DEATH in ROMAN MARCHE, ITALY: a COMPARATIVE STUDY of BURIAL RITUALS Presented by Antone R.E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DEATH IN ROMAN MARCHE, ITALY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BURIAL RITUALS _______________________________________ A Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts _____________________________________________________ by ANTONE R.E. PIERUCCI Dr. Kathleen Warner Slane, Thesis Supervisor MAY 2014 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the thesis entitled DEATH IN ROMAN MARCHE, ITALY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BURIAL RITUALS presented by Antone R.E. Pierucci, a candidate for the degree of master of arts, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Kathleen Warner Slane Professor Marcus Rautman Professor Carrie Duncan To my parents, for their support over the years. And for their support in the months to come as I languish on their couch eating fruit loops “looking for a job.” ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank the Department of Art History and Archaeology for the funding that allowed me to grow as a scholar and a professional these last two years; without the support this thesis would not have been possible. Secondly, I would like to thank my thesis Adviser, Dr. Kathleen Warner Slane, for the hours she spent discussing the topic with me and for the advice she provided along the way. The same goes for my committee members Dr. Rautman and Dr. Duncan for their careful reading of the manuscript and subsequent comments that helped produce the final document before you. And, of course, thanks must be given to my fellow graduate students, without whose helping hands and comforting shoulders (and the occasional beer) I would have long since lost touch with reality. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………..……………………ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS………………………………………...……...iv LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………..v-vi LIST OF GRAPHS………………………………………………………….vii-viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………...……..….1 2. METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………….…6 3. THE CEMETERIES AND THEIR GOODS……………………….........22 Portorecanati………………………………………………….……....….26 Urbino…………………………………………………….………...…....48 Fano………………………………………………………..……....…….71 Miscellaneous…………………………………………..………………...76 4. THE RITUALS PRACTICED AT THE MARCHE CEMETERIES…....84 5. CONCLUSION……………………...………………………………..….124 APPENDIX……………………………….………………………………..….139 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………..…154 GRAPHS…………………….……………………………………………...... 169 FIGURES…………………………...…………………………………........... 180 iii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: Map of Roman Italy………………………………………………………….180 Figure 2: Location of cemeteries……………………………………………………….181 Figure 3: Flow diagram…………………………………………………………………181 Figure 4: Location of Northern Cemetery of Portorecanati…………………………….182 Figure 5: Plan of the Northern Cemetery……………………………………………….183 Figure 6: Map of Urbino………………………………………………………………..184 Figure 7: Bivio Cemetery……………………………………………………………….185 Figure 8: Plan of San Donato Cemetery………………………………………………..186 Figure 9: Detail of central portion of San Donato……………………………………...187 Figure 10: Map of Fano………………………………………………………………...187 Figure 11: Plan of Fano cemetery………………………………………………………188 Figure 12: Location of graves excavated at San Vittore di Cingoli…………………….188 Figure 13: Location of graves excavated at Pergola……………………………………189 Figure 14: Location of graves excavated at Piane di Falerone…………………………189 Figure 15: Marble relief from Amiternum……………………………………………...190 Figure 16: Map of finds of dates in Roman cemeteries in Northern Italy……………...190 iv LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER 3 PORTORECANATI Table 1: Grave Types…………………………………………………….....…………..30 Table 2: Frequency of functional types for vessel assemblages………………………..36 Table 3: Number of vessels in individual graves…………………………………….…37 Table 4: Frequency of coins in assemblages with different types of objects…...............38 Table 5: Frequency of lamps in assemblages with different types of objects…..............39 Table 6: Chronological appearance of types of personal items in graves……...……….40 Table 7: Group two and its subcategories……………………………………............…42 URBINO BIVO DELLA CROCE DEI MISSIONARI Table 8: Grave types……………………………………………………………………52 Table 9: Frequency of functional types for vessel assemblages……………………......55 Table 10: Number of vessels in individual graves……………………………….…......56 Table 11: Frequency of coins in assemblages with different types of objects….………56 Table 12: Frequency of lamps in assemblages with different types of objects…….…...57 Table 13: Chronological appearance of types of personal items in graves……..............57 Table 14: Group two and its subcategory...………………………………………….....58 SAN DONATO Table 15: Grave types………………………………………………………….…….....62 Table 16: Frequency of functional types for vessel assemblages…………………...….65 Table 17: Number of vessels in individual graves……………………………………...66 v Table 18: Frequency of coins in assemblages with different types of objects………....65 Table 19: Frequency of lamps in assemblages with different types of objects…...........67 Table 20: Chronological appearance of types of personal items in graves……….........67 Table 21: Group two and its subcategories....…………………………………….........68 FANO Table 22: Number of vessels in individual graves………………………………….......74 Table 23: Group two and its subcategories....……………………………………..........76 CHAPTER 4 Table 24: Group two and its subcategories for the Marche cemeteries………………...111 Table 25: Group three and its subcategories for the Marche cemeteries…………….....112 Table 26: Frequency of vessel types appearing alone in graves from group four................................................................................................113 Table 27: Group four and its subcategories for the Marche cemeteries………………………………………………………………........114 Table 28: Frequency of functional types for vessel assemblages of the Marche cemeteries………………………………………………………………..…. 115 Table 29: Number of vessels I individual graves with vessels for food and drink……………………………………………………………..…116 Table 30: Group five and its subcategories for the Marche cemeteries…………….…..117 vi LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 1: The 116 graves with the interment stage organized by types of goods……...169 Graph 2: Group 3 further subdivided…………………………………………………..169 Graph 3: Group 4 further subdivided………………………………………………..…170 Graph 4: Group 1 further subdivided………………………………………………......170 Graph 5: Five occasions at Portorecanati……………………………………………....171 Graph 6: The 60 graves with the interment stage organized by types of goods……….171 Graph 7: Group 3 further subdivided…………………………………………………..172 Graph 8: Group 4 further subdivided…………………………………………………..172 Graph 9: Group 5 further subdivided…………………………………………………..173 Graph 10: Five occasions at the Bivio cemetery…………………………………...…..173 Graph 11: The 53 graves with the interment stage organized by types of goods……....174 Graph 12: Group 3 further subdivided……………………………………………...…..174 Graph 13: Group 4 further subdivided……………………………………………….....175 Graph 14: Group 5 further subdivided……………………………………………….…175 Graph 15: Five occasions at the San Donato cemetery…………………………………176 Graph 16: The 17 graves with the interment stage organized by types of goods............177 Graph 17: Group 2 at Fano subdivided…………………………………………………177 Graph 18: Five occasions at the Fano cemetery; grouped by combination of occasions……………………………………………………178 Graph 19: Each cemetery organized into the combinations of the five occasions..........178 Graph 20: The interment stage at each cemetery organized by types of goods………...179 Graph 21: Group 5 at the cemeteries………………………………………………...…179 vii Graph 22: Group 4 at all cemeteries……………………………………………………180 viii Chapter 1: Introduction For decades graves have been an important source of information for the social, cultural and religious landscape of the Romans. The assortment of items, from coins and lamps to a variety of ceramic bowls and plates, have been used at different times as evidence of the relative wealth of the dead and as a means of recreating the social structure of the burying community.1 Over the last few decades a greater interest in Roman burial rituals has seen the publishing of numerous articles and monographs on the subject. These studies often couched the question of funerary rituals within a wider interest in cultural integration, using the presence of distinctly Roman burying traditions as an indication of the “Romanization” of indigenous peoples.2 In doing so, however, such studies only tangentially addressed the theoretical and methodological issues inherent in reconstructing rituals from the excavated grave objects. Over the last two decades the methodological framework for interpreting funerary rituals has been the focus of renewed scholarly interest, especially in the fields of Iron and Bronze Age archaeology.3 Lagging somewhat behind their colleagues, classical archaeologists have recently begun to seek methods of recording objects within graves in order to better recreate the ritual actions behind their placement. That is not to say that mortuary archaeology is a new subject for Roman archaeologists; far from it, in fact. Since its first publication in the 1 See Chapter 2 for more information. 2 Fasold et al. 1998; von Hesberg 1998; Heinzelmann 1998; Fasold 1993, 386-387; Pearce 2000; Struck 1995. 3 For a more in depth discussion on this see Chapter 2. 1 2 nineteenth century, the Notizie degli Scavi of the Italian