A Land Between:Sicily’s Place in the Emergence of

Medieval Hilltop Settlements

By: Scott Kirk M.A.

University of New Mexico

T05S003 : Comparative Perspectives on Early Urbanism in Europe and Beyond

Research Questions

– What is the nature of Urban Development in Sicily ?

• Can it be accurately represented in the Middle Ages by the appearance of castles?

– What kind of roles do castles play within the community and intercommunally?

• How are they represented spatially?

Out of the Roman World and into the Medieval:Collapse or Transformation?

• Medieval landscape overlies the Roman one

– Over half of Medieval Settlements located on Roman ones

Urban Development

• Arabs enter a depopulated landscape

– Large, low-lying Roman population centers supposed to be abandoned

– Population moved to more easily defensive hilltop sites

• Contradiction

– Many Roman sites in Sicily were hilltop

• Reoccupied or Repopulated?

Incastellamento

• “The reorganization of European settlement in the ninth to eleventh centuries around hilltop fortifications, or castles, which impose feudal dominance on dependent villages…” (Boone 2009: 19; Toubert 1973; 1990).

• “The Emergence of Private fortifications from within villages in the 10th Century” (Creighton 2012: 144; Francovich and Hodges 2003).

• “The ratcheting up of lordly control over landscape and populace for reasons of social control and economic intensification” (Creighton 2012: 45; Wickham 1981: 165-6).

The Nature of Urbanism in Sicily

• Relationship to Roman Settlement linked to Trade

– Medieval Sites springing up on established trade routes

– Suggests Sicily’s economy may be wealth-based, as opposed to staple-based

Methodology

• Research Questions answered using satellite Data and GIS– 1 Arc Second Digital Elevation model of

Sicily from ASTER GDEM (A product of METI and NASA)

– Modern urban centers as proxy for medieval centers

• Database constructed for Castles

– Dates typically Earliest possible

– Represents a large sample

– Sample is unbiased

Settlements

• Positions in relationship to an urban site:

– Center of urban site, edge of urban site, adjacent to urban site, and not associated with an urban site (Rural)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

9th C 10th C 11th C 12th C 13th C 14th C 15th C 16th C

Community Relationship to the Castle

Rural Adjacent/ Outside Edge Center

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Rural Adjacent/Outside

Edge Center

Relationship in Total Population

Numbers normalized by percent

Reason for Being on the Edge of the Community

• Positions in relationship to an urban site:

– Center of urban site, edge of urban site, adjacent to urban site, and not associated with an urban site (Rural)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

9th C 10th C 11th C 12th C 13th C 14th C 15th C 16th C

Community Relationship to the Castle

Rural Adjacent/ Outside Edge Center

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Rural Adjacent/Outside

Edge Center

Relationship in Total Population

Numbers normalized by percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

9th C 10th C 11th C 12th C 13th C 14th C 15th C 16th C

Characteristic Surroundings

Defensive Position Trade Route

Seaside Other

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Total Population

Normalized by percent

Defensive Capabilities of the Natural Landscape

• Defensibility: “The degree to which a place is capable of protecting itself or withstanding attack.” (Borgstede and Mathieu 2007)

– Quantitatively, it presents a problem.

• Slope V. Prominence

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

9th C 10th C 11th C 12th C 13th C 14th C 15th C 16th C

Castle Prominence

<80m 80-159m 160-239m

240-319m 320-479m >480m

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Total Population

A Cochran’s test of linear trend was run on the total population with a clear trend

towards lower prominence (χ2=115.716; p=<.001; departure= 324.284; df=4)

Results normalized by percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

9th C 10th C 11th C 12th C 13th C 14th C 15th C 16th C

Per

cen

tage

of

Cas

tles

Average Slope Around a Castle

None (0-8°) Low (8.01-16°)

Medium (16.01-24°) High (24.01-32°)

Severe (32.01-90°)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Total Population

Normalized by percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Severe High Medium Low None

Characterization by Steepest Slope

Note that this has not been normalized

by percent

Proximity to other Castles

• In Spain castles believed to be about a days walk from one another

– This is 15 km

– Implies castles are not entities on to themselves

• Testing this theory in Sicily

– Use a 15 km buffer to represent a days walk

– 30 km buffer to show a days ride on horseback

Castle Proximity

• Results 15km ANOVA

– F value= 55.50525 - F Crit= 2.015698 -p value= 9.19E-71

• Results 30 km ANOVA

– F value= 124.1718 - F crit= 2.015698 -p value= 6.54E-144

15 K Proximity Castles Only 30 K Proximity Castles Only

Groups Count Average Variance Mode Groups Count Average Variance Mode

9th C 51 0.98 1.26 0 9th C 51 3.25 3.03 5

10th C 60 1.23 1.27 1 10th C 60 3.93 3.55 4

11th C 135 3.23 4.76 4 11th C 135 10.73 16.30 9

12th C 190 4.91 6.70 4 12th C 190 16.52 36.73 18

13th C 228 5.93 10.71 5 13th C 228 19.64 57.53 19

14th C 273 6.92 14.92 5 14th C 273 22.98 73.12 26

15th C 277 7.07 18.08 5 15th C 277 22.85 74.60 20

16th C 288 7.24 18.15 5 16th C 288 22.60 73.42 25

Conclusions

• Castles can be used as a proxy for understanding urban development in Sicily

– Likely continuity between the Roman and Medieval eras• Castles signal a reinvestment in urban development

– State owned by the 13th Century• Early on part of the reestablishment of trade

• Indicative of a wealth based economic system

Special Thanks To

• Northern Illinois University Sicilian Archaeological Field School

• University of New Mexico GPSA