Take Home Exam AHIX331 Prehistory to Pompeii: Archaeology in Ancient Italy Lecturer & Tutor
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Assessment Four – Take Home Exam AHIX331 Prehistory to Pompeii: Archaeology in Ancient italy Lecturer & Tutor: Ray Laurence Referencing Style Used: Harvard (Author-Date) Style Word Count: 2952 Section A Figure (a) This Italo-Mycenaean amphora was discovered in Brogolio di Trebisacce during excavations directed by Renato Peroni in 1979.1 Brogolio di Trebisacce is located in the Sibaritide region on a hilltop overlooking the Ionian Sea, with a settlement site that dates back to the LH IIIA.2 There were a number of vessels excavated from the LH IIIA to LH IIIC strata that exhibited distinct Mycenaean influence in design and construction indicating trading connections between Greece and southern Italy, with the greatest yields for this type of pottery being derived from the LH IIIB phase.3 This is evident from the use of floral motifs and geometric painted decorations, wheel-made technologies, high temperature firing and similarities in vessel shapes to those identifiable to the Aegean and central Mediterranean with slight variations.4 The vessel is a medium sized amphora with a notable wide and short 1 Vagnetti (1999: 143) 2 Vagnetti (1999: 143) 3 Kilian (1990: 456) 4 Jones & Vagnetti (1989: 131); Wijngaarden (2002: 244) neck signifying that it was not suitable for the storage of liquids such olive oil or wine, which were customarily stored in dolia, but may have been used for the storage of grains or dry agricultural produce. 5 This is also reinforced by the placement of the handles in the horizontal position indicating their design for lifting rather than pouring.6 The piece originated during the LH IIIB phase and corresponds with increased agricultural production and advancement in harvest storage in the region, which may have resulted from the diffusion of Mycenaean farming techniques.7 Based on petrographic and chemical analysis of the site’s pottery yield, it can be asserted that this piece was locally made from levigated clay sourced from Italy rather than being imported, however the materials were likely obtained outside the direct regional vicinity. 8 This is another indication that not just trade of merchant goods occurred across the Mediterranean but that techniques in farming and pottery construction were influenced as well. This may have been through the imitation of imported goods in addition to the arrival of pottery makers to southern Italy, suggested by finds of Mycenaean style kilns in the southern Italian region.9 5 Mountjoy (2001: 123); Ridgway (1988: 626); Wijngaarden (2002: 244) 6 Mountjoy (2001: 123) 7 Kilian (1990: 457) 8 Kilian (1990: 457); Vagnetti (1999: 143) 9 Mountjoy (2001: 121) Figure (d) The ‘Shipwreck’ krater was found on the island of Ischia, ancient Pithekoussai, in the Bay of Naples.10 Excavations of Valle di San Montano began in 1952 led by Giorgio Buchner and yielded the remnants of a necropolis containing over a thousand burial pits, the ‘Acropolis dump’ as well as pottery such as the Nestor’s cup that exhibits possibly the oldest three lines of Euboian inscription.11 The ‘Shipwreck’ krater is a vessel that dates to the Late Geometric phase and is notable for its depiction of the dangers of voyage between the Mediterranean regions and may be the oldest representation of a shipwreck and oldest vessel with figured painting found on Italian soil.12 This krater was found in the necropolis and pieced together from sherds recovered from outside a burial pit suggesting it was possibly broken while being carried to the burial place.13 It is missing the stem and base, however the pictorial design remains largely intact. 14 The pictorial scene presents a clear sequence of events, firstly the maritime vessel is shown in the upside down position surrounded by swastikas while next to the vessel there are fish and bodies depicted 10 Whitley (2001:126) 11 Holloway (1995: 364) 12 Holloway (1995: 364); Keegan (2014: 228); Whitley (2001:126) 13 Keegan (2014: 228) 14 Keegan (2014: 228) in the water.15 As the sequence continues there are further images of bodies surrounded by fish and a fish in the process of consuming a body until finally there are only suspiciously big-bellied fish.16 Buchner has theorized that this vessel along with the yields from Pithekoussai have a direct connection to Phoenician culture through the burial practices of the necropolis. 17 This theory is not without contention, as there are also clear indications of Corinthian and Euboea influences in this piece, for example use of one continuous large frieze around the belly of the vessel with black-figure men is emblematic to Corinthian style while the expansion of territorial control and trading routes are emblematic of the Greek and Euboean culture.18 15 Keegan (2014: 228) 16 Keegan (2014: 228) 17 Ridgway (1994: 35) 18 Coldstream (2004: 228); Payne (1931: 94); Ridgway (1994: 35-36) Figure (e) This vessel is a red-figure calyx krater created during the Lucanian period, around 350-340 B.C.E., by Asteas.19 The red-figure style originated in Greece and was transferred to Italy through trade and relocation of potters dating to the eighth century.20 The production process involved the vessel being constructed in separate sections and allowed to air dry.21 After the assemblage of the piece a mixture of fine-grained clay slurry was applied to the background, which could vitrify in a short time period and be fired at lower temperatures than the clay used for the body.22 There was a single firing cycle that consisted of a sequence of oxidizing and reducing with precise control of time and temperature to ensure the final piece would retain accurate colour.23 This piece was created in Asteas’ workshop, located in Paestum in southern Italy on the Tyrrhenian coast and it can be inferred that the vessel was made with fabrics sourced locally, although due to the limited chemical analysis of 19 Hughes (1996: 102); Murley (2001: 27, 44) 20 Colivicchi (2014: 214); Mirti et al., (2004: 713) 21 Murley (2001: 6) 22 Mirti et al., (2004: 712) 23 Mirti et al., (2004: 712) pottery during this period it is currently speculation.24 This type of vessel belongs to a series of krater vases; column, volute, bell and calyx, which were all associated with the mixing of wine with water as indicated by the horizontal handles for lifting and the wide mouth to allow for ladling.25 The piece is crudely known as ‘Robbing the Miser”, a recreation of Athenian comic theatrical performances, highlighting the style’s Greek origins and the dispersion of Greek culture in southern Italy.26 The vase has been signed by Asteas, one of only eleven, with the names of the characters written in white paint above the characters.27 One aspect of vessels with this style of pictorial design demonstrates there was no uniformity in stage performances of the period, with this particularly vessel depicting five pillars beneath the stage.28 24 Hughes (1996: 105) 25 Murley (2001: 4-5) 26 Hughes (1996: 104) 27 Murley (2001: 27) 28 Hughes (1996: 101) Section B Identify and describe the impact of 3 significant aspects of the development of Italian archaeology. The history of Italian archaeology is a complex amalgamation of events and theoretical disciplines, which were influenced by both internal and external factors. Scholars have loosely divided these developments into five categories, spanning from the unification of Italy. We will examine three aspects of Italian archaeology and outline how these contributed to its development. Firstly, the dominance of Luigi Pigorini in the 19th century will be explored and the emergence of eoria pigoriniana. Following this, the materialization of fascism will be highlighted and how this impacted the direction and scope of archaeology between 1920 and 1945. Finally, we will examine the liberation of theoretical constraints from the post-war period till present. The unification of Italy in 1861 marked the beginning of a transitional period for Italian archaeology, which would shape the discipline for over a hundred years. Schools such as the Accedemia Nazionale dei Lincei, which was founded in 1603, were primarily controlled by the church and had dominion over funding, academic appointments, theoretical approaches and excavation methodology in Italy.29 This control of fundamental aspects of the discipline led to the adherence to creationist and anti-evolution theory as well as an isolationist approach to collaboration.30 29 Loney (2002: 202) 30 Loney (2002: 204) However, after unification authority over archaeological studies was transferred away from the church to three centres of study; Naples, Florence and Rome.31 This facilitated the establishment of the Scuola Archeologica di Pompei in 1866 under Guiseppe Fiorelli, the Archive for Anthropology and Ethnology in Florence by naturalist Paolo Mantegazza in 1871 and the National Museum of Rome in 1876 with Luigi Pigorini becoming Chair of Paletnology in 1877.32 As Chair of Paletnthology and the only professor of prehistory in the Italian peninsular, Pigorini took control of archaeological activities from 1870 to 1923 by controlling research, regional planning, excavation methodology and final academic interpretation as well as avoiding the creation of new chair positions.33 Under Pigorini, previous excavations of the Swiss lake dwellings, the Terremare settlement in the Po valley and the Golasecca and Villanovan cemeteries in Bologna became the basis of the theory eoria pigoriniana.34 This theory focused on cultural facies and cultural replacement by primarily northern peoples migrating across Italy during