Intercultural Contacts between Northwest Iberia and the Mediterranean

A  Tale  of  Exchange  and  Symmetry:   Intercultural  Contacts  between  Northwest  Iberia  and  the   Mediterranean   (9th-­‐7th  Centuries  BCE)    March  2016   Archaeology   1   Abstract Recent   years   have   seen   a   wave   of   research   in   intercultural   contacts   between   Northwest   Iberia   and   the   Mediterranean.   This   paper   explores   these   contacts   during   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE,   a   period   of   transition   between   the   Late   Bronze   Age   and   Early   Iron   Age.   It   revises   the   material   evidence   of   Mediterranean   origin   found   within   Northwest   castros,   hillforts,   specifically   in   the   Rías   Baixas.   The   analysis  shows  a  typological  diversity  of  artefacts  of  varied  origins.  This  suggests   that   the   Northwest   was   exchanging   material   goods   and   ideas   with   the   Mediterranean,   more   specifically   the   Phoenicians   and   locals   in   southern   Iberia.   An   attempt   is   made   to   understand   the   mechanisms   behind   these   interactions,   suggesting   a   hybrid   exchange   mechanism   that   integrates   both   communities   and   maritime   routes   from   the   Atlantic   bronze   circuit.   This   is   used   to   propose   a   continuous  transition  between  the  Late  Bronze  Age  and  the  Early  Iron  Age  in  the   Northwest.   The   exchanges   are   revisited   through   three   ideas   of   symmetrical   archaeology.   Thing’s   agency   sheds   light   on   the   exchange’s   network   of   relations   between   things   and   human   as   agents   and   patients.   This   also   shows   how   foreign   imports   can   disrupt   a   community’s   habitual   memory.   Finally,   the   concept   of   a   percolating  time  allows  us  to  present  the  exchanges  as  a  poly-­‐chronic  ensemble.   2     Table  of  Contents   Title  page                1   Abstract          2   Table  of  Contents            3   List  of  Figures  and  Tables          5   List  of  Abbreviations          6   Acknowledgements      7   1. Introduction Objectives          8                  8   Past  studies  of  the  Northwest  and  the  Mediterranean:  nationalism,   colonialism  and  post-­‐colonialism                9   Theoretical  standpoint            11   Contact,  exchange  and  trade            11   Symmetry            12   Time  and  space            13   2. Main  players          17   The  communities  of  the  Northwest                    17   The  communities  of  the  Mediterranean:  Phoenicians  in  southern  Iberia    18   Portugal            22   The  connection            22   Raw  materials  and  the  quest  for  metals            23   Maritime  routes            24   3. An  analysis  of  the  material  evidence Where  to  look?            27            28   Key  materials              28   Limitations              30   Mediterranean  artefacts  by  castro            30   Torroso              31   Torres  de  Padín            33   Montealegre              33   Islas  Cíes            34   A  Lanzada              34   3   Penalba          35   Alobre            35   Neixón  Pequeño          36   Castrovite          37     Data  compilation      37   4. Theoretical  considerations  on  exchange  and  symmetry Intercultural  contacts  in  the  Northwest  in  the  9-­‐7th  centuries  BCE            42          42   The  nature  of  exchange:  Phoenicians,  southern  Iberia  and  an   active  Northwest            42   Exchange  mechanisms:  a  dynamic  Atlantic          44   Bridging  the  divides            47   A  symmetrical  interpretation          48   Things’  agency          49   Memory          51   Time            52   5. Conclusion        55   Future  directions          56   Bibliography            57   4   List  of  Figures  and  Tables   Figures:   Figure  1.  Chronological  comparison.          14   Figure  2.  Location  of  the  Rías  Baixas  in  relation  to:  (a)  the     Mediterranean;  (b)  Iberia;  and  (c)  Galicia.  Map  base  ©  Google  Maps.   Figure  3.  Main  geographical  features  of  the  Rías  Baixas.          15          15   Figure  4.  Major  cultural  zones  in  Late  Bronze  Age  Atlantic  Europe.   From  Cunliffe  (2001:  fig.7.20).          16   Figure  5.  Phoenicians  in  the  Mediterranean:  mentioned  colonies  and   maritime  routes.          20   Figure  6.  Main  Portuguese  settlements  with  Phoenician  evidence.          22   Figure  7.  Main  Iberian  metal  resources.            23   Figure  8.  Prevailing  currents  (a)  and  winds  (b)  in  the  western   Mediterranean.  From  Aubet  (2001:  fig.38-­‐39).          25   Figure  9.  Known  castros  of  the  9th-­‐7th  centuries  BCE  and  their   distribution.              27   Figure  10.  Fibulae  types:  a)  double-­‐spring,  after  Ruiz-­‐Delgado   (1986:fig.D.r.1),  modified;  (B)  ‘Alcores’,  after  Torres-­‐Ortiz  (2002:  fig  VIII.26);   ‘Sanguisuga’  or  ‘Acebuchal’,  after  Torres-­‐Ortiz  (2002:  fig  VIII.28).      29   Figure  11.  Castros  with  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin.          30   Figure  12.  Mediterranean  artefacts  from  Torroso:  (a)  curved  knives,     after  Peña-­‐Santos  (1992b:  fig.69);  (b)  iron  sickles,  after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:   fig.69);  (c)  buckle,  after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:  fig.63);  (d)  double-­‐spring  fibula   foot,  after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:  fig.63);  (e)  unidentified  piece,  after  Peña     Santos  (1992b:  fig.62).            32   Figure  13.  Painted  sherd  from  Torres  de  Padín.  After  González-­‐Ruibal   (2004a:  fig.4.2).          33   Figure  14.  Painted  sherd  from  Islas  Cíes.    After  González-­‐Ruibal   (2006-­‐7:  fig.3.50.3).            33   Figure  15.  Curved  bronze  knife  from  A  Lanzada.  After  Cunliffe   (1985:  plate  XVIII.1).    34   Figure  16.  Mediterranean  artefacts  from  Penalba:  (a)  curved  knife,   after  González-­‐Ruibal  (2004a:  fig.4.6);  (b)  fibula  spring,  after     5     González-­‐Ruibal  (2006-­‐7:  fig.3.50.13) .    35   Figure  17.  ‘Sanguisuga’  fibula  from  Alobre.  From  Fariña-­‐Busto  &     Arias-­‐Vilas  (1980:  fig.1)  (left)  and  González-­‐Ruibal  (2004a:  fig.4.7)  (right) .          36   Figure  18.  Fibula  piece  from  Neixón  Pequeño.  After  Ayán-­‐Vila  et  al.   (2011:  fig.6) .        36   Figure  19.  Some  statistics  on  the  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin:   (a) artefacts  by  type;  (b)  nature  of  the  imports;  and  (c)  provenances. Figure  20.  Distribution  of  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin.          40          41   Figure  21.  Exchanges  between  southern  Iberia  and  the  Northwest:  (a)          46   traditional  models  and  (b)  proposed  hybrid  exchange  mechanism.     Figure  22.  Bridging  the  chronological  divide  in  the  Northwest:  (a)   traditional  model  and  (b)  continuity  model.          48   Figure  23.  A  network  of  agency:  three  examples  of  momentary  agent-­‐        51   patient   relations.     Figure  24.  Imports  and  the  disruption  of  memory:  the  introduction  of          52   iron  know-­‐how  in  the  Northwest.     Figure  25.  Percolating  time:  the  Northwest’s  contacts  with  the   Mediterranean  as  part  of  its  polychromic  ensemble  of  the  9th-­‐7th  centuries          54   BCE.       Tables:   Table  1.  A  synthesis  of  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin  by  castro.          38   List  of  Abbreviations   Northwest  –            Northwest  Iberia   BA  –            Bronze  Age   LBA  –          Late  Bronze  Age   IA  –            Iron  Age   EIA  –          Early  Iron  Age   RB  –            Rías  Baixas   6   B034290   1. Introduction This   paper   can   be   contextualised   within   the   research   surrounding   intercultural   contact   between   the   Mediterranean   and   the   Atlantic   coast   of   Iberia   during  the  Bronze  to  Iron  Age  transition.  Over  the  past  20  years,  there  has  been  a   wave  of  interest  in  understanding  these  contacts  –  and  their  role  in  the  Phoenician   and   Punic   expansion   –   prompted   by   recent   discoveries   of   Mediterranean   presence   in   these   areas.   There   is   ample   evidence   along   the   Atlantic   coast   for   regular   exchanges   with   Phoenicians   by   the   6th   century   BCE,   with   typical   Punic   settlements   in   place   by   the   5th.   However,   these   well-­‐established   Atlantic-­‐Mediterranean   exchanges   need   to   have   been   preceded   by   some   kind   of   contact,   which   is   probably   less   visible   in   the   archaeological   record.   This   is   the   period   from   the   9th   century   BCE,   with   the   start   of   Phoenician   presence   in   southern   Iberia,   to   the   7th   century   BCE.  This  appears  as  a  time  of  transformation  in  Atlantic  Iberian  communities,  key   to   understanding   the   shift   from   exchanges   within   the   Atlantic   bronze   circuit   of   the   second  millennia  to  Phoenician  and  Punic  trade  networks.     OBJECTIVES   The   purpose   of   this   paper   is   twofold.   First,   it   aims   to   understand   Mediterranean  presence  in  northwest  Iberia  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  millennia   BCE.   This   study   will   focus   on   settlements   of   the   9th-­‐7thcenturies   BCE   in   the   Rías   Baixas,  a  series  of  inlets  along  the  western  coast  of  Galicia,  a  province  in  northwest   Spain   (see   Figure   2);   this   will   be   referred   to   as   the   Northwest.   Methodologically,   it   will  entail  an  examination  of  material  evidence  for  Mediterranean  contacts  that  has   been   found   within   indigenous   hillforts,   castros,   in   order   to   identify   artefacts’   numbers,  origins  and  distributions.  The  analysis  will  aim  to  understand  who  in  the   Mediterranean  was  carrying  out  these  contacts  and  to  contextualise  the  nature  of   these   contacts   within   the   theoretical   framework   of   exchange.   This   might   help   archaeologists   understand   the   mechanisms   behind   these   contacts   and   their   relation  to  LBA  exchange  networks.   8   B034290   Secondly,  this  paper  aims  to  approach  the  evidence  and  conclusions  from  an   alternative  perspective,  that  of  symmetrical  archaeology  –  as  presented  by  B.  Olsen   (2004;  2007;  2010),  M.  Shanks  (2007),  T.  Webmoor  (2007;  2013)  and  C.  Witmore   (2007).   Presented   as   ‘a   defense   of   things’,   this   archaeological   theory   aims   to   reconfigure   dualisms   by   focusing   on   the   collectives   and   complex   interactions   between  humans  and  things  (Olsen  2010;  Webmoor  2007:  563-­‐5).1  This  viewpoint   – which   is   opposed   to   the   social   and   linear   ideas   characteristic   of   studies   of exchange,   both   of   the   formalist   and   substantivist   schools   –   might   allow   one   to suggest   unusual   avenues   of   thought   within   the   wider   debate   of   intercultural contacts   between   the   Mediterranean   and   the   Atlantic   coasts   of   Iberia   during   the Bronze   to   Iron   Age   transition.   The   analysis   will   focus   on   applying   three symmetrical  concepts  to  the  recollected  material  evidence  and  conclusions:  things’ agency,  memory  and  percolating  time. Overall,  this  dissertation  aims  to  revise  a  traditionally  marginal  and  isolated   area   and   ‘dark’   time   period,   the   Northwest   in   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE,   by   examining   its   intercultural   contacts   with   the   Mediterranean.   It   seeks   to   set   these   contacts   within   a   wider   spatial   and   temporal   framework,   understand   their   exchange  mechanisms  and  approach  them  through  symmetrical  ideas.     PAST   STUDIES   OF   THE   NORTHWEST   AND   THE   MEDITERRANEAN:   NATIONALISM,  COLONIALISM  AND  POST-­‐COLONIALISM   Interest   in   contacts   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean   has   developed   within   the   context   of   Phoenician   colonisation   in   the   western   Mediterranean   and   the   evolution   of   local   Northwest   communities.   Ideas   have   broadly   corresponded   to   the   evolution   of   archaeological   thought   throughout   the   20th  century.     The   first   investigations   were   deeply   entrenched   within   nationalist   and   colonial   ideas.   The   mid-­‐20th   century   saw   the   Spanish   dictatorship   start   to   manipulate   the   country’s   proto-­‐history   (Ruiz-­‐Zapatero   1996).   Thus,   autonomous   1  The  term  ‘thing’  will  be  used  subsequently  under  Olsen’s  (2010:  9)  definition  of  things  as  ‘  all  those  varied     physical  entities  we  by  effective  conventions  refer  to  as  “material  culture”.   9   B034290   communities  in  northern  Spain  started  to  build  their  regional  identities  upon  the   notion   of   a   ‘Celtic   Iron   Age’,   which   clearly   distinguished   them   from   the   ‘Iberian’   southeast  Spain  (Almagro-­‐Gorbea  1991:  12).  This  inevitably  led  to  archaeological   interpretations   of   the   Northwest   as   isolated.   In   the   Mediterranean,   Phoenician   expansion   was   thought   to   have   reached   an   end   at   the   Strait   of   Gibraltar   due   to   Helleno-­‐   and   Mediterraneo-­‐centric   ideas   dominating   the   intellectual   discussion.   These  had  derived  from  Ancient  Greek  beliefs,  which  saw  the  Strait  as  the  end  of   the  known  world,  and  Braudel’s  (1949)  geographical  focus  on  the  Mediterranean.   Overall,   in   these   early   stages,   interaction   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean  during  the  LBA  and  the  EIA  was  inconceivable.   The   material   evidence   for   Phoenician   presence   beyond   the   Strait   of   Gibraltar  multiplied  over  the  course  of  the  1980s-­‐90s  (Arruda  2009:  113).  Interest   in   the   Mediterranean   presence   in   southern   Iberia   increased,   with   investigations   into   what   were   considered   Phoenician   settlements   at   Peña   Negra,   Alicante,   and   Gadir.   Investigations   then   expanded   to   North   African   sites,   such   as   Lixus,   and   Portuguese   hillforts,   such   as   Abul.   These   were   all   regarded   as   emporia,   after   the   Greek  colonial  model,  founded  by  Phoenicians  as  trading  posts  from  the  8th  century   BCE   onwards   as   part   of   their   larger   exchange   network   in   the   Mediterranean   (Aubet   2001a:   348).   This   process   started   to   be   acknowledged   as   the   Phoenician   ‘colonisation’,  suggesting  it  was  both  political  and  economic  in  character.  As  such,   Phoenicians   were   seen   to   have   arrived   in   the   western   Mediterranean   to   found   colonies   and   exploit   the   local   resources.   Referring   to   this   phenomenon   as   ‘colonisation’   is   still   deeply   entrenched   in   archaeological   writings   (see   Dietler   &   López-­‐Ruiz  2009).  Thus,  when  archaeologists  identified  Phoenician  evidence  in  the   western   Mediterranean   dating   to   the   10-­‐9th   centuries   BCE,   this   period   was   inevitably  referred  to  as  ‘precolonisation’  (Celestino  et  al.  2009).  Nevertheless,  in   the  past  15  years,  postcolonial  ideas  have  steadily  been  incorporated  to  analyses  of   Phoenician  presence  in  Iberia.  Deeper  insights  into  the  so-­‐called  emporia  revealed   the   co-­‐existence   of   Phoenicians   and   local   communities,   suggesting   a   more   equal   relationship   than   originally   proposed.   In   this   context,   Alvar-­‐Ezquerra   (2009)   has   criticised   the   terms   ‘colonisation’   and   ‘precolonisation’,   proposing   the   use   of   ‘Systemic   Hegemonic   Mode   of   Contact’   and   ‘Episodic   Mode   of   Contact’   instead.   Aubet  (2001a:  200-­‐211),  drawing  from  the  scarcity  and  isolation  of  items  from  the   10   B034290   12-­‐10th  centuries  BCE,  has  questioned  the  viewpoint  of  precolonisation.  However,   words   like   ‘founding’,   ‘colonies’   or   ‘precolonisation’   are   still   common   and   the   debate   remains   open   (see   Celestino   et   al.   2009).   Both   points   of   view   currently   coexist  within  the  academic  sphere.   During  most  of  these  developments,  the  Northwest   was  still  regarded  as  an   isolated   area   for   the   most   part,   home   to   the   distinctive   cultura   castrexa,   hillfort   culture.   When   evidence   for   Mediterranean   presence   in   the   coast   from   the   5th   century   onwards   –   for   instance   in   A   Lanzada   –   became   undeniable,   these   sites   were   contextualised   within   Punic   colonial   trading   activities   (González-­‐Ruibal   et   al.   2010).   However,   the   discussion   within   the   archaeological   literature   soon   welcomed   postcolonial   ideas   and   began   including   matters   of   ethnicity,   continuity   or   internal   change.   The   chronology   of   Mediterranean   contacts   in   the   Northwest   also   expanded   to   include   the  LBA   and   EIA,   as   well   as   the   area’s   role   in   the   Atlantic   bronze   circuit   (Ruiz-­‐Gálvez   2013:   314).   Nowadays,   thanks   to   Cunliffe’s   (2001)   and   González-­‐Ruibal’s   (2004:   287-­‐8)   work,   the   Northwest   has   begun   to   be   regarded   less   as   a   marginal   or   liminal   location   and   more   as   a   pivotal   point   between   two   areas,  the  Atlantic  and  the  Mediterranean.  The  discourse  of  intercultural  contacts   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean   is   moving   towards   a   theoretical,   practical  and  scholarly  holism.   THEORETICAL  STANDPOINT   Drawing   from   this   holism,   an   integrated   approach   will   be   use   to   analyse   exchange.  Furthermore,  an  alternative  theoretical  stance  will  be  provided  through   the  use  of  symmetrical  ideas.         Contact,  exchange  and  trade   When   looking   upon   the   nature   of   the   interaction   between   the   Northwest   and  the  Mediterranean,  three  key  terms  are  in  need  of  definition:  contact,  exchange   and   trade.   ‘Contact’   refers   to   the   basic   level   of   this   interaction   whereby   the   two   groups   meet.   It   is   used   within   an   intercultural   context   because   each   group   is   11   B034290   distinctive   enough   from   the   other   to   distinguish   two   different   types   of   communities:   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenician   Mediterranean   (see   chapter   2).   ‘Exchange’   has   been   given   varied   meanings   within   the   interaction   scale:   from   simply   an   ‘interaction   between   humans’   to   the   transfer   of   ideas   and   social   practices   but   not   material   goods  (Oka   &   Kusimba   2008:   340).  In   contrast,   ‘trade’   is   presented   as   a   more   complex   activity   that   includes   a   material-­‐economic   component   and   a   market   (Oka   &   Kusimba   2008:   340).   This   paper   will   use   ‘exchange’   to   refer   to   the   transfer   of   both   the   social   and   the   material   between   groups.   It   will   refrain   from   using   ‘trade’   to   avoid   interpretation   pitfalls,   as   the   evidence   in   the   Northwest   is   already   sparse   enough   without   having   to   face   archaeologists’  difficulties  of  identifying  a  market  in  an  ancient  society  (Kolb  2011:   150).   This   analysis   will   begin   by   viewing   the   interaction   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean   as   intercultural   contact.   After   the   evidence   has   been   examined,   it   will   then   contemplate   whether   there   is   enough   evidence   to   suggest   exchange.   Theoretically,   exchange   will   be   approached   as   a   material   and   temporal   process,  just  as  material  goods  and  ideas  are  produced,  circulated  and  consumed.   This   process   is   continuous,   complex,   integrated   and   dynamic   (Aubet   2001a:   105;   Earle   2010:   209;   Dillian   &   White   2010:   3).   This   continuity   and   dynamism   of   exchange   will   also   allow   us   to   approach   its   results   from   a   temporal   perspective.   Finally,   the   approach   will   be   substantivist   in   the   sense   that   it   will   consider   exchange   to   operate   within   a   cultural   context,   that   of   Mediterranean   presence   in   the  Northwest.     Symmetry   Symmetrical   theories   have   presented   archaeology   as   ‘an   ecology   of   practices   […]   that   work   on   material   pasts   in   the   present’;   thus,   it   draws   from   several  theories  and  approaches  (Olsen  et  al.  2012:  2).  All,  however,  are  oriented   to   the   same   goal:   a   defense   of   things   and   collectives   of   things   and   humans.   Nature-­‐ society  is  seen  as  an  imbroglio  of  human-­‐things  (Webmoor  2007:  569).  This  does   not  imply  equivalence,  but  does  defend  a  variety  of  agencies  (Witmore  2007:  547;   549).  It  is  therefore  a  critique  of  ‘asymmetrical’  theories,  both  processual  and  post-­‐ 12   B034290   processual,  that  prioritise  either  the  empiric  or  the  social  agent  (Ruiz-­‐Zapatero  &   Álvarez-­‐Sanchís   2015:   217).   Above   all,   it   is   a   theory,   not   an   approach,   and   therefore   offers   enough   flexibility   to   apply   to   this   dissertation’s   specific   research   without   envisaging   a   fixed   outcome,   but   rather   suggesting   fields   of   inquiry.   As   in   Witmore  (2007:  547),  this  paper’s  interest  in  symmetry  is  one  of  ‘proposition  and   construction’.   Three   symmetrical   ideas   have   been   found   especially   relevant   to   the   current   topic.   First   is   the   idea   of   things’   agency,   that   is,   that   artefacts   have   their   own   properties   and   can   affect   the   human   agent.   This   might   shed   light   on   the   ways   in   which   Mediterranean   artefacts   might   have   affected   the   everyday   lives   of   Northwest  communities  within  the  symmetrical  interaction  between  both.  Second   is  the  distinction  between  habit  memory,  consequence  of  repetitious  practice,  and   involuntary   memory,   caused   by   a   disruption   of   habit.   This   could   shed   light   on   how   Mediterranean   artefacts   might   have   influenced   locals’   relationship   to   Atlantic   BA   artefacts,   and   how   this   perception   could   have   evolved   over   time.   Thirdly,   the   concept   of   time   as   percolating   might   offer   an   alternative   interpretation   to   the   linear  narrative  of  Atlantic-­‐Mediterranean  contacts  from  the  BA  to  the  Iron  Age.   TIME  AND  SPACE   The   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   have   been   chosen   as   timeframe   because   they   represent  the  connection  between  the  LBA  and  the  EIA  (Figure  1).2  This  shift  has   been   pinpointed   approximately   to   c.800BCE.   It   is   a   period   of   transition   during   which  local  communities  changed  internally  and  contacts  with  the  external  world   shifted   focus   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004a:   294). 3  As   such   it   holds   the   key   to   understanding   this   shift   of   attention   from   the   Atlantic   to   the   Mediterranean   and   connecting   both   periods.   This   also   follows   symmetrical   concerns   with   breaking   neatly  stacked  chronological  periods,  and  thus  the  wider  theoretical  standpoint  of   this   paper   (Witmore   2007:   554).  Furthermore,   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   have   been   2  Calo-­‐Lourido  (1993:  15)  has  even  argued  that  the  term  EIA  should  not  be  used  as  this  metal  was  barely  in  use  yet.   3  This  transition  deeply  affected  both  Iberia  and  the  rest  of  the  Mediterranean,  driving  changes  between  different   political,  economic  and  symbolic  systems  (Olmos  2008:  8).   13   traditionally  dismissed  as  a  ‘dark  age’,  a  time  when  local  communities  fragmented   and   isolated   themselves   from   the   outside   world   (Peña-­‐Santos   19 92a:   52;   Snodgrass   2000:   2) .   Thus   this   period   has   been   generally   overlooked,   ignoring   a   narrative  that  is  key  to  understanding  broader  developments.     Figure  1 .  Chronological  table  comparison.   The   geographical   area   analysed   corresponds   broadly   to   the   RB,   in   Galicia,   an  autonomous  community  in  northwest  Spain  (Figure  2).  The  area  consists  of  four   inlets  (Figure  3)  with  a  distinctive  morphology  (Pacheco-­‐Ruiz  2009:  7)  that  differ   greatly   from   the   rest   of   the   Iberian   Atlantic   coast.   Here,   it   is   assumed   that   the   coastline  has  not  changed  much  since  the  early  first  millennium  BCE  (Aubet  2001a:   182).     14   B034290   a) b) c) Figure  2.  Location  of  the  Rías  Baixas  in  relation  to:  (a)  the   Mediterranean;  (b)  Iberia;  and  (c)  Galicia.  Map  base  ©  Google  Maps.   Figure  3 .  Main  geographical  features  of  the  Rías  Baixas.   15   This   region   has   been   chosen   as   a   subject   of   study   for   two   reasons.   First,   the   position  of  the  RB  in  relation  to  the  sea  is  unique.  It  is  located  between  two  areas  of   the  Atlantic,  facing  both  northern  and  southern  cultural  zones  (Figure  4) .  As  such,   it  is  a  pivotal  point  between  two  seas  that  can  help  archaeologists  explore  contact   between   the   Mediterranean   world   and   the   Atlantic   core   (González-­‐   Ruibal   2004a) .   The   sea’s   advantage   for   transport   and   communication   in   prehistory,   especially   around   mountainous   areas,   is   indubitable   (González-­‐Ruibal   2 0 06-­‐7:   62,   70) .   Therefore,   arguments   for   the   marginality   of   the   area   only   pertain   to   the   Northwest’s  location  in  relation  to  the  rest  of  the  Iberian  Peninsula.  Secondly,  the   geography  of  the   RB  favours  movement.  The   inlets   create  easily  accessible  natural   harbours   for   boats   to   go   aground.   The   inlets   also   provide   a   route   inland   along   valleys  and  their  tributary  rivers  (González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  246) .  This  allows  easy   access   inland,   otherwise   hindered   by   the   mountain   range   of   the   ‘Dorsal   Gallega’   (González-­‐  Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  70) .     Figure  4.  Major  cultural  zones  in  Late  Bronze  Age  Atlantic  Europe.  From   Cunliffe  (2001:  fig.7.20).   16   2. Main  players Chapter  1  presented  an  introduction  to  the  question  of  Northwest  contacts   with  the  Mediterranean  during  the  EIA.  In  order  to  approach  the  material  evidence   in   search   of   these   contacts,   it   is   necessary   to   understand   the   communities   that   would   have   been   involved   on   both   sides   and   the   connection   between   them,   that   is,   why   they   would   be   interested   in   each   other.   This   necessarily   raises   the   issue   of   how  they  could  have  established  contact  through  the  maritime  routes.   THE  COMMUNITIES  OF  THE  NORTHWEST   The   Northwest   is   widely   regarded   as   a   homogeneous   archaeological   assemblage   called   the   cultura  castrexa  or  castreja   (‘castro   culture’),   characterised   by  fortified  settlements,  usually  hillforts,  with  stone  roundhouses.  Bosch  Gimpera   (1921)   first   introduced   the   term   within   a   historico-­‐cultural   paradigm,   promoting   regionalist   and   ethnic   perspectives.   Deeply   rooted   within   the   scholarly   tradition,   the   term   still   prevails   in   publications   both   old   and   new   (López-­‐Cuevillas   1953;   Blanco-­‐Freijeiro   1960;   Calo-­‐Lourido   1993:   14;   Acuña   Castroviejo   1991).   These   present   the   cultura   castrexa   as   inherent   to   Galicia,   expanding   into   Portugal,   Zamora  and  Salamanca.  These  ideas  show  referring  to  the  Northwest  as  a  unified   ‘castro   culture’   is   out-­‐dated;   it   overlooks   diversity   and   oversimplifies   local   communities  both  typologically  and  chronologically  (dos  Reis  Martins  1997:  145).   However,  the  complex  and  dynamic  character  of  Northwest  peoples  is  starting  to   be   acknowledged.   For   instance,   González-­‐Ruibal   (2006:   130)   has   proposed   their   division   during   the   5th-­‐1st   centuries   BCE   according   to   identity   into   three   types:   heroic  societies,  house  societies  and  deep  rurals.     Forgoing   the   terminology   of   a   ‘castro   culture’   also   means   that   the   period   between   the   9th   and   7th   centuries   BCE   can   no   longer   be   regarded   as   its   genesis,   with   the   same   characteristics   as   later   hillforts   slowly   being   solidified   in   stone.   Instead,   Northwest   9th-­‐7th-­‐century   BCE   settlements   show   varied   patterns:   some   are   located   near   major   communication   causeways,   others   closer   to   mineral   resources  (Calo-­‐Lourido  1993:  80;  Tereso  et  al.  2013:  3867).  Coastal  and  interior   17   settlements  differ  typologically,  with  the  former  being  more  defensive  in  character   (Acuña-­‐Castroviejo   1991:   296) .   Coastal   settlements   are   also   generally   located   at   more   visible   strategic   points   (Calo-­‐Lourrido   1993:   89) .   There   appears   to   be   a   dualism   between   innovative   coastal   settlements,   located   along   important   communication  routes,  and  more  isolated  interior  ones  (Ruiz-­‐Zapatero  &  Álvarez-­‐ Sanchís   2015:   215) .   Each   settlement   generally   consisted   of   a   series   of   stone   roundhouses,   with   the   progressive   addition   of   stonewalls,   palisades   and   embankments   (Calo-­‐Lourrido   1993:   81-­‐9) .   Some   were   long-­‐lived,   from   the   late   BA   well   into   the   IA   (Pacheco-­‐Ruiz   2009:   5) .   It   seems   that   these   settlements   were   steadily   becoming   more   sedentary   while   evolving   in   individual   autarchic   ways,   once  again   showing   the  inaccuracy  of  referring  to  them  as  a  ‘castro  culture’.  This   translated  onto  their  economy.  Animal  husbandry  was  widespread  and  the  9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   have   been   regarded   as   a   moment   of   agricultural   intensification   (López-­‐Cuevillas   1966;   Peña-­‐Santos   &   Vázquez-­‐Varela   1996:   44;   Tereso   et   al.   2013:  3867) .  This  might  have  been  stimulated  by  the  climatic  change  in  the  ‘Sub-­‐ Atlantic’   area   that   increased   humidity   (Calo-­‐Lourrido   1993:   78;   Peña-­‐Santos   &   Vázquez-­‐Varela   19 96;   Ru iz-­‐Zapatero   &   Á lva rez-­‐Sanchís   2015:   213) .   Coastal   settlements  also  exploited  maritime  resources  (Pacheco-­‐Ruiz  2009) .     The   settlements   found   along   the   RB   are   coastal.   As   such,   they   generally   adhere   to   the   aforementioned   patterns:   they   would   have   had   strategic   locations,   control   over   major   communication   routes,   defensive   character,   easy   access,   and   they  could  exploit  coastal  resources.  These  factors  suggest  that  their  communities   could  have  easily  been  in  contact  with  other  settlements,  both  along  the  coast  and   inland.   Coastal   sites   would   be   the   most   obvious   settlements   to   have   had   contact   with  the  sea  and  have  been  involved  in  exchange  networks  that  might  have  been   operating  in  the  area.     THE   COMMUNITIES   OF   THE   MEDITERRANEAN:   PHOENICIANS   IN   SOUTHERN   IBERIA     The   9th-­‐7th-­‐century   BCE   western   Mediterranean   presented   an   even   more   varied   picture   than   the   Northwest.   The   Phoenicians   had   voyaged   across   it   from   18   B034290   their  eastern  origins.  In  Southern  Iberia,  especially  around  the  Strait  of  Gibraltar,   they  were  settling  and  interacting  with  the  local  communities.     ‘Phoenician’  is  a  term  coined  by  the  Greeks  to  refer  to  the  inhabitants  of  the   Levant;   for   instance   the   Odyssey   (4.83,   14.291;   Dimock   &   Murray   1995)   uses   ‘Phoenicia’  as  a  territorial  homeland.  The  Phoenicians  would  have  never  referred   to   themselves   as   such.   Instead   they   would   have   probably   seen   themselves   as   inhabitants  of  the  individual  cities  along  the  Levant,  just  as  Ugarit  in  the  14th-­‐13th   centuries   BCE   (Sherratt   2010:   122).   Since   the   term   is   deeply   embedded   in   scholarship,   it   would   do   little   benefit   to   stop   referring   to   these   communities   as   Phoenician.  Phoenicians  were  primarily  traders  and,  over  the  beginning  of  the  first   millennia,   they   developed   stable   long-­‐distance   commercial   networks   throughout   the   Mediterranean.   These   would   have   replaced   the   LBA   networks   that   disintegrated   after   the   collapse   of   the   palaces.   Phoenician   commercial   ventures   sought   many   products,   but   the   quest   for   metals   –   gold,   silver,   tin   and   lead   –   was   without   doubt   the   most   profitable.   Whether   prompted   by   Assyria’s   demand   for   raw  materials  or  by  a  combination  of  internal  factors,  their  mercantile  enterprise   had  started  to  impact  southern  Iberia  by  the  early  9th  century  BCE  (Aubet  2001a:   70,  73-­‐85;  Ruiz-­‐Gálvez  2013:  309).     How   and   why   the   Phoenicians   reached   the   Strait   of   Gibraltar   is   far   from   clear.  Traditional  interpretations  have  contextualised  Phoenician  arrival  to  Iberia   as  a  period  of  reconnaissance  of  profitable  territories,  carried  out  by  adventurous   sailors   through   risky   voyages   led   by   trial   and   error   (Ruiz-­‐Gálvez   2013:   269;   Cunliffe   2001:   297).4  This   would   have   started   a   period   of   silent   trade   around   the   11th-­‐10th  century  BCE,  eventually  followed  by  a  ‘precolonisation’  in  the  9th  and  8th   centuries   BCE.   The   7th   and   6th   centuries   BCE   would   have   seen   the   establishment   of   substantial   colonies   in   places   like   Gadir   and   the   Guadalquivir   valley,   which   were   rich   in   metal   resources.   This   period   has   received   a   considerable   attention   from   scholars   (see,   for   instance,   the   dates   in   Aubet’s   2001b   chapter   on   Phoenician   expansion  in  Spain;  scope  of  focus  of  Bierling  &  Gitin  2002).  Southern  Iberia  would   have   been   one   of   the   last   areas   to   be   explored.   Phoenicians   would   have   progressively  founded  colonies  in  Cyprus,  Sicily,  Sardinia  and  the  Balearics  before   4 This   view   has   great   similarities   to   Greek   epics,   especially   the   Odyssey,   which   represents   Phoenicians  as  tramping  maritime  pirates  (Sherratt  2010:122).     19   B034290   reaching  Gadir,  as  part  of  a  commercial  chain  (Aubet  2001a:  161)  (Figure  5).  If  so,   Phoenician  presence  beyond  the  Strait  and  in  the  Northwest  would  appear  to  have   been  contingent  and  late  in  date.         Figure  5 .  Phoenicians  in  the  Mediterranean:  mentioned  colonies  and  maritime   routes.         20       B034290   Recent   radiocarbon   dates   present   an   alternative   picture.   Adopting   a   low   chronology   for   colony   foundations   (Gilboa   &   Sharon   2003),   Aubet   (forthcoming)   has  showed  that  Phoenician  dates  in  the  peninsula  might  be  earlier  than  those  in   the   east,   for   instance,   in   Kition.   A   recently   uncovered   material   assemblage   in   Huelva   with   Phoenician   artefacts   dating   to   the   middle   and   second   half   of   the   9th   century   BCE   further   confirms   this   (Núñez  2014).  Thus,  it  appears  that  Phoenicians   would   have   travelled   directly   to   the   Strait   of   Gibraltar   following   a   preconfigured   goal  (Ruiz-­‐Gálvez  2013:  270).  This  would  have  been  impossible  unless  Phoenicians   had   previous   knowledge   of   southern   Iberia:   the   route   to   follow   and   the   raw   materials   they   would   find   there.   Aubet   (forthcoming)   suggests   that   Phoenicians   would  have  had  knowledge  of  the  LBA  metal  circuit  and  they  would  have  arrived  at   the   Strait   led   by   expert   merchant   parties   with   defined   aims   to   identify   –   and   trade   –   sources   of   tin,   copper,   silver   and   gold   (Aubet   2001a:   279).   Since   contact   is   already   materialised   in   the   archaeological   record   by   the   early   9th   century   BCE,   it   is   highly  possible  that  interaction  was  already  taking  place  in  the  11th-­‐10th  centuries   BCE.   Setting   an   earlier   date   for   the   start   of   Phoenician-­‐Iberian   interaction   has   consequences   in   the   study   of   their   intercultural   contacts   with   the   Northwest.   If   Phoenicians  were  following  LBA  metal  circuits,  access  to  the  Northwest,  as  part  of   the  Atlantic  circle,  would  have  been  more  straightforward  than  initially  supposed.   The   Northwest   need   not   have   been   a   marginal   community,   but   instead   might   have   actively  engaged  in  this  movement.  Secondly,  Phoenician  knowledge  of  BA  routes   suggests   that   contacts   were   not   interrupted   after   the   collapse   of   Near   Eastern   palaces   c.1200   BCE.   Ruiz-­‐Gálvez   (2013:   289-­‐293,   309)   has   drawn   upon   from   Mediterranean  and  iron  evidence  –  at  Peña  Negra,  Alicante,  and  Baiôes,   Portugal  –   to   suggest   that   there   were   peoples,   probably   Sardinian,   moving   around   the   western   Mediterranean   and   Atlantic   during   the   11th-­‐10th   centuries   BCE.   These   would   have   been   small   private   enterprises,   supported   by   the   existence   of   lead   weights,   following   indigenous   routes.   Phoenicians   might   have   endorsed   these   contacts.   The   picture   of   Mediterranean   presence   in   southern   Iberia   between   the   11th   and   7th   centuries   BCE   is   becoming   increasingly   complex;   by   the   9th   century   BCE,   Phoenicians   were   impacting   upon   local   communities   on   both   the   Mediterranean  and  the  Atlantic  sides.     21   B034290       Portugal   Knowledge  of  the  Atlantic  circuit  and   maritime   access   to   the   Northwest   would   have   inevitably   led   Phoenicians   along   the   coast  of  Portugal.  Contacts  are  now  evident,   despite   being   originally   underestimated   in   the   1980s,   (Mederos-­‐Martín   &   Ruiz-­‐ Cabrero   2007),   and   signs   of   regular   Phoenician  shipping  can  be  noted  along  the   Portuguese  coast  (Aubet  2001a:  292).  Cerro   da   Rocha   Branca,   Abul,   Santa   Olaia   or   Baiâo   have   all   yielded   Mediterranean   bronzes   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004a:   239;   Cunliffe   2001:   298;   Peña-­‐Santos   1992b:   25).   These   cultural   contacts   fed   into   Portuguese   settlements,   which,   similarly   to   the   Northwest,   were   establishing   their   local   communities  (dos  Reis  Martins  1997:  152).   This   area,   then,   smoothly   connected   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   with   the   Northwest.     Figure  6 .  Main  Portuguese  settlements   with  Phoenician  evidence.         THE  CONNECTION     If   Northwest   communities   were   open   to   maritime   traffic   and   Phoenicians   had   knowledge   of   Atlantic   routes   to   them,   the   question   that   remains   is   why   they   would  have  contacted  each  other,  that  is,  what  would  have  made  their  interaction   profitable.         22   B034290   Raw  materials  and  the  quest  for  metals   Phoenician   enterprises   were   interested   in   metals.   This   can   be   seen   in   the   development  of  Gadir,  and  the  securing  of  the  Guadalquivir  and  río  Tinto  valleys  in   southern  Iberia,  allowing  access  to  silver.  In  contrast,  the  Northwest  is  not  rich  in   silver,   but   does   have   sources   of   tin   and   gold   (Figure   7).   The   Northwest’s   involvements   in   the   BA   Atlantic   metal   circuit   presumably   must   have   profited   from   its  local  sources.  By  the  5th  century  BCE,  the  area  was  certainly  famous  for  its  tin  in   the   Greek   world.   References   to   a   series   of   ‘tin   islands’   in   the   far   west   called   Oestrymnis   and   Cassiterides   can   be   found   in   Herodotus   (3.115;   Godley   1971),   Avienus  (Ora  Maritima  92-­‐106)  and  Strabo  (3.5.10;  Jones  1960).  Some  scholars,  for   instance  Cunliffe  (2001:  304),  have  maintained  that  these  places  were  located  off   the  Northwest  coast;  others  remain  undecided,  as  the  writings  could  be  referring   to   Britain   or   France   (Aubet   2001a:   291).   Either   way,   if   knowledge   of   the   Northwest’s   tin   sources   was   spread   throughout   the   Atlantic   in   the   LBA   and   throughout   the   eastern   Mediterranean   by   the   second   half   of   the   first   millennium   BCE,  there  is  little  reason  to  suppose  that  Phoenicians  would  have  been  ignorant  of   this  information  during  the  period  in  between.         Figure  7 .  Main  Iberian  metal  resources.       23     B034290   The   Northwest   need   not   have   been   a   passive   receptor   of   Phoenician   interest.   For   instance,   González-­‐Ruibal   (2006:   143),   looking   at   later   Punic   exchanges,   has   proposed   that   communities   in   the   Northwest   could   have   been   selectively   choosing   those   goods   that   could   either   be   consumed   collectively   or   transported  easily.  Phoenicians  could  have  also  traded  in  a  variety  of  goods  in  the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   138-­‐9).   Oil   and   good   wine   were   characteristic   of   southern   Iberia   and   can   be   found   in   the   Northwest   in   Punic   times   (Aubet   2001a:   287).   Mediterranean   salt   (Mederos-­‐Martín   1999:   129),   copper   (González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  139),  colourful  quality  fabrics  (Mederos-­‐Martín  &  Ruiz-­‐ Cabrero  2007:  382-­‐3)  or  exotic  products  could  have  been  other  options.         Maritime  routes   The  maritime  route  from  southern  Iberia  to  the  Northwest  would  seem  the   obvious   and   fastest   route   between   both   areas.   In   contrast,   the   mountainous   inland   would   have   proven   more   hazardous   to   go   anywhere   beyond   Tartessos   (Aubet   2001a:   292).   Phoenicians   had   sturdy,   long-­‐distance   trading   ships,   naves   rotunda   (Aubet   2001a:   174).   Northwest   communities   could   very   well   have   had   their   own   boats.   It   has   been   shown   how   Phoenicians   from   the   Levant   probably   reached   southern  Iberia  via  a  direct  route.  The  greatest  challenge  would  have  been  to  cross   the   Strait   of   Gibraltar,   which   is   made   difficult   by   a   combination   of   anticlockwise   currents   and   westerly   winds   (Aubet   2001a:   182-­‐5)   (Figure   8).   Considering   Phoenicians’   proficient   seafaring,   their   knowledge   of   past   routes   and   the   existence   of  months  of  easterly  winds,  the  task  seems  not  only  possible  but  also  backed  by   archaeological   evidence   (see   Phoenician   presence   in   Portugal).   Once   the   Strait   has   been  crossed,  it  is  easier  to  open  the  ships’  course  towards  the  Atlantic  instead  of   the   Portuguese   coast   in   order   to   travel   north,   which   is   called   the   volta  pelo  largo   (Mederos-­‐Martín   &   Ruiz-­‐Cabrero   2007:   380).   This   route   would   have   easily   taken   Phoenicians  to  the  Northwest,  or  vice  versa  by  sailing  closer  to  the  coast.  This  area   also  could  have  had  indigenous  maritime  circuits  in  operation  (Ruiz-­‐Gálvez  2013:   295).   These   also   could   have   incorporated   routes   of   the   Atlantic   trading   circuit   of   the  BA,  which  would  have  been  transporting  tin,  gold,  ivory,  copper,  lead  and  salt   (Aubet  2001a:  292).  Unfortunately,  its  mechanisms  and  routes  are  not  well  known.     24   B034290   a)   b)   Figure  8 .  Prevailing  currents  (a)  and  winds  (b)  in  the  western  Mediterranean.  From   Aubet  (2001:  fig.38-­‐39).         By   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE,   maritime   routes   between   the   Mediterranean   and  the  Atlantic  were  operative,  and  Phoenicians  and  the  Northwest  had  reasons   to   be   interested   in   each   other.   There   is   enough   evidence   to   suggest   that   intercultural   contacts   could   have   been   taking   place   during   this   period.   A   closer   look   at   Mediterranean   material   assemblages   in   the   archaeological   record   of   the     25   B034290   Northwest,   specifically   the   RB,   could   shed   light   on   the   nature,   scale   and   mechanisms  behind  this  contact.       26   B034290   3.  An  analysis  of  the  material  evidence     It   has   been   shown   that   settlements   in   the   Northwest   during   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   consisted   of   a   mixture   of   open   LBA   settlements   and   incipient   castros,   hillforts.   The   latter   make   more   reliable   sources   of   evidence   because   they   have   been   investigated   in   larger   numbers   and   are   more   visible   in   the   archaeological   record.   The   analysis   will   therefore   concentrate   on   these   castros.   Priority  will  be  also  given  to  coastal  settlements,  which  appear  to  have  been  more   engaged  in  communication,  both  inland  and  with  the  sea,  and  would  have  been  key   to  reaching  the  metal  sources  inland.  This  leaves  a  total  of   twelve   castros  in  the  RB   area  with  dates  earlier  than  the  6th  century  BCE  (Figure  9).       Figure  9.  Known  castros  of  the  9th-­‐7th  centuries  BCE  and  their  distribution.         27     B034290   WHERE  TO  LOOK?     The   early   stages   of   contact   between   two   different   communities   are   generally   small   in   quantity   and   complexity,   and   thus   characterised   by   their   low   visibility   in   the   archaeological   record.   Furthermore,   the   first   castros   are   problematic   because   they   have   usually   been   built   over   during   the   following   centuries.   Evidence   of   such   contact   will   not   be   found   in   the   design   or   layout   of   castros.   Instead,   artefacts   are   the   key   to   understanding   these   contacts.   Their   dimensions   make   them   easier   to   transport   across   long   distances   and   to   innovate   upon.   Thus,   the   analysis   will   look   at   evidence   of   either   foreign   artefacts   of   Mediterranean  origin  or  local  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  technique.       Key  materials   The   presence   of   artefacts   characteristic   of   the   Levant   but   not   of   the   Northwest   inevitably   suggests   these   materials   or   their   processing   techniques   are   imported.   Early   evidence   of   Phoenician   presence   in   south   Iberia   has   been   associated   with   iron   objects   (Ruiz-­‐Zapatero   &   Álvarez-­‐Sanchís   2015:   220).   Thus,   the   introduction   of   iron   in   the   Northwest   would   show   the   movement   of   ideas   through  the  Mediterranean  and  could  be  closely  connected  to  Phoenician  voyages   to   the   area.   In   a   similar   way,   faience   or   glass   artefacts,   especially   beads,   were   typically   traded   materials   in   the   Levant   since   the   BA.   Phoenicians   continued   producing   and   trading   these   materials   throughout   their   networks.   Once   again,   their  presence  in  the  Northwest  would  suggest  contacts  with  these  networks.   Secondly,   the   presence   of   typological   or   decorative   characteristics   of   the   Mediterranean   in   Northwest   objects   might   suggest   that   either   they   are   imported   or  the  ideas  behind  the  manufacture  of  the  artefacts  were  imported.  Bronze  fibulae   types   are   significant   indicators   of   Mediterranean   contacts   in   southern   Iberia   and   Portugal,   especially   of   the   double-­‐spring,   ‘Sanguisuga   or   navicella’   and   the   Tartessian   ‘Alcores’   types   (Figure   10).   Double-­‐spring   fibulae   are   the   earliest   type   to  have  spread  throughout  southern  Iberia  in  the  8th  century  BCE  (Mederos-­‐Martín   &  Ruiz-­‐Cabrero  2007:  382-­‐3;  Cortegoso-­‐Comesaña  2000:  130).  ‘Sanguisuga’  fibulae   are   characteristic   of   Italy   and   are   found   in   the   Iberian   Peninsula   from   the   8th     28   B034290   century   BCE   onwards,   for   instance   at   Alcacer   do   Sal   (Fariña-­‐Busto   &   Arias-­‐Vilas   1980:  186).  Their  Iberian  parallels  are  called  ‘Acebuchal’  (Torres-­‐Ortiz  2002:  201).   Tartessian   ‘Alcores’   fibulae   are   widely   spread   around   southern   Iberia   by   the   7th   century   BCE   (Torres-­‐Ortiz   2002:   199).   Imported,   or   locally   copied,   fibulae   are   strong   indicators   of   Mediterranean   contacts   in   the   Northwest,   where   communities   did  not  seem  to  have  a  characteristic  type  of  their  own   (González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:   215-­‐6).   Mediterranean-­‐type   curved   knives,  made   of   both   bronze   and   iron,   are   also   indicators   of   contact   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   138;   Peña-­‐Santos   1992b:   39).   Ceramics   can   show   Mediterranean   influence.   Local   Northwest   pottery   is   handmade.   Thus,   Mediterranean   foreigners   would   have   probably   brought   wheel-­‐ made   sherds   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004a:   292).   Decorative   patterns   could   also   show   whether   an   artefact   had   a   Mediterranean   origin   or   influence.   Local   Northwest   pottery   is   characterised   by   incised   geometrical   patterns   along   the   neck   and   shoulders   of   the   pot   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   fig.   3.44).   Any   uncommon   decoration  with  Mediterranean  parallels  could  point  to  contact.     a)   c)   b)   Figure  1 0.  Fibulae  types:  (a)  double-­‐spring,  after  Ruiz-­‐Delgado  (1986:  fig.D.r.1),   modified;  (B)  ‘Alcores’,  after  Torres-­‐Ortiz  (2002:  fig  VIII.26);  ‘Sanguisuga’  or   ‘Acebuchal’,  after  Torres-­‐Ortiz  (2002:  fig  VIII.28).         29     B034290   Limitations   There  are  a  series  of  limiting  factors  in  the  study  of  these  sites  and  artefacts.   Only  a  handful  of  9th-­‐7th-­‐century  castros  have  been  excavated  in  detail  –  Torroso,   Penalba,   and   Neixón   Pequeño.   Most   of   the   sites   were   explored   from   the   mid-­‐20th   century   onwards   and   are   lacking   in   detail.   Some   are   currently   being   excavated   with   modern   methodologies   but   their   results   have   not   yet   been   published   and   are,   thus,   inaccessible.   Materially,   the   poor   preservation   of   iron   as   compared   to   bronze   might   offer   a   biased   picture   of   the   use   or   availability   of   metal   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:  244).  Furthermore,  because  subsistence  goods  do  not  survive  well  in  the   archaeological   record,   analysis   will   be   biased   towards   those   that   do   (Dillian   &   White  2010:  9).       MEDITERRANEAN  ARTEFACTS  BY  CASTRO     Of  the  twelve  castros  that  have  been  dated  between  the  9th  and  7th  centuries   BCE,   nine   have   yielded   artefacts   that   might   be   related   to   the   Mediterranean   (Figure  11).  These  will  be  individually  analysed.     Figure  1 1.  Castros  with  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin.   30     B034290       Torroso  (Mos,  Pontevedra)     The  castro  of  Torroso  is  strategically  located  on  a  hill  in  between  two  major   communication   routes:   the   Ría   de   Vigo   to   the   north   and   the   Louro   valley   to   the   south   (Peña-­‐Santos   1992b:   49).   Originally   dated   to   the   7th   century   BCE   based   on   artefactual   typology,   radiocarbon   dates   have   now   been   suggested   for   the   9th-­‐8th   centuries   –   803,   794   CAL   BCE   in   levels   4   and   5   (Mederos-­‐Martín   &   Ruiz-­‐Cabrero   2007:  368-­‐9).     Several   iron   artefacts   have   been   identified,   but   only   a   few   can   be   reliably   dated  to  the  8th  and  7th  centuries.  Two  curved  iron  knives  were  probably  imported   (Figure   12.a).   A   series   of   iron   sickles   (Figure   12.b),   which   were   probably   locally   produced,   show   that   locals   were   comfortably   working   iron   by   the   7th   century   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   231).   A   bronze   belt   buckle   with   ironwork   and   damascene   silver   decoration   points   to   contact   with   the   Mediterranean   (Figure   12.c).  This  technique  has  been  traced  to  the  eastern  Mediterranean  and  could  have   been   considered   a   prestige   object   (Peña-­‐Santos   1992b:   31).   Two   bronze   objects   also  show  Mediterranean  influences.  The  clearest  of  these  is  the  foot  of  a  double-­‐ spring   fibula   (Figure   12.d).   Originally,   Peña-­‐Santos   (1992b:   33)   dated   this   fibula   type  to  the  6th  century,  but  its  chronology  has  been  pushed  back  (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   215).   An   elongated   piece   of   bronze   finished   in   an   arch   presents   some   controversy  (Figure  12.e).  Originally  interpreted  as  tongs,  it  might  have  been  part   of  a  tripod  or  a  skewer  (Peña-­‐Santos  1992b:  30).  These  last  two  options  would  link   it   to   Mediterranean   types,   especially   Mycenaean   (Gamito   1989:   148-­‐153).   Although   it   was   found   in   8th-­‐7th-­‐century   contexts,   the   piece   might   have   been   brought   in   before   Phoenician   presence   in   the   area.   Finally,   a   few   ceramics   are   burnished  with  a  technique  similar  to  that  of  the  Lapa  do  Fumo  pottery  from  the   Mediterranean  (Peña  Santos  1992b:  117;  González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  137,  239).       31   B034290   b)   a)   e )   c)   d Figure  1 2.  Mediterranean  artefacts  from  Torroso:  (a)  curved  knives,  after  Peña-­‐ Santos  (1992b:  fig.69);  (b)  iron  sickles,  after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:  fig.69);  (c)  buckle,   after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:  fig.63);  (d)  double-­‐spring  fibula  foot,  after  Peña  Santos   (1992b:  fig.63);  (e)  unidentified  piece,  after  Peña  Santos  (1992b:  fig.62).                   32   B034290     Torres  de  Padín  (Teis,  Pontevedra)     The   castro   at   Torres   de   Padín   is   located   at   the   mouth   of   the   Ría   de   Vigo.   Rescue   excavations   in   1989   determined   a   stratigraphic   level   of   the   8th-­‐7th   centuries.  To  these  belonged  a  wheel-­‐made  sherd  with  painted  geometric  motifs  in   red,   similar   to   Mediterranean   techniques   (Figure   13)   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   248).       Montealegre  (Moaña,  Pontevedra)   The  castro  of  Montealegre  is  located  in  the  northern  interior  of  the  Ría  the   Vigo.   It   was   excavated   in   the   1920s   and   during   2003-­‐4,   but   this   later   season   yielded  mostly  imports  from  the  2nd  century  BCE  onwards  (González-­‐Ruibal  et  al.   2007).   The   earlier   excavations   yielded   a   fibula   that   could   have   been   of   the   double-­‐ spring   type,   although   only   Losada   y   Diéguez’s   (1943:   101-­‐105)   description   survives   (Fariña-­‐Busto   &   Arias-­‐Vilas   1980:   191).   If   it   were   of   the   double-­‐spring   type,   it   would   be   datable   to   the   8-­‐7th   centuries   and   perhaps   of   Mediterranean   origin   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004a:   295).   Iron   slag   was   also   found   (Losada   y   Dieguez   1925-­‐6:  6).             Figure  1 3.  Painted  sherd  from  Torres  de   Padín.  After  González-­‐Ruibal  (2004a:   fig.4.2).   33   Figure  14.  Painted  sherd  from   Islas  Cíes.  After  González-­‐ Ruibal  (2006-­‐7:  fig.3.50.3).     B034290   Islas  Cíes  (Pontevedra)   The   castro   das   Hortas   is   located   on   the   Cíes   islands.   Excavated   in   the   20th   century,   it   underwent   a   second   season   of   excavation   in   2011-­‐13,   which   unfortunately   has   not   yet   been   published.   The   former   excavation   yielded   a   lip   sherd   decorated   with   a   white   crisscross   on   a   red   background   (Figure   14).   Phoenician   parallels   from   the   8th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   can   be   found   in   Santa   Olaia   (Arruda   2002).   Although   a   fragment   that   could   have   been   brought   in   through   Punic   trade   and   dates   back   to   the   4th-­‐3rd   centuries   BCE   has   also   been   found   in   Garvao,   this   kind   of   decoration   is   more   typically   Phoenician   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   248).   More   dubious   is   its   chronology,   as   the   sherd,   which   has   not   been   reliably  dated,  could  also  belong  to  the  6th  and  5th  centuries  BCE.         A  Lanzada  (Noalla,  Pontevedra)     The  castro  of  A  Lanzada  is  located  on  a  strategic  peninsula  in  between  two   of  the  inlets.  Excavated  continuously  during  the  1950s,  70s,  80s,  and  the  beginning   of   the   21st   century,   it   has   become   especially   interesting   due   to   its   commercial   relation   with   Punics   by   the   3rd   century   BCE   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004b).   It   has   evidence  of  occupation  from  the  8th-­‐7th  centuries  onwards  –  a  bronze  curved  knife,   of   Mediterranean   type,   belongs   to   this   era   (Figure   15).   This   is   similar   to   the   one   found   in   Torroso   and   it   might   have   been   adapting   Mediterranean   designs   to   bronze  technology.     Figure  1 5.  Curved  bronze  knife  from  A  Lanzada.  After  Cunliffe  (1985:  plate   XVIII.1).     34     B034290       Penalba  (Campo  Lameiro,  Pontevedra)     The   castro   of   Penalba   is   located   inland.   Radiocarbon   dates   have   recently   been   published   for   the   9th-­‐8th   centuries   (786,   759   CAL   BCE   –   levels   4   and   5)   (Mederos-­‐Martín  &  Ruiz-­‐Cabrero  2007:  367-­‐8).  These  contexts  have  yielded  three   interesting   finds.   There   is   a   curved   iron   knife,   similar   to   those   of   Torroso   and   A   Lanzada   (Figure   16.a).   A   bronze   spring   piece   from   a   double-­‐spring   fibula   also   shows   correlation   with   Torroso   (Figure   16.b)   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   215).   Finally,   a   series   of   glass   beads   with   Phoenician   parallels   have   been   dated   to   the   period  between  the  8th-­‐7th  centuries  (González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  249).       b)   a)   Figure  1 6.  Mediterranean  artefacts  from  Penalba:  (a)  curved  knife,  after   González-­‐Ruibal  (2004a:  fig.4.6);  (b)  fibula  spring,  after  González-­‐Ruibal  (2006-­‐ 7:  fig.3.50.13).         Alobre  (Vilagarcía  de  Arousa,  Pontevedra)   The   castro   of   Alobre   is   located   on   the   southern   side   of   the   Ría   de   Arousa.   The   1980s’   excavations   yielded   a   ‘Sanguisuga’   type   fibula   of   unknown   context   (Figure   17).   Its   similarity   to   Italian   types   could   point   to   contact   with   the   Mediterranean   through   the   southern   Iberia.   Although   there   is   a   slight   possibility   it   could  have  arrived  through  mainland  Europe,  presence  of  these  types  in  east  and   southern   Europe   suggests   otherwise   (González-­‐Ruibal   2006-­‐7:   248).   On-­‐going   excavations  in  2016  might  yield  new  finds  regarding  this  question.         35   B034290   Figure  1 7.  ‘Sanguisuga’  fibula  from  Alobre.  From  Fariña-­‐Busto  &  Arias-­‐Vilas  (1980:   fig.1)  (left)  and  after  González-­‐Ruibal  (2004a:  fig.4.7)  (right).       Neixón  Pequeno  (Boiro,  A  Coruña)   The  castro  of  Neixón  Pequeño  is  the  oldest  of  two  hillforts  located  in  the  Ría   de   Arousa.   Excavated   during   the   1970-­‐80s,   it   was   analysed   in   more   detail   in   2008.   These   last   excavations   have   yielded   iron   slag,   suggesting   technical   know-­‐how   of   this  metal  (Ayán-­‐Vila  et   al.  2011:  163).  Unfortunately,  they  belong  to  an  unknown   level  so  they  might  date  to  the  6th  century  BCE  (González-­‐Ruibal  2006-­‐7:  237,  244).   However,  the  presence  of  iron  materials  in  Torroso  and  Penalba  in  the  8th  and  7th   centuries   BCE   suggests   that   the   metal   was   already   being   exploited   in   the   Northwest   in   castros   further   inland   and   0   less   accessible   than   Neixón.   Thus,   it   is   2  cm   likely  that  it  could  also  have  been  in  use  in   Neixón  from  the  8th  century  BCE  onwards.   A   hook-­‐shaped   fragment   of   bronze   could   be  the  edge  of  a  fibula  of  the  ‘Alcores’  type   (Figure   18),   similar   to   the   ones   in   the   Guadalquivir   valley   (Torres-­‐Ortiz   2002:   200).   This   would   suggest   that   southern   Figure  1 8.  Fibula  piece  from  Neixón   Pequeño.  After  Ayán-­‐Vila  et  al.  (2011:   fig.6).   Iberians   were   maintaining   contact   with   the  Northwest.       36   B034290       Castrovite  (Orazo,  A  Estrada,  Pontevedra)   Castrovite,  also  known  as  the  castro  of  Santa  Mariña,  is  located  at  a  strategic   position   between   the   west-­‐east   routes   in   the   Ulla   valley.   Excavations   in   1986,   though   reduced   in   area,   yielded   glass   beads,   similar   to   the   ones   in   Penalba,   and   iron  slag  (Carballo-­‐Arceo  1998:  12).  However,  their  exact  chronology  is  unknown.   Punic   ceramic   sherds   have   been   reliably   dated   to   the   5-­‐4th   centuries   (Carballo-­‐ Arceo  1998:  12).  Thus,  the  beads  and  iron  slag  might  belong  to  this  timeframe  too.       DATA  COMPILATION     The   number   of   castros   with   Mediterranean   artefacts   account   for   three   quarters  of  the  total  number.  As  Croas,  Monte  do  Facho  and  Punta  do  Muiño  have   not   yielded   Mediterranean   evidence.   This   is   probably   due   to   the   excavation   methodology   carried   out   in   these   castros.   As   Croas   (8th-­‐5th   centuries   BCE)   has   undergone  a  season  of  excavations  in  1993,  which  showed  that  it  is  typologically   very   similar   to   Torroso   and   Penalba   (Peña-­‐Santos   2000:   155).   Finding   Mediterranean   artefacts   within   this   settlement   might   only   be   a   matter   of   time.   Excavations  at  Monte  do  Facho  have  focused  on  its  Berobreo  sanctuary  dating  to   the   4th-­‐3rd   centuries   BCE,   while   ceramics   have   allowed   archaeologists   to   date   the   castro  back  to  the  10th  century  (Schattner  et  al.  2004;  2006).  Thus,  Mediterranean   artefacts   of   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   might   not   have   been   uncovered   yet.   Punta   do   Muiño   might   have   undergone   a   similar   bias   towards   the   5th   century   and   its   contacts   with   Punics.   Thus,   the   overall   picture   appears   more   biased   towards   the   lack  of  Mediterranean  artefacts  than  previously  thought.                 37   B034290     Castro   Chronology   (centuries)   Iron   artefacts   Bronze   artefacts   Torroso   8th     –     7th  BCE   Curved   knives     Sickles   Torres  de   Padín   9th  BCE     –     1st  AD   -­‐   Montealegre   8th-­‐7th  BCE     –     st 1  AD   Cíes   8th  BCE   –     ?   -­‐   -­‐   A  Lanzada   8th  BCE   –     2nd  BCE   -­‐   Curved  knife   Penalba   8th  BCE   –     5th  BCE   Curved   knife   Double-­‐ spring  fibula     Alobre   8th  BCE   –   4th  BCE   Neixón   Pequeño   7th    BCE   –   5th  BCE   Slag   Castrovite   8th  BCE   –   ?   Slag   Ceramics   Double-­‐ Burnished   spring  fibula     Belt  buckle     Unidentified   piece   Painted     -­‐   Slag   Double-­‐ spring  fibula     -­‐   -­‐   Painted     -­‐     -­‐   Beads     -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   Glass     Sanguisuga   fibula           -­‐   Alcores   fibula   -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   -­‐   Glass       Table  1.  A  synthesis  of  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin  by  castro.       The   artefacts   of   Mediterranean   origin   identified   are   varied.   Approached   individually  by  castro  these  artefacts  may  appear  random,  but  when  put  together   they   start   appearing   as   a   more   consistent   assemblage   (Table   1).   Uses   are   varied:   from   iron   know-­‐how   in   everyday   objects   such   as   sickles   to   exquisite   valuables   such   as   a   belt   buckle,   and   anything   in   between,   ceramics,   weaponry,   fibulae   and   jewellery.   Of   these,   fibulae   are   the   most   frequently   found,   closely   followed   by     38   B034290   curved   knives   and   ceramics   (Figure   19.a).   Both   materials,   such   as   ceramics   and   glass   beads,   and   technical   know-­‐how   have   been   imported   (Figure   19.b).   Fibulae   and  curved  knives  could  have  been  either  directly  imported  or  stylistically  copied   by   local   metalworkers.   Although   diverse,   the   number   of   Mediterranean   finds   is   scarce:   a   total   of   nineteen   imports.   However,   there   is   something   more   important   that   suggests   that   the   Northwest   was   open   to   contact   and   innovation:   the   introduction   of   the   know-­‐how,   for   instance,   in   the   working   of   iron   and   the   development  of  curved  knives  (Ruiz-­‐Gálvez  2013:  286).  The  numbers  of  artefacts,   then,   point   to   an   early   stage   of   interaction   (González-­‐Ruibal   2004a:   291).   Furthermore,   the   artefacts   can   be   traced   to   several   points   in   the   Mediterranean.   The  ‘Sanguisuga’  type  fibula  can  be  traced  to  Italy;  the  double-­‐spring  and  ‘Alcores’   types   fibulae   to   southern   Spain,   especially   the   area   around   Tartessos;   ceramic   burnish   to   Portugal;   glass   beads   and   ceramic   painted   decorations   to   the   Levant;   and  curved  type  knives  and  iron  simply  to  the  wider  Mediterranean  (Figure  19.c).                                             39   B034290   a)Artefacts  by  type Glass   beads   11%   Iron   (slag)   16%   Iron   (sickles)   10%   Ceramic s   16%   Fibulae   26%   b) Nature  of  the imports   Unknow n   42%   Curved   knives   21%   Material   32%   Technica l   28%   c) Provenances Southern   Iberia   22%   Mediterrane an  (general)   44%   Portugal   6%   Italy   6%   Levant   22%   Figure  1 9.  Some  statistic  on  the  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin:  (a)  artefacts  by   type;  (b)  nature  of  the  imports;  and  (c)  provenances.   The  distribution  of  these  artefacts  is  also  varied  and  encompasses  most  of   the   RB,   except   the   Ría   of   Muros   e   Noia   (Figure   20).   Mediterranean   artefacts   are   found   both   in   coastal   settlements   and   inland   ones   overlooking   valleys.   These   are   strategic   points   throughout   the   landscape   and   communication   routes.   The   distribution   shows   that   different   artefact   types   do   not   concentrate   in   adjoining   castros   but   are   dispersed   throughout   the   area.   Overall,   it   seems   that   these   40   B034290   Mediterranean   artefacts   were   moving   around   the   RB.   Whether   this   local   movement   was   being   promoted   by   indigenous   people   or   by   foreigners,   there   must   have  been  enough  on-­‐going   contact   with   the   Mediterranean   world   to   bring   these   artefacts  to  the  Northwest  in  the  first  place.  Since  the  coast  of  Portugal  has  a  trail  of   evidence  for  Mediterranean  contacts  from  the  9th  century  BCE  (see  chapter  2),  this   appears  a  plausible  route  or  contact  point.  Furthermore,  it  must  not  be  forgotten   that   these   Mediterranean   objects   are   found   within   material   assemblages   that,   although   are   dominated   by   local   artefacts,   also   have   older   and   contemporary   Atlantic   imports.   For   instance,   at   Torroso,   the   castro   with   the   largest   number   of   finds   in   this   study,   these   Mediterranean   characteristics   appear   to   be   mixing   with   Atlantic   and   continental   ones,   all   foreign   to   the   Northwest   (Peña-­‐Santos   1992b:   34).  The  Northwest  seems  to  have  been  moderately  engaging  in  contacts  both  with   the  Mediterranean  and  the  Atlantic.  The  questions  that  need  to  be  addressed  now   are  theoretical,  including  what  kind  of  contacts  these  were  and  what  mechanisms   drove  them.       Figure  2 0.  Distribution  of  artefacts  of  Mediterranean  origin.   41     B034290   4.  Theoretical  considerations  on  exchange  and  symmetry     Chapter  3  has  assembled  the  material  evidence  of  Mediterranean  origin  that   has   been   found   within   9th-­‐7th   century   castros   of   the   Northwest.   This   has   been   shown   to   be   low   in   number   but   of   diverse   nature   and   distribution.   Thus,   these   are   enough   to   suggest   early   contact   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean   and   raise   questions   regarding   exchange   and   its   participants,   mechanisms   and   circuits   in   the   Atlantic.   An   alternative   perspective   will   also   be   considered   in   the   hope  of  providing  new  avenues  of  approach  to  the  topic:  symmetrical  archaeology.   This   will   allow   us   to   explore   intercultural   contacts   in   the   Northwest   in   terms   of   three  key  concepts:  things’  agency,  memory  and  time.       INTERCULTURAL  CONTACTS  IN  THE  NORTHWEST  IN  THE  9TH-­‐7TH  CENTURIES   BCE     Data   compilation   has   shown   that   the   Northwest   was   in   contact   with   the   Mediterranean   since   at   least   the   8th   century   BCE.   However,   considering   the   Northwest’s  richness  in  metal  resources  and  the  Mediterranean  demand  for  them,   it  seems  likely  that  these  were  more  than  just  contacts  –  they  were  part  of  a  system   of  exchange.  If  exchange  is  understood  as  the  transfer  of  people,  ideas  and  material   goods   between   two   or   more   parties   (see   introduction),   this   view   would   be   further   supported   by   the   mixture   of   import   types   (Figure   19).   The   complexity   of   this   exchange  demands  attention.       The   nature   of   exchange:   Phoenicians,   southern   Iberia   and   an   active   Northwest   Considering   the   Phoenician   commercial   venture   in   the   rest   of   the   Mediterranean,   it   would   be   fitting   to   suggest   that   this   group   was   the   agent   promoting   these   exchanges   with   the   Northwest.   However,   the   artefacts   found   in   the   Northwest   have   shown   influences   of   varied   origin.   There   could   be   three   possible   explanations   to   this   phenomenon.   First,   it   could   be   argued   that   these     42   B034290   objects  arrived  to  the  Northwest  through  fortuity,  perhaps  elite  gift-­‐giving  or  a  few   lone   travellers.   Considering   the   insight   into   iron   know-­‐how   and   the   wide   distribution   of   these   artefacts   in   the   RB,   such   a   view   would   once   again   be   underestimating  the  Northwest  as  a  marginal  and  isolated  area.  Secondly,  it  could   be   suggested   that   the   Northwest   was   in   direct   contact   with   all   these   areas.   Despite   having   challenged   the   marginality   of   the   Northwest   and   acknowledged   its   active   engagement   with   the   Atlantic   Ocean,   it   would   be   foolish   to   argue   that   the   area   had   direct  links  with  all  these  eastern  areas,  considering  its  rooted  local  characteristics.   Thirdly,   it   could   be   argued   that   someone,   with   the   means   to   either   voyage   to   all   these   places   or   gather   objects   with   multiple   points   of   origin,   was   bringing   these   artefacts   near   or   directly   to   the   Northwest.   Chapter   2   has   shown   that   the   Phoenicians   not   only   had   the   motives,   means   and   knowledge   to   do   so   but   were   also   firmly   settling   in   southern   Iberia   and   moving   along   the   coast   of   Portugal   by   the   9th   century   BCE.   Thus,   the   varied   origins   of   the   Mediterranean   artefacts   outlined   in   Chapter   3   would   most   probably   have   been   the   result   of   Phoenician   enterprises.     Nevertheless,   these   need   not   have   been   Phoenicians   from   the   Levant.   Chapter  2  has  shown  how  Phoenicians  were  blending  with  the  local  communities   of  southern  Iberia  and  slowly  establishing  mixed  settlements  in  strategic  locations,   such   as   Gadir.   These   sites,   due   to   their   Phoenician   influences,   were   increasingly   sophisticated,  leading  complex  exchanges  and  housing  hybrid  societies,  especially   in  eastern  Iberia  (Vives-­‐Ferrándiz  2008).  These  settlements  would  then  make  the   perfect  centres  from  which  to  organise  ventures  to  the  Northwest:  they  would  be   connected   to   local   maritime   routes,   closer   to   the   sources   of   metal,   would   have   allowed   people   to   maximise   profits,   and   would   have   fed   into   the   western   Mediterranean   demands.   Seeing   this   area   as   headquarters   for   the   western   Phoenician   venture   would   also   explain   the   trail   of   Phoenician   engagements,   and   the  early  stages  of  hybrid  settlements,  for  instance  Santa  Olaia,  along  the  coast  of   Portugal.     As  trading  communities,  the  only  reasons  that  Phoenicians  would  not  have   engaged  with  exchange  in  the  Northwest  is  if  this  had  not  profitable  been  enough   for  them  or  if  local  communities  would  have  prevented  it.  Exploit  of  tin  and  gold   would   have   certainly   made   the   venture   profitable,   just   as   the   silver   in   the     43   B034290   Guadalquivir   valley   led   them   to   Gadir.   However,   the   picture   presented   in   the   Northwest   is   different   from   the   one   in   southern   Iberia.   Castros   were   not   hybridising  communities,  but  distinctively  local  sites  –  at  least  until  Punic  presence   in   the   4th   century   BCE.   González-­‐Ruibal   (2004a:   292)   has   suggested   that   Phoenicians   never   established   distinctive   settlements   along   the   Northwest   coast   because   they   were   unable   to   engage   in   profitable,   long-­‐lasting   relationships   with   the  locals.  This  happened  because  indigenous  communities  of  the  Northwest  were   deeply  involved  in  their  own  internal  developments  (Dietler  1998:  289).  Perhaps   an  alternative  view  could  be  put  forward:  Phoenicians  need  not,  or  could  not,  have   established   a   permanent   presence   in   the   Northwest   because   the   indigenous   communities  were  selectively  engaging  in  the  exchange  of  their  own  metals.  This   might   explain   why   evidence   for   Phoenician   presence   in   the   Atlantic   decreases   gradually   northwards,   despite   its   increasing   proximity   to   the   sources   of   metals   that   they   were   clearly   pursuing.   The   distribution   of   Mediterranean   artefacts   in   castros  exceptionally  located  for  connecting  the  interior  with  maritime  trade  could   also  support  this  view.  Giving  the  Northwest  a  more  active  role  in  these  contacts   with   the   Mediterranean   can   also   help   provide   a   dynamic   picture   of   the   exchange   mechanisms  between  the  Atlantic  and  the  western  Mediterranean.       Exchange  mechanisms:  a  dynamic  Atlantic     Analyses   of   prehistoric   exchange   mechanism   have   not   been   short   of   contrasting   theoretical   models,   and   studies   of   Phoenician   exchange   networks   have   made  use  of  several.  Diffusionist  ideas  presented  the  Phoenicians  as  harbingers  of   innovation,   but   these   models   were   eventually   challenged   by   post-­‐colonialism   (Aubet   2001a:   280).5  Core-­‐periphery   models   that   situated   the   Mediterranean   as   the   centre   and   Europe   as   marginal,   for   instance   Sherratt   &   Sherratt   (1993),   also   promoted   Phoenician   maritime   networks   (Mederos-­‐Martín   1995:137).   Centrality   of  the  Mediterranean  –  and  Phoenician  ventures  –  have  been  key  in  world-­‐system   models,  with  some  authors  even  arguing  that  it  was  already  established  by  c.3000                                                                                                                   5  This  view  was  mostly  derived  from  an  overreliance  on  Classical  texts.  Herodotus  (4.152)  narrates  how  silver  was   accidentally  discovered  in  the  Peninsula  after  a  great  fire,  but  without  the  local  knowledge  to  extract  or  work  it,   only  when  the  Phoenicians  arrived  could  it  be  exploited.     44   B034290   BCE   (Gills   &   Frank   1990).   The   study   of   Phoenician   exchange   networks   has   not   been   excluded   from   the   formalist-­‐substantivist   divide   either   (Dillian   &   White   2010:  5-­‐6).  Despite  this  variety  of  approaches,  these  theories  all  have  one  thing  in   common:   their   starting   points   are   rigid   models   of   exchange.   Thus,   they   are   disadvantageous  to  apply  to  the  current  topic  of  study,  which  is  characterised  by   its   dynamic   position   between   two   worlds,   the   Atlantic   and   the   Mediterranean,   and   two  time  periods,  the  LBA  and  the  EIA.     Instead,   it   might   be   more   effective   to   approach   the   exchange   mechanism   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenicians   through   an   understanding   of   prehistoric   exchange   as   a   continuous,   complex,   integrated   and   dynamic   process   (Aubet   2001a:   105;   Earle   2010:   209).   This   then   becomes   an   attempt   to   use   an   inclusive   approach   uniting   the   Atlantic   and   the   Mediterranean.   An   alternative   picture  arises  of  how  exchange  mechanism  with  the  Northwest  might  have  worked   when   the   Northwest   is   seen   as   an   active   participant   in   the   exchange   (Oka   &   Kusimba   2008:   363).   This   is   a   picture   that   integrates   Phoenician   routes   and   the   Atlantic  bronze  circuit.       On   the   one   hand,   it   has   been   shown   that   the   Northwest   was   involved   in   the   Atlantic   Bronze   circuit   at   the   end   of   the   second   millennium   (Aubet   2001a;   see   chapter   2).   Furthermore,   Cunliffe   (2001:   287),   in   his   division   of   Atlantic   Europe   into  spheres  of  influence  during  the  end  of  the  BA,  separates  the  Northwest  from   southern  Portugal.  The  former  directs  its  attention  north  towards  the  Cantabrian   Sea   and   western   France,   whereas   the   latter   looks   towards   the   southern   Atlantic   and  the  Strait  of  Gibraltar  (Figure  5).  On  the  other  hand,  traditional  academic  maps   show   the   Phoenician   advance   north   through   the   Atlantic   coast   of   Iberia   as   a   straight  route,  designed  solely  by  Mediterranean  advances  (Figure  21.a).  However,   knowledge   of   metal   sources   in   the   Northwest   suggests   that   the   Atlantic   bronze   circuit   routes   could   have   still   been   in   use.   There   is   a   high   probability   that   Phoenician   exchanges   with   the   Northwest   might   not   have   been   solely   dependant   on   their   own   advances   north.   Thus,   the   exchange   mechanism   proposed   between   the   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   and   the   Northwest   is   one   formed   by   a   combination  of  these  two  systems  (Figure  21.b).  Phoenicians  would  have  arrived   in  southern  Iberia  in  the  early  9th  century  BCE  and  started  mixing  with  the  locals,   where   hybrid   communities   would   have   developed.   These   would   have   served   as     45   B034290   entry   points   to   the   Atlantic,   with   indigenous   knowledge   of   maritime   routes   and   raw   material   resources.   Portugal’s   BA   sphere   of   influence,   which   directed   its   attention   south,   would   have   allowed   for   an   easier   establishment   of   contacts,   and   eventually  the  genesis  of  hybrid  settlements.  The  Northwest,  however,  was  within   a  different  sphere  of  influence  and  so  it  would  not  have  had  the  same  reaction  to   Phoenician   advances.   Thus,   it   is   suggested   that   Northwest   locals   were   moving   south   to   the   central   coast   of   Portugal   where   they   obtained   Mediterranean   artefacts.   This   would   explain   why   hybrid   settlements   of   the   type   of   Santa   Olaia   never  occurred  in  the  Northwest  during  the  8th  and  7th  centuries  BCE.       a)   b)   Figure  2 1.  Exchanges  between  southern  Iberia  and  the  Northwest:  (a)  traditional   models  and  (b)  proposed  hybrid  exchange  mechanism.           This   gave   rise   to   a   flexible   and   dynamic   exchange   mechanism   connecting   two   different   networks   of   exchange,   the   BA   Atlantic   circuit   and   the   Phoenician   IA   Mediterranean   sea-­‐routes.   It   was   in   no   way   part   of   a   world-­‐system   in   which   the   Atlantic   and   the   Mediterranean   meet   midway   along   the   coast   of   Portugal,   as   the   Sherratts   (1993:   fig.   1c-­‐d)   have   proposed   for   the   7th   and   6th   centuries   BCE.   The     46   B034290   constraints   of   such   a   model   have   already   been   highlighted.   Rather,   it   emphasises   hybridity   within   an   exchange   network,   instead   of   just   within   settlements.   Hybridism   emerged   as   a   concept   within   postcolonial   ideas   to   describe   periods   of   cultural   intermixing   (Bhabha   2004).   As   such   it   has   been   used   to   refer   to   the   ‘Orientalising   period’   in   8th-­‐century-­‐BCE   Greece   (Lydon   &   Rizvi   2012:   25)   or   to   Phoenician   interactions   with   local   communities   in   eastern   and   southern   Iberia   (Vives-­‐Ferrándiz   2008).   It   is   a   term   generally   applied   to   communities   and   their   cultures,   not   exchange   systems.   However,   it   could   be   applied   to   the   exchange   between   the   Northwest   and   Iberian   Phoenicians   because   it   took   places   between   two   distinctive   cultural   communities   and   it   is   suggested   that   interaction   routes   encompassed   two   distinctive   spheres   of   cultural   exchange   circuits.   The   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   on   the   edges   of   the   Atlantic   and   Mediterranean   were   a   period   of   change,   both   internally   and   externally.   Thus,   this   allows   archaeological   perspectives   to   abandon   constrictive   models   of   exchange   and,   instead,   argue   for   increased  mixing  and  connection  between  different  participants.       Bridging  the  divides     A   hybrid   exchange   mechanism   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   can   also   help   bridge   wider   geographical   and   chronological   divisions  in  archaeological  interpretations.  It  shows  how  exchange  networks  move   beyond   cultural   (Phoenicians-­‐‘castrexos’)   and   geographical   (Strait   of   Gibraltar)   boundaries   to   fulfil   the   needs   of   their   participants   (Oka   &   Kusimba   2008:   359).   This  dismantles  the  separation  between  the  Mediterranean  and  Atlantic,  which  can   no   longer   be   regarded   as   active   participants   and   passive   receptors,   respectively.   Instead,   it   connects   both   areas   geographically   and   connects   both   communities’   agency.   From   a   chronological   perspective,   this   mechanism   can   help   blur   the   traditional  division  between  the  LBA  and  the  EIA  in  western  Iberia  (Figure  22.a).   Combination   of   both   exchange   circuits   also   connects   the   cultural   transition   that   took   place   in   the   Mediterranean   and   Europe   in   the   turn   of   the   first   millennium   BCE.   Uninterrupted   knowledge   of   maritime   routes,   raw   material   sources   and   movement   of   communities   all   point   to   transition   and   continuity,   instead   of   the   disintegration   of   Atlantic   and   Mediterranean   BA   societies   and   the   emergence   of     47   B034290   new  ones  (Figure  22.b).  This  fits  in  with  wider  views  challenging  the  LBA  ‘collapse’   and   the   ‘dark   ages’   characteristic   of   EIA   societies,   for   instance,   in   Greece   (Lemos   2006:   87;   Morgan   2009;   Bintliff   2012).   This   is   especially   characteristic   in   the   Northwest,  where  changes  within  castros  and  the  introduction  of  iron  appears  to   have   been   a   slow   process.   Overall,   intercultural   exchanges   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenician   Mediterranean   in   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   show   a   picture   of   coherent  continuity  both  geographically  and  chronologically.       Figure  2 2.  Bridging  the  chronological  divide  in  the  Northwest:  (a)  traditional  model;   and  (b)  continuity  model.             A  SYMMETRICAL  INTERPRETATION       This  hybrid  exchange  mechanism  contributes  to  themes  within  the  current   postcolonial  debate  on  the  topic.  However,  since  archaeological  theory  appears  to   be  facing  a  moment  of  paradigmatic  lack  of  definition  (González-­‐Ruibal  2012:  104)   –   whether   this   means   a   ‘death’   of   theory,   a   new   paradigm   or   “post-­‐paradigm”   period  (Bintliff  &  Pearce  2011;  Kristiansen  2014:  12)  –  it  would  be  interesting  to   approach   the   topic   from   an   alternative   perspective.   Symmetrical   archaeology   provides  an  interesting  platform  to  do  so,  as  it  is  one  of  the  most  complex  additions     48   B034290   to   21st-­‐century   archaeological   theory.   Symmetrical   theories,   as   presented   in   the   introduction,   work   towards   a   common   goal:   the   defense   of   things.   This   does   not   imply   equivalence,   but   does   defend   a   variety   of   agencies   and,   therefore,   the   reclamation   of   an   equal   treatment   of   things   and   humans   (Witmore   2007:   547;   549).  Presented  as  a  theory,  and  not  an  approach,  it  allows  us  to  pick  and  choose   concepts   to   apply   to   the   intercultural   contacts   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean  in  order  to  propose  as  new  interpretative  framework.6  Thus,  three   ideas  have  been  selected:  the  agency  of  things,  the  disruption  of  memory  and  the   concept  of  percolating  time.         Things’  agency   Conceiving   the   world   as   an   imbroglio   of   human-­‐things   whereby   collective   entities  have  a  variety  of  agencies  allows  scholars  to  move  beyond  anthropocentric   views   of   agency.   A   symmetric   view   of   agency   is   not   attributed   to   entities   by   themselves,  but  rather  to  the  whole  network  in  which  these  entities  are  imbued,  to   their   associations   and   relationships   (Knappet   2002:   100;   Malafouris   2013:   127).   This   has   helped   advance   two   ideas.   On   the   one   hand,   the   Actor-­‐Network   Theory   (ANT)  argues  that  agents  are  the  effects  of  networks  and  that  there  is  no  primacy   of   the   human   actor   (Law   1999).   Instead   of   engaging   with   the   contradiction   between   agency   and   structure,   ANT   ignores   it   in   a   ‘bypassing   strategy’   (Latour   1999:   16-­‐7).   On   the   other   hand,   Malafouris   (2013:   136-­‐44)   removes   human   primacy   over   agency.   He   uses   Searle’s   ‘Background’   (1983:   143)   to   eliminate   intentionality’s   definition   as   the   diagnostic   feature   of   agency.   This   allows   Malafouris  (2013:  145-­‐6)  to  define  agency  as  a  fluid  dialectic  whereby  actors  and   patients   exist   in   a   dynamic   tension   that   is   in   constant   shift   and   mediation.   The   actor   or   agent   is   any   element   that   bends   the   space   and   entities   around   it   (Malafouris   2013:   147).   For   instance,   the   car   is   an   agent   insofar   as   the   person   is   the  patient  and  vice  versa  (Gell  1998:  22).  Agents  and  patients  engage  and  interact,   just   as   things   and   humans   do,   and   owe   their   definitions   as   such   to   their   relationships   in   a   certain   ontological   moment   (Malafouris   2013:   145).   Therefore,   not   only   can   things   have   agency   but   also   the   question   now   shifts   from   ‘what   are                                                                                                                   6  Symmetrical  archaeology’s  nature  as  an  ecology  prevents  us  from  encompassing  the  totality  of  its  scope.     49   B034290   things   as   agents’   to   ‘when   and   how   does   an   agent   occur’   (Malafouris   2013:   143,   147).     This   agency   of   things   enriches   the   network   of   exchange   between   the   Northwest  and  the  Phoenicians  in  southern  Iberia.  Seeing  the  exchanged  goods  as   agents   allows   us   to   move   beyond   the   description   of   movement,   route   and   interaction   mechanisms   between   the   two   communities.   These   exchanged   goods   can   be   regarded   as   what   was   bringing   both   communities   together   by   providing   channels   of   interaction   (Malafouris   2013:   44).   Therefore,   a   dynamic   network   of   actors   and   patients,   of   both   material   artefacts   and   human   interests,   guided   these   exchanges.   Some   of   these   have   been   represented   in   Figure   23.   The   presence   of   Northwest   metals   is   what   brought   the   Mediterranean   imports   to   the   Northwest,   perhaps   even   allowing   the   local   communities   to   produce   some   of   the   bronze   objects   themselves.   Yet   at   the   same   time,   the   Mediterranean   imports   were   allowing  Northwest  metals  to  be  transported  south.  The  relationship  between  the   Northwest   metals   and   the   Mediterranean   imports   is   what   allowed   a   two-­‐sided   exchange  to  take  place,  with  both  communities  having  an  active  role  in  it.  Yet  at  the   same   time,   the   human   goal   of   obtaining   profit   or   establishing   social   relations   from   exchange   established   the   quantity   and   quality   of   Northwest   metals   and   Mediterranean   imports.   Thus,   approaching   this   exchange   through   things’   agency   provides   insight   into   a   complex   network   of   agents   and   patients   that   was   in   constant  motion  and  reciprocal  relation.  The  mechanism  of  the  exchange  between   the  Northwest  and  the  Phoenicians  in  southern  Iberia  could  have  been  more  than   just  a  network  of  maritime  routes,  coastal  settlements  and  artefact  distributions.                         50   B034290           Figure  2 3.  A  network  of  agency:  three  examples  of  momentary  agent-­‐patient   relations.       Memory   Acknowledging   things’   agency   can   show   their   influence   on   memory.   This   might  provide  insight  into  how  Mediterranean  imports  could  have  impacted  upon   the   Northwest   communities’   relationship   to   local   objects.   Olsen   (2010)   outlines   three  types  of  memory.  Habit  memory  is  bodily  memory  preserved  by  repetitious   practice  of  which  humans  are  not  aware  because  it  is  embedded  in  their  practices   (Bergson   2004).   These   practices   are   only   made   possible   through   things,   just   as   a   piano   player’s   habit   memory   is   inconceivable   without   a   piano   (Olsen   2010).   Recollective   memory   involves   a   conscious,   wilful,   voluntary   gaze   at   a   particular   part   of   the   past   (Olsen   2010:   109,   116).   Involuntary   memory   is   triggered   by   the   interruption   of   habitual   memory   (Olsen   2010:   169).   Thus,   it   is   a   conscious   acknowledgement   of   the   habitual   memory   of   things.   Olsen   applies   this   role   to   ruins,  pieces  of  past  material   culture   that   interrupt  the  present   (Olsen  2010:  170).   However,   things   need   not   be   in   ruins   to   cause   involuntary   memory.   Foreign   artefacts  could  disrupt  habitual  memory  towards  local  objects  by  highlighting  the   technical,  material  or  aesthetic  differences  between  them.       An  example  of  foreign  artefacts  causing  involuntary  memory  can  be  drawn   from  iron  and  bronze  know-­‐how  (Figure  24).  Exchanges  in  the  Northwest  with  the     51   B034290   Phoenicians   from   southern   Iberia   probably   introduced   the   know-­‐how   of   iron   technology.   After   many   centuries   working   bronze   in   the   Northwest,   by   the   9th   century   BCE,   that   technical   know-­‐how   would   have   been   part   of   its   communities’   habitual   memory.   The   introduction   of   iron   know-­‐how   would   have   prompted   a   period  of  coexistence  of  both  metals.  This  would  have  forced  communities  to  see   the  working  of  bronze  under  a  new  light,  thus  disrupting  the  habitual  memory  of  it.   For   instance,   involuntary   memory   might   have   regarded   bronze   as   representative   of   a   long   local   tradition   in   metalworking.   Eventually,   as   iron   know-­‐how   became   established   by   the   end   of   the   7th   century   BCE,   it   would   have   become   part   of   the   communities’  habitual  memory.  In  contrast,  bronze  know-­‐how  would  have  become   part   of   a   recollective   memory,   consciously   recalled   perhaps   through   technique,   tradition,  aesthetics  or  cult.  A  similar  thought  process  could  be  applied  to  each  of   the   Mediterranean   artefacts   that   have   been   found   in   the   Northwest.   Overall,   a   symmetrical   approach   to   things’   agency   over   memory   provides   an   interpretation   to   the   Northwest’s   reception   of   Mediterranean   artefacts   and   its   evolution   over   time.       Figure  2 4.  Imports  and  the  disruption  of  memory:  the  introduction  of  iron  know-­‐ how  in  the  Northwest.           Time   The  symmetrical  understanding  of  time,  however,  is  not  linear.  To  conceive  time  as   a   transitive   flow   marked   by   episodes   of   progress   or   regression   is   considered   an     52   B034290   oversimplification   of   the   concept   (Olsen   et  al.   2012:   138).   A   symmetrical   approach   presents  time  as  complex  and  chaotic,  after  the  Greek  word  kairos  –  simultaneous   time  –  instead  of  chronos  –  successive  time  –  (Olsen  et  al.  2012:  156).  This  does  not   seek   to   debunk   linear   time,   but   rather   to   give   primacy   to   a   percolating   time,   one   that   bends   and   folds   (Olsen   et   al.   2012:   146,   153).   This   is   possible   when   things   are   conceived   through   the   etymological   root   tenku,   that   is,   as   having   an   additional   temporal   dimension   (Olsen   2010:   109).   Their   materiality   allows   them   to   connect   the  folds  in  the  fabric  of  time  (Witmore  2007:  556;  Serres  1995:  60).  Thus,  the  past   lives  in  the  present,  what  Olsen  (2010)  refers  to  as  the  ‘present-­‐past’.     The   character   of   exchange   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   has   revealed   the   coexistence   of   knowledge,   maritime   routes   and   artefacts.  This  has  been  used  to  argue  for  a  continuous  transition  between  the   LBA   and   the   EIA   (Figure   22.b).   When   time   is   conceived   under   symmetrical   ideas,   a   richer  picture  of  these  exchanges  emerges.  Instead  of  following  a  linear  succession,   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE   in   the   Northwest   could   be   regarded   as   a   complex   poly-­‐ chronic   ensemble   in   which   a   part   of   the   past   survives   (Figure   25).   This   is   a   ‘present-­‐past’  where  the  9th-­‐7th  centuries  BCE  constitute  the  present.  A  fraction  of   this   ensemble   would   be   constituted   by   the   Northwest’s   exchange   with   the   Mediterranean  in  which  its  components  blur  the  boundaries  of  time  periods.  It  is   almost  like  a  melting-­‐pot,  allowing  the  coexistence  of,  for  instance,  BA  knowledge   of   metal   resources   and   maritime   routes   with   EIA   iron   know-­‐how,   a   9th-­‐century   BCE   trend   of   curved   knives   and   8th-­‐7th   century   BCE   fibulae   designs.   Thus,   the   exchange   mechanism   in   place   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   would   also   be   polychromic   and   temporally   chaotic,   just   like   the   symmetrical  conception  of  time.           53   B034290   Figure  2 5.  Percolating  time:  the  Northwest’s  contacts  with  the  Mediterranean  as   part  of  its  polychromic  ensemble  of  the  9th-­‐7th  centuries  BCE.         Symmetrical  archaeology  has  provided  new  avenues  of  approaching  exchange   between   the   Northwest   and   the   Mediterranean   in   the   9th-­‐7th   centuries   BCE.   The   agency   of   things,   memory,   and   time   constitute   some   of   the   ideas   that   can   be   applied   and   show   the   potential   of   introducing   a   symmetrical   theoretical   standpoint.  They  do  not  seek  to  debunk  or  annul  the  conclusions  reached  through   understanding  exchange  as  a  dynamic  process.  Rather,  they  seek  to  show  that  both   views  can  coexist.  This  coexistence  shows  a  tip  of  the  iceberg  that  is  exchange  in   the   Northwest,   which,   traditionally   presented   as   marginal,   fortuitous   or   one-­‐sided,   now  appears  as  a  complex  network  of  things,  communities  and  relations.     54   B034290   5. Conclusion     This   paper   has   shown   that   intercultural   contacts   between   Northwest   Iberia   and  the  Phoenician  communities  in  southern  Iberia  in  the  9th  to  7th  centuries  BCE   were  a  complex  phenomenon.  It  has  aimed  to  understand  Mediterranean  presence   in  the  Northwest  and  to  suggest  new  analytical  perspectives  through  symmetrical   theory.  An  introduction  of  the  character  of  the  communities  in  the  Northwest  and   the   Phoenicians   in   southern   Iberia   has   established   a   material   and   geographical   connection   between   both.   Analysis   has   focused   on   revisiting   the   material   evidence   of  Mediterranean  origin  within  the  castros  of  the  Rías  Baixas.  Results  have  shown   the   typological   diversity   of   the   artefacts,   their   varied   origins   and   wide   distribution   throughout  the  area  of  study.  Therefore,  it  has  been  proposed  that  the  Northwest   was   not   just   in   contact   with   the   Mediterranean   but   that   these   communities   were   maintaining   exchanges.   More   specifically,   it   has   been   argued   that   they   were   actively   interacting   with   settlements   in   southern   Iberia,   which   served   as   headquarters   for   Phoenician   ventures   into   the   Atlantic.   A   hybrid   exchange   mechanism   has   been   developed   that   unites   Phoenician   advances   with   local   maritime   routes   along   the   Northwest,   in   place   since   the   BA.   This   has   also   been   used   to   suggest   a   continuous   transition   between   the   LBA   and   the   EIA   in   the   Northwest.   Additionally,   the   results   and   conclusions   have   been   approached   through   three   notions   proposed   by   symmetrical   archaeology.   The   idea   of   things’   agency   has   allowed   us   to   present   exchange   as   a   network   of   agent-­‐patient   relations   between   things   and   humans.   This   has   also   helped   show   the   importance   of   imported   artefacts   in   the   disruption   of   habitual   memory   in   the   communities   of   the   Northwest.   Finally,   the   idea   of   percolating   time   has   introduced   the   poly-­‐chronic   nature  of  the  9th-­‐7th-­‐centuries  exchanges.  Overall,  by  presenting  these  intercultural   contacts  between  the  Northwest  and  the  Mediterranean  as  a  hybrid  –  and  dynamic   –  exchange  mechanism  and  a  symmetrical  network  of  things  and  communities,  this   paper   has   managed   to   challenge   traditional   ideas   of   marginality   and,   hopefully,   open  new  avenues  of  research.           55   B034290   Future  directions   This   paper’s   research   on   intercultural   contacts   between   Northwest   Iberia   and   the   Mediterranean   could   be   developed   in   several   directions.   First,   it   would   benefit  from  broadening  its  area  of  study.  Geographically,  analysis  could  expand  to   settlements   inland   and   along   the   northern   coast   of   Galicia.   Eventually,   if   regional   archaeological   excavations   and   investigations   in   the   area   continue   to   advance,   there   might   be   enough   evidence   to   explore   open-­‐air   settlements   as   well.   Secondly,   the   material   evidence   could   be   approached   through   scientific   methods,   for   instance,   investigating   the   origins   of   Mediterranean   artefacts,   especially   bronzes,   through  provenance  studies.  Thirdly,  other  theoretical  areas  of  exchange  could  be   explored,   for   instance,   the   meaning   and   value   of   the   imported   Mediterranean   artefacts  in  the  Northwest.  Finally,  perhaps  chance  will  prompt  the  discovery  of  a   shipwreck  off  the  Northwest  coast,  a  local  ‘Uluburun’,  that  may  answer  the  burning   questions  regarding  the  mechanisms  and  participants  in  the  exchanges.     Further  studies  could  also  tackle  the  two  most  important  limitations  of  this   paper.   The   most   obvious   one   is   the   absence   of   a   social   perspective,   not   only   in   symmetrical  theory  (Fernández-­‐Martínez  2007:  317).  Moving  beyond  arguing  the   active   role   of   the   Northwest   in   these   exchanges,   the   social   side   of   these   interactions   could   be   approached   perhaps   through   questions   of   social   hierarchy,   gender   division   or   the   role   of   exchange   in   the   construction   of   identity   (Dillian   &   White  2010:  11).  Less  obvious,  but  more  important,  is  the  issue  of  closure  caused   by  a  symmetrical  interpretations  (Malafouris  2013).  When  the  world  is  conceived   as   an   imbroglio,   where   humans   and   things   form   relations   and   time   percolates,   boundaries   blur.   The   dimensions   of   exchange,   then,   appear   almost   limitless   and   the   challenge   is   to   understand   where   to   stop   constructing   to   avoid   falling   into   speculation.       56   B034290   Bibliography     Acuña-­‐Castroviejo,  F.,  1991.  ‘Algunhas  cuestións  previas  sobre  a  cultura  castrexa’,   in   F.   Rodríguez-­‐Iglesias   (ed.)   Historia   I   Prehistoria   e   Historia   Antigua:   287-­‐93.   A   Coruña:  Hércules.     Almagro-­‐Gorbea,   M.,   1991.   ‘Los   celtas   en   la   Península   Ibérica’,   in   M.   Almagro-­‐ Gorbea   (ed.)   Los   celtas   en   la   Península   Ibérica:   12-­‐17.   Madrid:   Revista   de   Arqueología.     Alvar-­‐Ezquerra,   J.,   2009.   ‘Modos   de   contacto   y   medios   de   comunicación:   los   orígenes   de   la   expansión   fenicia’,   in   S.   Celestino,   N.   Rafel   &   X.-­‐L.   Armada   (eds)   Contacto   cultural   entre   el   Mediterráneo   y   el   Atlántico   (siglos   XII-­‐VIII   ane):   La   precolonización  a  debate:  19-­‐25.  Madrid:  CSIC.     Arruda,  A.M.,  2002.  Los   fenicios   en   Portugal:   Fenicios   y   mundo   indígena   en   el   centro   y  sur  de  Portugal  (siglos  VIII-­‐VI  a.C.).  Barcelona:  Universidad  de  Pompeu  Fabra.   -­‐ 2009.   ‘Phoenician   colonisation   on   the   Atlantic   coast   of   the   Mediterranean   Peninsula’,   in   M.   Dietler   &   C.   López-­‐Ruiz   Colonial   encounters   in   ancient   Iberia:   Phoenician,   Greek   and   indigenous   relations:   113-­‐130.   London:   The   University  of  Chicago  Press.     Aubet,   M.E.   2001a.   The   Phoenicians   and   the   west:   Politics,   colonies   and   trade.   Cambridge:  Cambridge  University  Press.   -­‐ 2001b.  ‘Spain’,  in  S.  Moscati  (ed.)  The  Phoenicians.  London:  I.B.  Tauris.   -­‐  (forthcoming).  ‘Phoenicians  abroad:  From  merchant  venturers  to  colonists’,   in  M.  Fernández-­‐Götz  &  D.  Krausse  (eds.)  (forthcoming)  Eurasia  at  the  Dawn   of   History:   Urbanization   and   Social   Change.   Cambridge   University   Press,   Cambridge.     Ayán-­‐Vila,   X.M,   M.   Costas-­‐Casais,   R.   Tallón-­‐Armada,   R.   Mª.   Rodríguez-­‐Martínez   &   M.A.  Franco-­‐Fernández,  2011.  ‘Redescubriendo  o  castro  pequeño  de  Neixón  (Boiro,     57   B034290   A   Coruña):   Nuevos   resultados   de   la   campaña   arqueológica   de   2008’,   Férvedes   7:   159-­‐168.     Bergson,  H.,  2004.  Matter  and  memory.  Mineola,  New  York:  Dover.     Bhabha,  H.K.,  2004.  The  location  of  culture.  New  York:  Routledge.     Bintliff,   J.L.,   2012.   The   complete   archaeology   of   ancient   Greece:   From   hunter-­‐ gatherers  to  the  20th  century  AD.  Oxford:  Oxford  University  Press.     Bintiliff,  J.L.  &  M.  Pearce,  2011.  The  death  of  archaeological  theory?.  Oxford:  Oxbow   Books.     Braudel,  F.,  1949  (trans.  1975).  The  Mediterranean  and  the  mediterranean  world  in   the  age  of  Phillip  II.  Translated  by  S.  Reynolds.  London:  Fontana.     Bierling,   M.R.   &   S.   Gitin,   2002.   The  Phoenicians  in  Spain:  an  archaeological  review  of   the   eighth-­‐sixth   centuries   B.C.:   a   collection   of   articles   translated   from   Spanish.   Winona  Lake,  Ind.:  Eisenbrauns.     Blanco-­‐Freijeiro,   A.,   1960.   ‘La   cultura   castrexa’,   I   symposium   de   Prehistoria   Peninsular:  179-­‐95.     Bosch-­‐Gimpera,  P.,  1921.  ‘Los  Celtas  y  la  civilización  céltica  en  la  Península  Ibérica’,   Boletín  de  la  Sociedad  Española  de  Excursiones  29:  248-­‐300.     Calo-­‐Lourido,  F.,  1993.  A  cultura  castrexa.  Vigo:  Nosa  Terra.     Carballo-­‐Arceo,  L.X.,  1998.  ‘A  agricultura  en  Castrovite  (Orazo,  A  Estrada)  durante   a  Idade  do  Ferro’,  A  Estrada:  Miscelánea  histórica  e  cultural  1:  9-­‐26.       58   B034290   Celestino,   S.,   N.   Rafel   &   X.-­‐L.   Armada   (eds),   2009.   Contacto   cultural   entre   el   Mediterráneo   y   el   Atlántico   (siglos   XII-­‐VIII   ane):   La   precolonización   a   debate.   Madrid:  CSIC.     Coffyn,   A.,   1985.   Le   bronze   final   atlantique   dans   la   Péninsule   Ibérique.   Paris:   Diffusion  de  Boccard.     Cortegoso-­‐Comesaña,   M.,   2000.   ‘Tipología   de   las   fíbulas   de   los   castros   gallegos,   a   través  de  los  ejemplares  publicados’,  Gallaecia  19:  125-­‐142.     Cunliffe,  B.,  2001.  Facing  the  ocean:  The  Atlantic  and  its  peoples  8000  BC  –  AD  1500.   Oxford:  Oxford  University  Press.     Dietler,   M.,   1998.   ‘Consumption,   agency   and   cultural   entanglement:   Theoretical   implications   of   a   Mediterranean   colonial   encounter’,   in   J.G.   Cusick   (ed.)   Studies  in   cultura   contact:   Interaction,   culture   change   and   archaeology:  288-­‐315.  Carbondale:   Southern  Illinois  University.     Dietler,  M.  &  López-­‐Ruiz  C.,  2009.  Colonial  encounters  in  ancient  Iberia:  Phoenician,   Greek  and  indigenous  relations.  London:  The  University  of  Chicago  Press.     Dillian,  C.D.  &  C.L.  White,  2010.  ‘Introduction:  Perspectives  on  trade  and  exchange’,   in  C.D.  Dillian  &  C.L.  White  (eds)  Trade  and  Exchange:  Archaeological  studies  from   history  and  prehistory:  1-­‐12.  London:  Springer.     Dimock,  G.  &  A.T.  Murray,  1995.  Homer  Odyssey  (Loeb  Classical  Library).  London:   Harvard  University  Press.     Dos   Reis-­‐Martins,   M.M.,   1997.   ‘The   dynamics   of   change   in   northwest   Portugal   during  the  first  millennium  BC’,  in  M.  Díaz-­‐Andreu  &  S.  Keay  (eds)  The  archaeology   of  Iberia:  The  dynamics  of  change:  143-­‐57.  London:  Routledge.       59   B034290   EARLE,   T.   2010.   ‘Exchange   systems  in  prehistory’,   in   C.D.   Dillian   &   C.L.   White   (eds)   Trade   and   Exchange:   Archaeological   studies   from   history   ad   prehistory:   204-­‐17.   London:  Springer.     Fariña-­‐Busto,  F.  &  Arias-­‐Vilas,  F.,  1980.  ‘Aportazón  ao  estudo  das  fibulas  atopadas   nos  castros  galegos’,  Actas   do   I   Seminario   de   Arqueología   do   Noroeste   Peninsular   II,   Braga:  183-­‐95.     Fernández-­‐Martínez,   V.M.,   2007.   ‘Arqueología   simétrica:   ¿Nueva   síntesis   o   nueva   etiqueta?’,  Complutum  18:  316-­‐7.     Gamito,   T.J.,   1989.   ‘The   wind   of   change   blows   from   the   east:   The   transition   from   Late   Bronze   Age   to   Iron   Age   in   southwest   Iberia   and   the   east   Mediterranean’,   in   M.L.   Stig   Sorensen   &   R.   Thomas   (eds)   The   Bronze   Age   –   Iron   Age   transition   in   Europe:  Aspects  of  continuity  and  change  in  European  societies  c.  1200  to  500  B.C.:   137-­‐172.  Oxford:  BAR.     Gell,   A.,   1998.   Art  and  agency:  An  anthropological  theory.   Oxford:   Oxford   University   Press.     Gilboa,  A.  &  I.  Sharon,  2003.  ‘An  archaeological  contribution  to  the  Early  Iron  Age   chronological   debate:   Alternative   chronologies   for   Phoenicia   and   their   effects   on   the   Levant,   Cyprus   and   Greece’,   Bulletin  of  the  American  School  of  Oriental  Research   332:  7-­‐80.     Gills,   B.K.   &   A.G.   Frank,   1990.   ‘The   cumulation   of   accumulation:   Thesis   and   research  agenda  for  5000  years  of  world  system  history’,  Dialectical   Anthropology   15:  19-­‐42.     Godley,   A.D.,   1971.   Herodotus   II   Books   III-­‐IV   (Loeb   Classical   Library).   London:   William  Heinemann  LTD.       60   B034290   González-­‐Ruibal,  A.,  2004a.  ‘Facing  two  seas:  Mediterranean  and  Atlantic  contacts   in   the   north-­‐west   of   Iberia   in   the   first   millennium   BC’,   Oxford   Journal   of   Archaeology  23:  287-­‐317.   -­‐ 2004b.  ‘Un  askós  ibicenco  en  Galicia:  Notas  sobre  el  carácter  del  comercio   púnico  en  el  noroeste  ibérico’,  Complutum  15:  33-­‐43.   -­‐ 2006.   ‘Past   the   last   outpost:   Punic   merchants   in   the   Atlantic   Ocean   (5th-­‐1st   centuries  BC)’,  Journal  of  Mediterranean  Archaeology  19:  121-­‐50.   -­‐ 2006-­‐7.  ‘Galaicos:  Poder  y  comunidad  en  el  noroeste  de  la  Península  Ibérica   (1200  a.C.  –  50  d.C.)  I-­‐II’,  Brigantium  18-­‐9:  7-­‐692.   -­‐ 2007.  ‘Arqueología  simétrica:  Un  giro  teórico  sin  revolución  paradigmática’,   Complutum  18:  283-­‐319.   -­‐ 2011.  ‘The  politics  of  identity:  Ethnicity  and  the  economy  of  power  in  Iron   Age   northwest   Iberia’,   in   G.   Gifani   &   S.   Stoddart   (eds)   Landscape,  ethnicity   and   identity   in   the   archaic   Mediterranean   área:   245-­‐66.   Oxford:   Oxbow   Books.     González-­‐Ruibal,  A.,  R.  Rodríguez-­‐Martínez,  R.  Aboal-­‐Fernández  &  V.  Castro-­‐Hierro,   2007.   ‘Comercio   Mediterráneo   en   el   castro   de   Montealegre   (Pontevedra,   Galicia):   Siglo  II  a.C.  –  inicios  del  siglo  I  d.C.’,  Archivo  Español  de  Arqueología  80:  43-­‐74.     González-­‐Ruibal,   A.,   R.   Rodríguez-­‐Martínez   &   X.   Ayán-­‐Vila,   2010.   ‘Buscando   a   los   púnicos  en  el  noroeste’,  Mainake  32:  577-­‐600.     Jones,   H.L.,   1960.   The   geography   of   Strabo   II   Books   III-­‐V   (Loeb   Classical   Library).   London:  William  Heinemann  LtD.     Knappett,   C.,   2002.   ‘Photographs,   skeuomorphs   and   marionettes:   Some   thoughts   on  mind,  agency  and  object’,  Journal  of  Material  Culture  7:  97-­‐117.       Kolb,  C.C.,  2011.  ‘Review:  Archaeological  approaches  to  market  exchange  in  ancient   societies  edited  by  Christopher  P.  Garraty  &  Barbara  L.  Stark,  2010.  Boulder  (CO):   University  Press  of  Colorado’,  Cambridge  Archaeoogical  Journal  21:  150-­‐1.       61   B034290   Kristiansen,  K.,  2014.  ‘Towards  a  new  paradigm?  The  third  science  revolution  and   its  possible  consequences  in  archaeology’,  Current  Swedish  Archaeology  22:  11-­‐34.     Latour,   B.,   1999.   Pandora’s   hope:   Essays   on   the   reality   of   science   studies.   London:   Harvard  University  Press.     Law,  J.  1999.  ‘After  ANT:  Complexity,  naming  and  topology’,  in  J.  Law  &  J.  Hassard   (eds)  Actor  Network  Theory  and  after:  1-­‐14.  Oxford:  Blackwell.     Lemos,   I.S.,   2006.   ‘The   “Dark   Age”   of   Greece’,   in   E.   Bispham,   T.   Harrison   &   B.   Sparkes   (eds)   The   Edinburgh   companion   to   ancient   Greece   and   Rome:   87-­‐91.   Edinburgh:  Edinburgh  University  Press.     López-­‐Cuevillas,  F.,  1953.  La  civilización  céltica  en  Galicia.  Santiago  de  Compostela:   Porto  y  Cia.   -­‐ 1966.  ‘A  economía  nos  tempos  da  cultura  castrexa’  Grial  4.13:  261-­‐75.     Losada  y  Diéguez,  A.,  1925-­‐6.  Excavaciones   en   Montealegre   (Domayo),   provincia   de   Pontevedra:  Memoria  de  los  trabajos  realizados  y  descubrimientos.   Madrid:   Revista   de  Archivos.   -­‐ 1943.   ‘Objetos   arqueológicos   procedentes   de   las   excavaciones   de   Montealegre’.  EMP.  II:  101-­‐5.     Lydon,   J.   &   U.Z.   Rizvi,   2012.   ‘Introduction:   Postcolonialism   and   archaeology’,   in   J.   Lydon   &   U.Z.   Rizvi   (eds)   Handbook   of   postcolonial   archaeology:   17-­‐33.   Walnut   Creek,  California:  Left  Coast  Press.     Malafouris,   L.,   2013.   How  things  shape  the  mind:  A  theory  of  material  engagement.   Massachusetts:  Institute  of  Technology  Press.     Mederos-­‐Martín,  A.,  1995.  ‘¿Back  to  the  past?  Trade  or  diffusion  in  ancient  world   systems  analysis’,  Trabajos  de  Prehistoria  52:  131-­‐41.     62   B034290   -­‐ 1999.   ‘La   metamorfosis   de   Villena:   Comercio   de   oro,   estaño   y   sal   durante   el   Bronce  Final  I  entre  el  Atlántico  y  el  Mediterráneo  (625-­‐1300  AC’,  Trabajos   de  Prehistoria  56:  115-­‐136.     Mederos-­‐Martín,   A.   &   L.A.   Ruiz-­‐Cabrero,   2007.   ‘Un   Atlántico   mediterráneo:   Fenicios   en   el   litoral   portugués   y   gallego’   Byrsa,   Rivista   Smemestrale   di   Arte,   Cultura  e  Archeologia  del  Mediterraneo  Punico  3:  351-­‐410.     Morgan,   C.,   2009.   ‘The   early   Iron   Age’,   in   K.   Raaflaub   &   H.   Van   Wees   (eds)   A   companion  to  archaic  Greece:  43-­‐63.  Chichester:  Malden.     Moro,   O.,   2007.   ‘La   “arqueología   simétrica”   o   la   irrupción   de   la   sociología   del   conocimiento  científico  en  arqueología’,  Complutum  18:  318-­‐9.     Naveiro-­‐López,   J.,   1991.   ‘Intercambios   e   comercio   na   cultura   castrexa’,   in   F.   Rodríguez-­‐Iglesias   (ed.)   Historia  I  Prehistoria  e  Historia  Antigua:   327-­‐35.   A   Coruña:   Hércules.     Núñez,   F.J.,   2014.   ‘Western   challenges   to   East   Mediterranean   chronological   fraeworks’,   in   M.   Botto   (ed.)   I   fenici   in   Andalusia:   Nuove   acquisizioni.   Rivista   di   Studi  Fenici  Supplementa.  Rome:  CNR.     Oka,   R.   &   C.M.   Kusimba,   2008.   ‘The   archaeology   of   trading   systems,   part   1:   Towards  a  new  trade  synthesis’,  Journal  of  Archaeological  Research  16:  339-­‐95.     Olmos,   R.,   2008.   ‘Prólogo,   in   S.   Celestino’,   N.   Rafel   &   X.-­‐L.   Armada   (eds)   Contacto   cultural   entre   el   Mediterráneo   y   el   Atlántico   (siglos   XII-­‐VIII   ane):   La   precolonización   a  debate:  7-­‐8.  Madrid:  CSIC.     Olsen,   B.,   2003.   ‘Material   culture   after   text:   remembering   things’,   Norwegian   Archaeological  Review  36:  87-­‐104.   -­‐ 2007.   ‘Keeping   thing’s   at   arm’s   length:   a   genealogy   of   asymmetry’,   World   Archaeology  39:  579-­‐88.     63   B034290   -­‐ 2010.   In   defense   of   things:   Archaeology   and   the   ontology   of   objects.   Plymouth:  AltaMira  Press.     Olsen,  B.,  M.  Shanks,  T.  Webmoor  &  C.  Witmore,  2012.  Archaeology:  the  discipline  of   things.  Berkeley:  University  of  California  Press.     Pacheco-­‐Ruiz,  R.,  2009.  Re-­‐evaluating  Iron  Age  maritime  societies:  the  north  west   Iberian  Peninsula.  Unpublished  MA  dissertation,  Southhamptom  University.     Peña-­‐Santos,   A.,   1992a.   ‘El   primer   milenio   a.C.   en   el   área   gallega:   génesis   y   desarrollo  del  mundo  castreño  a  la  luz  de  la  arqueología’,  Complutum  2-­‐3:  372-­‐94.   -­‐ 1992b.   Castro   de   Torroso   (Mos,   Pontevedra):   Síntesis   de   las   memorias   de   excavaciones  1984-­‐1990.  Vigo:  Xunta  de  Galicia.   -­‐ 2000.  ‘Castro  de  As  Croas  (Salcedo,  Pontevedra)’,  Brigantium  12:  153-­‐160.     Peña-­‐Santos,  A.  &  J.M.  Vázquez-­‐Varela,  1996.  ‘Aspectos  de  la  génesis  y  evolución  de   la  cultura  castrexa  de  Galicia’.  Complutum  Extra  6:  255-­‐62.     Ruiz-­‐Delgado,   M.M.,   1986.   ‘La   fíbula   de   doble   resorte   en   Andalucía   (I):   Tipos   y   cronología’,  Habis  17:  491-­‐514.     Ruiz-­‐Gálvez,   M.L.,   2013.   Con   el   fenicio   en   los   talones:   Los   inicios   de   la   Edad   del   Hierro  en  la  cuenca  del  Mediterráneo.  Barcelona:  Bellaterra.     Ruiz-­‐Zapatero,   G.,   1996.   ‘Celts   and   Iberians:   Ideological   manipulations   in   Spanish   archaeology’,  in  P.  Graves-­‐Brown,  S.  Jones  &  C.  Gamble  (eds)  Cultural  identity  and   archaeology:   The   construction   of   European   communities:   179-­‐95.   London:   Routledge.     Ruiz-­‐Zapatero,   G.   &   J.R.   Álvarez-­‐Sanchís,   2015.   ‘¿Centros   de   poder?   Sociedad   y   poblamiento  en  la  Meseta  Norte  española  (ca.  800  –  400  a.C.)’,  Vegueta  Anuario  de   la  Facultad  de  Geografía  e  Historia  15:  211-­‐33.       64   B034290   Schattner,  T.G.,  J.  Suárez-­‐Otero  &  M.  Koch,  2004.  ‘Monte  do  Facho,  Donón  (O  Hío  /   Prov.   Pontevedra)   2003:   Informe   sobre   las   excavaciones   en   el   santuario   de   Berobreo’,  AEspA  77:  23-­‐71.   -­‐ 2006.   ‘Monte   do   Facho,   Donón   (O   Hío,   Prov.   Pontevedra)   2004:   Informe   sobre   las   excavaciones   en   el   santuario   de   Berobreo’,   Palaeohispanica   6:   183-­‐223.     Searle,   J.R.   1983.   Intentionality:   An   essay   in   the   philosophy   of   mind.   Cambridge:   Cambridge  University  Press.     Serres,   M.   1995.   Conversation  on  science,  culture  and  time.   Ann   Arbor:   University   of   Michigan  Press.     Shanks,  M.  2007.  ‘Symmetrical  archaeology’,  World  Archaeology  39:  589-­‐96.     Sherratt,  S.,  2010.  ‘Greeks  and  Phoenicians:  Perceptions  of  trade  and  traders  in  the   early   first   millennium   BC’,   in   A.A.   Bauer   &   A.   Agbe-­‐Davies   (eds)   Social   archaeologies   of   trade   and   exchange:   Exploring   relationships   among   people,   places   and  things:  119-­‐42.  Walnut  Creek,  California:  Left  Coast  Press.     Sherratt,  S.  &  A.  Sherratt,  1993.  ‘The  growth  of  the  Mediterranean  economy  in  the   early  first  millennium  BC’,  World  Archaeology  24:  361-­‐78.     Snodgrass,   A.M.,   2000.   The   dark   age   of   Greece.   Edinburgh:   Edinburgh   University   Press.     Tereso,   J.P.,   P.   Ramil-­‐Rego,   Y.   Álvarez-­‐González,   L.   López-­‐González   &   R.   Almeida-­‐ Da-­‐Silva,  2013.  ‘Massive  storage  in  As  Laias/O  Castelo  (Ourense,  NW  Spain)  from   the   Late   Bronze   Age/Iron   Age   transition   to   the   Roman   perio:   a   Palaeoethnobotanical  approach’,  Journal  of  Archaeological  Science    40:  3865-­‐77.     Torres-­‐Ortiz,  M.,  2002.  Tartessos  (Bibliotheca  Archaeologica  Hispana  14).  Madrid:   Real  Academia  de  la  Historia.     65   Vives-­‐Ferrándiz,   J.,   2008.   ‘Negotiating   colonial   encounters:   Hybrid   practices   and   consumption   in   eastern   Iberia   (8th-­‐6th   centuries   BC) ’,   Journal   of   Mediterranean   Archaeology  21:  241-­‐72.   Webmoor,  T.,  2007.  ‘What  about  ‘one  more  turn  after  the  social’  in  archaeological   reasoning?  Taking  things  seriously’,  World  Archaeology  39:  563-­‐78.   -­‐ 2013.   ‘The   discipline   of   things:   Matters   of   care   in   archaeology’,   Paper   presented  at  the  AAA  session  The  distress  of  things:  materiality,  agency  and   ethics,  Chicago,  IL,  20-­‐24  November  2013.   Witmore,   C.L.,   2007.   ‘Symmetrical   archaeology:   excerpts   of   a   manifesto’,   World   Archaeology  39:  546-­‐62.   66