Angela
Veteran member
- Messages
- 21,793
- Reaction score
- 12,339
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
I posted the papers mostly for the dating aspect. Dolfini is reacting to scholarship which has held that metal working developed gradually in Italy during the mid-third millennium, and he is saying that a local tradition of copper and aresenical copper working emerged in central Italy in the early Copper Age (3600-3300 calendar B.C.), presumably following a short but momentous intensification period during the Final Neolithic, which might go all the way back to 4351 B.C.
The comment about "shepherd warriors" from the Balkans introducing copper metallurgy is made in the context of explaining the earliest theories about metallurgy in Italy, and contrasting them with the views of Renfrew among others, that posited a blend of independent invention and cultural influence from the Balkans to explain it. Although, at the end of the paper he dismisses the possibility of independent invention on Sicily, or a transmission from either Iberia or the Aegean, and instead seems to tentatively see a source in the Balkans.
However, he doesn't say anything about whether this influence would have involved a substantial movement of peoples from the area of the Balkans.
As you know, I'm no longer so convinced that the spread of copper technology into Italy was accompanied by a necessarily large movement of people. Oetzi is the quintessential Neolithic farmer genetically even if he did have a copper ax and had arsenic in his blood. Of course, maybe the people in the Balkans whom I believe might have been the source of any such movement weren't so different yet either. Perhaps what change occurred came later in the mid third millennium with the Bronze Age proper.
The comment about "shepherd warriors" from the Balkans introducing copper metallurgy is made in the context of explaining the earliest theories about metallurgy in Italy, and contrasting them with the views of Renfrew among others, that posited a blend of independent invention and cultural influence from the Balkans to explain it. Although, at the end of the paper he dismisses the possibility of independent invention on Sicily, or a transmission from either Iberia or the Aegean, and instead seems to tentatively see a source in the Balkans.
However, he doesn't say anything about whether this influence would have involved a substantial movement of peoples from the area of the Balkans.
As you know, I'm no longer so convinced that the spread of copper technology into Italy was accompanied by a necessarily large movement of people. Oetzi is the quintessential Neolithic farmer genetically even if he did have a copper ax and had arsenic in his blood. Of course, maybe the people in the Balkans whom I believe might have been the source of any such movement weren't so different yet either. Perhaps what change occurred came later in the mid third millennium with the Bronze Age proper.