the general topography of the italian peninsula in the roman period
DESCRIPTION
EARLY ITALY (BEFORE ROME’S RISE): WHAT EVIDENCE DO WE HAVE? LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE 1. The linguistic pattern in the Italian peninsula can tell us which languages were spoken ONLY from about 600 BC when the first written evidence (in the form of inscriptions) begins to appear. 2. Since the first PERMANENT settlement on the site which became Rome belongs to a little after 1000 BC, we can get some sense of what languages may have been spoken in the peninsula only later than that – in fact not much earlier than 600 BC.TRANSCRIPT
THE GENERAL TOPOGRAPHY OF THE ITALIAN PENINSULA In the Roman
period Italy tended (until quite a late date) to mean ONLY the area
south of the wide valley of the River Po (in the north) EARLY ITALY
(BEFORE ROMES RISE): WHAT EVIDENCE DO WE HAVE?
LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE 1. The linguistic pattern in the Italian
peninsula can tell us which languages were spoken ONLY from about
600 BC when the first written evidence (in the form of
inscriptions) begins to appear. 2. Since the first PERMANENT
settlement on the site which became Rome belongs to a little after
1000 BC, we can get some sense of what languages may have been
spoken in the peninsula only later than that in fact not much
earlier than 600 BC. THE LINGUISTIC GROUPS OF EARLY ITALY ca 600 BC
(BUT NOT
NECESSARILY EARLIER) 3. Before going BACK in time to look at what
other evidence we have for very early Italy, we might perhaps spend
a short time only looking at what peoples those developing a
community from soon after 1000 BC on the site of Rome would
eventually come into contact with. 4. If the linguistic evidence is
anything to go by, then by soon after 600 BC we have a very complex
picture of peoples speaking both INDO-EUROPEAN and
NON-INDO-EUROPEAN languages. THE GENERAL LINGUISTIC PATTERN FROM
ABOUT 600 BC THREE of the INDO-EUROPEAN languages were late
arrivals:
Working backwards, THREE of the INDO-EUROPEAN languages were late
arrivals: CELTIC (or GALLIC) [including LEPONTIC] in the far north
- resulting from significant migrations about 600 BC GREEK
resulting from Greek colonization in the south which began after
700 BC MESSAPIC (in the south-east) which probably resulted from
migration from across the Adriatic But OTHER INDO-EUROPEAN
languages seem to beearlier- namely
i) The great swathe of OSCAN-UMBRIAN languagesand dialects of
central Italy, especially in the higherApennines. ii) VENETIC in
the far north-east. iii) LATIN (with its dialect FALISCAN) in a
very smallarea on the west coast. When the people of these regions
began to speak these languages is unknown. If the languages came
with people migrating in large numbers, there is NO EVIDENCE about
WHEN any such immigrants came (certainly NOT after about 1800 BC).
The OTHER Indo- European languages appear to be earlier: The great
swathe of OSCO-UMBRIAN languages and dialects in central Italy.
VENETIC - in the far north-east. LATIN (with FALISCAN) in a small
area in the west. The THREE major NON- INDO-EUROPEAN languages
cause their own problems. LIGURIAN (in the far north-west) and
RAETIC (in the far north) seem to be survivals [like Basque] from a
time before the Indo-European migrations. Finally there is ETRUSCAN
ETRUSCAN as a language presents
its own unique problems tied up with the question Who were the
Etruscans? It is probably the language of those who had long
populated the north-west (below the Apennines) and whose culture
evolved, as a result of outside influences, to become Etruscan.
SUMMARY While showing us the huge diversity of languages spoken in
Peninsular Italy from about 600 BC onwards, the linguistic map
tells us nothing about the origins of the peoples of Italy as Rome
began to rise. And it is important to note (as we will see) that,
ARCHAEOLOGICALLY, there is no solid evidence of any mass movement
of new peoples into the peninsula after about 1800 BC until the
Greeks began founding new communities (colonies) in the south after
about 700 BC. WRITTEN ACCOUNTS Any hope that surviving literary
accounts from the pens of Greek and Roman writers might throw light
on very early Italy is shattered by two considerations: 1. They are
all VERY LATE - the most detailed belonging to the Augustan Age (30
BC AD 20) or later. 2. Those who produced them, even where they
depended on earlier written accounts, had NO SERIOUS INFORMATION
available to them and did little more than engage in wild
speculation even when they purported to be describing the
population of early Italy. A. There were no Roman writers at all
until almost 200 BC and even those Greek writers who began to take
an interest in Italy as the Roman state began to attract their
attention do not predate the Roman writers by more than 100 years.
B. To give two examples only from amongst the Greek writers: a) one
of the best is said to have been TIMAEUS OF TAUROMENIUM - a western
Greek from eastern Sicily writing in the early 200s BC. He is
praised because he is said, unlike other Greek writers, to have
collected facts! Where he got them from is anybodys guess and
nothing suggests they were facts anyway. b) And in the Augustan age
(27 BC AD 14) there was the
historian DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: He eagerly has waves of
Greeks (for which there is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever) moving westwards
to Italy, the first coming from Arcadia before 1750 BC, the last
being the Trojans moving to Italy under Aeneas soon after 1200 BC
(although, of course, Trojans were not Greeks) if it is Dionysius
aim to show that the Romans too [allegedly descended from the
Trojans] were really Greeks! [It is worth repeating that there is
no evidence of any mass movement of peoples into Italy between 1800
and 700 BC] Generally, then, the literary accounts (like the
linguistic map) can tell us little that is reliable about early
Italy. It is to the archaeological record that we must turn to
get
ARCHAEOLOGY It is to the archaeological record that we must turn to
get any sense of who the early peoples of Italy were. THE
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD FOR EARLY ITALY Leaving aside the earliest
known hunter-gatherers who lived in the Italian peninsula, the
evidence suggests that the Neolithic Age was well in evidence by
5000 BC. 1. The NEOLITHIC Age (ca 5000 2200 BC) By about 5000 BC
there is evidence that immigrants have come to the peninsula
bringing with them a) knowledge of agriculture; and b) knowledge of
husbandry. More new peoples appear to have arrived in the
With the beginnings of the knowledge of metal working, theItalian
peninsula entered the Copper Age about 2200 BC. 2.The COPPER Age
(ca 2200 1800 BC) More new peoples appear to have arrived in the
peninsula during the Copper Age- the last mass movement of
population [until the Greeks came soon after 700 BC] arriving by
about 1800 BC.And Copper transitioned to Bronze as it was
understood how to mix tin with copper. 3.The BRONZE Age (ca 1700
900 BC) The Bronze Age in Italy saw a high level of cultural
uniformity south of the Apennines for at least seven centuries-
which did not begin to break down completely until just after 1000
BC. THE ITALIAN BRONZE AGE (1700 900 BC)
Characteristics South of the Po Valley the very high level of
culturaluniformity is referred to as Apennine (at least until
BC)[except in two small area: a) the Grotta Manacorra, and b)
thearea around Taranto] The population is sparse. The largest
inhabited places are small villages. Inhumation (burial) is the
norm. The main economic activity is transhumant pastoralism. There
is no evidence of new immigrants into thepeninsula during the
entire period. [In the Po Valley the culture was different (as seen
in artefacts, especially pottery) and is referred to as Terramara;
where the two cultures met there is a small area of mixed culture
known as Pianello] THE PO VALLEY The two areas (south of the
Apennines) where the culture of the BRONZE AGE was not uniform were
the area of the Grotta Manacorra and that around Taranto THE LATE
BRONZE AGE (1200 900 BC)
1. After at least 500 years (1700 1200 BC) of cultural uniformity
south of the Apennines, we find, in the Late Bronze Age (1200 900
BC) changes are occurring which suggest that a slow transition is
under way. 2. This period heralds the coming IRON AGE. 3. a) The
number of inhabited sites increases noticeably. b) Cremation begins
to replace inhumation. c) Cultural variants increase, especially
the closer we get to 900 BC. 4. BUT (again) there is NO EVIDENCE of
any newcomers in significant numbers. THE EARLY IRON AGE (900 BC
onwards)
By the time iron is being more generally used (from atleast 900
BC), in cultural terms the uniformity of theBronze Age has gone and
archaeologists distinguish sixdistinct cultural regions. a) In
three of them INHUMATION (burial) predominates. b) In three of them
CREMATION predominates. INHUMING (BURYING) CULTURES i) FOSSA
culture in southern Campania and in Calabria. ii) APULIAN culture
in Apulia (Puglia) [in the far south east]. iii)PICENE (or
ADRIATIC) culture in the Marche, Abruzzi, and Molise (with some
evidence of a warrior society) [All three cultures appear to have
evolved from the culture of the Bronze Age, with some modest
influences from the other side of the Adriatic in two of the three
cases] INHUMING CULTURES PICENE (ADRIATIC) culture in the Marche,
Abruzzi, Molise APULIAN culture in Apulia (Puglia) FOSSA culture in
Calabria and parts of Campania THE THREE CREMATING CULTURES
i) GOLASECCA culture in Lombardy and Piedmont (with some evidence
of influence from Hallstatt Culture beyond the Alps). ii) ESTE (or
ATESTINE) culture in the north-east of the Po Valley. iii)
VILLANOVAN[by far the most advanced] in Emiglia Romana and,
especially, in Tuscany and Lazio. Since in southern Lazio (south of
the River Tiber), in ancient LATIUM there was a variation, this
more southerly region of Villanovan culture is sometimes said to
display LATIAL culture. culture in the north-east Po Valley
CREMATING CULTURES ESTE GOLASECCA culture in Lombardy and Piedmont
GOLASECCA ESTE (or ATESTINE) culture in the north-east Po Valley
VILLANOVAN VILLANOVAN culture in Emilia Romana and in Tuscany and
Lazio VILLANOVAN CULTURE Two very specific characteristics of the
region where Villanovan culture developed from about 900 BC onwards
were: 1. a) Village settlements became GROUPED that is the
villages, through a process of coalescence, came together to form a
more obvious, much larger nuclear settlement; but, b) surprisingly,
there is often a lack of continuity in the sites of Villanovan
settlements north of the Tiber compared with the Bronze Age
settlements of the area. 2. Advanced metal working soon became more
and more common, the area being very rich in ores (especially
iron). Clearly there was increasing specialization too, accompanied
by greater stratification of society. 1. Eventually (soon after 700
BC) in the Villanovan area north of the River Tiber a) settlements
go through an process of extreme and rapid orientalization as a
result of contacts from outside the Italian Peninsula, especially
with cultures much farther to the East; b) dominant aristocratic
groups establish their control; c) before the late 600s BC true
cities have developed; and d) the culture has become ETRUSCAN. 2.
The Villanovan area south of the River Tiber, with its slightly
different Latial culture, remains about 100 years behind. It does
eventually see similar changes - however without Etruscanization.
3. An emerging ROME, on the Tiber itself, is in many ways between
the two. VILLANOVAN CREMATION PRACTICES
Before we turn to the site where ROME developed, let us glance at
what made Villanovan cremation practices distinct-and it is from
cemeteries that most of our knowledge about Villanovan life comes.
Characteristics Both sexes seem to have been treated equally in
termsof burial. With both males and females grave goods
reflectingtheir sex are found: a) males have weapons, razors,
fibulae (pins); b) females have rings, bracelets, fibulae, spindle
whorls, needles. c) the cremated remains are found in cinerary urns
placed in pit graves lined with stone; d) sometimes the grave-goods
are outside the urns, sometimes in the urns especially when they
are in miniature form; e) the urns themselves are bi-conical and
topped with either a bowl or a helmet. f) In the southern area,
especially in ancient LATIUM(south of the Tiber)[and this is what
helps defineLATIAL culture as a variant of VILLANOVAN], the urnsin
which the cremated remains are deposited are in theshape of HUTS,
without doubt of the sort the livingdwelt in. Sometimes the
hut-urn
was buried, along with other grave objects (often miniatures), in a
larger urn sunk into the ground These hut-urns (combined
occasionally with surviving post-holes) have made it possible to
gain some impression of the sorts of dwellings occupied by those
responsible for Villanovan culture. ANCIENT LATIUM AND NEIGHBOURING
REGIONS
SITES IN WESTERN CENTRAL ITALY (OUTSIDE ETRURIA) WHERE THERE SEEM
TO HAVE BEEN IRON-AGE COMMUNITIES IN THE 700S AND 600s BC ROME