 So, thank you very much, Ian, and excuse me, but in this case I will read the text that I prepared just to be in time. And I tried to introduce the session and what we thought about it, what we thought to discuss and to do. You already read the abstract of the session and we will read it very, very shortly. Reading from a fast that is throughout history that we run and see what we did while we were given, society and their relations that require somehow also to be presented in a less direct and straight way than normally with the thought image of the Mediterranean. And communications was globally enhanced as soon as possible and the entire community developed networks with each other in foreign hubs or hubs. This was crucial for lips in the relation of the university, cultures getting in contact with other white businesses in different areas of the structures coming to have relations. The first intervention of age emerged when we were digging in the lead from the age period in which people would intensely move their ideas, technology, and objects to spread. Through time, the Mediterranean sea acted either on a barrier or a facility or exchanges, conduct, complete power, new warriors were continuing to trade at some height. First up, and there is the recent idea of pirates and other things going around. The traditional excitement was experienced over a constant communication processes asked for a weather for proper analysis as communication was never and even in the beginning. Local communities made decisions as to which war and objects adopted that or reject and how to react to good activity. Bordering regions were also proximate sites, sometimes showed drastically different levels of non-business contact. This agency and decision should be dependent on a variety of period processes of innovation and connectedness. Reflecting the normal situation within a shared seascape, how can we explain the activity? The aim of the session is always to measure acceptance of and resistance to outside influences within Mediterranean coastal settlement and their immediate hinterments. With an open time frame, but most of the communication has to do with the name from the age. So, we have obviously problems of sampling of the approach to a record. In phases in which they are not even distributed or known, and our knowledge is dependent on, say, their sampling problems. We face difficulties in understanding whether specific parts of a manifestation of use in a population because of tasks dependent upon the archaeological record itself. Or because it is the effective reflection of specific behavior and notion of communication. Communication may be contact, but not diffusing. This fact is pointed out by some extraordinary monuments, such as the impressive start of Altar and Montevideo in Sardinia, which could be a reflection of fireway easterly grabbing attacks, but may as well be the result of local processes without any particular complex monument. Then, as archaeologists, we may refer generally on to pottery. This is not strictly made in rena, because I will show you something about northern Italy. But as soon as the record seems safe enough, the distribution of raw materials and objects, their technology and shape or typology, have been seen as one of the most immediate markers for communication of all the intellectual specific contacts. In the typical case of Pots, such a widespread product of great and poor Islamic societies, underlying the fact is more or less explicitly the idea that emerges continuously that Pots are somehow people or that Pots bring messages from people to people. In Italy, we find there is somehow relevant situation in the connections, for instance, between southern and northern Italy during the Middle Middle Ages, when Pots related to the celibate productions of southern and central Italy were found in two specific areas of northern Italy, that is, Emilia and Algevala in 13. Apparently reflecting specific communication. They show formal affinities, but seem to have been normally produced, and therefore should not correspond to the trade of their contact. The directional contact could be connected to a movement of female persons across wide spaces, apparently associated to these Pots in the tombs of northern Italy, or to the presence of shared costumes or weakness. Anyway, the communication seems oriented in a directional way, excluding other communities present nearby. And that when we come to the Mediterranean, and to situations like during the late Bronze Age, in one of the most intense phases of communication, through the Mediterranean, the mass of data available brings consistency to the existence of differences in communication, even between close by sides. The presence of specific spots, with abundance of Mycenaean pottery, are the easiest way to describe the types of contacts, both commercial ones involving the possibility of exchange of Pots as goods and as by-product of exchange, that these containers for their traded content, or they may be, sorry, by-products of exchange, that these containers for their traded content, or they may be also collateral events of exchange, sorry, collateral events of exchange being left or gifted in order to support and facilitate trade. And more complex fact that culturally very interesting is the local production of Pots. Sorry. I wanted to go back. I'll go back. The local production, and more complex cultural interest, in fact, is the local production of Pots, typical of the other end of the Mediterranean. The interpretation of these behaviors more often the transfer of population remaining stuck to their edits or their adherence of the cultural group to the system of beliefs of the other. The first case that we invoke, is that people moving and remaining attached to their original cultural behavior for the handmade burnished ware or burnished ware in the G.N. and Eastern Mediterranean as a transfer of people from Italy or the Balkans to Greece and Crete. But it is probably assumed also for the local production of Sardinia shapes of pottery in Sicily in the single side of the continent. The second case, that is the adoption of an external tradition, is generally invoked for the start of the local production of Italomycinian pottery in southern Italy and in Sardinia mainly, but also in Tessaly, like at the Castanas and near Cessaloniki. Even if some authors have also suggested that this could reflect instead of relations from the G.N. to a marginal part of the G.N. world as part of the late Elabic third sea turmoil. The differences in interpretation reside in the quality assumed for the pottery very often, where it is a beautiful and cultural impressive manifestation it is easier to find proposals assuming a writing force from the supposed to superior tradition on to the less sophisticated. But it is also a factor of spread and the incoming tradition derived from another Catholic shows a more even distribution into the landscape being documented in a multiplicity of sites and likely assumed by multiplicity of people it is seen as an acculturation fact more than as a massive income of population. Therefore an even communication would be mediated by specific transition information whose most relevant and pervasive aspect would be the transfer of information to the worlds that is equal. Social factors driving communication the crucial point is that communication far from being a factor of expanding as a wildfire is instead more often nucleated and transferred through the social power. There are social factors of contact and border that negate communication. The existence of directional communication is the mechanism here in every narrative about movement and contact such as in the Odyssey by Homer which is a clear case for uneven communication. The opposing factors of alliance and contrast direct the consolidation of such contacts and the definition of borders or may do with constructing both bottom up and being also directed at the top bottom. The top bottom consolidation is typical of hierarchy social systems for instance with vertical chain structures driving relations through leaders acting as a different nurse and linking through peer-poly interaction. The bottom-up relation can act fairly well in a scarcely hierarchical structure as a fracture in the traditional system mainly in open social environments. A trial will ribbon some children societies with experience white bodies acting a corporate way and possibly open to contact and communication in contrast with other groups inside the society. Anyway, this question is much, much complex and we need more details and I hope that these can come also from the communication that we will have even in this state. So, what I wanted to remark is that also other models have been involved. One of the models that has been for instance involved by Annalia this is theory for that I will return to this in my communication project folding communication apparently during Lake Aladdin 3C with CC and the Oregon Islands which were instead before had an area of very intense communication with the EGM has been seen as a model of reaction and rejection for an in a traditional cultural historical frame of interpretation she's so direct she'll not contact between by saying and promoting politics inserting in the militant hubs political centers of Sicily as forward by consolidation of this policy with strong nationalization and then crisis and cultural political and the population of foundation that learned in the end of the day fracture of communication. So, these kind of processes are just some of the examples that I can see in terms of what we can really go on discussing today what I want to remark just to end is that communication hints at the existence for me, at least in videos or for Ian that we should see in the discussion of specific groups which are involved in communication and of socially defined groups furthermore the idea that communication is a widespread and homogeneous factor is more often than not an illusion and one should seek in any case for the socially relevant groups that stay behind the apparent communication the ways contact is spread may have plenty of things to say in terms of the complexity of the societies involved within that through this idea of how communication is spread and managed and organized and defined by the contact between groups we can really understand something about the complexity and the structure of the society more open and open up or closed and stop open or what else So, this was my maybe a little bit confused the interaction but I hope that can help you to understand what we did mean when we spoke about uneven communication that is we have not to assume as a general fact that communication is like a wildfire spreading all around a single point of contact So, please