IRONRODUCTIONANDIRONVOTIVEOFFERINGSATBORGOLEFERRIERE/SATRICUM
(8THTO6THCENTURTESBC)
A.J.NIJBOER
Vakgroep Archeo/vfie. Cml/il/fel/. Nether/al/ds
ABSTRACT:TheironvotiveofferingsfromVotiveDepositIatSatricum(8thto6thcenturiesBC)arepresentedin
combinationwiththeevidenceforloealironproduction.The introduetionofironproductioninCentralItalyisbriefly
diseussedinorder toestablish a frarework for thesituationencountered at Satrieum. This is supplementedby
metallographicanalysesofsomeofthe7thcenturyBCironartefactsfromthesettlementexcavations.Thepaperis
completedbyanappendixrecordingalltheironartefactsknown from
atricum.
KEYWORDS:Tron,produetion,ironvotiveofferings,Satricum,Italy,Orientalizingperiod.
I. INTRODUCTION
The proto-historic settlement at Borgo Le Ferriere.
fromnowon referredtobyitssupposedlyancientname
of Satricum. has been excavated since 1977 by the
University of Groningen (Maaskant-Kleibrink. 1987
1992).3 These excavations have revealed many data
aong whih evidenee for the production of iron
artefacts fromthemiddleof the7thcenturyBConwards
(Nijboer.inprep.a).Thisactivity atthesettlementcan
not be linked directly to output or toa variety of iron
objects since the number of iron a=efacts from the
settlementexcavationsislimited.Nevertheless.during
diggings a century ago, many iron objeets were
excavatedfromboththeTronAgenecropolisandVotive
DepositI(8thto6thcenturyBC).
The neeropolis was recentlypublished by Waar
sen burg( 1994).Unfortunatel yhedidnotdoeumentthe
iron artefacts eomprehensively due to their state of
preservation. Waarsenburg writes that "although the
Northwest Neeropolis has produeed a fair amount of
ironweaponryandutensils,mostpieceshavedeeayed
beyondreeognition"(p.432).Thecompletecontentof
Votive Deposit I, stillawaitsa final publication.
Thispaperintendstorelatetheevideneefortheiron
manipulationatthesitewiththeironartefacts actually
known,sincethiswouldgivesomeindicationsabout
therangeofartefactsproduced.
The distribution of theironobjeets in the various
contexts(votivedeposit,necropolisandsettlement:see
appendix) in a period that iron was still considered
valuable, is significant. In the settlement hardly any
metalartefactshavebeen recovered,whileintheron
Age necropolis Cu-alloy artefacts are found side by
side withironobjects though from 725 BConwards
ironweaponrywasfairlycommonatSatrieum(Waar-
89
senburg,1994: pp. 79.89, 433) .Themajorityof iron
artefactsisfoundinVotiveDeposit [ (seefigs2to8).
AmongtheobjectsinVotiveDepositIareirondaggers,
swords.knives.axes,sickles,spears/shafts,pins,bars,
nails.rings,fibulae,pendants andbracelets.Theamount
of irontools inthis depositis indicative for theprevalence
of iron tools over copper alloy lools sincehardlyany
eopper alloy toolsare recoverel. Dueto the fact that
iron tools are onumbering coppr alloy tools by at
Ieast the middle of the 7th centuy Be. it ean be
concludedthatbythatperiod iron oolshavereplaced
Cu-alloy loolsatSatrieum.
Theinroductionof ironknivesisusuallyconsidered
to be a transitional stage towards a full-fledged Iron
Agewhenirontoolshavesuperseded Cu-alloy tools.
This intermediae stageiswell documented at exca
vations of the latial necropolis of Osteria dell'Osa.
Bietti Sestieri noticed that from 770 BC onwards all
knivesweremadeofiron.Whileinthepreviousperiod
(c.900to770BC),ironknivesarerareand appearto
havebeenpartofexceptionaltombs.thisisnolonger
thecaseduringthefolIowingperiods(BiettiSestieri,
1992:p.398).
T will first brieflydiscuss the introductionof iron
production in Central Italy in order to establish a
frareworkforthesituationeneounteredatSatricum.
Thesecondtopietobepresentedistheaetual evidenee
forthemanufaetureofironartefactsatSatricum.The
smithingslagswillbediseussedinmoredetail andthis
sectionissupplementedby metaloraphic analysesof
some0of the iron artefacts from he settlement. This
topic is followed by an actual aecount of the iron
artefacts attributedtoVotiveDepositI and anepilogue.
Thepaperiscompletedbyanappendixrecordingallthe
ironartefactsfromSatricum.