doi: 10.2143/AWE.16.0.3214933 AWE 16 (2017) 1-61 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDS IN THE DEEPEST ANTHROPOGENIC STRATUM AT 3 CONCEPCIÓN STREET IN THE CITY OF HUELVA, SPAIN* F. G ONZÁLEZ DE CANALES, L. SERRANO PICHARDO (†), J. LLOMPART GÓMEZ, M. GARCÍA FERNÁNDEZ, J. RAMON TORRES, A.J. DOMÍNGUEZ MONEDERO AND A. MONTAÑO JUSTO** Abstract Finds from the occupation layer under the water table at 3 Concepción St, in the historic centre of the city of Huelva, Spain, confirm the early development of an important Phoeni- cian emporion, already revealed by pottery and craft and industrial activities in the nearby plot at 7–13 Méndez Núñez St/12 Las Monjas Sq. As well as vessels of Phoenician and local tradition, some Greek Geometric and a significant Sardinian representation have been docu- mented. Whereas the oldest Phoenician pottery in Méndez Núñez St/Las Monjas Sq. was broadly dated to ca. 900 BC, the characteristics of a Tyre jug type 9 (in Bikai’s classification) from 3 Concepción St point more strongly to the 10th century BC. Against the background of the finds in the deepest anthropogenic sub-phreatic stratum at 7–13 Méndez Núñez St/12 Las Monjas Sq. (hereinafter MN/PM) in the historic centre of Huelva,1 we are now presenting the new corresponding finds, just 43 m away, at 3 Concepción St (hereinafter C3) (Fig. 1). The archaeological inter- vention took place in two phases between May 2009 and September 2010. SOME GEOLOGICAL AND STRATIGRAPHIC CONSIDERATIONS The old Huelva habitat spread out from a higher elevation, configured by a cluster of hillocks (cabezos), towards a lower brackish marsh on the estuary of the Tinto and Odiel rivers. Over the last several decades, excavations in the lower area of the * Our sincere thanks to the anonymous referees of AWE, many of whose valuable suggestions have been taken into account. Of course, any errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. ** Authors of drawings. Fig. 1: F. González de Canales and M. García Fernández. Drawings I.8 and 15, II.11, 17 and 20, III.2, 7, 9 and 11, IV.14, V.1 and 4, VI.1, 4–7, 9, 13–14, 16 and 20, VII.21, and XIII.5 and 7: M. García Fernández; XIV.1–9, 11 and 15: J. Ramon Torres and M. García Fernández; remaining drawings: L. Serrano Pichardo. 1 González de Canales et al. 2004; 2006. 2 F. GONZÁLEZ DE CANALES ET AL. Fig. 1: Huelva site and hinterland. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDS IN THE DEEPEST ANTHROPOGENIC STRATUM 3 city had to be interrupted due to the overflow of a strong phreatic layer, whose water table fluctuates depending on position and pluviosity but is always a few metres below ground level. Although only structures of the late 8th or early 7th centuries could be reached at MN/PM, during the subsequent emptying of the terrain for construction of an underground garage, it was possible to differentiate the deepest sub-phreatic stratum with anthropic activity. This stratum was previously documented in a geotechnical drilling by the dark greyish colour of the soil. Such characteristic and adherence allowed a selective control of the exhumed earths, as is shown by the dating of the recovered pottery to a chronological band of some amplitude, though homogene- ous. After the publication of these materials, a series of Groningen’s radiometric determinations ascribed cattle bones from the same stratum to a chronological band different from that estimated by the pottery, though also homogeneous.2 In the case of C3, after the interruption of the excavation when the phreatic level was reached, the recovery of materials followed by controlling the earthwork during the emptying of the terrain. In this case, the stratum under examination was between 4.7 and 5.5 m below ground level (thickness 80 cm); not dissimilar to the one at MN/PM. It is obvious that the difficulties inherent to excavations of sub-phreatic strata in metropolitan areas can be enormous, as in the case of MN/PM and C3 where landslides provoked the collapse of neighbouring buildings. From another stand- point, although it might be thought that an organised excavation could exhaust the archaeological record, the differentiation of hypothetical substrata within the incum- bent stratum can not be granted a priori. The reason is that, de visu, the stratum shows a great deal of homogeneity, explainable by a prolonged sub-phreatic situa- tion and its being subject to flooding by great oceanic tides during its formation, since it is located virtually at sea level. This is what samples of earths recovered at different levels suggest.3 While the deepest sample (pre-anthropic level) showed a marshy media over which the first occupation had happened (muddy nature of the sediments, abundant vegetation, absence of marine organisms and shell fragments conveyed from the marine environment), more superficial samples, corresponding to the stratum under consideration (anthropic level), aimed at an occasional (muddy materials with abundant remains of marshy vegetation, scarce molluscs and marine foraminifera) or permanently submerged tidal plain (muddy sands rich in bivalve and gastropod molluscs and foraminifera). These results can only be explained by floods similar to the ones experienced in the lower areas of the city until not long 2 Nijboer and van der Plicht 2006. 3 We would like to thank Prof. González Regalado, of the Experimental Sciences Department at the University of Huelva, for her sedimentological study based on the following references: Gofas et al. 2011; Laporte 1981; and Murray 1991. 4 F. GONZÁLEZ DE CANALES ET AL. ago, which at that time might have caused periods of depopulation. The action of tidal waves, whose impact over the lower parts of the habitat might have been dev- astating, could also be considered. Geological studies of numerous soundings in the Tinto-Odiel estuary inform us about the historical repetition of this type of cata- clysm.4 The most recent was the 1755 Great Lisbon Earthquake. Another issue to consider is the possibility that material in a secondary deposit was dragged down from an upper position. Although the Cabezo del Viento, the closest hillock, was demolished in 1872, a 1870 map with contour lines shows an elevation of 40 m. The space between this hillock and both MN/PM and C3 was over 100 m with no practicable slope, owing to its nature – brackish marsh. Other than this, although Phoenician pottery from the deepest stratum of MN/PM was associated with ceramics of local tradition, similar to the ones ascribed to Phase I at Cabezo de San Pedro, in this hillock, Phoenician pottery from that period was absent. Since it is implausible that just the Phoenician, but no local pottery, was going to be dragged down selectively from the hillock, the obvious interpretation is that, during that early phase, the lower areas must have been occupied by a mixed Phoenician-local population, while the hillocks were inhabited, for preference, by the locals. Neither can the selective dragging down of oven walls, big smelting slags, and other artefacts found in MN/PM – and no rolling stones or fragments of ter- tiary bivalve shells so common in the hillocks – be explained by the sweeping away due to surface run-off. Consequently, the primary deposition of recovered materials must have happened in the sub-phreatic stratum where they were found, except for possible displacements by cleaning, common to any inhabited space. The next ques- tion refers to the type of construction in the site during those initial stages. As from the 8th century BC, an urban mesh is recorded in Huelva not differing from the Eastern pattern with houses made of adobe and two types of rocks: slate and, in some singular buildings, calcarenite ashlars. Such rocks are alien to the site and needed transportation from the Gibraleón and Niebla quarries, respectively some 15 and 30 km distant. Although in the earths from the MN/PM deepest stratum appeared some slate fragments, it does not seem that this kind of stone was used extensively during the first phases. Rather suggestive was the presence of thickly worked tree trunks and, in C3, adobe debris. As stated above, we can rule out that these building blocks, like all other artefacts and ecofacts, could have ended up in a secondary position as a consequence of being swept away from upper levels. 4 Morales et al. 2008. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDS IN THE DEEPEST ANTHROPOGENIC STRATUM 5 POTTERY OF PHOENICIAN TRADITION Although there is extensive research on and at Phoenician sites, or sites of Phoeni- cian influence, vessels recorded in Tyre,5 Cyprus6 and Sarepta7 continue to be a fundamental reference for the 10th to 8th centuries BC. For this reason, as well as historical character and vascular analogies, preference was given in MN/PM to typologies differentiated in Tyre by P.M. Bikai. However, in order to sort out the material excavated, some categories were given an ad hoc classification. Regardless of hypothetical local productions, which should be resolved by further clay analyses, what we could appreciate in the period before the emergence of Western Phoenician plates, with wide and everted rim, were shapes similar to the Tyrian, without ruling out the arrival of Phoenicians of some other provenance. In C3, it seemed appropriate to keep the same classification criteria, also consid- ering further contributions after the completion of the MN/PM study, such as the publication of Kition pottery by Bikai.8 Thus, the Tyre and Kition types referred to in this work – with which we parallel the documented material – correspond to those established by Bikai in 1978 and 2003, respectively; the Sarepta types to the ones referred to by Anderson in 1988; and those of Huelva, as differentiated in MN/PM in 2004.