|
entry Sept
2009
Pithecusa—Ancient Ischia
sections: 1. Introduction; 2. Geology; 3. Human Cultures; 4.the name "Pithecusa"; 5.Pithecusa; 6. the Spread of Literacy; 7. Giorgio
Buchner; 8. related
entries & bibliography/sources
Introduction
In 1930, Amedeo Maiuri, the renowned
Neapolitan archaeologist, lamented that "Ischia is still completely
unknown." He would be pleased to know that a lot of work has since gone
into remedying that situation. Excavations and research on the wealth
of artifacts uncovered on "Pithecusa" (the ancient Greek name for
Ischia) as well as radioactive dating of the mineral deposits on the
island—all work done since the 1940s (and still going on)—permit us now
to sketch the geological history of the island over the last 150,000
years as well as the history of its human inhabitants over the last
5,000 years.
Geology
Seen from above, Ischia is roughly a rectangle at the western entrance
to the Gulf of Naples. The four corners are almost exactly at NW, NE,
SW and SE. The island has a 34 km (c.21 miles) coastline and a surface
area of 46.3 square kilometres (c.18 sq miles). Ischia and her
neighbors, Procida and Vivara, are all
islands of recent and intense volcanic origin (unlike the other island
neighbor, Capri, on the other side of
the gulf, which is really a broken-off fragment of the Apennine
mountain chain—an extension of the Sorrentine peninsula). Ischia
consists of Mt. Epomeo (787 meters/2,589 ft., photo, below) surrounded
by a number of
various
types of "volcanic units," (small, extinct or dormant craters), and it
is here that recent research has corrected the misconception that Mt.
Epomeo is a deeply eroded central volcanic crater. In 1930, the Swiss
vulcanologist, Alfred Rittmann, established that the greenish tufa
rocks
of Epomeo are not the remains of a crater, but the products of a
powerful eruption that were thrust up and broken into blocks (called
"uplifted horst").
Radioactive dating has shown that the oldest
formations on Ischia go
back 150,000 years; they are
on the eastern and southern edges of the island. About 40,000 years ago
there was then the powerful Campanian eruption and caldera
collapse. (That eruption is estimated to have lofted as much as 40
cubic km
of ash and pumice into the atmosphere. By way of comparison, one of the
most powerful volcanic eruptions in recorded history—on the Indonesian island of
Krakatoa in 1883— sent
about 18 km3 of
such material into the air).
The Campanian
cataclysm sank much of the island of Ischia Between 25,000 and 18,000
years ago,
the sunken green tufa and sea mud (clay) deposited on top of it were
then thrust up again by the intrusion of molten magma from below,
breaking up into many blocks (horst), causing many faults, and creating
Mt.
Epomeo. (That clay later became important to humans as raw material for
pottery manufacture.) The volcanic units around Epomeo continued to be
active for some time, and the island as we know it was still being
formed through significant lava flows as recently as 5,000 years ago.
The last eruption on the island
occurred in 1302 AD and caused documented damage to inhabited medieval
sites. ^to top
Human Cultures
The extreme volcanism on the island made the presence of truly early
humans unlikely. (Even a Neanderthal is not going to move out to an
exploding island.) The oldest evidence of human settlement on Ischia
is, thus, from a scant 5500 years ago, the Later Middle Neolithic
Period ("Recent Stone Age," for short). Substantial remains were found
in the 1960s near the town of Ischia: undecorated as well as painted
handmade pottery, terracotta weights for fishing nets, flint and
obsidian knife-blades. From somewhat later (c. 1400 BC) there are finds
of pottery belonging to the so-called Apennine Culture, widespread in
Central Italy and part of southern Italy. That period then runs into
the Mycenaean period, that is, a few centuries on either side of the
Trojan War (c. 1200 BC). The Mycenaeans set up trading
posts at various points in the Western Mediterranean, including Ischia,
but
generally did not displace native peoples. Judging from the Iron Age
implements of about 1000 BC, the natives on Ischia were Indo-European
(IE), probably Oscans, a sister people of the other IE peoples on the
Italian mainland, including the Sabines, the Samnites,
and the Latini.
^to top
The name "Pithecusa"
amphora
at the Pithecusa museum on Ischia
These early natives of Ischia produced large
terracotta amphora, called pithol,
with lug
handles, as containers for foodstuffs. They had a
characteristic shape, and more of them have been found on Ischia in
comparison to other Iron Age sites. This may be the source of Pliny the
Elder's claim (Nat. Hist. 111, 6.82) that the pith- in Pithecusa is the same as
the one in pithol —thus, Pithecusa, Land of the Big Jugs! A competing etymology
says that the pith- is the
same as in pithecantropus,
thus, "monkey," and traces back to Greek mythology: a race of
mischievous little forest creatures called Cercopes were turned into monkeys
by Zeus and banished to various volcanic areas, one of which was
Ischia. Thus, Pithecusa meant "Isle of the Monkeys." Either way—indeed, even in some third or fourth way—it is thus likely that the immigrants to Ischia from the
Greek island of Euboea settled a place they
already knew as "Pithecusa" rather than naming it that, themselves.
(Later nomenclature: Virgil referred to the island as Arime, saying it was
the island mentioned by that name in The
Iliad (II, 783). Later, the Romans called it Aenaria, possibly from the name of Aeneas,
himself. Some crazed revisionist etymologists also hold out for a
Semitic origin: I-schra,
"black island." [The problem with that one is that all the sand on the
island is white.] The current name, Ischia,
appears for the first time (as iscla,
derived from the Latin insula [island]
in a letter from Pope Leo III to Charlemagne in 813.)
No matter which version you like—and I'm sure you'll choose wisely—the Euboean Greeks who settled on the hill at the NW corner
of the island (now Mt. Vico, above the modern town of Lacco Ameno) did
so in c. 770 BC. It does seem strange that Greeks would come this far
north to found the "first Greek settlement in Italy," before sites on
Sicily such as Syracuse or further up on the mainland at Elea or Paestum,
all suitable sites that colonists would have had to pass on the way.
Yet, scholars now think the Pithecusa was not a typical polis; that is, not a result of a pattern of colonial expansion to
spread Greek city-states beyond the Aegean. There
is, in fact, no literary reference to the founding of such a Pithecusan
colony. The extreme variety of artifacts on the island is seen as
evidence that Pithecusa was an emporion,
a port of commerce and trade in advance of the wave of Greek expansion
that led to the city-states of Magna
Graecia and purposely set in a favorable position for trade with
non-Greek peoples in more distant parts of the
Mediterranean.
^to top
Pithecusa
Mt.
Vico over the modern town
of Lacco Ameno
The acropolis of Pithecusa was
on the north-western hill, Mt. Vico, with water on two sides. The
necropolis was to the west in the adjacent valley of San Montano. That
valley is 500 meters long, 75-150 meters wide and runs SE to NW between
the slopes of Monte Vico and the slope of the Zaro lava flow. The
valley was used for burials for 1000 years, from the foundation of
Pithecusa until the beginning of the third century AD. So far, no
graves of an aristocracy have been found—that is, no cremated bones in
bronze urns as found at Cuma and back in Eretria (on the island of
Euboea, itself). This supports the
view that Pithecusa was not a polis
but simply a thriving commercial
center—all merchants with no aristocratic rulers. (Many of the
artifacts found at Pithecusa are, in fact, from burial sites and were not found simply "lying around"
beneath the earth, say, near the acropolis.)
Archaeologists have found a
great variety of pottery imported from different regions of Greece:
Corinth, Euboea, Athens, Rhodes and others yet to
be identified. Importantly, Pithecusan pottery is found elsewhere in
the Mediterranean, including North Africa, Spain, southern France
and
the middle east, as well as in many Italian regions: Apulia, Calabria,
Sardinia, Etruria, and Latium. Workshops for the working of iron have
also been found.
Also, the Pithecusans worked gold and silver and
minted coins.
The conclusion of all this is
that the settlement was home not only to Greeks, but to a mixed
population of Greek, Etruscan and Phoenician inhabitants. Because of
its fine harbor and location more or less equidistant from the
Etruscans, the early Italic tribes of central Italy, the island of
Sardinia and Phoenicians from the Middle East and North Africa, the
traders of Pithecusa were very successful, at least for a short time.
At its peak (around 700 BC) Pithecusa was home to about 10,000 people.
What happened next—the decline of Pithecusa and the rise of Cuma—is not that clear. Both Strabo and Livius have passages about
the Euboean Greeks who founded Pithecusa and nearby Cuma, although it
isn't clear from these literary sources which was first. Experts
now
hold that Pithecusan pottery is the older of the two; thus, the
settlement at Pithecusa came before Cuma. This has nothing necessarily
to
do with the theory that the
Pithecusans might have left the island because of volcanic activity
and, themselves, founded Cuma, a few miles across the waters on the
mainland. That may
have happened, but, alternately, Cuma may also have
been founded by a separate band of settlers shortly after the year 700
BC. There is not a lot of proof one way or the other. Geologically,
nothing seems to have happened that would have forced the Pithecusans
to desert the island. They had chosen their site well and were
generally spared damage from eruptions as well as from landslide
activity from Epomeo. So, one colony founding the second one, or two
separate groups founding their respective colonies—the jury is out on
that one and not likely to return anytime soon.
Whatever the case, with the rise of Cuma, Pithecusa declined in
importance and by about the middle of the 600s was no longer an
autonomous trading center and had become a dependency of Cuma. The
Cumans (and their dependent Pithecusans), were then aided in 474 BC by
Hiero I of Syracuse who sent a fleet to help defeat the Etruscans who
were threatening Cuma. Hiero occupied Ischia and left behind a garrison
to build a fortress that was still in existence in the Middle Ages.
(Cumans were themselves later displaced by more settlers and moved a
bit further down the coast to found Parthenope,
which then begat
Neapolis/Naples somewhat later.)
Nestor's Cup
Volcanic activity on Ischia started up again in 470 BC and
continued.
Later,
there was so much volcanic activity during Roman rule, that very few
Romans settled there. The volcanism is probably why the young Octavian
(not-yet Augustus) decided to trade Ischia to the city of Naples in 29
BC
for Capri, one-fifth the size. Suetonius, in his Lives of the Caesars,
tells of a dried-up old oak suddenly greening back to life the
minute Octavian set foot on Capri! The future emperor took that as a
good sign and also a good way to unload an exploding island. A bit
before that, in the civil and social wars that wracked Rome at the
beginning of
the first century BC, Cuma and Pithecusa bet on the wrong horse. The
right horse, the vindictive general Sulla (138 BC-78 BC), may have
destroyed the old
acropolis
on Mt. Vico. That may be why very few remains of it have been found.
^to top
The Spread of Literacy
Discovered in 1954, the
most famous artifact found on Ischia is Nestor's
Cup. It was an
import from the island of Rhodes and a burial artifact laid into the
tomb of a 12-to-14-year-old adolescent, a grave now numbered as 168.
There
were 27 vases in the tomb—a rich send-off. Examination of four of
them in early Corinthian style puts the burial at about 720 BC. The
famous inscription on Nestor's Cup...
"This is Nestor's cup, good to
drink from. Whoever empties it will be
seized by desire for Aphrodite, crowned with beauty."
...reminds us of the role
that Pithecusa must have played in the transmission of literacy from
Greece to Italy. Much earlier scholarship on the
subject,
such as Carpenter (1945, below), does not
even mention (!)
Pithecusa, concentrating almost entirely on the
role of Cuma. The author says:
The latest student of the material, Edith Hall Dohan, in her extremely
competent and valuable study of Italic
Tomb-Groups in the University
Museum, came to the conclusion that it was during the period
680-650
B.C. that "foreign influence penetrated deeply into Central Italy"...
[and]... Commercial relations between Etruria and Greece
had thus lasted almost
precisely two centuries, from ca. 680 to 474 B.C. Early in that span
of years the Etruscans had learned the Greek alphabetic
signs...[and]... Payne reported
for Corneto "great quantities, especially early Corinthian" and stated
that "Caere and Vulci have probably produced more Corinthian vases than
any other Italian sites. [Reference is to Necrocorinthia, a study of Corinthian art
in the Archaic Period by H.G.G. Payne, first published in 1931.]
Recent important finds of great quantities of Pithecusan
pottery bearing Greek inscriptions and archaeological evidence of trade
between Pithecusa and Etruria have helped push that date of 680 BC back
a bit into the time of the flowering of early literate culture on
Ischia and reevaluate the notion
that Cuma, important as it was, was solely responsible for the
Etruscans learning the Greek alphabet. Also, it bears mentioning to the
modern reader that in the period from, say, 700 to 500 BC, there was no single "Greek alphabet" to
pass on. Literacy in Greece was still so new that various parts of the
Greek homeland developed their own variations of the earlier Phoenician
writing system and carried those variants out into Magna Graecia. A list of such variants
includes names such as Corinthian, Accadian, and Ionic, and there are
even examples of forms of letters reworked by Greek settlers after they
settled in Italy. The complexity of deciphering all of those variants
and determining influences in the spread of literacy should not be
underestimated.
^to top
Giorgio
Buchner
Many of the archaeological discoveries on Ischia since the 1940s have
been the result of work done by Giorgio Buchner. He was born in Munich
in 1914 and passed away on Ischia in 2005. His German father and
Italian mother had acquired property on Ischia and the family moved
there before WW II. Buchner studied the classics in Naples and became
fascinated by the early history of the area. His graduate thesis in
Rome in 1938 was on early human settlements on the Flegrean Islands
[Ischia and Procida] from pre-history to the time of the Romans. He
started serious work on Ischia in the late 1940s. At the time, though
scholars had known of a settlement called Pithecusa, it was more or
less considered to have been a secondary Greek stop-over, some sort of
a trading post perhaps. Over the years, Buchner was responsible for
hundreds of important finds on Ischia, starting with his dramatic
discovery of Nestor's Cup. Buchner changed the way scholars
looked at Pithecusa. In 1947, he and vulcanologist, Alfred Rittman,
created a small museum for their finds on the island. In 1999, it was
officially inaugurated as the Archaeological Museum of Pithecusa in the
presence of museum dignitaries from the international community.
Also see ——> Ischia
(1), Ischia (2), Nestor's
Cup, Uncovering the Bronze Age on
Procida, The Etruscans in Campania, Geology of the Bay of Naples, Magna Graecia, Ancient
Peoples of Italy, Cuma.
Sources:
—The
Archaeological Museum of Pithecusa,
located in the Villa
Arbusto in Lacco Ameno on
Ischia.
—Buchner, Giorgio & Gialanella Costanza (1994). Museo archeologico di Pithecusae, Isola
d'Ischia. N. 22, nuova serie. Istituto poligrafico e zecca dello
stato, libreria dello stato. Rome.
—Carpenter, Rhys (1945).
"The Alphabet in Italy" in American
Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 49, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1945) pp.
452-464. Pub. Archaeological Institute of America.
—Ridgway, David.
(1984). The First Western Greeks.
Oxford
University Press. Oxford.
—Rittmann, Alfred. (1930) "Geologie der Insel Ischia"
in Zeitschrift fűr Vulkanologie,
Ergȁnzungsband 6. Berlin.
to main index
to history portal to archaeology portal
|