Download pdf - Sardinian prehistoric burials in a Mediterranean perspective. Symbolic and socio-economic aspects, in Schulz Paulsson B.; Gaydarska B. (eds), Neolithic and Copper Age Monuments. Emergence,

Neolithic and Copper Age Monuments

Emergence, function and the social construction of the landscape

Edited by

Bettina Schulz PaulssonBisserka Gaydarska

BAR International Series 26252014

Published by

ArchaeopressPublishers of British Archaeological ReportsGordon House276 Banbury RoadOxford OX2 [email protected]

BAR S2625

Neolithic and Copper Age Monuments: Emergence, function and the social construction of the landscape

© Archaeopress and the individual authors 2014

ISBN 978 1 4073 1260 6

Printed in England by CMP (UK) Ltd

All BAR titles are available from:

Hadrian Books Ltd122 Banbury RoadOxfordOX2 7BPEnglandwww.hadrianbooks.co.uk

The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com

7

SARDINIAN PREHISTORIC BURIALS IN A MEDITERRANEAN PERSPECTIVE. SYMBOLIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS

MARIA GRAZIA MELIS (SASSARI, IT) Summary: This text presents a general overview of funerary customs in prehistoric Sardinia and the relationship to the area of the western Mediterranean. The intention is to isolate macro phenomena and to examine their origins and evolution, as well as their internal and external island relationships. The chosen period begins around the middle of the 5th millennium BC, when in Sardinia the first hypogeum burials appear, including all the phases of the Neolithic and Eneolithic, until the last centuries of the III millennium cal. BC. From the second half of the 5th millennium onwards first megaliths appear demonstrating the close links with Corsica. The Final Neolithic represents a period of great dynamism regarding the spreading of the rock-cut tombs in an extraordinary way to the other regions around the Mediterranean, with the exception of Malta. With the Copper Age it is easier to discern through funerary rituals the impression of a society in evolution. Here leads the competitiveness among the human groups for the control of natural resources to the construction of monumental tombs and single or small groups of burials, reserved for members of the hierarchy. INTRODUCTION The intention of this research is to present an overview of funerary customs in prehistoric Sardinia the light of the most recent finds and new research on ritual aspects. In the period between the middle of the 5th and the last centuries of the 3rd millennium BC, from the point of view of cult practises, consideration will be taken of the cultural facies which developed during the later Middle Neolithic up to the end of the Eneolithic. The chronological span starts with the middle of the 5th millennium, a period that coincides with the emergence of the first rock-cut tombs. Sardinia demonstrates, thanks to its insularity and its position at the centre of the western basin of the Mediterranean, a slow and gradual cultural development, in part conditioned by contact from the world beyond the confines of the island. Through the routes of communication stabilised for the circulation of important raw material (principally obsidian from Monte Arci during the Neolithic, and metals during the Eneolithic) there is an evolution of ideas, customs and artefacts. Attention will be given to architectonical types and to other aspects of social and ritual dimensions. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS The most ancient funerary traditions with burials in caves or simple graves begin in the Early Neolithic. These continue to be found during the rest of the Neolithic and the Eneolithic. The general picture of Prenuragic funerary practises is symbolised by the emergence and development of the two important phenomena: hypogeic and megalithic monuments. These seem to have begun separately and with distinct geographical divisions. But, starting from the Final Neolithic and in particular during the Eneolithic clear

signs of interaction and contamination become evident with monuments that combine these features. Middle Neolithic The use of caves as dwellings, for cult practise and as burial sites during the Middle Neolithic is particularly diffuse: in fact 61% of all sites are found in caves. This percentage changes heavily in the Recent Neolithic (21%). The type of activity for each cave is not always completely clear: for example at Sa Ucca de Su Tintirriolu, the absence of bones seems to exclude funerary activity (Loria and Trump 1978), probably in favour of cult practise, considering the morphological characteristics. The Rifugio cave at Oliena seems to contain evidence of a l secondary burial. The remains of circa 11 individuals and their grave goods were thrown, seemingly in a single moment, into a natural well inside the cave (Biagi Cremaschi 1980). There were no signs of selection of skeletal parts. It is not clear whether this action was truly the result of a ritual secondary burial carried out by the same people, or rather the clearing and removal of the remains by peoples belonging to the Eneolithic Monte Claro facies who later used the cave. The strong link between man and the underground environments of caves in the Ancient and Middle Neolithic is perhaps the origin of the phenomenon of Sardinian funerary hypogea, in fact, towards the end of the Middle Neolithic, there is evidence for the first funerary hypogeum. The burials were not isolated but for the first time organized in a formalised area, that is, a necropolis. Considering the dating and the presence of an entire necropolis (Cuccuru s’Arriu-Cabras; fig. 1,1) the most likely hypothesis is that, of a local and independent origin of the phenomenon in Sardinia. This consideration is confirmed by the more recent appearance during the Middle Neolithic of the use of hypogeum in the areas of the island that were in contact with the obsidian trade

NEOLITHIC AND COPPER AGE MONUMENTS

8

Age Middle Neolithic

Late Neolithic

Final Neolithic

Early Eneolithic

Middle Eneolithic

Late Eneolithic

Final Eneolithic

Date Cal. BC around 4500

4400-4100 4000-3500

3400-2900 3000-2500 2600-2300 2400-2200

Cultural facies Bonu Ighinu

San Ciriaco

Ozieri Sub-Ozieri Filigosa, Monte Claro

Abealzu, Monte Claro

Bell Beaker

Cave X X X X X X Simple grave X X X X Hypogeum a forno

X X X X

Coffre (cist) with stone circle

X X X

Domus de janas X X X X X X Hypogeic and megalithic tomb

X X X X

Dolmen X ? X X Allée couverte X Simple cist X X X Burial in dolio X Burial in hut X X X

Tab. I: Prehistoric Sardinia. Classification of funerary monuments. routes. Burials in simple graves or in cists are present in northern Italy (Bernabò Brea et alii in press) in relation to the facies dei vasi a bocca quadrata. Elements of contact between this facies and its Sardinian counterpart of Bonu Ighinu recur in some formal and decorative aspects of the pottery Middle Neolithic The use of caves as dwellings, for cult practise and as burial sites during the Middle Neolithic is particularly diffuse: in fact 61% of all sites are found in caves. This percentage changes heavily in the Recent Neolithic (21%). The type of activity for each cave is not always completely clear: for example at Sa Ucca de Su Tintirriolu, the absence of bones seems to exclude funerary activity (Loria and Trump 1978), probably in favour of cult practise, considering the morphological characteristics. The Rifugio cave at Oliena seems to contain evidence of a l secondary burial. The remains of circa 11 individuals and their grave goods were thrown, seemingly in a single moment, into a natural well inside the cave (Biagi Cremaschi 1980). There were no signs of selection of skeletal parts. It is not clear whether this action was truly the result of a ritual secondary burial carried out by the same people, or rather the clearing and removal of the remains by peoples belonging to the Eneolithic Monte Claro facies who later used the cave. The strong link between man and the underground environments of caves in the Ancient and Middle Neolithic is perhaps the origin of the phenomenon of Sardinian funerary hypogea, in fact, towards the end of the Middle Neolithic, there is evidence for the first funerary hypogeum. The burials were not isolated but for the first time organized in a formalised area, that is, a necropolis. Considering the dating and the presence of an

entire necropolis (Cuccuru s’Arriu-Cabras; fig. 1,1) the most likely hypothesis is that, of a local and independent origin of the phenomenon in Sardinia. This consideration is confirmed by the more recent appearance during the Middle Neolithic of the use of hypogeum in the areas of the island that were in contact with the obsidian trade routes. Burials in simple graves or in cists are present in northern Italy (Bernabò Brea et alii in press) in relation to the facies dei vasi a bocca quadrata. Elements of contact between this facies and its Sardinian counterpart of Bonu Ighinu recur in some formal and decorative aspects of the pottery. Cist burials are also found in southern Italy, where, during the middle centuries of the 5th millennium cal BC the most ancient hypogeum burials (fig. 1. 4) of the Italian peninsula appear (Tiberi and Dell’Anna in press). It is not possible to determine, if the origin of the use of the hypogea in Sardinia and that of southern Italy (Puglia) may have been related, notwithstanding the chronological information and the generic and sporadic elements of comparison between these facies. It must be underlined, that the two regions shared several of the same trade circuits, on the one side that of Sardinian obsidian, and on the other that of obsidian from Lipari. It is likely that these models should not be considered very rigidly, as is demonstrated by the finds of an obsidian artefact in Puglia (Acquafredda and Muntoni 2008). However, the current state of research does not allow further consideration. Corsica maintained intense relations with Sardinia during the 5th millennium BC. In particular during the Néolithique moyen I (first half of the 5th millennium cal BC) there are close comparisons between Sardinian (Bonu Ighinu) and Corsican (Curasien) ceramic styles

MARIA GRAZIA MELIS: SARDINIAN PREHISTORIC BURIALS IN A MEDITERRANEAN PERSPECTIVE

9

(Tramoni et alii 2007). However there are no examples of hypogea on Corsica. The case of Cuccuru s’Arriu remains anomalous because it is an unicum in Sardinia. The tombs were comprised of a vertical shaft, which gave access to the elliptical funerary chamber with a convex roof “a forno”. The necropolis also contains pit burials (Santoni 1992, 2000). Late Neolithic In the second half of the 5th millennium the earliest expressions of megalithic monuments in Sardinia are represented by coffres (cists for single burials) surrounded by stone circles. . Parallel to this the tradition of hypogeic tombs continues. The Mediterranean proto-mégalithisme, according to Guilaine’s definition (1996), spread into other geographical areas (Languedoc, Catalonia, Almeria); it includes prestigious grave goods. These structures are also found in Sardinia with the stone circles at Arzachena (north-eastern Sardinia) and in particular in the Li Muri-Arzachena necropolis (fig. 2,1), at one time attributed to an autonomous culture, and later to a facies of the Ozieri culture, and today to the middle Neolithic San Ciriaco horizon of the Recent Neolithic. An important contribution to the chronology comes from the site at Contraguda-Perfugas, which provided five C14 datings, from the period between 5423±47 BP and 5070±40 BP (4358-3778 cal BC, 95, 4%). In particular the earliest date is interesting (OZC-966, 5423±47 BP; 4358 – 4073 cal BC, 95, 4%), coming from Layer 4 of Area A, which provided a number of elements retraceable to the San Ciriaco facies and which therefore could be considered as a valuable reference point for its chrono-cultural placement (Melis 2007). In Corsica megalithic tombs appear during the second half of the 5th millennium (fig. 2,6), which corresponds to a period when communities began to assume a sedentary agricultural lifestyle (Leandri 2000). The principal sites were concentrated in the regions of Nebbio, des Agriates (Haute Corse) and Porto Vecchio (Corse du Sud). The Vasculacciu-Figari site (Tramoni et alii 2004) is attributed to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC. Finds from the south-eastern sector of the settlement are similar to those of San Ciriaco, such as the tubular handles from the same site, and polished axes that provide a further comparison with the context at Li Muri (Melis 2007). Considering the high number of sites on Corsica it is likely, that megalithic principles arrived in Sardinia directly from Corsica, while in the opposite direction stocks of Sardinian obsidian went to Corsican sites. Accordingly during the second half of the 5th millennium the relationship intensified between the two islands: they interacted through the obsidian trade and shared similar funerary practises.

Single burials in coffre without stone circles are documented in northern Italy in relation to the vasi a bocca quadrata (eg.. La Vela-Trento; fig. 2,7) and Chassey-Lagozza facies (eg. Maddalena di Chiomonte-Torino). Cists, earthen graves and burial shafts typify the inhumations of the Diana facies of southern Italy, with different rituals with both primary and secondary depositions (Manfredini 2001). This facies had some elements comparable to the Sardinian San Ciriaco material, in particular in the use of tubular handles in pottery. It is interesting to note the use of megalithic tombs also in the Diana facies (eg. Madonna delle Grazie-Rutigliano; Ciancio and Radina 1979). However, it does not seem possible to individuate the elements of contact with the earliest Sardinian megaliths, from which it deviates in terms of the funerary practise of secondary multiple burials. The hypogea tradition continued and matured in Sardinia with the appearance of the first domus de janas, rock-cut tombs of greater complexity compared to those of the earlier phase. From the tombs of S. Iroxi and S. Pedru are registered finds in the style of San Ciriaco (Melis 2009, ivi bibliography). Final Neolithic The first half of the 4th millennium is witness to the full development of megaliths and hypogea. The former took shape in several categories of monuments including dolmens, coffres and chamber tombs with stone circles (eg. Pranu Mutteddu-Goni; fig. 2,2),which are often associated with menhirs. But the feature that most strongly characterised the sphere of funerary custom is the extraordinary spread of domus de janas (rock-cut tombs): there are more than 3000 examples known and they include simple single chambers or more complex monuments with several chambers, following codified patterns that diversify geographically. These were tombs with collective burials, often modified and reused up until the medieval and post medieval periods. They were typically isolated, in small groups or sometimes in large necropoli (as many as circa 40 tombs). Architectural characteristics underline the autonomy of the Sardinian phenomenon compared to that of peninsular Italy, to the French Midi, to Spain and the Balearic islands, where simple monuments, rarely comprising of more than one chamber, took shape. In the Balearic Islands, where traces of human activity preceding the Eneolithic are limited, burials in caves and rock shelters predominate. Hypogea and megalithic tombs here had characteristics that were comparable to their Sardinian counterparts only in certain aspects. During the Final Neolithic, but also during the Eneolithic, megalithic and hypogeic tombs begin to combine in structures such as Tomb II at Pranu Mutteddu-Goni (fig.


10

3,1), a hypogeum excavated in a block of sandstone, surrounded by concentric stone circles, which originally supported a tumulus. The tomb was located in a sacred area, marked by the presence of numerous menhirs (Atzeni and Cocco 1989). From this period the relationship with Corsica seems to become less strong in terms of funerary practise. The burials within stone circles, are no longer realised in Corsica, but continue to be practised in Sardinia until the Eneolithic. Early Eneolithic The first phases of the Eneolithic have limited documentation: only 19% of the known sites are funerary (Melis in press). Construction and use of the domus de janas both continue, but it is difficult to ascertain to what degree. In fact, due to the continued reuse of the tombs, it is precisely the depositions and grave goods of the earliest phases that have been lost. Burials in simple graves (Perda Lada II-Decimoputzu; fig. 3,5) and hut burials (Su Coddu-Selargus) were also recorded. Burials within settlements occur rarely and are present again only in the middle Eneolithic (Monte Claro). In mainland Italy this is recorded in numerous Neolithic sites: deposition rituals vary and only occasionally contain grave goods (Conati Barbaro 2007-2008). The practise continues sporadically during the Eneolithic (Cocchi Genick 2001). The passage grave of Motorra-Dorgali appertains to the Ozieri Final Neolithic or to the Early Eneolithic (fig. 2,4; Melis 2000). Middle and late Eneolithic A multi-chambered longitudinal domus de janas with dromos access can probably be attributed to the Filigosa facies. It is clear that hypogea in Sardinia developed autonomously with respect to the outside world and the Italian peninsular Eneolithic hypogea were basic, predominantly with a single chamber (for example the Gaudo, Rinaldone and Laterza facies). The Sardinian Filigosa and Abealzu Late Neolithic phases are strongly linked to the preceding tradition. In their ambit the Neolithic models mature and evolve reflecting a greater social complexity. In fact on one side the use of domus de janas continues in a similar fashion, while on the other side the model of the allée couverte (fig. 2,5) and that of single chamber tombs within a stone circle (fig. 2,3) are associated with the use of statue standing stones. It is evident that the intention was to be as visible as possible in the territory.

At the same time another facies, Monte Claro, which differentiates from the local tradition, spreads across Sardinia, demonstrating exotic characteristics as well as some examples of interaction with local facies. This is particularly evident in the funerary customs. The Late Neolithic hypogea (domus de janas) were reused for multiple burials. The practise of cave burials develops and there are examples of megalithic-hypogeum tombs as well, as simple graves. Cist tombs and hypogea a forno are manifest in the field of single burials. This last type, in more simple forms, is comparable to examples on mainland Italy (eg. Rinaldone, Gaudo) and in other parts of the western Mediterranean, Spain and the Balearic Islands, but generally with a different form of access (horizontal). In comparison to the Neolithic, relations between Sardinia and the Mediterranean world underwent profound transformation during the full Eneolithic. The exchange of obsidian declines and new trade routes are established, through which new raw materials and new ideas are circulated. Contacts with the facies of southern Italy (Taurasi and Gaudo) in the areas of ceramics, funerary rites and information relating to metallurgy suggest a hypothesis of relations based on the exchange of Sardinian copper (Melis 2009). One class of “mixed” monument is the hypogeum augmented with megalithic elements. They are documented from the Final Neolithic onwards (Pranu Mutteddu) and they make up a heterogeneous group, often difficult to place chronologically. While, in fact, the monument at Goni was a singly conceived structure, there is often a dolmen corridor added to Late Neolithic hypogea. These rock-cut tombs were formed by single (eg. Mariughia and Canudedda a Dorgali) or double chambers (Cuccuru Craboni-Maracalagonis). The chronology of these tombs is not always clear; the burial at Canudedda (fig. 3,3), plundered ab antiquo, contained several finds from the Final Neolithic, whereas in the burial at Bingia ‘e Monti-Gonnostramatza (Atzeni 1998) the oldest finds belonged to the Monte Claro facies. The tomb at Cuccuru Craboni contained material from both Monte Claro and the Early Bronze Age; while it is true that the hypogeum shows some affinity to those of the Monte Claro facies, it remains unclear as to whether the corridor was contextual to the excavation of the hypogeum or relative to its reuse during the Early Bronze Age. On the island of Minorca, the two tombs at Biniai Nou- Mahon (Plantalamor Massanet 2001) show several generic similarities with the mixed monuments of the Sardinian Eneolithic: they were formed of a sub-elliptical hypogeic chamber, a megalithic corridor and a façade. Comparisons from the area of craft production are more generic (fig. 3,3). Burials in dolii are peculiar to the Monte Claro facies: at Scaba ‘e Arriu-Siddi the domus de janas was rebuilt with an external corridor of dolmen, emptied and reused introducing cist and dolio burials (fig. 3,6).


11

Final Eneolithic The Bell Beaker facies is for the most part known from funerary contexts in Sardinia (90%), but in almost every case, the earlier funerary monuments for multiple burials (as the domus de janas, the hypogeum-megalithic tombs, the dolmens) were reused. The use of caves also continued. In only two cases are the burials directly related to this facies: these are single cist tombs. The general picture is therefore conditioned by the absence of data concerning the settlements and subsequently by the rapport between the village and the burial ground. The presence of Bell Beaker material in more than 70 sites (Melis 2010a) and the confirmation of regional character in an advanced moment, together with the wealth of the grave goods, show how this pan-European phenomenon found fertile ground for development on this island. From here it would have spread to western Sicily (Tusa 1998). THE SOCIAL DIMENSION. ELEMENTS OF RITUAL This is a complex theme that requires more attention, and therefore the consideration will be limited to only a few aspects. Above all, a dichotomy emerges which characterises the phases under examination between two apparently opposing tendencies: on the one hand burial grounds with subterranean tombs that are not visible, and on the other hand monumental tombs well visible in the territory through the use of menhirs and/or menhir statues. In reality these attributes tend occasionally to intersect; for example, at the domus de janas necropolis of Montessu-Villaperuccio some tombs are defined as “shrines” given the large dimensions of the chambers and entry halls, which have some characteristics of monumentality. Often are they surrounded by external megalithic structures. In one case (tomb IX; fig. 3,2) an ancient type of hypogeum with access via a vertical shaft was surrounded by a double circle of orthostatic blocks, reminiscent of the model of the first megalithic circles of Arzachena. It is important to underline, that from even in the advanced phases of the Middle Neolithic the burials were organised in apposite areas (such as the necropolis at Cuccuru s’Arriu). Hypogea and megaliths. The origins of social inequality These two phenomena, as it has been previously specified, would seem to reflect two opposing ideologies, one devoted to the subterranean world, the other heightening the visibility of tombs, introducing them to and confirming them as part of the historical and cultural background. They are, furthermore, expressions of two opposing rituals, tied to, in the case of the former, multiple burials, and in the second to individual inhumations. It will be demonstrated how these differing aspects were not so inscrutable and distinct. They are

both present, for example, during the initial phases of hypogea use as well as among the Mid- to Late Eneolithic hypogea for single burials or for small groups buried in separate chambers or in different areas of the tomb. The hypogeum necropolis of Cuccuru s’Arriu (fig. 1,1) is unique and as such poses many interpretative problems. The absence of precise data as to the full extension of the village, to which it was associated as well as comparisons with other sites, do not help the formulation of hypotheses as to the accessibility to the necropolis. It remains unclear whether the burials represent the entire community or only a part of it. The general picture of the Sardinian Middle Neolithic remains fragmentary; the limited number of tombs may be related to limited access to the necropolis, perhaps based on social distinctions. Only further research will be able to throw more light on the subject. The type of deposition and the wealth of grave goods are part of a coded and repetitive expression; single inhumations in huddled form on stone floors, grave goods and offerings with elements that are repeated, the presence of feminine statuettes and of ochre. In rare cases there is evidence of secondary deposition: in Tomb 386 the dead lay on its left side with its limbs folded, had its left arm extended towards the cranium of a second individual of which the remaining parts of the skeleton were not present. The grave goods and offerings were comprised of pottery, bone pins, chlorite beads, shells including dentalia and geometrical microliths. The statuettes were mostly presented alone, sometimes in pairs, and in one case there are three. They were placed close to the hand of the deceased, facing the entrance. The necropolis also contained simple grave burials in lesser numbers. The topographic distribution was not homogeneous; an alignment of hypogea were found to the north west, to the south of which were three non-hypogeum tombs; the latter did not contain grave goods. The most substantial group of tombs was to be found towards the south east and included both hypogea and simple graves. Studying a plan of the necropolis (Santoni 1982, fig. 3) a reading of the minimum distance between the tombs highlights the presence of couples of tombs particularly close to one another (385-386, 387-388, 68-69, 410-420, 432-433, 434-439), that may not simply be casual. However, the absence of chronological data for each hypogeum makes it impossible to establish how and over how much time the necropolis developed; furthermore it does not allow us to determine if there is any chronological contiguity between the closest tombs. The passage from single inhumation hypogea “a forno” to the multiple burial domus de janas reflects the necessity to underline family links and genealogy. The lack of elements preserved from the burials and any grave goods relating to the earliest phase of use of the domus


12

(San Ciriaco, Ozieri, Sub-Ozieri) excludes any further reflection. But beyond any specific manifestations of ritual the unifying element, as has been proposed for the Diana facies (Manfredini 2001), is the funerary monument itself and its construction. In the already noted necropolis of Montessu (south western Sardinia), the topographic distribution of the tombs shows the discontinuity both in the positioning and in the architectural characteristics. Four main groups can be recognised: the first, composed of tombs 1-13 in the south eastern area is not very homogeneous. The tombs were in some cases very close one to another, while others were more distant. The architectonic types were also different. The second (tombs14-23) to the north, and third (tombs 24-28) to the north west, were more compact and homogeneous. Lastly, the fourth group, to the south west (tombs 29-35), was composed of four closely grouped hypogea with two others close to each other at a slight distance from the rest. It is interesting to note, how in each group there was at least one tomb with one or more distinctive characteristics; greater dimensions, the presence of an anteroom and/or particularly well made central chambers or monumental entrances. The ritual function of these monuments and, perhaps, their assignment to people of particular status, is confirmed by the presence of cupules, columns and hearths. However these symbolic/artistic elements are also present in the smaller tombs, where the walls are decorated with symbolic motifs, bovine protomes, spirals and triangles. The necropolis of S’Elighe Entosu-Usini contains a rock-cut tomb with two large rectangular chambers and a smaller room, preceded by a disproportionately long corridor with respect to the dimensions of the monument as a whole (fig. 1,2): it was probably the seat of funerary rites, in particular those related to the treatment of bodies preceding the final deposition in the tomb. One of the principal characteristics of the Eneolithic are the multiple burials. In Sardinia it is sometimes possible to detect an attempt to maintain distinctions on behalf of particular personages. Inside a tomb at Perda Lada a sub-

elliptical structure in polygonal stone blocks delimited a space which contained some of the burials (fig. 3,5). The state of the deposit meant, that it was not possible to establish which of the many skeletal remains should be attributed to the earliest phase (Ozieri) and which to the second (Sub-Ozieri). These were secondary depositions in which it was evident that a selection of anatomical parts including skulls and long bones had been carried out. In domus de janas XI at Anghelu Ruju two inhumations were surrounded by about 50 picks for digging. In the megalithic hypogeum tomb at Bingia ‘e Monti some inhumations of the Bell Beaker phase were buried inside coffres. Alongside this the manifestations of megalithism, starting from the Recent Neolithic, were related to single burials or occasional double inhumations. The grave goods, typically objects of value, underlined the particular status of the individual. Domestic space and funerary space Large settlements distinct from burial grounds become recognisable in the beginning of the Final Neolithic. A model for the use of territory in which the burial grounds are situated at the edges of the plateau and the settlement in the centre has been identified at S’Elighe Entosu-Usini (D’Anna et alii 2010, Melis 2010a). In the most common funerary monument, the domus de janas, the smaller dimensions of the entrance seems to highlight the necessity to separate the world of the living from that of the dead. But at Cuccuru s’Arriu the settlement spreads towards the West during the Middle Neolithic and the Early Eneolithic; during the Recent Neolithic it reaches the eastern edge of the necropolis, and in the Final Neolithic it begins actually to cover it (Santoni 1982, fig. 2). This is the opposite of what is found in Neolithic mainland Italy, in which it was usual for funerary spaces to be chosen in places that had previously been the sites of settlements (Conati Barbaro 2007-2008).

Age Middle

Neolithic Late Neolithic

Final Neolithic

Early Eneolithic

Middle Eneolithic

Late Eneolithic

Final Eneolithic

Date Cal. BC Around 4500

4400-4100 4000-3500

3400-2900 3000-2500 2600-2300 2400-2200

Cultural facies Bonu Ighinu

San Ciriaco

Ozieri Sub-Ozieri Filigosa, Monte Claro

Abealzu, Monte Claro

Bell Beaker

Primary burial X X X X X X Secondary burial X X X X X X Single inhumation X X X X X X Double inhumation

X X

Multiple inhumations

? X X X X X

Tab. II: Prehistoric Sardinian burial customs.


13

The presence of hut burials is documented in some rare cases in Sardinia during the Final Neolithic, and during the Early and Middle Eneolithic. This could be related to the extremely low number of settlements that have been extensively excavated archaeologically. At Su Coddu burials without grave goods were discovered near Hut 28 and inside Structure 65; in a Monte Claro facies hut at the village of Corti Beccia two huddled skeletons were found. This limited data does not clearly establish whether the choice of habitation as burial site was based on factors such as age, sex, social standing, the cause of death or the role in life of the defunct. Examining the links between domestic activity and funerary ritual, research on the significance and function of the stone objects found in burials in Sardinia (Cappai and Melis 2005-2008) has established that some of the stone working occurred inside the tomb, thanks to the discovery of waste flakes from knapping, elements of the process of stone tool production. This evidence leads us to ask several questions: was knapping a part of the ritual? Was it performed in order to create objects such as grave goods or offerings? Or was it to create the tools necessary for the making of grave goods or offerings, or even the grave itself? Only a systematic use of the chaîne opératoire approach in the technological research of lithic elements of funerary deposits can hope to answer these questions. Conversely, a selective study of finished instruments leads only to an incomplete picture. The reproduction of elements of domestic architecture in numerous domus de janas introduces the theme of the representation of living spaces inside tombs. The pillars, pilasters, windows, doors and architraves refer to wooden structures - hearths, niches, tables and benches – which are at the same time part of domestic furniture and an element of funerary ritual. This theme is at present the subject of in-depth research. Symbolic manifestations and rites of passage In relation to rock-cut tombs we can hypothesise that the ritual begins with the digging of the tomb itself. Picks for digging found within the domus de janas may have a more complex interpretation than that of simply being abandoned there (Cappai and Melis 2005-2008). For example, there is no doubt that the deposition of two picks with points facing each other had a symbolic value in Tomb II at Ispiluncas a Sedilo; in another case, at Anghelu Ruju, more than 50 picks were arranged around two skeletons. In the same necropolis picks were commonly left in the antechamber, often close to the door connecting to the access corridor. For some time the plurality of funerary customs of the Eneolithic on the Italian peninsula has been seen according to a different perspective. A ritual in several phases has been recognised at the necropolis of Selvicciola of the Rinaldone facies (fig. 1,5) and in the tombs of the Gaudo facies (Cocchi Genick 2001) with

primary inhumation; for example, the changing of the anatomical order, and the collection, removal and relaying of some of the skeletal parts (usually the skull and long bones) resulting in a definitive loss of the individual identity. This ritual, given the lack of well preserved deposits, is only hypothetical in most cases for the domus de janas in Sardinia. However, the monument itself offers suggestions on the subject: the corridor, the antechamber and the central chamber have all been identified as sacred places. The presence of symbolic/artistic elements on the walls, cupules, niches and fake fireplaces underline the ritual function of these rooms. During the Filigosa phase the practise of partial burning of the corpse has been identified (Melis 2000). S. Benedetto-Iglesias, in south western Sardinia, is the only example of a domus de janas that contained the burial deposit relative to the first phase of use. It dates to the first half of the IV millennium cal. BC (Atzeni 2001). A group of roughly 30 individuals of both sexes were buried in a secondary deposition. The group was formed mostly of adults. The hypogeum was of a multi-cellular type, with a central chamber around which were situated three lateral rooms. The modest dimensions of the central chamber suggest that any rituals were practised outside of the tomb. The presence of skeletal remains throughout suggest an indistinct funerary function for all of the rooms. The placing of skulls for the most part around the edges of the rooms is evidence of the phases of removal and movement of the remains in prospect of to achieve the loss of individual identity. However, the presence of small groups of two, three or more skulls could conversely point to a time in which there remained a desire to maintain such distinctions and elements for identification. The gradual loss of personal identity could be a key to the reading of a process of abstraction related to anthropomorphic images inside the domus de janas. On the painted walls of a domus de janas at Sas Concas-Oniferi (Contu 1965) “tridents”, “candelabra” and upside down anthropomorphic figures with raised arms share the same scene. These different representations of the human figure could be evidence of a different nature or value of the figures, and in any case it appears not to be an articulated scene characterised by different behaviour or activities or engravings made over different periods. In prehistoric hermeneutics tridents are extremely stylised humans who are missing a pair of limbs. A hypothesis to explain the upside down figures could be that it represents the loss of the physical body during the various phases of the process of transformation; upside down with raised arms → upside down figure with lowered arms (= “candelabra”) →” trident” → “U” motif. The presence in the same figurative panel of “trident”, “candelabra” and U motifs is also visible at Sos Furrighesos-Anela (fig. 3,7; Tanda 1984). Even though the latter is generally interpreted as a corniform, in this


14

context we should not exclude that it may represent the last phase of the process of the loss of the personal and physical identity of the deceased. This does not exclude that in this process the animal has not assumed a symbolic role; an anthropomorphic bi-triangular figure with a corniform element as its head comes from Tomb 32 at Ispiluncas a Sedilo, incised on a Final Neolithic vase; among the various hypotheses is that it represents the image of a trance during the moment of transformation from man to animal or vice versa, analogous to other anthropo-zoomorphic representations from different contexts. In the domus de janas corniforms often constitute monumental images in which the head of the animal coincides with the door or false door inside the hypogeum. At Sos Baddulesos-Usini (Melis 2010b) on the entrance wall of the central chamber we find that the door is surmounted and/or flanked by corniforms, while a symmetrical composition is present on the opposite wall, with a false rather than real door. The hypogeum was therefore not simply a container for the remains of the deceased, but a space through which the deceased would make his or her slow journey to the afterlife in a measured passage from the outside world towards the inside, up to the false door and beyond. This could have been structured following an articulated sequence of actions: manipulation of the cadaver excarnation; deposition and intermediate rites in the central chamber; definitive deposition in the secondary rooms. And the animal (head = door surmounted by horns) becomes the means by which the “passage” is undertaken. For the more recent phases relative to the Bell Beaker facies, the coexistence in multiple tombs of primary inhumations beside secondary inhumations has been well documented. In the hypogeum at Padru Jossu (Ugas 1998), originally dug by the Monte Claro facies, the Bell Beaker groups seem to be responsible for the removal of the depositions of the preceding phase, as well as the selection of skulls and long bones and the depositing of these in fragments of dolii. Among the Bell Beaker depositions the various phases of the ritual are recognisable: inhumation on left flank followed by partial removal and then total removal. Perhaps it is not merely chance that of almost 70 individuals there was only one whole skeleton preserved. In the megalithic hypogeum tomb at Bingia ‘e Monti the presence of three primary inhumations alongside numerous secondary depositions seems to indicate the diverse phases of treatment of the body. The objects: grave goods, dress, offerings It is not always easy to distinguish which objects make up the grave goods of the defunct, which are offerings and which belong to the dress. In fact, often it is not possible to re-establish the position of the objects inside the monument and in relation to the inhumations. For example the presence of approximately 2000 pieces of a necklace at Padru Jossu were interpreted as offerings (Cocchi Genik 2001), but could have been part of the

dress of the numerous individuals buried in secondary depositions. In this case there would have been a hypothetical first phase in which the defunct was buried wearing full dress; successively this would have been removed and the individual subjected to the excarnation process, while the dress objects would have remained within the tomb. The objects which accompanied the defunct would often have been elements distinctive to the sex of the individual, but would also have indicated status, or, according to post-processual archaeology, ideal representations of the social structure. In the general wealth of grave goods sometimes an object of particular prestige stands out, such as the gold torques at Bingia ‘e Monti or the silver mirror at Padru Jossu. The dagger, symbol of masculinity, begins to appear consistently during the middle phase of the Eneolithic. The symbolic value is reflected in the representations of masculine menhir statues; however the distinctive feminine trait was the presence of breasts. Various menhir statues at Laconi are related to the burial at Corte Noa, the grave goods of which are composed of ornamental metal objects, numerous arrowheads in obsidian of excellent craftsmanship, while there are no copper daggers. The opposite is true of the grave goods of the tomb at Cungiau su Tuttui-Piscinas, which, unlike Corte Noa is further from the obsidian deposits, but closer to the mineral resources of Iglesiente, which included five metal daggers. This underlines that the composition of grave goods is partly conditioned by the availability of prime materials. In these two examples it is interesting to note how obsidian and metal were accorded the same level of importance. In the field of pottery the recurrence of some forms with truncated conical necks is interesting, such as the vases “a fiasco” of the Rinaldone facies, and the truncated cone jugs and mugs of the Spilamberto, Taurasi, Gaudo, Abealzu and Monte Claro facies (fig. 3,6). These sometimes have very similar morphological characteristics, evidence of the circulation of fashions and use in the area of the Tyrrhenian. Another recurrent theme in this area is the presence of arms and of ornamental objects. Among the offerings sometimes pieces of meat are found: pig jawbones at S. Caterina di Pittinuri; jawbones, hooves, occasionally shoulders, quarters or whole individuals of ovis aries at Padru Jossu. Interesting information on the material aspects of ritual come from the hypogeum of the Monte Claro facies of Bau su Matutzu (fig. 1,3; Manunza 2010). The tomb is a hypogeum with access through a vertical shaft but the architecture is more sophisticated and articulated than usual. The square shaft has three steps cut into three of the sides and from here the entrance is reached through a short corridor that leads to a rectangular room with three


15

benches along the sides. A second short corridor connects with the central chamber with elliptical niche following the same axis. The ceilings of the two rooms were curved (“a forno”). The remains of 4 primary inhumations were accompanied by 12 objects that seem to reflect a codified ritual of deposition: 11 vases and 1 small dagger. The absence of artefacts in hard animal material may be due to the perishable nature of the matter, as the skeletal remains were also profoundly decomposed. This exceptional find implies that these inhumations belonged to a hegemonic group; the presence of the dagger as grave goods of one member only means, that it was likely, that he was a person of importance or that he was the only male individual. The large ceramic containers, amphorae, dolii and ollae, which accompanied the inhumations would point to them being part of a community of farmer warriors. The concentration of Monte Claro villages in potential farming land such as the plain around Campidano, lends credence to this hypothesis. Other clues may come from the results of isotope analysis, still to be confirmed through further research (Lai 2009). The presence large handles on the pottery (often 4 handles) underlines that beyond the preservation of foodstuffs, transport was important. This evidence shows an ordered and dynamic level of socio-economic organisation, capable of both production and the storing of surplus, that was an established part of the circulation of trade in the Mediterranean. Contemporaneously the many cave burials, in particular in the mountainous area of south western Sardinia, are probably related to human groups with a predominantly pastoral economy. New, used and broken objects The lack of research on functionality makes it impossible to systematically approach the theme of deposition of used or new objects, while there is more information on ritual fragmentation. The theme of defunctionalisation of objects among grave goods has not been thoroughly studied in Sardinian contexts, above all in relation to the analysis of fractures and methods of breaking. Precious and everyday objects underwent an intentional fragmentation. This phenomenon is witnessed in different geographical and cultural contexts and therefore may not have a unified significance. In Sardinia burials often contain various categories of broken objects: picks, axes, hammer heads, arrow heads, blades, pottery and statuettes. The latter are often broken at the neck, at the waist or arms, which represent the most fragile parts; therefore in many cases the fracture may be accidental. Exceptions to this, based on the position of the fracture, were two examples found in Tombs XX and XX bis at d’Anghelu Ruju-Alghero and one at Marinaru-Sassari, where the lower portion of the figure was splintered. It has recently been shown how a large quantity of picks for digging, found within the hypogea that they were employed in excavating, had the heads broken, in some cases intentionally. In tomb I of S.

Pedru-Alghero the picks were broken in half. Therefore, if the breakage was limited to use, it seems most unlikely that the fracture would occur where the instrument is at its thickest and most solid. In tomb XV of Anghelu Ruju a hammer head of excellent workmanship with a small and impractical perforation was broken in half. It was part of a rich collection of grave goods, evidently related to an important personage (Cappai, Melis 2005-2008). Only a systematic technological and functional analysis of the artefacts with anomalous breakages will be able to establish any eventual intentionality in the action. This would demonstrate the method of breakage, and contribute - together with the integration of data relative to the positioning and other post-depositional phenomena - to a reconstruction of a part of the funerary ritual which still remains a mystery. Fragments of three dolii used as funeral beds in the tomb at Bau su Matutzu (southern Sardinia) merit separate attention (Manunza 2010). They were broken longitudinally, following the lines of the fluted sides. Two of these were used in more than one burial. Another aspect of defunctionalisation is related to miniature objects, often found in burials. They are present in every Sardinian Eneolithic phase. In a study of the Sub-Ozieri, Filigosa and Abealzu phases(Melis 2000) it was affirmed that miniature vases were found predominantly in funerary settings and rarely in living areas or sacred sites. The pots that reproduce noted forms and types in normal dimensions are more common, but there are also types that are only known through miniature examples. Among these were vases clearly used for ritual purposes, such as the two conical pots from Monte Crastu - Serrenti and Serra Cannigas-Villagreca. Their form is comparable to the rhyton, a vase for drinking or libation, and the small size enhances the symbolic-ritual character. Another pottery class of certain ritual use, generally in miniature, is a vase with perforated diaphragm. Examples are to be found at the shrine of Monte d’Accoddi, in the necropolis of Anghelu Ruju and in the cave at San Bartolomeo S. Bartolomeo-Cagliari. In particular the example at Monte d’Accoddi finds comparisons with the almost contemporary Taurasi facies, in the territory of Avellino. These artefacts, all related to religious or funerary activity, were probably used in ritual where someone sprinkled a liquid like water. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR RESEARCH A general overview of the historical processes of Prehistoric Sardinia through the manifestations of rituals demonstrates the complexity of the different phenomena that developed as part of it. The lack of finds for some periods makes an overall view impossible, for example, the supposed ossuary of the Rifugio cave or the necropolis at Cuccuru s’Arriu. Considering the unique


16

quality of the finds, it is not possible to establish whether these were common or exceptional practises. Another limit is the lack of data to compare with the settlements. These are often only known through surface finds, or yet to be discovered. But the greatest difficulty in understanding funerary rituals is caused by the repeated reuse of the domus de janas hypogea, which offer a fragmented view of the more ancient contexts. From what we know, it appears difficult to make general observations or to see behavioural models that can be systematically compared with other extra-insular contemporary existences. The variability of ritual - single and multiple, primary and secondary depositions - does not seem to have chronological significance. But in terms of social organisation it can be affirmed, that the large domus de janas are the convention of families or groups of relatives. In comparison with the interpretations on the variability of Eneolithic funerary rituals of mainland Italy it has been hypothesised that in the multiple burials of the domus de janas it is possible to identify signs of a ritual, carried out in several phases, in which the process of the loss of personal identity begins. The identity of the defunct in some cases is preserved and monumentalised through megalithic tombs presumably associated with proto-anthropomorphic menhirs (Goni and Laconi) and menhir statues (Laconi). This is not a new ideology, but a continuation of an ancient tradition, which has its beginning in the Recent Neolithic with San Ciriaco and the stone circles of Arzachena, in which there is the presence of both the circular megalithic elements, menhir, single inhumations, and grave goods with precious objects. This continues during the advanced Ozieri at Goni and ends with similar practises in the Filigosa-Abealzu phase at Laconi. In recent years the number of C14 datings of Sardinian contexts has increased noticeably. The continuation of this trend is absolutely essential in order to study in detail the modes of formation of funerary deposits. The increase in the analysis of stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes, underway for some years on Prenuragic contexts, should also give an indispensable contribution to paleo-climatic and paleo-economic knowledge and the effect these phenomena had on prehistoric communities. BIBLIOGRAPHY ACQUAFREDDA, P., MUNTONI, I. M. (2008): Obsidian from Pulo di Molfetta (Bari, Southern Italy): provenance from Lipari and first recognition of a Neolithic sample from Monte Arci (Sardinia). Journal of Archaeological Science 35, pp. 947-955. ATZENI, E. (1998): La tomba ipogeica di Bingia ‘e Monti, Simbolo ed enigma. Il bicchiere campaniforme e

l’Italia nella preistoria europea del III millennio a.C. (F. Nicolis, E. Mottes, Eds), Trento, pp. 254-260. ANTONA, A. (2003): Il megalitismo funerario in Gallura. Alcune osservazioni sulla necropoli di Li Muri, Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche LIII, pp. 359-373. ATZENI, E. (2001): La necropoli di cultura “Ozieri” a San Benedetto di Iglesias, La collezione Pistis-Corsi e il patrimonio archeologico del comune di Iglesias. Mostra archeologica e fotografica (E. Atzeni, L. Alba & G. Canino, Eds.). Iglesias, pp. 25-29. ATZENI, E. (2004): La scoperta delle statue menhir. Trent’anni di ricerche archeologiche nel territorio di Laconi, Cagliari, Cuec. ATZENI, E., COCCO, D. (1989): Nota sulla necropoli megalitica di Pranu Mutteddu-Goni, La cultura di Ozieri. Problematiche e nuove acquisizioni. Atti del I Convegno di Studio, (Ozieri, gennaio 1986 - Aprile 1987) (L. Dettori Campus, Ed.) Ozieri, Il Torchietto, pp. 201-216. BAGOLINI, B., FERRARI, A., STEFFÉ, G. (1988): La necropoli di Spilamberto (Modena), Rassegna di Archeologia 7, pp. 614-615. BERNABÒ BREA, M., CASTAGNA, D., MAFFI, M., MAZZIERI, P., PEDROTTI, A., SALVADEI, L., TIRABASSI, I. (in press): Le necropoli VBQ in area padana e alpina. Atti del convegno, Il pieno sviluppo del Neolitico in Italia, Finale Ligure (SV), 8-10 giugno 2009. BIAGI, P., CREMASCHI, M. (1980): Scavi nella grotta Rifugio di Oliena (Nuoro), 1977-78. Caverna sepolcrale della cultura di Bonu Ighinu (Nota preliminare). Atti della XXII Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, pp. 95-114. CAPPAI, R., MELIS, M. G. (2005-2008) : Signe et fonction des objets lithiques de la Sardaigne préhistoriques: données par la nécropole de Ispiluncas – Sedilo (Sardaigne - Italie), Préhistoire Anthropologie Méditerranéennes 14, pp. 145-166. CAVULLI, F., GRIMALDI, S., PEDROTTI, A. (2002): Riflessioni per una schedatura delle caratteristiche tecno-morfologiche delle cuspidi neolitiche. L’esempio archeologico da La Vela e Isera La Torretta. IN: Bellintani P., Cavulli F. eds, Catene operative dell’arco preistorico: incontro di archeologia sperimentale, Trento, Provincia di Trento, pp. 141-165. CIANCIO, A., RADINA, F. (1979): Madonna delle Grazie (Rutigliano Bari): campagna di scavo 1979, Taras. Rivista di archeologia 1-2, pp. 7-61 COCCHI GENICK (2001): Considerazioni sulle forme del rituale funerario dell’Eneolitico italiano, Studi di Preistoria e Protostoria in onore di Luigi Bernabò Brea


17

(M.C. Martinelli, U. Spigo, Eds.), Messina, Edas, pp. 113-144. CONATI BARBARO, C. (2007-2008): Custodire la memoria: sepolture in abitato nel neolitico italiano. Atti del Convegno internazionale, Sepolti tra i vivi. Buried among the living (M. G. Melis, Ed.), Scienze dell’Antichità, 14, Roma, L’Erma di Bretschneider, pp. 49-70. CONTU, E. (1965): Nuovi petroglifi schematici della Sardegna, Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana XVI, pp. 69-122. D’ANNA, A., GUENDON, J. L., SOULA, F. (2010): La nécropole de S’Elighe Entosu dans son espace, Usini. Ricostruire il passato. Una ricerca internazionale a S’Elighe Entosu (M. G. Melis, Ed.), Sassari, Carlo Delfino editore, pp. 57-72. FERRARESE CERUTI, M. L. (1980): Le domus de janas di Mariughia e Canudedda e il dolmen di Motorra, Dorgali. Documenti Archeologici, Sassari ( Aa.Vv. Ed.), Chiarella, pp. 57-65. GUILAINE, J. (1996): Proto-mégalithisme, rites funéraires et mobiliers de prestige néolithiques en Méditerranée occidentale, Complutum Extra 6 (I), pp. 123-140. GUILAINE, J. (2000): Les Hipogées de la France méditerranéenne. L'ipogeismo nel Mediterraneo, origini, sviluppo, quadri culturali (AA.VV., Ed.), Atti del congresso internazionale, Sassari, Università degli Studi, pp. 221-250. LAI, L. (2009): Il clima nella Sardegna preistorica e protostorica: problemi e nuove prospettive. IN: Atti della XLIV Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria La preistoria e la protostoria della Sardegna. Cagliari, Barumini, Sassari, 23-28 novembre 2009, vol I – Relazioni generali, Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria. Firenze, pp. 313-324. LEANDRI, F. (2000): Les mégalithes de Corse, Paris, Editions Jean-Paul Gisserot. LORIA, R., TRUMP, D. H. (1978): Le scoperte a "Sa Ucca de su Tintirriolu" e il Neolitico sardo, Monumenti Antichi dei Lincei II (ser. misc.), XLIX, 2, pp. 115-253. LO PORTO, F. G. (1972): La tomba neolitica con idolo in pietra di Arnesano (Lecce), Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche XXVII,2, pp. 357-372. MANFREDINI, A. (2001): Rituali funerari e organizzazione sociale: una rilettura di alcuni dati della facies Diana in Italia meridionale, Studi di Preistoria e Protostoria in onore di Luigi Bernabò Brea (M.C. Martinelli, U. Spigo, Eds.), Messina, Edas, pp. 71-87.

MANUNZA, M. R. (2010): Bau Su Matutzu. Serdiana: segni del potere in una sepoltura del III Millennio a.C., Cagliari, Scuola Sarda Editrice. MELIS, M. G. (2000): L’età del Rame in Sardegna: origine ed evoluzione degli aspetti autoctoni, Villanova Monteleone Soter. MELIS, M. G. (2007): La Sardegna e le sue relazioni con la Corsica tra la fine del Neolitico e l’età del Rame. IN: 128e Congrès des sociétés historiques et scientifiques, Relations, échanges et coopération en Méditerranée, Bastia, du 14 au 21 avril 2003, CTHS, Paris, pp. 253-263. MELIS, M. G. (2009): L’Eneolitico antico, medio ed evoluto in Sardegna: dalla fine dell’Ozieri all’Abealzu. IN: Atti della XLIV Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria La preistoria e la protostoria della Sardegna. Cagliari, Barumini, Sassari, 23-28 novembre 2009, vol I – Relazioni generali, Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria. Firenze, 81-95, pp. 107-109. MELIS, M. G. (2010a): La necropoli di S’Elighe Entosu e il territorio di Usini in età preistorica e protostorica, Usini. Ricostruire il passato. Una ricerca internazionale a S’Elighe Entosu (M. G. Melis, Ed.), Sassari, Carlo Delfino editore, pp. 289-298. MELIS, M. G. (2010b): Simbolismo e arte nei monumnti preistorici e protostorici del territorio di Usini, Usini. Ricostruire il passato. Una ricerca internazionale a S’Elighe Entosu, (M. G. Melis, Ed.) Sassari, Carlo Delfino editore, pp. 83-94. MELIS, M. G. (in press): Archeologia degli insediamenti eneolitici della Sardegna. IN: Atti della XLIV Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria La preistoria e la protostoria della Sardegna. Cagliari, Barumini, Sassari, 23-28 novembre 2009. MELIS, M. G., TALAMO, P. (in press): Elementi di contatto tra la Sardegna e l’Italia meridionale durante l’Eneolitico attraverso il confronto tra le produzioni ceramiche. IN Atti della XLIV Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria La preistoria e la protostoria della Sardegna. Cagliari, Barumini, Sassari, 23-28 novembre 2009. PLANTALAMOR MASSANET, L., MARQUÈS, J. (eds.) (2001): Biniai Nou. El megalitismo meditarrani a Menorca, Treballs del Museu de Menorca 24, Maó, Editorial Menorca, S.A. SANTONI, V. (1982): Cabras-Cuccuru S’Arriu. Nota preliminare di scavo (1978, 1979, 1980), Rivista di Studi Fenici X, 1, pp. 103-127.


18

TANDA, G. (1984): Arte e religione della Sardegna preistorica nella necropoli di Sos Furrighesos-Anela, Sassari, Chiarella. TIBERI, I., DELL’ANNA, S. (in press): Usi funerari nel Salento del V millennio a.C.: le tombe di Carpignano Salentino (Lecce). IN Atti del Convegno Il pieno sviluppo del Neolitico in Italia, Finale Ligure (SV), 8-10 giugno 2009. TRAMONI, P., D’ANNA, A., PINET, L. GUENDON, J. L., ORSINI, J. B. (2004): La nécropole mégalithique de Vascolacciu (Figari, Corse-du-Sud). IN: 5e Rencontres Méridionales de Préhistoire récente, Clermond Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme) 8-9 novembre 2002, Cressenac, Préhistoire du Sud-ouest, pp. 523-536. TRAMONI, P., D’ANNA, A., PASQUET, A., MILANINI, J. L. (2007): Le site de Tivulaghju (Porto-Vecchio, Corse-du-Sud) et les coffres mégalithiques du sud de la Corse, nouvelles données, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 104, n. 2, pp. 245-274. TUSA, S. (1998): Prospettiva mediterranea e integrità culturale del bicchiere campaniforme siciliano, Simbolo ed enigma (F. Nicolis, E. Mottes, Eds), Trento, Provincia autonoma di Trento, pp. 205-219. UGAS, G. (1990): La tomba dei guerrieri di Decimoputzu, Cagliari, Edizioni Della Torre. UGAS, G. (1998): Facies campaniformi dell’ipogeo di Padru Jossu (Sanluri-Cagliari), Simbolo ed enigma (F. Nicolis, E. Mottes, Eds.), Trento, Provincia autonoma di Trento, pp. 261-280. USAI, E. (1998): Le sequenze culturali e i rituali funerari dell’ipogeo di Scaba ‘e Arriu di Siddi (Cagliari), Quaderni della Soprintendenza Arcehologica per le province di Cagliari e Oristano 15, pp. 28-58. Maria Grazia MELIS Dipartimento di Scienze Umanistiche e dell’Antichità - Università di Sassari, piazza Conte di Moriana, 8 07100 Sassari, Italy [email protected]


19

Fig. 1 Funeral hypogeum monuments. 1: Cuccuru s’Arriu-Cabras; 2: S’Elighe Entosu IV-Usini; 3: Bau su Matutzu-Serdiana; 4: Arnesano-Lecce; 5: La Selvicciola 14 e 5-Ischia di Castro (1, after Santoni 1982; 2, after Melis 2010; 3, after Manunza 2010; 4, after Lo Porto 1972).


20

Fig. 2: Funeral megalithic monuments. 1: Li Muri-Arzachena; 2: Pranu Mutteddu V-Goni; 3: Masone Perdu-Laconi; 4: Motorra-Dorgali; 5: Corte Noa-Laconi; 6: Tivulaghju-Porto Vecchio; 7: Cist tomb 5 from La Vela- Torino (1, after Antona 2003; 2, 3, 5, after Atzeni 2004; 4, after Ferrarese Ceruti 1980; 7, after Cavulli et alii 2002).


21

Fig. 3 Hypogeic and megalithic monuments. 1: Pranu Mutteddu II-Goni; 2: Montessu IX-Villaperuccio; 3 Canudedda-Dorgali; Biniai Nou 1-Maó; 4: Castellet-Arles; 5: Pit tomb of Perda Lada II-Decimoputzu; 6: Scaba ‘e Arriu-Siddi; 7: Jugs from italian eneolithic contexts; 7: Engraved wall from tomb VIII di Sos Furrighesos-Anela (1, after Atzeni 2004; 2; photos by Fabio Serchisu; 3, after Ferrarese Ceruti 1980; 4, after Guilaine 2000; 5, after Ugas 1990; 6, after Usai 1998; 6, after Melis and Talamo in press and Bagolini et alii 1988; 7, after Tanda 1984).