Reti culturali tra Sicilia e isole minori: comportamenti, codici e simboli nella cultura materiale

Cultural networks between Sicily and minor islands: behaviours, codes, and symbols in material culture - Bronze Age mobility and networks in Central Mediterranean are documented by the exchange of technologies and artifacts, as well as by direct or mediated interactions. Some finds, related to ritual practices or societal behaviours, reflect the interconnectedness among communities, even those geographically distant. A brief review of selected archaeological findings from Sicily, Pantelleria and the Aeolian Islands allows us to explore ties, patterns, or simple transfers of knowledge as well as, on the contrary, assess instances of diversity and autonomy. This investigation also invites facing the concepts of culture and facies applied to the Bronze Age communities. Certain indicators identify precise actions wherein processes of transmission, imitation and adoption reveal distinct identities. Conversely, other markers, with their ambiguous attribution of ritual and symbolic significance, highlight shared cultural practices, challenging notions of identity and cultural diversity. Structures found inside the settlements, such as hearths, cooking plates, andirons, reflect food preparation activities, while other objects with uncertain significance, often interpreted as elements of the ritual sphere (ceramic horns or the so-called double axes) hint at deeper symbolic realms. Other items, mainly related to pottery or clay manufacture, represent symbolic meaning (goat horns shaped handles) or practical activities (so-called tokens). This paper aims to identify cultural networks across various scales (geographical and cultural), useful for recognising specific cultural traits of Bronze Age communities.

In questo contributo si ritiene che nella presentazione dei dati archeologici relativi all’antica e media età del Bronzo in Sicilia non sia più accettabile restare vincolati all’inquadramento degli aspetti culturali noti dalla tradizione: parlare di cultura di Castelluccio, contrapposta a quella di Rodi Tindari Vallelunga (RTV) o alla facies di Capo Graziano1 significa ignorare l’avanzamento degli studi sociali e antropologici ad integrazione di quelli archeologici. Si ritiene anche che l’uso del termine facies, considerato al momento attuale un consolidato espediente per garantire l’oggettività di quanto si possa affermare sulle caratteristiche di un contesto archeologico, debba essere integrato da nuovi approcci della ricerca.