenician nature of the Tophet. religious meaning and exploiting them to ensure Children and their lives were a basic resource for the community most heart‐felt identity was, thus, a growing colony. This explains the attention that congenial to Phoenician colonies, especially when the early Phoenician inhabitants of Motya confronted with the strong cultural traditions of devoted to them in the sanctuary of the Tophet. indigenous populations, like in Sicily and in Urns number is consistent with dead children of Sardinia. This may suggest a direction towards a the upper class as calculated by the demographic proper interpretation of the Tophet, a religious simulator (§ 5.). Moreover, high mortality made it funerary institution physically represented by a compulsory to encourage a continuous arrival of sacred compound and a specific burial rite migrants during the first two generations to focused on incineration opposed to inhumation, foster the constant grow of the city. the funerary custom indigenous preferred.
[fig. 71 ‐ NECK‐RIDGE JUG MT70/353, STRATUM VII] [fig. 72 ‐ AMPHORA MT72/326, STRATUM VII]
[73]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4. The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)
Half a century after the arrival of Phoenician colonists, Motya has deeply changed. It is as a firmly established harbour city involved in trans‐ Mediterranean exchanges, living an exceptional flourish both in economy and culture, that is reflected by excavated monuments and, in as much as it is possible, also by ceramic finds. [fig. 1 ‐ MAGNIFIED SECTION OF THE PLATE MC.05.1526/3 SHOWING THE THICKNESS OF THE RS COATING] 4.1. General features A close examination of Motya IVB pottery Red Slip in general (both Motyan and Levantine) repertoire not only shows the full inclusion of the is still the most fashionable production, even Phoenician city into Central and West though Bichrome‐style Ware (BsW) also Mediterranean exchange networks (‘circuitos’), progressively increases in frequency. This comprising those established by the newborn production (BsW) occurs at Motya and Central Greek colonies of Eastern Sicily and Southern Mediterranean, on a number of specific forms Italy, but also a certain codification of its own (mainly bowls, drinking cups, jars and jugs), and is ceramic repertoire. Cohabitation with the attested to from the 8th to the 7th century BC, indigenous population is reflected both in the use when it gradually decreases up to disappear at of local vessels and in the adoption of some the end of the century. specific shapes of the native tradition within the Phoenician inventory1. The relationships with Greek colonists since the beginning had a deep impact in to the cultural growth of Motya. The macroscopic evidence is the importation of East‐ Greek ceramics such as Euboean skyphoi and, from the last quarter of the 8th century BC, of Proto‐Corinthian Ware. Their strong influence is shown by the imitation of some distinguished Greek typologies (oinochoai, skyphoi) within the local Phoenician pottery repertoire2.
4.2. Phoenician pottery In Motya IVB, a local production of Red Slip (Motyan Red Slip Ware henceforth MRS) appears for the first time. MRS has a red to light‐red shade (2.5YR5/8 Red), and exhibits a thinner coating in respect of Levantine Red Slip Ware. This different quality of MRS is a basic distinguishing feature (fig. 1), in addition to a progressive differentiation in shapes. MRS will gradually select only some shapes of the original Phoenician RS inventory, successively developing them into new types.
1 This was possibly due to contacts with inland centers of Central and Eastern Sicily. See infra § 4.2., Trumpet‐neck [fig. 2 ‐ BICHROME‐STYLE WARE MUSHROOM‐LIP JUG FROM amphorae (Bietti Sestieri 1988). 2 See infra § 4.2.4. TOMB 80]
[74]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
The typical BsW decoration is a geometric pattern Oriental types are now locally produced: the with horizontal Red Slip bands alternating to shallow plate with curved rim (LRS‐P3), the black lines usually occurring in the upper half of shallow carinated bowl (LRS‐CB2), and the vessels (fig. 2). The slipped or painted decoration carinated bowl with high everted rim (LRS‐CB4), commonly highlights the significant parts of the as well as the deep bowls of the three types with vessel, i.e. rim, neck, shoulder and carination. A straight walls (LRS‐DB1), hemispherical (LRS‐DB2) more elaborate variant is the metope decoration and with everted rim (LRS‐DB3) (fig. 4). with vertical (straight or wavy) strokes alternating to empty panels3. The antecedents of this decorative scheme can be traced in two directions. It possibly descends from the Late Cypriot and Cypro‐Geometric pottery, which is in turn inspired to Aegean models (Gilboa 1999, 9, fig. 9: 1‐7), and, in the specific case of Motya, it was probably also influenced by a certain familiarity with earlier Phoenician Bichrome Ware (Ciasca 1987, 8). Fabrics are commonly hard and compact, with [fig. 4 ‐ MRS BOWL WITH EVERTED RIM (MRS‐DB3, CFR. § several calcareous and mineral inclusions (fig. 3), 2.2.3.) MT72/392/1 FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII] clay is red to dark red (2.5YR5/6 Red, 10R5/4 Weak Red). Chalices (LRS‐Ch1) are still produced in the Levantine tradition with a red slip coating on the upper part of the body (fig. 5).
[fig. 3 ‐ MAGNIFIED SECTION OF RED SLIP WARE PLATE SHOWING THE PECULIARITIES OF THE FABRIC (MC.05.1526/2)]
Painted decoration on a reddish‐yellow coating (5YR7/6 Reddish Yellow, 7.5YR8/2 Pinkish White) is also attested. Plain Ware is attested in a major amount in respect to the previous period, often borrowing shapes belonging to the Levantine Red Slip tradition (pls. 1‐2). In Motya IVB, the tendency of Phoenician ceramics to follow independent development paths (Ciasca 1996, 179) emerges, even though the strong persistency of some typical mid‐8th [fig. 5 ‐ MRS CHALICES WITH RED SLIP UPPER DECORATION century BC Levantine shapes testifies to the (MRS‐CH1) FROM THE NECROPOLIS, TOMB 69 (M2989)] intense relationship with the motherland. As in the previous period, the main part of the
Phoenician repertoire collected so far consists of 3 Trumpet‐neck amphorae used as urns in the open shapes: plates, bowls and drinking vessels. Necropolis have a complex metopic decoration, with There are, however, new types again arriving hatched diamonds, juxtaposed triangles, lozenges, dente di lupo, chevrons, zig‐zag, wavy or dotted lines. from the homeland, like the tripod‐bowl (pl. 5).
[75]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
6 4.2.1. MRS Plates (P ‐ Plate 1) and is attested to also in the Iberian colonies and at Carthage (Vegas 1999, 137, fig. 25). Motya Most of plates attested to Motya IVA evolves into specimens belong to the end of Period IVB (fig. new typologies. Such types, characterized by the 7). flaring and elongated rim, are distinctive of the second half of 8th century BC ceramic horizon of Motya and Central and Western Mediterranean colonies (Tore ‐ Gras 1976, 62). MRS‐P2 ‐ Plate with straight sides and hollow bottom, has an inclined and rounded rim and a ring base (fig. 6)4.
Plates usually have a Red Slip coating inside, and some specimens are decorated by black lines. [fig. 7 ‐ MRS‐P3 – SHALLOW PLATE WITH STRAIGHT AND This type is a local outcome of the Motya IVA GROOVED RIM MC.08.2345/5] type LRS ‐ P2. It is peculiar of Western Phoenician repertoires, and largely attested to in the colonial MRS‐P4 ‐ Plate with round sides and extended 7 milieu with local variations5 in the time span from horizontal everted rim shows a red coating the end of the 8th to the beginning of the 6th inside and on the rim. It is usually decorated with century BC. Earlier types are characterized by a black concentric lines in the middle (fig. 8). The shorter and less curved rim, and often show a disk base is incised by shallow round groove. black painted line decoration on the Red Slip Dimensions are very homogeneous with coating on the interior. diameters ranging from 14 to 16 cm.
[fig. 6 ‐ MRS‐P2 ‐ PLATE WITH STRAIGHT SIDES AND HOLLOW BOTTOM MC.11.2491/16] [fig. 8 ‐ MRS‐P4 ‐ ROUND‐SIDED PLATE MC.07.1685/5]
MRS‐P3 ‐ Shallow plate with curved and grooved This is a very typical Phoenician plate widely rim belongs to the southern Levantine tradition spread over Phoenician coastal cities8, Southern of Iron Age IIA‐C (Herzog ‐ Singer‐Avitz 2015, 218, Levant (Gitin 2015, pl. 3.5.1: 29), Cyprus9 and in pl. 2.4.9: 5). The rim width increases in time (LRS ‐ the western colonies (Vegas 1999, 136, fig. 24: 1‐ P3, § 2.2.1.). Like Levantine models, specimens of 2; Schubart 1982, 219; Ramón Torres 2010, 220, Motya have disk base. fig. 3: 34; Bernardini 1990, 88: Pompianu ‐ Unali This sub‐typology appears in the Phoenician 2016, fig. 10: 3). th colonies at the beginnings of the 7 century BC, 6 Ramon Torres 2010, 220‐221, fig. 3; Torres Ortiz et al. 4 MC.11.4510/24, MC.11.4510/30, MD.07.2219/94, 2014, 66, fig. 14. MC.08.2409 II/27, MC.12.4427/15, MC.11.2491/16, 7 MC.05.1526/2; MC.07.1685/5; MC.11.1786/81; MC.10.2951/28, and MD.05.1401/38, MD.05.1401/39, MC.10.2477/23, and MC.11.4510/21 (not illustrated). MC.07.1685/142, MF.09.2678/16 (not illustrated). 8 Bikai 1978, nos. 22‐24, pl. VIIIA (stratum III, 740‐700 BC). 5 Plates ascribed to the 6th century BC most frequently 9 It is attested to at Cyprus in 9th‐ 8th centuries BC: Bikai show a plain undecorated surface: Ramón Torres 2010, 1987, 42, 68‐69, n. 541, pl. XX (Salamis Horizon, 850‐750 228, fig. 6. BC).
[76]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.2.2. MRS Carinated Bowls (CB ‐ Pl. 1) 4.2.3. BsW Deep Bowls (DB ‐ Plate 2) In Motya IVB the typological subdivision between BsW‐DB2 ‐ Hemispherical bowl. This typology, carinated bowls and deep bowls is further already attested to in Motya IVA (LRS ‐ DB2, § highlighted by the application of painted 2.2.3.), also continues in Motya IVB13. Little decoration. Carinated bowls (CB) appear as the differences in shape can be noticed, while the most conservative shape, locally manufactured decorative style changes more markedly. It and generally coated by Red Slip (MRS, Motya corresponds to “Type 7” of V. Tusa’s classification Red Slip), while deep bowls (DB) are chiefly of ceramic materials from the Necropolis (Tusa fashioned in Bichrome‐style Ware (BsW). 1978, 37‐38, pl. XXV: 3, T. 103; 34‐35, pl. XXIII: 4, MRS‐CB2 ‐ Shallow carinated bowl continues with T. 97; 61, pl. XLIX, 1, T. 161; Spanò Giammellaro major variants in decoration rather than in shape 2000, 326, fig. 54). in respect to earlier Motya IVA specimens (§ Actually, the painted decoration with parallel 2.2.2., LRS‐CB2). As far as morphology is black lines on a light red (10R6/6 Light Red) or concerned, Motya IVB bowls show a gentler reddish yellow (7.5YR7/6 Reddish Yellow) coating carination, while changes in decoration are more gradually increases until it replaces the Red Slip remarkable. The attestations of Red Slip and towards the end of the 7th century BC (fig. 10). painted specimens10 run parallel to an increasing This style of decoration differs from RS Levantine number of bowls with a plain undecorated models, that continue during Iron Age IIC, surface (fig. 9)11, showing the popularity of this without variation of surface treatments or shape, commonly used in food preparation and decorations14. table serving.
[fig. 9 ‐ PW‐CB2 ‐ SHALLOW CARINATED BOWL MC.14.4448/5]
This typology reaches its wider distribution at 12 Motya and in other Phoenician foundations of Central and Western Mediterranean during the [fig. 10 ‐ BSW‐DB2 ‐ HEMISPHERICAL BOWL WITH PAINTED 7th century BC (Vegas 1999, 145, fig. 36; Peserico DECORATION ON A REDDISH‐YELLOW COATING FROM THE 2007, 286‐287, fig. 120; Gonzalez de Canales NECROPOLIS (WHITAKER’S EXCAVATIONS NO. INV. 2746)] 2004, 40, pl. V). It can be observed to in the Iberian colonies and at Carthage, where this shape follows the same decorative development (Gonzalez de Canales et al. 2004, 45, pl. VI; Peserico 2007, 302‐303, fig. 10 MC.11.4510/17. 11 MC.14.4448/5, MC.11.4510/20. MC.08.2409 II/199, 130: 1682, 1684). The painted decoration is MC.08.2409 II/225. usually applied on the upper outer surface, and 12 This type of shallow bowl is often included within the sometimes also in the lower part above the foot. funerary furnishings of Archaic Necropolis: Tusa 1978, 91‐ 97; 51, pl. XXXVI: 1‐2 (T.130) showing both Red Slip and painted decoration. Plain undecorated bowls are also 13 MD.07.2206/21, MC.07.1685/148, MD.07.2219/40, attested to the Necropolis: Tusa 1978, 42, T.112, pl. XXIX: MC.06.1771/3. 3, T.73, 23, pl. XIV: 3. Several attestations are also known 14 Gilboa 2015a, 303, pl. 3.1.1: 15. The type is widely in the lower layers (strata VII and VI) of the Tophet: diffused in Levantine Northern Coastal Plain in early Iron Ciasca 1978b, 131, 133, pl. LXXIV: 8. Age IIB: Lehmann 2015, pl. 2.1.4: 2.
[77]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.2.4. Chalices (Ch ‐ Plate 2) 4.2.5. MRS Tripod bowls (Plate 3) MRS‐Ch1 ‐ Chalice. This shape, which is still the MRS‐TB ‐ Tripod bowls are largely attested within main original Phoenician drinking type, is popular the early ceramic assemblage of Motya IVB17. both in the MRS Ware and in the BsW, with a Originating in the second half of the 2nd gradual diminishing of the former production. It millennium BC in the Levant and developed in a undergoes the same decorative development distinguished ceramic type at the beginning of already noticed on deep bowls15. The majority of the 1st millennium BC among Neo‐Hittite and Motya IVB chalices, thus, exhibits a black lines Aramean élites of Northern Syria, tripod bowls painted decoration outside, as like as the spread over the Mediterranean cities during the contemporaneous – or slightly later – specimens Orientalizing period. Due to its use in food from Carthage (Vegas 1999, 151, fig. 46). preparation, it has been interpreted as a Moreover, MRS chalices are fairly present (fig. diagnostic indicator of the aristocratic way of life 11)16 especially in the Necropolis (Tusa 1978, pl. of Mediterranean élites. TB, suitable for XII: 4, T.69). crumbling spices and aromatic herbs18, is a piece of evidence of luxury consumption, such as valuable drinking vessels, silver bowls and jugs, and other precious objects as ivory and spices, that the new aristocracies required to Phoenician international trades. Tripod bowls of Motya IVB have usually a simple Red Slip decoration on the rim (fig. 13). They were found both in cult and domestic contexts19, while only one, entirely coated with Red Slip, was found in a tomb (Tusa 1978, 48‐49, pl. XXXIV: 2, T.126).
[fig. 11 ‐ MRS‐CH1 ‐ CHALICE MC.13.4441/20 FROM BUILDING C8 PHASE 8]
Plain Ware specimens also start to be produced during Motya IVB (fig. 12) with an average diameter of 8‐9 cm, even though the shape is gradually diminishing in attestations.
[fig. 13 ‐ MRS‐TRIPOD BOWL MD.05.1401/1 FROM SOUNDING I IN AREA D, ON THE WESTERN SLOPES OF THE ACROPOLIS]
17 MD.07.2206/82, MD.07.2219/19, MC.08.1835/75, MD.05.1401/1. 18 The aromatic substances were mixed to the wine. It has been suggested that this model of symposium,
[fig. 12 ‐ PW‐CH1 ‐ CHALICE FROM THE NECROPOLIS, TOMB originating from Egypt and Mesopotamia, rapidly spread 125] over the Mediterranean élites thanks to the Phoenician mediation: Botto 2006, 16‐17. 19 From the Sacred Area of the Kothon: MC.08.1835/75 15 MD.04.1112/19, MC.06.1591/14, MD.07.2246/2, (Nigro 2010a, 19, fig. 20), from the Area D: MD.09.2219/19. MD.04.1112/16 (Spagnoli 2007, 95, pl. LXXXIII), 16 MC.13.4441/20: probably it is an import from MD.07.2206/82, MD.07.2219/19 (Caltabiano ‐ Spagnoli Carthage. 2010, 128, pl. VI), MD.05.1401/1.
[78]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.2.6. MRS and BsW Skyphoi (Plate 2) A more complex decoration is the metope pattern (fig. 17), alternating vertical strokes or a MRS and BsW skyphoi are one of the most horizontal wavy line. Horizontal handles are often representative early outcomes of cultural decorated with vertical black or red painted contacts between Phoenicians and Greeks. The strokes, alternatively a horizontal continuous most popular drinking shapes of the Attic and line21. Those drinking vessels descend from Corinthian repertoires were soon imitated by Euboean skyphoi traded as luxury goods from the Phoenicians who wanted to exhibit their social end of 9th century BC across East and Central status. These vessels are, thus, linked to the Mediterranean (Vallet ‐ Villard 1956, 22, pls. 1‐3, emerging élites. BsW skyphoi found at Motya 6‐7, Frasca ‐ Fouilland 1994, 514‐516, fig. 170), usually show a geometric decoration alternating while their decoration is mainly inspired by Proto‐ Red Slip bands and black painted lines (figs. 14‐ 22 20 Corinthian graphic layout . 15) .
[fig. 17 ‐ BSW SKYPHOS WITH METOPAL DECORATION MD.07.2219/47]
The creation of Phoenician skyphoi can be dated [fig. 14 ‐ BSW SKYPHOI MC.11.2953/6 AND to the end of period Motya IVB, their production MC.10.2951/30] lasting up to the end of the 7th century BC.
According to the sequence of the Necropolis, it is possible to distinguish two typological groups basing on the profile and on the combined painted decoration. The earliest group includes skyphoi with a sharp carination and hemispherical body, decorated with Red Slip bands alternating to painted lines and metope. The second group (fig. 18), dating to the mid‐end of 7th century BC, is characterized by a shallow body and horizontal lines under the carination painted on a light washed surface (Vecchio 2015,
16). [fig. 15 ‐ BSW SKYPHOS WITH RS BAND DECORATION MM.16.6047/20+31]
[fig. 18 ‐ BSW SKYPHOS WITH LINE DECORATION MD.05.1401/16]
[fig. 16 ‐ MRS SKYPHOS MN.11.T180/2 FROM TOMB 180] 21 MD.07.2219/47, MB.89.34/13, MF.09.2691/17+18, MC.11.4404/12. 22 MD.07.2219/9. A comparison is found in Doumet‐ 20 MC.08.1685/33, MC.10.2951/30; MC.11.2953/7. Serhal 2008, fig. 60.
[79]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
Some skyphoi belonging to this group are BsW‐J2 ‐ Mushroom‐lip jug. A few fragments of possible imports from Carthage (fig. 19)23. the neck and the body (fig. 18) of this characteristic Phoenician shape25 were found in Moya IVB layers in the site, while the same shape is a common marker in tombs (§ 3.5.2.).
[fig. 19 ‐ BSW SKYPHOS MF.09.2678/19 IMPORTED FROM CARTHAGE]
4.2.6. BsW Jugs (J) and Domestic Amphorae (Plate 4) BsW‐J1 ‐ Neck‐ridge jug. Several fragments of neck‐ridge jugs belong to this period (Núñez Calvo 2008‐2009). They are characterized by black painted lines often combined with red coated bands on the neck or the shoulders of the [fig. 21 ‐ BsW‐J2 ‐ MUSHROOM‐LIP JUG MC.12.2491/59] vessels. Moreover, an increasing number of Plain Ware jugs (PW‐J1) is also attested to in this BsW ‐ Trumpet‐neck amphora. A very popular period (fig. 20)24. vessel in Motya IVB is the so‐called Trumpet‐neck amphora, a wide recipient with ovoid body, horizontal or vertical handles and rounded or flat base. It was primarily used for short‐term domestic storage, but it was widely employed as urn in the Tophet26 and in the Necropolis27 too. The Trumpet‐neck amphora hypothetically descends from earlier Aegean/Mycenaean prototypes (Bietti Sestieri 1988, figs. 17, 33; Ciasca 1996, 183), transmitted by Mycenaeans to the local populations who adopted it (see § 4.3.). The inclusion of such an amphora within the Phoenician inventory exemplifies the process of
25 MC.12.2491/59, MC.07.1685/143, MC.11.2491/89. 26 In the Tophet this particular type of amphora – usually of slightly reduced dimensions (§ 3.6.; figs. 64, 72) – is not th documented after the second half of 7 century BC (stratum VI): Ciasca 1983, 619, fig. 1; Ciasca 1996, 183, [fig. 20 ‐ PW‐J1 ‐ PLAIN WARE NECK‐RIDGE JUG note no. 27, figs. 12, 14. (MC.13.4441/31) OF A REDDISH FABRIC FROM BUILDING C8] 27 Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 334, note no. 31, figs. 3a, 4a. A conspicuous repertoire of Trumpet‐neck amphorae is 23 MF.09.2678/19. included within Whitaker’s Collection nowadays kept in 24 MD.05.1401/32, MC.07.1685/96 (Plate 4). the Whitaker Museum on the island of Motya.
[80]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE progressive acquisition of indigenous typologies within the new born colonial repertoire28. These amphorae had originally a domestic use as short‐term storage containers. They often show a geometric metope decoration alternating Red Slip bands to black painted lines (fig. 22).
[fig. 23 ‐ BSW TRUMPET‐NECK AMPHORA WITH METOPE AND CHEVRONS DECORATION MM.16.6047/102]
The variety of the decorative repertoire, in facts, testifies to a plurality of inspirations coming from the indigenous culture of Sicily and Southern Italy originating from Late Helladic Aegean influences (Bietti Sestieri 1988, 49; Marazzi 2014, 71‐73; Nigro 2016, 341), and possibly reflects the cultural dynamism of the growing Phoenician city. A later specimen (mid of 7th century BC) has been identified as a Carthage import basing on its fabric, a grey gritty temper that is characteristic of the region of Carthage30. The external surface is decorated with painted parallel lines lying on a
yellowish‐red coating. Over the painted [fig. 22 ‐ BSW TRUMPET‐NECK AMPHORA decoration, a Phoenician inscription (aleph, shin) MD.07.2219/85+84] is partially preserved (fig. 24).
Funerary Trumpet‐neck amphorae employed as urns in the incineration necropolis (§ 3.5.1.; figs. 37‐38) developed a more complex pictorial style, mainly consisting of parallel straight or wavy lines alternating metope, lozenges, triangles and dente di lupo (fig. 23)29. The domestic employ of this shape made it most suitable for hybridization processes between eastern and western decorative traditions.
[fig. 24 ‐ CARTHAGE TRUMPET‐NECK AMPHORA WITH A 28 The indigenous influence is deeper than a simple FRAGMENTARY INSCRIPTION MC.12.4428/36 imitation of the shape. It is proved by the presence of an indigenous Trumpet‐neck amphora within the funerary This may further indicate how this shape gained a equipment of a Phoenician tomb: Spagnoli 2007‐2008, wide popularity during the second half of the 8th 328, note no. 26, fig. 3: a; Nigro 2015a, 233‐234, 236‐237. th 29 MM.16.6047/102. This fragment of a Trumpet‐neck and the 7 century BC among Phoenician amphora was found inside the filling of Tower 1 in 2016 foundation in Central Mediterranean. excavation field. Other ceramic materials included specimens dating from the mid‐8th to the beginnings of 6th century BC. It is probably a dump of pottery collected 30 MC.12.4428/36. The fabric of this amphora can be from the burial area uncovered by the erection of the city compared with a Carthaginian specimen: walls. http://facem.at/car‐reg‐a‐2.
[81]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.2.7. PW Large bowls (Lb ‐ Plate 3) 4.2.8. PW Cooking pots (CP) No significant variations can be noticed between The wheel‐made globular CP with a short everted Periods IVA and IVB inventory of plain deep bowls rim, single‐handle and rounded base makes its (see § 2.2.6., PW‐Lb1, PW‐Lb2), a shape basically appearance amongst the Phoenician local employed for food preparation and serving. repertoire at the end of the 8th century BC, and Large bowls attested to in the early stages of the rapidly became the most spread cooking vessel Phoenician settlement are still very close to the taking gradually the place of handmade Impasto oriental morphologies. Successively, such Ware piñata‐pots used in Motya IVA. This Levantine shapes evolve in new original colonial typology derives from the Late Bronze Age types. Aegean‐Cypriot and Levantine cooking jug PW‐Lb3 ‐ Large bowl with hammerhead rim. At (Spagnoli 2010, 3, with previous bibliography), the end of the period is ascribable the deep bowl characterized by a tapered body, cylindrical neck, with a high rounded carination and thickened one handle and disk base. everted rim (hammerhead rim, fig. 25)31, that is The shape was transmitted to the Levant one of the bowls most prominently attested to in probably by the settlement on the Syro‐ the Levant in 8th‐7th centuries BC (Lehmann 2015, Palestinian coast of peoples from Cyprus and the 118, pl. 2.1.5: 21). Aegean Islands at the beginnings of Iron Age (Dothan 1989, 5‐6; Killebrew 1999, 94; Spagnoli 2010, 50‐51, 53) (fig. 24). During the Iron Age I, due to the encountering with the local Cooking Ware repertoire, cooking jugs promptly abandon the Aegean‐Cypriot model, with changes in the shape of the base and in the position of the handles (Spagnoli 2010, 31). Motya globular CP are a local outcome inspired to this new Levantine typology. Their globular shape with a narrow opening makes them suitable mainly to boiling liquid or 33 semisolid dishes, as cereals and vegetables , because the tightened opening minimizes the [fig. 25 ‐ PW‐Lb3 ‐ LARGE BOWL MD.16.1112/57 WITH HAMMERHEAD RIM SHOWING TRACES OF ITS CONTENT] evaporation of the liquids held inside (Spagnoli 2010, 65). PW‐Lb4 ‐ Large carinated bowl. This typology is Globular CP thus became the typical cooking characterized by a deep shape diffused at Motya body with high and in the Phoenician West from the late 8th to carination, and rounded th everted rim (basin)32. It is the end of 6 century, attested to in Motya when it was progres‐ from the early 7th century sively replaced by other BC (Nigro 2010a, 36, fig. cooking pots of Greek or 39, MC.08.2409 II/226). Sicilian tradition, as the tray and the chytra (Vecchio 2002, 207; Spagnoli 2007, 93‐94).
[fig. 26 ‐ GLOBULAR SINGLE‐ HANDLED COOKING POT WITH EVERTED RIM M3113 FROM TH TOMB 11, BEGINNING OF 7 CENTURY BC]
31 MC.07.1685/78, MC.07.1685/137. 33 Probably the so‐called Puls Punica mentioned by Latin 32 MC.07.1685/189. authors: Cato, De Agri Cultura XCIV, 85.
[82]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.2.9. PW Dippers (Plate 5) This seems to be a colonial development, as conversely, dippers found at Tyre have a coarse Plain Ware inventory includes also the dipper, a surface, being described by Patricia Bikai as “very popular type of jug in the Levant from the 2nd poorly made and very poorly fired” (Bikai 1978, millennium BC onwards connected with drinking 41, pl. XII, strata II‐III, second half of 8th century and feasting. Types attested to in Motya IV BC; Núñez Calvo 2011, 281‐283, fig. 3: e). On the descend from the common oriental typologies contrary, specimens from Motya (figs. 26‐27) are kept almost unchanged over time (Ben‐Tor ‐ characterized by an accurate manufacture, a Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 144, pl. 2.2.18:12, 17). For good firing, and by a certain attention in the this shape, a fine light yellow fabric is usually surface refinement. This possibly indicates the employed. role given to this kind of vessel in the table Dippers are attested to both in domestic and service associated with drinking practices. funerary contexts (Caltabiano ‐ Spagnoli 2007, Dippers in Motya are a high‐specialized 130‐131, pl. XII; Tusa 1972, 78‐79, pl. LIX: 2, T.44). production. Their particular shape and In respect of oriental specimens and also of those dimensions make them suitable to draw liquids found at Carthage in the same period (Vegas from a container as an amphora or a large jug. 1999, 170, fig. 73: 3, 6, type 37), the dippers of The considerable quantities of dippers in Motya show a more careful surface refining: they residential areas (Acropolis and its southern are burnished or smoothed (which recalls that of slopes, Areas D and B) are probably related to the Late Bronze Age white shaved specimens domestic and everyday consumption of wine in [Stampolidis (ed.) 2003, 246, nos. 81‐85]) and in these aristocratic quarters, also testified by a some case also coated by whitish or Red Slip (fig. large quantity of drinking vessels of both 27). traditions, Phoenician (chalices skyphoi and hemispherical bowls) and Greek (kotylai and skyphoi) retrieved in such dwelling quarters.
[fig. 28 ‐ DIPPER MD.16.1112/101 SHOWING A REFINED SURFACE WITH A WHITE WASHING]
[fig. 27 ‐ DIPPER M3104 FROM TOMB 44B SHOWING A WHITE [fig. 29 ‐ DIPPER MD.16.1406/18 SHOWING A REFINED WASHED SURFACE] SURFACE WITH TRACES OF BURNING]
[83]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.3. Impasto Ware (IW) Other typologies progressively faded, perhaps due to the increasing use of the Phoenician Impasto Ware (IW) handmade production globular CP, while the IW repertoire decreases in continues without sharp variations. Trumpet‐ few variety of shapes including piñata pots (fig. neck amphorae still appear as cinerary urns in the 30), trays, deep bowls and plates (Nigro 2013a, Necropolis (§ 4.6., fig. 30). 49‐50; Orsingher 2013, 769).
[fig. 32 ‐ IW INDIGENOUS PIÑATA POT MT78/181 FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII)]
IW imitations of Phoenician globular cooking pots, like some specimens found in the Tophet (fig. 33), are also attested to in this period, testifying to the early cultural integration [fig. 30 ‐ IW INDIGENOUS TRUMPET‐NECK AMPHORA MM78/96/1 FROM TOMB 164 FOUND INSIDE TOWER 4 OF THE between indigenous population and new settlers. CITY‐WALLS]
Moreover, a different type of cooking pot – the so‐called piñata pot with tapered body, flat base and four/two loop handles (fig. 31) – becomes fairly popular34.
[fig. 31 ‐ HANDLE OF IW PIÑATA POT MC.13.4441/85]
34 MC.13.4441/85, MC.13.4446/27. Piñata pots are largely attested to among the funerary equipment of the Necropolis. It is one of the most common IW shape employed as depositional urns in the Tophet also in later [fig. 33 ‐ IW INDIGENOUS GLOBULAR COOKING POT MT72/381 strata. See as an example: Tusa 1972, pl. XXXVI:1; Ciasca FROM THE TOPHET, STRATUM VII] 1969, pl. LVI: 2.
[84]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.4. Motya Transport Amphorae (MTA ‐ Plate 3) A local production of transport amphorae (MTA) is attested to in Motya since the second half of 8th century BC (Ramon Torres 1995, 180‐182, 3.1.1.1‐ 3.1.1.2; Toti 2002, 275‐276). MTA1 ‐ Ovoid jar. The majority of Motya IVB amphorae35 is ascribable to the ovoid type of ‘Canaanean’ tradition (Toti 2002, pl. 1). It has a relatively wide body and its shape made it unsuitable for shipping over long distances. These amphorae were probably employed for stationary storage (Stern 2015a, 440). In Iron Age IIB Levant this amphora varies considerably in rim and neck profiles. The Motya IVB type (MTA1) seems to descend from the neckless variant with a simple embossed vertical collar rim (figs. 34‐35) (see e.g. specimens from Khorvat Rosh Zayit [Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 141, pl. 2.2.10:8] and Samaria [Tappy 2015, 192]).
[fig. 35 ‐ MTA1 ‐ OVOID JAR WITH COLLAR RIM MC.08.2345/15]
4.4.1. Levantine Transport Amphorae (LTA) Together with locally produced MTA, several LTA were identified. It is presently impossible to determine their exact provenance without systematic petrographic analyses in Phoenician sites. An 8th century BC variant of ovoid jar, showing higher neck and externally thickened profiled rim, has several comparisons in Samaria (fig. 34)36.
[fig. 36 ‐ OVOID JAR VARIANT WITH HIGHER NECK AND [fig. 34 ‐ MTA1 ‐ OVOID JAR WITH EMBOSSED COLLAR RIM OF TH EXTERNALLY THICKENED PROFILED RIM MC.12.4427/23] THE MID OF 8 CENTURY BC]
35 MC.08.2345/15, MC.10.2962/16, MD.07.2246/22, 36 MC.12.4427/23. Comparisons at Samaria: Samaria III, MD.09.2219/7. pl. 6: 10.
[85]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.5. Cypriot, Carthaginian, and Greek 4.5.2. Carthage imports (ChI ‐ Plate 5) Imports The second half of the 8th century BC marks the For its position at the centre of Mediterranean, entrance of Motya within the trade network of Motya was a crossroad of sea routes leading from Carthage. The Tyrian colony is a rising polity in the East to the West. In a few decades after its Central Mediterranean, and its progressive foundation, the Phoenician landing became a influence is reflected by the appearance of major hub of international commerce. This is imported Carthage Red Slip within the repertoire reflected by the number of importations from its of Motya since the end of the century. Carthage main commercial partners, such as Cyprus, pottery found at Motya includes mostly plates Carthage, the Greek colonies in Sicily and Magna and bowls, characterized by an orange‐shining Grecia and their homelands. Red Slip shade. A series of table ware vessels plain and decorated with black lines on a red‐ 4.5.1 Cypriot imports orange lustrous coated surface has been CyI ‐ Amphorae. Cypriot amphorae (or better identified as Carthage imports. Cypriot crater‐amphorae) are the principal import ChI ‐ P2 ‐ Straight sides plate with hollow bottom. from Cyprus in Motya IVB period. They were Plates belonging to this group present several found both in sacred (Nigro 2010a, figs. 21, 24; morphological varieties. Moreover, they are Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012, 25, figs. 25‐26) and characterized by a straight inclined rim, thick domestic contexts (from Area D, western slope of walls and a hollow bottom37. For shapes and the Acropolis: MD.05.1405/103, MD.05.1407/1), fabrics they can be attributed to a Carthaginian while a funerary use (as it was common in Cyprus production of the beginnings of 7th century BC itself and in Phoenicia) is not attested to so far. (Peserico 2007, 272‐275, fig. 109, no. 1611, Type Cypriot amphorae show a bichrome decoration P2; Bechtold 2007, 337, no. 2019)38. with horizontal straight and wavy lines, and a ChI‐P3 ‐ Shallow plate with curved rim. This type central metope frieze alternating vertical of shallow plate with a long curved and thin rim triglyphs and concentric circles (fig. 37). (fig. 38) is fairly widespread at Motya between Closest parallels are the Cypriot urns from the the end of 8th and the first half of 7th century BC necropolis of Tyre al‐Bass (Núñez Calvo 2004, (Peserico 2007, 276‐277, fig. 110, Type P3; 292‐293, fig. 100: 1, urn no. 49) and Tell‐ Bechtold 2007, 338, no. 2023)39. Rachidiyeh (Doumet‐Serhal 2004, 76, figs. 10‐11), and an amphora from Sidon (Doumet‐Serhal 2006, 23, fig. 35: 1, L.1171, 9th century BC). The Cypriot urns were soon imitated by local potters, and expressly used in religious contexts.
[fig. 38 ‐ CHI‐P3 ‐ PLATE WITH CURVED POINTED RIM MC.12.4427/4, FROM THE ‘FUNDUQ’ PLACE, BUILDING C8]
37 [fig. 37 ‐ CYI ‐ CYPRIOT AMPHORA MC.07.1835/141 FROM MC.06.1776/21, MC.13.4441/38, MC.13.4441/27. 38 MC.12.4427/4, MC.08.2357/1, MC.06.1776/21, THE SACRED AREA OF THE KOTHON, FOUND BETWEEN THE NORTH MD.07.2246/8, MD.07.2219/15. WALL OF TEMPLE C5 AND THE FAVISSA F.1680] 39 MD.07.2219/15, MC.12.4427/4, MD.09.2246/8,
MT.10.3215/7, MT.10.3215/35, MF.09.2678/3.
[86]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.5.3. Greek imports The bottom can be filled or decorated with black spikes radiating from the foot (fig. 40). From the last thirty years of the 8th century BC a These oldest series attested to in Motya IVB massive presence at Motya of Corinthian imports contexts belong to Neeft’s type 8d, usually dated can be observed40. Corinthian pottery, including from the end of 8th‐ beginnings of 7th century BC drinking vessels and other small‐sized pottery, as (Neeft 1975, 108‐110, fig. 3). Before this date aryballoi and pyxides, is spread over every Greek pottery was not imported to the island. context of early Motya: sacred areas, tombs and domestic quarters41. Proto‐Corinthian Pottery The most ancient attestation of Proto‐Corinthian Ware (henceforth PC) at Motya is a group of kotylai with geometric decoration42 dating back from 730 BC. They feature on the outer surface a linear decoration interrupted beneath the handles with a row of hatches and schematic herons or, more frequently, loose sigmas (fig. 39).
[fig. 40 ‐ EARLY PROTO‐CORINTHIAN KOTYLE MD.05.1401/3]
[fig. 39 ‐ EARLY PROTO‐CORINTHIAN KOTYLE MC.11.2491/1]
40 This phenomenon was probably mediated by Syracuse, the ancient Corinthian colony founded in 733 BC. 41 PC Ware found in funerary graves by Antonia Ciasca under the city‐walls was studied by P.G. Guzzo (1979). An overview of attestations in other areas was offered by C.A. Di Stefano (2003). 42 PC kotylai were found in: Area E ‐ Acropolis (Famà ‐ Toti 2000, 454, 465); Area C: MC.07.1835/184, MC.07.1835/185, MC.07.1835/186, MC.07.1835/187, MC.08.2409 I/2 (comparisons in: Perachora II, 71, n. 616, pl. 27; Mégara Hyblaea 2, 60, n. 1, pl. 44; Dehl von Kaenel 1995, 260, n. 1791, pl. 45. MC.08.2345/1); Area D: MD.05.1401/3; MD.04.1112/99: Nigro 2007, pl. LXXXII. For the Necropolis and burials under the city walls see as illustrative – yet incomplete – examples: Tusa 1972, 76, pl. LVII: 5 (Tomb 39); Tusa 1978, pl. V: 4 (Tomb 52); Guzzo 1979; Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 326. Several specimens belonging to this series were found by J. Whitaker in the [fig. 41 ‐ TREFOIL‐MOUTH PROTO‐CORINTHIAN OINOCHOE Archaic Necropolis: Whitaker 1921, 312‐314, fig. 87. MC.13.4441/1]
[87]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
A PC trefoil‐mouth oinochoe (fig. 41)43, showing a metope motif alternating vertical straw to symmetrical triangles (butterfly) and reticulated lozenges between two groups of horizontal bands (Stampolidis [ed.] 2003, 318, no. 390), is dated to c. 730 BC. Skyphoi of the so‐called ‘Thapsos type’ are decorated with running bands arranged uniformly on the rim, while the handle zone and 44 the body are filled in black (fig. 42) .
[fig. 44 ‐ PROTO‐CORINTHIAN SKYPHOS MC.13.4446/8 FROM BUILDING C8 IN AREA C SOUTH]
Other PC shapes retrieved in Motya IVB contexts are pyxides: one of the earliest specimens has a linear decoration and a metope frieze alternating vertical strokes (straight and wavy), and a silhouette heron (fig. 45)48.
[fig. 42 ‐ THAPSOS‐TYPE PROTO‐CORINTHIAN SKYPHOS FROM THE EASTERN SEASHORE MM.16.6047/243]
A more complex decoration consisting of metope with loose sigmas and vertical strokes in the handle zone appears on several contempo‐ raneous skyphoi (fig. 43)45.
[fig. 45 ‐ PROTO‐CORINTHIAN PYXIS MC.13.2781/1 DECORATED WITH A METOPE FRIEZE AND THE SILHOUETTE OF A HERON FROM BUILDING C8 IN AREA C SOUTH]
PC piriform aryballoi are quite a few examples. One was retrieved in the Temple C Area: the vase, preserved in its lower part, presents a
double frieze of running hounds divided by a [fig. 43 ‐ PROTO‐CORINTHIAN SKYPHOS MC.08.2409 II/1 frame of vertical strokes, and had radiate spikes FROM TEMPLE C5 IN THE SACRED AREA OF THE KOTHON] round the base (fig. 46)49.
These drinking vases belong to a widely spread 46 variety , and are attested to in Motya since the dating to the first half of the 8th century BC (Dehl von last quarter of 8th century BC (fig. 44)47. Kaenel 1994, 259; Lippolis 1994, 514‐515, 548, no. 57). 47 MD.04.1112/95, MD.07.2219/2: Tusa 1978, 46, pl. XXXI, 4 (T.119), pl. XLV: 2 (T.150) MC.08.2409 I/1: 43 MC.13.4441/1: the neck and part of the rim are Bernardini 1988, 81, fig. 2: b, d; Peserico 2007, 296, n. preserved. 1658, fig. 124; see also Neeft 1981, 11‐12, fig. 2a. 44 MM.16.6047/243. The specimen belongs to the 48 MC.13.4441/4; MC.13.2781/1: red painting, the base Thapsos “plain type” of Neeft 1981, 15, fig. 4: b. and the lower body are preserved. For comparisons, see 45 MD.04.1113/12, MC.08.2409 I/1, MD.08.2354/8. For a pyxis from Reggio in Stampolidis 2003 (ed.), 354, n. 481, comparisons, see Tusa 1978, pl. V: 3 (Tomb 51). dated to the end of 8th ‐ beginning of 7th century BC. 46 Earlier records attested to at Taras belong to the 49 MC.12.4333/1. The aryballos dates from 700‐650 BC, Corinthian production of the Middle Geometric period and can be attributed to Subgroup N by C.W. Neeft:
[88]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
spread over type is B155, gradually replacing the Corinthian imports, which ultimately fade. Greek colonial pottery The prolific relationships with the Greek colonies of Eastern Sicily are highlighted by the presence of imported jugs of Euboean‐cycladic tradition, principally oinochoai and hydriai, probably from Naxos (Lentini 2003, 187‐189, figs. 2‐3). The fragment of the neck of a jug retrieved in Area D shows a red painted decoration with parallel 56 bands and a central wavy line (fig. 47) , while
[fig. 46 ‐ PROTO‐CORINTHIAN ARYBALLOS MC.12.4333/1] another specimen of an oinochoe shows a black 57 painted sinuous line on the neck (fig. 48) . Other closed PC shapes are fairly rare: only few examples of conical oinochoai with a linear red painted decoration50, a typical funerary good (Stampolidis [ed.] 2003, 333, no. 394), retrieved in this case in a sacred context (Temple C and its environs) attesting to its possible cult use. Corinthian Pottery Corinthian pottery is attested to from the first half of 7th century BC51, and continues since the end of the century with a major variety of shapes and decorations. A globular aryballos with animal and floral decoration52 belongs to the Early Corinthian (Payne 1931, 287‐290, no. 579; CVA Kassel I, 29, no.6, pl. 9: 6; CVA Gela I, 19, pl. 26), while the transitional period between the Late Proto‐Corinthian to the Early Corinthian is [fig. 47 ‐ JUG OF EUBOEAN‐CYCLADIC TRADITION illustrated by a piriform aryballos with scales or MD.16.1115/1] hounds on the body, dating back to 640‐625 BC (Nigro 2007, pls. LXXXI; MD.04.1112/98, LXXXII). At the mid of 7th century BC (beginning of Motya VA Period, 675‐625 BC) Ionian cups of types A253 appear in sacred contexts as the uppermost (US.2409 III) layers of Favissa F.1680 yielding offerings and cult vases of the 8th to the 6th century BC. Attestations of Ionian cups increase toward the end of the period54, when the most
1987, 192. Another aryballos featuring the same theme was also found in Area C South: MC.16.5108/16. [fig. 48 ‐ OINOCHOE WITH BLACK PAINTED SINUOUS LINE OF 50 MC.10.2740/1, MC.12.4408/1. For comparisons, see EUBOEAN‐CYCLADIC TRADITION MD.16.1112/16] Stampolidis (ed.), 333, no. 393 51 MC.08.2409 I/6, MC.08.2409 I/5, MC.08.2409 I/7, BC). See, as an example, the wide repertoire of the 3rd MC.08.2409 I/57, MC.08.2409 I/206, MC.12.4408/2: stratum of Favissa F.1680 (layer 2409 III, Phases 7 and 6): Mégara Hyblaea 2, 59, nos. 3, 5, pl. 43; Lo Porto 1978, a preliminary overview of this context is in Nigro 2010a, 133, fig. 6, pl. LXIV. 35‐39, figs. 37‐38, 41. 52 MC.13.2754/97. 55 MC.08.2409 II/33, MC.08.2409 II/37, MC.08.2409 53 MC.08.2409 II/61, MC.08.2355/1: Boldrini 1994, n. 253, II/200, MC.08.2409 II/203, MC.08.2409 II/204, pl. 5. MC.08.2409 II/209. Comparisons in Boldrini 1994, 158‐ 54 This tendency is corroborated by the increasing 159, pl. 8. quantity of Ionian productions (and colonial imitations) at 56 MD.16.1115/1. Motya during the following period Motya VA‐B (675‐550 57 MD.16.1112/16.
[89]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[90]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[91]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[92]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[93]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[94]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
4.6. The pottery repertoire of the several morphological variations mainly Archaic Necropolis concerning the shape of the body, that is tapered or rounded (Tusa 1978, pl. XLIX:3; Ciasca 1970, pl. The grave goods of the Archaic Necropolis include XLVII: 1; 1978, pl. LXXIII: 2). Their funerary use is several typologies of vases employed specifically also attested to at Carthage (Ciasca 1979, 215, for funerary purposes (Vecchio 2015, 45‐47, fig. note no. 25; Docter 2013, 89‐91), in Sardinia 1). Such typologies do not appear within the (Bartoloni 2009, fig. 1), and in the Iberian domestic assemblages, and, in respect of them, Peninsula (Pellicer Catalán 2007, fig. 8). they are carefully decorated. In many cases, Amphorae with carinated shoulder descend from decorated vases were expressly produced for the a Levantine typology of storage vessel originated specific funerary function, except for some in 10th century BC lasting until the 8th century BC Impasto Ware vessels showing traces of a (Ben‐Tor ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2015, 140, pl. 2.2.12: previous use during the life of the dead. 12, 20). Carinated‐shoulder amphorae were The most common funerary urns belonging to found at Motya in the Necropolis and in the Phoenician productions are transport amphorae Tophet (Ciasca 1970, pl. XLVI: 1; Orsingher 2016, and domestic amphorae. Transport amphorae pl. III: 7). They show a complex decoration attested to in the Necropolis belong to the ovoid consisting of Red Slip bands, painted lines, and type (§ 4.4.), but the presence of amphorae with metopae with vertical bands, dots, and wavy lines carinated shoulder is also recorded. Domestic (Ciasca 1979, pl. LXXIV: 6; Tusa 1978, pl. XXV: 3). amphorae include three types: the Trumpet‐neck amphora, the somewhat rare amphora with cylindrical neck (kindred to the neck‐ridge jug), and the carinated‐shoulder amphora (§ 3.5.1.). Trumpet‐neck amphorae have a twofold use, as domestic short‐term storage containers, and as funerary urns. As mentioned above (§ 4.2.6.), the latter develops a more complex pictorial decoration in respect to the domestic specimens. Amphorae with cylindrical neck (neck‐ridge) and carinated‐shoulder amphorae are attested to within the pottery repertoire of Motya IVB only in funerary contexts. Both represent a high specialized production entirely depending on the funerary realm. Amphora with cylindrical neck. This somewhat [fig. 49 ‐ CARINATED‐SHOULDER AMPHORA DECORATED BY rare type is characterized by a short cylindrical VERTICAL WAVY LINES AND ROWS OF DOTS, FROM THE neck with a pronounced ridge at the middle. NECROPOLIS, TOMB 163] Rounded handles are neck‐to‐shoulder, the body is ovoid and the base is ring‐shaped. Amphorae Trefoil‐mouth piriform jug. The trefoil‐mouth with cylindrical neck show an elaborate pictorial piriform jug, together with the mushroom‐lip jug pattern. The simple linear decoration emphasizes and the globular cooking pot, constitutes the the architecture of the vase, while the metopal basic furnishing good of Phoenician tombs both motif is usually drawn on the shoulder. The rim in the Levant and in Mediterranean colonies and the handles are decorated with radial and (Vecchio 2013, 47). Descending from metallic horizontal strokes (Tusa 1972, 40, pls. XXVII: 2, prototypes – bronze and silver – widespread th T.3; XXXI: 2, T.5. See also a later specimen in through the Mediterranean between the 8 and th Bartoloni 2011, 423, fig. 1). the 7 century BC (Grau Zimmermann 1978), this Carinated‐shoulder amphora. It is characterized jug is characterized by a biconical shape of the by a bag‐shaped body, a rounded base, high body, double handles and a trefoil‐shaped vertical neck, and a simple rim (fig. 49). It is mouth. Its function in the funerary ritual was attested to in the Necropolis (§§ 3.5.1., 3.5.2., probably related to the libation worshipped figs. 35, 57) and in the Tophet (§ 3.6., fig. 67) with possibly with wine after the incineration and the deposition of the dead (Bartoloni 1990, 69).
[95]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
The trefoil‐mouth jug is attested to in the West since the first half of 8th century BC (Pellicer Catalán 2007, 36). The earliest specimens are completely coated with the Red Slip (LRS) (fig. 50), while the jugs of Motya IVB are decorated with red slip bands and black lines (BsW). The numerous morphological variants probably reflect the same typological variability in the homeland (Vecchio 2015, 22). A unique fragment of a RS trefoil‐mouth jug coming from the Sacred Area of the Kothon was retrieved on the destruction layer of Temple C5, and is ascribable to the first half of 7th century BC (Nigro 2010a, 30, fig. 30, MC.05.1526/18).
[fig. 51 ‐ BICHROME‐STYLE WARE MUSHROOM‐LIP JUG WITH SQUATTED BODY, FROM TOMB 13, NO. INV. M3029]
Globular Cooking pots. Cooking pots found in the Necropolis often do not show traces of a preceding usage (fig. 52). The specialized production for funerary uses is supported by the finding of a painted specimens in Tomb 173 showing a painted metopal decoration. Other cooking pots (see § 4.2.7.) with soot signs on the external surface have been probably used by the deceased during his life, and put on the grave as supplies for the afterlife (Fantar 1997, 57‐58; Ribichini 2004).
[fig. 50 ‐ RED SLIP TREFOIL‐MOUTH PIRIFORM JUG FROM TOMB 6, NO. INV. 6852]
Mushroom‐lip jug. This type of jug is attested within the materials found in Area C (§ 4.2.5., BsW‐J2), although it is rarely attested to in Motya outside funerary contexts. It forms, together with the trefoil‐mouth jug, the standard set of Phoenician graves, used to contain perfumed oils (Núñez Calvo 2012, 238, fig. 3b). Originating from oriental models of the beginning of the first millennium BC (Peserico 1996; Pellicer Catalán 2007, 59, with bibliography), the mushroom‐lip jugs found at Motya show a bichrome‐style decoration, with painted lines bordering the parts of the vase filled with the Red Slip, and a number of variant in shapes concerning principally the [fig. 52 ‐ COOKING POTS FROM ARCHAIC TOMBS COVERED BY shape of the body and possibly connected to THE CITY WALLS. FROM TOP LEFT: MM78/146, MM78/165, their chronology (fig. 51). MM78/145, MM78/158, MM78/132]
[96]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
Vase à chardon. The vase à chardon is a peculiar Trefoil‐mouth oinochoe. Another vessel linked to feature of the Phoenicians of the West that does the consumption of wine in funerary context is not descend from a Levantine model. Its early the trefoil‐mouth oinochoe with elongated attestations are in the Iberian Peninsula, where thinner neck and globular body. This shape is probably it first originated from an indigenous borrowed from the Corinthian repertoire (Ciasca model (Bartoloni 2003, 170; Ruiz Mata 1991, 212, 1996, 183, note no. 25), but the decoration is pl. I, 2; Negueruela Martínez 1980, 341), in North deeply influenced by the indigenous pictorial Africa (Harden 1937, 69, fig. 3: k; Cintas 1970, style (Campisi 2003, 157). The decorative 330‐335, pls. XXV, XXXII: 102, 104C), and then in scheme, consisting in vertical lines and radial Morocco (Tore ‐ Gras 1976, 66‐67 with wavy lines alternated to horizontal bands, recalls bibliography), in Sardinia (Bartoloni 1996, 50), the East‐Greek pictorial motives. As an example, and Sicily (an overview in Orsingher 2015, 575, the oinochoe found in Tomb 156 (Tusa 1978, 60, note no. 55). An origin from Egypt might be also pl. XLVII: 1) can be compared to an Euboean jug suggested. It is characterized by a globular body found in a tomb of Pithekoussai (Buchner 1964, and a large flaring rim, and shows numerous 263‐274; Bisi 1969, 15, fig. 7). Some BsW minor morphological variants in size (fig. 53). specimens present the typical bichrome Vases à chardon are a high specialized production decoration (fig. 52). related to the funerary sphere, and constitute a characteristic element of the funerary equipment of archaic necropoleis and Tophets from the end of 8th century BC to the end of the 7th century BC. It represents a specific feature of drinking vessels employed, as like as chalices, skyphoi and cups, throughout the funerary rituals, common meal and libations, worshipped in honor of the deceased.
[fig. 54 ‐ BSW TREFOIL‐MOUTH OINOCHOE FROM TOMB 13, NO. INV. 3028S]
Etruscan pottery and imitations
The grave goods of the Necropolis include a few [fig. 53 ‐ RED SLIP VASE À CHARDON FROM T.36, NO. INV. imported Etruscan vessels and several local PG497] imitations. Etruscan imports are attested to in Tomb 82 (Tusa 1978, 28, pl. XVIII: 3; Ciasca 1990a, Jugs. The most common type of jugs attested to 120‐121), where an amphoriskos with incised the Necropolis of Motya is the neck‐ridge type (§ decoration and “W” motif under the handles, 4.2.5.). It was probably employed to contain the probably imported from a coastal city of water required to dilute the wine used for the Southern Etruria (Benedettini 2007, 40, fig. 8, pl. funerary rites. 2), was found (fig. 55).
[97]
[4.]
Federica Spagnoli [The pottery repertoire of Motya IVB (750‐675 BC)] MOTYE
[fig. 55 ‐ ETRUSCAN AMPHORISKOS WITH INCISED DECORATION [fig. 57 ‐ PAINTED AMPHORISKOS FROM J. WHITAKER’S FROM TOMB 82, NO. INV. M3046] COLLECTION (AFTER TUSA 2008, PL. IV:19]
Several fragments of the same shape were also An original re‐elaboration of the Etruscan double‐ retrieved into the archaic tombs drown out by spiral amphoriskos was found in Tomb 177 (fig. the city‐walls (Ciasca 1979, 222, pl. LXXVIII:3; 58). Amphoriskos MN.11.T177/2 shows a Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 326‐328, figs. 2‐6). flattened everted rim, tapered neck, biconic Local imitations of this Tyrrhenian typology are body, strap handles and ring base. A black represented by a BsW amphoriskos found in painted decoration is associated to this shape of Tomb 11 (Tusa 1972, 46, pl. XXXIV: 2), showing Etruscan inspiration: metopae and vertical wavy the same morphology but a different decoration, lines on the neck and part of the body, radial consisting in a Red Slip band at the centre of the strokes on the rim and horizontal lines feature body (fig. 56). the typical Phoenician pictorial path that Antonia Ciasca labelled as “Phoenician Geometric” (Ciasca 1999, 71), highlighting its derivation from early Greek Geometric models. Moreover, the decorative syntaxes of this vessel moves away the models and embraces an original style, a sort of horror vacui, that does not fall within any pictorial repertoire of the other Western Phoenician colonies (Bisi 1974, 23).
[fig. 56 ‐ BSW AMPHORISKOS FROM TOMB 11, NO. INV. M3055]
A less accurate amphoriskos from a tomb excavated by J. Withaker (fig. 57) shows a gentler profile in respect to the Etruscan originals, and a white‐coated surface decorated with dente di lupo and a wavy line depicted on the body (S. [Fig. 58 ‐ PAINTED AMPHORISKOS MN.11.T177/2 FROM Tusa 2008, 77, n. 19, pl. IV). TOMB 177]
[98]
[5.]
Federica Spagnoli [Motya IV: a ceramic horizon in transition] MOTYE
5. Motya IV: a ceramic horizon 5.1. Phoenician imprinting: Motya in transition IVA ceramic repertoire
This conclusive paragraph aims to draw out the The early Phoenician repertoire of Motya IVA main lines of the discussion, summing up the two includes Levantine and indigenous pottery, and issues mentioned before (§ 2.1.), concerning, on Cypriot imports. The absence of Greek imports in the one side, the dynamics of the Phoenician the early layers of the Phoenician settlement has settlement at Motya, and, on the other, the social chronological and historical implications. It seems and cultural relationships with natives and other to be a characteristic of early Phoenician colonists (i.e. Greeks and Carthaginians). This foundations in central and west Mediterranean consequently presupposes the involvement of corresponding with Thucydides’ statement that Phoenicians into the wider issue of the Phoenicians settled Sicily before the Greeks4. construction of the Mediterranean identity1. Greek imported vessels, notably painted double‐ How did the settlement grow in the earliest handled cups (Proto‐Corinthian skyphoi and Phoenician colony? Motya IVA pottery types kotylai) did not appear in the archaeological distribution shows the gradual extension of the record of Motya until the second half of the 8th inhabited area from the south landing shore up century BC. A similar circumstance for imported on the Acropolis. Earliest records of Phoenician pottery has been noted in contemporary levels at occupation at Motya are mainly attested to in the Carthage, principally in archaic tombs (Early Punic ‘Funduq’ zone (Area C South) and on the dwelling I, 760‐675 BC), and in Malta5. Conversely, the quarters of the top (Areas E and L) and on the presence of Cypriot material may indicate one of slopes of the Acropolis (Areas D and B), where the more significant component of the colonial formerly the indigenous settlement was community. established (Nigro 2016, fig. 1). Wheel technology, well established in the The distribution of ceramic finds in the following Levantine homeland, was not immediately period of Motya IVB reflects the expansion of the introduced in the new settlement, suggesting Phoenician city towards the north and the west that potters were not amongst the earliest ships’ of the island. The zones of major attestations are crews that landed on Motya. New settlers made Area C to the south and the Acropolis, although a use of local handmade pottery for Cooking and certain amount of early Phoenician pottery was Storage Ware (but also Table Ware), complying also found to the north‐west in Area F2, and along with indigenous tradition which, in turn, the northern fringe of the site in the Tophet3. increased the repertoire with new shapes Not only the spatial distribution, but also the borrowed from Phoenician tradition6. The same different composition of the two ceramic phenomenon is also documented in the Iberian assemblages of Motya IVA and IVB may describe Peninsula, where some indigenous pottery cultural transformations occurring during the first shapes, as plates and bowls, were decorated century of life of the colony. following the Phoenician fashion7. How do the different assemblages of Motya IVA Imported Red Slip Ware constitutes a significant and IVB illustrate the relationship between portion of the early Phoenician pottery of Motya natives and Phoenician settlers, as well as the IVA. It usually includes plates, carinated bowls, relationship between them and the homeland? and hemispherical bowls, with trefoil mouth jugs This question may find an answer after a short in the funerary realm. This repertoire is suddenly discussion of the highlights of these ceramic enlarged after one or two generations, adding repertoires, as they resulted from the most different types of bowls and plates, cups, chalices recent excavations conducted by our expedition. and introducing composed decorations (RS and plain, or black bands). The predominant taste 1 Bondì 2014, 60‐65. combines the red lustrous coating with plain 2 A preliminary account on archaic pottery of Area F in Giardino 2011, 103‐107. 4 Thuc. VI, 2.6. 3 For the pottery of earliest strata of the Tophet, see 5 Sagona 2008, 207‐208. Orsingher 2016, pls. I‐IV. The northern and eastern coast 6 See IW red‐burnished bowls with a sinuous profile and were used as burial area since the pre‐Phoenician IW chalices, § 2.5., plate 8. periods: Spagnoli 2007‐2008, 337‐338; Nigro in press. 7 Negueruela Martínez 1980, 347.
[99]
[5.]
Federica Spagnoli [Motya IV: a ceramic horizon in transition] MOTYE nude parts. Towards the end of the period, a Two guidelines were suggested by Antonia Ciasca simple linear black‐painted decoration is for the interpretation of the Phoenician ceramic sometimes overlaid to Red Slip, marking the repertoire of the West, one chronological, and profile of carinated bowls or the inside of plates. the other geographical. Ciasca noticed that of the In Motya IVB period, this decorative scheme two Phoenician decorative styles, Bichrome and evolves in a kind of bichrome style (BsW, § Red Slip, as singled out by Patricia Bikai, only the 4.2.6.)8 recalling the Phoenician Bichrome Ware latter one was attested to in the western (PhBW), a painted production spread over the colonies. Like Ciasca, Bikai stated: “it is the Red Levant from the end of 11th to the beginnings of Slip repertoire that goes with colonists to the 9th century BC9. western sites”14. A geographical perspective The decorative framework of PhBW found its brought Ciasca to assert that the cultural (basing antecedents in pictorial motifs of Late Cypriot on ceramics) background of the Phoenician and Cypro‐Geometric repertoires10. Furthermore, colonists could have been that of an inland region the black‐painted decoration on Red Slip plates of the Levant or a coastal region of Southern and bowls recalls the Black‐on‐Red Ware style Levant, only partially touched by the Phoenician originated at Cyprus and spread over the coastal milieux contaminated with Mycenaean, Northern Levant during the 10th and 9th centuries Cypriot and Aegean experiences15. Actually, new BC11. Affinities between the most ancient data from Sapienza excavations at Motya, and Phoenician pottery found at Motya and the recent discoveries in North Africa and in the Cypro‐Phoenician ceramic repertoires may Iberian Peninsula reaching the earliest Phoenician indicate the contribution given by Cyprus in the levels might suggest a reassessment of both foundation of the city. In respect to other interpretive guidelines. The stylistic and contemporaneous contexts, i.e. the earliest morphological analysis of early Phoenician Phoenician levels of the Iberian colonies, Moyta’s repertoire of Motya IVA suggests that it could early Phoenician repertoire seems to follow have been originated in a transitional period precise stylistic standards which prefer a pictorial between the earlier Bichrome Ware style and the style rather than a simple Red Slip coating. massive diffusion and standardization of Red Slip Nonetheless, decorations on Red Slip vessels of Ware, possibly during the last decade of the 9th Motya IVA barely show more than a linear motif. and the beginning of the 8th century BC. The The non‐adoption of a more elaborate pictorial transmission of the Phoenician ceramic repertoire could have had a precise significance12. repertoire to the West followed a more complex This feature might be attributed to a stylistic process that included also the stylistic choice, but one cannot exclude that it could have experiences of the Cypro‐Geometric period a different meaning related to an identity (White Painted and Bichrome Ware), as implication13. demonstrated by the elaboration of a Bichrome‐ style Ware at Motya in the second half of 8th 16 8 Antonia Ciasca already suggested a possible derivation century BC . of the Motya Bichrome style from the Phoenician The strong deal of standardization in shapes and Bichrome Ware: Ciasca 1987, 8. decorations of early Phoenician pottery at Motya 9 The style is first represented on flasks and strainer‐ reflects a well‐defined cultural group committed spouted jugs: Gilboa 1999, 2‐5, figs. 1‐2. to establish a new commercial settlement in the 10 Probably descending from an Aegean tradition: Gilboa most incisive and efficient way, and, at the same 1999, 9, fig. 9: 1‐7. 11 The chronology, origin, function and cultural time, trying to differentiate itself from other implication of Black‐on‐Red Ware have been discussed similar endeavors, selecting their ceramic extensively in literature. A summary in Gilboa 2015b, materials basing on an identity‐creating 485‐486, with bibliography. parameter. 12 Antonia Ciasca already noted the almost complete absence in western assemblages of a more elaborated decoration, and the lacking of the vessels usually holding 14 Bikai 1978, 75. them, as like as the pilgrim flasks, that is one of the most 15 Ciasca 1987, 9‐10. On the Phoenician colonization with characteristic shape of the Phoenician pottery repertoire a special focus on Motya also in Ciasca 1994, 372‐373. in the Levant: Ciasca 1987, 9. 16 It could hypothetically explain the absence at Motya of 13 These dynamics are not infrequent in the homeland: a typical Cypro‐Phoenician production, the Black‐on‐Red Spagnoli 2010, 55‐59 with bibliography. ware, the prevalent painted in Iron Age II Levant.
[100]
[5.]
Federica Spagnoli [Motya IV: a ceramic horizon in transition] MOTYE
Phoenicians met the indigenous population in a Phoenician potter who borrows Greek ideas”19. pacific and inclusive process leading, from the Undoubtedly, the contact with Greek culture earliest years of settlement, to a progressive represented a great opportunity for the hybridization of the pottery repertoire, creating, Phoenicians settled at Motya. The fascinating in the following decades, a mixed ceramic Greek way‐of‐life, as the aristocratic practices of culture17. Moreover, in this early stage, the symposium and common meal, are some of the ceramic repertoire also testifies to earlier albeit most appreciated immaterial merchandises that sporadic contacts with other native communities, Greek spread over the Mediterranean from the as those of Sardinia. The retrieval of a fragment end of the 8th century BC, represented in the of Nuragic‐like askos‐jug (MC.06.1592/18) within archaeological record also at Motya by drinking the materials of Temple C5, the earliest cult place sets and wine‐flavoring devices. Although the of the sacred Area of the Kothon18, is among the penetration of Hellenic features into the more ancient evidence of such relationships, Levantine mainframe is a long‐lasting process, it specifically related to the cult. This vessel was nevertheless represents one of the main suitable to pour wine, and it was probably used cornerstones composing the social, economic, for some kind of libation within the rites political, in short, the cultural identity of the city. worshipped in the early sacred place. With other During Motya IVB, the links with the motherland Nuragic finds from earlier late prehistoric (Motya are still tight, as the presence of Levantine IIIB) layers on the Acropolis (Nigro 2016, 355‐356, transport amphorae may exemplify20. Motya is fig. 20:3), it shows the important role of the sea‐ involved in a commercial network reaching the route to Sardinia (Guirguis ‐ Unali 2016, 81‐82). West Phoenician centers, the Greek colonies of Recent excavations of Sapienza Expedition, the Italian Peninsula, the Sicilian indigenous particularly in Area C (Nigro 2012c; 2015a; background, the Aegean, Egypt and the Levant21. Spagnoli 2013) have thus changed the traditional Nevertheless, from a strictly ceramic point of interpretation that “fin dall’inizio del periodo view, new models of inspiration seem to be no coperto dalla documentazione archeologica more in the Levant. disponibile, i caratteri fenici sembrano tutt’altro The main inputs derive from a twofold source, che vitali e anzi destinati ad essere assorbiti o ad the Greek culture and Carthage’s milieu (Guirguis estinguersi piuttosto rapidamente” (Ciasca 1992b 2012, 103). Both influences emerge in the 1996, 186). ceramic repertoire in such a way as to trigger a On the contrary, as shown by the Motya IV local and original path of differentiation from pottery repertoire, Phoenician cultural features, Levantine models. were steadily persistent during the whole life of A third element that contributes to the modelling the harbour city, notwithstanding its progressive of the ceramic identity of Motya is the indigenous Hellenization (Nigro 2015a; Spagnoli 2014, 97‐ component in the repertoire of pottery types, 98). whereas an apparent marginal role was also played by Tyrrhenian relationships. Etruscan 5.2. Aegean connections and pottery is scarcely represented in the earliest hybridization. The development phases of the Phoenician settlement. Scattered fragments of Etruscan transport amphorae were of a local Phoenician identity in found in mid‐end of 8th century levels of the the Motya IVB pottery repertoire Sacred Area of the Kothon22, while fragments of Nicholas Coldstream in his volume Greek Bucchero Ware found in the Sanctuary of Geometric Pottery, published in 1968, affirmed Cappiddazzu (Nigro 2015a, 233, fig. 8) and in the that “in earlier times, the Greeks occasionally Sacred Area of the Kothon (Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012, imitated Levantine shapes. Now it is the 25, fig. 27) testify to the cultural use as offerings
17 A similar situation is observed also in Sardinia, as the 19 Coldstream 1968, 388. analysis of the earliest Phoenician ceramic repertoire of 20 Ciasca 1978a, 237 n. 38 pl. 64: 3; Ramón Torres 1995, Sulky attests to: Pompianu ‐ Unali 2016. 272. 18 This fragment was found in “Sondaggio A” in the 21 Orsingher 2016, 291, notes no. 116‐123. temple entrance: Nigro 2010a, 12‐13, fig. 11. 22 Nigro ‐ Spagnoli 2012, 30, fig. 38.
[101]
[5.]
Federica Spagnoli [Motya IV: a ceramic horizon in transition] MOTYE or cult vases, of Etruscan fine pottery in archaic cultural environment of the Etruscan and Latium Phoenician cult places during the 6th century BC. coast, including also the sharing of some cultural As regards the early Phoenician occupation, features28. This type of vessel probably Vincenzo Tusa, during the excavation of the represents the practice at Motya of an alternative Necropolis, found an Etruscan amphoriskos model of wine consumption in respect to the among the grave goods of Tomb 8223. This vase Greek symposium29. was imported probably from a coastal city of In broader terms, the development of the Southern Etruria24. Other fragments of the same ceramic repertoire of Motya overlays two main shape with a double‐spiral decoration were found streams of influences to the original Phoenician in the archaic tombs drown out by the city‐walls tradition: that of the Central Mediterranean‐ (fig. 1)25. Both findings are ascribable to period Carthage Circuit, and that of the Greek colonies, Motya IVB. A similar situation is described, in the including the Hellenized Indigenous background. same period, also in Sardinia at Bithia, where a 5.2.1. The influence of the Central unique Etruscan amphoriskos decorated with Mediterranean ‐ Carthage Circuit 26 double spiral was found in a tomb . The shared origin of material culture of Carthage and Motya is reflected by the presence of the BsW in association to the Red Slip Ware, meeting to a common origin of the shape repertoire and also of the decorative background of the new settlers, while in other contemporaneous colonial milieux, i.e. the Iberian colonies, the Red Slip coating is preferred30. The parallel development of several shapes, as well as the numerous Carthage imports found at Motya, suggests that the two Phoenician foundations of the Sicily Canal developed in close contact. Moreover, Carthage impact on Motya’s pottery repertoire of the second half of 8th century BC does not comes out, probably because pottery alone cannot grasp the dimension of this phenomenon. The influence [fig. 1 ‐ ETRUSCAN AMPHORISKOS MM78.74 FOUND NEARBY of Greek colonies, and the interaction with TOMB 169] indigenous neighbors lead both pottery repertoires to have an early differentiation from Nevertheless, these Etruscan amphoriskoi from oriental models, and place them at the boundary Motya may not result from occasional between the Levantine culture and the Greek circumstances. A certain familiarity with the world31. Etruscan pottery is testified by the assimilation 5.2.2. Greek colonial influences and the and re‐elaboration of this Etruscan typology, relationship with the Hellenized represented by at least three other amphoriskoi Indigenous culture found in the Necropolis. Those vessels are locally The foundation of the earliest Greek colonies in manufactured, and show a Phoenician decorative Sicily, Naxos in 734 BC by Chalcis, and Syracuse in style27, entailing a regular attendance with the 733 BC by Corinth, represents a turning point also in the life of Motya. The Phoenician city became
23 one of the favourite targets of the Greek trade. Tusa 1978, 28, pl. XVIII: 3. 24 Benedettini 2007, 40, fig. 8, pl. 2 The early contacts with Greek colonies of Eastern 25 Ciasca 1979, 222, pl. LXXVIII: 3 (MM.78.74); Spagnoli Sicily and Southern Italy are reflected in the 2007‐2008, 326‐328, figs. 2‐6. 26 Probably in the grave of an Etruscan living in Sardina 28After the 6th century BC Etruscan attestations at Motya (“un oggetto personale legato all’immigrazione di un decrease probably as a consequence of the First Treaty etrusco nella città sarda”): Zucca 1985, 48, notes nos. 50‐ between Rome and Carthage of 509 BC. 51. 29 Torelli 2000, 92‐96. 27 Tusa 1972, 46, pl. XXXIV: 2 (T.11); S. Tusa 2008, 77, n. 30 Ciasca 1987, 8. 19, pl. IV; Spagnoli 2012, 303‐305, fig. 1 (T.177). 31 Ciasca 1987, 10; Ciasca 1983, 619‐620.
[102]
[5.]
Federica Spagnoli [Motya IV: a ceramic horizon in transition] MOTYE increasing quantity of Corinthian pottery found in connecting Motya and the Phoenician homeland domestic, sacred and funerary contexts. The continue to be fluently active, the colonial penetration of Greek models into the local milieu ceramic culture follows independent dynamics, is a long lasting process triggering a gradual developing its own characteristics, and showing a hybridization encompassing material culture and clear differentiation in respect to Levantine life customs. However, in this early phase of the series. However, the Levantine contribution to city, Proto‐Corinthian pottery does not represent the cultural development of Motya did not fade, only a luxury good. It is presumably the indicator and the acquisition of a distinguished North‐ of the aspiration to join the Mediterranean elites’ Syrian shape as the tripod bowl bears sound way‐of‐life. Later on, a key‐role in the witness to this (Principi Etruschi, 214, no. 242). transmission of these Greek elements was played Moreover, the original momentum seems to have by the Hellenized indigenous communities living gradually lost its power, probably due to the in the hinterland, that in many cases worked as a instable politic situation. In this event, a definitive bridge between the Phoenicians and the role is indirectly played by the Assyrian conquest Greek/Aegean world. This is exemplified by the of the main Phoenician cities between the end of acquisition within the local Phoenician pottery of the 8th and the 7th centuries BC32 bearing to the trumpet‐neck amphora type, held by the several changes on the balance of powers as like indigenous as an early shape descending from a as trade and business relations33. Nevertheless, Mycenaean model (§ 3.5.1., figs. 37‐38). This an indicator of the still valuable intermediary role typology rapidly became one of the most of Levantine cities might be considered the representative shapes of the earliest ceramic identification at Motya of a remarkable number horizon, not only as a domestic‐use vessel but as of Cypriot imports. Although attested to since the funerary urn, thus achieving a highly symbolic pre‐Phoenician phases of the settlement34, the role. presence of Cypriot pottery reaches its climax in Phoenician decoration on funerary specimens of the colony during period Motya IVB, between the this Indigenous/Hellenic type may illustrate the end of the 8th and the mid of the 7th century BC35, fusion between Phoenician settlers and native with several attestations both in domestic and cultures. The fruitful exchanges with peoples sacred zones (Spagnoli 2012, 306; Aubet ‐ Núñez living on the fertile hinterland is also 2008, 86‐93)36. demonstrated by the presence at Motya of such At the end of the period (Motya IVB 750‐675 BC), luxury pottery, as the Elymian cup found in Area when the harbour city is flourishing, Motya has D (MD.16.1407/1), showing a painted geometric become a Mediterranean‐oriented city, and its decoration (fig. 2). Moreover, several fragments international vocation is thoroughly reflected by of incised pottery belonging to the indigenous its mixed material culture, namely in pottery. tradition were found in the burial places later obliterated by the city‐walls on the northern and north‐eastern sea‐shores of the island. 32 On the progressive deculturation and the affirmation of the Assyrian koinè in the Levant see Stern 2015b, 533‐ 534. 33 Orsingher 2016, 288, Stratum VI, 675‐625 a.C. 34 Nigro in press. 35 One should, however, recall that the amount of Cypriot imports at Motya is not comparable to the massive presence of Greek pottery, in a countertrend with the Levant, where generally the vast majority of imported pottery, in this century, comes from Cyprus. See, as an example, the case of Iron Age I‐II Sidon: Doumet‐Serhal 2008, 43‐44. This may give account on the special impact [fig. 2 ‐ ‘ELYMIAN’ PAINTED BOWL MD.16.1407/1 FROM AREA of the Greeks in Sicily. D ON THE ACROPOLIS WESTERN FLANKS] 36 The strong impact of the Cypriot culture on the
development of the Western Phoenician identity has 5.2.3. The role of the Levant and Cyprus already been highlighted by Piero Bartoloni, particularly Although during the first century of life of the concerning the reception of pottery styles, iconographies colony (Motya IV, 800‐675 BC) trading routes and religious symbols at Carthage (Bartoloni 1992, 124, note no. 10; Bisi 1966. See also: Guirguis 2016, 4, fig. 1).
[103]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6. Motya IV: building up a West Phoenicians’ landing on Motya at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC, however, was Phoenician colony something completely new. The earliest town of Results of recent archaeological investigations Motya IV arose as a settlement colony and, in the carried out by Sapienza University of Rome at meantime, as a trading outpost ‐ a strategic Motya, summarised in the present volume, allow berthing place on the maritime route towards to sketch out a novel picture of the early Sardinia and the Iberian Peninsula. The Phoenician settlement on the Sicilian island (§§ geographic and environmental setting of the 6.1‐4.), and to tentatively outline its historical foundation in a coastal lagoon not far away from contribution to the formation of the cultural the estuary of a river fits perfectly with what is identity of the Phoenicians in the West (§ 6.5.). deemed the typical Phoenician concept of a New data from Area C with Building C8 (the so‐ harbour city. Nevertheless, this view, directly called ‘Funduq’) and the earliest cult places of borrowed from ancient sources, may not fully Baal and Astarte (Shrine C14, Temple C5 and reflect implications and complexity of the colonial Shrine C12), as well as from Areas B, D, E and L, model the new settlers pursued. The physio‐ respectively on the Acropolis slopes and summit, gnomy of Motya rather eludes the traditional from the Tophet, and from the northern scholarly approaches to Phoenician colonization Necropolis, enhanced our knowledge of the (Núñez Calvo 2008), badly influenced by a Tyro‐ earliest stages of life of the city. centric perspective (e.g. Bernardini 1993, 33; The simultaneous re‐evaluation of the prehistoric Aubet 2006, 95‐96; Gubel 2006, 88‐89), pointing settlement on the Acropolis, with four towards a more articulated paradigm. The new stratigraphic periods (Nigro 2016, 340‐341; Nigro colony matched the purposes of a mercantile in press) has shown how this small island at the enterprise with those of a religiously motivated centre of the Marsala Lagoon played a relevant community, which aimed at the construction of a role in Mediterranean interconnections from the novel society. Long distance navigation, intensive 2nd millennium BC onwards (Bietti Sestieri 2014). trade, an economy free from taxes and tributes The foundation, thus, is a natural development of of the homeland, assimilation of indigenous preceding Levantine trade on the sea‐route of the entities, but also building up a new community, Great Islands (Cyprus, Crete, Malta, Sicily, and and religious renovation by the erection of Sardinia). Motya was already at that time a stop‐ temples and the creation of the Tophet, are all over on the trans‐Mediterranean cross (fig. 1), elements indicating that Motya hosted an and kept this role when the route was extended innovative and cohesive group of colonists aware to the Baleares, up to the Andalusia and Cadiz. Its of the endeavour it was committed to early origins thus descend from a long prehistoric accomplish: to generate a new cultural identity, frequentation by seafarers from the far East. that of the Phoenicians in the West.
ST [Fig. 1 ‐ MEDITERRANEAN SEA‐ROUTES IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE 1 MILLENNIUM BC, SHOWING THE CENTRAL LOCATION OF MOTYA]
[104]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6.1. Starting a colony: population, The model starts from the landing of two or three demography and economic basics ships carrying about fifty people, including Phoenician women (from proper Phoenicia, Syria, The earliest settlement started from the Palestine and Cyprus), and incorporates other anchorage “MOTYE” (Amadasi Guzzo 2005; Guizzi young women/girls taken from the local 2011, 457) discovered on the southern shore of indigenous population (later called Elymians). The the island, and grew up quickly on the adjacent variety and number of women, and their regular marl shallow mound and around the nearby increase during the first decades of life of the springs. It, then, expanded on the acropolis and colony, necessarily due to a continuing flow of further north, increasing its population up to migrants, led the social body to a demographic about 1460 inhabitants after the first century of boom (fig. 2, A). This is shown by the dwelt area life (fig. 2). The population growth was possibly on the island in period Motya IVB, which quickly the major challenge the colony faced during its spread over the acropolis bringing the overall first stage of life until the mid of the 6th century extension of the new born town up to around 9 BC. A demographic model, matching all available hectares (fig. 1 on p. 44) out of an overall archaeological data with ethnographic sources extension of about 40 hectares (with an average (developed with Luca Benvenuti, Lorenzo Farina, population density of 160 inhabitants per and Federica Spagnoli, forthcoming), highlighted hectare). At least three quarters of the island (30 that the most decisive factors influencing the hectares) were, instead, kept free for agriculture, possibility for the just settled community not only animal breeding and other productive activities. to survive (that in antiquity was already a great A datum taken from the model may help to figure accomplishment), but also to prosper – as it out which kind of demographic challenge the actually happened and it is thoroughly colony faced: after three generations (a documented by archaeology –, are women’s generation is nearly 25 years), in about 728 BC, fertility and the birth survival rate of the the colony counted 1377 inhabitants, 8166 were youngest members of the community. These people dead on Motya – so the total number of factors in turn depended on general health the island’s inhabitants at that date was 9543. conditions on the island, and, especially, on As regards the social composition of the early fertile women’s wellness and constant number. community, the ‘nuclear’ family was of course
[Fig. 2 ‐ DEMOGRAPHIC MODEL OF THE FIRST CENTURY OF LIFE OF THE PHOENICIAN COLONY IN MOTYA]
[105]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE the main component of the social body, together Six broad ‘social classes’ or groups have been with other groups, as priests, soldiers, seamen, tentatively distinguished in the earliest and individual merchants. Actually, families had community, also considering the ages pyramid an average number of members around 20‐25, so (fig. 2, B): a) primary food producers (peasants that after two generations, in 764 BC, with 481 and fishermen) 40%; b) seamen/warriors (28%); inhabitants, we can count 10, maximum 15, c) merchants (10%); d) priests (12%); e) members families. It is more difficult to detect social class of the ruling élite (6%), plus around 4% of slaves, differentiation or hierarchical organization at this refugees and outlaws (pirates?) (fig. 3). early stage of life of the colony. Funerary The demographic model also allows to calculate evidence shows the presence of an élite and of the primary food need of the colony, which is soldiers. It is, however, impossible to assess the basically connected to the land available on the number of the members of this ‘upper class’ island for cultivation and grazing. especially because an important point After three generations, in 728 BC, the 1377 underscored by the demographic model is that inhabitants of Motya needed the following basic excavated tombs or burials represent roughly food supplies per year: 28,3 tons of cereals 0.25% of the real number of dead inhabitants of (barley) (corresponding to around 14,1 hectares the city. Nonetheless, the necropolis, which of cultivated land); 20 tons of legumes (4 originally extended over the not‐dwelt region hectares land); 23,3 tons of meat; 27,1 tons of along the northern side of the island (§ 3.5., p. fish; 22 tons of combustible oil (for lightening); 59, fig. 31), apparently reflected a medium 13,5 tons of olive oil; 49,5 tons of fuel (wood for mercantile class with some warriors (§ 3.5., pp. cooking and heating). Basic agricultural products 66‐68), and the only evidence for a ruling élite are (cereals and legumes) could be produced on the some huge sarcophagi found in an unexplored island, and even animals could be at least area of the island. partially bred there (with, however, some Moreover, also in the light of the number of undesirable hygienic side effects). Combustible overall dead people calculated by the model, it oil could be only partially obtained by lentisk seems highly probable that a large part of the berries and olive scraps. Olive oil could be instead population was buried outside the island itself, locally produced (about 250 olive trees occupied presumably in the nearby site of Birgi, already in a grove of around 4 hectares), and wood for the 8th and 7th century BC. Lower class population cooking and heating may be equally obtained by was simply incinerated without leaving any plants living on the island. Fishing was a basic physical memory in the ground. resource for the early city – though progressively reducing in time –, which assured an important income of proteins and calories to its inhabitants. Albeit broadly speculative, the demographic model, thus, shows how the colony of Motya IV was largely self‐sufficient. Nonetheless, it depended on its own trade capacities for gathering other raw materials and products necessary for navigation (timber, hemp for ropes, iron and bronze), commerce, and for many other functions of everyday urban life (§ 6.5.). A vigorous naval activity, both in the lagoon and in the open sea, was essential to provide extra food (fruits, fresh vegetables), building materials (timber, stones, mineral sands), salt, but also other less easily detectable stuffs (textiles, leather, spices, animal bones as e.g. deer antlers, found numerous in the dig), as well as for generating wealth through trade and exchange, which actually was the main industry for such a [fig. 3 ‐ RECONSTRUCTED DISTRIBUTION OF BROAD SOCIAL harbour city. CLASSES/GROUPS AMONG THE POPULATION OF MOTYA IV]
[106]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6.2. Urban layout and architecture Buildings and dwellings of Motya IV excavated so Was there a pre‐conceived urban model far offer a picture of the architectural tradition of suggesting where and how to build new the colony suspended in between plans and structures on the island at the time of concepts deriving from the multi‐millennial Phoenicians’ arrival? Levantine tradition and a new adaptation to local The answer to this question is twofold. From the conditions, spaces and functions. one hand, the overall urban layout of the colony Motya IV architectural remains were excavated in and its earliest buildings seem inspired to a well‐ Area C near the southern shore of the island, and consolidated tradition of coastal Levant (§ 6.3.); in Areas B, D, E and L on the Acropolis, as well as on the other hand, the locations of temples, in the Tophet, and in area of the so‐called Temple docks, and other public functions were clearly of “Cappiddazzu” in the northern region. dictated by the island natural landscape and by Temples and cult compounds were characterized pre‐existing remains of the prehistoric by the employ of flat limestone slabs as settlements. Hence, the new settlers knew foundation walls set into shallow trenches cut exactly what to build and set the different through the natural clayish bedrock, with a structures according to the genius loci, i.e. a mudbrick superstructure (in some cases the stone millennial frequentation and knowledge of the foundation was substituted by a layer of island and of its environmental and anthropic compressed sand or flat limestone slabs). Adobe features. Religious compounds were the main was also used for cult installations such as pivots of the foundation, but also landing devices benches, altars, niches, abutting frameworks or and more protected positions were exploited. wall decorations, usually coated with a thick Temples were originally erected by the springs in whitish chalky plaster. Floors consist of crushed the southern region of the island, and then, and finely smashed lime, as in almost during Motya IVB, on the northern limestone contemporary Utica and Carthage. spur in the nearby of which also the Tophet and Domestic architecture was built with mudbricks the necropolis were located. The other functions, upon foundations made of uneven stones of connected with navigation and trade, were small and medium size, commonly taken from a initially accomplished by Building C8 and the riverbed (that of the not far away river Birgi) and seashore in front of it (Motya IVA), and then barely extracted from local limestone bedrock. partially moved to quays and docks constructed Foundation trenches were filled up with sand and on the northern side of the island. mudbricks were made of clay, straw, sand and chalk grits. Roof and ceilings, made of timber (evergreen oak, lentisk, sometime pine) beams, were flat, with plastered walkable surface as in the homeland (Faust 2013, 304). Dwellings are very simple, one‐storey only, and consist of one‐to‐three rectangular rooms with annexed shelters (supported by wooden posts) and yards, usually equipped of wells and ovens. Domestic architecture is neatly different from that of the few major constructions, like Building C8, Temple C5 or Shrines C12 and C14, which are more clearly inspired to Levantine prototypes. As regards the urban layout, plan, orientation, and limits of dwelt compounds depended on an embryonic street network, which basically consisted of a main north‐south axis crossing the entire island, which circumvents the western foot of the acropolis, and concentric and radial streets descending from the latter, running towards south, west, north‐west and east (p. 47, fig. 4), [fig. 4 ‐ RECONSTRUCTED LAND USE IN THE ISLAND DURING plus a perimeter street along the north seashore. PERIOD MOTYA IV, AT ABOUT 728 BC]
[107]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6.3. Public buildings functional plan (§ 2.), with a two‐storeys wing, Public buildings characterize the earliest colony overlooking the Lagoon, three arrayed as ideological and organizational centres of the rectangular storerooms, and a courtyard just born town. They differentiate it from a encircled by rooms, recalls on the one side simple maritime stopover or emporion. The two tripartite buildings typical of Southern Levant, on temples of Baal (respectively Shrine C14 of Motya the other side, it is very similar to Building C at Toscanos in Andalusia (fig. 9)6. IVA, and Temple C5 of Motya IVB) and of Astarte (Shrine C12, § 3.) with their sacred compound, moreover, show the importance of religious spaces within the colony, providing holy resources (waters and sacred holes) for religious rites. Cult areas were the spaces where the cultural mediation between Phoenician settlers, seamen, and natives took place. Whilst temples plans descended from the Levantine tradition of religious architecture1, their installations, baetyls, platforms, holy of holies, sacred wells, votive pits, etc., were quickly adapted to new cult activities [fig. 5 ‐ THE TEMPLE OF THE OBELISKS AT BYBLOS; FIRST HALF OF ND and religious performances developed by the THE 2 MILLENNIUM BC] culturally hybridized society of the colony.
Templar architecture in this early stage is characterized by the use of slabs, unworked stones, and carefully plastered mudbricks for benches and altars, as in Astarte’s Shrine C12. Another distinguishing feature, inherited from the Levant and kept also in the following periods, is the importance given to entrances, marked by slab‐paved raised thresholds and flanked by abutting pillars. As regards Temple C5, comparisons with its plan might be identified with the Temple of the Obelisks of Byblos2 (fig. 5), especially for the obelisk and stelae array in the temple courtyard, with the recently excavated TH temple at Sidon (fig. 6), as well with Temples 1 at [fig. 6 ‐ PLAN OF PHASE D TEMPLE AT SIDON, 8 CENTURY BC Kition3 (fig. 7) in Cyprus, and Temple 650 at (AFTER BORDREUIL ‐ DOUMET‐SERHAL 2013, FIG. 5)] Khirbet al‐Muqanna/Ekron4 (fig. 8). The same planimetric layout of Temple C5 was during the Iron Age (Shiloh 1970; Ottosson 1980, 66‐71; used for the earliest construction of the Temple Wright 1985, 275‐280; Nigro 1994, 203‐291, 436‐452; of Melqart, known as “Cappiddazzu”, erected in Sharon ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg 2006). It is derived from a typical layout of domestic architecture of this period, that of the Period Motya IVB and transformed into a proper so‐called “Four‐Room House” (Braemer 1982; Bunimovitz sacred building in Motya VA (Nigro 2009, 242‐ ‐ Faust 2003), showing three parallel long rooms with a 245). Both temples are inspired from the transversal room behind them. Levantine Iron II “Four‐ Levantine architectural prototype of called “Four Room Buildings”, moreover, are often characterized by Room Building”5. As regards Building C8, its multi‐ the adoption of the ashlar masonry typical of the Phoenician tradition with dressed blocks regularly displaced on alternated courses (Shiloh 1979, 50‐69; 1 Compare Shrines C12 and C14 with Sarepta and Tell el‐ Stern 1992, 302‐304). This technique was adopted in the Judeideh: Pritchard 1975, 13‐18, fig. 2; Matthiae 1993. front wall of Temple C5 (M.55). Recently J. Kamlah 2 Byblos II, 644‐652, Fig. 767; Finkbeiner 1981; Saghieh offered a different interpretation for this architecture 1983, 14‐25; Nigro 2011, 64‐65. called “Tripartite Pillar Temple” (Kamlah 2012). On the 3 Karageorghis et al. 1981; Nigro 2012, 307, fig. 22. same topic, see Nigro 2009; Nigro 2012a; Nigro 2012b. 4 Nigro 2012c, 308‐309, fig. 28. 6 Niemeyer 1985, fig. 6, who already suggested the 5 The so‐called “Four‐Room Building” is a plan‐scheme comparison with Building C8 of Phase 7. See also Lopez adopted in Levantine public and religious architecture Castro 2006, 87, fig. 6, and Prados Martínez 2001‐2002.
[108]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6.4. Industrial installations and productive activities As the basic needs of the city were satisfied by fishing and agriculture, the lagoon abundant resources produced an economic surplus which attracted migrants and fostered demographic growth. This made available more labour power and triggered navigation and trade enterprises in central Mediterranean. With the urban expansion of Motya IVB, the city witnessed the starting of [fig. 7 ‐ PLAN OF TEMPLE 1 AT KITION (RE‐ELABORATION AFTER productive activities. The earliest ‘industrial’ KARAGEORGHIS ET AL. 1981)] installations were connected with food production and navigation. Bronze fragments and iron slugs found near the pond of the Kothon testify to a limited local production of metal tools (ploughs, hooks, rings, spacers, nails, hinges, linkages). Food production and preservation was a major industry in the city, by drying or salting cereals, legumes and more rarely meat, fish and fruits. A winery was active in the central area of the island, with a vineyard extended over the western shallow plains of the island. Connected [fig. 8 ‐ PLAN OF TEMPLE 650 AT KHIRBET EL‐MUQANNA, with agriculture was also firewood and brushes ANCIENT EKRON (AFTER GITIN 2003, FIG. 5.6)] collection, as well as reeds exploitation for fuel, combustible oil (from tamarisk berries, olives scraps) for lightening, and manufacture of strings for rigging and fishing nets. Weaving and dyeing are also attested to since Motya IVB, the former one at an household scale (except for the production of sails, possibly manufactured in Building C8), the second concentrated on especially devoted installations located not far away from the necropolis in the northern region of the island. At the same advanced stage of Motya IVB, locally based potters started to produce vessels and clay fittings. Pottery was [fig. 9 ‐ BUILDING C AT TOSCANOS IN ANDALUSIA (AFTER AUBET made in a very simple course, as it shown by Plain 2006, FIG. 7.5)] Ware, Impasto Ware, and Storage Ware, with a The building technique for such early civil limited use of the fast‐wheel (§ 2.). Local clay was buildings consisted of solid foundations made of easily available and proved to be extremely large limestone slabs or sandstone blocks or two‐ suitable for many different manufactures. It three superimposed courses of uneven stones exhibited special plastic properties so that clay supporting walls made by regular mudbricks sized figurines, and terracottas production became a th on the 0.525 m royal cubit. The use of wooden distinguished industry of Motya already in the 7 pillars and fine plaster, the careful revetment of century BC. In conclusion, the new born colony floors, and the fitting of passages with slab shows since its beginnings the establishment of thresholds, neatly distinguish such buildings from flourishing industrial activities, which, coupled domestic units and working or familiar storage with trade and metal exchange, gave fuel to an devices, thus suggesting that a public institution extraordinarily fast economic growth. This conceived, erected and maintained them. allowed the inhabitants of Motya to import raw materials and commodities.
[109]
[6.]
Lorenzo Nigro [Motya IV: building up a West Phoenician colony] MOTYE
6.5. Trade, imports and luxury goods It is, together with some scarabs, among the As soon as the harbour city was able to grow in earliest luxury items imported to the island. A population and to accumulate wealth, it could provenance from North Phoenicia, the earliest further invest in maritime trade and import region to fall into Neo‐Assyrian control, may be commodities and raw materials necessary for its suggested. It recalls another faience find, an life and industries both from the Mediterranean Egyptian situla, told to have been found in a and from inland Sicily. tomb of the Birgi necropolis or in Motya itself in th Few archaeological data can be used to grasp the 19 century (Falsone 2006), now in A. Salinas’ information concerning which kind of products Archaeological Museum of Palermo. It bears a were imported and from where. Non visible stuffs hieroglyphic inscription with the name of were traced by means of photo‐sensors, gas Bakenranef (Bocchoris), the last Pharaoh of the th chromatography and soil analyses: food, leather, 24 Dynasty, who reigned approximately textiles, ointments, perfumes, spices, animal between 725 and 720 BC. Both precious items glues, wooden furnishings were identified in may epitomize the level of wealth reached by the Building C8, in tombs and in the temples area. colony at the end of Motya IV period, and remark Whitaker found a glazed Neo‐Assyrian faience the strong commercial connection established by Phoenician merchants with Egypt. unguentarium (fig. 10) in Tomb 10 (1921, 254).
[fig. 10 ‐ GLAZED NEO‐ASSYRIAN UNGUENTARIUM FOUND BY J. [fig. 11 ‐ EGYPTIAN SITULA WITH THE NAME OF PHARAOH WHITAKER IN TOMB 10; COURTESY: MUSEO G. WHITAKER, BAKENRANEF; COURTESY: ARCHIVIO FOTOGRAFICO MUSEO MOZIA, INV. 865] ARCHEOLOGICO “ANTONINO SALINAS” ‐ PALERMO, INV. 1311]
[110]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
8. Bibliography Amadasi Guzzo, M.G. 2005 “Ancora sul nome Mozia”, in A. Spanò Giammellaro (ed.), Atti del V Congresso Internazionale di Studi Fenici e Punici (Marsala‐Palermo 2‐8 ottobre 2000), Palermo 2005, pp. 575‐578. Amiran, R. 1970 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land: From Its Beginnings in the Neolithic Period to the End of the Iron Age, Jerusalem 1970. Anderson, W.P. 1988 Sarepta, I. The Late Bronze and Iron Age Strata of Area II, Y, Beirut: Publications de l’Université Libanaise 1988. Aubet, M.E. 2006 “On the Organization of Phoenician Colonial System in Iberia”, in C. Riva and N. Vella (eds.), Debating Orientalization: Multidisciplinary Approaches Change in the Ancient Mediterranean, London‐ Oakville 2006, pp. 94‐109. Aubet, M.E. ‐ Núñez, F.J. 2008 “Cypriot imports from the Phoenician cemetery of Al‐Bass”, in C. Doumet‐Serhal ‐ A. Rabate ‐ A. Resek (eds.), Networking Patterns of the Bronze and Iron Age Levant. The Lebanon and its Mediterranean Connections. On the occasion of the symposium “Interconnections in the Eastern Mediterranean. The Lebanon in the Bronze and Iron Ages”, 4‐9 November 2008 (Archaeology and History in the Lebanon ‐ Special Edition), Beirut 2008, pp. 71‐104. Badre, L. 1997 “Bey 003 Preliminary Report”, Bulletin d’Archéologie et d’Architecture Libanaise 2 (1997), pp. 6‐94. Badre, L. ‐ Gubel, E. 1999‐2000 “Tell Kazel, Syria. Excavations of the AUB Museum, 1993‐1998. Third Preliminary Report”, Berytus 44 (1999‐2000), pp. 123‐203. Bartoloni, P. 1990 “Riti funerari fenici e punici nel Sulcis”, in AA.VV., Atti dell’incontro di studio “Riti funerari e di olocausto nella Sardegna fenicia e punica” (Sant’Antioco, 3‐4 ottobre 1986) (Quaderni della Soprintendenza Archeologica per le Province di Cagliari e Oristano, 6 [1989], Supplemento), Cagliari 1990, pp. 67‐81. 1992 “Recipienti rituali fenici e punici dalla Sardegna”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 20 (1992), pp. 123‐142. 1996 La Necropoli di Bitia I (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 38), Roma 1996. 2003 “Un vaso caliciforme da Bitia”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 31, 2 (2003), pp. 169‐171. 2005 “Nuove testimonianze sui commerci sulcitani”, in L. Nigro (a cura di), Mozia ‐ XI. Il Tempio del Kothon. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII e XXIV (2003‐2004) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, II), Roma 2005, pp. 563‐578. 2009 “Testimonianze dalla necropoli fenicia di Sulky”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 7 (2009), pp. 71‐80. 2011 “Ceramica fenicia della Collezione Giacomina di Sant’Antioco (Sardegna)”, Tharros Felix 4 (Collana del Dipartimento di Storia dell’Università degli Studi di Sassari 39) (2011), pp. 421‐436. 2012 “Appunti sul Tofet”, in V. Nizzo ‐ L. La Rocca (a cura di), Antropologia e Archeologia a confronto: rappresentazioni e pratiche del sacro. Atti dell'Incontro Internazionale di studi. Roma, Museo Nazionale Preistorico Etnografico “Luigi Pigorini”, 20‐21 Maggio 2011, Roma 2012, pp. 215‐221. 2013 “Urne e stele nel tofet non sono contemporanee”, Sardinia, Corsica et Baleares Antiquae 11 (2013), pp. 75‐76. Bechtold, B. 2007 “Die phönizisch‐punische Gebrauchskeramik der archaischen bis spätpunischen Zeit”, in H.G. Niemeyer ‐ R.F. Docter ‐ K. Schmidt ‐ B. Bechtold, Kartago. Die Ergebnisse der Hamburger Grabung unter dem Decumanus Maximus (Hamburger Forschungen zur Archäologie, 2), Mainz am Rhein 2007, pp. 327‐431. Bechtold, B. ‐ Docter, R.F. 2010 “Transport Amphorae from Punic Carthage: an overview”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Motya and the Phoenician Ceramic Repertoire between the Levant and the West, 9th‐6th Century BC. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Rome, 26th February 2010 (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, V), Rome 2010, pp. 85‐116. Ben‐Tor, A. ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg, A. 2015 “Iron Age IIA‐B: Northern Valleys and Upper Galilee”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 135‐188. Benedettini, G. 2007 “Le produzioni ceramiche medio‐italiche di Età Orientalizzante”, in G. Bartoloni (ed.), Il Museo delle Antichità Etrusche e Italiche. II. Dall’incontro con il mondo greco alla romanizzazione, Roma 2007, pp. 31‐ 134. Bernardini, P. 1988 “S. Antioco: area del Cronicario (campagne di scavo 1983‐1986). L’insediamento fenicio”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 16 (1988), pp. 75‐89.
[114]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
1990 “S. Antioco: area del Cronicario. La ceramica fenicia: le forme aperte”, Rivista di Studi Fenici XVII (1990), pp. 81‐99. 1993 “La Sardegna e i Fenici. Appunti sulla colonizzazione”, Rivista di Studi Fenici XXI, 1 (1993), pp. 29‐81. Bietti Sestieri, A.M. 1988 “The ‘Mycenaean connection’ and its impact on the central Mediterranean societies”, Dialoghi di Archeologia 6 (1988), pp. 23‐51. Bikai, P.M. 1978 The Pottery of Tyre, Warminster 1978. 1987 The Phoenician Pottery of Cyprus, Nicosia 1987. Bisi, A.M. 1966 ‘Kypriakà’. Contributi allo studio della componente cipriota della civiltà punica, Roma 1966, pp. 54‐69. 1969 “La ceramica a decorazione dipinta della Sicilia fenicio‐punica”, Sicilia Archeologica 6 (1969), pp. 11‐20. 1974 “Le componenti mediterranee e le costanti tipologiche della ceramica punica”, in E. Ripoll Perelló (ed.), Simposio Internacional de Colonizaciones, Barcelona 1971, Barcelona 1974, pp. 15‐23. Boldrini, S. 1994 Le ceramiche ioniche (Gravisca. Scavi nel santuario greco, 4), Bari 1994. Bondì, S.F. 2012 “Tucidide e i Fenici in Sicilia: una proposta di interpretazione”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 40 (2012), pp. 57‐66. 2014 “Phoenicity, punicities”, in J. Crawley Quinn ‐ N. Vella (eds.), The Punic Mediterranean: Identities and Identification from Phoenician Settlement to Roman Rule (British School at Rome Studies), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2014, pp. 58‐68. Bordreuil, M.P. ‐ Doumet‐Serhal, Cl. 2013 “Un nouveau temple phénicien à Sidon”, in Compte Rendu de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles‐Lettres 2013/1, pp. 83‐102. Botto, M. 2006 “Da Sulky a Huelva: considerazioni sui commerci fenici nel Mediterraneo antico”, Annali dell’Istituto Universitario di Napoli, Sez. Archeologia e Storia Antica 11‐12 (2004‐2005) [2006], pp. 9‐27. 2014 Los Fenicios en la Baha de Cádiz. Nuevas investigaciones (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 46), Pisa‐Roma 2014. Braemer, F. 1982 L’architecture domestique du Levant à l’âge du fer, (Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations Cahiers 8), Paris 1982. Briend, J. ‐ Humbert, J‐B. 1980 Tell Keisan (1971‐1976), une cité phénicienne en Galilée (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Series Archaeologica 1), Paris 1980. Broodbank, C. 2015 The Making of the ‘Middle Sea’. A History of the Mediterranean from the Beginning to the Emergence of the Classical World, London: Thames & Hudson 2015. Buchner, G. 1964 “Metropoli e colonie di Magna Grecia”, in Metropoli e colonie di Magna Grecia. Atti del III Convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia tenuto a Taranto dal 13 al 17 ottobre 1963, Napoli 1964, pp. 263‐274. 1982 “Die Beziehungen zwischen der euböischen Kolonie Pithekoussai auf der Insel Ischia und dem nordwestsemitischen Mittelmeerraum in der zweiten Hälfte des 8. Jhs. v. Chr.”, in H.G. Niemeyer (Hrsg.), Phönizier im Westen. Die Beiträge des Internationalen Symposiums über ‘Die phönizische Expansion im westlichen Mittelmeerraum’ in Köln vom 24. Bis 27. April 1979 (Madrider Beiträge, Band 8), Mainz am Rhein 1982, pp. 277‐306. Bunimovitz, S. ‐ Faust, A. 2003 “The Four RoomHouse: Embodying Israelite Society”, Near Eastern Archaeology 66 (2003), pp. 22‐31. Byblos II M. Dunand, Fouilles de Byblos, Tome II, 1933‐1938, Paris 1950‐1958. Caltabiano, A. ‐ Spagnoli, F. 2010 “Mozia: la ceramica fenicia arcaica dal sondaggio stratigrafico III nella Zona D”, in L. Nigro (a cura di), Motya and the Phoenician Ceramic Repertoire between the Levant and the West, 9th‐6th Century BC. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Rome, 26th February 2010 (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, V), Roma 2010, pp. 117‐149. Campisi, L. 2003 “La ceramica indigena a decorazione dipinta”, in F. Spatafora (ed.), Monte Maranfusa. Un insediamento nella media valle del Belice: l’abitato indigeno (Beni culturali Palermo, 7), Palermo 2003, pp. 157‐228. Chapman, S.V. 1972 “A catalogue of Iron Age Pottery of the Cemeteries of Khirbet Silm, Joya, Qrayé and Qashmieh of South Lebanon, whit a note on the Iron Age Pottery of the American University Museum, Beirut”, Berytus 21 (1972), pp. 55‐194. Charaf, H. 2008 “Arqa during the Bronze Age: Connections with the West”, in C. Doumet‐Serhal ‐ A. Rabate ‐ A. Resek (eds.), Networking Patterns of the Bronze and Iron Age Levant. The Lebanon and its Mediterranean Connections. On the occasion of the symposium “Interconnections in the Eastern Mediterranean. The
[115]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
Lebanon in the Bronze and Iron Ages”, 4‐9 November 2008 (Archaeology and History in the Lebanon ‐ Special Edition), Beirut 2008, pp. 121‐150. Ciasca, A. 1969 “Il Tofet. Lo scavo del 1968”, in A. Ciasca ‐ M.G. Guzzo Amadasi ‐ G. Matthiae Scandone ‐ B. Olivieri Pugliese ‐ A. Cutroni Tusa ‐ V. Tusa, Mozia ‐ V. Rapporto preliminare della Missione congiunta con la Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale (Studi Semitici, 31), Roma 1969, pp. 37‐52. 1970 “Il Tofet. Lo scavo del 1969”, in A. Ciasca ‐ M.G. Guzzo Amadasi ‐ S. Moscati ‐ V. Tusa, Mozia ‐ VI. Rapporto preliminare della Missione congiunta con la Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale (Studi Semitici, 37), Roma 1970, pp. 65‐81. 1978a “Mozia 1977. Scavi alle mura (campagna 1977)”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 6 (1978), pp. 227‐245. 1978b “Il tophet. Lo scavo del 1972 e 1973”, in A. Ciasca ‐ G. Coacci Polselli ‐ N. Cuomo Di Caprio ‐ M.G. Guzzo Amadasi ‐ G. Matthiae Scandone ‐ V. Tusa ‐ A. Tusa Cutroni ‐ M.L. Uberti, Mozia ‐ IX. Rapporto preliminare della Missione congiunta con la Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale (Studi Semitici, 50), Roma 1978, pp. 125‐143. 1979 “Scavi alle mura di Mozia (campagna 1978)”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 7 (1979), pp. 207‐227. 1980 “Mozia 1979. Scavi alle mura (campagna 1979)”, Rivista di Studi Fenici 8 (1980), pp. 237‐252. 1983 “Note moziesi”, in Sabatino Moscati (ed.), Atti del I Congresso Internazionale di Studi Fenici e Punici. Roma, 5‐10 Novembre 1979 (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 16), vol. III, Roma 1983, pp. 617‐621. 1985 "A proposito di anfore fenicie", in M. Liverani, A Palmieri, R. Peroni (eds.), Studi di Paletnologia in onore di Salvatore M. Puglisi, Roma 1985, pp. 323‐327. 1987 “Note sul repertorio ceramico fenicio di occidente”, Dialoghi di Archeologia 5, 2 (1987), pp. 7‐12. 1990a “Considerazioni su Mozia fenicia”, in G. Pisano (ed.), Da Mozia a Marsala. Un crocevia della civiltà mediterranea, Marsala 4‐5 aprile 1987, Roma 1990, pp. 117‐121. 1990b “Sulle necropoli di Mozia”, Sicilia Archeologica 72 (1990), pp. 7‐11. 1992 “Mozia: sguardo d’insieme sul tofet”, Vicino Oriente 8 (1992), pp. 113‐155. 1994 “Osservazioni sulla colonizzazione fenicia”, in S. Mazzoni (ed.), Nuove Fondazioni nel Vicino Oriente antico: realtà e ideologia (Seminari di Orientalistica, 4), Pisa 1994. 1996 “La ceramica fenicia in Sicilia e i suoi rapporti con le produzioni coeve” in D. Palermo et alii (eds.), I vasi attici ed altre ceramiche coeve in Sicilia (Atti Convegno Internazionale Catania, Camarina, Gela, Vittoria 1990) [Cronache di Archeologia, 30 (1991)], Catania 1996, pp. 176‐187. 1999 “Sicilia e Malta. Note sui repertori ceramici a confronto”, in A. Gonzáles Prats (ed.), La cerámica fenicia en Occidente: centros de producción y áreas de comercio. Actas del I Seminario Internacional sobre Temas Fenicios, Guardamar del Segura, 21‐24 de noviembre de 1997, Alicante 1999, pp. 69‐87. 2000 “Imitazioni di forme esterne nella ceramica di Malta”, in M.E. Aubet ‐ M. Barthélemy (eds.), Actas del IV Congreso Internacional de Estudios Fenicios y Púnicos, Cádiz, 2 al 6 de Octubre de 1995, Cádiz 2000, pp. 1287‐1296. Cintas, P. 1970 Manuel d’archéologie punique, I. Historie et archéologie comparées. Chronologie des temps archaïques de Carthage et des villes phéniciennes de l’ouest (Collection des Manuels d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Art), Paris 1970. Coldstream, J.N. 1968 Greek Geometric Pottery, London 1968. CVA Kassel I R. Lullies, Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, Deutschland. Kassel, Antikenabteilung der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen, Band 1 (Deutschland, Band 35), München 1972. CVA Gela I M. Cristofani Martelli, Corpus Vasorun Antiquorum, Italia. Museo archeologico Nazionale di Gela, fascicolo 1. Collezione Navarra (Italia, fascicolo 52), Roma 1972. D’Andrea B. 2014 I Tofet del Nord Africa dall’età arcaica all’età romana (VIII sec. a.C.‐ II sec. d.C.). Studi archeologici (Collezione di Studi fenici, 45), Pisa‐Roma 2014. Dehl von Kaenel, C. 1994 “Keramik als Handelsware. Zum Vertrieb korinthischer Keramik in das Malophoros‐Heiligtum in Selinunt”, Münstersche Beiträge zur antiken Handelsgeschichte 13, 1 (1994), pp. 55‐82. 1995 Die archaische Keramik aus dem Malophoros‐Heiligtum in Selinunt. Die korinthischen, lakonischen, ostgriechischen, etruskischen und megarischen Importe sowie die “argivisch‐monochrome” und lokale Keramik aus den alten Grabungen (Antikensammlung, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz), Berlin 1995. Delgado, A. 2016 “Mujeres, grupos domésticos y prácticas cotidianas en las comunidades fenicias y púnicas occidentales”, in B. Costa Ribas (ed.), Aspectos de la vida y de la muerte en las sociedades fenicio‐púnicas. XXIX Jornadas de Arqueología Fenicio‐púnica (Evissa, 2014) (Treballs del Museu Arqueològic d’Eivissa i Formentera, 74), Evissa 2016, pp. 47‐84. Dietler, M. ‐ Lopez Ruiz, C. (eds.) 2009 Colonial Encounters in Ancient Iberia: Phoenician, Greek, and Indigenous Relations, Chicago 2009.
[116]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
Di Stefano, C.A. 2003 “Motye: a bridge between Carthage and the Tyrrenian Sea”, in N.Chr. Stampolidis (ed.), Sea Routes…From Sidon to Huelva. Interconnections in the Mediterranean, 16th ‐ 6th BC, Athens 2003, pp. 194‐195. Docter, R.F. 2007 “Published Settlement Contexts of Punic Carthage”, Carthage Studies 1 (2007), pp. 37‐76. 2013 “Bichrome Ware Amphoras from Al‐Mina, Kition, and Carthage”, in O. Lorenz ‐ S. Ribichini ‐ W. Watson ‐ J. Zamora (eds.), Ritual, religion and reason: studies in the Ancient World in honour of Paolo Xella (Alter Orient und Altes Testament, 404), Münster 2013, pp. 89‐102 Docter, R.F. et alii 2007 R.F. Docter ‐ F. Chelbi ‐ B.M. Telmini ‐ H.G. Niemeyer ‐ A. de Wulf, “Punic Carthage: Two decades of archaeological investigations”, in J.L. Lopez Castro (ed.), Las Ciudad fenicio‐púnicas in el Mediterraneo Occidental (Centro de Estudios Fenicios y Púnicos, 7), Almeria 2007, pp. 85‐104. Dothan, T. 1989 “The Arrival of the Sea Peoples: Cultural Diversity in Early Iron Age Canaan”, in S. Gitin ‐ W. Dever (eds.), Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology (AASOR 49), Winona Lake 1989, pp. 1‐22. Doumet‐Serhal, C. 2004 “Jars from the First Millennium BC at Tell Rachidiyeh: Phoenician Cinerary Urns and Grave Goods”, in C. Doumet‐Serhal (ed.), Decade. A decade of Archaeology and History in the Lebanon, Beirut 2004, pp. 70‐79. 2006 “Preliminary Report on the Iron Age at Sidon: British Museum Excavations 2003‐2004”, Archaeology and History in the Lebanon 23 (2006), pp. 2‐29. 2008 “The Kingdom of Sidon and its Mediterranean Connections”, in C. Doumet‐Serhal ‐ A. Rabate ‐ A. Resek (eds.), Networking Patterns of the Bronze and Iron Age Levant. The Lebanon and its Mediterranean Connections. On the occasion of the symposium “Interconnections in the Eastern Mediterranean. The Lebanon in the Bronze and Iron Ages”, 4‐9 November 2008 (Archaeology and History in the Lebanon ‐ Special Edition), Beirut 2008, pp. 1‐63. Falsone, G. 2006 “Il ‘vaso di Bocchoris’ da Marsala: opera egizia o fenicia?”, in P. Mina (ed.), Imagines et iura personarum. L’uomo nell’Egitto antico, per i novanta anni di Sergio Donadoni, Atti del IX Convegno Internazionale di Egittologia e Papirologia (Palermo 2004) (Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’Università di Palermo. Studi e Ricerche, 48), Palermo 2006, pp. 93‐112. Famà, M.L. ‐ Toti, M.P. 2000 “Materiali dalla ‘Zona E’ dell’abitato di Mozia. Prime considerazioni”, in AA.VV., Atti delle Terze Giornate Internazionali di Studi sull’Area Elima, Gibellina ‐ Erice ‐ Contessa Entellina, 23‐26 ottobre 1997, Pisa‐ Gibellina 2000, pp. 451‐478. 2005 “Materiali inediti dalla collezione ‘G. Whitaker’ di Mozia”, in A. Spanò Giammellaro (ed.), Atti del V Congresso Internazionale di Studi Fenici e Punici (Marsala‐Palermo 2‐8 ottobre 2000), Palermo 2005, pp. 615‐630. Fantar, M.H. 1997 Fenici e cartaginesi (Enciclopedia del Mediterraneo), Tunis 1997. Finkbeiner, U. 1981 “Untersuchungen zur Stratigraphie des Obeliskentempels in Byblos. Versuch einer methodischen Auswertung”, Baghdader Mitteilungen, 12 (1981), pp. 13‐69. Finkelstein, I ‐ Zimhoni, O. ‐ Kafri, A. 2000 “The Iron Age Pottery Assemblages from Areas F, K and H and their Stratigraphic and Chronological Implications”, in I. Finkelstein ‐ D. Ussishkin ‐ B. Halpern (eds.), Megiddo III. The 1992‐1996 Seasons (Tel Aviv University, Monograph Series No. 18), Tel Aviv 2000, pp. 244‐234. Frasca, M. ‐ Fouilland, F. 1994 “Monte Casasia (Ragusa). Campagne di scavo 1966, 1972‐73, nella necropoli indigena”, Notizie degli Scavi d’Antichità (1994), pp. 323‐583. Giardino, S. 2011 “La ceramica fenicia arcaica dalla Zona F di Mozia”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Mozia ‐ XIII. Zona F. La Porta Ovest e la Fortezza Occidentale. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII ‐ XXVII (2003‐2007) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, VI), Roma 2011, pp. 103‐107. Giglio, R. 2012 “Il restauro e la valorizzazione del Tofet di Mozia”, in C. Ampolo (ed.), Sicilia occidentale. Studi, rassegne, ricerche. Atti delle settime giornate internazionali di studi sull’area elima e la Sicilia occidentale nel contesto mediterraneo, Erice, 12‐15 ottobre 2009. Workshop «G. Nenci» diretto da Carmine Ampolo, Vol. II (Seminari e Convegni, 29), Pisa 2012, pp. 219‐223. Gilboa, A. 1999 “The Dynamics of Phoenician Bichrome Pottery: A View from Tel Dor”, in Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 316, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1999, pp. 1‐22.
[117]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
2015a “Iron Age IIC: Northern Coast, Carmel Coast, Galilee, and Jezreel Valley” in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 301‐326. 2015b “Cypriot Imports and Local Imitations”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 2, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 483‐503. Gitin, S. 2003 “The Philistines: Neighbors of the Canaanites, Phoenicians and Israelites”, in D.R. Clarks ‐ V.H. Matthew (eds.), One Hundred Years of American Archaeology in the Middle East. Proceedings of the American Schools of Oriental Research Centennial Celebration, Washington DC, April 2000, Boston 2003, pp. 57‐85. 2015 “Iron Age IIC: Philistia” in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 383‐418. Gjerstad, E. 1948 The Swedish Cyprus Expedition (SCE) IV.2. The Cypro‐Geometric, Cypro‐ Archaic and Cypro‐Classical Periods, Stockholm 1948. Gonzales de Canales Cerisola, F. 2004 Del Occidente mítico griego a Tarsis‐Tarteso. Fuentes escritas y documentación arqueológica, Madrid 2004. Gonzales de Canales Cerisola, F. et alii 2008 F. Gonzales de Canales ‐ L. Serrano Pichardo ‐ J. Llompart Gómez, “Tarsis y la monarquía unificada de Israel. Con un Addendum sobre la deposición primaria de los materiales de época emporitana‐precolonial exhumados en Huelva”, Gerión 26, 1 (2008), pp. 61‐88. Gonzàlez Prats, A. 2011 La Fonteta. Excavaciones de 1996‐2002 en la colonia fenicia de la actual desembocadura del río Segura (Guardamar del Segura, Alicante), Vol. 1, Alicante 2011. Grau Zimmermann, B. 1978 “Phönikische Metallkannen in den orientalisierenden Horizonten des Mittelmeerraumes”, Madrider Mitteilungen 19 (1978), pp. 161‐218. Gubel, E. 2006 “Notes on Phoenician Component of the Orientalizing Horizon”, in C. Riva and N. Vella (eds.), Debating Orientalization: Multidisciplinary Approaches Change in the Ancient Mediterranean, London‐ Oakville 2006, pp. 85‐93. Guirguis, M. 2012 “Monte Sirai 2005‐2010. Bilanci e prospettive”, Vicino Oriente 16 (2012), pp. 97‐130. 2016 “Da Elissa ad Annibale, tra Tiro e Cartagine: sei secoli di connessioni mediterranee tra Oriente e Occidente”, Cartagine, Studi e Ricerche 1 (2016), pp. 1‐33. Guirguis, M. ‐ Unali, A. 2016 “La fondazione di Sulky tra IX e VIII secolo a.C.: riflessioni sulla cultura materiale dei più antichi livelli fenici (area del Cronicario ‐ Settore II ‐ scavi 2013‐2014)”, in A. Cazzella (a cura di), Ubi Minor…. Le isole minori del Mediterraneo centrale dal Neolitico ai primi contatti coloniali. Convegno di Studi in ricordo di Giorgio Buchner, a 100 anni dalla nascita (1914 – 2014) (Scienze dell’Antichità 22.2), Roma 2016, pp. 81‐96. Guizzi, F. 2011 “Mozia: l’attracco”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Motya XIII, Zona F. La Porta Ovest e la Fortezza Occidentale. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII ‐ XXVII (2003‐2007) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica VI), Roma 2011, pp. 456‐463. Guzzo, P.G. 1979 “Mozia 1979. Analisi preliminare di ceramiche non puniche d’importazione”, Rivista di Sudi Fenici 7 (1979), pp. 253‐263. Harden, D.B. 1937 “The Pottery from the Precinct of Tanit at Carthage”, Iraq 4 (1937), pp. 59‐69. Harrison, T.P. 2004 Megiddo 3: Final Report on the Stratum VI Excavations (Oriental Institute Publications, 127). With contributions by D.L. Esse, A. Graham, R.G.V. Hancock, and P. Paice, Chicago: The Oriental Institute 2004. Heinz, M. et alii 2010 M. Heinz ‐ S. Kulemann‐Ossen ‐ J. Linke ‐ E. Wagner, Kamid el‐Loz. Intermediary between the Cultures – More than 10 years of archaeological research in Kamid el‐Loz (1997 ‐ 2007) (BAAL Hors‐Série VII), Beyrouth 2010. Herzog, Z. ‐ Singer‐Avitz, L. 2015 “Iron Age IIA‐B: Judah and the Negev”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 213‐255. Hitchcock, L. A. ‐ Maeir, A.M. 2016 “A Pirates’ Life for Me: The Maritime Culture of the Sea People”, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 148 (2016), pp. 245‐264.
[118]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
Jamieson, A.S. 2011 “The Iron Age Pottery from Tell Beirut 1995 ‐ Bey 032: Periods 1 and 2”, in Sagona (ed.), Ceramics of the Phoenician‐Punic World: Collected Essays (Ancient Near Eastern Studies, Supplement 36), Leuven ‐ Paris Walpole, M.A. 2011, pp. 7‐276. Kamlah, J. 2012 Temple Building and Temple Cult: Architecture and Cultic Paraphernalia of Temples in the Levant (2.‐1. Mill. B.C.E.) (Abhandlungen des Deutschen Palästina‐Vereins 41), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2012. Kang, H.G. ‐ Garfinkel, Y. 2009 “The Early Iron Age IIA Pottery”, in Y. Garfinkel ‐ S. Ganor (eds.), Khirbet Qeiyafa Vol. 1. The 2007‐2008 Excavation seasons (Israel Exploration Society), Jerusalem 2009, pp. 119‐149 Karageorghis, V. et alii 1981 Excavations at Kition, IV. The non‐Cypriote pottery, Nicosia 1981. Killebrew, A.E. 1999 “Late Bronze Age and Iron I Cooking Pots in Canaan: A Typological, Technological, and Functional Study”, in T. Kapitan (ed.), Archaeology, History and Culture in Palestine and the Near East. Essays in Memory of Albert E. Glock (ASOR Books Review, volume 3), Atlanta 1999, 83‐126. Knapp, B. ‐ Van Dommelen, P. (eds.) 2014 The Cambridge Prehistory of the Bronze and Iron Age Mediterranean, Cambridge 2014. Isserlin, B.S.J ‐ du Plat Taylor, J. 1974 B.S.J. Isserlin ‐ J. du Plat Taylor, Motya. A Phoenician and Carthaginian City in Sicily. A report of the excavations undertaken during the years 1961‐65 on behalf of the University of Leeds, the Institute of Ar‐ chaeology of London University and Farleigh Dickinson University, New Jersey, I. Field Work and Excavation, Leiden 1974. Lamon, R.S. ‐ Shipton G.M. 1939 Megiddo I. Seasons of 1925‐34, Strata I‐V (The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications, Volume XLII), Chicago, Illinois 1939. Lancel, S. 1982 “Les niveaux funéraires”, in S. Lancel, ‐ J.‐P. Morel ‐ J.‐P. Thuillier (eds.), Rapports préliminaires sur les fouilles 1977‐1978: niveaux et vestiges puniques, Rome 1982, pp. 261‐364. Lehmann, G. 1996 Untersuchungen zur späten Eisenzeit in Syria und Libanon. Stratigraphie und Keramikformen zwischen ca. 720 bis 300 v. Chr. (Altertumskunde des Vorderen Orients, Archäologische Studien zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients, 5), Munster 1996. 2015 “Iron Age IIA–B: Northern Coastal Plain”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 115‐133. Lentini, M.C. 2003 “Naxos in Sicily”, in N.Chr. Stampolidis (ed.), Sea Routes…From Sidon to Huelva. Interconnections in the Mediterranean, 16th ‐ 6th BC, Athens 2003, pp. 187‐189. Lippolis, E. 1994 Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto. III,1 Taranto. La necropoli: aspetti e problemi della documentazione archeologica dal VII al I sec. a.C., Taranto 1994. Lo Porto, F.G. 1978 “Le importazioni della Grecia dell’Est in Puglia”, in AA.VV. Les Céramiques de la Grèce de l’Est et leur diffusion en Occident. Centre Jean Bérard. Institut français de Naples, 6‐9 juillet 1976 (Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique n. 569, Sciences Humaines), Paris ‐ Naples 1978, pp. 131‐136. Lopez Castro, J.L. 2006 “Colonials, merchants and alabaster vases: the western Phoenician aristocracy”, in Antiquity 80 (2006), 74‐88. Lopez Castro, J.L. et alii 2016 J.L. Lopez Castro ‐ A. Ferjaoui ‐ A. Mederos Martín ‐ V. Martínez Hahnmüller ‐ I. Ben Jerbania, “La colonización fenicia inicial en el Mediterráneo Central: nuevas excavaciones arqueológicas en Utica (Túnez)”, Trabahos de Prehistoria 73, 1 (2016), pp. 68‐89. Marazzi, M. 2014 “Prima dei Fenici. I Micenei nel Mediterraneo tra espansione e collasso”, in A. Accardi (ed.), Ricordando Baudrel. Mediterraneo, un mare condiviso. Atti delle giornate di studio, Palermo 28 maggio, Ustica 29 maggio 2010, Palermo 2014, pp. 65‐86. Matthiae, P. 1993 “Ancora una fabbrica sacra nel paese di Unqi”, Contributi e Materiali di Archeologia Orientale 4 (1992), Roma 1993, pp. 123‐140. Mazar, A. 2015 “Iron Age I: Northern Coastal Plain, Galilee, Samaria, Jezreel Valley, Judah, and Negev”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 5‐70.
[119]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
Mégara Hyblaea 2 G. Vallet ‐ F. Villard, Mégara Hyblaea 2. La céramique archäique (École Française de Rome. Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire. Supplément, 1), Paris 1964. Neeft, C.W. 1975 “Corinthian Fragments from Argos at Utrecht and the Corinthian Late Geometric Kotyle”, Bulletin Antieke Beschaving 50, 2 (1975), pp. 97‐134. 1981 “Observations on the Thapos class”, Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome. Antiquité 93, 1 (1981), pp. 7‐ 88. 1987 Protocorinthian Subgeometric Aryballoi (Allard Pierson Series, 7), Amsterdam 1987. Negueruela Martínez, I. 1980 “Sobre la ceramica de engobe rojo en España”, Habis 10‐11 (1980), pp. 335‐359. Niemyer, H.G. 1985 “El yacimiento fenicio de Toscanos: urbanística y función”, Aula Orientalis 3 (1985), pp. 109‐126. Niemeyer, H.G. ‐ Schubart, H. 1975 Trayamar, die phönizischen Kamergräber und die Niederlassung an der Algarrobo‐Mündung (Madrider Beiträge 4), Mainz 1975. Nigro, L. 1994 Ricerche sull’architettura palaziale della Palestina nelle Età del Bronzo e del Ferro. Contesto archeologico e sviluppo storico (Contributi e Materiali di Archeologia Orientale, V), Roma 1994. 2004 L. Nigro (ed.), Mozia ‐ X. Zona C. Il Kothon. Zona D. Le pendici occidentali dell’Acropoli. Zona F. La porta ovest. Rapporto preliminare della XXII campagna di scavi ‐ 2002 condotta congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, I), Roma 2004. 2007 L. Nigro (ed.), Mozia ‐ XII. Zona D. La “Casa del sacello domestico”, il “Basamento meridionale” e il Sondaggio stratigrafico I. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII e XXIV (2003‐2004) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, III), Roma 2007. 2009 “Il Tempio del Kothon e il ruolo delle aree sacre nello sviluppo urbano di Mozia dall’VIII al IV secolo a.C.”, in S. Helas ‐ D. Marzoli (Hrsg.), Phönizisch und punisches Städtewesen. Akten der internationalen Tagung in Rom vom 21. bis 23. Februar 2007 (Iberia Archaeologica Band 13), Mainz am Rhein 2009, pp. 241‐270. 2010a “Alle origini di Mozia: stratigrafia e ceramica del Tempio del Kothon dall’VIII al VI secolo a.C.”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Motya and the Phoenician Ceramic Repertoire between the Levant and the West, 9th‐6th Century BC. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Rome, 26th February 2010 (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, V), Rome 2010, pp. 1‐48. 2010b “L’orientamento astrale del Tempio del Kothon di Mozia”, in E. Antonello (ed.), Il cielo e l’uomo: problemi e metodi di astronomia culturale. Atti del VII Convegno Nazionale della Società Italiana di Archeoastronomia. Roma, Museo Nazionale Romano, Terme di Diocleziano. 28‐29 settembre 2007, Roma 2010, pp. 15‐24. 2011 L. Nigro (ed.), Mozia ‐ XIII. Zona F. La Porta Ovest e la Fortezza Occidentale. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII ‐ XXVII (2003‐2007) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, VI), Roma 2011. 2012a “From Tyre to Motya: the temples and the rise of a Phoenician colony”, in A.M. Afeiche (ed.), L'Histoire de Tyr au témoinages de l'archéologie. Actes du Séminaire International. Tyr 2011 (BAAL Hors‐Série VIII), Beyrouth 2012, pp. 233‐248. 2012b “Scavi e restauri dell’Università di Roma ‘La Sapienza’ a Mozia, 2007‐2009: il Tempio del Kothon, il Temenos Circolare, il Sacello di Astarte e il Tofet”, in C. Ampolo (a cura di), Sicilia occidentale. Studi, rassegne, ricerche. Atti delle settime giornate internazionali di studi sull’area elima e la Sicilia occidentale nel contesto mediterraneo, Erice, 12‐15 ottobre 2009. Workshop «G. Nenci» diretto da Carmine Ampolo, Vol. II (Seminari e Convegni, 29), Pisa 2012, pp. 207‐218. 2012c “The Temple of the Kothon at Motya, Sicily: Phoenician Religious Architecture from the Levant to the West”, in M. Gruber ‐ S. Ahituv ‐ G. Lehmann ‐ Z. Talshir (eds.). All the Wisdom of the East. Studies in Near Eastern Archaeology and History in Honor of Eliezer D. Oren (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 255), Friburg 2012, pp. 293‐331. 2013a “Before the Greeks: the earliest Phoenician settlement in Motya ‐ recent discoveries by Rome «La Sapienza» Expedition”, Vicino Oriente 17 (2013), pp. 39‐74 2013b “Il Tofet e la città. Il limite meridionale del Santuario e le strutture collegate negli scavi della Sapienza 2010‐2011”, Scienze dell’Antichità 19/1 (2013), pp. 37‐53. 2014a “An Absolute Iron Age Chronology of the Levant and the Mediterranean”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Overcoming catastrophes. Essays on disastrous agents’ characterization and resilience strategies in pre‐classical Southern Levant (ROSAPAT 11), Rome 2014, pp. 261‐269. 2014b The so‐called “Kothon” at Motya. The Sacred Pool of Baal ’Addir/Poseidon in the light of recent archaeological investigations by Rome «La Sapienza» University ‐ 2005‐2013. Stratigraphy, architecture and finds (Quaderni di archeologia fenicio‐punica/Colour Monograph 03), Rome 2014.
[120]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
2015a “Mozia tra VI e V secolo a.C. Monumentalizzazione e organizzazione socio‐politica: un nuovo modello”, in M.P. Baglione ‐ L. Michetti (eds.), Le lamine d’oro a cinquant’anni dalla scoperta. Dati archeologici su Pyrgi nell’epoca di Thefarie Velians e rapporti con altre realtà del Mediterraneo (Scienze dell’Antichità 21.2), Roma 2015, pp. 225‐245. 2015b “Temples in Motya and their Levantine prototypes: Phoenician religious architectural tradition”, in A.M. Maila‐Afeiche (ed.), Cult and Ritual on the Levantine Coast and its impact on the Eastern Mediterranean Realm. Proceedings of the International Symposium Beirut 2012 (BAAL Hors‐Série X), Beyrouth 2015, pp. 83‐108. 2016 “Mozia nella preistoria e le rotte levantine: i prodromi della colonizzazione fenicia tra secondo e primo millennio a.C. nei recenti scavi della Sapienza”, in A. Cazzella (a cura di), Ubi Minor…. Le isole minori del Mediterraneo centrale dal Neolitico ai primi contatti coloniali. Convegno di Studi in ricordo di Giorgio Buchner, a 100 anni dalla nascita (1914 – 2014) (Scienze dell’Antichità 22.2), Roma 2016, pp. 339‐362. In press “Mozia e l’espansione fenicia verso Occidente: dalla pre‐colonizzazione alla colonizzazione. Il primo insediamento presso le sorgenti del Kothon”, in J.L. Lopez Castro (ed.), Entre Utica y Gadir. Navegación y colonización fenicia en el Mediterráneo Occidental a comienzos del I milenio a.C., Madrid, in press. Nigro, L. ‐ Spagnoli, F. 2004 “Il Santuario del ‘Cappiddazzu’”, in L. Nigro ‐ G. Rossoni (eds.),«La Sapienza» a Mozia. Quarant’anni di ricerca archeologica, 1964‐2004. Catalogo della mostra, Università di Roma «La Sapienza», Facoltà di Scienze Umanistiche, Museo dell’Arte Classica, 27 febbraio ‐ 18 maggio 2004, Roma 2004, pp. 56‐61. 2012 Alle sorgenti del Kothon. Il rito a Mozia nell’Area sacra di Baal ‘Addir ‐ Poseidon. Lo scavo dei pozzi sacri nel Settore C Sud‐Ovest (2006‐2011) (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica/Colour Monograph 02), Roma 2012. Núñez Calvo, F.J. 2004 “II. Catalogue of Urns”, in M.E. Aubet, The Phoenician cemetery of Tyre‐Al Bass. Excavations 1997‐1999 (BAAL Hors‐Série I), Beyrouth 2004, pp. 63‐203. 2008 “Western Challenges to East Mediterranean Chronological Frameworks”, in D. Brandherm ‐ M. Trachsel (eds.), A New Dawn for the Dark Age? Shifting Paradigms in Mediterranean Iron Age Chronology/ L’âge obscur se fait‐il jour de nouveau? Les paradigmes change, Proceedings of the XV UISPP World Congress (Lisbon 4‐9 September 2006)/Actes du XV Congrès Mondial (Lisbonne 4‐9 Septembre 2006) Vol. 9 Session C53 (BAR S1871), Lisbona 2008, pp. 3‐27. 2008‐2009 “A snapshot of the Phoenician Ceramic Sequence: the neck‐ridge jug from Tell el‐Ghassil at the AUB Museum”, Berytus 51‐52 (2008‐2009), pp. 47‐70. 2011 “Tyre ‐ Al Bass. Potters and Cemeteries”, in C. Sagona (ed.), Ceramics of the Phoenician‐Punic World: Collected Essays (Ancient Near Eastern Studies, Supplement 36). Leuven ‐ Paris Walpole, M.A. 2011, "pp. 277‐296. 2012 “The al‐Bass funerary ceramic set”, in A.M. Maila‐Afeiche (ed.), Cult and ritual on the Levantine coasts and its impact on the Eastern Mediterranean realms. Proceedings of the International Symposium, Beirut 2012 (Baal Hors‐Série X), Beyrouth 2012, pp. 235‐254. Orsingher A. 2013 “La ceramica d’impasto a Mozia tra cultura fenicia e tradizione indigena”, in L. Girόn ‐ M. Lazarich ‐ M. Conceiçao Lopes (eds.), Actas del I Congreso Internacional sobre Estudios Cerámicos. Homenaje a la Dra. Mercedes Vegas. Cádiz, 1 al 5 de noviembre 2010 (Actas. Hystoria y Arte), Cádiz 2013, pp. 757‐790. 2015 “Vessel in Tophet sanctuaries: the archaic evidence and the Levantine connection”, in A.M. Maila‐Afeiche (ed.), Cult and Ritual on the Levantine Coast and its impact on the Eastern Mediterranean Realm. Proceedings of the International Symposium Beirut 2012 (BAAL Hors‐Série X), Beyrouth 2015, pp. 561‐590. 2016 “The ceramic repertoire of Motya: origins and development between the 8th and 6th centuries BC”, in F. Schön ‐ H. Töpfer (Hrsg.), Karthago Dialoge. Karthago und der punische Mittelmeerraum ‐ Kulturkontakte und Kulturtransfers im 1. Jahrtausend vor Christus (Ressourcen Kulturen Band 2), Tübingen 2016, pp. 283‐ 312. Ottosson, M. 1980 Temples and Cult Places in Palestine, (Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Civilization 12), Uppsala 1980. Payne, H. 1931 Necrocorinthia: a study of Corinthian art in the archaic period, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1931. Pellicer Catalán, M. 2007 La Necrópolis Laurita (Almuñeçar, granada) en el contexto de la colonización fenicia (Cuadernos de Arqueología Mediterránea 15), Navas de Tolosa: Edicions Bellaterra 2007. Perachora II T.J. Dunbabin, Perachora. The sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia. Pottery, ivories, scarabs, and other objects from the votive deposit of Hera Limenia excavated by Humfry Payne (Excavations of the British School of Archaeology at Athens, 1930‐1933, 2), Oxford 1962. Peserico, A. 1996 Le brocche “a fungo” fenicie nel Mediterraneo. Tipologia e cronologia (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 36), Roma 1996.
[121]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
2007 “Die phönizisch‐punische Feinkeramik archaischer Zeit Red Slip‐, Bichrome‐ und Glattwandige Ware (Plain Ware). Offene Formen”, in H.G. Niemeyer ‐ R.F. Docter ‐ K. Schmidt ‐ B. Bechtold (Hrsg.), Karthago. Die Ergebnisse der Hamburger Grabung unter dem Decumanus Maximus (Hamburger Forschungen zur Archäologie, 2), Mainz am Rhein 2007, pp. 271‐305. Pompianu, E. ‐ Unali, A. 2016 “Le origini della colonizzazione fenicia in Sardegna: Sulky”, Forum Romanum Belgicum 13.12 (2016). Principi Etruschi AA.VV., Principi etruschi tra Mediterraneo ed Europa. Catalogo della Mostra (Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico 2001), Venezia 2001. Prados Martínez, F.J. 2001‐2002 “Almacenes o centros redistribuidores de carácter sacro?. Una reflexión en torno a un modelo arquitectónico tipificado en la protohistoria mediterranea”, in Estudios Orientales 5‐6: 173‐180. Pritchard, J.B. 1975 Sarepta. A Preliminary Report on the Iron Age. Excavations of the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, 1970‐72, Philadelfia 1975. Ramón Torres, J. 1995 Las ánforas fenicio‐púnicas del Mediterráneo central y occidental (Instrumenta, 2), Barcelona 1995. 2010 “La cerámica fenicia del Mediterráneo extremo‐occidental y del Atlántico (s. VIII ‐ 1r. 1/3 del VI a.C.). Problemas y perspectivas actuals”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Motya and the Phoenician Ceramic Repertoire between the Levant and the West, 9th‐6th Century BC. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Rome, 26th February 2010 (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, V), Rome 2010, pp. 211‐253. Regev, D. 2004 “The Phoenician transport amphora”, in J. Eiring ‐ J. Lund (eds.), Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 5), Aarhus: Aarhus University press, pp. 337‐ 353. Ribichini, S 2004 “Sui riti funerari fenici e punici. Tra Archeologia e Storia delle religioni”, in A. González Prats (ed.), “El mundo funerario”. Actas del III Seminario internacional sobre temas fenicios (Guardamar del Segura, 3‐5 maggio 2002), Alicante 2004, pp. 43‐76. Riis, P.J. 1982 “Griechen in Phönizien”, in H.G. Niemeyer (Hrsg.), Phönizier im Westen. Die Beiträge des Internationalen Symposiums über ‘Die phönizische Expansion im westlichen Mittelmeerraum’ in Köln vom 24. Bis 27. April 1979 (Madrider Beiträge, Band 8), Mainz am Rhein 1982, pp. 237‐260. Ruiz Mata, D. 1991 “El túmulo 1 de la necrópolis de Las Cumbres”, in AA.VV., I‐IV Jornadas de arqueología fenicio‐púnica (Ibiza, 1986‐1989), (Trabajos del Museo Arqueologico de Ibiza y Formentera, 24), Ibiza 1991, pp. 207‐220. 2002 “The Ancient Phoenicians of the 8th and 7th Centuries BC in the Bay of Cadiz: State of the Research”, in M. Bierling ‐ S. Gitin (eds.), The Phoenicians in Spain: an archaeological review of the eighth‐sixth centuries B.C.E.: a collection of articles translated from Spanish, Winona Lake, Indiana 2002, pp. 155‐198. Saghieh, M. 1983 Byblos in the Third Millennium B.C.: A Reconstruction of the Stratigraphy and a Study of the Cultural Connections, Warminster 1983. Sagona, C. 2008 The Archaeology of Malta: From the Neolithic through the Roman Period, New York: Cambridge University Press 2015. Schubart, H. 1982 “Phönizische Niederlassungen am der Iberischen Südküste”, in H.G. Niemeyer (Hrsg.), Phönizier im Westen. Die Beiträge des Internationalen Symposiums über ‘Die phönizische Expansion im westlichen Mittelmeerraum’ in Köln vom 24. Bis 27. April 1979 (Madrider Beiträge, Band 8), Mainz am Rhein 1982, pp. 207‐231. Sharon, I. ‐ Zarzecki‐Peleg, A. 2006 “Podium Structures with Lateral Access: Authority Ploys in Royal Architecture in the Iron Age Levant”, in S. Gitin ‐ J.E. Wright ‐ J.P. Dessel (eds.), Confronting the Past. Archaeological and Historical Essays on Ancient Israel in Honor of William G. Dever, Winona Lake 2006, pp. 145‐167. Shiloh, Y. 1970 “The Four‐Room House ‐ Its Situation and Function in the Israelite City”, Israel Exploration Journal 20 (1970), pp. 180‐190. 1979 The Proto‐Aeolic Capital and Israelite Masonry, (Qedem. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology of Jerusalem 11), Jerusalem 1979. Spagnoli, F. 2007 “La ceramica comune punica dallo strato di pareggiamento US.1111 e dal riempimento della fossa F.1112b: il repertorio del VII‐VI secolo a.C.”, in L. Nigro (ed.), Mozia ‐ XII. Zona D. La “Casa del sacello domestico”, il “Basamento meridionale” e il Sondaggio stratigrafico I. Rapporto preliminare delle campagne di scavi XXIII e XXIV (2003‐2004) condotte congiuntamente con il Servizio Beni Archeologici della
[122]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
Soprintendenza Regionale per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Trapani (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐ Punica, III), Roma 2007, pp. 93‐102. 2007‐2008 “Sepolture intramurali a Mozia”, in G. Bartoloni ‐ M.G. Benedettini (a cura di), Atti del convegno internazionale Sepolti tra i vivi. Buried among the Living. Evidenza ed interpretazione di contesti funerari in abitato”, Roma, 26‐29 aprile 2006 (Scienze delle Antichità, 14), Roma 2007‐2008, pp. 323‐346. 2010 Cooking pots as an indicator of cultural relations between Levantine peoples in Late Bronze and Iron Ages. Origins, diffusion and typological development of cooking ware in Levantine and Cypriot repertoires (14th‐ 7th centuries BC) (Quaderni di Archeologia Fenicio‐Punica, vol. 4), Roma: Missione Archeologica Mozia 2010. 2012 “Un’anforetta dipinta dalla tomba T.177 di Mozia”, Vicino Oriente 16 (2012), pp. 303‐310. 2013 “Demetra a Mozia: evidenze dall’area sacra del Kothon nel V secolo a.C.” Vicino Oriente 17 (2013), pp. 153‐164. 2014 “Phoenician cities and water: the role of the sacred sources in to the urban development of Motya, western Sicily”, in T. Tvedt ‐ T. Oestigaard (eds.), A History of Water Series III. Volume 1: Water and Urbanization, London‐New York 2014, pp. 89‐106. Spanò Giammellaro, A. 2000 “La ceramica fenicia della Sicilia”, in P. Bartoloni ‐ L. Campanella (a cura di), La ceramica fenicia di Sardegna. Dati, problematiche, confronti. Atti del Primo Congresso Internazionale Sulcitano, Sant’Antioco, 19‐21 Settembre 1997 (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 40), Roma 2000, pp. 303‐331. Spatafora, F. 1980‐1981 “La ceramica preistorica”, in G. Falsone ‐ F. Spatafora ‐ A. Spanò Giammellaro ‐ M.L. Famà, “Gli scavi della ‘Zona K’ e il caso stratigrafico del Locus 5615”, in Kokalos XXVI‐XXVII (1980‐1981), pp. 877‐930. 2003 “La ceramica di impasto di età protostorica”, in F. Spatafora (ed.), Monte Maranfusa. Un insediamento nella media valle del Belice: l’abitato indigeno (Beni culturali Palermo, 7), Palermo 2003, pp. 89‐108. Stampolidis, N.Chr. (ed.) 2003 N.Chr. Stampolidis (ed.), Sea Routes…From Sidon to Huelva. Interconnections in the Mediterranean, 16th ‐ 6th BC, Athens 2003. Stern, E. 1992 “The Phoenicians Architectural Elements in Palestine during the Late Iron Age and the Persian Period”, in A. Kempinski ‐ R. Reich (eds.), The Architecture of Ancient Israel. From the Prehistoric to the Persian Period, Jerusalem 1992, pp. 302‐309. 2015a “Iron Age I‐II Phoenician Pottery”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 2, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 435‐ 482. 2015b “Iron Age IIC Assyrian‐type Pottery”, in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 2, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 533‐553. Tappy, R.E. 2015 “Iron Age IIA–B: Samaria” in S. Gitin (ed.), The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors, from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic Period, Vol. 1, Jerusalem 2015, pp. 185‐194. Tore, G. ‐ Gras, M. 1976 “Di alcuni reperti dall’antica Bithia (Torre di Chia‐Sardegna)”, Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome Antiquité, 88, 1 (1976), pp. 51‐94. Torelli, M. 2000 “Primi appunti per un’antropologia del vino degli Etruschi”, in C. Tomasi ‐ D. Cremonesi (eds.), L’avventura del vino nel bacino del Mediterraneo. Itinerari storici e archeologici prima e dopo Roma. Atti del simposio internazionale, Conegliano 30 settembre ‐ 2 ottobre 1998, Treviso 2000, pp. 89‐100. Torres Ortiz, M. et alii 2014 M. Torres Ortiz ‐ E. López Rosendo ‐ H‐M. Gener Basallote ‐ M. M. Navarro García ‐ J‐M. Pajuelo Sáez, “El material cerámico de los contextos fenicios del ‘Teatro Cómico’ de Cádiz : un análisis preliminar”, in M. Botto (ed.), Los Fenicios en la Bahía de Cádiz. Nuevas investigaciones (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 46), Pisa‐ Roma 2014, pp. 51‐82. Toti, M.P. 2002 “Anfore fenicie e puniche”, in M.L. Famà (ed.) Mozia. Gli scavi nella “Zona A” dell’abitato (Collana di Archeologia del Centro Internazionale di Studi Fenici, Punici e Romani, Comune di Marsala, 1), Bari 2002, pp. 275‐304. Tusa, S. 2008 “Gli elementi di interesse paletnologico nella Collezione Whitaker e la preistoria moziese”, in R. De Simone ‐ M.P. Toti (eds.), La Collezione Whitaker, Vol. I, Palermo 2008, pp. 67‐85. 2016 Primo Mediterraneo. Meditazioni sul mare più antico della storia. Modica: Edizioni di storia e studi sociali 2016. Tusa V. 1964 “Il Cappiddazzu. Lo scavo del 1964”, in A. Ciasca ‐ M. Forte ‐ G. Garbini ‐ S. Moscati ‐ B. Pugliese ‐ V. Tusa, Mozia ‐ I. Rapporto preliminare della Missione archeologica della Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale e dell’Università di Roma (Studi Semitici, 12), Roma 1964, pp. 33‐40. 1972 “La Necropoli Arcaica e adiacenze. Lo scavo del 1970”, in F. Bevilacqua ‐ A. Ciasca ‐ G. Matthiae Scandone ‐ S. Moscati ‐ V. Tusa ‐ A. Tusa Cutroni, Mozia ‐ VII. Rapporto preliminare della Missione congiunta con la Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale (Studi Semitici, 40), Roma 1972, pp. 7‐81.
[123]
[8.]
[Bibliography] MOTYE
1978 “La Necropoli Arcaica e adiacenze. Relazione preliminare degli scavi eseguiti a Mozia negli anni 1972, 1973, 1974”, in A. Ciasca ‐ G. Coacci Polselli ‐ N. Cuomo di Caprio ‐ M.G. Guzzo Amadasi ‐ G. Matthiae Scandone ‐ V. Tusa ‐ A. Tusa Cutroni ‐ M.L. Uberti, Mozia ‐ IX. Rapporto preliminare della Missione congiunta con la Soprintendenza alle Antichità della Sicilia Occidentale (Studi Semitici, 50), Roma 1978, pp. 7‐98. 2000 “Il santuario fenicio‐punico a Mozia, detto di ‘Cappiddazzu’”, in M.E. Aubet ‐ M. Barthélemy (eds.), Actas del IV Congreso Internacional de Estudios Fenicios y Púnicos, Cádiz, 2 al 6 de Octubre de 1995, Cádiz 2000, pp. 1397‐ 1417. Tusa, V.A. 2012 “Le armi dei corredi tombali della necropoli arcaica di Mozia”, Vicino Oriente 16 (2012), pp. 131‐150. Vallet, F. ‐ Villard, G. 1956 “Gèomètric grec, gèomètric sicèliote, gèomètric sicule. Ètude sur le premier contacts entre Grecs et indigènes sur la côte orientale de Sicile”, Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome. Antiquité 66 (1956), pp. 7‐27. Vecchio, P. 2002 “La ceramica comune”, in M.L. Famà (ed.) Mozia. Gli scavi nella “Zona A” dell’abitato (Collana di Archeologia del Centro Internazionale di Studi Fenici, Punici e Romani, Comune di Marsala, 1), Bari 2002, pp. 203‐273. 2013 “Morte e società a Mozia. Ipotesi preliminari sulla base della documentazione archeologica della necropoli”, Römische Mitteilungen 119 (2013), pp. 43‐67. 2015 Ceramica comune fenicia e punica della Collezione Whitaker di Mozia, https://www.academia.edu. Vegas, M. 1999 “Phöniko‐punische Keramik aus Karthago”, in F. Rakob (Hrsg.), Karthago III. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen in Karthago, Mainz am Rhein 1999, pp. 93‐219. 2000 “Ceramica cartaginese della prima metà del secolo VII”, in P. Bartoloni ‐ L. Campanella (eds.), La ceramica fenicia di Sardegna. Dati, problematiche, confronti. Atti del Primo Congresso Internazionale Sulcitano, Sant’Antioco, 19‐21 Settembre 1997 (Collezione di Studi Fenici, 40), Roma 2000, pp. 355‐370. Yadin, Y. et alii 1960 Y. Yadin ‐ Y. Aharoni‐ R. Amiran, Hazor II. An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956, Jerusalem 1960. 1961 Y. Yadin ‐ Y. Aharoni‐ R. Amiran, Hazor III‐IV. An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations, 1957‐1958, Jerusalem 1961. Yasur‐Landau, A. 2014 “The Philistines and Aegean Migration at the End of the Late Bronze Age”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 73 (2014), pp. 144‐146. Whitaker, J.I.S. 1921 Motya. A Phoenician Colony in Sicily, London 1921. Wright, G.R.H. 1985 Ancient Building in South Syria and Palestine (Handbuch der Orientalistik 1/2), Leiden ‐ Köln: Brill 1985. Zucca, R. 1985 “Un frammento di anforetta a doppia spirale d’impasto da Bithia”, Studi Etruschi 53 (1985), pp. 43‐49. Zukerman, A. ‐ Gitin, S. 2016 “An Overview of Iron Age I Pottery Types from Strata VII‐IV”, in T. Dothan ‐ Y. Garfinkel ‐ S. Gitin (eds.), Tel Miqne ‐ Ekron Excavations 1985‐1988, 1990, 1992‐1995. Field IV Lower ‐ The Elite Zone. Part 1. The Iron Age I Early Philistine City (Harvard Semitic Museum Publication ‐ Final Reports of the Tel Miqne‐Ekron Excavations. Ekron 9/1), Winona Lake 2016, pp. 101‐126.
[124]