You are on page 1of 24

I

r
ir:
~
~
MEDITERRANEA
QUADERNI ANNUALI DELL'ISTITUTO
DI STUDI SULLE CIVILTA ITALICHE
E DEL MEDITERRANEO ANTICO
DEL CONSIGLIO NAZIONALE DELLE RICERCHE
GI
QUADERNI DI ARCHEOLOGIA ETRUSCO-ITALICA
1 . 2004
ESTRATTO
I
3
PISA' ROMA
ISTITUTI EDITORIALI E POLIGRAFICI INTERNAZIONALI
MMV
"
Radiocarbon drJtes 01 animal bones in the earliest levels 01Carthage
R.F. DOCTER, R.o. NIEMEYER, NIJBOER, 1.' VAN DER PLICHT *
,d.
This contribution has been added to the
proceedings Qf the Incontro di Studio, after it
became clear that the results of five 14C analyses
from Carthage, presented in Rome by A.J. Nijboer,
would potentially have great impact on Central
Mediterranean absolute chronology1 . The analyses
cncerned five bone samples from the earliest hvo
phases ofthe Carthaginian settlement (excavations
ofthe University ofHamburg below the decumanus
maximus). Four ofthe bone samples yieIded a
combined, calibrated dte of835-800 BC (with 95%
probability). In view ofthe association with Greek
Late Geometric pottery and the unprecedented
proximity of this date to the tradtional foundaton
date of Carthage (814/13 Be), it was decided to
publish arid interpret 1:he results in relation to the
archaeological contexts. The 1
4
C dates and calibratt::d
" results forthe five Carthage samples are given first.
Then Docter and Niemeyer discuss fue contexts
from which fue 5 samples wereretrieved while Van der
Plicht closes this contribution by examining the quality
ofilie radiocarbon datesthemselves and their calibration.
The animal bones dated may be secondafy but
the descriptions of the contexts demonstrate that
"Pro dr.RoaldEDocter,DepartmentafArchaeologyandAncient
History, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
(RoaldDocter@Ugentbe). Pro en1 Dr. Hans Georg Niemeyer,
Eppendorfer Landstrasse 60, D-20249 Hamburg (niemeyer@uni-
hamburg.de).Dr.AlbertlNifboer, GrtmingenInstituteofArchaeology,
University 'of Groningen, Poststraat 6, 9712 ER Groningen, The
Netherlands (www.lcm.rug.nl);(AlNljboer@letrug.nl). DI: ir. Hans
van derPlicht, Centre ofIsotopeAnalysis, University ofGroningen,
Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands (www.
1/
theyare recovered from the earliest levels of
Carthage excavated,by theUniversity ofHamburg
and that the animal bones do not seem to belong
to an settlement, which theoretically
might have existed on this locationprior to the
Phoenician foundation of Carthage. 'The results
2540+/-30" BP and 2510+/-30 BP are no longer
relevant due to doubts regarding t.h:eir
archaeological context (KA931189, see the
desctiption ofthis context below). The remaining
4 fadiocarbon dates indicate, that cattle was
slaughtered in the period 835-800 BC with a 95%
probability and that their remains were excavated
in contxts that pertain to the earliest levels of
Phoenician Cartbage so far excavated
2
The two
measurementsfor sample no. 189 (GrN-26092 ard
26479) are)averaged and years are rounded to the
nearest 53 (TAB. A).
l. The archaeological contexts
4
(R.F.
DOCTER, H.G.NIEMEYER)
Introduction
From 1986 till1993 a team ofthe University of
cio.phys.n1); (J.van.der.Plicht@phys.rug.n1).
I See for a balanced comment bn the consequences of re-
dating the Central Mediterranean chronologies, RroGWAY 2004,
especially 19-22.
2 The calibrated probability distribution wasanalysed as
. explained in VAN DER PLICHT, MOOK 1989.
3 Seealso Tav. 2{p. 554) ofthepaperbyNijboerprecedingthls
contribution, which presents the calibrations using the Oxcal-
progranJIDe.
,557
, _H ......
Samp1e Lab. Dr.
14C age
error la
Ka93- GrN (BP) 20
181 26090 2650 30 la
2a
183 26091 2710 30 la
2a
189 26092 2540 30 la
1 89duplo 26479 2510 30
2a
220 26093 2640 50 la
2a
<"
499 26094 2660 30 la
2a
calBC
825-800
890-880,835-795
9
th
century BC with 95%
probability
895-825
905-805
9
th
century BC with 99%
probability
790-760, 680-665,
630-595, 575-560
795-755, 685-545
No longer relevant
discussion due to
regarding ther . ;,.
archaeological
890-885 . .,:' ..... .
905-760, 680-670, 61
9
th
century BC with 95%'
probability . '
825-805
895-875,835-795
9
th
century Be with. 90% :. '.'
probability
TAB. A: 14C dates and calibrated results for the [ve Carthage samples.
Ramburg, UIlder the direction of R.G. Niemeyer,
excavated an area ofsorne 400 square meters ofthe
city ofCarthage
5
The site is situated in the northem
part of aterrain in the centre of present-day
. Carthage, 10cal1y known as Bir Massouda. The
location was chosen for its exact position on the
crossroads of the decumanus maximus and cardo
4 We would like to thank C.w. Neeft (Amsterdam) for kindly
reading andcriticallycommenting on a draft ofthispart ofthepapero
5 NmMEYER, DOCTER ET ALlI 1993; NmMEYER, DOCTER,
10-east in the Roman grid system, allowing for
rather easy access to the Punic stratigraphy below,
whieh was reached.
Three goals govemed the Hamburg excavatkm
projeet from the starfi:
1. How would the arehitectural remains,
arehaeologieal sedimentation and the fmds relate
RlNDELAUB 1995; NlEMEYER ET ALllforthcoming.
6 See e.g. NmMEYER 1989, p. 11.
to the pi,
. early staf
necropoll
provided
2. H
archaeolc
general:fi
Mediten-
3. A:
Carthage
813BCc
almostee
Rh,einiscl
agenda'.
Itis1
to expan
results e
earliest e
In su
analyses
layers o
associatc
would e
conventl
ehronol<
Unfortul
anylong
Univers:
the faur
storeroo
infa1l2(
some1a:!
conteJrn
samples
a most
Conser
Nationa
Asl
by 1.
suggest
ofthe S1
'Ba
8 L.}
forthcom
9 No
contribui
558
tothepicture ofanimportantcityalreadyatavery surprising results and how to publish them in an
earlystage,ashadbeensuggestedbybotl1the. ___.____ waycarnetothefore.ltwasdecidedto
necropoleisexcavationsandthehistoricalinfonnation produceajointmanuscriptmwhicntfie- f4Creslts---------
providedbytheAncientsources? would be linked tothe full presentation ofthe
2. How would the observations on
f
the archaeologicalcontexts; publicationwasscheduled,
archaeologicalremainsfitinwithinthelargerandmore quiteoptimistically, for 2002. From the side ofthe
generalframeworkofthePhoenicianexpansioninthe Hamburgexcavationteam,theprovisohadtobemarle,
Mediterranean? though,thattheediting forthefinal
3. As asubsidiarygoalalsotheoIdproblemof publicationofthe1986-1993fieldcampaignsshould
Carthage'sfoundationdate,traditionalIysetin 814/ preferablybeconc1udedfirst. Thisprovisohadthree
813BConthebasisofTimaeus'accountanddiscussed practicalreasons:
almostcontinuouslysinceJ.C.Beloch'sarticleinthe 1. The chronological frarnework oftheearliest
Rheinis-chesMuseumof1894,hadbeenontheproject's stratigraphy used inthe fmalpublication is based
agenda
7
mainIyontheconventionaldaterangesoftheGreek
Itisthisthird- subsidiary- goalthatnowleadsus Late potteryimportsandtoalesserdegree
to expand- priortothefmal publication- onsorne onthoseofthePhoenicianlocalandimportedpottery
results ofthe Hamburg excavation coneemingthe (thararepartIybased- ultimately- alsoontheGreek
earliestchronoIogyoftheCarthaginiansettlement. sequice rWedidft'fWfitt6burdenthepublication
Insummer2000,A.J.Nijboersuggestedtodo14C with chronological discussions or 'outofcontext'
analysesonsorneaftheanimalbonesfromtheearliest referneestosuchdiscussionsthatmighthavewider
layers ofthis excavation. These layers had beeJ:l implicationsand,henee,shouldbebasedonaseparate
associated with GreekLateGeometric potteryand studyofafarwiderscope.
would offerthernselves readily for comparing the 2.Linkedtothe-fustpracticalreason,bothauthors
conventionaldaterarigesoftheseGreekimportswith feltthatall efforts should gotothemain objective:
chronologies yielded byscientific dating methods. editingthemanuscripts ofthe Harnburg excavation
Unfortunately,theboneswerenotintheNetherlands andbringiigtherointoprinL
anylonger.AfterL.H.VanWijngaarden-Bakkerofthe 3.Alastpracticalreason isbasedonthewayin
UniversityofAmsterdarnhadcompletedthestudyof whichthe finds oftheHamburgexcavationproject
the faunal remains8, theyhad been returned tothehavebeenpreparedfor publication.In1990 itwas
storeroomsoftheMuseNationaldeCarthage.There, decidedtodividethecataloguedfmds intodifferent
infal12000,thearchaeozoologist1.Slopsmaselected c1assesandstorethembythisprincipIe.Thisdecision
sornelrugebonefragmentsofcattlecomingfromfive hadto bemade intheface ofthehugenumbers of
contextsofphaseslandlP.Pennissiontoexportthese finds from many archaeological contexts in
samplesfor14CanalysesinGroningenwasgrantedin combination with the almost complete lack of
a mostliberal way by the then director ofthe typologicalstudiesofthemajorCarthaginian(ceramic)
Conservaton du site de Carthage ofthe Institut classes.Bythattime, oneofthe additiorud goalsof
NationalduPatrimoine,A.Ennabli. theexcavationprojecthadbecometheproductionof
AstheresultsoftheJ4Canalysesonthesamples typological sequences, in the hands.ofmany
byJ. Van derPlichtbecamavailableinJlU1e2001, specalists,basedontheHamburgstratigraphy.This
suggestingdaterangesaround800BCfor'allbutone fmds' publication andthewayofstorage
ofthesamples;thequestionofhowtointerpretthese preventusfromviewingthecompletecontentsofa
7 BELOCH 1894. onlycattle bones.W. Prummel oftheGroningen Instituteof
8 L.H. VAN WIJNGAARDEN-BAKKER, inNIEMEYER ET ALIl Archaeologyisthankedforkindlycheckingtheremainingbone
forthcoming. material ofthe samplesused in the14C analyses, confuming
9 Not having the notes at hand while writing this theirinitialidentifications(exclusivelycattle )"
contributionsornedoubtsaroseon whetherweactuallyused
559
=>
given context in reality. Only tbrough listing the
finds by context in the ARCHBANK. database,
which is in fact rather easy, can we grasp the full
pictur of the context's contents. The link:s to the
specialists' reports on individual items, however,
had not yet been made in aH cases. A context report
written in 2001 or 2002 and even in 2003 would,
therefore, certainly have been incomplete and
subject to corrections once all specialists' comments
would have been entered in t}1e database.
For various reasons, the editing of the fmal
publication ofthe Hamburg excavations in Carthage
has still not been concluded at the time of writing
these lines (February 2004). At the same time,the
pressure to present th results of the 14C analyses,
which so suggestively and temptingly would
reconcile the archaeological and the literary
chronologies, becomes stronger and stronger.
Already in November 2001, A.l Nij boer presented
the results on a national conference in Groningen,
publishing a Dutch version of his talk shortly
thereafter
10
, When he presented them again on the
intemational conference in Rome of October 31 st
2003, ofwhich these are the proceedings, we were
pressed hard byvarious colleagues to provide more
information on the archaeological contexts of the
sampled bones. In view of the fact thatthese new
chronological dates are starting to get quoted and
used for different ends, we felt obliged to present
at least a basic overview-of the. contexts' contents
for the present volum on Iron Age chronology. A
full publication of these contexts in relation with
pottery drawings and field sections is foreseen
elsewhere and at a more appropriate moment!!,
The raw data forthe finds' lists compiled below
bave been kindly furnisbed by members of the
publication team of the Hamburg University
excavations, in particular by K. Schmidt (Hamburg),
B. Bechtold (Graz), K. Mansel (Munich/Berlin), H.
10 NIlBOER 2002.
11 Moreover, a series ofbone samples from the earliest levels
in the new bilateral excavations of Ghent University and the
Institut National du Patrimoine in Carthage will be submitted
for 14(; analysis in eooperation With Al Nijboer and 1 Van der ,
Plicht. Onthese new excavations, see DoCTER, CHELBI, TEr.MINr
2003; CHELBI, TELMINI, DOCTER forthcoming.
12 With regard to the transport amphorae ofthe 1993 eampaign,

Koens (Amsterdam),A. Peserico (pisa), Ch. Briese in each
(Randers), W. Van Neer (Brussels), L.B. Van Gre
Wijngaarden-Bakker (Amsterdam), P.J. Nukoop best po
and R. Maliepaard (Amsterdam), or for the
bave been added by the present authors
I2
.-. : that Ph
i
,
studied
On tbe absolute dating of pbases 1 and n . ranges
J
The pottery and other fmds come from levelling secure
layers or fillings, which are mainly composed of t elemen
accumulated domestic and industrial garbag. paralle
Primary archaeological contexts, that is' td say
destruction layers, have been found only inafew though
cases (layers Illb in House 1 and IVb in House2). t period
The levelling layers precede constructionlPld f establi
occupation levels (floors); the fillings are lik:'wise t remain
connected withbuilding activities, viz. they constitute study ,
the in-;til1ings offoundation trenches. i been (
found m these layers has, therefore,to be consldered S seque
as pre-dating the construction and usephaseSi!.: t Cyclac
The architectural remains ofthePuniq,pe.riod that F
found on the site, wbich for the better part:had been Cornt
heavi1y affected by later human building'and t end of
robbing activities, could be clearl)
different major construction phases
l3
They:belOfig indiscl
to sorne seven architectural units f becau
streets (East- and West-Street),and can be furlhr Geom
subdivided in 14 occupation levels (mostlYfloors). Corin
F ortunately, there are manY cross-links betWeenthe t'
building sequences in the individualhouses: antl i.
streets, mainly because theseshated commu.naI
14 1i
walls, which by consequence had to be reph:icea l i eonsidt
the same time. Tbe layers and fills precedingthe assume
floors of eacb individual building phase"bavebeen ! 'Hallstl
considered to be contemporary with eachother,even * 15 F
. . . . ',' 'c > dates te
lftheorettcallya floor oflayer ITa I 2004, I
have been laid out some years later or earherthan i AJ. N:
floor na in House 2 or a street level na n the&s.:: i cireuJ
Street. Tbis synchronisation enabld uS1:ollhlce r: founda
maximum use ofthe few dating elements contained !.. : tphhe re:
.;. t oeUl
events,
it should benoted thatthese were only statisticallyregisteredduriI.g
NIJBOE
the campaigr. Two years later RE Docter ehecked and cometed
volum(
in Carthagethe statistics ofthedifferent contexts. Onlyoccasionny
is mad
amphorae ofthis campaign have been included inthe 1997 study
sugg
es
(DoCTER 1997). Consequently, no full profile drawings
circula
descriptions ofthese amphorae are available.
mentic
13 R.E DoCTER, H. G NIEMEYER, K. SCHMIDT, in NIEMEYER l'
table b
ALI! forthcorning.
oceurE
560
in each layer and filI.
Greek imports in the earliest layers form the
best possible eviOence to obtain absolute dates
for the stratigraphical given the fact
that Phoeniciap. pottery is either still not well
studieCl or provides us with only very wide date
/'
l4
ranges In the record of Greek imports, no
secure Middle Geometric formal or decorative .
'elements were found; the fragments find good
parallels in the ,Late Geometric repertoires'of
Euboea, Pithekoussai andperhaps the Cyc1ades,
thougp, The absolute dating of this stylistic
period in the three Greek landscapes is well
established, has been widely accepted and has
remained virtually unchallenged ince the 19-68
study of J.N. Coldstream
15
Its beginning has
been dated around 750 BC in the regional
sequences us here: Euboean,
Cyc1adic, and Corinthian (considering'the fa9t
that Pithecusan pott,ers closely followed
styles next to Euboean ones)16. The
end offuese Late GeopIetric sequences is, not as
clarly given as their start. Quite arbitrarily and
indiscriminately, we use here c. 715 BC, mainly
because of the clear transition from Late
Geometric to Early Protocorinthian in the
Corinthian sequence, based on inter alia
14, I4C dating of charcoal rernains had never been
considered a serious alternative, givel;l the reasonably
assumed overlap of the earliest layers with the so-called
'Hllstatt-Plateau' .
15 For sorne recent and unconvincing proposals to lower
dates to the 7th century BC, see the discussion in RIDeWAY
2004, p. 22 wth references in n. 23. On various occasions
A.I Nijboer has stated that the following reasoning is a
circular argument: first, using Thucydides' Sicilian
foundation dates for dating Greek pottery and, next, using
the resulting absolute dates for rnaking ,the Greek and
Phoenician (Levantine) expansion in fue West srnultaneous
events, dated from c. 770 BC onwards (A.J. NUBOER, in
NUBOER ET ALlI 1999/2000, NrJBOER 2002, NlJBOER, this
volume p. 527 ss.). The fact that in this connection reference
is made to POCTER 2000 is highly unfortunate, since it
suggests that confirmation can be found there for such a
circular argument, which is not fue case. The Greek imports
rnentioned in DOCTER 2000 (pp. 165-1.66, fig. 1) and in the
table belowclearly show that Greek Late Geometric pottery
,occurs next to Phoenician pottery from the first phase
Pithekoussai grave 325 with the Bocchoris
scarab
17
Corinthian (Protocorinthian) pottery
only found in the stratigraphicl
sequence afier phase lI
IB

The table below lists of Greek
FineWare pottery found in contexts of phases 1
and II19. When looking at these imports in
isolation, there seems to emerge a very
homogeneous-picture of only few provenances
and vessel shapes, and one could even speak of
one single horizon of imports. It is only by
comparing the frequency of other - non-Greek -
c1asses (local and imported Phoelfician,
Nura'ghic,U::.tc,) within the different layers, that
the distinction in three Iayers (1, lIa and IIb)
, based on the architectural changes in this early
period finds confirmation in the material culture
as weIl. Moreover, the Greek Fine imports
of phases l and II and their bearing on the
dating of Iayers 1, Ila and IIb can only
be properly understood in the context of the
imports inthe sub..sequent phases III and lV
20

Iieoutsicle the scope' of the
present articIe
21
, but some of their: results may
already be grasped by the comments on different
classes of transport in the contexts
discussed below (especially KA93/183).
/'
onwards, leaving no doubt as to the fact that they are
contemporary (but see now below on KA931183). Moreover,
the Thucydides' dating scheme, which starts with the
foundation ofNaxos in 734 BC, is oflittle help in absolutely
dating the Euboean, Cycladic (?) and Pithecusan Late
Geometric pottery found in our erliest layers.
16 COLPSTREAM 1968, pp, 302-331 and especially p. 330
with tableo Only the start ofthe Theran sequence has been
dated later, to around 720 BC.
17 NIiEFr 1987, pp. 372-379, correcting the transition from
Corinfuian LG to EFC as given by Coldstream and others
(720 BC).
18 DOCTBR 2000, p. 66, fig. 1; see also below, n. 57.
19 It is based on DOCTER 2000, pp. 65-66, fig. 1 and R.F.
DOCTER, in NIEMEYER ET Awforthcoming.
20 In the layers of phases III and IV Euboean and
Pithecusan vessels continue in good quantities; as stated
aboye, Corinthian vessels appear for the first time.
21 Por this we refer to the final publication, NIEMBYER ET
Alforthcoming. "-" .,
561
GreekFineWares Stratigrapby,
e.760-740 I 1EuboeaI'lLGskyphos
22
e.750-715 PhaseI
e.740-725 I 1EuboeanLGskypbos
23
1Cyc1adie(?)LGopenvesseF4
1PitheeusanAetos?66kotyle
25
. 1PitheeusanLGflatbowIorplate
26
Layerlla
"
. I
e.725-700 Layerllb
,
Inthepresentationofthefivecontextsbe10w,the
abso1utedatesgivenarealwaystheeonventionalones.
ContextKA93/183: pbase1(bonesampleof
cattle)
Thiscontextwasexeavatedinthesouthempart
oftheEast-Streetataleve1of7.00-7.39IDbelowpoint
zero offue site. Itwas described as a "fettige,
knochenreicheSehichf'.Astreetpavementofsmall
1imestoneeobb1espartlycoveredtheeontextInpart
itsatdireet1yontopofthevirginsollo
Thecontextcontains75fragmentsofanimalbones
andamollusc(nos.32-39),100fragmentsofpottery
22 K.A93/183-31:outseethecornmentsoncontextKA93/
183,below.
l3 K.A911537-4, East-Street: REDociER, inNIEMEYER ET
ALII fortbcoming, cato4118.
24K.A911537-3,East"Street:NIEMEYER, DOCTERETAm1993,
226;RF.DocrER,inNIEMEYERET ALIl fortbcoming, cat.4297.
25 KA88/57-12, House 2, Room K: RF. DOCTER, in
NIEMEYER ETAw fortbcoming, cat. 4192. .
26 KA88/57-B12, House 2, Room K: R.F. DOCTER, in
NIEMEYERET ALII fortbcoming, cat.4202.
27 KA93/124-4and 5,House2, RoomM:R.EDOCTER, in
NIEMEYER ET mI fortbcoming, cato 4262-4263.
28 K.A86171-5,House2,RoomK:R.EDOCTER, inNIEMEYER
ET Aw fortbcoming, cato 4101.
29K.A86171-7,House2,RoomK:REDOCTER, inNIEMEYER
ET Awfortbcoming, cato 4102.
30 KA861118-2, House 2, Room K: R.F. DOCTER, in
NIEMEYERET ALII fortbcoming, cat. 4107.
3J KA861118-84, House 2, Room K: R.E DOCfER, in
562
2Greekopenvesse1s
27
1EuboeanLGskyphOS
28
1EuboeanLGskypbos
29
1EuboeanLGskyphos
3O
1EuboeanLGSkyphOS
31
1EuboeanLGskyphos
32
1Pitheeusanjug1et
33
le. 750-715
:
e.750-715
e.750-715
e.750-715
?
'e. 750-715
!e.750-715
e.750-715
c.750-715
e.750-715
. '.
?
i
and 1 iron slag (no. 31). The abso1ute date ofthe
eontextandofphase1hasbeenfiXedmainlybyfue
baseoftheEuboeanskyphoswithtriglyphmdtifin
thehandlezone(no.1),dated
C. 750and715BC34. The 14fragrneritsofNufgbib
handmadeamphoraeseemtoconfinnthis illt,
stillwithinthesecondhalfofthe8th 4uariefof
the 7th centuryBC (nos. 2-3)35. Thediagllostic
fragments oflocalRedSlip:dates
theearinatedbow1(no.21)seemtobe10ngeidtiSively
toA.Peserieo'sfirst horizon oftheRed:Sj'Wre
openvesselsofCarthage, eomprisinglayers1toNa
anddatedonlygeneral1ybetweenc.750and650BC
36

NIEMEYERET ALII fortbcoming, cato 4108.


3l K.A911122-58, House 2, Room K: R.F. DOCI1:.!t, in
NIEMEYER ETAw fortbcoming, cat. 4111. .
33 KA86/71-6,House2,RoomK:DocrER,NIEMEYER 1994,
p. 107, cato 1, fig. 5h; R.E DOCfER,inNIEMEYEREiALlI
fortbcoming, cat. 4211.
34 The two joining base fragments have been kindly.
examinedby1. Coldstream(19.6.1996) andwereconsidered
byhimtocorrespondtohisnotionof genuineEuboeanfabrico
SeeRF. DocrER, inNIEMEYER ET Aw fortbcoming,cat. 4120,
withfullreferences.
35 Onthese amphorae, initiallyassigneda
provenance(DOc:rER1997,chapterIX),seenowOOOIANO2090;
DOCTER 1998;REDOCTER, inNIEMEYERET ALIl fortbcoming,
XILA2,cat. 5362-5389.
36 Onthishorizon,PESERlCO2002,pI. 12:platsoftypeP1
(PESERICO2002,21-27,fig.4,pI.3),abaseoftypeB2(PESERlCO
2002, 53-56, fig. 12, pI. lla-b), and acarinated bowl CCr2
(PESERlCO2002,40,43-44,49, 8,pI. 8).
Thesam
fragmen
'delEstn
theSout
Carthagl
oftheir
thermd
campai
laeking,
justaeei
10fragn
years. j
oeeurre
amphon
campaig
inthe e
Tl
I
1
! ]
2 1
3
]
: 4 1
. 5
]
6
]
7
]
8
]
9 J
10 J
11 J
12 J
13 J
14
]
15 TJ
]
16
]
17
J
]
18
19
20
]
]
21
37Doc
inNIEMEYE
38 Doc
DocrER,in:
The same general date range n+ay be given to the 23
fragments oftransport amphorae from the Circuito
del Estrecho (CdE )}, that is to say principally from
. -
the South andSouth-West of Spain (nos. 4-5)31. In
Carthage, layera IDa till Na constitute the floruit
of the inport of c1ass CdE 1 (c. 700-650 Be). In
the finds of contexts assigned to phase 1 in the
campaigns 1986-1991 the class is comp1etely
iacking, which may be significant, but may a1so be
. just accidental1y so, given the fact that onlysorne
10 fragments could be attributed to phase 1in these
years. ,Although the same may be said of the
occurrence of the Corinthian A type transport
amphorae and the Attic ones in the 1986-1991
carilpaigns, it seell1S that these classes do sta.rt later
. in the Carthaginian stratigraphy. Starting with 7
fragments in layer Ilb, so in the last quarter of the
8th cent. BC, the Corinthian amphorae are mainly
. found in phase JV3B. The Attic amphorae of the
1986-1991 campaigns start even later, in layer IDa,
although examples of the earliest, 8th century BC
versions have been found in residual position
39
. The
Corin.thianA type transport amphorae (nos. 6-7) and
the Attic ones (nos. 8-9) in context KA931183 may
therefore perhaps -suggest that the context is not as
homogeneous as initiallythought. AIso the factthat
only one single fragment ofHandmade Ware pottery
has been found in the context (no. 30) is suspicious.
This seems to be rather unusua1 in a context ofsuch
an eariystratigraphica1 position, especially in view
ofthe otherwise high number ofpottery fragments
(100)40.
l:l
13 KA931l83 I 2 wall
,.)4 KA93/183-37 I 1 wa11
15 I KA931l83-34 I 1 rim
~
I 16 I KA93/183-63 I 1 nm
:..J 7 .. ! KA93/183-66 i 1 nm
31DocrER 1997, VI.I.3.4, tab. 18,figs. 542-543;RF. DOCTER, 39 DOCTER 1997, XI.2; RE DOCTER, in NIEMEYER ET Aw
in NIEMBYER ETAmfortbcoming, XIIA4, cato 5431-545L fortbcoming, XILA6, cato 5474-5489.
38 DOCTER 1997, XI.l, tab. 85, figs. 455-464, pL 12; RF. 40 See MANSEL 1999; K. MANSEL, in NIEMEYER ET Aw
DOCTER, inN:!EMEYsRETAwfortbcorning, XIlA6, ca!. 5465-5473. fortbcoming.
563
I KA93/183
321Bos Tauros (cattle 2
33
34
35
36
37 .
Indeterminable
38 A vsvmus regius sE. (meagre)
39 Mollusc
Context KA93/189: phase 1 (?) (bone
sample of cattle)
This context was excavated in the southem
.part ofthe East-Street, directly on top ofthe virgin
soil till a level of7.39 m below point zero ofthe
site. A more precise description of the context is
22' KA93/183-40 I 1 ,. diagn.
. ,1
23 KA931183-41 1 diagn.
24 I KA931183-44 1 diagn:
25 KA93/183-45 1 diagn.
26 I KA931183-46 I 1 diagn.
27 KA931183-47 I 1 diagn.
28 I KA931183..48
1 diagn.
29
' KA931183-68 !
1 base
I 30
KA93/183-38 1 wall
31 KA931183-1 1
I
--+
Local Red Slip Ware
I PIate
I
Local Red Slip Ware
. Plate
I
Local Red Slip Ware Plate
Local Red Slip Ware PIate
I
Local Red Slip Ware PIate l
Local Red Slip Ware PIate
l
Local RedSlip Ware Plate
Local Red Slip Ware plate or bowl
Local Handmade Ware Jar
Iron slag41
:
Inventory no. I No. Fragment
I
FabriclWare
I
i

!
Bronze
43
rod-shaped
!
1 KA931l89-1 I 1-
1 1
lacking however. Another complicating factor is
the fact that finds other than animal bones arid a
bronze fragment have not been recorderl this
context. Especially the fact that not a sirlgle piece
ofpottery was recorded is odd; the 31bone and
mollusc fragments and 1 bronze object wouid
clearly suggest a medium sized
least some pottery42. These
particularly disturbing since exactly the 14C
analysis ofthe bone sample from cntext KA93i
189 yielded a more ample - and later - dfite ralge
than the other four samples. A sasfCtoiy
explanation is still to be looked for, thoughit
cannot be excluded that already during tbe
excavation something has gone wrong in the data
and finds collection. .
I KA93/189
NOI
2 Bos Taurus (cattle) 12
3 I Equusasinus(donkey) 1
Ovis/Capra (sheep/goat) 10
5 I Canis familiaris (dog) 1
6 Large maromal 4
I
7 I Mediwn maromal 1
I
I
.8 ! Indeterminable 1

!9 ! Mollusc 1
I
41 The slag wiIl be published by K. MANsEL, H. KOENS, in
NmMEYERETALlIforthcoming, cat. 6575. ,
42 Exactly animal bones and metal objects are finds which
already in fue field are separated from me pottery, so before
Context KA93/181: phase ll, stratum II-:d
(bone sample of cattle)
The context was excavated in the nortbern part
ofthe East-Street at a leve! of 6.73-6.90 m belw
" -.' ---",--
point zero ofthe site. It consists ofilie lower pa:t! of
a sequence offilling layers, wruch were
as "schwarzIch 'fettige' Auffllungenmit viel
Keramik, mittelgro6en Kalksteinfragmenten,
Feldsteinen und Knochen". It lies below context
entering fue finds' processing laboratory.
43 The fragment wiIl be published by K. MANsEL, H. KOENS,
in NlBMEYER ETALlI forthcoming, ca. 6542.
KA93/,
stratign:
, Imayh;
Apa
mollus(
vory '"
fragmeJ
belong
(nos.1.
till mi
putfon
the Cif.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
44
45
46
ETAIJ
47
564
KA93/499. Although KA93/181 is assigned
class has predominantly been found in layers illa
stratigraphically to stratum TI-al, material ofphase
to IVa (c. 700-650 BC)45. A third class ofimported
1 may have been mcludedin the context.'
transport amphorae comes from the Levant (nos.
Apart from 116 fragments of animal bones and
and is first found in layer TIa of the 1986-
moJlu!cs (nos; 41-50) as well as one waster of
1991 sample, but continues in the 7th and frrst haIf
ivoryworking (no. 40), no Iess than 188 pottery
ofthe 6thcent. BC layers of Carthage
46
. AH Red
fragments were foud in the context. Six fragments
Slip Fine Ware vesse1s for eating and drinking in
, belotig to Nuraghic handmade transport amphorae this context may be attributed to A. Peserico's
(nds. 1-2), which are regu1arly found in phasesI "fidt horzon;,:'one bowl of her type CsC1 (no.
till ill (c. 760-675 BC)44. A similar datemaybe _ 17), a carinated bow1 oftype CCr2 (no. 16), the
put forward for the 30 fnigments ofamphorae from plates oftype PI (nos. 19-31) and the bases of
the Circuito del Estrecho (nos. 3-4), although this type B1 (nos. 32-34)47.
IS
a
s
"-, N:l ___ Shape I
;e
1 i KA931181 __ __ Amphoru
2 KA93/181 3 wall. Nuraghic Ware Amphora I
ld
I
ld
at
KA93/181 diagn. I Imporled Plain Ware CdE
KA931181 28 Amphora ! J
e'
5, ' ,KA93/.l81 ,1., diagn. '- , I
6 KA93/181 5;
i"
,:all , Ware __
ge
KA93/181-3 flm Levantme Plam Ware Juglet'
31
l.
8 KA93/181-2 2 i' rim , Local? Plain Ware Juglet48
9 KA931181-14, 1 _ rim I Local Plain Ware i Basin
ry
it
le
KA931181-17 , 1 I handle Plain Ware Closed vessel
ta
11 1 I rim
12 KA93/181-5 I 1 I rim LocalPlain Ware __--tyearth
I
j
,13 J<A!j3/18! : 2 i diagn. I LocalPlain Ware Ampbora -
14 KA931181
KA93/181-4--1__1 I SmoothedlocalPlailiWare -L2penvesse.LJ
'r 16, KA93/181-25 I 1 I diagn. RedSlipWare Carinatedbowil
I 17! KA93/181-37 --i 1 I diagn. ,! Red Slip Ware ' BowI_
18 I KA93/181-39 1! diagn. , Red Slip ______._, Cup
11
191 KA931181 11 diagn. Red Slip Ware , Plate J
I 20 I KA93/181-23. _.!- Red Slip Ware
rt
21 KA93/181-24 1 diagn. Red Slip Ware I Plate_ i
w
22 I KA93/181-26 ' 1 Red Slip Ware I Plate
)f
23 KA931181-28 1 Red Slip Ware I PIate
:d
r24 KA93/18l-29 ' Red Ware ,PIate
:::1
25 KA931181-33 1 __ __ Shp Ware ___----;
1,
- - KA93118l-34 1 diagn. Red Slip Ware I PIate
<t
44 On this c1ass, see above at context KA931183. 5), these vessels have been discussed already in the section on
4S On this class, see above at context KA93/I83. context KA93/183 (see above).

.,; DOCTER 1997, VI-4, tab. 6; R.F. DOCTER, in NlEMEYER 48This fragment will be published byB. BECHTOLD, in
ETAwforthcomng, XII.A3, cato 5414-5427. NlEMEYER ET ALrr forthcoming, cato 4701.
47 Apart from CsC1 (PESERICO 2002, 28-36, fig, 5, pI.
565
KA93/181 No.
I
, - BosTaurus(cattle) 29
42 Equuscabal!..us(horse) 3
43 Ovis/Capra(sheep/goat) 28 I
44 Susdomesticus(domesticpig) 1
!
45 Canisfamiliaris(dog) !

1
I
46 Largemammal 30 I
47 Mediummammal
11 J
49 Epinephelus sp. 2
5
ContextKA93/499: phasen, stratumTI-bl
(bonesampleof cattle)
I
I
Thecontextwasexcavatedinthenorthempart
of theEast-Streetata level of6.60-6.73 m below
pointzeroofthesite.It consistsoftheupper partof
asequenceof fillinglayers,whichweredescribed
as "schwarzlich 'fettige'AuffIlungen mit viel
48 Indeterminable 6
I
50 MoIluscs
e
r
27 KA931181-35 1 diagn.
28 K.A931181-36 I 1 diagn.
29,
KA931181-38 I 1 diagn.
30 KA931181-40 1 diagn.
31
1
KA93/181-45 1 diagn.
32 KA931181-27 1 base
33''KA931181-30 ' 1 base
34 KA931181-31 1 base
35 KA93/181-87 4 wall-handle
36 KA931181-8 1 wall
37! KA93/181-9 1 wall
i 38 KA93/181-10 2 wall-handle
39 KA931181-12 1 wall
40 KA931181-7 1 sawnofftusk
I
RedSlipWare
i
Plate
'.
RedSlipWare Plate
I
RedSlipWare Plate
RedSlipWare Plate
i
RedSlipWare Plate '
RedSlipWare Plate
RedSlipWare Plate
. RedSlipWare Plate
LocalHandmadeWare Amphora
49
I
LocalHandmadeWare Jar
i
LocalHandmadeWare Jar
LocalHandmadeWare JarS
!
LocalHandmadeWare Jar
I
Ivory(loxodonta africana?) . Wasters
1
l.
Inventory

Fragment Fabric/Ware Shape

no.
1 KA93/499-168 1
diagn. NuraghicWare Amphora
Keramik, mittelgroBen Kalksteinfragment;i,
Feldsteinen und Knochen". 1t les aboye corite'xt
KA93/181 (see aboye) and belowKA93/498
("graueErde"),fromwhichitisseparatedbyalayer
of smallcobbles(streetpavement?). . .c.
Thecontextcontained114fragmentsofIli:iiil
bonesandmolluscs(nos.29-40)and112fragrlrifs
ofpottery.TheRedSlipWareplatesinthecontext
areexclusivelyofPeserico'searlytypePI(nos.12-
21)52. A Red Slip Ware carinated plate haspen
attributedtoPeserico'stypeCCr4(no. 11),whih
startsinphases1- TI (c.secondhalf ofthe'8thcerit:
BC), butis mainlyfound inlayerslVb-c(c. 645-
550BC)53. TheimportedNuraghic(nos. 1-2)
CdE1(no. 3)transportamphoraecanbegent3'lly
attributedtothesecondhalfofthe8thandfirsthalfof
the7thcen.Be (seeaboye, KA931183). A for
thecontextin thesecondhalforlastquarterofth8th
centuryBCseemsplausible,alsoinviewofthenumbr
ofHandmadeWarefragments(nos.22-28).
49 This fragment has already been dscussed in: DOCfER
1997, X.l.3, fig. 441, tab. 77; see also R.F. DOCTER, in
NlEMEYER ET ALlIforthcoming, cat. 536l.
lO ThisfragmentwillbepublishedbyK.MANsEL, inH.G
NJEMEYER ET Am forthcoming, ca. 2756.
51 VAN WDNGAAlmEN-BAKKER ETAllI 2003, p.37; L.H. VAN
WDNGAAlmEN-B;\KKER, P.I. Nux.oop, in RGNIEMEYER ET Am
forthcoming,ca.7351.Thiswaster istheearliesthardevidence
forivoryworkinginCarthage.
52 Onthistype,seeaboveatcontextKA931l83.
S3 PESERICO 2002,pp. 40, 44-46,fig. 8, pIs. 8, 12, second.
horizon.
2
1
i 3
1
] 4
] 5
6
1
)
:
i 9 ,
10 .
. 11 I

.13
15
!

16
18
19
20

22

124
p-
t

29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
566
54
n
:, 2 . KA93/499 =3_12 wall___ Nuraghlc W-ar-e- -L
r. ImjJorted Ware
;' 4 l 2 wall Imported Plam Ware I
t 5 -+ 1 1 __ ___,.
6 KA93/499 i 8 dlagn.." . Ware
.. I_.-KA93/499 I 35 wall LocalPlain Ware __
8KA93/499-91 I 2 rim _ I LocalPlain Ware
l' _ if I 9 KA93/499-98 1 wan-h. andle Loc,al Plain
10 I'KA93/499-93 I 1 rim
11 KA93/499-79 1 _diagn.
'E-i-KA93/499 I 1 'r-!:fl1
13 KA93/499-80 I 1 . diagn.

15
I 16
17
I 18
""T9
20
, t
, 21
22 :1
"23
KA93/499-82 1 diagn.
KA937499-83- I 1 diagn.
KA93/499-84 1 diagn.
KA.93/499-85 I 1 diagn.
KA93/499-87 1 diagn.
KA93/499-88 . 1 'diagn.
KA93/499-89 i l __diagn.
1
1
KA93/499-23 waU
KA93/499-7 1 base
24 KA.93/499-10 3 rim
25 IKA93/499-43 3 wall
t26 KA93/499-12 1 handle
27 tiKA93/499-45 11]1. _
28 KA93/499-46 1 rim
__._ __ ____._-"
L
29 Bos Ta.:tJ!Us (cattle)
30 E uus asinus (donkey)
31 Ovis/Ca ra (sheep/goat)
. LocalPIainWare
1_ Local Red Slip Ware-
_ I L()cal Red_Slip Ware
I Local Red Slip Ware
Local Red Slip Ware
AmpE5?ra


Amphora I
Jug-----=:1
Jug
Trefuilmouthjug
plate
PIate
Plate
p.late
Local Red Slip Plate
Local Red Slip 1- 1'1;jo.------l
- Local R.ed Slip Rlate
Local Red Slip Ware Plate
LocaCRed Slip Ware ----piaie--
Local Red Slip \Vare-
Local Red Slip Ware , .
Loca! Handma,de war.e
Wate_
Local HandmadeWa.re--
. -'Local Handmade Ware
Local Handmade Ware
Local Handmade Ware
, Local Handmade Ware
I
.'
. Tabouna
'Jar
JarlbowI54
Jarlbow-l----

Jar
Jar
______---l
Context KA93/220: phase n, stratum II-5b2
(bone sample of cattle)
No.
The context was excavated in the higher, north-
I 24
westem part ofthe site at a level of 5.38-5,55 m
I 3
below point zero, lt was described as a "braunliche
20
Unterpackung mit vielen Lehmziegeln und
32 Sus domesticus (dOmestf.c pig) 2
Kalksteinfragmenten". The sequence of layers in
which the context was found, c1early places it in a
I __-
house interior, to be precisely Room J ofHouse 5.
135 Medium maroma! 13
The small context contains 12 fragments of
36 Indetenninable 14
. ' .--"-,------1--- animal bones (nos. 11-15) and 13 fragments of
37 Epinephelus sp. 2
pottery. The imports of Nuraghic handmade
38 Argyrosomus regius (meagre) 3
transportamphorae (nos. 1-2) and CdE 1 amphorae
39 I Sparidae (seabream) __ _
(nos. 3-4) among these and the relatively large
, Molluscs I 5
proportion ofHandmade Ware vessels (nos. 7-10)
b.
(f
rl
',{"
. "Thi, pi"" wilI b' by K. in H.G
NIEMEYER ET AllI forthcoming, cato 2760.
I
567

I
IInventory
No. Fragment
no.
1 KA93/220-27 1 diagn.
2 KA93/220 3 wall
3 KA93/22O 1 wall
4 KA93/22O 2 wall
5 KA93/220-10 1 wall
6 KA931220-26 1 rim
7 KA93/220-1 1 wall
! 8 ! KA93/220-13 1
!
base
9 I KA93/220-.l5 1 wall
1
10
1 KA93/220 1 wall
... -
I
Fabric/W"are Shape
Nuraghic Ware Amphora
Nuraghic Ware Amphora
Imported Red Slip Ware CdE Amphora?
Imported Plain Ware CdE Amphora
I
Local Plain Ware Amphora
I
Local Plain Ware Closed vessel? I
Local Handmade Ware Jar
!
Local Handmade Ware
IJar
I
Local Handmade Ware Jar
Local Handmade Ware
IJif
I
KA93/220 No.
Bos Tauros (cattle) 5
Rt-
12 Ovis/Capra (sheep/goat) 1
113
Large mammal 2
. 14
Medium mammal 1 i
[15
Argyrosomus regius (meagre) 3
I
are suggestive of a rather early date, still within the
second halfor last quarter ofthe 8th century BC55.
Comments
How do we explain the apparent difference
between the conventionaI dating ofthe earliest two
phases inthe Carthaginian stratigraphy (c. 760-700
BC) and the 14C dates of all but one sample
pertaining to the 9
th
century Be? Unless there are
inconsistencies ( or consistent errors) and unforeseen
tecfu"lical problems in the 14C method involved,
which seems hard to believe, one is left with only
two possible explanations for the gap of 40 to 100
years:
1. the conventional date ranges of the Greek
Late Geometric pottery series found in these
contexts are incorrect; or .
2. the bone material sampled for 14C analysis is
residual in the contexts con cerned.
From a methodological point ofview, the frrst
jjOnthe different classes, see aboye context KA93/183.
56 Any serious challenge of the Greek Geometric dating
scheme would effectively constitute something in the order of
a change ofparadigm.
57 The forthcoming publication of the University of
568
option cannot be seriously discussed in the context
ofthe present contribution. Not oply is the number
ofsamples too small and the only direct association
in sample KA931187 with a Greek,
skyphos problematic (see below), but also would
this demand a study ofamuch wider scope, notthe
least because ofthe unforeseeable implications f
such a re-dating56.
Theoretical1y, the second option seems not
improbable in the light of the high level of
residuality in almost all Carthaginian
However, it would be extremely strange if onlyfue
cerarnic material would date to the second half f
the 8th century BC and exactIy the animal bones
used in the i
4
C analyses to the 9
th
century BC; and
that in all five contexts.
But is there no alternative explanation?
Let us start with the only 'problematic' samplt;:
(problematic from a 14C point of view): the bone
from context KA931189, which has been datedto
2540 :1: 30 BP and re-dated to 2510 :1: 3 O
calibrated 800-540/510 Be. As outlined inthe
discussion ofthe context, which has been attributed
to phase l, it is not unlikely that something has
wrong in the fie1d or in the finds' processip.g
laboratory. The pottery, which we may suppose 10
have found in is not registered; precise notes and
a field description of the context are lacking too,
Amsterdam excavationson fue Bir Massouda site (2000 and
2001) is particularly focussing upon fuese residuality problems;
DOCTER forthcoming, 3.1.1 (R.E DOC1ER), 3.1.2-.7 (B.
BECHTOW), 3.1.&(J. NACEF, L. FERSI). .
apart
ofth,
toco
chrO]
1
to pI:
ofth
conb
and,
whic
the
rath!
the(
the:
asse
ofp
orp
witl
con
trig:
con
con
dat<
cor
hetl
exc

anc
wh
(so
ap
Str
Oc
roc
aS"
gu.
: .
th!
gu
th(
ID(
di:
fao

rai
apart from the brief mention of its position on top
ofthe virgin soil. 1t is, therefore, perhaps best not
I to consider this context and sampIe in the following
chronological discussions.
t .The other sample from a street context attributed
to phase I, again on the basis of its position on top
:...........ofthe virgin soil, is KA93/183. AcIoser Iook on its
, contents \vouId suggest fuat it is nqt as homogeneous
j
and early as initially thought: it includes material,
f. which is more regulrly found in later phases. 'At
the same time, Handmade Ware vessels, which are
-rather typical for early contexts, form only 1 % of
the ceramic assemblage. Ifone would not have had
,..:. fue stratigraphical information on the context, this
!. assemblage would have been compared to contexts
1
,. of phase ID or layer IVa, that is to say the frrst half
or perhaps first quarter of the 7th cent. BC, aIbeit
w with a fair amount ofresidual material. It is in this
context that the base of the Euboean skyphos with
. trlglyph motif in the handle zone was found, dated
'conventionally between c. 750 and 715 BC. Before
confronting any conventionaI date with the new J4C
date for this cO!1text (late 9th cent. BC), we should
consider how to explain the relatively
heterogeneous composition of the contexto Upon
excavation it seemed to have been a rather well
deposited context, partly on top of 1;he virgin soil
and partIy even sealed with a cobble pavement,
which clearly belonged to fue fust usage ofthe street
(so phase I).'The answer may perhaps be sought in
a phenomenon found also higher up in the East-
Street. At times of heavy rainfall, especially in
October and November, water fell down from the
roofs ofthe houses borderingthe streets and formed
a strong current in the streets, at times carising deep
gullies on its way downhill
58
1t is natto be excluded
that also in this case we see the effects of such a
gully, created e.g. during phase mand filled in soon
thereafter with garbage. Since all street layers are
more or less similar in composition and, moreover,
:f discoloured black to greenish by the influenc of
{f faeces, it is possible that the Part ofthe context that
1-
ff:
1"
58 Similar effects of such heavy rainfall could be seen on
i"
the 1.3ir MassOUliasite in the last week ofSeptember 2003; these
rams carne extremely early in the year and were extremely heavy.

,
59 It seems to be excluded that phase III can be re-dated
'1
f
f
had not been covered by cobbles upon excavation, .
is in fact an in-fill of later date. Two contexts,
excavated as one, would explain the rather
heterogeneous composition of KA931183. At frrst
sight, tbis down-dating of part of the context only
worsens the chronological problem, since the gap
with the 14C date ofthe contextis now widened to
no less than 100-150 years. We return upon this after
discussing the other contexts.
The other three contexts, attributed to layers ITa
(KA93/181) and lIb (KA93/220 and KA93/499),
have 14C dates, which in absolute terros would
correspond to the late 9th century till C. 790 BC (in
the case of KA931220, from layer IIb). Their
compositions are rather homogeneous and would
seem,.. to the present knowledge - to be very well in
acc9rdance with a date in the second halfofthe 8th
century BC. No direct associations with Greek
Geometric pottery were available in these contexts,
however. This brings us perhaps nearer to an
explanation for the apparent gap between the
conventional dates and the 14C dates.
The three contexts ;; orly indirectly associated
with Greek Late Geometric pottery (see aboye). Also
our notion of the date ranges of the Phoenician,
Carthaginian, Levantine andNuraghicpottery contained
in fuese contexts is ultimately based only on the same
indirect association with GreekLate Geometric pottery.
What would be the consequences if this pottery had
actua1ly been produced in the late 9th century BC, as
the associated 14C samples would suggest?
In the frrst place, these types would then have
had longer date ranges, starting already by the late
9th century BC, continuing at least till the end of
the 8th century BC. In view of the conservative
character ofmost ofthe Phoenician, Levantine and
Carthaginian (and al so Nuraghic?) pottery, this
would not seem impossible.
In the second place, this would imply that phase
IT covers the whole 8th century BC, which seems
less likely in view ofthe relatively thin sediments
of layers ITa and IIb59. Moreover, how would we
upwards to the 8th cent. BC, since it is associated with a
Corinthian kotyle of probably Middle Protocorinthian 1 type
(685-665 BC), DOCTER 2000, p. 66, fig. 1; R.F. DOCTER, in
NlEMEYERETAUIforthcoming, cato 4144.
569
then explain the other contexts of phasen, not
discussed here, that do have direct assoejations with
Greek Geometric pottery (see the table above)? And
how would we explain the direct association of
KA93/183 (phase 1, but probably disturbed in phase
III) with an Euboean Late Geometric skyphos in
conneetion withthe bone-sample dated by the 14C
method to the 9
th
century BC?
It seems inevitable that we have to consider
again the possibility ofresidual material. The three
contexts KA931181, KA93/499 and KA93/220
would then be composed of mainly early material
dated to the late 9th century BC, which had been
re-deposited in the second half or last quarter of
the 8th cent. BC, at the time this part ofthe eastern
Byrsa hill became urbanised. Similar stratigraphical
sequences are not uncommon in Archaic Carthage.
Sorne 140 m farther to the south, the new
excavations of Ghent University and the Institut
National du Patrimoine (Tunis/Carthage) have
attested 8th century BC contexts, re-deposited in
the middle ofthe 7th eentury BC on top ofthe virgin
soil (extra muros)60. And the exeavations of the
University ofAmsterdarn in 2000 and 2001, some
90 m south of the Hamburg site, yielded
homogeneous 8th and 7th century Be contexts on
top of 5th century BC levels
61
. In the excavations
ofthe University ofHamburg one should probably
consider the contexts containing also Greek Late
Geometric pottery, as e.g. KA931183, to be
composed of oIder (bone sample) and younger
material (LG skyphos) alike. If this reasoning is
correet, such contexts should probably also contain
younger bone material. Only by having more bone
fragments fromcontexts in direet association with
Greek Late Geometric pottery analysed by the 14C
method, can this reconstruction of the site's
fonnation processes be substantiated.
The final question to be adduced in this
connection is, from where this residual material had
been taken? The most likely option is that it carne
from an earlier settlement higher up the Byrsa hilI.
In the light ofthe almost exelusiveIy 'Carthaginian'
60 DocTER, CHELBI, TELMINr 2003, esp. 48; CHELm, TELMlNI,
DOCTER forthcoming_
6! DOCTER forthcoming, 2.1.8 (E. GROENEWOUD, R.F.
570
character of the pottery contained in the contexts wh
(with 100,188,112 and 13 fragments respectively), "Pr
it is highly unlike1y that these eeramics and by staJ
consequence the bone material in the contexts is e
should stem from an indigenous population living
in the area before the foundation of Phoenician con
Carthage. Ho
If new 14C dates prove to be eorrect and fmd con
confinnation in samples that will be analysed in oft
the near future, we shall onIy be gIad to overcome bot
our initial reservations and to conclude that alS(
Phoenician Carthage had indeed been founded in con
the late 9th eentury BC. Ral
chr!
ll. TheRadiocarbon dates (J. vANDERPurnr) in (
eur
Radiocarbon or Carbon-14 (l4C) is a naturall)' wo<
occurring isotope ofilie element Carbono lt is noi. by -
stable fonn of carbon but radioaetive, anddeeays IntI
with a haIf-life of 5730 years. This half-lifeisth:t Hol
time needed for half ofthe radioactive isotopesl
deeay. Radiocarbon is 1 is d
upper atmosphere by cosmlC radlation. A statoIal:y' i tran
state ofproduction, distribution (between the gl6ba.l f caL
carbon reservoirs) and decay results CUf1
coneentration of ca. 10-10 % in living as
(people, animals and pIants). The earbon I in a
with the environment eeases after deathof -fue COl
organism, whereupon only the decay Of14C oceuts::
,
1

cali
Thus, the age (more precisely: the moment ofdeaili) t for
can be determined by measuring the amount of l1C
left in the sample
62
. '-;.\'5
Radiocarbon ages are reported as ame
conventional ages. This is a practiee '1 Eac
the 14C concentration for a sample is trea
reIative to a standard aetivity (corresponding'Willi f dan
the year 1950 AD), is correeted for , eoll
oceurring in nature and laboratory, and is " dev
using an oId value for the haIf-life (in order' toc'l:(e 't mat
consistent with dates publishd in the bgi:nD:lrlg vah
years of Radiocarbon dating). For more t nan
details, we refer to the literature
63
.l".j';'C' f in p
Radiocarbon ages are expressed in the unit''J3P;':''
DOCTER), 3_1.1 (R.F. DOCTER).
62 ArrKEN 1990.
63 Cf. MooK, WATERBOLK 1985.
which originally meant "Befare Present", with
"Presenf" being 1950AD(becauseofthechosen
.standard).Today,thistermseemsunfortunateand
is confusing.
Itwas assumed orginallythatthe natural 14C
concentratonwasaconstantthroughouttheages.
However, t was soon realised that this 14C
cO,nceutrtionvaries
64
; itdepends onthe strength
ofthegeomagneticfieldartdonsolaractivitywhich
bothdeterminethecosmicradiationfluxandthuS'
.also the 14C production rate. Bothfactors arenot
ponstant but vary in time
65
This means that a
Radiocarbon chronology is not a calendar
chronology.Radiocarbondateshaveto calibrated
in orderto obtain historical dates. A calibration
~ u r v has been consructedbydating samples of
wood,absolutelydatedbydendrochronology,also
bythe 14C method. This calibration curve, called
Intca.l98, covers practically the complete
Holocene6
6

Surnmarizing,theRadiocarbontimescale(BP)
isdefined and14CdatesexpressedinBPneedtobe
~ translated into calendar ages (noted as calBC or
calAD) bymeans ofcalibration. The calibration
curveisnotregularbutshowsfluctuationsknown
as"wiggles".Asimple14Cdatecanthereforeresult
.inacomplicatedcalibratedagerangedistribution.
Computer programs exist to perform such
calibrations
67
.Anexampleconcemingthe14Cdates
forCarthagewil1 bediscussedbelow.
Organic materials suitable for 14C dating are,.
arrlngothers,charcoal,wood,peat,shellsandbOlle.
EachmaterialhastoundergochemicalandphysiCal
treatmenttoremovecontaminantsandtoextractthe
datablefraction
68
,Forbone,tbedatablefractionis
collagenwhichisextractedfollowingaprocedure
.developedbyLongin
69
Qualitychecksforsample
material aretbe carbon content (%C) andthe
13
8
value.Thelatterisameasureofthecontentof the
naturalstablecarbonisotope13C, andisexpressed
inpermil(%0)deviationfromastandard.Forbone,
64 DEVRIES 1958.
6$ SUESS 1970.
66 STUlVER, VAN DER PLlcm1998.
67 BROlRAMsEY 1998;VAN DERPucm1993.
tbecarboncontentshouldbeintherange40to 50
%,andthe
13
8valueshouldbeintherange-18to-
21 %0. Deviations frorp. thesenmbersmaybean
indication for contamination, for example sol
humicinfiltrations(
13
8;:::-;'25%0)whichcouldnotbe
completelyremovedbytbepre-treatmentprocedure.
Short-lived samples are ofkey importance.
Charcoal is usuallymulti-year; bones are short-
.lived,andforthatreasonofkeyimportancein14C
dating
70
, Thisisinparticulartruewhentheboneis
clearlyassociatedwitbtheprehistoriceventto be
dated
7l

The results ofthe 14C dates forCarthage are
showninTAE. B. AHdateswereobtainedforbones
(determinedascattle).Thecollagenproducedfor
theseboneswas ofgood quality; their
13
8values
andcarbncontentsarewithinnormalrange.The
14C datesarereportedinBP(asexplained,above),
the errors quoted are lC, Theresults wereolder
thanoriginal1yexpectedbasedontheconventional
chronologyoftheGreekLateGeometricpottery,
except GrN.;;26092,.which seems too young.
Therefore we repeated this measurement, the
..resultsbeingthesame(GrN-26479)so. theyoung
age is confirmed for KA93-189. However. this
Carthage context is no longer relevant due to
doubts regarding the documentation during
excavation(seeaboye).
/
The results, calibrated to historical ages, are
shown in TAB. e(aH dates) and in Tav. 1 (one
example, GrN-26093). The radiocarbon ages
obtainedforthe4reliablesamplescomplywithtbe
archaeological,relativesequencepresentedaboye
by Docter and Niemeyer. Ka93-183 is the only
samplepertainingtoPhase1andisalsotheoldest
sample in radiocarbon age (2710 +/- 30 BP).
Howevertheexcavatorsoftbebonesamples,Docter
andNiemeyer,consideratpresentthattbe4reliable
samples are all secondary making it possible to
combinethe4radiocarbonagesoftbeearliestlevels
atCartbage.Thisresultsinameanageof2670+/-
20BPanda calibratedageof835-800Bewitha
68 MOOK, STREURMAN 1983.
69 LoNGIN1970.
7fJ BRUlNs,VAN DER PUCHT2001.
11 VANSTRJIDONCKElAw1999.
571
Sample lab llf.
14C age
error
13
8 Carbon
Ka93- GrN (BP) '(lcr) (%0) (%)
181 26090 2650 30 -20.40 45.9
183 26091 2710 30 -20.36 47.4
189 26092 2540 30 -20.27 43.8
189dupl0 26479 2510 30 -20.54 47.9
220 26093 2640 50 -21.00 47.7
499 26094 2660 30 -20.22 41.7
TAB. B:
Sample 1cr
Ka93- 2cr
181 1cr
2cr
183 1cr
. 2cr
189 1cr
2cr
220 1cr
2cr
499 1cr
2cr
14C dates and quality parameters (13&, %C) forthe 5 Cartago samples.
--_. --_..._-------
calBC
825-800
890-880, 835-795
895-825
905-805
790-760, 680-665, 630-595, 575-560
795-755, 685-545
890-770
905-760, 680-670, 610-595
825-805
895-875,835-795
TAB. C: caIibrated results forthe Carthago 14C dates. The two miasurements (TAB. A) for sample no. 189 (GrN-26092 and 26479)
are averaged. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 5.
95% or 2cr probability (Tav. 2).
Tav. 1 shows the relevant part ofthe calibration
curve for the 14C date 2640 50 BP. The calibration
curve is a smoothed curve fitted through the
calibration datapoints, a decadal dataset measured
with high precision for dendrochronologically dated
wood
72
The so-caBed probability distribution for
the Radiocarbon date, 2640 50 BP, is plotted along
the vertical axis. The calibrated age probability
, distribution is plotted along the horizontal
(=historical) axis. This distribution is ca1culated by
72 STUIVER, VAN DER PLlcm 1998.
computer programs developed for thispurpose
73
, '
and is irregular because ofthe wigg1y shapeofthe
calibration curve. The calibrated probability
distribution is further analysed numericalIy in terms
of calibrated age ranges, at both 1 cr and 2cr levek
For GrN-26093 (Ka93-220), the 1cr range
corresponds with 890-770 calBe (see Tav. land
TAB. C). The 1cr and 2cr levels are rounded tot:h,e
nearest 5 . Note that the wiggles can produce
multiple ranges (where the calibrated probabiJity
distribution has several peaks). Illustrative examples
73 VAN DER PLIcm 1993; BRONK RAMsEy 1998.
for ti:
derP
for!
Betw
u r v ~
sudd
starti
phite
1.
durl
ArrK
A
BEU

F
BRO?
a
BRUl
D
e
/t.
CHE
F
}
},
"
1
(j
l
COI
(
(;
DE
(.
.1
~
Do(
572

forthecalibrationprocedurescanbefoundinvan
derPlichtandMook
74
.For thisanalysis,the2dates
for Ka93-189 are averaged to 2525 25 BP.
Betweenca.800BCand400BC,fue14Ccalibration
curve features a "plateau"which is caused byan
suddenandtemporaryincreasein 14C production
startingat850BCdueto a solarexcursion. This
plteauiscaUedfueHallstatt-plateau
75

Unfortunately, the application of14C dating


during the period 800 to 400 BC is severely
limited:a 14C dateofsay2500BPmayresultina
calibratedagerangeofapproximately4centuries,
independent of the accuracy of the 14C'
measurementitself.ThisistrueforfueKa93-189
where a very accurate result (fue average for 2
dateshasanerrorof 25BP)doesnotresultinan
accuratehistoricalage.AHothersamplesareolder
andyield accurate calibrated age ranges, which
pertain with a 95% probability to the late 9
th
centuryBC(Tav. 2)16.
RrFERIMENTI BIBLIOGRAFICI
Arl:'.KEN 1990:M.J. .AmcEN,Sciencebaseddatingin
Arr-haeology,London-NewYork.
BELOCH 1894: J.C. BELOCH, Die Phoniker am
giiischenMeer,inRheinischesMuseum(Neue
Folge),49,pp. 111-131.
BRONKRAMsEY1998:C.BRONK.RAMsEY,Probability
anddating,inRadiocarbon,40,pp.61-474.
BRUINS, VAN DER PLICHT 2001: H.J. BRUINS, J. VAN
DERPuCRT,RadiocarbondatinginNear-Eastem
contexts: confusion andquality control, in
Radiocarbon,43,pp.1155-1166.
CHELBIETAwforthcoming:F.CHELlI,B.M.TELMINI,
REDocTER, Dcouverte d'une ncropole du
huitieme siecle av. J.-C. aCarthage Bir
Massouda. Rapportprliminairesurlesfouilles
de 1 'InstitutNationalduPatrimoine (Iunis) et
l'UniversitdeGand,in CEDAC.Bulletin. Centre
d'tudesetdedocumentation archologiquede
laconservationdeCarthage,21,(2003).
COLDSTREAM 1968: J.N. COLDSTREAM, Greek
GeometricPottery. Asurveyoftenlocalstyles
andtheirchronology,London.
DE VRIES 1958: H. DE VRIES, Variation in
concentration ofradocarbonwith time and
locationon earth,inKoninklijke Nederlandse
Akademie'van Wetenschappen Proceedings
seriesB(61),pp. 1-9.
DOCTER 1997:RF.DoCTER,ArchaischeAmphoren
ausKarthagoundToscanos.Fundspektrumund
Formentwicklung.EinBeitragzurphi5nizischen
b"
~

I
74 V llNDERPLlCHr, MooK 1987.
7S VAN GEELETAUJ1998.
Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Amsterdam.
DOCTER 1998:R.F. DOCTER, DiesogenanntenZitA-
Amphoren: nuraghisch undzentralitalisch
(19.09.1997), in R. ROLLE, K. SCHMIDT, R.F.
DOCTER (Edd.), Atchiologische Stdien in
KontaktzonenderantikenWelt(Veroffentlichung
der Joachim Jungius-Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften Hamburg, 87: FestschtiftRG
Niemeyer),GOttinge,pp.359-373.
DOCTER2QOO: RF.DOCTER, EastGreekfinewares
andtransportamphorae01the8th-5thcentury
B. CfromCarthageandToscanos,inP.CABRERA
BONET,M. SANTOS RETOLAZA(Edd.),Ceramiques
joniesd'epocaarcaica:Centresdeproducci1
comercialitzaci alMediterrani occidental
(Actes Taula Rodona, Empries 1999),
Barcelona,pp.63-88.
DOCTERforthcoming:RF.DOCTER(Ed.),Carthage.
TheexcavationsattheBirMassoudasite2,vol.
1(ARGU. ArchaeologicalReports Ghent
University),Ghent.
DOCTERETALlI 2003:REDOCTER, F. CHELBI, B.M.
TELMINI, Carthage BirMassouda. Preliminary
reportonthefirstbilateralexcavationsofGhent
University and the Institut National du
Patrimoine (2002-2003); in BulletinAntieke
Beschaving.AnnualPapers onMediterranean
Archaeology,78,pp.43-70.
DOCTER, NIEMEYER 1994: R.F. DOCTER, H.G.
NIEMEYER, Pithekoussai: the Cartaginian
76 The calibratedprobabilitydistributionwas analysed as
explainedbyVAN DER PLICHT, MoOlc 1989.
f 573
Connection. Onthearchaeologiealevidence01
Euboeo-Phoenicianpartnershipin the8thand
7thcenturiesB.e, inB. D' AGOSTINo,D.RrooWAY
(Edd.), APOlKIA. 1piu antiehi insediamenti
greci in occidente: funzioni e modi
dell'organizzazionepoliticaesociale.Scrittiin
onore di Giorgio Buchner (Annali Istituto
OrientaleNapoli. AreheologiaeStoriaAntiea,
n.s. 1),Napoli[1995],pp. 101-115.
LoNGIN 1970: R. LoNGIN, Extraetondueollagene
desosfossilespourleurdatationparlamthode
ducarbone14(Thesis,UniversityofLyon).
MANSEL1999:K. MANsEL,HandgemaehteKeramik
der Siedlungssehiehten des 8. und 7.
Jahrhunderts v. Chr. aus Karthago. Ein
.Vorbericht, in E RAKOB (Ed.), DieDeutschen
Ausgrabungen in Karthago (Karthago llJ),
Mainza.R,pp.220-238.
MOOK, STREURMAN 1983: W.G. MOOK, H.J.
S1REURMAN, Physiealandehemicalaspects01
radiocarbon dating, inPACTPublications, 8,
pp. 31-55.
MOOK, WATERBOLK 1985: W.G. MOOK, H.T.
WATERBOLK, HandbookforArchaeologists, no.
3, RadiocarbonDating,Strasbourg,pp. 1-65.
NEEFT 1987: C.W. NEEFT, Protocorinthian
SubgeometricAryballoi,
NIEMEYER1989:H.GNIEMEYER,DasjrheKarthago
unddiephOnizischeExpansionimMittelmeerraum.
AIs offentlieher Vortrag derJoachim Jungius-
GesellschqftderWissenschaften-gehaltenam31.
Mai 1988 in Hamburg (Veroffentlichung der
JoachimJungius-GesellschqftderWlSsenschqften
Hamburg, 60),Gottingen.
NIEMEYER, DOCTER ETALII: H.o. NIEMEYER, RE
DOCTER ET ALII, Die Grabung unter dem
DecumanusMaximusvonKarthago. Vorbericht
berdie Kampagnen 1986-91, inMitteilungen
des Deutschen Archaologischen lnstitut,
Romische Abteilung, 100,pp.201-244.
NIEMEYERETAw1995:B.o.NIEMEYER,R.F.DoCTER,
A. RINDELAUB, Die Grabung unter dem
Decumanus Maximus von Karthago. Zweiter
Vorbericht, in Mitteilungen des Deutschen
Archaologisehenlnstitut, RomischeAbteilung,
102,pp.475-502.
NIEMEYERETALlIforthcoming:H.o.NJEMEYER, RE
DOCTER, K. SCHMIDT, B. BECHTOLD ET ALIJ,
Karthago. Die Ergebnisse der Hamburger
Grabung unterdem Decumanus Maximus
(HamburgerForsehungenzurArchaologie,2).
NDBOERETALII199912000:AJ.NDBOER,A.M.BIETTI
Vi
SESTIERI,A.DESANTIS, J.VANDERPLICHT,Ahigh
chronologyfor the EarlylronAgein Central
.ltaly,in Palaeohistoria,41/42,pp. 163-176.
NIJBOER 2002: B. NIJBOER, Een debat over
chronologieen, in TMA. Tijdschrift voor
MediterraneArcheologie,26,pp.23-32.
OGGIANO 2000:1. OGGIANO, Lpceramicafeniciadi
Sant'Imbenia (Alghero - SS), in P. BARTOLONI,
L. CAMPANELLA (Edd.), Laceramicafeniciadi
Sardegna.Dati,problem, confront(AttiPrimo
Congresso Sulcitano, Sant' Antioco 1997),
Roma,pp.235-258. .
PESERICO 2002: A. PESERICO, Die offenen Formen
derRedSlipWareausKarthago. Untersuchungen
zurphonizischen Keramik im westlichen
Mittelmeerraum(HamburgerWerkstattreihezur
Archaologie,5),Mllster-Hamburg-London.
RrooWAY 2004: D.RIDGWAY, Euboeans andothers
alongtheTyrrhenianseaboardinthe8thcentury
B.C., in K. LOMAS (Ed.), Greekldentity in the
Western Mediterranean. Papers in Honour 01
BrianShefton,Leiden-Boston,pp. 15-33.
STUIVER, VAN DER PLICHT 1998: M. STUIVER, J. VAN
DERPLICHT(Edd.),INTCAL98 CalibratonIssue,
inRadiocarbon,40,pp. 1041-1164.
SUESS 1970:RE.SUESS, Thethreecausesofsecular
I4C fluctuations, their amplitudes and time
constants, in 1.U. OLSSON (Ed.), 12
th
Nobel
Symposium, Stqckholm,pp.595,..605.
VAN DER PLICHT 1993: J. VAN DER PUCRT, The
Groningenradocarboncalibratonprogram,in
Radiocarbon,35,pp.231-237. .
VANDERPLICHT, MOOK 1987:J.VANDERPLICHT,W.o.
MOOK, Automatc radiocarbon calibration:
illustrativeexamples,inPalaeohistoria,29,pp.
173-182.
VANDERPUCRT,MOOK 1989:J.vANDERPLICHT,W.G.
MOOK, Calibration ofRadiocarbonAges by
Computer,inRadiocarbon,31,pp. 805-816.
VAN GEEL ETAw1998: B. VAN GEEL, J. VAN DER
PUCHT, M.R. KILIAN, E.R. KLAVER, J.H.M.
KOUWENBERG, H.RENSSEN,1.REYNAUD-FARRERA,
574
I
I
H.T. WATERBOLK, The sharp rise ofjI4Cca. 800
cal BC: possible causes, related climatic
connections and the impact on human
environments, in Radiocarbon, 40, pp. 535-550.
. VAN STRIJDONCK ET Aw 1999: M. VAN STRIJDONCK,
D.E. NELSON, P. COMBRE, C. BRONK RAMSEY,
E.M. SCOTT, J. VAN DER PLICHT, R.E.M.
HEDGES, What's in a I4C date, in Third
conference on J4C and Archaeology, Lyon,
pp. 433-440.
VAN WIJNGAARDEN-BAKKER ET Aw 2003: L.H. VAN
WDNGAARDEN-BAKKER, C.H. MAllEPAARD, R.F .
DOCTER, H.G. NIEMEYER, Op jacht in Carthago,
in Phoenix, 49,1, pp. 34-46.
575
TAV.l
2640 +1'- 50 BP GrN-26093 C.I.O. Groningen
Stuiver et al. - INTCAL98
2800
2700
BP
2600
2500
2400
1.0O 900 800 700 600 500
cal BC
Calibration ofthe HC date 2640 5013P (GrN-26093) for one ofthe Carthage bone samples (Ka93-220). The relevant part (1000-
500 BC; 2400-2850 BP) ofthe calibration curve Intcal98 (Stuiver and van der Plicht, 1998) is shown, with the measured (vertical
axis) and calibrated (horizontal axis) probability distributions.
576
j,
TAV.2
a?6a ;/- 20. BP' Carthillgo C. J nroningen
, , '---
S-t:uivstl'" at: al. - lttTCAL.98
2"140
2"120
2"100
3680
BP
2660.
2640
2620
2600
2580.
"00 aso
ciill Be
. - "'O :', .0. l=)" -'-1
,..... J',... ,
'K"
0.000
900
aoo
''''''
eal Be
The radiocarbon ages obtained for the 4 reliable bone samples from the earliest layers at Carthage comply with the archaeological,
relative sequence presented aboye. Ka93-183 is the onIy sample pertaining to Phase 1 and is also the oldest sample in radiocarbon
age (2710 +/- 30 BP), However the excavators, Docter and Niemeyer, consider at present that the 4 samples are all secondary, thus
making it possibleto combine the 4 radiocarbon ages ofthe earlest levels at Carthage. This results in a mean age of2670 +/- 20
BP and a calibrated age of 835-800 BC with a 95% or 20: probability.
,
CALIBRATION OF: 2670 BP +/- 20
ANALYSIS OF PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION:
Combined result of 4 radiocarbon ages from the earliest SeattlelGroningen Method
levels at Carthage, ' 1/2 sigma confidence interval analyss
The calculations were performed using the following 68.3 % (1 sigma) confidence level yields the following

1
datafiles: ranges:
i'
calibration data : c:\cal25\datal\cal40.dta 827 cal BC... 809 cal BC
1
I
i spline fit data: c:\cal25\datal\fit40s0.spl 95.4 % (2 sigma) confidence level yields the following
which means : Stuiver et al. - lNTCAL98 ranges:
integration step size (l/years) : 10 833 cal BC... 802 cal BC
577
r
f
'1
I
fJ
t


.\
'l
INDICE
ANDREA CARANDINI, FRANCESCORONCALLI, Indirzzidisaluto..............................................................,... p. 7
GILDA BARTOLON!, FlLIPPO DELPrno,Introduzioneailavori...................................................................... 9
QUADROGENERALE
RAFFAELE C.DEMAruNI:s, Cronologiarelativa, cross-datingedatazioncronometrche
trabronzojinaleeprimoferro.............................................................. :.......................... 15
RENATO !>ERON!,ALESSANDROVANZETTI, IntomoaUacronologiadellaprimaeta
delferroitaliana:daR Mller-KarpeaCh. Pare.................................................................. 53
MARcoPACCIARELLI, Osservazionisullacronologaassolutadelbronzojinale
edellaprimaetadelferro.............................................................................................. 81
CRISTIANO lAIA,Ibronzilaminatidelprimoferroitalianocomeindicatori
cronologiciavastoraggioeproblemiinterpretativi............................:-....................................}> 91
DISCUSSIONEEOOERVENTI: R.e.deMarinis,C. laia,A. Guidi,A Babbi,RC.deMarinis,
M.Pacciarell,G. Bartoloni,S.Verger,AM.BiettiSestieri,A Zanini,A Babbi,F.Delpino,
RC.deMarinis,A Vanzetti,RC.deMarinis,R Peroni,M. Pacciarelli,R.C. deMarinis,
M.Pacciarelli,C.laia ...oo..............................................oo ................................................113
ITALIA SETTENTRIONALEE CENTRALE
MIRErLLEDAVID-ELBIALI, CYNTIllADUNNING,R quadrocronologicorelativoe
assolutonell'ambitonord-alpinotra1000e700a.C.................................................................145
RAFFAELE C.DEMAruNI:s,FlLIPPOM. GAMBARI, LaculturadiGolaseccatraX eVIII
secoloa. c.:cronologiarelativaecorrelazioniconaltreareeculturali.........................................197
ALBERTOALBERTI, LORENZODALfu,CATRINMARzoLI,UMBERTO TECCHIATI, Evidenze
relativeal X; IXe VIIIsecoloa. C. nell'ambitodell'alto bacinodeljiumeAdge(cultura
di.Luco-Meluno)...................................................................oo.oo..................................227
ELODIABIANCFIlN CITTON,NICOLETTAMARTINELLI, Cronologarelativaeassolutadi
alcuncontestivenetidellatardaetadelbronzoedegliinizidell'etadelferro. Nota
preliminare.................................................................................................................239
ANNADORE,R ViUanovianoI-III diBologna:problemidcronologarelativaeassoluta.....................255
ANDREA BABBI,ALEsSANDRAPIERGROSSI, Perunadeftnizionedellacronologiarelativa
eassolutadelVillanovianoveienteetarquiniese....................................................................293
FRANCESCABorrAN!,Laceramcagreco'-geometricadiVeo. ........................................................ p.319
MAruAANTONIETTA RIzzo, CeramcagrecaeditipogrecodaQerveteri.. ...........................................333
DISCUSSIONEElNTERVENTI:A Vanzetti,M. David-Elbiali,A Vanzetti,U.Tecchiati,RC.
deMarinis,A.Vanzetti,M. Pacciarelli,AM.BiettiSestieri,RC.deMarinis,G. Bartoloni,
R. Peroni, GBartoloni,E. BianchinCitton,A Guidi,G. Bartoloni,A Guidi,R PeroneF.
Ferranti,P. VonEles,G. BagnascoGianni,F. De1pino,B. d'Agostino,A Dore,M. Pacciarelli,A.
Dore,F.Trucco,AM.BiettiSestieri,RC.deMarinis,A.M.BiettiSestieri..........:...........................381
ITALIACENTRO-MERIDIONALE
GILDABARTOLONI,VALENTINONJZZo,Lazio protostorico e mondo greco ............ ...............................409
BRUNOD' AGOSTINo, Osservazioni suIZa cronologa delZa prima eta del ferro nell 'Italia
meridionale . ...................................................................................................................437
FRANCESCA FERRANTI, L 'orizzonte tardo-geometrico enotrio alla vigilia delle fondazioni
coloniali greche .. ....................................................'" ...................................................441
ETTOREM.DEJULIIS, Laprima eta delferra in Puglia. ........................................................... 453
DISCUSSIONE EOOERVENTI:B.d'Agostino,E.Gusberti,M.Rendeli,M.L.Lazzarini,
G. Colonna,M.Pacciarelli,A Vanzetti,A.M.BiettiSestieri,G. Bartoloni,A.M.Bietti
.Sestieri,G. Bartoloni,E.M.DeJuliis,B.d'Agostino,C. raa,V. Nizzo,E. Gusberti,V. Nizzo,
G. Bartoloni,A.M.BiettiSestieri,E.M.DeJuliis................................................................... 469
MEDITERRANEO
T ~ KOUROU, Greek imports in Early IronAge Italy.................................... ........................... 497
ROSA MARIAALBANESE PROCELLI, Fas; e facies della protostoria recente in Sicilia:
dati e problemi interpretativi. .. '':'...................-. :'.:............................................................. 517
ALBERT J.NIJBoER, La cronologia assoluta detreta del ferro nel Mediterraneo:
dibattito sui metodi e sui risultati ............................................................ ......................... 527
ROAill F. DocTE'R, HANs GEORGNIEMEYER, A:r..BERT J.NIJBoER, HANs VANDER PLIeHT,
Radiocarbon dates ofanimal bones in the earliest levels ofCarthage .. ...."...................................... 557
MAsSIMOBOTTO,Per una riconsiderazione della cronologa degli i'nizi della
colonizzazione fenicia nel Mediterraneo centro-occidentale . .....................................................}) 579
DISCUSSIONEElNTERVENTI: N. Kourou,A Guidi,N.Kourou,A Quidi,N.Kourou,
F. Cordano,C.Giardino,AM.BiettiSestieri,R.M.AlbaneseProcelli,F.Arietti,RC.
deMarinis,G. Colonna,F. Delpmo,R Peron,A.J.Nijboer,N.Kourou,A.J.Nijboer,
N. Kourou,AJ.Nijboer,N. Kourou,A.J.Nijboer,V.Nizzo,L.Nigro,M. Botto............................... 631
DISCUSSIONE GENERALE E CONCLUSIONI
A Guidi,R.C.deMarinis,C.Giardino,S.Verger,F.Delpino,M.Pacciarelli,R.PeronieAVanzetti p. 651
BRUNOD'AGOSTINo, Conclusioni ............................................................ ............................ 661
'(
1
I
t