Stone upon stone, earth and sky, and then the tranquility of the countryside, the grace of nature that welcomes the towers built by man. As if marked by an archaic rhythm of drums, the Sardinian landscape was changing, being shaped according to a higher, rational order. After all, was this not the germination of the seed that Mother Earth had nurtured for over four thousand years? Vibrant Pre-Nuragic cultures had first appeared, but now a new era was blossoming. The Bronze Age marked a time of change and true revolution, the tangible sign of which was the spread of the characteristic truncated cone-shaped constructions. These nuraghes, “piles of stones” whose etymology derives from the pre-Indo-European nur1, were erected in great numbers throughout the Island, to the extent that they came to characterise the landscape itself. This was the dawn of the civilisation that built the nuraghes, hence Nuragic!
“To speak of great architecture and to speak of nuraghes is the same thing. And to speak of nuraghes and to speak of Sardinia is also, within certain limits, the same thing”.
Giovanni Lilliu, La civiltà dei Sardi: dal Paleolitico all’età dei nuraghi, 1988, translation by the author
The civilisation of the nuraghes
The Sardinian landscape, with all its vestiges, is the result of thousands of years of transformation. We see it today as if it were a photography of the present moment. But how can we keep track of what came before or after? How can we distinguish between different degrees of antiquity? This question is particularly difficult to answer in the case of the nuraghes. From their appearance around 1800 BC onwards2, we can surmise that they underwent a certain architectural evolution, enabling us to date them. However, archaeologists have only discovered two types: the protonuraghes and the tholos nuraghes.
The protonuraghes
Protonuraghes are found mainly in the central-western area of Sardinia. They are also known as archaic nuraghes3, but some authors argue that they do not date exclusively from a period prior to the classical nuraghes4. These constructions were built using simple methods, with rather crude masonry work. They reached a maximum height of ten metres and had a geometry of different shapes, such as circular, elliptical or polygonal. One or more entrances led to the interior, consisting mainly of corridors and ogival vaulted rooms. A flight of steps led to an upper terrace. Initially, the walls of the nuraghes were massive, predominating over the usable space.
The architecture of the nuraghes
The need to increase the interior space conducted, through a gradual process, to the design of a central room with an “upside-down boat” roof and, finally, to the development of tholos models5. This process led to the formation of the basic unit of the classic nuraghes, truncated cone-shaped. Replicated and arranged in different ways, it allowed for the creation of modular architecture. The Nuragic people built towers by laying rough-hewn and sometimes isodomic masonry. The basalt, granite or trachyte stones were arranged in alternating courses without binders. The size of the blocks in the wall facing decreased from the bottom to the top, with the base constructed using cyclopean masonry and smaller, wedge-shaped blocks placed at the top.
Inside the nuraghes
The tholos roof, named after the contemporary burial architecture of the Mycenaean civilisation, was the defining feature of the central circular room. This was achieved by adding progressively smaller blocks so that the rows narrowed in diameter as they rose upwards. The height of the central room consistently exceeded seven metres, as in the cases of Barumini (7.80 metres) and Torralba (7.55 metres)6. The room’s diameter could vary from four to seven metres. It could host trapezoidal or semi-elliptical niches cut into the wall.
The top part
Sometimes, a single enormous tower contained several chambers. For example, it is estimated that the Santu Antine nuraghe in Torralba was at least 20 metres high7. Instead, we do not know what the top of a nuraghe looked like, as none of them have survived intact. Based on the collapsed materials, archaeologists have proposed some possible reconstructions, the most notable feature of which is the presence of stone corbels, which may have supported a wooden balcony with a parapet. Several bronze models of nuraghes, such as the one found in Barumini, also depict a terrace protruding from corbels.
The entrances and staircases, an elaborate architecture
We have no clues to understand how the entrances to the nuraghes, usually located at ground level and sometimes preceded by a few steps, were closed, but it is likely that they were barred by wooden doors. Each opening led to a narrow corridor with a pointed slab roof. This space gradually became higher until it gave access to the central chamber of the nuraghe. A spiral staircase into the masonry led to the upper floor, and a large wall niche was located opposite it. Only in the Santu Antine nuraghe in Torralba did the corridor run circularly around the main chamber. Some small openings faced the staircase or, more rarely, the central room, as in the Losa nuraghe in Abbasanta. In some nuraghes, access to the staircase was located inside the chamber, in an elevated position. It could be reached by means of connecting stairs between wooden balconies.
Complex of nuraghes
Not long after the first nuraghes appeared, multi-tower structures began to be built, large architectural complexes with elaborate plans. One to five smaller secondary units accompanied the main tower, known as the “keep”. We can find a clear example of this at Su Nuraxi in Barumini. Here the four auxiliary towers are tangent to the keep and form a sort of bastion. Larger, multi-lobed complexes also typically featured an internal courtyard housing a water well, as seen in Torralba and Barumini. Sometimes, external walls surrounded the nuraghes complexes.
The nuraghes and the nuragic society
The study of the architecture of nuraghes allows us to explore some important aspects of Nuragic society. For instance, questions arise concerning whether they were primarily composed of warrior clans, if there were distinctions in status, how groups interacted with each other, and how the economy was organised. All of these curiosities are related to the function of the nuraghe, the centre of social organisation and the most prevalent human-made structure in Sardinia. However, despite the fact that there are about seven to eight thousand nuraghes, their actual purpose remains unclear. The repetitiveness of their architectural forms makes it difficult to understand their meaning. In fact, there is no clear correspondence between the various spaces and their specific uses. Essentially, it is impossible to deduce the function of nuraghes from structural observation alone. We must consider the broader anthropological and cultural context.
The tribal model and the chiefdom
According to Giovanni Lilliu, nuraghes were primarily fortresses built by a population organised into patriarchal warrior clans8. Therefore, the architectural development of nuragic complexes could be an expression of a hierarchical organization of the territory. Thus, smaller structures were subordinate to more elaborate ones with multiple towers.
Scholars debate whether this system reflects a tribal, egalitarian and segmentary socio-economic structure. More recently, archaeologists have proposed the chiefdom as an explanatory paradigm for Nuragic civilization9. According to this model, each clan consisted of autonomous communities settled in a limited area which shared a chief. In this case, the degree of kinship determined social rank. This not only allowed for military control of the territory, but also for the widespread exploitation of natural resources within an agro-pastoral economy. The nuraghes served as centres for the collection and distribution of community goods. They were often located in strategic positions along the functional routes of the Sardinian landscape. In certain areas, they were so widespread that they could accommodate the entire population10.
The social revolution of Nuragic civilisation
This type of social organisation lasted for around seven hundred years until the Late Bronze Age, when a radical change occurred. By the 10th century BC, during the early Iron Age, no one built nuraghes anymore11. Villages often developed around the larger complexes, which were often already in ruins. The Nuragic people built huts made of perishable materials on stone foundations, either circular or, more rarely, rectangular. At the Late Nuragic settlement of Barumini there are units consisting of five to seven small quadrangular rooms arranged around a courtyard and enclosed by a circular perimeter wall. Perhaps these dwellings housed families from the upper social classes, and they included rotundas with basins intended for worship12.
Another sign of the social changes taking place was the emergence of special “meeting huts” within the villages. These, which are larger than normal and equipped with perimeter seating, were probably used for civil assemblies of heads of families13 or for performing special public rituals. In hut 80 in Barumini, which has a seat and five niches14, a model of a tower made of calcareous marl was found. This testifies to the purely symbolic and identity-related value now attributed to nuraghes.
Therefore, at the end of the Bronze Age, Nuragic civilisation underwent a revolution that overturned the established hierarchies. The clan chief regime, which was associated with moderate social stratification, was replaced by a political-administrative model involving assemblies held in special huts by aristocratic family groups, represented by elders and priests.
Nuragic sanctuaries
Tangible evidence of this change was the appearance of sanctuaries. This was the sign of a definitive break with previous traditions and the rise of aspects linked to worship. In the new era, Nuragic society was no longer centred on the imposing figure of the nuraghe, but expressed itself through monumental temple architecture. Megaron buildings15, springs and sacred wells arose where ancient cults already existed, becoming the main centre of social gathering16. It is very difficult to reconstruct the sacred ceremonies that took place in megaron temples, so named because of their quadrangular layout, which resembled similar Mycenaean buildings in the eastern Mediterranean. On the other hand, we can clearly define Nuragic water rituals thanks to the architecture of the sanctuaries.
Well temples and sacred springs
Today, there are around fifty sacred springs and sixty wells in Sardinia, but there were originally many more17. Well temples, such as the impressive one at Santa Cristina in Paulilatino, were built to intercept underground aquifers, while sacred springs were characterised by the channelling of surface water in the countryside, as seen at Su Tempiesu in Orune. Therefore, the construction of these structures was primarily a functional necessity. During the Late Bronze Age, significant climate changes occurred, leading to increased drought. The complex architectures served to collect spring water and make it available for agriculture. Water, now a precious commodity, became an object of worship. Its abundance was invoked through propitiatory rites and collective ceremonies. To this end, the Nuragic people also sacralized and monumentalized existing architecture.
At the Santu Antine nuraghe in Torralba, the well in the north tower was modified by adding a stone barrier, which changed its structure and layout. A ceremonial vase was also placed at its bottom18. The well in Torralba thus became an expression of ritual, still within the social and political confines of the nuraghe. During this period of transition, a different type of social architecture began to emerge, blurring the distinction between the profane and the sacred, and between civil and religious matters. The development of monumental water structures was no longer solely attributable to the needs of daily life, but rather responded to specific cultual guidelines.
Cultual architecture
The case of Torralba is not an isolated one, but rather part of a general trend to repurpose existing wells and springs, which had previously been used solely for water supply. Through monumental architecture, communities expressed their identity, including in terms of economic capacity and prestige. Thus, the Nuragic people used isodomic masonry with regular blocks in some sacred structures, characterised by greater aesthetic appeal and more expensive. The use of isodomic masonry not only recalled the construction technique of the nuraghes, but also revealed the transmission of ancient knowledge among craftsmen.
The construction of sacred springs and wells evolved from a basic structure comprising a trapezoidal or rectangular atrium, a staircase for accessing the water, and a room with a tholos roof. The surrounding wall of the vestibule often featured niches for votive offerings. A small canal channelled the water from the atrium into external votive cup marks, which served to both allow water to flow away during moment of flood and ensure its availability to pilgrims. Access to the inner chamber of the well was likely restricted to priests. The faithful remained in the vestibule or on the edge of the sacred area, where they received blessings and offered gifts to the deity.
The well temple of Santa Cristina in Paulilatino
At the well temple of Santa Cristina, in Paulilatino, the vestibule had a rough masonry. The perfectly carved trapezoidal stairwell allowed access to the water, the level of which varied throughout the year. The underground chamber, two and a half metres wide, had a typical tholos roof with concentric circular blocks. The builders of Santa Cristina adhered to specific architectural principles: the north-northwest to south-southeast orientation ensures that, even today, during the equinoxes, the sun’s rays pass through the stairwell and reach the bottom of the well.
The sacred spring of Su Tempiesu in Orune
A small staircase leading to the chamber was also present when the water was accessible at ground level, suggesting that it had some ritual function. We can see an example of this at the Su Tempiesu spring in Orune, where a trapezoidal staircase with just four steps leads into the spring.
In Orune, the isodomic construction of the fountain involved skilfully shaping trachyte blocks with a hammer. These blocks, cut at an angle, formed the trapezoidal, double-pitched roof of the fountain, decorated with relief frames. Numerous votive swords atop the pediment emphasise the relationship between the symbolic value of water and weapons19.
A semicircular wall surrounded the atrium. Here a cup mark collected water flowing from the spring chamber via a stone channel. Archaeologists have found several objects in the votive cup, including swords, brooches, bracelets and small bronze statues. These were offerings made by the faithful of Orune to the water deities20. While it is not always clear what the bronze statuettes of the Nuragic people represented, it is certainly possible to recognise images of offerers, warriors, women and wild animals in them. They may also have been simulacra of transcendent beings belonging to a mythology and religion.
A more open society
In springs and sacred wells, there is an interesting diversity in the provenances of the materials. Nuragic people used sandstone, basalt, tuff and trachyte based on specific design choices rather than mere local availability. The materials were also, in fact, quarried and transported from distant geographical locations. We can only understand this free movement in light of the dissolution of rigid territorial divisions between clans and the chiefdom model. In addition to the decline of the nuraghe-fortress, it indicates an important change in Nuragic civilisation from the Late Bronze Age onwards.
The villages and the “meeting huts” now stood near sacred springs and wells, as we can see at the archaeological site of Santa Cristina in Paulilatino. The aristocratic elite used religion as a tool to achieve social consensus. The ritual at the water sanctuary served to welcome new members into the community. It also enabled the overcoming of divisions based on rank and kinship. Society became more open. By breaking down the boundaries of the impenetrable Nuragic towers, labour began to move, facilitating contact between different territories and making possible the extraordinary monumentalisation of culture that distinguished not only the water sanctuaries, but also funerary architecture and statuary. The Nuragic civilisation was ready to bear its ripest fruits, and the giants of Mont’e Prama rose in the land of Sinis.
Samuele Corrente Naso
Notes
- G. Lilliu, I Nuraghi. Torri preistoriche della Sardegna, Ilisso, 2005. ↩︎
- M. P. Zedda, Archeologia del paesaggio sardo, Cagliari, Agorà Nuragica, 2009. ↩︎
- G. Ugas, L’alba dei nuraghi, Cagliari, 2005. ↩︎
- E. Contu, L’architettura nuragica, 1981; F. Lo Schiavo, M. Perra, A. Usai, F. Campus, V. Leonelli, P. Bernardini, Sardegna: le ragioni del cambiamento nella civiltà nuragica, 2010. ↩︎
- A. Moravetti, Considerazioni sui protonuraghi. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e monumenti, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2017. ↩︎
- P. Melis, I nuraghi. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e monumenti, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2017. ↩︎
- Ibidem ↩︎
- G. Lilliu, La civiltà nuragica, Carlo Delfino editore, 1999. ↩︎
- P. Bernardini, Santuari, culti e ideologia del potere nella Sardegna nuragica della Prima età del Ferro. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e monumenti, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2017. ↩︎
- A. Depalmas, I Villaggi. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e monumenti, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2017. ↩︎
- Ibidem note 9. ↩︎
- V. Santoni, Il nuraghe Su Nuraxi di Barumini, in Guide e Studi, 2, Quartu Sant’Elena, 2001. ↩︎
- A. Taramelli, Nuove ricerche nel Santuario nuragico di Santa Vittoria di Serri, MAL, XXXIV, 1931. ↩︎
- G. Lilliu, Il nuraghe di Barumini e la stratigrafia nuragica, StS, XII-XIII, 1955. ↩︎
- M. A. Fadda, I templi a megaron della Sardegna nuragica. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e monumenti, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2017. ↩︎
- V. Santoni, I templi di età nuragica, in La Civiltà Nuragica, Eletta, Milano, 1990. ↩︎
- M. A. Fadda, L’architettura dedicato al culto dell’acqua. Nel volume: A. Moravetti, P. Melis, L. Foddai, E. Alba, La Sardegna Nuragica. Storia e materiali, Corpora delle antichità della Sardegna, Carlo Delfino editore & C., 2014. ↩︎
- G. Salis, L’acqua degli dei e i culti nella Sardegna nuragica. In: M. E. Minoja, A. Usai, G. Salis, L’isola delle torri. Giovanni Lilliu e la Sardegna nuragica, Carlo Delfino Editore, Sassari, 2015. ↩︎
- R. Cicilloni, Le armi, la guerra e la caccia. In: M. E. Minoja, A. Usai, G. Salis, L’isola delle torri. Giovanni Lilliu e la Sardegna nuragica, Carlo Delfino Editore, Sassari, 2015. ↩︎
- M. A. Fadda, Nel segno dell’acqua. Santuari e bronzi votivi della Sardegna nuragica, Carlo Delfino Editore, Sassari, 2013. ↩︎
