Figure 9 3.A Pompeian painting showing a compitum with shrines (Casa della Fontana Piccola) (Dar.-Sag. II, 1429 fig. 1887)
Related Figures (80)
Fig. 1. The Italic peoples that according to the sources inhabited ancient Italy (adapted from Salmon 1967, 25, pl. 1). before its actual military submission. Similarly, enemy gods could be summoned away from their cities by promising them a temple in the victorious city of Rome. Such a fate would, according to Livy (5.21—22), have befallen Juno Regina during the capture of the Etruscan city of Veii in 396 BC. Furthermore, K.oman roundation Myths would ave been used to consolidate the Roman efforts.*” Indeed, in this view, the installation of the new colo- ial oppidum was accompanied by the establishment of a political and ideological set of elements which 1ore or less copied the urban organisation of the mother city in synthetic form. Colonies were actu- ly ‘small copies’ of Rome, as Aulus Gellius argued as late as AD 169.*° Amongst these elements are the uguraculum, the forum, and, perhaps most important of all, the typical Capitolium-temple. These temples ith three cellae on a high podium are thought to have expressed proud urbanity and Romanness, to the fect that others in the area came to admire and eventually imitate the model (see fig. 2.2). The Ftrusco_Italic temple model would thus have spread 45 9 superior svmbol] of Romanness and Fig. 2.2. The ‘Capitolium’ of Cosa (adapted from Brown et al. 1960, 95 fig. 71 and 109 fig. 82. Not only are the black gloss cups themselves regarded as ‘Roman / Latin’ or ‘romanised’,** but their use, and especially the gods that are inscribed on them would also specifically relate to Roman or Latin religious ideas (cf. Chapter 7).** Other types of black gloss ceramics have similarly been related to Roman influence in colonial contexts.*° with their mixed character, perfectly reflect the situation Fig. 3.1. Pietrabbondante, Temple B with theatre and Temple A (adapted from Sannio 1980, 166 fig. 32) Fig. 3.2. The sanctuary of S. Giovanni in Galdo, Colle Rimontato (adapted from Zaccardi 2007, 63 pl. 1). of the front of the podium there is a flight of stairs leading to the podium. Two altars stand in front of the podium aligned with the central and eastern cellae and it seems legitimate to reconstruct a third one aligned with the western cella. The temple building was flanked by two lateral porticoes. The theatre, with impressive polygonal walls on the outside and elegantly decorated with amongst other things telamones on the inside, was built shortly before the temple and occupies the space in front of it. Fig. 3.3. Podium of the sacellum (adapted from Di Niro 1980, 273 fig. 46). Fig. 3.4. Coin struck by the Italian allies, showing the Samnite bull goring the Roman she-wolf (Kent 1978, pl. 14 no. 46) to be: a reference to the perceived old Samnite / Sabine roots by the Pentri themselves. The historical framework within which this development has to be understood can be reconstructed fairly well. It is tempting to see this process of self-assertion in relation to the antagonism between Romans and Samnites on the eve of the Social War.” Fig. 3.5. Sanctuary of Juno, Gabii (mid second century BC), plan and reconstruction (adapted from Almagro Gorbea 1982, 584- 585 figs. 1 and 2). The interesting point here is that the image recalls the oath sworn by Aeneas and Latinus, depicted on golden staters at the moment that the (Trojan) Romans most needed their Latin allies during the Han- nibalic invasion.'”’ On the Social War coin the Roman model is appropriated and used against Rome. In this context the adoption of the Roman goddess Victoria — in Oscan Vikturrat — evoked at Pietrab- bondante most probably in hope of a victory over the Romans,'”' suggests the same process. Although the architectural aspects of the sanctuary are perhaps less explicit and therefore more difficult to interpret, there is no reason per se to think that the underlying processes leading to the adoption of these models was fundamentally different from that of the images just evoked. The models adopted had no intrinsic signifi- cance but acquired it in the process. The only way to try to understand what significance could have been attributed to them is by trying to reconstruct the ideological frameworks within which the building was conceived. No explicit evidence survives that informs us about Pentrian views of the three cellae temple or the comitium model, but from the ideological framework reconstructed from other sources it appears that the adoption of what modern authors have called ‘Roman’ or ‘Latial’ cultural models can, in the case of Fig. 4.1. Transhumance routes, important places and sanctuaries (Van Wonterghem 1999, 415 fig. 2) On the other hand, most evidence for the connection between the cult of Hercules proper and transhumance dates to the second century BC or later, and although continuity is often presumed, this is not self-evident. It could therefore be that this dimension of Hercules became prominent only in a later stage. Indeed, as Guy Bradley has emphasised, Hercules was venerated in different Italic regions long before large-scale transhumance can be presumed to have been an important factor.” This is not to say that Hercules was not important in the Italic world in his role as patron of herdsmen and merchants, but the evidence for the direct relation between Hercules and (flock) market activities for the Republican Fig. 4.3. Metapontum with chora (adapted from Carter 1994, 163 fig. 7.1). Fig. 4.4. Sanctuaries as frontiermarkers according to D’Ercole et al. 1997, fig. on p. 23. It is generally assumed that this organisation stems from very ancient times (on the argumentation and reasons for this see the discussion in Chapter 6). Edward Togo Salmon for example calls the pagus 266 “the immemorial Italic institution”, and sees it as the Samnites’ “sub-tribal entity”, and this forms part of a longer tradition going back to late 19" century German scholarship.” Until recently little attention has been paid to the chronological development of the pagus-vicus system,” and for a long time there has been a general consensus on the pre-Roman date and nature of the system. Fig. 4.6. The lex aedis Furfensis (Degrassi 1986, pl. 29) Fig. 5.1. Location of the sanctuary of S. Giovanni in Galdo, Colle Rimontato. Fig. 5.2. A 3D reconstruction of the Alta valle del Tappino showing areas surveyed (left S. Giovanni in Galdo, Colle Rimontato; right Gildone, loc. Cupa). Fig. 5.3. 20% coverage survey in the S. Giovanni in Galdo area (photo J. Pelgrom). Fig. 5.4. Research area around the sanctuary of S. Giovanni in Galdo indicating visibility (1: low, 5: high) Fig. 5.5. Site survey of the sanctuary indicating find densities (detail from 5.6). Fig. 5.6. Find densities of the Hellenistic and Roman periods in the area around the sanctuary of S. Giovanni in Galdo, quanti- ties per ha. Fig. 5.7. Iron Age, Hellenistic and Roman imperial sites identified during the 2004 and 2005 surveys. The black dots represent probable subsoil archaeological remains from which the surface material presumably (at least in part) derives. Fig. 5.8. The site of the sanctuary of S$. Giovanni in Galdo as it appeared in the survey. the third to first centuries BC (e.g. G9-10: Morel 2978c; G9-6: Morel 2652; G9-12: Morel 2984), including fragments of more particular forms such as unguentaria (G9-11). Also tiles (of the common type illustrated here for G9-49) and some Roman imperial wares (e.g. G9-3: Italian sigillata and G9-1: Hayes 8a) were col- lected. No ceramics predating the fourth century BC have been found in the sanctuary site. Fig. 5.9. Selection of finds from site G9 (sanctuary). Fig. 5.10. Iron Age sites (the future sanctuary site is also indicated). Fig. 5.11. Hellenistic sites. Fig. 5.12. Site G2, interpreted in conjunction with G3, G17-21 as a village. Higher surface find densities are indi- cated in black. Fig. 5.13. Electric resistivity research at the site (photo J. Pelgrom). Fig. 5.14. Electric resistivity results at site G3 (village). The higher find densities recognised in the field survey are also indicated. Fig. 5.15. Selection of finds from site G2-3 (village). Fig. 5.16. Selection of finds from site G4 (Hellenistic farm). Fig. 5.18. Roman imperial sites. Fig. 5.19. Black gloss plates / dishes from the sanctuary excavations, Morel F1100-1400. Fig. 5.20. Black gloss cups from the sanctuary excavations, Morel F2420 and F2780. Later forms (fig. 5.21) are represented by F2610 (SLP06_SG_75-92)*” and F2650 (SLP06_S22-T6), both of the second-first centuries BC (compare SLP06_S2-T9 — 2654 or 2653- and SLP06_S90-T2 -2654a2, first century BC). Another late cup might be represented by F2983 (SLP06_S90-T4), presum- ably datable to the beginning of the first century BC. Fig. 5.21. Black gloss cups from the sanctuary excavations, Morel F2600-2900. Fig. 5.22. Black gloss from the sanctuary excavations, Morel F4300, F7500. Fig. 5.23. Black gloss ceramics from the sanctuary excavations, various forms, Morel 2150, 3121, 7222 Fig. 5.24. Italian terra sigillata from the sanctuary excavations. Fig. 5.25. African red slip wares from the sanctuary excavations. generally date from the Augustan period to the first half of the first century AD, Ettlinger 29, 34 and 3° can be dated to the first century AD, especially from the middle of the century onwards. Fig. 5.26. Coarse wares from the sanctuary excavations. Fig. 5.27a and b. Lamps (SLP06_S55T1 and SLP06_SG74-283) from the sanctuary excavations (photo A. Dekker). Fig. 5.28. Research area of the Biferno Valley project, upper valley, Samnite period (adapted from Barker 1995, 186 fig. 72) Fig. 7.1. An inscription from S. Maria degli Angeli (CIL I’, 1801) mentioning several mag(istri) Mart(is) who ex pagi decr(eto) saw to the erection of a fornice(m) et parietes caementicios (Degrassi 1986, pl. 87 fig. 1). Fig. 7.5. Fortunai pocolo(m), possibly from Otranto (CIL I’, 443). In order to understand the character of the dedications involving the pagi and vici of Ariminum it is useful to briefly examine the possible interpretations of the texts themselves. In light of the above, we should actually refrain from referring to the vases mentioning pagi and vici as pocola, first because they lack the pocolum text, the most significant identify- ing element but also because the function of the pagi and vici vases does not seem to be in accordance with that of the standard pocola. Is seems illogical to suppose that anyone pass- ing by could or would buy a cup with the indication of the rather specific administrative entities of pagus or vicus on it, unless one was in some way related to these entities. This is in line with the context in which the pagi and vici inscriptions were found, namely public and/or sacral contexts, as opposed to funerary and domestic contexts. In light of the above, we should actually Fig. 7.6. Some of the Ariminate vici and pagi inscriptions (Degrassi 1986, pl. 14, fig. 4). Fig. 7.7. Some of the Ariminate pocola (Degrassi 1986, pl. 14, fig. 5). In any case, for both grammatic interpretations it is clear that representatives of different parts of (the territory of) the colony dedicated the objects in one central place in the urban centre, where apparently other more specific ‘religious’ dedications were also brought (the ‘real’ pocola, and the dedications to Apol- lo, Hercules and Vulcanus).This place could therefore, with some probability, be recognised as a cult place or at least as a politico-religious central place.'” Essentially, it makes no difference whether it is defined as a ‘cult place’ or not. The point is that rituals involving socio-political entities were performed there. Differently from the ‘real’ pocola, which were made for a generic audience, it seems probable that for the Fig. 7.9. Marble altar, Rome Palazzo dei Conservatori (inv.no. 3352), Augustan period (Fless 1995, pl. 45, fig. 1) Fig. 7.10. Basciano, localita S. Rustico. Settlement with temple (T) (adapted from Messineo 1986, 138 fig. 47) Fig. 7.11. Basciano, localita S. Rustico. Temple, plan, reconstructed plan and reconstructed section (adapted from Messineo 1986, 160 figs. 82 and 83). Fig. 7.12. Vici in the ager Praetutianus (adapted from Guidobaldi 1995, 248 fig. 5). > whereas further the centre of Interamna were most heavily hit by the Roman viritim assignations’” away in the hinterland these sites could continue to flourish. Campovalano, where a Praetutian settle- ment ceased to exist in the course of the second century BC, would be an example of the first category This last settlement however was, as far as we know, not a vicus in the strict sense. The two securely attested vici in this area do not come across as pre-Roman settlements; on the contrary. An inscription dates site 2 (Localita Case Lanciotti-Masseria Nisii) to 55 BC, although some remains could date to the second century BC at the earliest. The other site (5), the vicus Stramentarius, has yielded some pre- Roman materials but the formation of the settlement proper is dated to the second century BC. Even the inclusion of sites 6,7, and 8 that could represent vici in spite of the lack of decisive evidence does not change the picture as these date also to a period after the Roman conquest, 1.e. the second and early first centuries BC. The image of these vici as the remnants of pre-Roman settlement can thus be seriously questioned. It seems much more probable that the vici represent the outcome of processes that started after Roman interference. PQwea Ew Aen AE atk wo cwem BD! nena Unotitwtinwe be Aborasediad <eao chawld wel vaecslevacq wxohnk dh eos odin Fig. 7.13. Location of the vici south of the Fucine lake (the location of the vicus Petinus is unclear) The name Setmius (= Septimius) is common but may come from Latium.*'’ This is the first appear- 211 in Mar- ance of the name in the Marsic area. Later Septimii are recorded in the area at S. Benedetto, ruvium,”’’ and, thrice, in Alba Fucens.*!? Caisius or Ceisius is attested in only one other inscription in the area, found not far from Trasacco and possibly dating to the first half of the second century BC and mentioning a liberta.*"* ‘Faunus, lustful pursuer of the fleeing Nymphs, ‘Faunus, lustful pursuer of the fleeing Nymphs, come gently onto my land with its sunny acres, and as you depart look kindly on my little nurslings, seeing that a tender kid is sacrificed to you at the end of the year, plenty of wine is avail- able for the mixing bowl (Venus’ companion), and the old altar smokes with lots of incense. The whole flock gambols in the grassy meadow when your day comes round on the fifth of December. The village in festive mood is on holiday in the fields along with the oxen, which are also resting. The wolf wanders among the lambs, and they feel no fear. The forest sheds its woodland leaves in your honour. The digger enjoys beating with his feet in triple time his old enemy, the earth.’ (translation Loeb) Fig. 8.2. An inscription perhaps mentioning an iter paganicam found between Castelvecchio Subequo and Secinaro (CIL I’, 3255) (Degrassi 1986, pl. 84, fig. 5). because it attests to the ritual definition of territory and territoriality.*° At the same time, the group of people living within it was defined. Importantly, we are certain that the lustratio pagi was performed in the pagi of Italy. Siculus Flaccus, who was a land surveyor active in the second century AD, comments on the importance of the /ustratio pagi in his de condicionibus agrorum (9-10). He even asserts that the extent of the territory of the pagus could be deduced from the area that was covered by this ritual. According to Siculus, the lustratio would be performed by the magistri pagorum.”’ Tr pee ge 7 ot ee: | cae ee es | ee a: ee f | ¢T. 1° 9 AQ OO > |e Fig. 8.3. A thesaurus from Carpineto della Nora (CIL I’, 3269) (Degrassi 1986, pl. 89, fig. 3). to be thrown into the thesaurus. The inscription dates to the first century BC and mentions four people who restored the object and dedicated it to Juppiter Victor decem paagorum.*° Fig. 8.4.A thesaurus from Hatria (CIL I’, 3293) reading P(ublius) Aufffilius P(ubli) f(ilius) / C(aius) Magius M(arci) f(ilius) / magist(ri) (Degrassi 1986, pl. 98, fig. 2). Fig. 8.5. Wall-painting with ‘sacro-idyllic’ landscape within decorative scheme from the villa of Agrippa Postumus at Boscotrecase, Red Room, North wall (after Von Blanckenhagen/Alexander 1990, pl. 21). Fig. 9.1a. Painted compitum with hanging dolls from altar, Pompeii, (Via dell’Abbondanza, SW corner of Ins. [X, 11) (Spinazzola 1953, 178 fig. 216). Fig. 9.1b. Detail of 9.1a. (Spinazzola 1953, 179 fig. 217). Figs. 9.2a and b. Delos, painted altar indicating a sacrifice ritu romano (Bulard 1926b, pls. XVII and XXIV). Fig. 9.4. The compitum Acilium (Colini 1961-1962, 152 fig. 7). “Boundaries relating to shrines ought to be examined in the following way. If the shrine is positioned where four boundaries meet and establishes the boundary for four properties, look for four altars; moreover the shrine has four entrances so that anyone can enter through his own land to conduct a sacrifice... Now, if the shrine 9121 is between three properties, it has three entrances, if between two, then it has two entrances. cally. Moreover, one has to be careful not to read too much into the scholion on Persius. The word pertusa used by Persius could also have been used to indicate the ‘shabbiness’ of the structure, pertusa in the sense of ‘rotten’ or ‘perforated’. This is Walter Kissel’s interpretation, who states that the interpretation of the scholiast of pertusa (‘quia per omnes quattuor partes pateant’) is “weder sprachlich noch sachlich akzeptabel: Fiir pertundere bzw. pertusus lasst sich nirgendwo die wertneutrale Bedeutung “offen” nachweisen ... Richtiger wird man pertusa daher in seiner gangigen Bedeutung “durchlochert” fassen ... und auf den ruindsen Zustand des sacellum beziehen.’'** Actually, the scholiast also gives this option, “pertusa; because it is open on all four sides or because it is old”, vel vetusta.' The interpretation of pertusa as indicating the shabbiness rather than the architecture of the structure would also fit quite well in the context of Persius’ satirical description of a miser.'”° Thus, while the explicit explanation of ‘open on all four sides’ can be dismissed, the Calpurnian compita pervia remain.'*’ Calpurnius does not unequivocally describe the shrines however, *1?8 and if indeed a shrine is intended, pervia he could have used compitum here in the sense of ‘crossroads could just indicate an association with the location of the shrine. Maybe it is best here, in the absence of conclusive archaeological and textual evidence, to dismiss the pervia compita as a category of cult places. Indeed, from other literary evidence, it becomes clear that the discrepancy between the shrines attested in archaeology and texts need not be so problematic. In both inscriptions and texts it appears In one of the few studies on agricultural cults in the countryside, Claudia Lega notes this discrepancy between the literary sources mentioning various rural and agricultural cults and the lack of archaeologi cal evidence.'* In a situation like this, two options are usually put forward. The first is that archaeology has not yet provided, or is in general unable to provide, positive evidence for the rural or agricultura cults. The other is that the textual sources are wrong. Without doubt, the most logical conclusion in thi case 1s to blame the poor state of archaeological knowledge or even its fundamental inability to furnisl this evidence. Thus, according to Lega, these rites are just archaeologically invisible because probabh “si svolgessero su un altare provvisorio innalzato presso i campi e [che] le offerte fossero unicamente doni in natura Questo spiegherebbe la perdita totale delle testimonianze archeologiche. Gli stessi compita, dove, come si é detto, gl abitanti delle zone agricole circostanti si recavano a celebrare la fine del raccolto, dovevano essere per la maggior part strutture in materiale deperibile o piccole costruzioni andate completamente distrutte” (added emphasis).'** Tt qe indeed nerfactlh: pnocahle that the ahcencre af archaenlacical evidence indicates that thece ciulte dic However, there may be another explanation that questions whether we are looking for the right model, or rather, for the right structures. The (literary) discussion on the scholion on Persius with its fascinating ‘turres’ and multiple entrances and the consequent quest to retrieve this structure archaeologi- cally may have attracted too much attention, without leaving room for other possibilities. The following index lists places, peoples, deities, individuals and major subjects and themes in the text Rural cult places are listed by the localities and municipalities with which they are usually indicated, in case of ambiguity both are listed separately. Names occurring in inscriptions but not further discussed are not included. Individuals are listed by nomen, though major authors are cited by their common English name. Ancient authors are listed only for passages where they or their work are discussed at some length.