JOURNAL OF ROMAN ARCHAEOLOGY 14 (2001) The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa Nicola Terrenato Introduction The archaeology of Roman villas is based on a very rich body of evidence found actoss the entire Roman world and dating to a very broad chronological spectrum. Yet there are still crucial related issues, such as that conceming the origins of this type of settlement, not to mention the problem of its very homogeneity as a category, that have been debated on the basis of a surprisingly limited amount of factual information. In situations of this kind itis only to be expected that even individual new discoveries can alter the current wisdom. As a case in point, some recent discoveries made in Rome seem to contribute to our understanding of early Roman élite rural settlements and their relationship with Late Republican villas. As frequently hap- pens, the new material has also stimulated a reconsideration of the existing evidence from a different perspective. ‘An attempt will be made here at re-assessing the state of the question on the origins of villas by building on a summary exposition of the findings made at the Auditorium site. However, a few preliminary general remarks are necessary. Roman villas have been the focus of a great deal of scholarship and archaeological research in widely different geographical and historical contexts. The term ‘villa’ has been given to a variety of sites that differ in size, architecture, function and chronology, to the point where the boundaries of the type and terminological consistency appear today blurred and in need of a comprehensive redefinition. For present purposes, the term villa will be used to refer to élite Republican rural residences in central Italy, without subscribing to any empire-wide normative concept. Field surveys, whilst providing a more extensive and balanced understanding of Roman rural organization, have added a further level of complexity. A large number of artifact scat- ters, interpreted as villas on the basis of quite diverse criteria, now need to be taken into account alongside monumental remains and the references in the ancient sources. If generaliza~ tions about this type of settlement are to be advanced, they must cover such diverse entities as (to remain just within Italy) the villa at Laurentum mentioned in the letters of the Younger Pliny (Portsch 1993; Bergmann 1995), the Villa of the Mysteries outside Pompeii, and site 21 of Wesleyan University’s Ager Cosanus Survey (Dyson 1978, who includes one of the few explicit definitions of the criteria used in a survey to identify an artifact scatter a3 a villa). Notwith- standing this obvious difficulty, several recent books have striven to present a global picture of Roman villas. They have ranged from broad architectural analyses that pay little attention to the particular historical and geographical context (e.g., Smith 1997 ot, to a lesser extent, McKay 1975) all the way to more comprehensive (if synthetic and somewhat simplified) treat- ments of the phenomenon as a whole (Mielsch 1987; Carandini 1989b), to simple catalogues of sites with brief conclusions (e.g., Rossiter 1978), or collections of essays (Reutti 1990; Frazer 1998). In other works, villas have been discussed within a general architectural review of both urban and raral houses in the Roman world (De Albentiis 1990; McKay 1975), A whole other series of related issues touches on the réle of villas within the development of Roman agriculture. Structural traits (such as the presence, function and size of productive facilities) are combined with topographical observations (for instance, on the probable size of the estate or its access to commercial routes) and occasionally with palaco-environmental analyses to produce detailed reconstructions of the economy of individual sites (e-g., Carandini and Ricci 1985; Small 1994). In broader works based on those case-studies, the spread of villas during the Late Republic is seen as part of a complex and wider process involving Roman expan- sion, the decline of small ownership, the slave market, long-distance trade of wine and oil, and other related phenomena. In this perspective villa architecture is only one of the indicators of6 Nicola Terrenato a global transformation that is supposed to have changed the face of the ancient economy (Giardina and Schiavone 1981; Carandini 1988), Historical studies treating the development of Roman agriculture ate based on such material evidence as well as on the literary sources Ghatzman 1975; Kolendo 1980; Flach 1990). Mediterranean-wide reconstructions have also been attempted with innovative results (Leveau et al. 1993). In short, the implications of Roman villas in archaeological and historical discourse have become so rich and far-reaching, that the task of offering any kind of generalization, even if on only one particular aspect, appears daunting, As for the specific issue of the origins of the Roman villa, it has been treated in a variety of ways and discussed in different respects in several of the contributions mentioned. However, comparatively little attention has been paid to the broader archaeological context of the emergence of villas, as distinct from architectural innovations or developments in agrarian history. Apart from a few contributions which will described in detail below (and especially Torelli 1990), the debate has tended to focus upon the search for precedents of villas in various parts of the Mediterranean, ranging from Greece to N Africa (e.g., Zanker 1979; Lauter 1998) or upon the political transformations leading to the creation of large estates in Republican Italy (eg., Ochme 1988). The aim of the present contribution, on the other hand, is simply to reflect ‘on some of the archaeological implications of the new evidence, looking at the cultural and social context in which the first villas appeared and paying particular attention to the rela~ tionship between mid-Republican élite settlements in Italy and the modern concept of “Catonian’ villas. To explore all the ramifications of the hypothesis presented here concerning the origins of villas would go far beyond the scope of an article. In particular, a full discussion of what the Auditorium site means for the ongoing debate on the evolution of atrium architecture would require a reconsideration of many more sites, including urban ones. This could be properly treated only in a specific contribution dealing with architectural history rather than settlement types. Similarly, no attempt will be made at re-assessing the overall development of agriculture and land-use in the period, even if it will be necessary to include some observations about patierns of land-ownership in central Italy between the 5th and the 2nd ¢. BC. and their implications for early Roman expansion. ‘The Auditorium site in Rome In the early months of 19%, deep and extensive excavation work for the construction of a new Concert Hall in Rome (called the Auditorium) brought about 2 major archaeological discovery. ‘The area is located on the N side of the city, along the Via Flaminia, some 1.5 km outside the ‘Aurelian Walls, on what was once the Tiber flood plain at the foot of the Parioli hills running ‘east from the left bank of the Tiber (fig. 1). A preliminary excavation showed that massive ancient remains were present (Pisani Sartorio 1995) and a large-scale rescue operation was mounted (see Acknowledgements below). It lasted just over 6 months and had to be planned around the schedule of the building site. Two seasons of fieldwork (spring 1996 and summer 1997) resulted in a near-complete investigation of the preserved sequence. The monumental re- mains were then re-covered, but will be visible again once the new Concert Hall is inaugurated. ‘The Auditorium site clearly appeared to be a major residential complex. Its earlier phases were remarkably well preserved, thanks to the constant accumulation of thick alluvial depos- its. Unfortunately, the upper part of the archaeological deposit and of the structural remains had been massively disturbed by post-classical activity, possibly including the modern con- struction work itself, ‘The sequence of occupation, which will be summarized below, covered an uninterrupted span ‘of about 750 years, from the mid-6th c. B.C. at least to the end of the 2nd c. A.D. (fig. 2). The final abandoriment of the site cannot be precisely dated because of the disturbances already re- ferred to, The exceptional character of the Auditorium site, however, became apparent as soon as the size and quality of its Archaic and Early Republican remains were revealed. Virtually {for the first time an élite Roman settlement was shown to have a continuity of occupation and,The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 7 Fig. 1. Location of the Auditorium site Fig. 2. Auditorium, view of the site from the air (Ricci and Terrenato 1999). above all, of function that linked it with the earliest history of the city. The completely ‘unanticipated consequence was that the site prompted a reconsideration of the prehistory and early development of villas. The new evidence is relevant for a variety of issues ranging from. architectural history to the social conditions prevailing in the Early and Middle Republic. Some of these implications were touched upon in an interim report published soon after the completion of the work (Carandini ¢ al. 1997), and the preparation of a final excavation re- port is currently in progress. The present paper will rely only on the information already pub- lished, supplemented by Ricci and Terrenato 1999. While it is entirely possible that defini- tive analysis of the stratigraphy may change some of the details of the reconstruction sketched below, the broad development of the site appears quite firmly established, providing a reliable basis for the general archaeological anc historical points that will be made here. Phase 1 ‘The earliest building dates to the mid-6th c. B.C. and seems to cover a much smaller area than its later versions. A rectangular courtyard gave access on three sides to fairly small rooms, one of which has a raised. floor and contains the remains of an oven or kiln (fg. 3) Ithasa simple oval fring chamber, built with tuff fagments bound with clay and plastered internally with fine clay, reddened by use (fig. 4). Traces ofa hearth ‘were identified in another room, which also seemed to have a ceramic bowl sunk into the flor. Beaten earth floors have been excavated in several rooms. The latest ceramic materials associated with them date tothe rmid-6th ¢. 8 (eg, bucchero bowls similar to types Rasmussen 2 and 3; Carandini etal. 1997, 123 8). The walls were built without foundation trenches using irregular angular pieces of a local reddish volcanic rock. (‘tafo lionato’; see Montanari and Ammerman 1995) bound with yellow clay. A short stretch of an even flimsier wall (possibly belonging toa shed of some kind} abuts the NE corer of the building,8 Nicola Terrenato Fig. 3. Auditorium, reconstructed Fig. 4. Auditorium, remains of the oven or kiln (Carandini etal. 1997). plan of the building in Phase 1 (Carandini etal. 1997). Phase 2 About half a century ater a radical re-organization of the site took place. Even if afew of the existing, walls were re-used in the new construction, a much larger structure was created. Its main feature is a building that covers about twice the area ofthe previous one, aa result ofa remarkable expansion to the north (fg 5)-A different and much more refined building technique is employed, the layout is much more regular and ozthogonal, and the floor levels are raised considerably. The new building is centered upon a larger courtyard, probably reached through is W side. This open-air space was drained by a narrow chan- nel, Built with stone slabs and running approximately from the center of the yard to the entrance If indeed. access to the complex was on this side, the drain may have lowed into a road or into a channel connected. with 2 road, On the opposite side of the courtyard there is a post-hole associated with a narrow trench running along the same line a the wall of the zoom tothe south. Ths could be interpreted as traces ofa timber framing of some sor, closing off and pechaps covering the E side ofthe yard. Inthe same area a great quantity of small holes may suggest wooden bolts, pezhaps to keep a wooden flooring in place. These features are clearly related to activites earzied out around an oil press, whose bed was found in an exceptional state of preservation (lig 6)-Itis a single massive square tuff slab, with a cieular groove discharging into two dug out receptacles (cf. the arrangement described in Lafon 1993), They are cut directly into the earth layers, forming together a roughly circular shape, and are clearly functional tothe collection of oil and lees flowing from the press, inva way that recalls the struct genalla of later agronomic sources (eg, Col. 1252.10; cf. Mattingly 1996). incidentally, this is one of the easiest and largest olive presses ever found in Italy (cf. Rossiter 1981). A small square room, projecting out ofthe rectangular perimeter, les directly behind the press. On the side, the courtyard geve access to three rectangular rooms, an architectural rangement that would be maintained throughout the subsequent occupation ofthe site: an alum would take the place of the courtyard, and a tablinuon flanked by two square rooms will have almost exactly the same size and position as the thee northern rooms in this phase ‘The part of the building is divided into three larger rooms and four smaller ones. Ohe of them contains a well faced with tuff slabs and the mouth of which is fitted with the upper section ofa lium. [tis connected ‘with a row of slabs made out ofa tougher type of voleanie rock (pepering!) which may have been a working surface. In the opposite comer of the room remains of a hearth have been uncovered. In an adjoining small room, two flat tiles st inthe floor axe essocated with burnt layers and may representa cooking surface. The ‘oven ofthe previous phase, on the other hard, is obliterated. The frequency of large dalia fragments in this part ofthe building may indicate a storage area, The latest materials found inthe building and in occupation layers ofthe complex date between the end ofthe 6th and the fis half ofthe Sth c B.C. (eg, a bucchero kylix type Rasmussen 5 or a black-figured Segmentschalen kyix; Carandini etal, 1997, 128 n.14). The building technique is entirely compatible with a date of this kind. It is ashlar masonry in regular stretchers that employs a much better local tuff than the previous phase, the grey variety known as ‘cappelacsio” (for a definition, see Montanari and Ammerman 1985). The main walls have no foundation trenches but thick leveling layers were deposited against them once they were bull Partion walls may then be added on top. | | |The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 9 Fig. 5. Auditorium, reconstructed Fig. 6. Auditorium, the bed of the oil press (Carandini etal. 1997), plan of the building in Phase 2 (Carandini et al, 1997), This procedure finds precise comparanda especially in the élite residential block by the N slope of the Palatine as well as ina series of major Roman moruiments built inthis period such as the early phases ofthe [Regia and Fons Jutumnae and the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus itself (f.Cifani 1985, with full biblio- ‘graphical review). South of the main building lies another complex, which was only partially brought to light during the se ‘ond phase ofthe excavation. It is composed of a vast open-air space flanked by a series of rooms of different shapes and sizes and other smaller courtyards (Ril and Terrenato 1955, figs 7-8). Its building technique is ‘much coarser and its general layout much less regular. Itseems to be connected with the productive activities going on atthe site. This stracture has provisionally been attributed to phase 2, but its associated mat are still being studied and chronological shifts are possible. Its occupation surfaces were only partially ‘exposed and two subsequent phases in this complex are probable. A full discussion, therefore, must await the full publication by the excavators. Even apart from such uncertainties, however, ifs significance for the argument made here seems modest, given that its use wes limited in time, it served different purposes, and it ‘was clearly separated from the residential part. In this phase, the Auditorium site seems to assume a starkly innovative architectural form, reflected in its size and layout as well as in the quality of the materials and techniques used to construct it. As will be discussed below, the complex has no parallel yet in contemporary rural settlements, even if it may be similar to that on the N slope of the Palatine (now fully published; Carafe. 1995). The layout ofthe Auditorium in this phase, though still quite distinctive, is approaching what will later be the ‘grammar’ of atrium architecture (Wallace-Hadrill 197). The three northern cooms are in all likelihood to be secn as reception spaces, with a marked axial relationship with the courtyard in front of them. However, the separation between productive and residential areas is not as clearly marked as in later plans, especially in view of the position of the oil press. The combination of all these traits makes the main building of phase 2 at the ‘Auditorium a unique monument with a crucial importance for understanding the origins and development of the very concept of the Roman villa Phase 3 ‘The existing building was maintained with only modest alterations for almost two centuries, during which period some of the internal arrangements on theS side were modified. Towards the transition between the 4thand the 37d c. BC, however, wide-ranging internal renovations were carried out within the existing perimeter. There isa general raising of the floor levels, presumably in esponse to frequent flooding, and a large new space is created in the $ half of the site (fig. 7). This appears to be another courtyard, which completely obliterated the well and the cooking area; a new hearth was created on its S side. A floor surface is created with sand and pebbles, with its central sector carefully laid with regular tuf slabs. This paved space is associated with a small rectangular tank made of a large, seooped-out tuff block which sticks out of the floor. A narrow channel inthe same material drains the courtyard, ‘The residential part now seems to be more clearly separated from the productive one, since the oil press and its wooden framing are abandoned. On the same side of the main courtyard three new rooms are added,10 Nicola Terrenato Fig. 7. Auditorium, reconstructed Fig. 8. Auditorium, Acheloos comer tile (Carandini et al. 1997) plan of the building in Phase 3 (Carandini etal. 1997) with tu ashlar walls of beautiful quality. New channels drain the expanded openvair space, one of uff slabs on the W side and one of cover tiles (ibries) leading south. The latest diagnostic materials associated ‘with this phase are early black glaze (“venice nera’) fragments datable tothe late dthvearly 3rd c. B.C. A remarkable object, carefully deposited in the courtyard during the following phase could, on stylistic ‘grounds, belong to this arrangement its a painted architectural terracotta, a valley tle bent diagonally, to bbe placed at one ofthe four internal comers of a complucium (Ginouvés and Martin 1992, 185), The comer that would overhang on the impluaium has a rain spout surmounted by a protome of a river god with the attributes of Acheloos (Bg. 8 cf. sler 1969; 199). The area was exposed to floods from the Tiber, hence the reference toa relevant deity. The high Hellenistic style would be entirely consistent with the chronology of either phase: t could have been put in place around the time the building was renovated or shortly thereafter, maintained for some time (as can happen to architectural terracotias) ard finally deposited much later than its date of production. Its design clearly requires a compluviate roofing system. The presence of such a structure inthis period is not impossible, since its remains would have been obliterated by the deep late- Republican conctete foundation forthe impluvium. Possibly, then, another important element of classic atrium architecture made its appearance at the site in this perio. Phase 4 and later A radical renovation of the bullding took place shortly afterwards, around the middle ofthe Src. B.C. ‘Most ofthe existing walls were replaced by new structures and the floors were raised again. As the plan is snow perfectly symumetzcal, it resembles many other Late Republican examples (fig §) The courtyard becomes atypical cruciform atrium, with atablinum flanked by reception rooms on the N side and alae and smaller rooms (cubicua?) onthe sides. At the Send the atrium narzows into fauces that turn lft and lea to the main door on the W side, where it hed probably stood ever since the eailiest occupation. A new drainage channel, also running west, is built of terracotta tubul. The floor of the fablimrm preserves an opus signinum floor decorated with white tesseme. Traces of tuf slabs used as flooring have been uncovered in other rooms, one of which contains a hearth. ‘As.a result ofthe renovation and expansion of the residential area, the southern, functional part of the building is lett considerably seduced in size. In its courtyard a well faced in tuf slabs is dug and a cooking area is arranged on one side All these alterations can be dated to the central part of the Src. on the basis of fragments of black glaze pottery (Carandini etal. 1997, 198 n33). The building technique has some similari- ties with, buts much coarser than, those used before, combining headers and stretchers and different kinds of ‘ui. The blocks are only roughly how, often not rectangular, and have rough edges. The absence of mortar is also in line with the proposed chronology. rom the Late Republic onwards, the development ofthe Aucltorium site is comparable with that of many other villas in Tyrtenian central Italy of similar size and pla, although the continued use ofits older opus ‘quadratuom walls sets it somewhat apart from the rest. Indeed, during this period (in which most ofthe other villas were created), few alterations were made tothe structure, which needed only to retain the grandiosityThe Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa u b ig. 9. Auditorium, reconstructed plan of the bh building in Phase 4 (Carandini et a. 197) Fig. 10 (right). Auditorium, sructrl plan ofthe Poa building after Phase 4 (Carandini et al. 1997). st had in the Sth c. B.C. tobe on a par with its contemporary peers. The floor level was raised again and the ‘existing structures were occasionally patched with similar materials, while opus reticuletunt was employed for a long wall running along the W side of the site (including the secondary structures to the south), prob- ably to screen the complex and its main entrance (fig. 10). Large rectangular rooms (in opus caementicium) ‘were added on both sides of the main building, and the same technique is used for a thick foundation in the center of the atrium, clearly functional to an impluvium pool, drained by a channel running west: Only the foundations of these concrete structures are preserved, the whole upper patt of the sequence having been decapitated by post-classical disturbance. For the same reason very litte can be said about the later phases and abandonment of the site. A few inhumations, with virtually no grave goods, have been found in the NW part of the site, clearly deposited after the obliteration of the complex. The scanty datable remains seem to suggest a date around the end of the 2nd or the 3rd c. AD. Rural élite residence in the Sth and 4th ¢. B.C. Building upon the necessarily brief survey of the main sequence recovered at the Auditor- tum, we can begin to explore some of its historical and archaeological implications. Such an ‘unusual discovery cannot be properly understood without a comprehensive examination of the evidence pertaining to rural élite residence during the Republic. When the other known rele- vvant sites are considered, the Auditorium one appears to be unique in several respects. First and foremost, no other known Late Republican villa has such a long history of élite occupation, extending back into the late Archaic period. There are no immediate comparanda in Italy for its 5th ¢, B.C. phase. It thus provides us with an exceptional document of rural aristocratic residence for the Early and Middle Republican periods. Thirdly, it is located well within the ager Romanus antiquus, the original territory that Rome controlled as a city-state before it began its expansion (Colonna 1994). In sharp contrast with the distinctiveness of its early phases, however, as a villa of the late Ist c. B.C. the Auditorium site has very little that sets it apart from the many contemporary examples of that building type, except perhaps the old- fashioned appearance of the existing ashlar masonry in ‘cappellaccio’ blocks (on this building technique ef. Cifani 1995). It is precisely this link between an exceptional Archaic settlement and a fairly ordinary late-Republican one that constitutes the exciting archaeological element.2 Nicola Terrenato The cultural link made explicit by such contin- uity and superimposition can provide new insights into the processes that led to the emergence and diffusion of such a central, if diverse, feature in classical rural landscapes. A new seiflement type ‘The absence of comparanda may suggest that the Auditorium site in its earlier phases is an exception, a unicum perhaps of curiosity value but having little representativity. Alternatively, it can be seen as belonging to a class of settlements which have yet been found only in very limited numbers. Some little- considered evidence supporting the latter hypothesis may come from another site, the villa at Grottarossa. It lies a little to the north of the Auditorium, along the same via Flaminia. The site was excavated in the 1940s but the meager published information makes it hard to interpret. Only a few brief interim reports appeared (Stefani 1946, Lugli 1948; see also Messineo 1991, 86-95) and they do not in- clude much firm chronological evidence. A recent re-analysis, however, has confirmed Fig, 11, Grotarosa, structural plan (Stefani 1945). fhe existence of two main building phases and has attributed them tentatively to the Archaic and mid-Republicen periods (Cifani 1998). To the earlier phase belong only a few walls seen in a deeper sounding carried out in the $ part of the site, They are made of blocks of ‘cappellaccio’ tuff and appear to be associated with materials of the 6th c. B.C. The building they were a part of extended beyond the investigated area and its overall size cannot be guessed at. The plan of the later edifice, however, is pre- served almost in its entirety (fig. 11) It is a massive residential building centered on an atrium, of considerable size and architectural articulation. Its dating is open to discussion, since no reliable stratigraphic evidence was published or even recorded. Its building technique, an ash- Jar masonry of well-hewn tuff blocks, is generally compatible with an Early or Middle Repub- lican date, as is suggested by the absence of mortar. Support for a similar date for the main complex is also provided by the presence of architectural terracottas dating to the Sth c. B.C. (Gtefani 1946, fig. 5) and of a system of vast cisterns and tunnels cut in the bedrock beneath the villa and datable to the 4th c. B.C. (Lugli 1948). Even if these elements were not contempor- aneous with the main building, they would still indicate the presence there of an élite establishment in the Early Republican period, According to standard views on atrium development (cf. the review by Wallace-Hadrill, 1997), the plan at Grottarossa might seem to point more towards a mid-Republican date (but see Carafa 1995 for an alternative chronology of the origins of the Roman atrium). It is also possible that sub-phases within the main phase, including renovations and alterations, might have been missed by the investigators. Notwithstanding the grave chronological uncertainties, however, the second phase at Grottarossa appears to be the closest known parallel for the ‘Auditorium phase 2. In comparison with the Auditorium sequence, the plan seems to be closer to that of phase 4, because of the general symmetry and shape of the atrium, but it would be unwise to use such an ‘evolutionist’ argument as a chronological indicator. In any case, even if its actual date of construction turned out to be towards the later end of the spectrum (ie, duxing the 3rd c.), it would still be quite out of proportion with most early villas and much closer in size and layout to the Auditorium site in its contemporary version (phases 2 and 3) than to anything else (see below).The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 13 ‘Thus, one can perhaps surmise the existence of a hitherto unrecognized type of Roman rural ‘ite residence, datable between the Early and Middle Republic, of which Grottarossa phase 2 and Auditorium phases 2, 3 and 4 are the only known representatives." It appears to be a very distinctive class of monument within its chronological context. Its scarcity is probably an indicator that they were uncommon in the landscapes of the 5th and 4th c. B.C. However, they may also be under-represented in the archaeological record. Excavations of villa sites seldom each the very early levels, which are frequently underneath decorated floors and painted walls or other features that are not ordinarily removed (for a similar bias in the urban archae- ology of Rome, see Ricci and Terrenato 1999a). They may also be concentrated in areas, such as the environs of Rome, where archaeological visibility is made difficult by the superimposition of modem structures: the remains of the Auditorium site lay more than 6 m below the modern street and would never have been found, had a large underground parking not been built, Thus, it is not unthinkable that other examples will be located in central Italy, and we may note that field surveys in several areas of S Btruria indicate the presence of a few massive rural residential sites dating back to the 6th and 5th c., with occupation extending well into the Hellenistic period (Enei 1993; Cifani 1998). They are characterized on the surface by squared tuff blocks and fragments of architectural terracottas; the absence of votive materials seems to exclude an interpretation as shrines or sanctuaries. Of course, the layout and architecture of such sites, at present known only from surface evidence, could differ. What matters for the pre- sent argument is that their function and rOle in the geographic and social landscapes as large tural élite residences could be similar to those of the Auditorium and Grottarossa sites. A similar argument will be made below for the several palaces that are in course of excavation in N Etruria. More generally, the landscapes of central Italy can still reveal unexpected aspects of Archaic élite settlement, because they have never been systematically searched with the possibility of finding such large residential complexes in mind (cf. Vallat forthcoming) ‘The distinctiveness of the proposed new settlement type requires litle discussion. Contem- porary rural sites are much smaller in size, have simpler layouts and employ coarser building techniques (fig, 12). They cannot be mistaken for élite residences, and their interpretation as, small farms cannot be doubted (see, for example, the sites at Torrino and Tartuchino: Bedini 1984; Attolini and Perkins 1992). The social status of their occupants, on the other hand, is, debated. Survey data (see below) suggest that there is a close functional, spatial, and social relationship between the two kinds of site. The distinction between them, however, is sharp: there seems to be little blurring of the boundaries or evidence of intermediate examples, a fact that must reflect social conditions prevailing at the time. Indeed, the only other recognizable settlement type in the Archaic landscapes of central Italy is villages, which are sometimes fortified (Barker 1995, 176-80). They too are not well known, but they probably include both lite and common residences (in a similar way to mediaeval borghi; of, eg, Augenti and Terrenato 2000). The situation does not change radically in the 3rd c. BC. The Auditorium (now at the transi- tion between phases 3 and 4) and Grottarossa sites still appear to be in a league of their own. A few villa sites have remains dated to this period, generally comprising fairly scanty and poorly known structures underlying typical villas of the late Ist c. B.C. Otherwise there is no evidence of massive structures or large covered areas. Still, these early attestations are usually seen as supporting the ‘genetic’ model for the origin of Roman villas. The larger Hellenistic farmsteads, which appear in this period (see below), have also been seen as precursors of classic villas. Even if some of them achieve a considerable size, they are not on a par with Auditorium and Grottarossa. This class of large sites probably stood out in a conspicuous way in ‘he rural landscapes of the Early and Middle Republic. And yet, come the Ist c. BC., they are 1 The site at Selvasecea near Blera, discussed below, may also tur out to belong to this type if our hypothesis about its chronology is correc“4 Nicola Terrenato | Fig. 12. Archaic Farms. 1. Tartuchino Phase I; 2. House B, Luni sul Mignone; 3. Torrino; 4. Tartuchino Phase I; 5. Ficana zone 5b Phase II; 6. Veli Macchia Grande; 7. Lago dell’ Accesa complexes VII and VILL Phases I and I; 8. Lago dell’ Accesa complex I Phase Tl; 9. Lavinium. P= pithos, H = hearth (Attolini and Perkins 1992, fig. 21) rejoined by large numbers of villas of similar architecture and décor. Thus they can be seen to offer a crucial cultural reference for the Late Republican élites. Etruscan influences and social implications While the derivation of Late Republican villas from Early Republican élite residences has bbeen made clear by the Auditorium site, it is harder to point to precise antecedents for the early residences themselves. Given the dearth of direct parallels and models, it could be argued that their closest relatives can be found in what little we know of the so-called Etruscan palaces. ‘They are the only other form of Archaic élite residence that appears to have comparable dimensions and is often located in the countryside. Unfortunately, the only fully excavated andThe Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 15 published example is Murlo? Other sites of the same type appear to exist elsewhere in N Btruria, such as Casale Marittimo and Castelnuovo Berardenga (neither of which is yet well published; cf. Stopponi 1985; Torelli 19992). The list could be much longer if Etrusean rural settlement archaeology were not so overshadowed by funerary and urban studies (cf. Perkins 1999, 1-2), as is suggested by tantalizing surface evidence around Caere and elsewhere. ‘These Etruscan residences, it must be stressed, have very different time-frames compared to cour sites: they emerged earlier and did not last nearly as long. They were generally abandoned in the late 6th c. B.C. (Murlo) or pethaps survived into the early Hellenistic at the latest (pos- sibly Casale Marittimo), and their demise has frequently been connected with the dissolution of petty potentates in favor of urban agglomerations (Torelli 1981, 86). Furthermore, the layout of Muzlo, as reconstructed by the excavators, with its vast square courtyard has very little in common with the more compact plans displayed by our residences. However, the incomplete remains of other palatial sites currently being excavated seem to reveal plans that are much more compatible with the Auditorium one — ice, with smaller rooms and courtyards. Given these differences in architectural and chronological terms, the derivation proposed here cannot but be, for the time being, an indirect and loose one; and it cannot be forgotten that Murlo and the other palaces are located in peripheral areas of N Etruria, while Auditorium and Grottarossa are in the immediate hinterland of a great metropolis. Having said this, and lacking the evidence that could be supplied by the Caeretan sites already mentioned, the basic observation remains that Murlo and Auditorium phase 2 are the only two well-dated rural pre-Hellenistic residences to have a covered area of ‘more than 500 mé, If the two are brought to the same scale (fig. 13), it is clear that they belong to the same " a order of magnitude, especially by comparison with any esas other contemporary building known to us (such as the Fig. 13, Surfaces of Auditorium 3, Murlo, farms at Torrino and Tartuchino, also shown). Torrino and Tartuchino, all at same scale. Astonimn Accepting this hypothetical ascendancy for our sites may have important implications for their interpretation. The N Etruscan palaces are generally viewed as seats of clan leaders and petty kings (eg., Torelli 1981b, 83-87, 173-75), whose political functions are symbolized by the architectural terracottas, roof decorations, and princely burials found associated (Esposito 1999; Torelli 2000). If the owners of our residences were making some sort of reference to such, high-ranking spheres, one may wonder what was their actual social standing in a very differ- ent political world like that of the Early Republic. Recent research shows that the connection ‘may be less tenuous and inappropriate than it might seem. Several indicators point to the fact that a site such as the Auditorium could exist only within the context of some kind of political and social control over its hinterland. (Current reconstructions of Early Republican society present a picture that is perfectly com- patible with the available archacological evidence. Land-ownership in this period is thought, on the basis of a reconsideration of literary and legal sources, to be dominated by the possessum gentilicium (e.g., Capogrossi Colognesi 1994). This entails the control by the gens of large expanses of land, whose exploitation is regulated by the pater, the leader of the clan. He apportions parcels to families belonging to the gens and grants access to the land left communal, mostly represented by pasture, woods and other non-arable areas. It also remains his preroga- tive (although only exceptionally exercised) to re-assign lots. In return, he receives the alleg- iance of clan members (relatives and clients), as well as contributions ranging from crop shares 2 The interpretation of Murlo as an aristocratic palace is unconditionally accepted here (as itis almost universally, eg., Colonna 1986), but a complete and independent ro-assessment of the evidence from this unsatisfactorily documented site is long overdue (cf. De Grummand 1997)16 Nicola Terrenato Fig. 14, The Sth-c, landscape inthe territory of Fidenae (Quilici and Qulici Gigli 1986). and corvée labor to loyalty and support in wat and politics. The whole interaction is governed only by customary law, and it appears to have survived at least until the Licinio-Sextian rogations of 367 B.C. (Capogrossi Colognesi 1989). Only very slowly did the individual form of ‘ownership (originally probably limited to a very small parcel), the dominium ex iure Quiri- tium, become widespread and dominant. This reconstruction is mostly based on references present in the legal and antiquarian sources (frequently written when these Archaic customs had all but disappeared, at least in central regions; Capogrossi Colognesi 1994, 48). It also seems to fit in well with what we know of Early Roman landscapes around the city. Recent surveys have shown a countryside thickly settled with small farms of the kind excavated at Torrino (fig. 14). In these we could picture the habitation of junior clan members and clientes, although one cannot in principle exclude tenants or even free farmers. The discoveries at the Auditorium offer an important indication to support the clan model, since the élite residence appears surrounded by small farms such as those found in the neighbouring territories of Fidenae and Ficulea, immediately to the north and to the east of the Auditorium site (Quilici and Quilici Gigli 1986; 1993). Thus, it seems unlikely that the owners of the Auditorium siteThe Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 7 might have had a large fundus that they cultivated directly. The presence of an oil press, on the other hand, clearly indicates that the site was involved in productive activities, although it is very difficult to reconstruct the context and scale of the activity. Given the proximity of ‘small farms, perhaps a role of collection and redistribution — which would befit a clan chief — could be suggested, The building could be seen as the country seat of a prominent Roman gens. ‘The size, quality of masonry and presence of architectural terracottas? all point in the direction of the highest aristocratic spheres. Only in such high-ranking contexts would buildings of this kind even be conceived. It is in this light that the dramatic transition between phases 1 and 2 at the site must be evaluated, if indeed the former really turns out to be much smaller than the latter. The idea that a family could have risen socially from the status of farmers to that of ranking aristocrats seems unlikely, especially given what we know about the so-called patrician ‘closing’ of the 5th c. (Cornell 1995, 252-56). It seems more appropriate to imagine that at the beginning of the Republic a major established clan felt the need for asserting its control over the landscape, which could have been expressed in another way beforehand, by renovating a structure of lower rank already on their territory. A variety of hypothetical explanations for such a choice could bbe advanced, from an increase in aristocratic competition following the fall of the monarchy, to a wholesale clan move (like that of the Claudii in 504 B.C; Cornell 1995, 157). In any case, itis mote than likely that the Early Republican masters of the Auditorium enjoyed a long-standing ‘traditional relationship with their subordinate farmers. Strategically placed by the Tiber and along the main approach to Rome from Btruria, they could still probably exert a degree of con trol over commercial and military movements. In this perspective they appear to be poised at the transition between the sovereign ruling élite of Murlo and the plutocrat citizens of Late Republican villas such as Settefinestre. Even if they no longer had full political independence, they still exerted over their followers a power rooted in the traditional structure of Roman society. ‘The existence in pre-Hellenistic central Haly of a social system of this kind, with elements in common with later feudalism, is now attested by many indicators. Indeed, outside the indus- ‘rial and commercial sectors of the main centers it probably remained the default structure of local communities throughout the Roman period and beyond (e.g., Augenti and Terrenato 2000). It is an integral ingredient of precisely such societies for aristocrats to display their power conspicuously with visible symbols on the landscape. These may take the form of tumuli (Zifferero 1991) or other exceptional tombs, fortified settlements and so on, even if progressive- ly the urban contexts become the privileged arenas for such symbolic statements (Terrenato and Saggin 1994), Extraordinary rural residences, such as Auditorium phase 2 or Grottarossa phase 2, can be seen to continue in this traditional function, which is at least as important as any productive one. Although only the largest and most powerful clans could afford a palatial structure of the scale of the Auditorium in the Early Republic, a cultural link between these few exceptional sites and the mass of Late Republican villas may hold a clue to understand the origin and nature of this settlement type. The origins of villas By building on the picture outlined above, the issue of the origins of villa may be reconsid- ered. Existing reconstructions of this process cannot accommodate and explain the new archaco- logical evidence. While the discovery of a single site cannot revolutionize our perception of a much larger phenomenon, it can open up new interpretative avenues. At the outset, perhaps it is worth observing that in the debate about the origins of Roman villas three distinct aspects, seem to be entangled: the derivation of the architectural form; the sociology of the first villa- 3 The Acheloos piece isthe only well-preserved terracotta found atthe ste, but many smaller fragments have also been identified.18 Nicola Terrenato owners; and the economic processes that stimulated the spread of this settlement type. These need to be examined separately. The prevailing views will be resumed and then critiqued individually. An architectural, economic and social problem In architectural terms, villas are generally seen to emerge as a building type towards the end of the 3rd or beginning of the 2nd c. B.C. (McKay 1975; De Albentiis 1990). They are seen as somewhat small establishments that would later develop into larger, more luxurious residen- ces, destined to spread in various forms and with various fortunes throughout the Roman empire until its end, sometimes even beyond (Smith 1997). The architectural form would derive from models (not always clearly specified) which would be present elsewhere in the Hellenistic world. These range from farms in Attica or in Carthaginian areas to the Palace of Alexander (Lauter 1998). The Romans are supposed to have lived a “simple, archaic life” until the time of the conquest, which brought them in contact with the decadent luxury of the Hellenistic East (Zanker 1979, 462-63). Its in this area that the Auditorium and Grottarossa sites can suggest a completely differ ‘ent derivation. They show that private luxury was well known to aristocrats at least since the sth c. B.C, and they offer a direct and much closer antecedent to replace generic, oblique, and poorly attested ones. As far as architecture is concerned, it seems reasonable to conclude that classic villa architecture was largely inspired by an ongoing tradition of Etruscan and Roman lite settlements that went back to the Archaic period. It may be true that individual decora- tive elements, such as stone colonnades and mosaics, had been borrowed from Greek styles, but this happened for villas only in the 1st c. BC. (see below), as a result of the spread of new fashions, rather than as a direct consequence of the conquest. In their essentials, such as size, layout, and setting, classic villas simply carried on with the tradition of Early Republican mansions. The latter belonged only to the choicest patrician families and were still being used ‘when the new late-Republican type was created. ‘The economic issue, on the other hand, which has interconnections with the architectural ‘one, is much more complex. Here villas are again seen as drawing on Hellenistic agricultural concepts and as associated with the introduction of a new mode of production (e.g., Frederiksen 1970-71, 838 with references in n.27). This process is generally described as a unilinear model rooted in the economy, but perfectly matched by corresponding architectural and social devel- ‘opments. Thus a three-step evolutionary line is defined (Carandini 1989a; sometimes a late Roman ‘Palladian’ step is added), which would be supported both by the writings of Latin agronomists and by archaeological evidence (fig. 15). In this model, the earliest villas would make their appearance around the 3rd c. 8.C,, as fairly small productive establishments of the kind described by Cato in his treaty on agriculture. They would be Spartan structures represen- ting an expanded form of the smell farms existing in Italy ever since the 6th c. B.C. The transition from such family-run economy to a form of investment agriculture based on slaves ‘would be influenced by Greek, Sicilian, and even Carthaginian rural organizations (e.g. Picard and Charles-Picard 1958, 83-89), as well as prompted by economic and political developments brought about by the conquest (eg., Oehme 1988, 26-27; Sirago 1995, 243-53). Over time they would evolve from productive units with only moderate allowance made for luxury, into massive and quasi-industrialized agricultural establishments with a much larger pars urbana, by the Ist c. BCC having high-quality floors and decorations. These villas would correspond to those envisioned in Varro’s De e rustica. During the Empire, a further development would take place, with the diffusion of magnificent mansions involved in hyperspecialized and complex economic activities of the kind described by Columella. Many examples of residences of both kinds, dating from the Caesarian period onwards, have been excavated and they represent a fairly consistent type, which will be referred to below (for simplicity’s sake) as ‘classic villas’ A compatible evolution is suggested in discussions of the ownership of villas. The early mas- ters would spring from the yeomanry of the Middle Republic, taking advantage of the opportun- ities offered by Roman expansion and commercial intensification. A considerable proportion ofThe Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 19 Fig. 15. The three stages of villa development, Top: Catonian (Via Gabinay; ‘middle: Varronian (Franco- lise Posto Phase ID); bottom: Columellan (Villa of the Volusii Saturnini) (after Carandini 19898).20 Nicola Terrenato Fig. 16. Hellenistic farmsteads. From left to right and top to bottom, (top) Monteforeo; Giardino Vecchio; (qiiddle) Villa Sambuco; Via Gabina; (bottom) Nocellis Mancamasone; Posta Crusta (after Volpe 1990). these agricultural entrepreneurs would belong to the great aristocratic families, but the other ‘owners would be self-made men, who through rational re-investing of their profits in a booming, market increased their wealth exponentially (Torelli 19812). Cato’s long life, as hinted at by himself, would epitomize the transition from soldier/farmer to entrepreneur. The heyday of these sites would be the Late Republican and Early Imperial periods (Manacorda 1980), after which a combination of factors, including the competition of provincial products and higher labor costs, would put the system in crisis. By the Middle and Late Empire, the imperial hand would seize many villas, and private owners would largely be courtiers with little or no entrepreneurship (Carandini 1989a, but see Patterson 1987) For all aspects of the origins of villas the discoveries at the Auditorium and reconsideration of Grottarossa reveal weaknesses in the received wisdom. The architectural issue is the most straightforward. The design of ‘classic villas’ is clearly shown to be derived from older Roman residential models, which in turn may be influenced in their essentials by Etruscan palaces. This conclusion thoroughly debunks the theories about eastern influence, which, in truth, had only the traditional cliché about Greek cultural superiority to sustain them.The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa at ‘The social issues, on the other hand, are far more complex. The idea of successful farmers progressively becoming villa-owners essentially depends on the existence of intermediate forms between the two settlement types and on the sociological and ethical implications of Cato's ‘writings and political actions. These are the two lines of evidence frequentiy referred to in sup- port of the concept of a ‘Catonian’ phase in the development of villas. Indeed, most of the mod- em literature confidently assumes that an ‘ideal chronological sequence’ centered on the Caton ian villa can be reconstructed (Marcone 1997, 131; the connection with the emergence of amphora productions is emphasized in Morel 1989, 495-98). However, even a summary reconsid- eration shows that the actual support for such views is weaker than it is generally thought. In particular, the match between archaeological and literary evidence is problematic, especially if the latter is taken at its face value. Hellenistic farmsteads and ‘Catonian’ villas Taking an unbiased look at rural settlement in central Italy in the 3rd and 2nd c. B.C, one cannot but conclude that there are very few traces of the small transitional villas, modest and functional, whose existence is so often taken for granted. Most of the evidence can be attributed to two categories: farmsteads built in the Hellenistic period, and structural or ariefactual remains of limited consistency beneath classic villas. The few pieces of evidence falling outside these can, instead, be re-intezpreted in a different light (see below). The diffusion of farm- steads in 3rd- and 2nd-c. Italy is a well attested phenomenon, affecting many regions of the peninsula (Torelli 1999, 8-11). A fairly wide sample has been excavated by now (fig. 16): includes Giardino Vecchio and Villa Sambuco in Etruria (Attolini et al. 1982); Via Gabina 1 near Rome (Widrig 1987); Vittimose in Samnium (Dyson 1983); and Posta Crusta in Apulia (the evidence is well reviewed in Volpe 1990, 109-11). They are all fairly similar in size and layout, with a few rooms around a courtyard, and are generally believed to derive from Greek and Macedonian models (Rossiter 1978, 101; Volpe 1990, 113). Although their eastern connection is not entirely unquestionable, these Italian sites will be referred to here as ‘Hellenistic farmsteads’ purely for the sake of maintaining clarity in the present terminological confusion. They undoubtedly indicate that socio-economic changes are taking place, as is frequently argued, but their connection with Catonian villas and with the development of classic villas is much less straightforward. While they may go together with an agricultural intensification otherwise attested by amphora production and circulation, they are interpretable as proper villas (in the normal sense of the word) only with some difficulty, given their modest size and the absence of major processing structures. Villa Sambuco, for instance, is interpreted by its excavators as a Catonian farm (Ostemberg 1962), but in broader syntheses it tends to be regarded as an embryonic form at most (Carandini 1989b).* ‘These farmsteads have probably been correctly associated with some important processes characterizing central Italy in the Hellenistic period. Their specific relationship with classie villas, however, is more problematic, given the absence of any transitional form between the two settlement types, which are radically different in size and quality of materials. Indeed, even the spatial continuity between the two is the exception rather than the rule (it is only. attested at Via Gabina and at Posto, which are often cited as decisive proof of the existence of a formative stage [e.g., Vallat 1995, 60-63), and many such Hellenistic farmsteads were abandoned some time before the heyday of villas, which casts further doubt on this highly hypothetical descent. It must be stressed in addition that the presence of a simple farm on the site where a large villa will be built two or three centuries later does not prove any archi- tectural or social similarity between the two settlements and their occupants. The other class of evidence includes isolated and fragmentary earlier walls found underneath classic villas (e.g., at Buccino [Dyson 1983)), or the recovery of earlier artifacts as residues (Fentress 1990). These 4 Moreover, farms of not much smaller dimensions and displaying similar building techniques were present since the Archaic period (fig, 12; the eviclence is well reviewed in Attolini and Perkins 1992, M12-15; see also the site at Laurentina, Bedini 1990).2 Nicola Terrenato o Fig. 17. Moltone di Tolve (Torelli 19998). elements have no bearing on the issue at hhand, as their presence could be explain- ed in a variety of ways other than as farms developing into villas. Their inter pretation as remains of ‘Catonian’ estab- lishments is an assumption based on an @ priori teading of the sources rather than ‘one supported by the material evidence. Other sites often mentioned as ‘typi- cal’ Catonian villas (e.g., McKay 1975, 104) are in reality much later in date or their chronology is uncertain. At most the earliest phase is early Ist c. B.C, or very end of the 2nd c. at the earliest. Such is the case of Posto (where in any case the early building is a Hellenistic farmstead [Cotton 1979]) and San Roceo (Cotton and Métraux 1985), both near Francolise. Another complex frequently cited in connection with the origins of villas is the Villa of the Mysteries, generally dated to the late 2nd ¢. B.C. (eg, Mielsch 1987, 37-39). Quite aside from the fact that such a large and luxurious complex would hardly fit Cato’s descriptions, it must be remembered that its chronology is entirely dependent on the traditional sequencing of Pompeian building techni- ques, which is now being comprehen- sively re-assessed (given that the strati- graphic evidence from many recent exca- vations in Pompeii suggests a much later date for many key buildings [Nappo 1997; papers in Bon and Jones 1997]). A similar conclusion can be reached for a few other villa sites dated to the 2nd c. B.C. on dubious stylistic grounds (e.g., the villa at San Vito di Salpi in Apulia [Volpe 1990, 52-53) Tt remains to discuss the only two sites, datable to the 3rd or 2nd c. B.C. with any degree of certainty and having a consid- erable size: Moltone in Lucania, and Blera (Selvasecca) in S Etruria. The Mol- tone di Tolve (fig. 17), in particular, has been authoritatively cited as a crucial transitional form (Torelli 1990; 1999b).. There is a rather small phase of the 4th © BC, replaced by a much larger one in the following century. Even if Moltone phase 2 has been identified as the typi- cal attestation of a Catonian villa, there are several elements that invite caution.The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 23 ' os tom t Fig. 18. Blera (Carandini 19896). First, it would be an imitation in the periphery and before the conquest of a Roman model that is not attested in the center. Its setting on a hilltop in the uplands around Potenza, controlling a transhumance route, seems hardly compatible with investment agriculture; indeed, the ‘excavators suggested an economy based on the pastoral sector, as is supported by architectural terracottas with sheep protomes (Russo Tagliente 1992, 173-80). The use of these status symbols, should point to the residence of a local chief rather than to a productive settlement employing slaves to raise cash-crops. Thus Moltone could be seen as a small-scale version of the grand palaces of central Italy, fitting the social réle of a petty lord dominating a marginal area.> ‘The site at Selvasecca, near Blera, on the other hand, is puzzling (Berggren and Andrén 1969). It stands out from the others in terms of size, layout, and quality of materials employed. (and so is considered by Carandini [1989b] the earliest villa in the proper sense of the word). Its central peristyle, the eastern colonnaded room, and the well-executed ashlar masonry are all status indicators (fig. 18). Unfortunately, the only interim report published leaves room for ‘major uncertainties in its interpretation. In particular, the 2nd-c. B.C. date given for its construc- tion should have raised far more perplexity than it generally has. No evidence for such a chronology is provided in the report, and the elements suggesting a much earlier date, namely the many architectural terracottas attributable to the 5th and 4th c. B.C., are insufficiently discussed. They are explained away as the product of a local manufactory supplying local sanctuaries. While the presence of matrices indicates that at least some of the terracottas were produced at the site, it remains unclear with which of the exposed structures they would be associated. It seems quite possible that the terracottas were used to decorate an early phase of the building, part of which could have been incorporated in a later complex with a similar function (as happened at the Auditorium). The building technique used at Blera, by the way, is consistent with an Early Republican date. The excavators rejected this conclusion because of the then-prevailing axiom that terracottas were found only in religious buildings (e.g., Bodthius 1978 [but written in the late 1960s] 59-62). Thanks to sites such as the Regia at Rome, Acqua- ossa, Murlo, Grottarossa, and the Auditorium itself, we now know that exceptional public and private residences could possess such refinements (Torelli 1981b, 174-81). 5 This could be seen as a Hellenistic equivalent ofthe kind of regulus figure suggested in Torelli 1999a,ory Nicola Terrenato The doubts raised by the current interpretation of the site at Blera make it dangerous to uphold it as the sole instance of otherwise-unattested Catonian villas; instead, it is tempting to see it as another instance of élite residence beginning in the 5th c. B.C. and carrying on its function into the Imperial age (to which period date some mosaics). Both Moltone and Blera may be interpreted as smaller, though still exceptional, palaces of local lords, built before the 2nd c. B.C. Their building technique and the presence of terracottas, both point to the Mid- Republican phases of the Auditorium and Groitarossa as comparanda. In terms of size, they are in an intermediate position, above 500 m? (the maximum for Hellenistic farmsteads) but below 1500 m? (characteristic of the palaces). While planned on a somewhat less grandiose scale, they are closer to the élite residence than to the Hellenistic farmsteads that will become common only well after Blera and Moltone were built, If one were to judge on the basis of the archaeological data alone, one would conclude that there is extremely little evidence that 3rd- and 2nd-c. transitional villas existed at all; instead, the earliest generation of classic villas appears at the beginning of the Ist c. B.C. even if the type but becomes really widespread only under Caesar and Augustus (as Vallat 1995, 60] brilliantly suspected). The burden of proof on this issue then naturally falls upon the literary sources (D’Arms 1971, 1-17). In this connection Seneca’s description (Ep. 86.4) of the villa at Literum where Scipio Africanus retired is regularly cited. The Neronian writer was impressed by the modesty of the residence and by its smoke-darkened bath, commenting that it looked like an exile more than a buen retiro (Mielsch 1987, 35). There are many reasons not to take this narrative too literally, from using Scipio as a moral example to the unlikelihood that his bath arrangements had been preserved for three centuries (Bodel 1997, 3-5) 6 Cato and agricultural moratizing The scepticism about the Liternum villa can be extended to the often-quoted textual material about Cato and his estates. To be fair, only archeologists and historians of Roman agriculture have tended to take the Censor’s own writings (and the historical and biographical material associated with him) at face value, whilst others have been more cautious (e.g., Astin 1978). Cato's De agri cultura presumes the existence of a medium-sized farmstead with a workforce of over 2 dozen slaves. In this work and elsewhere, the Censor exalted parsimony and chastised luxury and decorations (Astin 1978, 94). He claimed to have toiled among Sabine rocks in his youth (ORF, fr. 128) and so seems to be a living example of a small farmer becoming a slave driver by dint of modesty and perseverance. However, when the cultural context of his life and works is taken into full account, this simple equation may turn out to be a little hasty. Since Cato descended from the local gentry of Tusculum, possibly from an equestrian family (Astin 1978, 1-3), he is unlikely to have been bom in a small farm. He will have inherited a considerable amount of land. The reference to his own handiwork cannot be taken to mean that his family relied upon it to run their estate: rather, it is an indication of a good moral upbringing (including a ‘hands-on approach’ to his domains). This is perfectly in line with his exaltation of agriculture as the only worthy pursuit, a topos that will be revisited by later Latin writers (many of whom, beginning with Cato himself, made money in a variety of less respectable ways). We must see in the same light the mention of farmers and soldiers in the preface to the De agri cultura, a treaty not otherwise dealing with small-scale farming (the ‘disconnect’ between the introduction and the rest has been noted, e.g. by Sirago 1995, 190). This is a topical laus of agriculture (cf. the discussion in Stone 1998). Cato could not seriously be suggesting that such slave-run villas could help fill the ranks of the army (indeed, precisely the opposite will be the complaint of the Gracehi; Frederiksen 1970-71, 331-33). ‘The only element that carries any weight here is the establishment described. So far, how- ever, archaeologists have failed to bring to light settlements that fit the bill, unless one is 6 Ttalso seems ironic that, in order to find an example of Catonian parsimony, scholarship has to turn toa ‘member ofthe gens that Cato accused of orientalizing luxury.The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 25 prepared to admit that they were one and the same as the Hellenistic farmsteads, which were certainly not introduced at the time of the Censor. Cato's villas are also reputed to have been ‘unplastered (ORF fr. 174), but such a curious specimen of building not only has not been found but ‘would be hard to imagine, given what we know of the architecture of the period. This mis- match between the single source and the mass of the archaeological evidence (many rural sites of Cato’s day having been excavated) urges caution. Until a number of villas corresponding to Catonian norms are found, itis safer to regard the Censor as unrepresentative of the contempor- ary Roman nobility. While agriculture was probably intensifying in the economy of the period, it cannot be assumed that it took place at sites such as those attributed to Cato (a similar view is already in Frederiksen 1970-71). The only villas that can be firmly dated to this epoch are the Auditorium phase 2, Grottarossa phase 2, and possibly Blera, and they do not fit the description in style or function. Instead, they may have to do with the villae expolitae depre- cated by the Censor himself (ORF fr. 176; Wallace-Hadrill 1998), which very few commentators have attempted to identify in reality. In conclusion, we may view Cato’s praise of a simple and modest rural life as a political argument steeped in contemporary politics. Indeed, he might have been purposefully down- playing the social importance of aristocratic palaces like the Auditorium, implicitly criti- cizing them as luxurious and decadent. His political agenda was that of promoting local aristo- cracies like his own that had no history of aggrandizing expenses (Astin 1978, 67). A skilled orator, he may have been trying to turn to his advantage one of his handicaps as a homo novus, at the same time trying to embarrass the sophisticated. patricians oppdsing him for their status symbols. Cato was contributing to a long-lived literary topos (McKay 1975, 100-1), that of a Golden Age in which the Italian countryside was populated only by austere farmers of equal social condition, whose allegiance went straight to the Republic. Another Sabine, Varro, was particularly vocal, contrasting the good simplicity of old with the wantonness of his day (RR 2, praef. 1 #4). Again, the ideological context of his deplorations has not been sufficiently con- sidered by archaeologists of the countryside. Varro's celebration of small-scale farming is part of the Caesarian and Augustan propaganda in support of the massive land-distributions (Girago 1995, 38). ‘The urban senatorial élites approved of Komines novi from a supposedly uncontaminated periphery who preached continence, so long as this was not used as a stick to harm them ically. The idea that wealth and vast estates were a later development and the result of thrift served well to conceal the strong élitist nature that had always characterized Roman society. The same went for the related myth that the aristocrats of old lived simply and that luxury had been unknown until contact with the decadent Greeks (e.g,, Plin., NH 186 ff; deconstructed in De Albentiis 1990, 58-59). In the days of the Late Republic all this discourse swas a distant reflection of reality. Perhaps it was true that the aristocrats of old did get their hands dirty more frequently than did their Late Republican descendants. But rural sites such as the Auditorium phase 2 and Grottarossa phase 2, as well as urban ones such as the complex on the N Slope of the Palatine (Carafa et al. 1995), show that, at least for some Roman and Etruscan clans, luxurious residences were known long before any supposed Eastern corrupting influence arrived. Such long traditions were in all likelihood valued and upheld in senatorial conservative circles; and what writers like Varro were really criticizing is not ownership of imposing residences, but rather the extravagant expenditure made by parvenus on delicacies such as peacocks or thrushes (Varro, RR 3.2.15). A comparison of built surfaces Since the reality and significance of Catonian villas can be seriously doubted, at least in architectural and sociological terms, it may be worthwhile to reconsider the whole ‘genetic’ approach to the development of Roman villas. The simple and appealing model that there is a progressive evolution from small and modest to large and luxurious appears to be shaken by doubts over the very existence of one of its formative phases (the phase of the Srd and 2nd c. BC) and by the discovery of Early Republican palaces. The problem is cleazly brought out by a26 Nicola Terrenato Fig. 19. Histogram comparing built surfaces of Republican farms and villas. comparison of built surfaces. In the histogram (fig. 19), the shaded bars represent a succession of sites chosen to show the supposed evolution from small farms to classic villas. Even when one tries to build the best possible case for the evolutionary view (shown by the solid line), the sequence assembled cannot but look contrived and uneven. To begin with, there is the lack of a reasonable example of a Sth-c. farm. Then the progression must necessarily move on (lacking any other example) to two very debatable sites such as Moltone and Blera, while use of more appropriate evidence (such as the Hellenistic farmsteads of the Via Gabina and Giardino Vecchio) would produce an almost flat line (hatched on the graph). Quite apart from the wide ‘geographical and cultural range, there remains a steep step to reach the level of classic villas. Above all, one hardly ever witnesses a stnall farm becoming a large farmstead, or the latter becoming an early villa, Auditorium and Grottarossa (the white bars on the graph), on the other hand, offer a completely different model, one in which there were always a few sites at the top of the scale, ‘and formed a direct antecedent to classic villas. What is more, they attest to a continuity of use ‘and function that none of the other sites can approach. In this perspective, the exceptional early villas would contribute greatly to the imagery of the new architectural type. In other ‘words, when villas became widespread around the change of the era, they sprang up as fully- fledged entities, making a specific (and probably conscious) reference to the élite residences of the past, rather than growing out of a long formative process. Ifa straight derivation needs to be established, when it comes to Roman villas it will have to be from Late Archaic palaces, rather than from Hellenistic farmsteads or largely imaginary exotic models. Even if a defini tive conclusion cannot yet be reached given the limited representativeness of just two sites, the ‘model proposed here appears at least as strong as the established ‘progressive’ one. Some economic implications Having explored the architectural and sociological issues, we move on to the economic aspect, which is perhaps the most far-reaching. Even if classic villas draw on Archaic models, their spread may still be a result of agricultural intensification building up in the Late Repub- lic, This is what many scholars, mostly of Marxist orientation, argued in the 1970s and 1980s (eg, Giardina and Schiavone 1981; Purcell 1995). In this perspective, what is really evolving are the modes of production, of which architectonic forms are seen as a direct reflection. A fullThe Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa a reconsideration of this complex issue, given its links with problems ranging from the degree of technology and rationality in Roman agriculture to the evolution of land-ownership and its relationship with the ager publicus (cf. the syntheses in Flach 1990 and Marcone 1997), would {go far beyond the scope of the present paper. Some preliminary observations can be advanced, however, building on what has been said so far. While the evidence does not support direct architectural development, it is still possible that families of farmers who progressively re- invested the profits of cash-cropping had fine villas in the end to show for it. They would have been able to take advantage of the problems for small-scale farming created by the Hannibalic War, joining to theirs the parcels of ruined neighbors (Oehme 1988). A reconstruc- tion of this kind, though debatable in some respects (eg., Vallat 1995, 60; Curti 2001), could find some support in archaeological evidence from Republican central Italy. In some areas of S Etruria, for instance, a remarkable change in settlement patterns is discernible: while the Jhuman landscapes seem dominated by small farms down to the 3rd c. B.C. from the 2nd c. ‘onwards they seem to be replaced by a smaller number of larger establishments (Potter 1979 — at least, if the interpretation of the data, now being re-scrutinized by the Tiber Valley Project, will stand: cf. Patterson and Millett 1998). This process is accompanied by the spread of ceramic production (eg., amphorae) linked with intensive agriculture. While it is possible that in such contexts land-ownership was being concentrated in the hands of few, the réle played by villa buildings is much less clear. As we have seen, no villas in central Italy can be clearly associated with agricultural intensification before the Ist c. B.C,, but the massive diffusion of wine- and oil-amphora production in the same areas began at least a century and a half before. To find sites that match the massive amphora output (a major problem, as admitted in Carandini 1989a, 510), for now one can only point to the Hellenistic farmsteads. Elsewhere, villas appear to co-exist with the traditional farms and were occupied by descendants of the local élites, suggesting the survival of Archaic social and economic structures (Terrenato 1998a; Vallat forthcoming). It would seem prudent to conclude that there is no cer tainty that the emergence of all villas was a direct consequence of increasing agricultural intensification. This phenomenon may account for some of the cases, especially in suburban and central areas, but should not be taken as the sole explanation for such a complex process. Furthermore, there is no direct archaeological correlate of such a progressive accumulation in terms of buildings: rather than slowly developing from farmsteads, most classic villas are built ‘ex novo, of they replace a much smaller farm, with no continuity of function or habitation, at a time when the Roman economic boom is supposed to have been under way for some time. In other words, the relationship between Roman villas and the growth of the Roman ‘economy, long assumed to be two facets of the same process, appears to be much less straight- forward than generally reputed. In the circumscribed areas in which intensification can be shown to have occurred, it cannot be excluded that small farmers over generations, by dint of Catonian industry and perseverance, may have grown into agricultural magnates. But the evidence reviewed suggests that this cannot be taken as the standard scenario. In at least as, many cases, and in vast areas of the peninsula, villas were rather an architectural fashion adopted by a moneyed élite that had acquired its prosperity elsewhere. In these cases, villas represent a type of building laden with strong traditional and cultural connotations, one chosen, to affirm the status reached by its owner.” Some of the villas meant for display may also have represented a sound investment for money amassed through more hazardous enterprises, but we hhave very little direct indication that they were what made their owners affluent. What is much clearer is that villas, precisely because of the images they evoked, lent an aura of respectability to gains made in much less savoury ways than agriculture. Landownership allowed aristocrats of old or of recently-acquired standing to project personas characterized by traditionalism and morality. 7 Ingeneral on the symbolic value of villas for aristocratic display, see Bode! 1997.28 Nicola Terrenato ‘Conclusions Our reconsideration suggests that the recent discoveries can produce an interesting new ‘model for the origins and early developments of Roman villas. The picture becomes more nuan- ced and at the same time requires less conjecture and fewer assumptions. The purpose of this paper is not the production of another normative explanation of the phenomenon. First, defini- {ive conclusions cannot be reached before a comprehensive reconsideration (including more fieldwork) is made of all the relevant evidence, and particularly of key sites such as Grotta- rossa and Blera. What is becoming clearer is that Roman villas seem to call for a highly articulated and context-sensitive reconstruction, more than for another over-simplified uniform narrative. ‘The trajectory of villas can now be seen to originate in the Early Republic, if not before. That ‘was the period in which some of the choicest Roman and Etruscan clans decided to mark their political and social contro! on the landscape with a residence of exceptional size and quality. From those centers of power, aristocratic lords were able to engage in their local réle, which included the extraction of surplus and its redistribution, the ellocation of land to clients, and the resolution of controversies within the clan. In creating such luxurious complexes, the Herrschafisarchitektur of Etruscan petty kings is kept in mind, Through the first four centuries of the Republic, such residences will remain the prerogative of a few families at the very top of the social hierarchy. Their number may have increased a little over the years, but they remained a very distinctive and singular type of settlement. No intermediate forms existed between them and the farms inhabited by the lesser clan members and other social subot- dinates. Even where economic development was occurring, creating new élites who relied more on cash-producing activities than on traditional obligations, it did not yet have a perceptible architectural impact It was only in the Ist c. B.C., and more precisely in its latter part, that villas underwent a dramatic boom across Italian landscapes. This happened when the political expansion was virtually complete and the economic one had already reached its peak. Thus, classic villas can be considered consequences much more than causes or instruments of the process ® All of a sudden this type of residence became a ‘must’ for a much wider range of social subjects, many of whom were able to afford them because of the political and economic changes. As a result of the complex interaction of cultural fashions, peer competition and the influx of wealth, an unprecedented number of villas was built during the last decades of the Republic. Their owners were mixed sociologically, in sharp contrast with the homogeneity of the lords of old. The latter (such were the owners of the Auditorium and Grottarossa sites) were the only ones who had always possessed a villa, and their descendants now had to redecorate their ancestral country seats to keep up with the latest exotic styles. These owners were at once “the guardians of ancestral tradition, and the innovators who redefine it” (Wallace-Hadrill 1998, 53). It must also be observed that the new situation probably required each of these patrician gentes to hhave more than one villa, thus leading to the erection of a much larger number of residences than before. Others (especially outside W central Italy) were also descendants of old and noble clans but had never possessed a villa before. Increased political integration and élite competition now required them to have villas in order to keep up with their Roman counterparts and re-assert their status. Quite a few of these owners appear to be descendants of local, non-Roman aristo- cracies, and they were probably still engaged in a social system not dissimilar to the one origi- & Cb. the understandable perplexities expressed long ago by M. Frederiksen (1970-71, 341), which the scholarship of the 1970s and 80s largely ignored, The reconstruction of the Roman conquest in central Italy which was put together in those decades appears in need of a comprehensive redefinition, which could result in radically different views on the motivations and very nature of the process. CE. ‘Mouritsen 1998; Terrenato 2000.The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 29 nally associated with the earliest villas. Other villas again were built or acquired by upstarts with no direct link with the long cultural tradition hitherto associated with this type of building: they owed their sudden affluence to a wide variety of sources, which included the rewards of military conquest and profits made from supplying the army, tax farming, lending money, dealing in urban property, undertaking public contracts, trading in slaves, wine and oil (to name but a few), as well as through the rationalization and intensification of agriculture. Villas represented convenient investments and brought in relatively stable returns, but also brought local political and social influence and increased the status and respectability of their owners. ‘Thus, villas in Italy of the Ist ¢. B.C, could serve a variety of functions, depending on the cultural context and the local circumsiances. It would be unwise to regard one of the sociological ‘groups characterized above as dominant over the others. What can be safely concluded — and this is where the Auditorium site has made a vital contribution — is that when this mass of new villas was built, the archetypes for the new trend raging through the landscapes of Italy were the centuries-old country seats of a few great Roman families. While external influences from other Hellenistic cultures played a very modest r6le, what was taken as a model was a very specific type of site of the Early and Middle Republic. The new villas were, of course, a much less exclusive kind of residence, the function of which could be completely different from that of the traditional type being formally imitated. What matters is that the Late Repub- lican parventus, in their self-representation, made a specific reference to the great noblemen of old and ultimately to the Archaic Etruscan kings. Whatever the moralistic expectations of Cato or Varro, the Late Republican villa-owner ended up dreaming of himself as having promoted his family to the rank of the patrician lords of the land, rather than as a descendant of austere, egalitarian yeomen. The connection with small-scale farming, even when it may have been a reality, was not emphasized in the statements implicit in the architecture of classic villas. ‘These reflections on the origins of villas again emphasize the heterogeneity of Roman Italy (cf. Terrenato 1998b) and the important rle of local traditions. In addition, the dangers of normative explanations and of Darwinian models (such as those advocated by many positivist and Marxist thinkers) are exposed. Caution should be exercised when attributing strong para- digmatic value to individual literary accounts, such as those offered by the agronomic writers: they can only reflect specific conditions known to the author and will invariably contain an ideological and rhetorical bias, leaving under-represented the more conservative groups and communities. Cultural change, when it does happen in the ancient world, took the form of a complex bricolage in which traditional concepts and images were assigned new values and put to new functions (for a clear definition see Moretti 1996, 21 ff). A complex tangle of old and new is thus created that takes different forms in different contexts, depending on local society, culture and economy. To represent this as a unilinear evolution hardly does justice to the rich and complex dialectics of ancient cultures. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Acknowledgements ‘The Auditorium excavation was made possible by E. La Rocea and the X Ripartizione of the Comune di Roma, in conjunction with the Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma. The fieldwork was carried out by teams of the University of Rome “La Sapienza” and Coop. ASTRA under the direction of A. Carandini. The supervisors in the field were G. Ricci, M. T. D’Alessio, C, De Davide, H. Di Giuseppe, A. Gallone and L. Motta. The same team is preparing a final excavation report due to appear in the series “Supplementi del Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica di Roma’. ‘The reflections presented here were sparked by the experience of working at the Aucitorium in the winter ‘of 1996, Iam largely indebted to countless discussions and friendly arguments with the aforementioned colleagues and in particular with A. Carandini and G. Ricci. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect (and in several important respects diverge from) those of other members ofthe team, Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Univ. of Durham, UNC at Chapel Hill, and in Durham, NC. The comments made on all occasions provided valuable food for thought. D. Manacorda, M.30 Nicola Terrenato ‘Torelli, J-P. Vallat and two anonymous reviewers read the manuscript and thanks are due to them all for their interesting comments. References Astin, A. E. 1978, Cato the Censor (Oxford), ‘Attoling, 1. etal. 1962. “Ricgnizione archeologica nell Ager Cosanus e nella valle dll Albegna, Rapporto prelininare 1981,” “Archbed 9, 265-86, Autolni and P. Perkins 1992. “The excavation of an Btruscan farm at Podere Tartuchino,” PRSR 60, 1-76. ‘Augent, A. and N, Terrenato 2000 “Le sedi del potere nel teritorio di Volterra: una lunga prospettiva (seco VII aC: XIII d.C)," in. P. Brogiolo (ed), 1! Congress raz. di Archelogia Meicele (Florence) 298-303 Barker, G 1995. A Maditeraneon valley (London). Bedini, A, 1984, “Seavi al Torrino,” QuadAET8, 84-90. Bedini, A. 1990. "Laurentina-Acqua Aceoss,” ia M, Cristofani (ed), La Grande Roma de Targini 171-73. Berggren, Zand A. Andeén 1969, “Bleta (local Selvasecca}. Vila rustica etrusco-romana con manifattura dl terrectte architettoniche,” NSe51-71. Bergmann, B. 1995 “Visualizing Pliny’ vila" TRA, 406-20. Bodel, J. 1997. “Monumental villas an villa monuments,” RA 10, 9-35. Bosthius, A 1978. Etruscan and Early Roman arcilesture (Londo), Bon,S. E-and R. Jones (ed) 1997. Sequence and space at Pompei (Oxford). Capogrossi Colognesi 1989. "La ct ela sua tera," in Stora dé Roma (Turin) 263-89. Capogrossi Colognes, L194. Propet e signori in Roma antcaT (Rome). Carafa,P. 1985. "Le domus della Sacra Via e Vorigine della casaitalicaadatro," BolArct 31-93, 26674 Caraia, P.M, Munzi and P, Brocato 1995, “La Fase 7 Alletimento desolate e costruzione dele ease” BollArch 31-33, 215-48, CCarandini A 1988, Schein Ialis Rome), CCarandin, A. 198%, “L‘economaitalca fa tarda repubblica © medio impero considerata dal punto di vista di una merce: vino,” in Anpores remains histoire éemomigue (Rome) 267-8. CCarandini, A. 1989, “La vila romana ela plantagione schiavistca,” in Stora di Roma (Torino) 101-200. CCarandini, A. and A. Rie (ede) 1986. Setfnestre (Modena). CCarandlini, Ae al 1967.“La villa dell Auditorium dal ta arclca alta imperisl,” RomMit 104, 117-48 Cifani, G. 1955. “Aspeti dell eilizia romana arcain,” SIEtr 60, 185-226. CCitani, G, 1998, “Carateri degli inseciamentirurali nell Ager Romanus ta VI eT secolo a.C,” in M. Pearce and M. Tosi (edd), Papers from the EAA Third Annual Meeting at Ravenna 1997 (Oxford) 53-68 Colonna, C1986. "Urbanistca e archtetura” in Rasenna (Milano) 371-530. Colonna, G. 1994. “Acqua Acetosa Laurentina, Ager romanus antiquus ei santuai del miglio,” Scienze del Antica 5, 208-92 (Cornell, TJ. 1995. The eghonigsof Rome London). Cotton, M. A. (ed) 1979. The Late Republica ila at Posto, Francaise (London). (Cotton, M, A. and GP. Métraux (edd) 1985, The San Roco vill at Franclise (Rome) (Cust, E2001. “Toynbee’s legacy: discussing aspects of the Romanization of Italy” in S.J. Keay and N. Terrenato (ed), Rome and the West. Comparative issues in Romanization (Oxford) 17-26 D’Anms, JH. 1971, Romans he Bay of Nopes (Boston). De Alberts, E 1990. Le asa dei Romani (Man). ‘De Grummond, N.T.1997, “Poggio Civitate a turning point,” Etrascan Stes, 4, 2-40. ‘Dyson, $.L. 1978 “Settlement pattems in the Ager Cosanus: the Wesleyan University Survey 1974-1976," JFA, Dyson, $.L; 1983, The Roman villas of Buccino (Oxford). Enel, F. 1993, Coreter: cognition’ erchelogiche nel feritori df na cit ebrasca (Rome). epost, A.M. od.) 199, Princip guar la ceropolterusca di Casale Maritimo (Man, Fentress, E1998, “The house ofthe Sicilian Greeks,” in Fraser 1998, 28-41. ‘lack, D 1990, Riche Agrargescicte (Mich). ortsch, R193 Arhologischer Kommentar zu den Vlenbrgen des ngrenPlinis (Maina). Frazer, A. (ed.) 1998, The Roman oil, Villa rb (Philadelphia). Frederiksen, M. 1970-71 “The contribution of archaeology tothe agrarian problem inthe Gracchan period,” DialArch 45, 33057.The Auditorium site in Rome and the origins of the villa 31 Giardina, A.and A. Schiavone (ed) 1961, Soil rrtnaeprodusione ehivstieaRome-Bard, ves, and R. Martin 1992. Ditonnrve méthadique de ariiteture gresue et romaine vol.2 (Rom). seg H, 1968, Aches eine Monographie 2c, Isler, H. 1996. "Der Akarnanische Flussgott Acheloos in der Bildkunst,” in Ackarnanen. Eine Lendscha i ater Griecenand (Wazzbarg) 16-72 oendo, J 1980. agrcottune nl tals romaa (Roma). Lafon, X.1953. “Lie en Tale centrale & époque publicane: une production sous-estimée,” in Production du vine de ‘eon Ntiteranée (Pais) 253.79, Laurence, and A. Wallace Hadril (edd) 1997. Domestic space in the Roman World QRA Suppl. 22) ‘Lauter, H. 1958, “Hellenisttche Vorlufer der Romischen Vil,” in Fraser 1998, 21-77. “Levea PP, Silos and JP, Vallat 199 Campagne el Mterrande romaine (ars). Lgl, G 1948, “Grotarossa(Voesbolo Monte delle Grote) Cistema ad ogiva in opera quadrata,” NSc1947, 101-10 Manscorda,D. 1980, "Lager cosanus fra tatda repubblice impero: forme di produatone e asseto della proprit,” in. HL D’Anms and EC. Kopf (edd), The sesbore commerce of wiciest Rome (MAAR) 17388 Marcone, A. 1997. Stora delfegriatua romana Rome). Mattingly, DJ. 196. "First fruit The olive i the Roman world,” in G. Shipley an J Salmon (ed), Huan landscapes classical antiquity (London) 213-53 MeKay, A. G. 1975, Houses, elas and ples nthe Roman wold (London) ‘Messineo, 1981. La via Flaminia Rome). Misc, 1987. Die omiche Ville Arlt ed Leno (Mich). Montanari, A. and A.J. Ammerman 1555. “Sourcing the wall,” SollArch 31-3, 169-93. Morel, J-P, “The transformation of aly, 300-133 B.C. The evidence of archaeology,” in CAH VIN, 2nd edn) 477-516 Moret F 1986, Mader pi London} “Mouriten, H. 1998, alan unfit. A study in anion and meer historiography (BulintClaseStud. 70, London). Nappo, S.C. 1997. “The urban transformation at Pompei in the late thd and the early second centuries B.C,” in ‘Laurence and Wallace Hadi 91-12, ‘Gehme, M. 1988 Die mich Villers Untersuchungen zu den Agr Cates unt Cots und rer Darstellung tei Nebr urd Momsen (Boe, ‘ORF 1930. Orato romanoram fagreeta (ed. Maleovat) (Ti) Gatenberg, C.E, 1962, “Villa Sambuco” in Etruscan culture. Land and people (Malm-New York 313.20 Patterson, H. and M, Millett 998. “The Tiber Valley Project,” PBSR 66, 1-20. Patterson, JR. 1987. “Crisis? What cisis? Rural change and urben development in Imperial Appernine Ttaly,” PBSR 55, 115446. Perkins, P. 1959, rasan stent society and materi culture central cast Etre (Oxford), Picard, G. and C. Charles-Picard 1958. Lave quotient Carthage au temps dHannibal (Pai) ican Sctori, C1985. "Via Marescallo Plsudski Via P. De Couberti,” BullCom 9, 27681 Potter, T. W. 1979. The changing landscape of South Etruria (London, ‘Purcell, N.1995.“The Roman vila and the landscape of production,” in T. Comell and K. Lomas (da) Urtan society in Rornan tay (London) 151-73, Qc, Land. Ql igh 2986, Pena (Rome). Quis Land S. Ql Gig 198, Fuse Rome). Reuti F. (ed) 199. De Romie Vil (Darmstadt) ‘Ried, G. and N. Terrenato 1998, “Ideslogcal biases inthe urban archaeology of Rome: quantitative approach” in P. Baker, C.Forcey ea. (edd), TRAC 98 Orford) 163-71, Ricci, G. and N. Terrenato 1999, “La villa del! Auuitorium.” in M. Tosi and M, Peace (el), Papers fom the EAA Third ‘Arnal Mectng et Ravenna 1357 (Oxford) 45-52 Rossiter, JJ. 1978. Roman frm buildings in aly Oxford, Rossiter, J.) 1981. “Wine and oil processing at Roman farms in aly," Phoone35, 345-6 Russo Tagliente, A. 1992, Elia dmeston in Apu Lucania Galati). Shatzman, | 1975, Satori ech nd Ronan ptt Bruxels). ‘Sirag, V. 1996. Storia agrari romana (Naples). Small . (ed) 1994, The exooations at San iowa i Ruoti Toronto), Smith, J 7.1987, Roman lesa shud in social structure (Lend ‘Stefani, E. 1946, “Grotarcosa(Vocabolo Monte delle Grote). Ruder ua villa diet republican,” NS 194445, 5272. Stone, DL 1956. “Culture and investment inthe rural landscape. The North African fonusagrzol,” AntAfr 8, 103-13.32 Nicola Terrenato Stopponi,S (ed) 1985. Cee e paca! Etre (Mile). “Terrenato, N. 19888, “Tam firmus meuniere. The Romanization of Volaterrae and its cultural implications,” jRS 88 14 ‘Terrenato, N.1968b, “The Romanization of lay: global acalturation or cultural bricolage?” in C. Forcey, J. Hawthome et «al. (a), TRAC 97 (Oxford) 20-27 ‘Terrenato, N. 2000. “Introduction,” én S.J. Keay and N. Terrenato (ed), Rome and the West. Compartive issues in Romanization (Oxford) 14. ‘Terzenato, N.and A. Saggin 1994. "Ricognizion archeclogiche nel teritorio di Volterra," ArchC! 46, 465.82 ‘Torelli, M. 1981, “Osservazioni conclusive su Lazio, Umbria ed Etruria,” in A, Giardina and A. Schiavone (edd), Societa romana e produsion schdcstca (Rome, Bat. “orl, M.198Ib, Storia del Etraschi(Bari-Rome) “Torelli M, 1990. "La frmazione dell il,” in Stora di Roma (Forno) 123-82, “Torelli M. 1999a. “Princip guerre! di Ceca. Qualcheosservazione di un visitatoe curios,” Ostraa 8.1, 247-59 “Toell, M. 1999. Teta italia (Oxford). Vallat J-P. 195: Lelie et Rome, 228-31 2: (Pats). Vallat,J-P. forthcoming. “Temps lng et temps cour, structures ot conjonctures dans conomie rurale de la Campanie romaine,” in E Lo Cascio end A. Storchi Marino (ed) Modal insediatoe e bratture grace aia meriionale i et romana (Bri Volpe, G 1980, Lt Daun nel eh delle Romanizacione (Bar) Wallace Hadril, A. 197. “Rethinking the Roman atrium house,” in Laurence and Wellace-Hadrill 21940. Wallace Hadi, A. 1998, “The vila: a cultural symbol in Fraser 1958, 49-58. Wiki, W. M. 1987, “Land use atthe Via Gabina villas,” in E.B, MacDougall (i), Ancien! Roman villa gardens (Washing ton) 223-60, Zanker, P. 1979. "Die Villa als Votbld des spaten pompeanischen Wohngeschmach,”Jd1 94, 450-523, Zillereto, A. 1991 "Forme di possesso della trea e tumuli orientalizzantineltalis centrale trreniea,” in E, Herring, R. Whitehouse etal. edd), The arcinology of power (Accord, London) 88-350,