arqueologia italiana

A R C H A E O L O G I A E

Periodico semestrale

DirettoreG i u s e p p e M . D e l l a F i n a

Comitato scienticoF r a n c e s c o B u r a n e l l i , M a r i a g r a z i a C e l u z z a , X a v i e r D u p r R a v e n t o s ,

F r a n o i s e G a u l t i e r , P i a G u l d a g e r B i l d e , A r c h e r M a r t i n ,N i g e l J o n a t h a n S p i v e y , A n d r e a s S t e i n e r , S t e p h a n S t e i n g r b e r

Amministrazione e abbonamentiI s t i t u t i E d i t o r i a l i e Po l i g r a f i c i I n t e r n a z i o n a l i

Casella postale n. , succursale n. , I PisaTel. + ( linee) Fax +

Abbonamenti ():Italia: Euro , (privati) Euro , (enti, brossura con edizione Online)

Euro , (enti, rilegato con edizione Online)Abroad: Euro , (Individuals) Euro , (Institutions, paperback with Online Edition)

Euro , (Institutions, hardback with Online Edition)

I pagamenti possono essere eettuati tramite versamento su c.c.p. n. o tramitecarta di credito (American Express, Visa, Eurocard, Mastercard)

La Casa Editrice garantisce la massima riservatezza dei dati forniti dagli abbonati e la possi-bilit di richiederne la rettica o la cancellazione previa comunicazione alla medesima. Leinformazioni custodite dalla Casa Editrice verranno utilizzate al solo scopo di inviare agli

abbonati nuove proposte (L. /1).

Autorizzazione: in corso di registrazioneDirettore responsabile: Fabrizio Serra

Sono rigorosamente vietati la riproduzione, la traduzione, ladattamento, anche parziale oper estratti, per qualsiasi uso e con qualsiasi mezzo eettuati, compresi la copia fotostatica,il microlm, la memorizzazione elettronica, ecc., senza la preventiva autorizzazione scrit-

ta degli Istituti Editoriali e Poligraci Internazionali, Pisa Roma.Ogni abuso sar perseguito a norma di legge.

Propriet riservata All rights reserved Copyright by

Istituti Editoriali e Poligraci Internazionali, Pisa Roma

http://www.iepi.it

i s s n -

A R C H A E O L O G I A EResearch by Foreign Missions in Italy

i

P I S A R O M A

I S T I T U T I E D I T O R I A L I E PO L I G R A F I C I I N T E R N A Z I O N A L I

M M I I I

S O M M A R I O

EditorialeG i u s e p p e M . D e l l a F i n a

Seeing the Trees and the Forest: toward a more Rened Understanding of So-cio-Cultural Systems in Classical Antiquity. The Case of Olive Oil in AncientLatiumE r i c C . D e S e n a

Lucien Bonaparte, Prince de Canino: Citations archologiquesA l e s s a n d r a C o s t a n t i n i , C h r i s t o p h H a u s m a n n

The process of Urbanization of the Etruscan Settlements from the Late Villa-novan to the Late Archaic Period (end of 8th to Beginning of 5th cent. B.C.):Presentation of a ProjectS t e p h a n S t e i n g r b e r

La gens Caelia en TusculumD i a n a G o r o s t i d i P i

Recensioni

NotiziarioA cura di A l e s s a n d r a C a r a v a l e

Rassegna bibliogracaA cura di A l e s s a n d r a C a r a v a l e

E D I T O R I A L E

Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli nella premessa alla terza edizione del volume Storici-t dellarte classica () narra un aneddoto illuminante sugli indirizzi di fondo del-larcheologia negli anni Sessanta e Settanta avvertibili ancora oggi, ben celati dietroun acritico novismo tecnologico, apparentemente tanto moderno. Ricorda che uncattedratico illustre nel recensire Roma. Il centro del potere e Roma. La ne dellarteantica dette un giudizio non lusinghiero sulle due opere con largomento ritenutodecisivo che si trattava di libri da leggere, non da studiare. Bianchi Bandinelli, daautore, interpret invece quella critica come un graditissimo elogio.

Archaeologiae accoglie saggi che, prima di tutto, vogliono essere letti. Da quiunattenzione notevole per la scrittura e uno sguardo attento su ci che accade nelmondo della cultura europea e statunitense.

La rivista pubblicata in Italia e alla tradizione storica italiana intende riallacciar-si, ma il taglio internazionale e non potrebbe essere altrimenti per una pubblica-zione che vuole dare conto delle ricerche svolte da Universit, Istituti o singoli stu-diosi stranieri sulla penisola.

Vi si aronteranno temi che andranno dalla preistoria allarcheologia industriale,anche se unattenzione maggiore verr prestata di necessit allarcheologia classi-ca, dato che le missioni straniere si occupano, per lo pi, delle fasi etrusco-italica,magnogreca e romana dellItalia.

In Archaeologiae troveranno poi spazio articoli di metodologia e di storia deglistudi: si cercher, da un lato, di entrare nel vivace dibattito in corso soprattutto nelmondo anglosassone e, dallaltro, di recuperare, storicizzandole, indagini sinorainedite. Non mancheranno neppure interventi sulla politica di tutela dei beni cultu-rali in Europa. Ogni numero ospiter inoltre un notiziario con le informazioni es-senziali sulle campagne di scavo in corso e una rassegna bibliograca. Le lingue uf-ciali saranno litaliano, linglese, il francese, il tedesco e lo spagnolo.

Il periodico avr anche unedizione Online.Dietro uniniziativa editoriale di taglio scientico vi sempre (o, almeno, do-

vrebbe esservi) un progetto culturale, nel nostro caso vi quello ambizioso di crea-re unoccasione dincontro stabile fra ricercatori di nazionalit diversa e di portarealla ribalta una nuova generazione di archeologi. Riusciremo nel nostro intento? Larisposta andr cercata nelle pagine di ogni numero della rivista.

G i u s e p p e M . D e l l a F i n a

S E E I N G T H E T R E E S A N D T H E F O R E S T : T O W A R D AM O R E R E F I N E D U N D E R S T A N D I N G O F S O C I O -

C U L T U R A L S Y S T E M S I N C L A S S I C A L A N T I Q U I T Y .T H E C A S E O F O L I V E O I L I N A N C I E N T L A T I U M

E r i c C . D e S e n aAmerican Academy in Rome

I n t r o d u c t i o n

Large-scale, long-distance exchange has often been viewed as one of the primaryindicators of a prosperous economy in the Roman world and is the crux of a pair ofinter-related issues: rst, whether or not the Roman Empire represented an enor-mous conglomeration of interdependent markets whereby all regions within theempire had access to the same variety of raw materials, commodities and nishedproducts; and second, whether or not Italy suered a major economic/agriculturalcrisis around AD . While the so-called primitivist and modernist schools havebattled over the rst dilemma for decades, both sides generally agree upon thenotion of an agricultural crisis. According to a growing number of scholars, how-ever, the crisis is alleviated when more than circumstantial evidence is studied.Many of these scholars adhere to a moderate view of the Roman supply systemwhereby raw materials, agricultural commodities and nished products were regu-larly and abundantly shipped over long distances in order to furnish the needs ofelite citizens, the city of Rome and other metropoleis and the military, while mostof the population living within the boundaries of the empire relied largely upon re-gional supplies.

Despite the position of scholars, the primary sources of information have beenancient literature, epigraphic evidence, the remains of elite villas and, increasingly,the ceramic record of consumption centers. Traditionally, there has been a re-liance upon certain bodies of evidence that reect the background of researchers:e.g., ancient historians relying largely upon textual information with some men-tion to ceramics or vice versa. The main problem is (and this point has been raisedmore than once in recent years) that no single source of information is complete:the ancient writers generally reect the values and behavior of the elite membersof society, while the archaeological record contains only those material objectsthat have survived the test of time. For example, a far greater number of largemasonry-built villas are known in Italy than farmsteads constructed in wood andthatch, despite the fact that the majority of the rural population probably resided in

. Among the primitivists are F i n l e y and J o n g m a n ; among the modernists are C a -r a n d i n i and T e m i n .

. R o s t o v t z e f f : ; F i n l e y ; C a r a n d i n i ; G i a r d i n a and S c h i a v o n e .. P u r c e l l : ; T c h e r n i a : -; Pa t t e r s o n .. G a r n s e y and S a l l e r : -.. B i n f o r d :-; Pu r c e l l : .

e r i c c . d e s e n a

very humble dwellings. Perhaps one of the challenges for current and future gen-erations of classical archaeologists is to account for what might be termed thevanished or the invisible evidence in an attempt to achieve a more realistic vi-sion of the socio-cultural trends and patterns of antiquity.

The aim of this paper is to explore a procedure according to which we can attaina more accurate picture of socio-cultural systems in classical antiquity whereby aseries of questions are developed based upon a cursory study of a body of evidence,followed by the creation of a research strategy that draws upon, but is not limitedto the original body of evidence. These notions were developed by anthropologi-cal archaeologists based primarily in the United States and Britain, beginning in thes-s; however, they have not been widely adopted by classical scholars, whotend to interpret or read bodies of archaeological evidence in order to obtainknowledge. In the case at hand, the questions surround the importance of region-ally produced agricultural goods in Rome and Ostia, while a pottery assemblagefrom the DAI/AAR excavations at Ostia Antica serves as the basis of the discus-sion This paper begins with a consideration of depositional processes and howthe ceramic record of consumption centers relates to patterns of supply. This is fol-lowed by a brief discussion of the methods involved in studying ceramic assem-blages as a means to understand questions of exchange and supply. Finally, a casestudy is presented that considers the role that agricultural commodities producedin the hinterland of Rome and Ostia played in these large urban centers based inlarge part upon the ceramic record of Ostia Antica, but with a consideration of lit-erary sources, archaeological evidence from villas and analogy with early modernand modern trends. For the sake of brevity, I will focus upon the production andsupply of olive oil in the rst half of the second century AD.

T h e o r y : P o t t e r y a n d B e h a v i o r

One does not have to delve very far into theoretical literature to appreciate thatwhat is contained in the archaeological record is but a remnant of the physical enti-ties that were somehow involved in the life of men sometime in the past. But whatthese remnants signify and how they should be studied is the topic of considerabledebate, particularly among North American and British archaeologists of the pre-historic and historical periods of the New World. We are faced with the questionof how representative archaeological features and nds (including ecofacts) are ofpast events and trends. For some, the archaeological record is an accurate reec-tion of past individual and collective actions. For other scholars this conceptcould not be farther from the truth. At the risk of seeming overly compromising,I suggest that features and objects are accurate representations of themselves, but

. Anthropological archaeologists have been dealing with this problem for more than years, inpart through the application of ethnographic analogy and the development and testing of models.

. B i n f o r d : , : -.. Recently H e i n z e l m a n n ; M a r t i n et al. .. On the origins of ethnographic analogy by archaeologists, see A s c h e r . Ethnographic ana-

logy has not been widely applied in classical archaeology. Some examples by classical scholars areP e a c o c k ; P e a ; B a r k e r .

. Dyson (: ) in describing a tenet of social archaeology.. S c h i f f e r ; P e r o n i : .

s e e i n g t h e t r e e s a n d t h e f o r e s t

that the farther we move from a physical object to a broader cultural interpreta-tion, the reection grows more and more vague, like the shadow produced bymoving a candle away from an object. This is not to say that we cannot approach arelatively accurate vision of the past, only that in the end, we are not presentingfact, but learned impressions.

The two main amphora-borne commodities wine and olive oil were pro-duced in dierent parts of the Mediterranean, including Italy, and were brought topoints of distribution (e.g., markets) in order to meet the quotidian requirementsof people. In short, these foodstus were transported in large containers to thepoints of distribution, often following temporary deposition in storage facilities,where the contents were sold/distributed either directly to consumers or to mid-dlemen, such as inn proprietors who, in turn, sold/distributed to customers.While most scholars only discuss ceramic amphorae with regard to the transporta-tion of large volumes of liquid and semi-liquid commodities from the place of pro-duction to the marketplace, there is fairly ample evidence from art historical andliterary sources for the use of wooden barrels (cupae) and large, cart-mounted ani-mal skins (cullei) for overland transportation. The latter were presumably re-uti-lized by the transporting agent; however, the ceramic amphorae were often dis-carded once they were emptied, which is best exemplied by Monte Testaccio inRome. Some proportion of amphorae were re-utilized for further transport orstorage; however, based upon the relatively low proportion of residual pottery ob-served in ceramic assemblages from urban sites in Roman Italy, I would guess thatless than % of amphorae were reutilized for any substantial amount of time.

It appears that in the case of direct sale to consumers, the contents of the ceram-ic, wooden or skin containers were transferred into smaller, portable receptacles,which were carried away. This is clearly demonstrated in the evidence from theHouse of Zosimus in Pompeii (insula III..) where the remnants of garum werediscovered in small bowls in the distributional point (counter) of the shop. Garumwas produced in Pompeii, including the House of the Umbricii (insula I..) andsold in small packages in shops like the one owned by Zosimus. Also from Pompeii(insula VI..) is a wall painting of a vendor distributing wine from a large culleusinto small containers. On the other hand, business owners and possibly elite con-sumers may have purchased bulk quantities of wine, oil, sh sauce, etc. In casessuch as these, either the commodities were brought to the business or residenceand transferred into large, pre-existing storage facilities, such as dolia, or, in thecase of amphorae, the amphorae were brought and left at the house or business for

. For a recent summary of the production and distribution of wine and olive oil in Rome, see P e - a : -.

. While markets in antiquity have been discussed on several occasions from a theoretical and hi-storical point of view (e.g., de L i g t ; Fr a y n ), there are no studies that this author is aware ofthat recreate the behavior and actions involved in procuring quotidian resources in the ancient Ro-man city; for the problem of distribution vs. sale, see M a t t i n g l y : -.

. W h i t e : -; P u r c e l l : -, ; T c h e r n i a : -; P e a : .. R o d r g u e z ; B l z q u e z and R o d r g u e z , .. Currently, Pea is studying aspects of this question for an upcoming monograph.. A n d r e a u ; the claim that Zosimus was a potter (d e V o s and d e V o s : ) is unfoun-

ded.. J a s h e m s k i : , g. ; T c h e r n i a : g. .


consumption or redistribution. A fairly clear example of a retailer who stored largequantities of wine and olive oil in a portion of his home/business is at the House ofAnnius in Ostia (insula III.xiv.). The second century AD proprietor of thishouse/business installed a number of dolia in one of the large spaces of the build-ing, while an inscription, omnia felici[a] Anni (all of Annius aairs go well), sug-gests that the commodities stored in the house were for sale rather then for privateuse. Naturally, the choices of consumers were based upon the availability of mer-chandise, personal tastes and economic means.

The process of discarding domestic waste in the Roman world has not been ade-quately studied. From what we know, refuse was deposited both within areas ofhouseholds, within cities, or immediately outside city boundaries. Thus, inand around the large urban centers of the Roman world we encounter several di-erent kinds of archaeological deposits: primary deposits representing localized orcollective household, industrial or commercial refuse, as well as secondary de-posits represented by the disturbance or relocation of primary deposits. Each ofthese scenarios occurred because of very specic human behavior and, thus, eachkind of deposit must be treated in dierent ways. For example, single localizedrefuse deposits such as those in the House of Amarantus in Pompeii may be stud-ied to elucidate the nature of activities conducted at a very specic location withina city and may not be representative of all households, industries or commercialactivities. Secondary deposits, which in urban centers are frequently representedby construction lls, generally contain a rich blend of materials used domestically,commercially and industrially in a city. The majority of archaeological deposits inurban centers are either primary, collective deposits (domestic, commercial andindustrial refuse) or secondary deposits generally related to building activities.These are the two most useful kinds of deposits for studies of supply/consumertrends because both kinds of deposits represent what might be termed involun-tary samples.

Actions such as discarding refuse, while planned, are generally performed un-consciously while we are aware of what is being discarded and, in broad terms,where the item(s) will be discarded, we are generally not concerned about wherein a refuse deposit the item will come to rest and in what state (intact/broken) theitem will come to rest in the deposit; nor are we concerned whether or not theitem (or portions of the item) remains in the original deposit. Similarly, when arti-

. P a v o l i n i : -, : -.. Ibid.. For example, C i a r a l d i and R i c h a r d s o n : ; F u l f o r d .. E t a n i and S a k a i : .. Only under extreme circumstances, would refuse have been moved a signicant from its place

of origin. The best known example of this is recorded in Tacitus (Ann. XV.) when the great re of AD in Rome caused tremendous damage. Nero carted building debris and other refuse down to themouth of the Tiber River on grain barges. Ancient garbage must have been considerably less volumi-nous than that generated today and most of what was discarded was biodegradable, or at least compa-tible with the environment (e.g., food scraps, ceramics, stone).

. Commercial refers to storage or distributional centers, such as the river port area of Rome nearMonte Testaccio; industrial refers to manufactories, such as pottery workshops or tanneries.

. Among the many urban sites excavated in recent years, Carthage (e.g., Fulford and Peacock), Ostia (Ostia I-IV), and Rome (e.g., P e a ) present clear examples.

. Clarke (: ) calls this structured chaos.


fact-laden earth is removed for construction, agriculture, funerary purposes, weare generally not concerned with the excavated natural and articial material. If,for example, an intact object is broken in the unearthing process and some portionof it is moved from the original location, workers would presumably not notice orcare. These examples are given to suggest that deposition, disturbance of depositsand redeposition are carried out with specic goals in mind (e.g. removing trashfrom a household, digging a foundation trench, creating a terrace) that have littleor no regard for the objects being discarded, disturbed or redeposited these ac-tions are involuntary.

Under ideal circumstances, archaeologists would base the study of supply/con-sumer trends of a given urban center upon a sequence of primary, collectivehousehold and commercial refuse, which would indicate the provenience and pro-portions of goods consumed, while the question of residuality would be virtuallynon-existent because we would have an undisturbed sequence of gradual deposi-tion. The stratigraphic record of many urban sites, however, is composed of sec-ondary layers, which are more complicated to study, but also oer useful informa-tion for supply/consumer trends. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to deter-mine the derivation of the material in secondary deposits; however, when we real-ize that the secondary deposits excavated at other locations in the city are compa-rable qualitatively and proportionately, we are in a good position to assume thatthe secondary deposit(s) in question are representative of citywide trends and notsite-specic ones.

To reiterate, no matter how thorough a study such as the one at hand is, itshould be clear that the statistical information presented does not represent con-crete facts, but only estimates of ancient trends because we are dealing with a verypartial view of the overall material record of a given site. The life-assemblage ofpast cultures was far richer than what we generally see in the archaeologicalrecord. Despite the relatively unique preservation of foodstus, parchment andother normally perishable goods at sites such as Pompeii or in desert regions, likeEgypt, archaeologists will never achieve a full reconstruction of past lifeways andbehavior. Therefore, it is crucial to attempt to bridge elements of the archaeolog-ical record with other sources of information, such as epigraphy and ancient liter-ary sources, visual culture and ethnographic/historical analogy.

M e t h o d s : e x t r a c t i n g m e a n i n g f u l d a t a f r o m p o t s h e r d s

The s and s witnessed a paradigm shift in the study of Roman pottery thatintroduced a wave of research aimed at elucidating aspects of the ancient economythrough the examination of ceramic evidence unearthed at urban sites in Italy andother areas throughout the Mediterranean basin. Inspired by concepts developedwithin Processual and Postprocessual schools of archaeological thought and cer-tain political ideologies, particularly Marxism, a small number of Italian and Britishresearchers attempted to transcend functionalist statements that type X was manu-factured at site Y and was distributed within a particular geographic area. Potterywas viewed as a potential indicator of broad trends in the Roman economy, espe-cially patterns of trade and consumption, as well as the socio-economic organiza-

. P e a c o c k ; F u l f o r d and P e a c o c k : -; P a n e l l a ; T o m b e r .


tion of certain industries. The New Archeology called for adherence to science-like procedures, more rigorous forms of analysis and, above all, the positing ofbroader and deeper questions. For example, we have known for a long time thatArezzo was an important center of production for Italian sigillata, but it was notuntil the s that we learned about the specic organization of the ceramic in-dustry in Arezzo, involving master craftsmen who may have supervised dozens ofslaves and freedmen who, in turn, frequently set up satellite workshops.

Contributions by ceramologists often complemented historically based studiesof the ancient economy, but critics began to point out that some research present-ed skewed reconstructions of ancient trends due to a reliance on partial evidence aswell as on imprecise methods and terminology. In other words, pottery does notrepresent the whole Roman economic system, because it was only a small compo-nent of the economy just as the distribution of soft drink containers does littlejustice in explaining the intricacies of the world economy of the late th/early st

century AD. In order to remedy these shortcomings, a number of pottery special-ists interested in socio-economic questions began reconsidering their approaches,bodies of evidence and the implications of their results and denitions. This has in-volved merging the ceramic evidence with other kinds of archaeological indicatorsas well as historical evidence and the realization that the interpretation of a pot-tery assemblage from a single site or region is not indicative of the Roman econo-my as a whole, but is simply another piece in the massive and complex puzzle.

In order to discuss patterns of exchange and supply based upon the ceramic recordof consumption centers, it is necessary to reect upon the methods employed inthe study of pottery assemblages: provenience-based classication and quantica-tion of the pottery with particular attention to the problems of the size of the sam-ple group, the most meaningful techniques for assessing the amount of pottery,and residuality. These subjects have been discussed at length on numerous occa-sions; thus, I will only elaborate on particular issues.

The determination of the more or less specic provenience of the ceramics in agiven assemblage is of prime importance. While many pottery typologies areform-based, it should be borne in mind that forms are individuals which are tem-porally, but not necessarily geographically, signicant. Alternatively, ceramicpastes are geographically signicant and are, in this case, considered to be the prin-cipal criterion for the creation of classes. Vessel shapes, surface treatment and dec-oration, when present, are considered to be secondary attributes; thus, Dressel -amphorae are not considered as a class in their own right, but as a component ofthe formal repertoire of amphorae manufactured in many parts of the western

. R e n f r e w .. B i n f o r d ; C l a r k e : -.. Recently, F l l e .. P u r c e l l ; T c h e r n i a : -; P e a : .. For example, P e a c o c k ; P e a ; Al l e n and F u l f o r d .. Many studies assumed that pottery was an indicator of more general economic trends; most

pottery specialists now admit that ceramics played a minor role in the ancient economy, but that wecan still learn a lot about specic aspects of the Roman economy, based upon the ceramic record andassociated evidence (recently, A l l e n and F u l f o r d : ).

. Of particular importance for the study of excavated pottery is P e a c o c k : -.


Mediterranean, including Campania, Tuscany/Umbria, Tarraconensis, Baetica,etc. Fabrics are characterized based upon optical evaluation of the clay matrix,range and frequency of inclusions, hardness, etc. and specic forms are identied.In most instances, ceramologists rely upon existing fabric and form typologies,while it becomes necessary to develop new typologies for poorly understood class-es of pottery, such as common ware. Finally, some percentage of a given potteryassemblage will be left unclassied or unidentied because either we do notknow the provenience of a given type or because some ceramic pastes are verysimilar and it becomes dicult to distinguish between formless body sherds.

Despite the fact that archaeologists have been quantifying pottery in one way oranother for more than a century, it has only been in the last decade that scholarshave begun a process of re-evaluating the various techniques available to deter-mine which method(s) produce the most accurate reection of the past. There isno clear answer, but much depends upon the types of questions we are trying toanswer.

An important issue pertaining to quantication that has not been adequately ad-dressed is: how large does an assemblage have to be in order to be consideredvalid? In terms of the volume of a study assemblage, the size of a sample, the ruleof thumb is clearly the larger the better, although the statistics based upon a smallassemblage is preferred to a complete absence of numerical information. Many sta-tistically based studies have been based upon fairly small groups of material (up toor slightly more than sherds) Others have considered far more substantial as-semblages involving thousands or tens of thousands of sherds. One of the di-culties in this respect is the fact that many archaeological contexts are quite small often containing fewer than sherds and weighing less than kg. The solution israther simple we can combine the numerical information recorded from multiplecontexts that are comparable in date. This procedure also lends itself towardgreater randomness in a sample group. In order to explore the question of samplesize, a series of tables are presented here, based upon the DAI/AAR pottery assem-blage, that illustrates how percentages change with the addition of each contextthat forms the cumulative assemblage (Tables -). Data has been drawn from sev-en stratigraphic units from these excavations; the proportions represent the aver-age percentage of the seven methods of counting listed below (p. ).

There is clearly variation among the individual contexts, although there arefew gures that are wildly beyond the average: in Table South Spanish am-phorae in US and SU, Baetican amphorae in US , Tarraconensis, Gallicand Black sand amphorae in general, African amphora in SU, Italian amphoraein SU and SU, Rhodian, Cretan and Schne Mau amphorae appearin such small quantities that their erratic occurrence is understandable. Alterna-tively, the cumulative data is quite encouraging; we note that by the time thenumerical information for three or four contexts has been merged (ca. -sherds), the percentages assume greater stability and can be considered very re-

. Recently, O r t o n ; O r t o n et al. : -, A l l e n and F u l f o r d : -; C a r r e r a sM o n f o r t : -.

. Recently, A l l e n and F u l f o r d : -.. For example, P a n e l l a , A n s e l m i n o et al. .. Fulford and Peacock , Fentress and Perkins ; Pea .


liable. The most signicant diculties lie with the uncommon varieties of pot-tery.

One of the most important choices that pottery specialists have to make regardsthe method(s) of quantication used. If simple documentation of an assemblageis the goal, standard methods of counting and weighing sherds are probably su-cient. But, as mentioned above, more and more researchers are using the numeri-cal information gathered from pottery studies in order to discuss broader historicalquestions, particularly aspects of trade in the Mediterranean and, in this case, theproportion of pottery classes must by compared synchronically and diachronicallyin the most accurate manner possible. While the most commonly employed meth-ods have been described on a number of occasions, it is important to weigh the be-nets and decits of each of them here. But rather than argue in favor of the bestmethod, I will suggest that since no method is perfect and since resulting percent-ages are not concrete and only oer a rough estimate of ancient trends, a suite ofcounting methods should be employed and presented together. This author gener-ally presents counts and weights of rims, counts and weights of all sherds, estimat-ed vessel counts (minimum and maximum values) and estimated vessel equiva-lents as well as an average value. In this way, authors and readers can judge the rel-evance of the data and what to consider as most valid (Table ).

Bridging the notions of dating and quantication is the problem of residuality. Itwas stated above that the study of pottery can be used to reveal information aboutthe ancient economy when pottery from stratigraphic excavations is properly clas-sied, dated and quantied. But due to a variety of reasons, some percentage ofpottery assemblages are not contemporary with the date of deposits formation perhaps by a matter of years, or in some cases by a matter of centuries (i.e. is resid-ual). The later the date in a sites sequence, the greater the chance for residualitysince rubbish accumulates. The reasons for the occurrence of residual pottery inarchaeological contexts are several and include both human and environmentalagents, but as a recent article suggests, archaeologists who are interested in con-ducting quantitative studies of pottery assemblages should deal with residual pot-tery in the same manner without thought to agency. Because studies such as theone at hand rely upon the most precise statistics as possible, residual pottery needsto be accounted for in order to achieve valid results. A number of pottery special-ists have proposed ways in which residual pottery can be treated in order to under-stand the remaining contemporary assemblage in a more rened manner.Some of the proposed techniques are quite elaborate and involve mathematicalcalculations that attempt to determine the age of sherds at the time of depositionor the percentage of residuality in a given assemblage. Others are more subjec-tive and involve the removal of obviously residual sherds from statistical analyses.Clearly some percentage of the sample group will still be residual; however, thefact that we are dealing with such broad chronological horizons may help to quell

. O r t o n ; O r t o n et al. : -; A l l e n and F u l f o r d : -.. C r u m m y and T e r r y : -.. E v a n s and M i l l e t : .. C r u m m y and T e r r y : ; Pe a : -.. C r u m m y and T e r r y ; Ev a n s and M i l l e t ; M a r t i n ; P e a , : .. For example, E v a n s and M i l l e t .


the problem of residuality. And, like hard sciences, we must accept that there willbe some background noise.

B e y o n d P o t t e r y : t h e C a s e o f O l i v e o i l i n R o m e a n d O s t i a

The study of regional economic systems in the Roman world is not new; howev-er, for a combination of reasons, including a heavy reliance upon ceramic data andexcavations of large slave-run villas, scholars have tended to emphasize the globalaspect of Roman production and trade. We are better informed about the territo-ry surrounding Rome than other regions of Italy and the Roman world thanks tomention in the ancient sources. Thus we know from writers such as Varro, Col-umella and Martial where the better qualities of wine, apples, nuts and other goodsare to be found and which to avoid. In this context, we know from Strabo (Ge-ograa V..) that the town of Setia (Sezze) produced an excellent and costly wine,while the wine from Signino (Segni) was a cure for lazy intestines. There is alsofairly ample archaeological evidence of Roman-period villas, presumed villas andpresumed farmsteads in Latium, although no systematic review of this evidencehas been conducted in order to discuss spatial and temporal patterns. In terms ofmodern scholarship, John Evans lists many vegetables and fruits that would havebeen cultivated in central Italy. Andrea Carandini also discussed vegetable gar-dens and arbors in Romes suburban belt. Nicholas Purcell discusses wine pro-duction in Romes extended hinterland stressing the dierence between vintagesaimed at rened tastes and those aimed at producing enormous quantities for themasses. Neville Morleys seminal study on the hinterland of Rome is certainly themost thorough, developing a series of models for the systems of production anddistribution of agricultural goods designed to ll Romes collective stomach.

The immediate hinterland of Rome/Ostia has been dened more then once,based upon any number of factors such as geographical features, lines of communi-cation and transport costs (Figure ). I would dene the territory much as Morleyand others do, based upon geographic features, lines of communication and travel-related time requirements. This includes a stretch of coastline roughly from Cas-trum Novum to Antium and an area roughly miles around Rome as far north asthe ager Capenas and the Sabine Hills and including the ager Veientanus, Tivoli,Praeneste and the Alban Hills. To this should be added a narrow strip of land upthe Tiber River to the level of Falerii Novii and Forum Novum. This catchmentarea consists of about square miles and was cultivated in antiquity as it still istoday. Transporters of produce could have reached Rome and Ostia by some com-bination of land, river and sea routes within about three days. The question is: canwe achieve a closer reconstruction of production, distribution and consumer sys-tems that is both qualitative and quantitative?

. C r u m m y and T e r r y : -; P e a : .. For example, B a r n i s h ; J o n g m a n ; B a r k e r ; M o r l e y .. See note .. E v a n s .. C a r a n d i n i .. P u r c e l l .. M o r l e y .


During the early imperial period, Rome had a population of roughly ,-,, people, with estimates ranging as low as , and as high as well overone million. At the same time, Ostia and Portus had a combined population ofabout ,. For the sake of this experiment, I will assume a total urban popula-tion of one million. Estimates of the population of Romes hinterland are far morespeculative, but we can imagine something on the order of ,. There is nohard evidence for the population of this limited territory. Many scholars suggestthat the free population of Roman Italy in the st century AD was around . mil-lion and that the total population was around . million. Subtracting ,,for Rome and another ,, for the greater Bay of Naples region, if we assumethat the remaining population was spread evenly over the ca. , square milesof peninsular Italy, we come to a gure of people per square mile, or , peo-ple in the square mile region of Romes immediately hinterland. Given theimportance of Rome, however, I will assume that population density would havebeen at least three or four times this average gure.

If we posit, like many other scholars, that Romans consumed an average of liters of olive oil per year, then the annual requirement for the urban areas ofRome and Ostia/Portus was about ,, liters. We must recall that olive oilwas not only an alimentary good, but was used for lighting, hygiene and as the baseof unguents. Statistical data gathered through analytical studies of pottery assem-blages excavated at Rome and Ostia suggest that during the early second centuryAD, roughly one-third of olive oil consumed in these urban centers derived fromNorth Africa, while the remainder derived from portions of Spain. Recent workon the ceramic assemblage from Ostia Antica excavated by the Deutsches Archol-ogisches Institut and the American Academy in Rome produced similar results(Figure ). Such numerical gures have often been taken to be indicative of sup-ply patterns of olive oil and wine, but are more appropriately dened proportionsof wine- and olive oil-bearing amphorae since there are several other factors toconsider before we can establish the proportion of wine and oil. More recently, ar-chaeologists, such as Pea, have been calling for amphora capacities to be consid-ered in calculations of supply. When we consider amphora capacity in light of theOstia, we arrive to a slightly dierent picture. But even with these more rened re-sults, we have still not provided an overall reconstruction of the supply of olive oilto Ostia, but the proportion of olive oil transported to Ostia in amphorae. Nev-ertheless, based upon these gures, we can work out the maximum volume of im-ported oil (Figure ).

Based upon what we know from the ancient sources and the archaeological

. For a full discussion, see M o r l e y : -.. P a c k e r ; S t o r e y .. H o p k i n s : -; J o n g m a n : ; M o r l e y : -.. For example, Pa n e l l a .. Oil amphorae have been extracted from the overall amphora data presented in table ; garum

amphorae have been excluded when possible, but in many cases, it is impossible to distinguish bet-ween oil and garum amphorae; thus, the latter are probably embedded in the data presented here. P e - a (: ) chooses to consider oil/sh sauce amphorae together.

. P e a : -.. Rodrguez (: ) estimated that ,, liters of olive oil consumed in Rome each year

was imported; Mattingly (: ) states that of this about % was from Tripolitania.


record, some portion of the olive oil consumed in Rome and Ostia must have de-rived from central Italy, including the immediate hinterland, dened above. Butcentral Italian oil is generally not discussed because it was likely transported in cu-pae and cullei that do not survive in the archaeological record. Modern-day Latiumhosts more than , hectares of olive groves that produce an average of,, liters of virgin oil per year, with a ten-year low of about ,, and aten-year high of about ,,. Average, poor and bumper yields are normal inmodern olive growing regions and was the same in antiquity. Statistical informa-tion regarding olive producing nations in the Mediterranean indicate that in thes, there were generally poor yields, bumper yields and average yields.Mattingly has shown that yields were the same in antiquity as they are in the pre-sent day (about kg of oil from kg of olives) modern oil presses speed up theprocess, additional oil is not squeezed out. The territory dened in this study isshort of one-half the size of modern Latium, but consists of much of the existingand ancient olive country; therefore, I will assume that the hinterland that I havedened produced half the volume of what is produced in all of modern-dayLatium: an average of million liters of oil.

Given this hypothesis, we can work out the following scheme (Table ). Herewe see the hypothetical yields in average, poor and bumper years with the numberof people that the yields could satisfy in one year. Assuming that the producersof this oil (for convenience the , rural folk) kept enough oil for themselves(,, liters), the surplus oil for the urban market would have been ,,liters in an average year, enough oil to satisfy the annual needs of , peoplein Rome and Ostia or the needs of ,, urbanites for about weeks. Witha bumper yield the surplus was ,, liters, which would have satised %of urban needs (, people for year or ,, people for nearly weeks).Poor yields presented obvious diculties. If the producers kept their share ofthe yield, just half a million liters of oil would have been available for Romeand Ostia; thus nearly all oil consumed in these urban areas had to have beenimported from extra regional sources. There is an alternative, however. Producersof olive oil in Romes immediate hinterland may have stockpiled oil from bumperyears in provision of poor yields and by tightening their own belts may still havebeen able to provide up to ,, liters of oil to the Urbs and its port city despitepoor yields. Assuming that ,, liters was an annual target, this still leftsomewhat more than % of the urban supply to satisfy. While not going intogreat detail, the remainder of Latium not falling with Romes immediate hin-terland, and the neighboring regions of Etruria and north Campania would haveproduced a combined average of ,, liters of oil per year. Despite noknown oil amphorae from these regions, it seems logical to assume that someportion of surplus production derived from these territories was destined forRome/Ostia. A modest and convenient estimate may have been ,, liters.

. Source: Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT).. Source: International Olive Oil Council Economics Division.. M a t t i n g l y : .. Source: Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT).. Oil was presumably transported in cullei and/or cupae or in amphorae that are generally thou-

ght to have contained wine, such as mid-imperial Campanian amphorae (P e a : -).


The remainder was imported from the provinces. In the end, we might thinkof the following supply (Figure ).

C o n c l u s i o n s

The case study presented here concerns a very narrow component of the produc-tion-distribution-consumer system in Roman Italy and is more of a methodologicalexercise than an attempt to elucidate a socio-cultural problem. From the latterpoint of view, this paper demonstrates that while a signicant portion of the staplegoods consumed in Rome and Ostia were shipped from several of the Romanprovinces, a signicant proportion of these goods were, in fact, homegrown.While this notion is not new, this is the rst attempt to quantify agricultural pro-duction in Romes hinterland. Rome was exceptional and while the regional econ-omy of Rome/Ostia was important, it was little more than a drop in the bucket interms of overall supply. This was not the case in most other regions of Italy and theRoman empire archaeological evidence points increasingly toward a reliance up-on regional supplies, even in territories lying in relatively close proximity to theUrbs.

Methodologically, this paper calls for greater reection over what our sources ofinformation do and do not mean and integration with other sources of informa-tion, including elements of ancient society that are not preserved in the archaeo-logical or literary records. This study need not have ceased with estimates of howmuch oil consumed in Rome was from various regions and could easily shift intobroader themes, such as a projection of how many ships were necessary to importoil from the provinces, based upon the number of amphorae needed to ship mil-lion liters of oil. The scale of production could easily lead into questions of thechane opratoire of regional agricultural production and the distribution of agricul-tural commodities. Finally, with the tremendous potential of information technol-ogy to facilitate us in endeavors to merge geographic, ecological, archaeological,architectural and other kinds of information, we should be able to develop morecomplex types of socio-cultural models that approach ancient realities closer thanwhat has been possible in the past.

A b b r e v i a t i o n s

Ostia I-IV = StMisc (); (); (); ().

B i b l i o g r a p h y

A l l e n and F u l f o r d : A l l e n , J.R.L. and F u l f o r d M.G., The Distributionof South-East Dorset Black Burnished Category I Pottery in South-WestBritain, Britannia (), pp. -.. This scheme does not take the quality of oil into account. While we are aware that dierent gra-

des of oil existed, scholars are still unable to determine if, say, North Africa oil was poorer than Baeti-can oil.

. For a paucity of imported amphorae and domestic pottery in the Liri Valley, see W i g h t m a nand H a y e s ; for the upper Valle Latina, see D e S e n a .

. The phrase seeing the trees and the forest is a derivative of a well-known proverb meaningthat we should pay attention to both individuals and collectives. We must also recall that forests arehighly complex ecosystems that are composed not only of trees, but also of soil, rocks, animals, insec-ts, plants, etc. If we are to truly understand the forest as a system, we must delve beyond the obvious. Iwish to thank Michael MacKinnon for commenting on an early draft of this paper and Janne Ikheimofor digitizing the map. I am very grateful to the National Geographic Society for a generous grant (#-) toward my dissertation research, upon which this article is based.


A n d r e a u : A n d r e a u , J., Pompi: enchres, foires et marchs, BSAF ,pp. -.

A n s e l m i n o et al. : A n s e l m i n o , L., C o l e t t i, C.M . , F e r r a n t i n i , M . L . ,P a n e l l a , C ., Ostia: Terme del Nuotatore, in A . G i a r d i n a (ed.), Societ Ro-mana e Impero Tardoantico III. Le merci, gli insediamenti, Bari , pp. -.

A s c h e r : A s c h e r, R., Analogy in Archaeological Interpretation, South-western Journal of Anthropology (), pp. -.

B a r k e r : B a r k e r, G., A Mediterranean Valley. Landscape Archaeology and AnnalesHistory in the Biferno Valley, Leicester University Press: London and New York.

B a r n i s h : B a r n i s h, S.J.B., Pigs, Plebeians and Potentes: Romes EconomicHinterland, c. - AD, PBSR (), pp. -.

B i n f o r d : B i n f o r d , L.R., Archaeological Perspectives, in S.R . B i n f o r d andL.R. B i n f o r d (eds.) New Perspectives in Archaeology, Chicago , pp. -.

B i n f o r d : B i n f o r d, L.R., Interassemblage Variability: the Mousterian andthe Functionalist Argument, in C. R e n f r e w (ed.) The Explanation of CultureChange: Models in Prehistory, London , pp. -.

B i n f o r d : B i n f o r d , L.R., Where do Research Questions come from?American Antiquity . (), pp. -.

B l z q u e z and R e m e s a l : B l z q u e z M a r t n e z, J.M. and J. R e m e s a l R o -d r g u e z, Estudios sobre el Monte Testaccio (Roma) I, Universitat de Barcelona:Col.lectip Instrumenta ().

B l z q u e z and R e m e s a l : B l z q u e z M a r t n e z, J.M. and J . R e m e s a l R o -d r g u e z, Estudios sobre el Monte Testaccio (Roma) II, Universitat de Barcelona:Col.lectip Instrumenta ().

C a r a n d i n i : C a r a n d i n i , A. Roman imperialistica: un caso di sviluppo pre-capitalistico, in J.H D A r m s and E.C . K o p f f (eds.) The Seaborne Commerce of An-cient Rome: Studies in Archaeology and History, MAAR (), pp. -.

C a r a n d i n i : Ca r a n d i n i, A., Hortensia: orti e frutteti intorno a Roma, in C .P a v o l i n i (ed.), Misurare la Terra: centuriazione e coloni nel mondo romano. Citt,agricoltura, commercio: materiali da Roma e dal suburbio, Modena , pp. -.

C a r r e r a s : C a r r e r a s M o n f o r t, C., Economa de la Britannia romana: la im-portacipn de alimentos, Instrumenta (Barcelona: ).

C i a r a l d i and R i c h a r d s o n : C i a r a l d i , M. and J. R i c h a r d s o n, Food, Ritualand Rubbish in the Making of Pompeii, TRAC (): -.

C l a r k e : C l a r k e , D.L., Analytical Archaeology, London .C r u m m y and T e r r y : C r u m m y, P. and R . T e r r y, Seriation Problems in Ur-

ban Archaeology, in M . M i l l e t (ed.) Pottery and the Archaeologist, University ofLondon Occasional Paper (), pp. -.

d e L i g t : d e L i g t, Fairs and Markets in the Roman Empire, Amsterdam .D e S e n a , E r i c C. (), Catalogo dei manufatti ceramici, in S . P r a c c h i a , L .

P e t r a s s i , F . M . C i f a r e l l i (eds.), Elementi Minori di un Paesaggio Archeologico:Una Lettura dellAlta Valle Latina (Rome), pp. -.

d e V o s and d e V o s : d e V o s, A. and M. d e V o s, Pompei, Ercolano e Stabia,Guide Archeologiche Laterza, Bari .

D y s o n : D y s o n , S.L., From New to New Age Archaeology: ArchaeologicalTheory and Classical Archaeology - A s Perspective, AJA (), pp.-.


E t a n i and S a k a i : Et a n i, H. and S. S a k a i, Preliminary Reports: Archaeologi-cal Investigation at Porta Capua, Pompeii - Fifth Season, Opuscula PompeianaVIII (Kyoto), pp. -.

E v a n s : Ev a n s , J o h n K., Plebs Rustica. The Peasantry of Classical Italy I andII, AJAH (), pp. -, -.

E v a n s and M i l l e t : E v a n s , J. and M . M i l l e t t, Residuality Revisited,OJA . (), pp. -.

F e n t r e s s and P e r k i n s : F e n t r e s s , E. and P. P e r k i n s, Counting African redslip ware, LAfrica romana (), pp. -.

F i n l e y : F i n l e y, M.I., The Ancient Economy, University of California Press ,updated edition .

F r a y n : F r a y n , J., Markets and Fairs in Roman Italy, Oxford .F u l f o r d : F u l f o r d , M.G., Theoretical aspects of ceramic assemblage for-

mation: examples from assemblages from Carthage, Pompeii and Sabratha, pa-per presented at the First International Conference on Late Roman Coarse Wares,Cooking Wares and Amphorae in the Mediterranean: Archaeology and Archaeometry(Barcelona, March ).

F u l f o r d and P e a c o c k : F u l f o r d , M i c h a e l G. and P e a c o c k , D a v i d P.S .(eds.), Excavations at Carthage: The British Mission Volume I, . The Avenue du Presi-dent Habib Bourguiba, Salammbo: The Pottery and other Ceramic Objects from the Site,University of Sheeld .

F l l e : F l l e, G., The Internal Organization of the Arretine Terra SigillataIndustry: Problems of Evidence and Interpretation, JRS (), pp. -.

G a r n s e y and S a l l e r : G a r n s e y , P. and R. S a l l e r, The Roman Empire. Econo-my, Society and Culture, London .

G i a r d i n a and S c h i a v o n e : G i a r d i n a, A. and A. S c h i a v o n e, Societ romana eproduzione schiavistica, Rome-Bari .

H e i n z e l m a n n : H e i n z e l m a n n , M., Ostia. Urbanistisches Forschungspro-jekt in den unausgegrabenen Bereichen des Stadtgebietes. Vorbericht zur .Grabungskampagne , MittRm (), pp. -.

H o p k i n s : H o p k i n s , K., Economic growth and towns in classical antiquity,in P. A b r a m s and E. W r i g l e y (eds.) Towns in Society, Cambridge , pp.-.

J a s h e m s k i : J a s h e m s k i , W., The Gardens of Pompeii, Herculaneum and the VillasDestroyed by Vesuvius, New Rochelle .

J o n g m a n : J o n g m a n , W.M., The Economy and Society of Pompeii, Dutch Mono-graphs on Ancient History and Archaeology, Amsterdam .

M a r t i n : M a r t i n, A., La formula di South per il calcolo della data media del-la ceramica applicata a contesti romani, in F . G u i d o b a l d i , C . P a v o l i n i , P .P e r g o l a (eds.) I materiali residui nello scavo archeologico, CEFR (), pp.-.

M a r t i n et al. : M a r t i n , A . , M . H e i n z e l m a n n , E . C . D e S e n a , M . G . G r a n i -n o C e c e r e, The urbanistic project on the previously unexcavated areas of Os-tia (DAI-AAR -), MAAR , () pp. -.

M a t t i n g l y : M a t t i n g l y , D.J., Maximum Figures and Maximizing Strategiesof Oil Production? Further Thoughts on the Processing Capacity of Roman OlivePresses, in M.-C . A m o u r e t t i and J.P . B r u n (eds.) La production du vin et dehuile en Mediterrane, cole Franaise dAthens, Bulletine de CorrespondanceHellenique, Supplement XXVI (), pp. -.


M a t t i n g l y : M a t t i n g l y , D.J., Tripolitania, London .M a t t i n g l y : M a t t i n g l y, D.J., First Fruit? The Olive in the Roman World,

in G. S h i p l e y and J. S a l m o n (eds.) Human Landscapes in Classical Antiquity. Envi-ronment and Culture, London , pp. -.

M o r l e y : M o r l e y , N. Metropolis and Hinterland: the City of Rome and the ItalianEconomy BC - AD , Cambridge University Press .

O r t o n : O r t o n, C., How Many Pots Make Five? Archaeometry .(), pp. -.

O r t o n et al. : O r t o n , C . , P . T y e r s a n d A . V i n c e, Pottery in Archaeology,Cambridge University Press .

P a c k e r : P a c k e r , J . E., Housing and population in imperial Ostia and Rome,JRS , pp. -.

P a n e l l a : P a n e l l a , C., I commerci di Roma e di Ostia in et imperiale (seco-li I-III): le derrate alimentari, in C . P a v o l i n i (ed.), Misurare la Terra: centuri-azione e coloni nel mondo romano. Citt, agricoltura, commercio: materiali da Roma edal suburbio, Modena , pp. -.

P a t t e r s o n : P a t t e r s o n , J.R., Crisis? What crisis? Rural Change and UrbanDevelopment in Imperial Appennine Italy, PBSR (), pp. -.

P a v o l i n i : P a v o l i n i, C., Ostia, Guide Archeologiche Laterza, Rome-Bari.

P a v o l i n i : P a v o l i n i, C., La vita quotidiana di Ostia Antica, Laterza, Rome-Bari.

P e a c o c k : P e a c o c k, D.P.S. (ed.), Pottery and Early Commerce. Characterizationand Trade in Roman and Later Ceramics, Academic Press, London and New York.

P e a c o c k : P e a c o c k , D.P.S., Pottery in the Ancient World: an EthnoarchaeologicalApproach, Longman, London and New York .

P e a : P e a, J.T., Raw Material Use among Nucleated industry Potters: theCase of Vasanello, Italy, Archaeomaterials (), pp. -.

P e a : P e a, J.T., Aspects of residuality in the Palatine East pottery assem-blage, in F. G u i d o b a l d i , C . P a v o l i n i , P . P e r g o l a (eds.) I materiali residui nelloscavo archeologico, CEFR (), pp. -.

P e a : P e a , J.T., The Urban Economy during the Early Dominate: Pottery Evidencefrom the Palatine Hill, BAR-IS ().

P e r o n i : P e r o n i , R., Introduzione alla Protostoria Italiana, Laterza, Bari .P u r c e l l : P u r c e l l, N. Wine and Wealth in Ancient Italy, JRS (),

pp. -.R e n f r e w : R e n f r e w, C., Introduction: Production and Exchange in Early

State Societies, the Evidence of Pottery, in D.P.S. P e a c o c k (ed.), Pottery andEarly Commerce. Characterization and Trade in Roman and Later Ceramics, AcademicPress, London and New York , pp. -.

R o d r g u e z : R o d r g u e z A l m e i d a, E., Il Monte Testaccio, Rome ().R o s t o v t z e f f : R o s t o v t z e f f , M.I., Social and Economic History of the Roman

Empire, Oxford .S c h i f f e r : S c h i f f e r , M.B., Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, Salt

Lake City .S t o r e y : S t o r e y , G.R., The population of ancient Rome, Antiquity

(), pp. -.


T c h e r n i a : T c h e r n i a , A., Le Vin de lItalie Romaine, Bibliothque des colesfranaises dAthnes et de Rome ().

T e m i n : T e m i n , P. A Market Economy in the Early Roman Empire, JRS (), pp. -.

T o m b e r : T o m b e r , R., Pottery from the - excavations, in J.H u m p h r e y (ed.) The Circus and a Byzantine Cenetery at Carthage I, Ann Arbor1988, pp. -.

W h i t e : Wh i t e, K.D., Farm Equipment of the Roman World, Cambridge Univer-sity Press .

W i g h t m a n and H a y e s : W i g h t m a n, E.M. and J.W . H a y e s, Society, Econo-my and the Environment, in J.W . H a y e s and I.P . M a r t i n i (eds.) Archaeologicalsurvey in the lower Liri Valley, Central Italy: under the direction of Edith Mary Wight-man, BAR-IS (), pp. -.


T a b l e 1. Comparing percentages of individual contexts (DAIAAR Ostia excavations).

Provenience 1040 1041 1050 1060 2635 2869

South Spanish 19.0% 38.0% 20.1% 15.6% 52.9% 12.2%Baetican 3.1% 6.0% 5.2% 5.5% 3.7% 17.4%Lusitanian 4.3% 3.6% 3.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2.3%Tarraconensis 0.0% 0.0% 10.1% 13.8% 0.7% 3.5%Narbonensis 30.1% 4.8% 26.9% 26.1% 0.0% 4.1%Africa Proconsularis 23.9% 10.4% 22.0% 17.9% 17.6% 21.5%West central Italian 19.0% 34.8% 10.4% 15.1% 17.6% 29.7%PhlegreanBay of Naples 0.0% 1.6% 1.5% 5.0% 16.2% 8.7%Rhodian 0.0% 0.8% 0.4% 0.5% 0.0% 0.6%Cretan 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Schne Mau 35 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Total n. 163 250 268 218 136 172

T a b l e 2. Percentages of cumulative assemblage (DAIAAR Ostia excavations).

Provenience 1040 +1041 +1050 +1060 +2635 +2869

South Spanish 19.0% 30.5% 26.4% 23.8% 27.6% 25.4%Baetican 3.1% 4.8% 5.0% 5.1% 4.9% 6.7%Lusitanian 4.3% 3.9% 3.5% 2.8% 2.4% 2.4%Tarraconensis 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 6.3% 5.6% 5.3%Narbonensis 30.1% 14.8% 19.5% 21.1% 18.4% 16.3%Africa Proconsularis 23.9% 15.7% 18.2% 18.1% 16.9% 17.6%West central Italian 19.0% 28.6% 21.4% 19.9% 19.6% 21.0%PhlegreanBay of Naples 0.0% 1.0% 1.2% 2.1% 4.0% 4.6%Rhodian 0.0% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4%Cretan 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%Schne Mau 35 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%Cumulative n. 163 413 681 899 1035 1207


T a b l e 3. Comparison of the dierent methods of quantication (all amphorae - oil, garumand wine).

Provenience RN(n=112)

RW(21.4 kg)

TN(n=5682)

TW(376.7 kg)

MIN(n=93)

MAX(n=282)

EVE(25.08)

AVG

WC Italy 24.1% 16.7% 23.2% 15.6% 22.6% 21.6% 19.9% 20.5%PhlegNaples 1.8% 2.3% 0.7% 1.5% 2.2% 1.8% 4.5% 2.1%South Italy 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.6% 0.0% 3.2% 0.0% 0.6%Narbonensis 9.8% 7.1% 6.7% 6.7% 9.7% 10.0% 10.6% 8.6%Tarraconensis 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 2.4% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 0.8%South Spain 17.0% 20.8% 14.7% 21.6% 18.3% 19.8% 22.5% 19.2%Baetica 17.0% 32.9% 6.8% 25.6% 18.3% 13.1% 19.1% 18.2%Lusitania 1.8% 0.8% 1.2% 1.7% 2.2% 2.1% 2.2% 1.7%Africa Procon 14.3% 14.3% 22.1% 18.1% 14.0% 9.6% 13.0% 15.1%Tripolitania 2.7% 1.2% 0.1% 0.2% 1.1% 0.4% 1.3% 1.3%N. Africa? 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 0.3%Aegean 2.7% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 3.3% 1.8% 2.8% 1.8%Anatolia 6.3% 0.4% 2.6% 0.7% 4.3% 3.5% 2.0% 2.8%Egypt? 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.1%Unknown 2.7% 0.8% 20.1% 5.0% 3.3% 9.6% 1.9% 6.0%Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

* RN = number of rims; RW = weight of rims; TN = total number of sherds; TW = totalweight of sherds; MIN = minimum number of individuals; MAX = maximum number of in-dividuals; EVE = estimated vessel equivalents; WC Italy = Tuscany, Umbria and northernCampania; PhlegNaples = Phlegrean Fields and Bay of Naples

T a b l e 4. Model for regional oil production and urban distribution.

Year Average Low Bumper

Yield (liters) 12,000,000 8,000,000 16,000,000Producers share 7,500,000 7,500,000 7,500,000Surplus for urbanites 4,500,000 500,000 8,500,000Percent of urban supply 18.0% 2.0% 34.0%Additional annual requirement 20,500,000 24,500,000 16,500,000


F i g . . Romes Immediate Hinterland (drawing by E.C. De Sena and J.P. Ikheimo).


F i g . . Raw vs. adjusted proportions of oil amphorae (AD -).


F i g . . Maximum volume of imported oil (liters) based upon DAI/AAR amphora data (AD-).


F i g . . Proposed volume of olive oil (liters) considering regional production (AD -).

L U C I E N B O N A P A R T E , P R I N C E D E C A N I N O :C I T A T I O N S A R C H O L O G I Q U E S

A l e s s a n d r a C o s t a n t i n iC h r i s t o p h H a u s m a n n

In questo taccuino Luciano Bonaparte ha raccolto, in forma di appunti, una serie dicitazioni archeologiche copiate dagli autori classici e dai testi antiquari a lui coevi odi poco precedenti. La passione del principe per lantichit e la letteratura, unita-mente alle capacit oratorie che ne avevano decretato il successo in politica, erauno dei tratti salienti della sua personalit. Non avendo avuto la possibilit di segui-re studi regolari, egli fu costretto a crearsi una cultura da autodidatta e proprio cistimol in lui la volont di sapere, linteresse per i libri e la curiosit per ogni formadi cultura, sia umanistica che scientica.

Al tempo del suo esilio in Inghilterra Luciano, con laiuto dellerudito padreMaurizio da Brescia, aveva iniziato la stesura del poema epico Carlomagno o la Chie-sa liberata. Si tratt di un lavoro di ampio respiro nel quale il principe, pur non es-sendo dotato di particolari intuizioni artistiche, rivel di avere acquisito un sor-prendente patrimonio di erudizione letteraria, mitologica e storica. Nello scrivereil poema, inoltre, egli tenne sempre bene a mente la sua posizione politica di esulevolontario nello Stato Ponticio e, soprattutto, di fedele amico del papa: tutta lo-pera, infatti, una celebrazione della chiesa di Roma della quale re Carlo sarebbestato il valoroso paladino. Il papa Pio VII, a cui Luciano aveva dedicato il poema,per ricambiare il sincero e leale attaccamento verso la Santa Sede, gli confer il tito-lo di Principe romano, assegnandogli i possedimenti di Canino. Non bisogna di-menticare che Luciano, come tutti i Bonaparte, era un passionale e, soprattutto, unpolitico. Se la ragione di stato e la diplomazia lo richiedevano, come era accadutonel caso del Carlomagno, anche lerudizione poteva divenire uno strumento al ser-vizio della politica. Questo atteggiamento potrebbe spiegare, almeno in parte, loschieramento incondizionato di Luciano con i sostenitori della teoria loitalica,quando la grande quantit dei vasi emersi dagli scavi di Canino riapr il dibattitosullorigine della ceramica attica gurata. Il principe si inser attivamente nella dot-ta diatriba e no allultimo, ricollegandosi alle posizioni delletruscheria settecen-tesca e negando ostinatamente levidenza, continu ad aermare con tutto il fer-vore e leloquenza di cui era capace che i vasi di Canino erano etruschi e non gre-

. Nel Carlomagno Luciano aveva contrapposto, alludendo chiaramente a Napoleone, la guradelleroe carolingio, difensore della Chiesa, a quella del moderno comandante dei franchi, che, al con-trario, non la rispettava. Napoleone, quando si trovava in esilio a SantElena, rammentava con ranco-re che il fratello aveva consacrato ben . versi a delle assurdit prostituendo cos il proprio talen-to. A . P i e t r o m a r c h i, Luciano Bonaparte principe romano, Modena , p. ; G.M. D e l l a F i n a, Lu-ciano Bonaparte archeologo: nuove prospettive, in Vulci, Cerveteri, Tarquinia. Atti del XXIII Congresso di StudidellIstituto Nazionale di Studi Etruschi e Italici, in corso di stampa.

a l e s s a n d r a c o s t a n t i n i c h r i s t o p h h a u s m a n n

ci. Non bisogna dimenticare che ladoratore dellItalia e del popolo italiano, acui lo legavano vincoli aettivi e di gratitudine, dopo gli eventi rivoluzionari e lav-ventura napoleonica aveva trovato rifugio proprio in quella Maremma toscana,che un tempo era stata culla della civilt etrusca. Risulta pertanto comprensibilecome, una volta messa a fuoco lindole romantica e per certi versi ambigua del per-sonaggio, ragioni politiche e personali, oltre, naturalmente, alla mancanza di unreale approccio metodologico scientico, avessero spinto Luciano a sostenere conorgoglio nazionalistico che tutto ci che si trovava in Italia risaliva alla civilt etru-sca. In una tale direzione vanno le Citazioni archeologiche raccolte in questo tac-cuino, che rappresentano una selezione mirata delle fonti letterarie e antiquariepi idonee a sostenere e consolidare le posizioni loitaliche. Gli appunti sono statitrascritti nellarco di un anno, dal al , epoca in cui il principe e sua moglieAlexandrine erano impegnati nelle fortunate campagne di scavo in Maremma. Al-larcheologia militante, condotta con criteri scientici assai moderni per lepoca, ilprincipe, sollecitato dalla grande quantit dei rinvenimenti, aanc lo studio del-larcheologia e delle fonti antiquarie nel tentativo di classicare la ceramica e gli al-tri reperti che emergevano quotidianamente dalle necropoli vulcenti. In queglianni il dibattito sullorigine dei vasi gurati si fece particolarmente acceso e Lucia-no scese apertamente in campo contro i sostenitori della teoria loellenica tra cuiEduard Gerhard, segretario dellIstituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica, con cui ilprincipe inizi una dotta e amichevole corrispondenza.

Come risulta molto chiaramente da queste Citations archologiques, partico-larmente gradita a Luciano era la lettura dei volumi dellHistoire de lAcadmie Roya-le des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres avec les Mmoires de Littrature tirs des Registres decette Acadmie (Paris ,/ ,/). Lui stesso sottolinea in una letteraad Eduard Gerhard limportanza di queste memorie, nelle quali trovava risposta aquasi tutte le sue domande: En attendant que nous puissions proter des lumires desarchologues modernes, nous cherchons nous instruire dans le recueil de lacadmie desinscriptions, o nous trouvons dans chaque volume lclaircissement de quelques dicul-ts. In particolare lo interessavano quei saggi lologici in cui i membri dellAcca-demia raccordavano la storia antica e la mitologia greca alle Sacre Scritture. lostesso approccio che guidava labate volterrano Mario Guarnacci nel suo libro Ori-gini italiche o siano Memorie istorico-etrusche, uscito a Roma in tre volumi fra il eil , da cui Luciano prese parecchi spunti. Sia le Memorie dellAccademia france-se che lopera di Guarnacci non erano altro che unulteriore riabilitazione del mitoetrusco, come era stato gi denito da Annio da Viterbo nel Quattrocento e svi-luppato con toni pi politici prima da Guillaume Postel e, successivamente, daThomas Dempster. Come noto, Annio da Viterbo (-) fu il primo erudito afar interagire le Sacre Scritture con la storia greco-romana per riportare la genealo-gia degli etruschi alle origini del mondo. Con lausilio di brani scelti, o addirittura

. A . C o s t a n t i n i , Eduard Gerhard e Luciano Bonaparte, in Luciano Bonaparte, le sue collezionidarte, le sue residenze a Roma, nel Lazio, in Italia (-), a cura di M. Natoli, Roma , pp.-.

. A. P i e t r o m a r c h i, op. cit., p. .. F . B u r a n e l l i, Gli scavi a Vulci (-) di Luciano e Alexandrine Bonaparte Principi di Ca-

nino, in Luciano Bonaparte , cit., pp. -.. A . C o s t a n t i n i, art. cit.. Lettera del . . a E. Gerhard, pubblicata in BdI. , p. .

l u c i e n b o n a p a r t e , p r i n c e d e c a n i n o

inventati, di autori antichi e di reperti archeologici di ambigua provenienza ricolle-g la civilt italica ad unorigine antichissima che risaliva al diluvio universale in di-retta liazione da No. Questa visione della storia degli Etruschi strettamente col-legata alle origini del mondo trov ulteriore sviluppo nel De Etruriae regionis origini-bus institutis religione et moribus del losofo e orientalista francese Guillaume Postel,pubblicata nel a Firenze e dedicata al duca Cosimo de Medici.

Nel suo sistema losoco, in cui gli Etruschi costituivano unimportante anellodi congiunzione tra paganesimo e cristianesimo, si teorizzava la derivazione dellalingua italiana da quella parlata da No e dai suoi discendenti, tramite letrusco.Cos perno la storia moderna e contemporanea vennero collegate alle origini delmondo attraverso la comune discendenza da No, il che dava soprattutto alla To-scana medicea un primato di potere storico, essendo diretta erede degli Etruschi.Nella temperie culturale della Toscana dei Medici si assiste allintensicarsi deglistudi storiograci o pseudo-storiograci per individuare una continuit storica fragli Etruschi e la potente famiglia. Fu Cosimo II de Medici a commissionare nel pri-mo Seicento una monograa sulla storia, sui costumi e sulle citt scomparse del-lantica Etruria allo scozzese Thomas Dempster (-), che scrisse fra il eil il De Etruria regali. Il Dempster considerava gli Etruschi non solo un popoloautoctono della Toscana, ma, sulla scia di Annio da Viterbo, i primi abitanti dellI-talia collegati alle Sacre Scritture tramite Giano, il corrispettivo italico del biblicoNo. Ci che interessava gli autori del Sei e Settecento, e attraverso questi ancheLuciano, non era tanto laggancio degli Etruschi antichi ai Medici, quanto, piutto-sto, la nuova erudizione che impose il primordio dello sviluppo culturale europeoallItalia. Nei secoli XVII e XVIII erano molti gli studiosi che pretendevano per lacultura europea una diretta discendenza da No; Luciano cita in particolare tre au-tori di questepoca, il Bochart, il Vossius e il Padre Carmeli.

Qualcosa, comunque, era cambiato rispetto alle teorie iniziali: i sotterfugi delleiscrizioni e lambiguit della gura di Annio da Viterbo erano ormai riconosciuti,perno dallo stesso Luciano che constatava: ...il nous semble que ceux qui imprimentde gros volumes sur des monuments incertains lvent comme les enfants des chteauxde cartes: cest ainsi que le fameux Annius de Viterbe a laborieusement construit sondice sur des bases imaginaires. Con il Dempster spar anche lidea della linguacomune che si basava sulla parlata di No e attribuiva alletrusco come allebraicounorigine aramaica. Secondo lo studioso scozzese la lingua etrusca era tale chenon possibile comprenderne nemmeno una sillaba. Si pu osservare tuttavia

. G. C i p r i a n i , Il mito etrusco nel rinascimento orentino, Firenze , p. .. Sugli studi antiquari del si rimanda a M. C r i s t o f a n i, La scoperta degli Etruschi, Roma .. Samuelis Bocharti Geographia Sacra, seu Phaleg et Canaan. Editio quarta prioribus multo cor-

rectior, & splendidior procuravit Petrus De Villemandy (Lugduni Batavorum, Trajecti ad Rhenum).

. Gerardi Ioannis Vossii De Theologia Gentili, et Physiologia Christiana; sive De Origine ac Pro-gressu Idolatriae, ad veterum gesta, ac rerum naturam, reductae; deque naturae mirandis, quibus ho-mo adducitur ad Deum, liber I, et II. (Amsterdam ).

. Padre Carmeli, Storia dei Varj Costumi Sacri e Profani. Dagli Antichi no a noi Pervenuti. Divi-sa in due Tomi del Padre Carmeli. Edizione Seconda, riveduta ed accresciuta di alcune dissertazionioltre le due appartenenti alla venuta del Messia. vols. (Venezia ).

. Musum Etrusque, p. .


a proposito delle lettere che esse sono diverse sia da quelle latine, sia da quellegreche.

La selezione delle fonti operata da Luciano nelle Citations archologiques atte-sta la sua adesione, in questi anni -, allidea del mito etrusco nella formaerudita di Dempster e Guarnacci, e per gli agganci della storia antica alle SacreScritture agli articoli dei membri dellAccademia francese. Supportato da questeletture, egli divenne un accanito difensore della linea lo-italica: et nos dcouvertescomme nos lectures nous conrment chaque instant dans lopinion que lantique Etruriena rien reu de la Grce et lui a beaucoup donn. Ma non bastava. Gi nel , in se-guito alla pubblicazione del Catalogo di scelte antichit etrusche, Luciano entr inaperta polemica contro gli ultragreci, come egli li chiamava: Et parmi nous lavieille Italie, mre trop longtems mconnue de loccident, entrouvre son sein pour revendi-quer la civilisation primitive de lEurope: elle appele un autre Champollion pour interprterses hiroglyphes, et certes cette gloire immortelle nest pas rserve ceux dont la vue ne s-tend pas au del dAthnes, qui sobstinent prendre la fable pour la vrit, qui dtournentleurs regards ddaigneux du grand livre, et qui ne pouvant pas expliquer avec leur diction-naire hellne les inscriptions trusque osent blasphmer contre la science des anciens temsen accusant dtre mal crites les inscriptions quils ne savent pas lire.

Agli inizi dell lidea del primato etrusco sulle altre culture e civilt comin-ciava a vacillare. Gi nel , Johann Joachim Winckelmann aveva ridimensionatonel terzo capitolo della sua Geschichte der Kunst des Altertums lattivit artistica degliEtruschi nei confronti di quella greca. Lo stesso faceva qualche anno pi tardi LuigiLanzi nel suo Saggio di lingua etrusca e di altre dItalia. Per servire alla storia de popoli,delle lingue, e delle belle arti, pubblicato a Roma nel . Lanzi abol la discendenzadella civilt, della cultura e della lingua etrusca dai gli di No e privilegi il lororapporto con la civilt greca, arancando cos letruscologia dal dilettantismo sette-centesco. Al curatore delle raccolte granducali va il merito di avere svelato latteg-giamento politico piuttosto che scientico e la visione faziosa che si celavano nelleteorie degli eruditi passati: Che se non spingo la gloria degli Etruschi tantoltre quante-gli [il Dempster] fece, o quanto Monsignor Guarnacci, non che io non brami di poter farlo. che non mi persuadon le lor ragioni ... LEtruria non ha bisogno di glorie dicili adimostrarsi.

Luciano, che aveva letto sia il Winckelmann che il Lanzi, ma si ostinava a tenerefede alla sua teoria lo-italica, ricorse alla polemica per dimostrare la falsit dellenuove idee, attaccando continuamente i due studiosi nei suoi scritti: nelle lettere,negli appunti delle Citations archologiques e perno nel Musum Etrusque: Lanzi dicele tems rserve peut-tre nos neveux la dcouverte de quelques monuments favorables lopinion trusque. Winckelmann sexplique dans le mme sens: Le meilleur moyen, dit-il, de soutenir lopinion commune en faveur des Etrusques serait de produire des vases trou-vs eectivement en Toscane; mais jusquici personne na pu en montrer.... En voil deuxmille! Daprs ces passages on ne peut douter que si Lanzi et Winckelmann vivaient encore,sils voyaient nos dcouvertes ils adopteraient sans balancer lopinion trusque et quils fe-

. T h . D e m p s t e r, De Etruria regali libri VII, (Firenze -), I... Lettera del . . a E. Gerhard, pubblicata in BdI. , p. .. Musum Etrusque, p. .. L . L a n z i, Saggio di lingua etrusca e di altre dItalia (Roma ), vol. II, p. .


raient des ouvrages bien dirents sur lhistoire des arts. ... ogni giorno si trovano vasipreziosi sotto li nostri occhi, e ridiamo di buon cuore della dida di Vinckelman di trovarenellEtruria un solo di questi vasi Etruschi; spero che nella vostra opera approtterete delfatto che condanna lipotesi ultra Greca di quel dotto Tedesco, e che rivendicherete ci cheappartiene alla nostra Etruria ... Mose, Sanchoniaton, Thucydide, Bochart, Vossius,Lanzi, Dempster, Gori, Mazzocchi, Matteo Egizio [?], Bonaroti, Maei, Guarnacci, Pla-ton, Herodote Virgile Homere, c.a.d. lhistoire sacree, lhistoire profane, la mithologie, lapoesie, ... et les monuments dmontrent lanteriorit de la civilisation en Jtalie: apres tantde preuves que reste-t-il aux ultragrecs ... quelques pages malentendues de Vinckelman et deLanzi: mais fussent-ils bien entendus, ces[s]eraient eux aussi par trop pres user de nos deuxarchologues modernes que de les croire de taille lutter contre de pareils et de si nombreuxadversaires et contre tant de monuments. Il principe si fece assorbire totalmente daquesto mito etrusco settecentesco, come attestano chiaramente le sue letture e,pubblicamente, non si fece convincere da nessuno, n da Eduard Gerhard con cuiera in continua corrispondenza n da J.V. Millingen che pubblic nel il Peintu-res antiques et indites de vases grecs e dal quale Luciano prese molti appunti. Tutta-via, in una lettera privata inviata nel al Gerhard, che era divenuto archeologouciale del museo di Berlino, il principe propone la vendita di un suo gruppo di va-si che denisce etruschi o greci: lecito domandarsi se, a dieci anni di distanza,questa ambigua apertura in senso ellenico sia il frutto di un convincimento realee di un ripensamento intellettuale oppure, anche in questo caso, sia dettata da esi-genze meramente politiche e commerciali.

. Musum Etrusque, p. .. Lettera di Luciano Bonaparte a Vincenzo Campanari, il direttore dellaltro grande cantiere di

scavo oltre Fiora, il ... Conservata nella Biblioteca Civica di Tuscanica, Fondo Cerasa, Carteg-gio Campanari, cit. da F. B u r a n e l l i, in: Luciano Bonaparte, (Roma ) cit., p.

. Citations archologiques, No. .. A . C o s t a n t i n i, La collezione di vasi attici del Cardinale Fesch ed il corredo della tomba di Isi-

de in una nota di Luciano Bonaparte ad Eduard Gerhard, in Rendiconti dellAccademia dei Lincei, serieIX, vol. II, Roma , pp. -.


C i t a t i o n s a r c h o l o g i q u e s

-

Denys ..... sous CsarTite-Live et Diodore ...... sous AugusteStrabon ...... sous TibereTacite et Pline lancien ... sous VespasienPline le jeune ..... sous TrajanSuetone ..... sous Adrien

Index

Septante Vulgate Cration (Vulgate): A av. J.-C. Dluge

Phaleg: tour de Babel

. Il taccuino conservato nellArchivio della Fondazione per il Museo Claudio Faina di Orvie-to. stato reso noto da F . B u r a n e l l i, Gli scavi a Vulci (-) di Luciano ed Alexandrine Bonaparte, inM. Natoli (a cura di), Luciano Bonaparte. Le sue collezioni darte, le sue residenze a Roma, nel Lazio, in Italia(-), Roma , p. e analizzato da G.M. Della Fina (Luciano Bonaparte archeologo: nuove pro-spettive, in Vulci, Cerveteri, Tarquinia. Atti del XXIII Congresso di Studi dellIstituto Nazionale di Studi Etru-schi e Italici, in corso di stampa). Trattandosi di un taccuino personale, si preferito adottare una tra-scrizione che rispetti fedelmente il testo originale. Sono state pertanto mantenute le minuscole emaiuscole, gli accenti, le interpunzioni dellautore senza interventi correttivi o riferimenti ai diversilapsus calami. Il taccuino copre pi di un anno di annotazioni da letture varie a destinazione di uso pri-vato. Pertanto, gli appunti presentano una calligraa irregolare, spesso dicile da decifrare. Il taccui-no contiene, inoltre, marginalia che, per motivi editoriali, abbiamo preferito sciogliere e mettere incorsivo a capo dei rispettivi paragra. La trascrizione e le note sono di Christoph Hausmann.

Abbreviazioni:Bochart: Samuelis Bocharti Geographia Sacra, seu Phaleg et Canaan. Editio quarta prioribus multo

correctior, & splendidior procuravit Petrus De Villemandy (Lugduni Batavorum, Trajecti ad Rhenum).

Carmeli: Padre Carmeli, Storia dei Varj Costumi Sacri e Profani. Dagli Antichi no a noi Pervenuti.Divisa in due Tomi del Padre Carmeli. Edizione Seconda, riveduta ed accresciuta di alcune disserta-zioni oltre le due appartenenti alla venuta del Messia. vols. (Venezia ).

Dempster: Thomas Dempster, De Etruria regali libri VII. vols. (Firenze -).Guarnacci: Mario Guarnacci, Origini italiche o siano Memorie istorico-etrusche. Sec. ed. ampliata.

vols. (Roma -; -).Hist. Univ.: Histoire Universelle, depuis le commencement du monde jusqu prsent. Traduite de

langlois dune socit de gens de lettres, vols. (Amsterdam e Leipzig, poi Parigi -). Vol. ,.

Lanzi: Luigi Lanzi, Saggio di lingua etrusca e di altre dItalia. Per servire alla storia de popoli, dellelingue, e delle belle arti. vols. (Roma ).

MmAc.: Histoire de lAcadmie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres avec les Mmoires de Lit-trature tirs des Registres de cette Acadmie. , / ,/.

Micali: Giuseppe Micali, LItalia avanti il Dominio dei Romani. Seconda edizione riveduta ed accre-sciuta dallAutore. vols. (Firenze ).

Millingen: J.V. Millingen, Peintures antiques et indites de vases grecs (Rome ).Vossius: Gerardi Ioannis Vossii De Theologia Gentili, et Physiologia Christiana; sive De Origine ac

Progressu Idolatriae, ad veterum gesta, ac rerum naturam, reductae; deque naturae mirandis, quibushomo adducitur ad Deum, liber I, et II. (Amsterdam ).


Mort de Noe Naissance dAbraham Mort de Sem Mort dAbraham Joseph en Egypte Naissance de Mose Dlivrance dEgypte Dbora Gedon Illion Prise. Samuel (Samson ans plus tard) Salomon Romulus Nabuchodonosor Cyrus Alexandre

LAbb MignotN. . Les Amathens. Tribu de Chananens (Potiers de terre cuite) nexistait pluslors que Dieu promet Abraham de lui donner la terre de Chanaan; ainsi des Rvo-lutions anterieures abraham (probablement les guerres des ls de Cham) avaientdej chass les Potiers de Chanaan: Mem. acad. Vol. . Partie Mem. p. .

Id. et Manthon. Les Rois Pasteurs taient de Chanaan: Manethon dit que quelques personnes lesappellent arabes. Cetait des Chananens venus en Egypte par ljstme darabie;cest ainsi que les Pelasges venaient de Phenicie par les Rivages de la Grce. Mem.acad. Vol. . Partie des Mem. p. .

LAbb Mignot. Dluge de Ducalion ans avant la guerre de Troie: Dodone tait antrieure:Temple fond par les Plasges dont le nom qui vient du mot Phenicien Phalag (Dis-perss) remonte bien au del de Pelasgus pere de Lycaon. Mem. acad. Partie Mem.p. .

Id.

. Deux pretresses de Thbes enleves par les Pasteurs fondent Dodone et ammon:Ces Pasteurs disperss apres leur expulsion dEgypte sont encore des Plasges.

Id.

. Mens metzram Osiris en Egypte ans av. J.C. c.a.d. apres le Dluge.

. M . l A b b M i g n o t, Second Mmoire sur les Phniciens, MmAc. , , -. p. s.. Ivi, p. s. LAbb Mignot scrive: Quoi quil en soit, on a pu donner galement ces Pasteurs

le nom dArabes & de Phniciens. Ces peuples venant du pays de Canaan lOrient de lEgypte, na-voient pu entrer dans ce dernier pays, quen passant par lArabie, soit quils eussent fait le voyage parmer, soit quils fussent venus par listhme. Ils ont pu tre appels Phniciens par les uns, raison deleur premire demeure & Arabes par dautres, cause du pays dont ils toient venus directement. Daquesto ragionamento sui fenici, Luciano deduce il suo proprio sistema sullorigine dei Pelasgi.

. Ivi, p. .. Ivi, p. .. Ivi, pp. -.


Guerres de Chanaan et de Mens. Chus en Ethiopie. Nemrod ls de Chuss chasseassur ls de Sem Ces Premiers discordes civiles font reuer vers loccident les P-lasges Noe qui vivait encore a d fuir cet odieux spectacle: Cham tait le coupableauteur de ces guerres ou le typhon de lEgypte; Sem tait vaincu par cham; le seulJaphet pouvait orir un asile a Noe: Saturne ou Bacchus, ou Noe se retire chez Ja-phet ou Janus: age dor Saturnia.

Cham ador par metzram sous le nom de Jupiter ammon rpond Jupiter quichasse son pere Saturne du trone; Noe oblig fuir nest-il pas represent par Sa-turne chass du ciel? La fable et lHistoire Sacre et Profane saccordent ici dunemaniere merveilleuse. Cham fut apel aussi Chronos!

Mem. p. .

LAbb Mignot

N. . Rois Pasteurs chasss en avant J.-C. du temps dabraham, ans av. laguerre de Troie. Les chananens reuent vers loccident sous le nom de Plasges:Epoque de la puissance Plasgique dJtalie entre les Rois Pasteurs et la guerre deTroie: Dcadence de cet Empire ans av. cette guerre: Les Plasges tyrrheniensde lJtalie reuent vers la Grece quils civilisent. Ainsi les Pelasges Phniciens civili-sent lJtalie; Les Pelasges jtaliens civilisent la Grce. Les premiers habitants de laGrece, Egiale, Jnachus ne formaient pas de Nation civilise: Les enfants de Japhetet les premiers Plasges staient arrets en partie en Grece et dans les jles; mais lepremier corps Plasgique civilis se constitue en Jtalie. Voila le centre de la ques-tion.

LAbb Le BatteuxN. . Les Thbains adoraient un Dieu unique nomm Cneph ou Phta; Dogme pri-mitif transmis Dodone par les Plasges. Mem. acad. Vol. . Partie des Mem. p..

LAbb FoucherN. . Origine des Fables dans les souvenirs du dluge et du vieux monde: Mem.acad. Vol. . Partie des Mem. p. .

LAbb MignotN. . LExploit de Gryon ne peut pas etre attribu lHercule Hellene, pas plusque celui des Hesperides ou dante. Mem. acad. part des Mem. Vol . p. .

FreretN. . Hellanicus de Lesbos antr[ieur] a Herodote place ans av. la Guerre de

. Cfr. Musum Etrusque, p. s: N. . Typhon foudroy (Mnchen J ).. La p. comporta una tavola sinottica con le date (da - a.C.) dei Re di Tebe secondo

Eratostene, della dinastia dei re che regnarono, secondo Manthon, in Egitto dopo luscita dei RePastori, della dinastia dei Re Pastori che regnarono in Egitto e delle epoche della storia greca.

. M . l A b b M i g n o t, Second Mmoire sur les Phniciens, MmAc. , , -. pp. -.. M . l A b b L e B a t t e u x, Second Mmoire sur le principe actif de lunivers. Doctrine des Egyp-

tiens. MmAc. , , -.. M. l A b b F o u c h e r, Recherches sur lorigine et la nature de lHellnisme ou De la religion de

la Grce. Sixime Mmoire. MmAc. , , -. p. .. M. l A b b M i g n o t, Vingt-deuxime Mmoire sur les Phniciens. Sur la navigation & le com-

merce de ce peuple, MmAc. , , -. p. s. Cfr. Musum Etrusque, p. : N. . Hercule et les Abo-rignes (Compigne, inv. . ARV ,).


Troie la retraite des Sicules en Sicile. Mem. acad. Vol. . p. . Epoque dHercule Denis dHalicarnasse Livre I. p. . atque ita Siculum genus reliquit italiam, si-cut Hellanicus Lesbius dicit, tertio generatione ante Trojanum bellum.

FreretN. . Acad. Vol . Page et suiv. Ligures en Celte signie homme de mer, qui-valent de Plasge. Ce ne sont que deux appellations dun seul peuple. Denis dHali-carnasse place longtemps avant le siege de Troe le passage des Pelasges darcadieen Jtalie sur une otte nombreuse! Impossibilit dune otte nombreuse en arcadie cette poque dmontre par Freret. Donc les Pelasges ont pass par larcadie etvenaient de plus loin; loracle de Dodone indiquait aux Plasges voyageurs la terrede Saturne! Le grand empire Pelasgique tait donc en Jtalie.

Atys pere de Tirrhenus anterieur la guerre de Troie: Le Recit dHerodote estdonc fabuleux: La Lidie navait pas de ottes! oui, mais les Pelasges passaient parla Lidie.

Les Etrusques avaient une religion plus simple que les Grecs: Donc ils ne peu-vent tirer leur religion des fables grecques.

N. . Deux Minos! Acad. Vol. . p. . Voir Minos; Acad. Vol. , p. .

N. . Plasges athenes avant la guerre de Troie. Acad. Vol. . p. .

BoivinN. . Lesbos nomme Aethalia. Mem, sur les Ciclopes: Acad. V.

HardionN. . Oracle de Saturne a Delphes avant celui de la terre et dapollon: Preuve dupassage de Saturne par la Grece en venant en

arqueologia italiana

Documents