Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Euboica

 | 
Bruno D'Agostino
, 
Michel Bats

Campania in the framework of the earliest Greek colonization in the west

Bruno D’Agostino et Andreas Soteriou

Texte intégral

I. - Cephalonia during the 8th and 7th centuries

  • 1 A complete and systematical study of the pottery presented here will be published later on.

1This paper mainly deals with the area of Campania during the period of the earliest Greek colonisation in the West, although it also presents new data that are relevant to the history of Great Greece as a whole. More specifically, it focuses on the role of Cephalonia1 in the colonial period, and the route followed by the Corinthians on their way to the West.

  • 2 Polybius 5. 3. 8; G. A. Souris, ‘H σημασία της Κεφαλλονιάς για τα Ελληνιστικά Κράτη ϰαι τη Ρώμη’, (...)

2Cephalonia is blessed with a strategic geographical position (fig. 1), being situated precisely at the mouth of the Gulf of Patras, which is a natural projection of the Gulf of Corinth. With Ithaca, it is the natural stop-over between Greece and Italy, and hence played an important role in antiquity, especially during the Roman period. This role has been commented upon by several writers, both ancient and contemporary2.

  • 3 According to P. G. Calligas, there was no human settlement on Cephalonia during this period. See C (...)
  • 4 Rennel of Rodd, in BSA XXXIII, 1932-3, pp. 1-22; W. A. Heurtley-H. L. Lorimer, in BSA XXXIII, 1932 (...)
  • 5 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 121-24; Calligas 1979, pp. 61-2; Coldstream 1977, pp. 182-4.
  • 6 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 10-59; Benton 1953, pp. 260-335.
  • 7 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 60-95, 103-113; Benton 1953.
  • 8 Calligas 1979, pp. 61-2; Sarantis-Symeonoglou, in Έργον 1986, pp. 80-1; idem, Prakt 1986, pp. 236- (...)
  • 9 S. Benton, in BSA XXXV, 1934-35, pp. 52-56; W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XL, 1939-40, pp. 11-13.
  • 10 S. Benton, ibidem, pp. 56-68.

3Until the latest finds, no archaeological evidence of the period from the end of the Mycenean era to the 8th century B. C. had been recovered in Cephalonia3. This datum was abnormal when compared to Ithaca, and raised many questions. The two islands are separated by a narrow channel, just 3. 5 km wide. Ithaca is much smaller than Cephalonia, and its natural resources are more limited. And yet, especially thanks to the British excavations4, it has been established that human settlement on Ithaca was continuous from prehistoric times to the Roman period. It has been further established that, during the 8th and 7th centuries B. C., the island was under the influence of Corinth5. Large amounts of pottery imported from this city were found here6. Corinthian ceramics inevitably influenced the local production, resulting in the creation of a distinctive style known as “Ithacan”7. Apollo was worshipped at the site of P. Aetos, where the first temple was built8. The cult of Athena, Hera, the Nymphs and, of In: Euboica. L’Eubeae la presenza euboica in Calcidicae in Occidente. Napoli, 1998 (Coll. CJB, 15/AION ArchStAnt Quaderno 12), pp. 355-368. course, Odysseus is attested at the Polis Cave9, which is also the find-spot of the well-known tripodlebes10.

Fig. 1-Map of the Ionian Islands (BSA 91. 1996, p. 316, fig. 7).

  • 11 See above, note 3.

4The situation described above does not seem to have raised any doubts about Cephalonia. Thus, the officially established view in the existing bibliography is that Cephalonia was deserted and abandoned during the period between the end of the Mycenaean era (1050 B. C.) and the end of the 8th century B. C.11. However, this view is not supported either by surveys or by systematic archaeological research. It merely rests on the results of a number of emergency excavations.

  • 12 The two trenches were excavated by the ST’ Ephory of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Patr (...)
  • 13 Thucydides, 2. 30. 2. J. Partsch, Κεραλληνία και Ιθάκη, 1892, pp. 225-7.
  • 14 Thucydides, ibidem; Partsch 1892, pp. 171-81.

5Recent research has brought to light new evidence which calls for a revision of this view, and provides a missing link in the island’s history. More specifically, two sample trenches12 were opened at two important classical period sites, at the foot of the acropolises of Pale13 and Same14.

6The first trench revealed, almost at surface level, a section of a floor where amphora and hydria sherds were recovered, while the lower strata yielded crater and kotyle sherds.

7The second trench yielded sherds found in a disturbed stratum whose thickness (1. 20 m) corresponds to the difference in height between two successive walls.

8At this initial stage of our study, I am going to present a mere selection of the pottery, arranged chronologically.

I. Protogeometric

  • 15 W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XXXIII, 1932-33, p. 43, n. 34, fig. 39. 5, pl. 3. 34; Coldstream 1968, p. 2 (...)

9Sherd from Same with a curvilinear pattern15 (fig. 2. 1, 3. 1).

II. Pottery from the 2nd half of the 8th century B. C.

  • 16 G. Vallet-F. Villard, Megara Hyblaea II, Paris 1964, p. 16 pl. 1. 7.
  • 17 J. N. Stillwell-J. L. Benson, Corinth, XV, III, 30, pl. 6. 90.
  • 18 Pithekoussai I, p. 638 t. 654. 1, tav. 188.
  • 19 M. Robertson, in BSA XLIII, 1948, p. 36, pl. 8. 131.

10A. Crater fragment from Same with two decorated zones separated by seven horizontal bands (fig. 5. 2), each featuring a series of panels with seven vertical zigzag lines bordered by seven vertical lines. The panels of the upper zone correspond to the seven vertical lines of the lower one. A similar decoration is found on a crater from Megara16, a pyxis fragment from Corinth17 and the neck of oinochoae from Pithekoussai18 and Ithaca19. On the last vase, the motif is exactly the same, even to the number of the sets of lines.

Fig. 2-Pottery from Same. (Red. 1:2).

Fig. 3-Pottery from Same.

  • 20 Benton 1953, p. 281, pl. 42. 666.

11B. Kotyle fragment from Pale and sherds (lips of pots) from Same (figs. 2. 2, 5-7, 13; 3. 2; 6. 1, 3-4), decorated with metopes à chevrons or zigzag lines of the same type as those on kotyle 666 from Aetos20.

III. Pottery from 725 to 625 B. C., with the characteristic decorative motifs of that period

  • 21 P. E. Arias, in BCH LX, 1936, pp. 144-151, pls. XI A, XIV 1.

12C. Crater fragment from Pale (h. 25. 5 cm, lip w. 2. 00 cm., fig. 4). On the shoulder, eight horizontals bands; above and below, zones decorated with parallel vertical zigzags in sets of eight. The panels on the handle are decorated by a set of eight vertical lines. The rest of the body is glazed. The shape and decoration are similar to those of two craters from Syracuse21.

  • 22 S. Brunnsåker, in OpRom 4, 1962, pp. 174-177, fig. 10 and also figs. 1-9.

13Sherds from two craters from Same (fig. 5. 3-4). On the neck, a zone decorated with an Sshaped motif22 and a plastic ring. Their profile is similar to that of the crater from Pale, although it is more vertical.

  • 23 C. G. Koehler, Corinthian A and Β Transport Amphoras, Ann Harbor 1981; C. A. Pfaff, in Hesperia 57 (...)
  • 24 M. A. Rizzo, Le anfore da trasporto e il commercio etrusco arcaico, Rome 1990, p. 55, figs. 54, 34 (...)
  • 25 S. Weinberg, Corinth VII, part I, Cambridge Mass. 1943, p. 48, pl. 24. 171.
  • 26 D. A. Amyx-P. Lawrence, Corinth VII, part II, Princeton 1975, p. 155, pl. 81, An 288.
  • 27 Ibidem, 157, pl. 79, An 306.

14D. Fragment of a large Corinthian handmade amphora from Pale23 (h 17. 00 cm, lip w. 4. 6 cm, fig. 8). The general shape is similar to that of an amphora from Caere in Etruria24 the lip is similar to that of amphora 171 from Corinth25, the neck and handles to those of amphorae A 28826 and A 30627.

  • 28 Corinth VII, part II, p. 145, pl. 72, An. 236. Cp. also F. D'Andria, ‘Magna Grecia, Epiro e Macedo (...)

15E. Hydria from Pale (fig. 7). The missing parts (base, horizontal handle and much of the lip) have been restored. Curved line on the vertical handle, red line of the neck, dark-red zone on the shoulder, above the horizontal handles. The rest of the body is glazed28.

Fig. 4-Late Geometric crater from Pale (0 rec. 0,25).

Fig. 5 – Sherds of Late Geometric craters from Same.

Fig. 6 – Pottery from Same.

16F. Body fragments from vases with successive horizontal bands, below which the surface is glazed (the glazed part normally occupies the area above the base).

17G. Handles with serpent decoration or other linear subjects (figs. 2.18-19; 3.8-10).

18H. Fragments from bases decorated with rays (figs. 3.12, 14-16).

19I. Sherds decorated with a spiral motif (figs. 2.4; 3.6, 11, 13) or flowers (fig. 5.1).

20358

Fig. 7-Hydria from Pale.

Fig. 8-Neck of Corinthian amphora from Pale.

Fig. 9-Sherds of handmade pottery.

21J. Sherds decorated with wavy, horizontal or vertical zigzag lines.

22Some sherds are dated between 625 and 550 B. C., but I will not deal with them in this paper.

23I have left for the end an unusual, handmade type of pottery which may date to the 7th century B. C. Leaving aside sherds such as this on fig. 9. 1, which clearly belong to Corinthian pithoi or amphoras, the hypothesis that these vases may attest the persistence of the long Mycenaean tradition of handmade pottery on Cephalonia is particularly tempting, although the evidence is still insufficient. Among these sherds there are two, an amphora base and an amphora handle with incised lines (fig. 9. 2, 6), which are common during this period.

24At this point, I would like to make some considerations on wheel-made pottery in the 8th and 7th centuries B. C. Although it is the first time that pottery from this period is found in Cephalonia and, as a consequence, we lack parallels, it is highly probable that the majority of it is made locally. This is suggested by the clay itself, which is light brown, refined, and powdery to the touch, all of which are characteristic features of Cephalonian clay. The clay and decoration of the pottery from Same present several similarities with the pottery of Ithaca, especially that of the P. Aetos site, which lies opposite Same and very close to it. It would seem that, from early on (end of the 8th century B. C.), there were cultural and commercial relations between the two sites.

25All of the above subjects are open to discussion. However, despite of the fact that the pottery is incomplete and comes from two limited samples, it is possible to draw some conclusions.

  • 29 P. Calligas, in AAA VI, 1973, p. 85. Also Calligas 1981, p. 83, note 4.

26(a) Up to now, the only location to yield large Protocorinthian craters was Metaxata, where a specimen, still unpublished, was found during Marinatos’excavations29. The craters found on the acropolises of Same and Pale, these two important sites of the Classical period, now shed new light on the period in question. Both are strategically located, Same on the eastern shore and Pale on the western one, at the mouth of the Gulf of Argostoli. Both lie on the sea route to the West.

Fig. 10-Pale and the bay of Argostoli, in the map by J. Partsch.

27(b) The view that Cephalonia was deserted, at least during the 8th century B. C. must be revised. Cephalonia is mentioned by Homer and Hesiod. This can only mean that, at that time, the island was inhabited, possibly even flourishing. The written sources thus corroborate the archaeological data presented here, which indicate that the island was already inhabited from the middle of the 8th century to the beginning of the 6th century B. C., when the archaeological evidence continues and even increases.

28(c) As B. d’Agostino will demonstrate here, from the third quarter of the 8th century B. C. onward, Corinthian presence in Campania was making itself felt. Similarly, the influence of Corinthian on Cephalonian pottery is obvious. It therefore appears that both Cephalonia and Ithaca were used by Corinth as a stopover on the way to the West. The Corinthian metropolis could not possibly have been indifferent to Cephalonia’s strategic position and its abundant natural resources. It is uncertain, however, whether Corinthian presence on the island was established after longterm mutually beneficial relations between the two or by other means. Future archaeological research is called upon to provide an answer to this, as well as many other questions.

Fig. 11-The hill of Pale (Dia Β. d’Agostino)

II. – Some observations on the finds in Cephalonia

  • 30 I am convinced that Homer drew on a local, Ithacan saga. This explains the generally precise corre (...)
  • 31 My knowledge of the site is based on a survey of the peninsula of Pale (Paliki) carried out in 199 (...)
  • 32 Syracuse: BCH 60, 1936, tavv. XI. A and XIV. 1; Aetos: Benton 1953, nr. 800 pl. 49. While the firs (...)
  • 33 BCH 60, 1936, tav. XI. A, already mentioned, and n. 798 from Aetos, which Benton 1953 (p. 295, not (...)

29It is true that the first ceramic finds of the Geometric period in Cephalonia are still scarce. They are sufficient, however, to reveal the limits of the age-old debate on the role of Ithaca. While the cave of Polis remains highly significant in the history of the pre-colonial period, and the relationship between the island and the Homeric text is still fundamental30, it has become evident that Aetos can no longer be considered an isolated outpost in no man’s land. It seems to have been, instead, one of several important settlements in a group of islands that was part and parcel of the Greek world. Indeed, that is the picture we get from the Homeric text. But, for the moment, let us limit ourselves to the archaeological evidence. It is useful to place the recent finds in Pale within their geographical context31. The ancient city stood on a hill running parallel to the coast (figs. 10-11), on the western side of the gulf of Argostoli. The small portion of the settlement area brought to light lies on the northern slope of the hill overlooking the ancient moorings, still called by the eloquent name of Karavostasi. (These moorings were buried by the silts of the river Louros, whose outlet lies between the hill of Pale and another hill on whose slopes is a large dump of Late Imperial amphorae). Thus, the vestiges found up to now apparently pertain to houses overlooking the port, lying at the margins of the ancient town. This would imply that, between the 8th and the 7th century, the town itself was already quite extensive. Among the most remarkable of the ceramics found up to now are some rather peculiar craters characterized by a thick lip continuing down towards the shoulder, from which it is separated by a slight indentation. As A. Soteriou has rightly observed, the only parallels for them are two craters from Fusco and one from Ithaca32. More specifically, the crater from Pale, made of local clay (fig. 4), has the same decoration as one from Ithaca and the more ancient of the two from Syracuse33. Clay indicates that the Pale crater is local. Turning to a later phase, some hydriae from Pale (fig. 7), also local, may br componed with one from Kerkyra, which F. D’Andria mentions as the closest parallel for the Otranto hydriai of the middle of the 7th century. These elements point to a role of Cephalonia in trade with the West.

Fig. 12-13-Cuma. Sherds from the earthwork of Aristodemo’s wall.

  • 34 One from Pastoia di Ischia published in Β. d’Agostino, ‘La stipe dei cavalli di Pitecusa’, in Atti (...)

30Even more interesting are the materials found by Sotiriou in Same. The few sherds presented here (figs. 2. 1-4; 3. 1-3, 6) are basically identical to the pottery from Ithaca, and belong to a slightly earlier phase (first half of the 8th century) than the evidence from Pale. They include a sherd of a chevron skyphos (figs. 2. 2; 3. 2) which is identical in form and clay to the most ancient sherds found at Ischia and Cumae34 (figs. 12. 2).

  • 35 Cf. Horn., Od., vv. 1. 246, IX. 24, XIV. 397, XVI. 123, XIX. 131. Since Doulichion and Pale are on (...)
  • 36 Apud Paus. 6. 15. 7.
  • 37 Str. X. 2. 14.
  • 38 Od. XIV. 335; XVI. 396.
  • 39 Polyb. V. 3. 9-4. 1.
  • 40 Od. XVI. 245.

31These preliminary data provide substantial corroboration of the information handed down by the literary sources from Homer on. In several passages containing formulaic descriptions of the political geography of the Ionian Islands, Homer enumerates Doulichion, Same and wooded Zacinthus, in this order35. Pherecydes, in the 6th century B. C. 36, was well aware that Doulichion was the ancient name of Pale (pace Strabo)37. Indeed, the Homeric name of Doulichion polypyron («rich in grain»)38 only fits Pale. Polybius reports that Philip V of Macedonia, after having initially attempted to seize Pronnoi, turned to Pale, because by conquering that city he would have been able to guarantee his army a regular grain supply39. This agricultural prosperity, recently undermined by traumatic geological events in the Pa-liki, helps to explain why, in Homer’s imagery, Doulichion is the strongest town of the Ionian Islands. In the list recited by Telemachus to Odysseus on the latter’s return40, it counts alone a number of suitors of Penelope equal to those of Same, Ithaca and Zacynthus all together.

Fig. 14-S. Marzano. T. 126: chevron skyphos.

  • 41 More specifically, Same faces Piso Aetos, from where one still leaves for Cephalonia and the West (...)

32It goes without saying that, in the political geography of the island, Same and Doulichion had two different functions. The former was the most important port on the isthmus of Cephalonia, being on the route to the ports of Aetos and Polis (Stavros) on Ithaca41. As to Pale, its function is made clear by Polybius in the passage I just mentioned, where he dedicates an excursus to the strategic position of Cephalonia, pointing out that it lies at the issue of the Saronic Gulf, facing the sea of Sicily, and faces on one side the northern and western coasts of the Peloponnese, on the other those of Aetolia, Acar nania and Epirus. Pale was the last station on the route of ships going west (the first important port along the western coast of the island is Assos, but it lies too far north).

33It is doubtlessly too early to come to new conclusions but, even in the light of these scarce finds, the picture drawn only two years ago needs to be reconsidered: the Ionian Islands were not depopulated in the 8th century; on Zacynthus, on the hill occupied by the castrum overlooking the main town, there must have existed a settlement contemporary with those of Pale and Same; Aetos was not an isolated outpost on the route towards the West; as the Hom- eric text, at any rate, clearly says, Ithaca lays in a populous and flourishing area, perfectly integrated into the Greek world.

34These new elements, as well as other important recent finds, call for a re-examination of the phenomenon of the resuming contacts between Greece and the West.

The Greek world and the West

  • 42 On the discoveries of Otranto, cf. especially F. D’Andria, ‘Il Salento nell’VIII e nel VII sec. a. (...)

35Thus, it is necessary to start anew from the Otranto evidence42. The pottery sherds found there, in the 9th century levels, certainly have no parallels on Italic soil: as C. Morgan remarked, they are Corinthian products, comprising both fine ware vessels and food containers.

36Nevertheless, the contacts they attest are still low in intensity. The bulk of the imported materials consist of typical MGII classes such as protokotylai and entirely painted kotylai, dating from the decades immediately preceding the foundation of Pithekoussai. They are Corinthian, while the relatively few “Euboic-Cycladic” sherds can be attributed to the Late Geometric period, i. e. the second half of the 8th century.

  • 43 D. Ridgway, in this volume, note 19 (S. Imbenia).
  • 44 d’Agostino, 1989; idem, ‘Relations between Campania, Southern Etruria, and the Aegean in the Eight (...)

37Elsewhere in Southern Italy, MGII evidence (i. e. contemporary with the bulk of Corinthian imports in the Southern Salento) includes the pendent semicircle skyphoi and chevron skyphoi from S. Imbenia discussed in this meeting by D. Ridgway43, and analogous imports from the “Villanovan” necropolises of the Tyrrhenian coast, notably Veii, Capua, Pontecagnano and Cumae44.

  • 45 To the specimens from Pontecagnano known up to now must be added two pendent semicircle skyphoi an (...)
  • 46 A complete bibliography on pendent semicircle skyphoi can be found in D. Ridgway, in this volume, (...)
  • 47 Cf. Ν. Coldstream, ‘Euboean Geometric Imports from the Acropolis of Pithekoussai’, in BSA 90, 1995 (...)
  • 48 Cf. D. Ridgway, ‘The Foundation of Pithekoussai’, in Nouvelle contribution à l’étude de la société (...)
  • 49 B. d’Agostino,’Prima della Colonizzazione-I tempi e i modi nella ripresa del rapporto tra i Greci (...)

38Pendent semicircle skyphoi from these sites have become relatively numerous. Two have been found in Veii, and three in Pontecagnano45. The latter belong to Kearsley’s Type 6, the most recent one, but one belongs to Type 546, and hence is coeval with the one from S. Imbenia. Veii, Capua, Pontecagnano and Cumae have also yielded chevron skyphoi, cups decorated with meanders, with a panel containing a single bird, with a chain of rhomboids, or entirely varnished. All these vases, as N. Coldstream rightly pointed out, are earlier than the foundation of Pithe-koussai47. In fact, the most ancient vases found on the island are chevron skyphoi of a late MG II type48 – which, incidentally, is also featured among the few sherds from Same presented by Soteriou (figs. 2. 2; 3. 2) – and a cup with a single bird49 of a type produced in Chalcis, as A. Andriomenou observed. Compared to the mass of the materials from the settlement and the necropolis, however, these sherds are too scarce to justify an earlier date for the foundation of the Greek settlement.

  • 50 A. Deriu,’Caratterizzazione di ceramiche greche e campane dell’VIII sec. a. C. mediante spettrosco (...)

39Most of the vases found in the “Villanovan” necropolises of the Tyrrhenian coast are Euboic imports. Mossbauer’s analyses seem to indicate that two slightly different clays were used, possibly pertaining to two different workshops, both in Euboea50.

  • 51 Cf. Salento Arcaico,’Atti del Colloquio’, Lecce 1979, pp. 37.
  • 52 See supra, note 41.

40In the first half of the 8th century, there existed two circuits of Greek trade with the West. One stemmed from Corinth and had a limited range. As I said as early as 197951, at a meeting organized by friends from the University of Lecce shortly after the first discoveries at Otranto, this city was probably part of a “closed” circuit limited to the Greek world, of which it was the antiperaia. I fully agree with the definition of the characteristics of this circuit proposed by F. D’Andria in 198452. All that remains to be ascertained now is whether Cephalonia was part of it as well as Ithaca.

41The Euboic circuit along the coasts of the Tyrrhenian Sea had different characteristics: it was totally outside the Greek world as it was perceived at that time, when the gates of Hades were still in Thesprotia, at the mouth of the Acheron. Furthermore, it was an “open” circuit, i. e. not limited to a series of predetermined destinations.

  • 53 Cf. Β. d’Agostino,’Pithekoussai and the First Western Greeks’, in JRA 9, 1996, pp. 302-309; D. Rid (...)

42In my opinion, these relations can still be called “pre-colonial”, both in the chronological and structural sense of the term, as they are earlier than any permanent Greek settlement in the West, and have a “weak” economic motive. This motive is normally thought to have been the quest for metal ores, and I am convinced myself that this was an important concern. However, I believe that an equally important motive was the pursuit of marginal benefits53 derivining from emporic trade and multiple exchanges, which were made possible by the political fragmentation of the indigenous world and the consequent lack of an organized trading system.

  • 54 P. Gastaldi, ‘Struttura sociale e rapporti di scambio nel IX sec. a. C.’, in La presenza etrusca n (...)

43The favourite trading partners of the Greeks were the populations of the Tyrrhenian coast, especially the Etruscans, both those of Etruria proper (notably Veii) and those who had pushed further south into Campania, founding the large settlements of Capua and Pontecagnano. The Greeks favoured them because they were the most advanced groups, the founders of large settlements characterized by remarkable political cohesion and strongly hierarchical social relations, which had already been trading with other populations of ancient Italy and the Phoenicians for fifty years54.

  • 55 Cf., e. g., B. d’Agostino, ‘I paesi greci di provenienza dei coloni e le loro relazioni con il Med (...)

44The indigenous populations of Southern Italy were selective in their choice of Greek vases. This is proved not only by the Corinthian pottery from Otranto and the Salento, but also, as I pointed out more than once, by that of the “Euboic” circuit55. In both contexts, the imported vases mainly consist of cups. Only in the second half of the century do other forms appear, especially jugs and craters.

45These vases were not especially valuable in themselves. Hence, their presence needs a different explanation: they were ceremonial gifts, prized not for their intrinsic value, but as a vehicle and symbol of customs which were a privilege of the Greek elite, first and foremost the social consumption of wine. Their symbolic importance is stressed by the fact that they became commonly featured grave-goods in “indigenous” burials, and we all know how strict the philtre of funerary ritual is.

  • 56 On Veii, cf. J. Toms, ‘The Relative Chronology of the Villanovan Cemetery of Quattro Fontanili at (...)

46As we shall see further on, the interpretation of these imported cups as ceremonial gifts also accounts for their almost sudden disappearance around the middle of the 8th century. This phenomenon is especially evident in the two best studied cases, viz. Veii and Pontecagnano56.

  • 57 On the subject, and on many of the questions dealt with subsequently, see d’Agostino 1994, pp. 19- (...)

47The character of Greek presence in the Tyrrhenian changed sharply around the middle of the 8 th century. This new phase, which we could call “proto-colonial”, using the term in a different sense from the one proposed by Malkin, was inaugurated by the creation of Pithekoussai, the first permanent settlement. Although the economic model was still weak, as in the preceding period, trade circuits became stable, and the search for marginal benefits was supplemented by the exploiting of techne through the creation of workshops on the island, and the exporting of craftsmanship to the Etruscan world. It cannot be denied that the Pithekoussan community was politically structured, and already an apoikia, albeibeit of a particular type57. The transition from the first to the second phase occurred roughly around 750 B. C.

48The change in the pattern of Greek connection affected the distribution of Greek ceramics in the indigenous world. As I said, in the “Villanovan” necropolises, imports (mainly Euboic) gradually gave way to imitations. This phenomenon certainly cannot be put down to a decline of Euboic trade along the Tyrrhenian coasts. In fact, the middle of the 8th century saw the foundation of the Euboic settlements of Pithekoussai and, sometime later, Cumae, which had, from the very beginning, a crucial role in the formation of the Tyrrhenian Orientalizing culture. Thus, it is undeniable that relations between Euboic settlers in Campania and the Etruscan world were still continuous and intense. Hence, this phenomenon must have another explanation, to be sought precisely in the fact that these cups were used as ceremonial gifts in the course of early contacts between the Greeks and the elites of the Tyrrhenian cities. With the foundation of the first colonies, relations with the Etruscans had gone beyond mere gift-exchange, and soon took on the character of an egalitarian political relationship. The social elites of southern Etruria and Etruscan Campania tried to emulate the Greek elites by imitating their lifestyle and thus setting themselves apart from their lower classes. It goes without saying that this involved a profound re-elaboration of the original Greek cultural models. This re-elaboration, in its turn, had a rebound on the Greek world itself, as the case of Cumae clearly shows. The Etruscan’s adoption of the Greek alphabet and the Homeric epos, and the settling of Pithekoussan metal-workers and potters in Etruscan cities also had an important role in the diffusion of Greek culture.

49All this concerns the “Euboic circuit” and its relations with the Etruscan world. In the “Corinthian circuit”, the reception of Greek-type ceramics in new indigenous environments followed a different pattern.

  • 58 See supra, note 47.
  • 59 On Pithekoussan imitations of Corinthian pottery, cf. G. Buchner, ‘Pithekoussai: Alcuni aspetti pe (...)

50It is well-known that, on Pithekoussai, since the foundation of the Euboic settlement, Corinthian or Corinthian-type ceramics prevailed. Euboic imports are not very numerous58. There is a local Euboic-type production comprising mainly large vases (amphorae and especially craters), but the bulk of the pottery consists of a vast array of imitations of Corinthian types of LGI and II, such as Aetos 666 cups, oinochoai and Thapsos cups59.

  • 60 On Euboic imitations of Corinthian pottery, cf. J. Board-man, ‘Euboean Pottery in West and East’, (...)

51This predominance of Corinthian pottery, however, has no political implications: indeed, in Euboea itself, exactly at the same time, a ceramic production arose which imitated the same Corinthian forms imitated at Pithekoussai60 thus, the latter’s behaviour is absolutely normal for an Euboic “province”. The phenomenon is extremely significant, instead, from the “economic” point of view. From this moment to the middle of the 6th century, Corinthian ceramics had a hegemonic role in Western trade.

  • 61 The most recent work on the subject is P. De Fidio, ‘Corinto e l’Occidente tra VIII e VI sec. a. C (...)
  • 62 Cf. A. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece. The Age of Experiment, 1980, pp. 53 s. ; I. Malkin, Religion and (...)

52This evolution was a consequence of the new role taken on by Corinth with the advent of the Bacchia-des61. The city took control of the Corinthian Gulf, causing the rapid rise to prominence of the sanctuary of Delphi, where, however, Euboeans also played an important role62. The Ionian Islands, lying at the exit of the Corinthian Gulf, was stimulated by Corinthian initiative. Around the middle of the 8th century, Aetos shows signs of considerable economic growth accompanied by a prevalence of Corinthian pottery. We do not know when Cephallenian cities were founded. All that we know is that Same and Pale already existed at that time. Initially, Corinthian pottery mainly circulated in the “internal” circuit, including the coast of southern Salento, which had long been part of it. Indeed, the bulk of Corinthian imports in the area dates from this period. The real novelty, however, was that the Tyrrhenian world was drawn into the orbit of Corinthian pottery trade. Corinthian vases became common both in Sicily and the Gulf of Naples.

53At this point, the West has become terra cognita·. the gates of Hades have been moved to Cumae; Euboic sherds begin to appear in the port of Rome on the Tiber; Hesiod knows of the existence of the Latin peoples.

  • 63 Cf. Β. d’Agostino, ‘La ceramica greca ο di tradizione greca nell’VIII sec. in Italia Meridionale’, (...)

54During the second half of the 8th century, in the Etruscan centers of the Tyrrhenian coast the role of Corinthian pottery remained unimportant. It was significant, instead, in the initial phase of the relations between Pithekoussai, Cumae and the Italic populations of north-central Campania, viz. the Opici of the Sarno Valley, in the hinterland of Pompeii, beyond the Vesuvius, and the Samnite fringes of the mesogaia, who had more direct contacts with the Greek and Etruscan paralia63. Unlike the elites of the “Villanovan” centers, they were not strong partners, with whom it was worth seeking egalitarian relations. They were peasant communities with a simple structure still based on function and rank, whose relations with the outside world had been, up to then, nearly non-existent. The only reason the Greeks had to keep in contact with them was their need to ensure a regular food supply at a time when they had not yet gained full control of the colonial chora.

55Once again, exchanges were propitiated by the offering of vases, and almost exclusively of those used in the social consumption of wine: the kotyle, the oinochoe and occasionally the kantharos, i. e. the same vases circulating a few years earlier in the Salento. As in that region, they are now of Corinthian type and comprise fewer imported specimens and a larger percentage of Campanian-made vases.

56In this brief sum-up of the available archaeological evidence on pre-colonial Greek presence in the West, I have intentionally omitted two important questions which the brilliant contributions of C. Morgan and I. Malkin at this meeting have induced me to look further into. Both concern the nature of the earliest Euboic contacts with the West. I am not sure to what extent they are interdependent.

  • 64 I already expressed my views on this passage in ‘Osservazioni a proposito della guerra lelantina’, (...)

57The first question arises from Plutarch’s well-know passage on the Eretrian settlement on Kerkyra. It is true that there is no archaeological evidence of the Greek settlement earlier than the last quarter of the 8th century. However, I believe that the depth and complexity of mythical and historical traditions are such that a more in-depth evaluation is called for64.

  • 65 Also mentioned by C. Morgan, in this volume. She rightly observes that a land route may have exist (...)
  • 66 The bibliography on the skyphos from Tomb 779 at Grotta Gramiccia can be found in Ridgway 1991, pp (...)
  • 67 Tomb 4871 at Pontecagnano is published in B. d’Agostino-P. Gastaldi, Pontecagnano II. La necropoli (...)

58The second is that of the route followed by Euboic ships. I do not know whether, before the foundation of Pithekoussai, Euboic ships came west by way of the Corinthian Gulf. However, considering that we all agree that the coming to the fore of the Delphic sanctuary is connected to navigation towards the West, the presence in the sanctuary itself of numerous pendant semicircle skyphoi65 should be carefully assessed, as it proves that the Euboeans were already interested in the “Corinthian route” before the middle of the 8th century. Furthermore, the distinction between the two circuits was not as rigid as some scholars have suggested: the earliest Greek imported cup found in Veii is Corinthian, and dates from the decade 780-770; hence, it is contemporary with the earliest Middle Geometric sherds from Otranto66. Another Corinthian cup, earlier than the middle of the 8th century, was found in Tomb 4871 in Pontecagnano67. The presence of Corinthian imports, albeit few, in the towns participating in the Euboic circuit suggests that the two routes overlapped. On this subject, however, it is best to wait for archaeological research to provide further data.

Pithekoussai and Cumae

59As I said, with the foundation of the Euboic settlement at Pithekoussai a new phase begins, for which I proposed the definition of “proto-colonial”. Has I tried to make clear above, this term, as I employ it, has an essentially structural meaning: the “proto-colonial” period comes to an end not with the foundation of Cumae, but when the control and exploitation of the colonial agricultural chora becomes the dominating economic model, and the ancient incentives connected to emporίa and techne lose their central role.

  • 68 On the excavations at Cumae, cf. Β. d’Agostino-F. Fratta, ‘Gli scavi dell’IUO a Cuma negli anni 19 (...)

60This point needs to be stressed all the more, now that the excavations I conducted in the years 1994-96 have called into question the chronology of the foundation of Cumae. It is not necessary here to review the results of the excavations, as I did during the meeting, since a brief sum-up has lately appeared elsewhere68. It is sufficient to recall that, in the earthwork of the Late Archaic walls, we found some sherds contemporary with the most ancient materials from Pithekoussai. Their location and certain clues suggest that they may come from the earliest tombs of the ancient city. Of course, it is not impossible that they belong, instead, to tombs of the Pre-Hellenic necropolis, or are a testimony of Greek presence on what must have been, before the foundation of the city, the Pithekoussan chora, although this last hypothesis seems to me the less plausible one.

  • 69 Cf. d’Agostino 1994, pp. 19-28.

61Again, caution demands that no hasty conclusions be drawn. At any rate, even if the chronological gap between Pithekoussai and Cumae should turn out to be narrower than it was thought to be, this would not greatly alter our perception of these two settlements. Indeed, the difference between these two apoikiai is first and foremost structural, as the archaeological evidence shows very clearly69. Only in the course of the last quarter of the 8th century did Cumae assert its hegemony. Accordingly, at the beginning of the 7th century, Pithekoussai declined markedly. It seems to have found a meaningful role again only at the end of the century, but at that time the island was merely a part of the Cumaean chora.

Annexes

Additional abbreviation

Benton 1953 = S. Benton, in BSA XLVIII, 1953.

Calligas 1979 = P. G. Calligas, in Κεφαλληνιακά Χρονικά 3, 1978-79, 1979.

Calligas 1981 = P. G. Calligas, Ή Μυϰηναϊϰη Κράνη’, in Αρχαιολογία 1, 1981.

Coldstream 1968J. N. Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery, London 1968.

Coldstream 1977 =J. N. Coldstream, Geometric Greece, London 1977.

d’Agostino 1989 =B. d’Agostino,’Rapporti tra l’Italia meridionalee l’Egeo nell’VIII sec. a. C.’, in’Secondo Congresso Internazionale E-trusco-1985’, Roma 1989, pp. 63-78.

d’Agostino 1994 =Β. d’Agostino,’Pitecusa, una apoikia di tipo particolare’, in ΑΠΟΙΚΙΑ - Scritti in onore di G. Buchner-AION Arch StAnt 1 (N. S.), 1994.

d’AgostinoB. d’Agostino,’Euboean Colonisation in the pressin the Gulf of Naples’, in G. Tsetskh-ladze (ed.), West and East, in the press.

De Natale 1992 =S. De Natale, Pontecagnano II. La necropoli di S. Antonio: Propr. ECI 2. Tombe della Prima Età del Ferro (AION ArchStAnt quad. 8), Napoli 1992.

Heurtley-Robertson =W. A. Heurtley-M. Robertson, in BSA 1948 =XLIII, 1948.

Pithekoussai I =G. Buchner-D. Ridgway, Pithekoussai I, Mon Al, serie monografica, Roma 1993.

Partsh 1892 =J. Partsch, Κεφαλληνία ϰαί ’Iθάη Αθήνα 1892.

* The § 1. is written by Andreas Soteriou; the§ 2. by Bruno d’Agostino.

Notes

1 A complete and systematical study of the pottery presented here will be published later on.

2 Polybius 5. 3. 8; G. A. Souris, ‘H σημασία της Κεφαλλονιάς για τα Ελληνιστικά Κράτη ϰαι τη Ρώμη’, in Κεφαλληνιακά Χρονικά, 1976, pp. 111-123; St. S. Zapantis, ‘Hσυμμετοχή των Πρόννων Κεφαλληνιάς στην Β Αθηναϊκή Συμμαχία’, in Κεφαλληνιακά Χρονικά 5, 1986, pp. 193-200.

3 According to P. G. Calligas, there was no human settlement on Cephalonia during this period. See Calligas 1981, p. 78, note V. Desborough believes the opposite, but stresses that there is no evidence. See V. Desborough, The Greek Dark Ages, London 1972, p. 90.

4 Rennel of Rodd, in BSA XXXIII, 1932-3, pp. 1-22; W. A. Heurtley-H. L. Lorimer, in BSA XXXIII, 1932-3, pp. 22-65; W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XXXV, 1934-5, pp. 2-44; S. Benton, in BSA XXXV, 1934-5, pp. 45-73; S. Benton, in BSA XXXIX, 1938-9, pp. 1-51; W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XL, 1939-40, pp. 1-13; Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 1-124; H. Waterhouse, in BSA XLVII, 1952, pp. 227-242; Benton 1953, pp. 255-358; S. Benton-H. Waterhouse, in BSA LXVIII, 1973, pp. 1-24; Calligas 1979, pp. 45-69, where there are also references to the earliest excavations. R. Hope Simpson, Mycenaean Greece, 1981, pp. 158-159. Excavations at P. Aetos are presently being conducted by Sarantis-Symeonoglou, in Έργον, 1984, pp. 42-45; 1985, pp. 36-42; 1986, p. 80; 1987, pp. 75-76; 1988, p. 140; 1989, pp. 136-7; 1990, pp. 123-7; 1992, pp. 91-3. The excavations at Stavros are being conducted by L. Kontorli-Papadopoulou

5 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 121-24; Calligas 1979, pp. 61-2; Coldstream 1977, pp. 182-4.

6 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 10-59; Benton 1953, pp. 260-335.

7 Heurtley-Robertson 1948, pp. 60-95, 103-113; Benton 1953.

8 Calligas 1979, pp. 61-2; Sarantis-Symeonoglou, in Έργον 1986, pp. 80-1; idem, Prakt 1986, pp. 236-7.

9 S. Benton, in BSA XXXV, 1934-35, pp. 52-56; W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XL, 1939-40, pp. 11-13.

10 S. Benton, ibidem, pp. 56-68.

11 See above, note 3.

12 The two trenches were excavated by the ST’ Ephory of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Patras, Greece, under the direction of A. Soteriou.

13 Thucydides, 2. 30. 2. J. Partsch, Κεραλληνία και Ιθάκη, 1892, pp. 225-7.

14 Thucydides, ibidem; Partsch 1892, pp. 171-81.

15 W. A. Heurtley, in BSA XXXIII, 1932-33, p. 43, n. 34, fig. 39. 5, pl. 3. 34; Coldstream 1968, p. 222, pl. 47 d. This is the earliest sherd of this period found on Cephalonia.

16 G. Vallet-F. Villard, Megara Hyblaea II, Paris 1964, p. 16 pl. 1. 7.

17 J. N. Stillwell-J. L. Benson, Corinth, XV, III, 30, pl. 6. 90.

18 Pithekoussai I, p. 638 t. 654. 1, tav. 188.

19 M. Robertson, in BSA XLIII, 1948, p. 36, pl. 8. 131.

20 Benton 1953, p. 281, pl. 42. 666.

21 P. E. Arias, in BCH LX, 1936, pp. 144-151, pls. XI A, XIV 1.

22 S. Brunnsåker, in OpRom 4, 1962, pp. 174-177, fig. 10 and also figs. 1-9.

23 C. G. Koehler, Corinthian A and Β Transport Amphoras, Ann Harbor 1981; C. A. Pfaff, in Hesperia 57, 1988, pp. 29 ss., fig. 22.

24 M. A. Rizzo, Le anfore da trasporto e il commercio etrusco arcaico, Rome 1990, p. 55, figs. 54, 345: 650 ca. B. C.

25 S. Weinberg, Corinth VII, part I, Cambridge Mass. 1943, p. 48, pl. 24. 171.

26 D. A. Amyx-P. Lawrence, Corinth VII, part II, Princeton 1975, p. 155, pl. 81, An 288.

27 Ibidem, 157, pl. 79, An 306.

28 Corinth VII, part II, p. 145, pl. 72, An. 236. Cp. also F. D'Andria, ‘Magna Grecia, Epiro e Macedonia’, in ‘Atti XXIV Convegno Taranto 1984’, Naples 1985, pp. 359 ss., pl. XX.1, from Kerkyra: middle 7th century, which has a tapering body.

29 P. Calligas, in AAA VI, 1973, p. 85. Also Calligas 1981, p. 83, note 4.

30 I am convinced that Homer drew on a local, Ithacan saga. This explains the generally precise correspondences between his indications and local reality, and especially the story of the tripods and the Louizo cave. On the subject, cf. most recently H. Waterhouse, ‘From Ithaca to the Odyssey’, in BSA 91, 1996, pp. 309-10.

31 My knowledge of the site is based on a survey of the peninsula of Pale (Paliki) carried out in 1996 in collaboration with the Ephory of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Patras, under the auspices of Ephoros L. Kolonas, and the direction of S. Tiné and A. Soteriou. I had the fortune to take part in this survey with a small team of the Naples Oriental Institute also including P. Gastaldi and M. D’Acunto.

32 Syracuse: BCH 60, 1936, tavv. XI. A and XIV. 1; Aetos: Benton 1953, nr. 800 pl. 49. While the first one dates from the last quarter of the 8th century, the other two are of the 7th century. P. Pelagatti (in ASAtene 1981, p. 148 n. 103) rightly thinks that the earlier of the Syracusan craters is unrelated to the family of the Fusco crater. Unlike this eminent scholar, however, I do not believe it to be Corinthian.

33 BCH 60, 1936, tav. XI. A, already mentioned, and n. 798 from Aetos, which Benton 1953 (p. 295, nota 282), like P. Pelagatti, considers similar to the Syracusan crater. However, the last does not have the characteristic form of the craters from Cephalonia. The hydria from Kerkyra is mentioned above, note 428.

34 One from Pastoia di Ischia published in Β. d’Agostino, ‘La stipe dei cavalli di Pitecusa’, in AttiMGrecia series III, 1994-95, p. 44 n. 1, pl. XXXIV, and another from Cumae published in d’Agostino, in the press.

35 Cf. Horn., Od., vv. 1. 246, IX. 24, XIV. 397, XVI. 123, XIX. 131. Since Doulichion and Pale are one and the same, it follows that Pale and Same are on the same island. This is not a problem, as Homer is speaking here of political, not geographical entities.

36 Apud Paus. 6. 15. 7.

37 Str. X. 2. 14.

38 Od. XIV. 335; XVI. 396.

39 Polyb. V. 3. 9-4. 1.

40 Od. XVI. 245.

41 More specifically, Same faces Piso Aetos, from where one still leaves for Cephalonia and the West today: cf. Lord Rennel of Rodd, ‘The Ithaca of the Odyssey’, in BSA 33, 1938, pp. 1-21. Vathy never had an important role, and has yielded no archaeological evidence earlier than the Hellenistic age. Polis faces Panormos (Fiskardo), of which very little is known.

42 On the discoveries of Otranto, cf. especially F. D’Andria, ‘Il Salento nell’VIII e nel VII sec. a. C.. Nuovi dati archeologici’, in ASAtene 60, 1982, pp. 101-116; idem, ’Documenti del commercio arcaico tra Ionio e Adriatico’, in ‘Atti XXIV Conv. Taranto 1984’, Napoli 1990, pp. 322-377; F. D’Andria (a cura di), Archeologia dei Messapi, ‘Catalogo Mostra 1991’, pp. 36-48; F. D’Andria, ‘Otranto’, in EAA Suppl. II vol. IV, Roma 1996.

43 D. Ridgway, in this volume, note 19 (S. Imbenia).

44 d’Agostino, 1989; idem, ‘Relations between Campania, Southern Etruria, and the Aegean in the Eighth Century B. C.’, in J. P. Descoeudres (ed.), Greek Colonists, and Native Populations, (Proc. I Australian Congress of Classical Archaeology), Oxford 1990, pp. 73-86; Ridgway, 1991. Cf. L. Hoffmann,’Civilisation on Barbarian Soil?’, in HBA 19/20, 1992/93, pp. 115-138. For a more complete bibliography, cf. D. Ridgway, in this volume, note 20.

45 To the specimens from Pontecagnano known up to now must be added two pendent semicircle skyphoi and two chevron skyphoi mentioned by D. Ridgway, in AR 1994-5, p. 85 fig. 15 a-d. As excavations progress, more specimens have been coming to light. See now G. Bailo Modesti, in this volume.

46 A complete bibliography on pendent semicircle skyphoi can be found in D. Ridgway, in this volume, note 21.

47 Cf. Ν. Coldstream, ‘Euboean Geometric Imports from the Acropolis of Pithekoussai’, in BSA 90, 1995, pp. 251-267.

48 Cf. D. Ridgway, ‘The Foundation of Pithekoussai’, in Nouvelle contribution à l’étude de la société et de la colonisation eubéennes (CCJB 6), Napoli 1981, pp. 45-60; see also supra, note 34.

49 B. d’Agostino,’Prima della Colonizzazione-I tempi e i modi nella ripresa del rapporto tra i Greci e il Mondo Tirrenico’, in AttiMGrecia 1, Terza serie, 1992, pp. 51-60.

50 A. Deriu,’Caratterizzazione di ceramiche greche e campane dell’VIII sec. a. C. mediante spettroscopia Mössbauer’, in’Secondo Congresso Internazionale Etrusco-1985’, Roma 1989, pp. 79-81, and observations of Β. d’Agostino, ibidem, pp. 75 ff., with table.

51 Cf. Salento Arcaico,’Atti del Colloquio’, Lecce 1979, pp. 37.

52 See supra, note 41.

53 Cf. Β. d’Agostino,’Pithekoussai and the First Western Greeks’, in JRA 9, 1996, pp. 302-309; D. Ridgway, in this volume, p. 311 n. 1.

54 P. Gastaldi, ‘Struttura sociale e rapporti di scambio nel IX sec. a. C.’, in La presenza etrusca nella Campania meridionale, ‘Atti Salerno-Pontecagnano 1990’, (Bibl. StEtr 28), Firenze 1994, pp. 37-48.

55 Cf., e. g., B. d’Agostino, ‘I paesi greci di provenienza dei coloni e le loro relazioni con il Mediterraneo Occidentale’, in G. Pugliese Carratelli (a cura di), Magna Grecia I, Milano 1985, p. 219; d’Agostino 1989, pp. 66 s.

56 On Veii, cf. J. Toms, ‘The Relative Chronology of the Villanovan Cemetery of Quattro Fontanili at Veii’, in AION Arch-StAnt 8, 1986, pp. 73 ss., and Ridgway 1991, p. 160: «Uno’stadio degli skyphoi a chevrons’... abbraccia le fasi Toms II A tardo e II Β iniziale». Considering the décalage between the phases of Veii and those of Pontecagnano, this moment coincides with phase II A of Pontecagnano and can be dated to the third quarter of the 8th century B. C., cf. Β. d’Agostino, in De Natale 1992, p. 41 s.

57 On the subject, and on many of the questions dealt with subsequently, see d’Agostino 1994, pp. 19-28, where all the previous bibliography is cited.

58 See supra, note 47.

59 On Pithekoussan imitations of Corinthian pottery, cf. G. Buchner, ‘Pithekoussai: Alcuni aspetti peculiari’, in ASAtene 59 XLIII (N. S.), 1981, pp. 263-273.

60 On Euboic imitations of Corinthian pottery, cf. J. Board-man, ‘Euboean Pottery in West and East’, in DialArch 3. 1-2, 1969, pp. 102-114.

61 The most recent work on the subject is P. De Fidio, ‘Corinto e l’Occidente tra VIII e VI sec. a. C.’, in Corinto e l’Occidente, ‘Atti XXXIV Conv. Taranto 1994’, Napoli 1995, pp. 47-142.

62 Cf. A. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece. The Age of Experiment, 1980, pp. 53 s. ; I. Malkin, Religion and Colonisation, Leiden 1987, p. 22; C. Morgan, Athletes and Oracles, Cambridge 1990, pp. 172 ss.

63 Cf. Β. d’Agostino, ‘La ceramica greca ο di tradizione greca nell’VIII sec. in Italia Meridionale’, in La céramique grecque ou de tradition grecque au VIII° siécle en Italie Centrale et Méridionale (CCJB 3), 1982, pp. 55-68.

64 I already expressed my views on this passage in ‘Osservazioni a proposito della guerra lelantina’, in DialArch 1. 1, 1967, pp. 30-37. I, too, examined, as far as it was possible, the most ancient pottery from Kerkyra, and saw nothing that was certainly earlier than the last quarter of the 8th century. As to the mythical traditions, one concerns the cults of Hera and Makris, on which see P. Calligas, ‘To ἐν Κερκύρα ιερόν τῆς ’Αϰραίας "Ηρας’, in ArchDelt 24 A’, 1969, pp. 50-58; and especially N. Valenza Mele, ‘Hera e Apollo nella colonizzazione euboica d’Occidente’, in MélRome 89, 1977, pp. 493-524; Eadem, ‘Hera ed Apollo a Cuma e la mantica sibillina’, in RivIstArch III (N. S.), 14-15, 1991-92, pp. 5-72. The other concerns Alcinoüs, a descendant of Eurymedon, king of the Giants, who went from Hypereia to Scheria: see N. Valenza Mele, ‘Eracle Euboico a Cuma. La gigantomachia e la via Heraclea’, in Recherches sur les cults grecs et l’Occident (CCJB V), pp. 19 ss.

65 Also mentioned by C. Morgan, in this volume. She rightly observes that a land route may have existed. It would have led, at any rate, to a sanctuary owing its importance to its control of the Corinthian route towards the West.

66 The bibliography on the skyphos from Tomb 779 at Grotta Gramiccia can be found in Ridgway 1991, pp. 160 ff. The skyphos has been dated by J. P. Descoeudres-R. Kearsley,’Greek pottery at Veii: another look’, in BSA 78, 1983, p. 29 n. 1.

67 Tomb 4871 at Pontecagnano is published in B. d’Agostino-P. Gastaldi, Pontecagnano II. La necropoli del Picentino 1. Le tombe della Prima Età del Ferro, Napoli 1988, pp. 223 ss. On the cup and its position in the sequence of Pontecagnano, cf. De Natale 1992, pp. 39 ss., fig. 130.

68 On the excavations at Cumae, cf. Β. d’Agostino-F. Fratta, ‘Gli scavi dell’IUO a Cuma negli anni 1994-95’, in AION ArchStAnt 2 (N. S.), 1995, pp. 201-209; d’Agostino, in the press.

69 Cf. d’Agostino 1994, pp. 19-28.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1-Map of the Ionian Islands (BSA 91. 1996, p. 316, fig. 7).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 612k
Légende Fig. 2-Pottery from Same. (Red. 1:2).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 741k
Légende Fig. 3-Pottery from Same.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,2M
Légende Fig. 4-Late Geometric crater from Pale (0 rec. 0,25).
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Légende Fig. 5 – Sherds of Late Geometric craters from Same.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 602k
Légende Fig. 6 – Pottery from Same.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 516k
Légende Fig. 7-Hydria from Pale.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 345k
Légende Fig. 8-Neck of Corinthian amphora from Pale.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 219k
Légende Fig. 9-Sherds of handmade pottery.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 226k
Légende Fig. 10-Pale and the bay of Argostoli, in the map by J. Partsch.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 5,2M
Légende Fig. 11-The hill of Pale (Dia Β. d’Agostino)
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 799k
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 138k
Légende Fig. 12-13-Cuma. Sherds from the earthwork of Aristodemo’s wall.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 150k
Légende Fig. 14-S. Marzano. T. 126: chevron skyphos.
URL http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/docannexe/image/673/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 511k

© Publications du Centre Jean Bérard, 1998

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540