Introduction

The study of the Greek western Mediterranean has sometimes been regarded as marginal to mainstream Greek history but at the same time not entirely accepted within the study of the native populations - a problem especially acute in Italy, where Magna Graecia tended to fall into a gap between the study of Greek history and that of Roman Italy. This is due in part to artificial boundaries created by the structures of Classical education, and in part to a rather Athenocentric approach to Greek history which took the mainland classical democracies as the norm and dismissed the western poleis, which had a different line of development, as an aberration. In doing so, scholarship was following the lead of Thucydides (Thuc. 6.17), who dismissed the Sicilians as being weakened by their demographic flexibility and lack of a strong bond between land and citizenship; but at the same time, this focus on fifth - and fourth-century Athens as the norm has drawn attention away from areas which provide fascinating evidence for culture-contact with the non-Greek world and for the development of alternative state identities and forms of political behaviour within the Greek communities. The Greeks of the western Mediterranean lived in a multicultural region, interacting with a wide variety of non-Greek populations. Their settlement history spanned a wide range of experiences from migration by individuals and small groups such as that which gave rise to Pithekoussai, through piecemeal settlement leading to the formation of a polis, to planned colonizations such as the foundation of Thourioi. As a result, study of these areas gives us a rich insight into the development of Greek communities and into the processes of cultural contact and exchange with their indigenous neighbours and with other immigrants such as the Phoenicians, and later the Carthaginians, in Sicily, Spain and North Africa.

The areas on which this chapter will focus are even more peripheral to mainstream Greek history than the settlements of Sicily and Magna Graecia. Both Spain and France had some Greek settlement which developed into poleis, much of it taking place later than that in southern Italy and Sicily, but both areas also had a long history of Greek contact which was not polis-based - settlement by individuals and small groups, formation of emporia, and regular economic and cultural contacts via trade networks. North Africa and the islands of the western Mediterranean are part of a complex network of economic and cultural contacts, including settlement by a number of different ethnic groups - notably Greek and Phoenician in the Classical period - which formed an intricate pattern of cultural contacts, exchanges and hybridization (van Dommelen 1997). Finally, central and northern Italy - and in particular the Adriatic coast - were regions of considerable economic, social and cultural contact with the Greek world.

The concept of colonization has become deeply problematic and there has been a vigorous debate about the nature of settlement in the West, particularly that of the early archaic period, but which is also relevant to our understanding of the region in the Classical period. Recent studies (e. g. Osborne 1998; van Dommelen 1997; De Angelis 2004) have emphasized the extent to which scholarship on ancient colonization has been refracted through the colonial experiences of western Europe in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This lent itself to a ‘top-down’ approach to the settlement process which viewed indigenous societies as less advanced but transformed by exposure to the economic and cultural benefits of a superior society, disseminated from a planned and structured city-state. The ancient sources could all too easily be used to support this model, presenting the act of settlement as a structured, state-driven event which results in the founding of a polis. Necessary components of the foundation process were identified as consultation of an oracle, appointment of an oikist or founder, the demarcation of boundaries and division of land, and the location of key ritual sites (Hdt. 5.42-8; Cicero De Divinatione 1.1.3; Diodoros 8.21.3, 8.23; Strabon 4.1.4). More recently, it has been argued that Greek communities in the Mediterranean evolved as part of a long-term process of migration and settlement rather than being founded as the result of a specific event or at a specific point in time (Osborne 1998). There are still many uncertainties about whether the concept of the polis had even crystallized in Greece itself at the time of the early colonizations (for contrasting views see Snodgrass 1994 and Malkin 1994) and new evidence from Italy and Sicily has opened up the likelihood that early settlement in the western Mediterranean was a fluid and piecemeal process. The earliest phases of Megara Hyblaia, Policoro, Metapontion (Metaponto) and other sites are much less structured than previously thought, and examination of early burials seems to point to a mixed population of Greeks and indigenous peoples which did not develop into something resembling a Greek polis until at least the end of the seventh century. Most recently, a vigorous series of counter-arguments have been put forward, defending the idea that Greek cities outside Greece were for the most part founded communities, and seeking to re-evaluate both the literary and archaeological evidence for the establishment of such communities (Malkin 2002).

This debate has fundamentally changed the way in which Greek settlement outside Greece and the Aegean is studied, and has to some extent outlawed the term ‘colonization’ in favour of more neutral terms such as ‘colonialism’ (van Dommelen 1997) or ‘settlement’ (Osborne 1998). It is, however, something which we need to consider in the context of Greek settlement in the areas and time-frames covered by this chapter. Greek contact with the western Mediterranean in the Classical period took place in a very different context from that of the eighth and seventh centuries and was driven by a complex mixture of economic and political motivations. The Phokaians, for instance, brought a well-defined sense of their own cultural identity as a polis with them to the West in the middle of the sixth century. Nevertheless, much Phokaian settlement was in small emporia of mixed ethnicity, only a few of which went on to form a fully developed polis identity, and despite the arguments for a common Phokaian identity, they fissured into several different groups with different settlement histories in various parts of the western Mediterranean. They were also notable for their ability to absorb and assimilate non-Greek populations into their community. There are areas of the western Mediterranean, however, in which Greek contact never crystallized into full-scale polis settlements even during the Classical period, or in which those which did evolve had a problematic trajectory of development. A significant amount of Greek settlement in Spain, for instance, was the result of individuals or small groups settling in indigenous communities rather than forming their own poleis (De Hoz 2004), while the Greeks at Spina and Hatria (Adria) at the head of the Adriatic remained part of ethnically mixed communities. Ankon (Ancona), despite being founded as a colony by Syracusans in 387, failed to flourish as a Greek polis, and the settlers seem to have remained as a fairly self-contained and isolated group in an otherwise Picene cultural environment (Mercando 1976: 16470; Sebastiani 2004: 22-3; Colivicchi 2000: 135-40). The question of whether we are examining a self-conscious colonization or a process of individual or group settlement is by no means clear even in the Classical era, and the Greeks of the western Mediterranean represent a wide range of different experiences of settlement and contact.

Greeks beyond Magna Graecia: Adriatic Italy and the Greek world

Greek contacts with Italy are mostly addressed in terms of the Greek cities of the south coast and Campania, but in fact this is only a part - albeit a major one - of the subject. From the Mycenaean period onwards, there had been close contacts between many other areas of Italy and the Greek world, attested by imported artefacts and cultural influences (Vagnetti 1983; Kilian 1990). During the Classical period, there was significant Greek contact with the Italic populations well beyond Magna Graecia, which took the forms of both settlement and less structured commercial and cultural contacts. These commercial contacts are particularly prominent in the Adriatic. There is evidence of Greek contact along this coast of Italy dating back to the Bronze Age, in the form of Mycenaean pottery found at many locations along the Adriatic coast, possibly as far north as Venice (Braccesi 1988), although whether it was transmitted via Greeks or local exchange networks remains open to question. In the Classical period, however, this region becomes an interesting case-study of contact and exchange. These contacts between Greeks and Italians are driven by socio-economic factors rather than large-scale colonization. During the last quarter of the sixth century, an upsurge in quantities of Greek material goods and evidence of Greek settlement on the Adriatic coast points to the development of a major trade route disseminating Greek goods - a phenomenon which continued throughout the fifth century and did not begin to tail off until c. 350. However, this took place via a number of multi-ethnic emporia and local trade networks, not via exclusively Greek settlements.

One important point which needs stressing is that the populations of Adriatic Italy are significant players in this relationship, which was driven to a large extent by demand for Greek luxury goods by the status-conscious Italic elites. Greek and Roman historians identify several different ethnic groups in this region, ranging from the Messapians, Peucetians and Daunians in what is now Puglia, through the Picenes in central Adriatic Italy, to the Veneti north of the Po delta (on the problems of self-identity among the indigenous populations, see Dench 1995; Bradley 2000; Herring 2000; Lomas 2000). Although there are significant cultural differences between these populations, there are some common features. At the beginning of the fifth century, these regions are all in the process of developing complex state societies, characterized by increasingly large and dominant central settlements which served as economic, ritual and administrative centres for their territories. Socially, these were highly stratified societies dominated by very wealthy and powerful elites, to the point where leading men are often described by Greek authors as kings (basileis) or autocrats (dynastai) (Pausanias 10.13.10; Thuc. 7.33; Strabon 6.3.4; Justin 12.2.5). Some of the sites in these areas (notably in south-east Italy, and possibly also in the Veneto) were in the process of developing urban settlement in the course of the fifth and fourth centuries, and were indisputably wealthy and complex societies dominated by elites with wide-ranging international connections, both within Italy and beyond.

Greek contact with the Adriatic is represented in two fields of activity - a modest level of permanent Greek settlement (although no exclusively Greek poleis), and copious evidence for the import of Greek goods, especially luxury goods, by the elites of these areas. Permanent settlement was restricted, and consisted principally of the growth of Greek communities at Adria, on the Po delta, in the late sixth century (Pseudo-Skylax 17.3; Pliny the Elder Naturalis Historia 3.16; Strabon 5.1.7; Dio-nysios of Halikarnassos 1.18.2-5), and the foundation of a colony at Ancona by refugees from Dionysios I in 387 (Strabon 5.4.2). These communities reflect a variety of different modes of Greek settlement and interaction with the non-Greek populations. According to our sources, Ancona was founded by Syracusans, but in fact there was a flourishing Picene community there dating back to the Bronze Age, and the Greek portion of the population seems to have remained relatively small. It also seems to have remained fairly self-contained and to have had little impact on the culture of the city. There is evidence for Greek goods found at Ancona and a series of Greek grave stelai of the late fourth to first centuries, but the culture of Ancona in the Classical period remained basically Picene, with only a few traces of Greek structures (Mercando 1976; Sebastiani 2004: 22-3; Colivicchi 2000: 135-8).

More important, from a commercial point of view, was the nearby Picene settlement of Numana. From c. 510 onwards, this site seems to have acted as an entrepOt for Greek goods and an emporion for trade between the Greeks and the Picenes. The Picene aristocrats were large-scale consumers of Greek luxury goods, and between the late sixth and mid fourth century, there is evidence of flourishing commercial and cultural contacts with Greece (Shefton 2003). Corinthian pottery was imported in significant quantities in the late sixth century, and is found in elite burials both in Numana itself and in the settlements in its hinterland (Luni 2001: 147-50). By the early fifth century, Attic wares are the most numerous pottery imports, along with Peloponnesian and Etruscan bronzes, south Italian pottery and Greek and GraecoItalic transport amphorae, which provide evidence for importation of wine (Luni 2001: 145; on the distribution of Greek pottery in Picenum, see Naso 2000: 202-7). Much of the pottery is sympotic in function. Princely burials of the sixth and fifth centuries, such as those at Numana, Filottrano and Sirolo, contained spectacular Attic red figure kraters, oinochoai and various types of drinking cup, providing a strong indication of the adoption of Greek vessels for ritual feasting by the wealthy Picene elite. The presence of Greek transport amphorae also indicates a trade in wine and olive oil (Landolfi 2001: 148-50). During the fourth century, the number of Greek imports decreases somewhat from its fifth-century peak, but Attic red figure and black glaze wares continued to be imported in significant quantities (Landolfi 2001: 147). As at Ancona, there is also the question of whether Numana had a resident Greek community. The presence of assemblages of early fifth-century grave goods similar to those found in the Kerameikos cemetery at Athens, and of Greek inscriptions on some ceramics, raises the question of whether there was a settled Greek presence in Numana, but the evidence for this is inconclusive (Landolfi 2001: 147).

Further north, there is strong evidence for Greek settlement at Adria and Spina, both major emporia in the fifth century, but these were ethnically mixed communities rather than exclusively Greek foundations. Both began to develop in the sixth century and by the later sixth century Spina was sufficiently established, and sufficiently embedded in Greek cultural networks, to build a treasury at Delphi (Strabon 5.1.7) to advertise its aspirations to membership of the wider Greek cultural community. In the fifth and fourth centuries, both expanded significantly, and in the Classical period, they played a major role as points on a major trade route up the Adriatic, and points of contact for Greeks and the populations of north-east Italy. Adria appears to have been a Greek (possibly Aiginetan) emporion, but it also had a substantial Etruscan population, and possibly also Venetic and Celtic elements (Fogolari and Scarf! 1970). Greek inscriptions on pottery, mostly of the fifth-fourth century, attest to the presence of a substantial Greek population, as does the existence of a cult of Apollo, and the large quantity of imported Attic pottery confirms Adria’s role as an important centre for trade with Greece. In the fourth century, however, Adria’s contacts with Etruria become more prominent and the commercial and cultural influence of Volterra becomes especially marked. Spina, despite references to Greek foundation myths (Pliny the Elder Naturalis Historia 3.16), its treasury at Delphi, and the copious quantities of Greek pottery found there, was principally an Etruscan settlement. The excavated areas of the city - principally the cemeteries and one area of the settlement - indicate that it was laid out in orthogonal fashion, in a similar manner to Marzabotto (Rebecchi 1998). Both burials and settlement areas produced large quantities of both Greek and Etruscan pottery and other goods, attesting to the mixture of ethnic and cultural influences.

Both Adria and Spina seem to have been essentially emporia of mixed Greek and Etruscan population and culture, and both acted as a means of diffusing Greek and Etruscan goods up the Po valley and into the Veneto. The effects can be traced in the quantities of Greek imports found at the important Venetic settlements of Este and Padova, where there is evidence of imported fifth - and fourth-century Greek pottery (Calzavara Capuis 1993), and also traces of wider Greek cultural influence. Greek inscriptions have been found at Padua, and Greek influence can arguably be detected in the styles of local pottery and sculpture (Zampieri 1994). The routes taken by them up the Adriatic can also be charted by the finds of Greek inscriptions, mostly short graffiti on pottery, in Adriatic Italy and also on the Adriatic islands and Dalmatian coast. As in other areas of central and northern Italy, as well as in France and Spain, the dynamics of Greek settlement and contact in the Classical period seem centred on emporia with mixed populations and wide networks of economic and cultural contacts, rather than on the foundation of colonies.