Le paysage de la fin du Néolithique et du Chalcolithique dans le territoire de Sorgono (province de Nuoro, Sardaigne centrale)

International audienceThe district of Sorgono (Nuoro province, Central Sardinia) is mainly known, for prehistory, thanks to theexceptional character of the standing stone monument of Biru ‘e Concas or Coa ‘e sa Mandara. The other archaeologicalremains in this territory had remained almost completely unknown. Archaeological surveys carried out recently are nowoffering an opportunity to develop a more complete description of the prehistoric occupation of this territory. This paperproposes an environmental characterization of the area associated with a synthesis of the newly acquired archaeologicaldata, especially for the fourth and the first half of the third millennium BC. These data allow an initial contextual analysisof the prehistoric occupation of this territory to be undertaken, centred on the standing stone monuments and based onthe principles of the “systemic-analytical” method (Soula, 2008, 2012c, forthcoming c).Although knowledge is still limited by problems related to the dating of the sites, it has been possible to clarify a certainamount of information and propose some potential chrono-cultural dates based on consistency. The most importantchronological deficiencies are related to the standing stone monuments for which it is possible to propose an attributionto the Ozieri culture only on the basis of their closest archaeological contexts. Although this is merely an assumption thatcan only be confirmed or invalidated by an excavation, this approach frequently demonstrates that the Sardinian insularmodel allows such hypotheses to be made.This central area of the island was probably inhabited from the fourth millennium, with the Ozieri Culture (4200/4000-3500 BC). Data permitting the documentation of a possible continuation of this occupation during the first Chalcolithic,with the Sub-Ozieri (3600-2900 BC), is lacking. This deficiency is probably due to the too recent distinction of theSub-Ozieri compared to the Ozieri (Santoni, 1991; Melis, 2000, 2009, 2011) and to the scarcity of research in this area.Notwithstanding this possible gap in our knowledge, continuity is discernible with the Chalcolithic Filigosa occupation(3000-2500 BC), identified through rare archaeological deposits and associated with some statue-menhirs. The Abealzu(2700-2400 BC) has not, for its part, been identified so far in this area. Another Chalcolithic culture, contemporary withthe Filigosa and Abealzu, is known through a few indications at Sorgono: the relationship between the Monte Claro(3000/2900-2300 BC), a clearly exogenous cultural facies, and the Filigosa, a local cultural facies, remains to be definedat Sorgono. This represents a major issue across the island as these two cultures seem both to coexist and to be mutuallyexclusive in some areas of Sardinia (Soula, 2012c, forthcoming b). The keys for understanding this cultural bipartitionof the island during the third millennium BC are to be found in particular at SorgonoThe proposed analysis is organized into two main phases. In a first stage, the territory analysed is presented from a geographicaland geological point of view. In a second stage, a synthesis of the distribution map of archaeological sites isproposed for the fourth and third millennia BC in order to conduct geostatistical analyses mainly based on standing stonemonuments and their context.Within the territorial limits identified for the Sorgono system, we distinguish the presence of full occupancy subsystems,i.e. consisting of the three main aspects of a Sardinian prehistoric human community (dwellings, burials and standingstones). The presence of bipartite subsystems and other subsystems composed of only one of these aspects can be interpretedin two ways: either we lack a certain amount of knowledge for that territory, or they are more secondary subsystemsor related to specific functions.This structural and functional analysis of the Sorgono system shows that the modes of land use are predominantly governedby constraints related to the topographical environment and to the different ecosystems. The areas preferentiallycolonized by the Ozieri groups at Sorgono are the more ‘hospitable’ ones, those more open into the landscape, with alarge variety of natural resources. This could mean that the less ’hospitable’ areas, occupied in a looser way, are relatedto control of the territory or the practice of specific activities. It is also possible that these ‘secondary’ subsystems are anextension of the nerve centre of the occupation at a time of strong regional pressure. The presence of rarer (and frequentlyunfinished) hypogeum tombs in these subsystems tends to confirm their later development in comparison with the centreof the Sorgono territorial system