Cultural Exchange in Southern France:
Archaeological and Textual Evidence for the Celto-Ligurian
Tribe of
the Salluvii
A thesis
submitted by
Shannon Donohue
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
in
Classical Archaeology
Tufts University
May 2012
Advisor: Dr. R. Bruce Hitchner
! ! !
Abstract
The south of France presents a valuable case in the study of the cultural contact and exchange between the Greeks and indigenous non-Greek peoples with whom they came in contact. This study concentrates on the material culture of the Salluvian sites of
Entremont and Glanum, with the purpose of showing that the Salluvian elite were receptive to Greek technological innovations. Early scholarship in the 1940's characterized Glanum and Entremont differently, arguing that Glanum was a Greek site and Entremont a Salluvian site. Taking account of recent scholarly debate over their interpretation, this study will show that both of these sites were the result of Salluvian efforts. The evidence from Glanum and Entremont suggests that the elite members of the
Salluvii took on modern Hellenistic cultural elements of art and architecture in order to demonstrate the prosperity of their community, which resulted in Salluvian sites that exhibited Greek features.
!
!
! ! !
"!! ! !
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. R. Bruce Hitchner for pointing me in the direction of the Salluvii and for providing me with many useful sources, helpful suggestions, and interesting points to think about. I would also like to thank Dr. J.
Matthew Harrington for his input, advice, and guidance throughout the writing process.
Many thanks also to David Proctor for his support in various aspects of my graduate student life at Tufts University. Last but not least I want to thank my family for everything they have done for me, especially their endless support and love.
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
""!! ! !
Table of Contents
Abstract...... i
Acknowledgements...... ii
Table of Contents...... iii
Figures...... iv
Chapter I: Introduction...... 1
Chapter II: Historiography...... 5
Chapter III: Entremont...... 32
Chapter IV: Glanum...... 66
Chapter V: The Salluvii and Rome...... 88
Chapter VI: Conclusion...... 94
Bibliography...... 98 !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
"""! ! ! !
Table of Figures
Figure 1 Map of Salluvian Territory...... 19
Figure 2 Site of Entremont...... 35
Figure 3 Map of Habitat 1...... 38
Figure 4 Map of Habitat 2...... 39
Figure 5 Map of Entremont...... 44
Figure 6 Front of Statue 1...... 46
Figure 7 Back of Statue 1...... 46
Figure 8 Front of Statue 3...... 47
Figure 9 Back of Statue 3...... 47
Figure 10 Front of Statue 5...... 48
Figure 11 Female Statue 40...... 49
Figure 12 Seated Warrior 6...... 51
Figure 13 Torso 10...... 51
Figure 14 Seated Warrior from Roquepertuse...... 54
Figure 15 Map of Habitat 1 & 2...... 57
Figure 16 Pillar...... 58
Figure 17 Lintel...... 58
Figure 18 Map of Provence with Trade Routes...... 67
Figure 19 Map of Glanum...... 73
Figure 20 Capital at Glanum...... 82
Figure 21 Image of Salluvian in Capital...... 82
Figure 22 Bouleuterion...... 85
"#! ! ! !
Chapter I: Introduction
The people referred to by ancient sources as either !" #$%&'( or as the Salluvii were a Celto-Ligurian tribal confederation who are known to have inhabited an extensive area in the Provence region of the south of France from the third to the first century BCE.
The Salluvii lived within the sphere of Greek contact via the Phocaean Greek settlement of Massalia in modern day Marseille. This degree of social exchange makes the Salluvii exceptional in the context of many other Celtic tribes, as they were in contact with the
Mediterranean world from a very early date. The Salluvii are first mentioned in Greek sources in the second century BCE. After the destruction of their premier settlement of
Entremont in 124 BCE and their subsequent defeat by the Romans in 90 BCE, however, all mention of the Salluvii in Greek and Roman texts disappears. It was not until the second half of the twentieth century that systematic archaeological excavations of
Salluvian sites in southern France began. Because the majority of archaeological research is of recent date and limited extent, the study of the Salluvii is partially dependent on the accounts of Greeks and Roman authors. As the Salluvii left behind no written works, these sources provide the only contemporary, first-hand accounts of their customs, appearance, language, religion, and way of life. However, these accounts are written from the vantage point of outsiders, Greeks and Romans, who had a formulaic manner of characterizing persons as ethnically "Celtic", "Ligurian", or "Salluvian". It is likely such broad terms, although common in ancient literature, may obscure more intricate ethnic affiliations and cultural differences that were intelligible to cultural outsiders.1 For this
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $!The definition of identity in regards to ethnicity that will be used in this thesis is that of Dominique Garcia who defines ethnicity as a social and psychological phenomenon associated with a cultural construct and an economic dynamic.!! $!! ! ! reason, in order to effectively utilize these sources it is necessary to acknowledge and scrutinize the inherent biases of such outside perspectives.
Glanum and Entremont are two sites associated with Salluvian occupation that exhibit a stark contrast in architecture, layout, and art. The site of Entremont fits well with the commonly accepted description of a Celtic-Ligurian settlement. From the location of the settlement to the architecture and artistic representations discovered by archaeologists, this site features all of the characteristics of a typical hilltop oppidum. The site of Glanum, however, exhibits drastically different features. The majority of the buildings and architecture found at Glanum are Hellenistic in style. Although the remains of Celtic art and architecture have been discovered at the site, the predominant culture at
Glanum comes across as mainly Greek.
The unexpectedly Hellenistic character of Glanum has been the subject of extensive debate among archaeologists of this region. The issue of how to interpret the overwhelmingly Greek character of this particular Salluvian site, in comparison to the other typically Celtic Salluvian sites, is an open question. To date, there have been two interpretations of the development and predominant culture of Glanum. The earlier theory is that of Henri Rolland, director of excavation from 1942 to 1969, who hypothesized that
Glanum was an offshoot of the Greek settlement of Massalia during the Hellenistic period. According to Rolland, Glanum was a predominantly Greek site, possibly even under the political control of Massalia. Rolland suggests that the indigenous elements found at Glanum are evidence of the native Celto-Ligurian population who continued to occupy the site along with the Greeks, but as the less dominant culture.2 In contrast, Anne
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! %!&'(()*+!,$-./0!$$12! %!! ! !
Roth Congès, director of excavations from 1982 to 1992, argues that Glanum was a predominantly native settlement, even throughout the Hellenistic period. According to this more recent theory, the Greek elements found at Glanum are evidence of the incorporation of foreign elements by the local Salluvian population.3 In this scenario, the
Salluvii are the predominant population. Moreover, according to Roth Congès there is no clear archaeological evidence at Glanum that suggests the Hellenistic architecture is solely the work of a Greek population. It is important to note that even though the original hypothesis proposed by Rolland is nearly forty years older than that of Congès, it is still supported by some modern scholars, such as Trevor Hodge, who are reluctant to attribute the Hellenistic characteristics of Glanum to an indigenous society, particularly one which was in the midst of conflict with Rome at the time of the construction of the
Hellenistic architecture at Glanum.4
In order to work toward the resolution of this problem in the archaeological record, this study will examine the archaeological remains of the Salluvian oppidum of
Entremont in order to determine the degree to which the Celto-Ligurian tribe was influenced by the Mediterranean world-system prior to the conflict with the Romans. It will then examine the site of Glanum, which continued to be occupied after the Roman conflict, in order to better understand why these two sites differ so greatly in urban planning and material culture. In doing so, this study will attempt to show that the archaeological remains of the site of Entremont indicate that the Salluvii were receptive to Greek influence prior to the conflict with Rome. It will then argue that the period following the abandonment of Entremont and the conflict with Rome saw an increase in
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3!Roth Congès (1992) 351. 4 Hodge (1998) 153-155.! 3!! ! ! the use of Greek art, architecture, and technology among a portion of the Salluvian population.
This investigation is structured in three chapters. The first chapter discusses the history of Provence from the period preceding the Greek settlement of Massalia up until the final defeat of the Salluvii by the Romans. In order to better understand what changes occurred in the archaeological record after the arrival of the Greeks the archaeology of the preceding period will be examined in general terms. The second chapter will discuss the archaeology of Entremont, outlining the architecture, layout, fortifications, and artwork of the site, while looking for signs of Greek influence. The third chapter will then discuss the archaeology of Glanum. As with the discussion of Entremont, this chapter will outline the important buildings, artwork, fortifications, and layout of Glanum. By comparing these two sites I will argue that it is possible to determine the reasons behind the divergent characteristics of each site. The final chapter will summarize my findings and highlight wider issues implicated in the outcome of this study.
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
4!! ! !
II: Ancient Historiography and Ethnographic Discourse
This chapter discusses the history of the region of Provence and the Rhône basin in the period directly preceding the arrival of the Greeks and throughout the period of
Greek contact and interaction. In order to understand what changes occurred in Provence after the arrival of the Greeks, it will be necessary to first discuss the general developments of the indigenous people of this region during the Iron Age. For information concerning this period it is necessary to rely on the archaeological record.
However, for later periods, it will be useful to include the writings of Greek and Roman authors in order to give a fuller account of the history of the region, as the indigenous people left no written records.
It is necessary to note that it is difficult to make any statement about the ethnicity and culture of the people of eastern Rhône region prior to and after the arrival of the
Greeks (in the proto-historic period). The main problem is that ethnicity is based on the self-awareness of an individual and a sense of belonging to a specific group or whole.5
The self-conscious identification of an individual or a group with a culture is difficult to detect in both the material record and in the ancient sources. Moreover, "identity" and
"ethnicity" are concepts that are commonly defined in modern terms and reflect modern geo-political ideas that do not necessarily apply to the way in which identity and ethnicity
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5!6'7")(!)*89:';'('<"=8!>:?+:"@!A):89!,$-B.C!4D4-0!): Roman accounts further complicates any attempt to understand identity. Despite these difficulties this chapter will attempt to scrutinize the perceptions and biases of the Salluvii as illustrated by the Greeks and Romans who observed them, by weighing the information presented in the ancient sources against modern archaeological research. Although it is impossible to determine the way in which these ancient people would have identified themselves, it may be possible to use the archaeological record to identify common traits and features8 of the material remains associated with the group of people labeled by the Greeks and Romans as Salluvii. This thesis will not attempt to give an identity to the people known as the Salluvii, but rather it will endeavor to use the archaeological material to identify common characteristics of remains associated with Salluvii. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .!Thomas (2004) 147. Thomas argues "we see ourselves as unique and unrepeatable yet possessing a series of attributes that are common to all individuals." Craib (1998, 28) argues that understanding identity requires knowledge of life experiences. In addition, he claims that identity operates on two levels, the first being the broader social level defined by formal associations and the second being the personal level where a person experiences many aspects of identity over the trajectories of life. As knowledge of personal life experiences is largely absent from the archaeological record pertaining to the Salluvii, there are large gaps in our understanding of the way in which the Salluvii may have understood their own identity. 7 Insoll (2007) 4. 8 For instance, common architecture, town layout, artistic motifs...! .!! ! ! In 1874 Swedish archaeologist Hans Hildebrand proposed a terminology for the Iron Age in Europe. Hildebrand divided the period into two distinct chronological phases, the first and the second Iron Age, which he associated with two archaeological cultures named according to their respective geographical areas. These cultures were the Hallstatt culture originating in Austria and the La Tène culture originating in Switzerland. Since Hildebrand's proposed terminology, the Hallstatt culture has become known as a pre- Celtic culture and the La Tène culture as a Celtic culture. Moreover, in recent scholarship concerning the south of France, archaeologist Dominique Garcia divides the history of the region into four principal chronological phases: the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age (900-600 BCE), the foundation of Massalia to the end of the fifth century (600-400 BCE), the fourth and the third centuries BCE, and the second and first centuries BCE. In the south of France the Iron Age and the period directly preceding the arrival of the Greeks is a phase of transition still poorly understood by archaeologists. According to Patrice Arcelin the beginning of the Iron Age in western Provence is characterized by sites that "are diversely distributed in the regional topography: on the border of a pond or the sea; out in the open or off to the side, in a cave or under a shelter, and finally in elevated positions."9 These settlements vary in size from small isolated farms to towns of several hundred inhabitants. Yet throughout the Iron Age the majority of these settlements maintain some degree of territorial mobility. According to Arcelin, this mobility was "tied to the rhythm of soil exhaustion or more simply stated [a] seasonal !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -!Arcelin (1992) 308: sont diversement répartis dans la topographie régionale : en bordure d’étang ou de mer, en plaine ou sur les versants, en grotte ou sous abri, sur des positions élevées enfin.! B!! ! ! [rhythm]."10 Therefore, the people of this period in Provence were not fixed within a specific territory, but moved around according to their needs. Moreover, Iron Age sites show variation in building techniques and materials. However, structures were mainly composed of un-worked stone and perishable materials such as wattle and daub, thatch, and mud. During the period corresponding to the establishment of the Greek settlement of Massalia the archaeological record shows a significant rise in the development of urbanized settlements. The few surveys of Iron Age habitats in the lower Rhone valley show a general trend in the consolidation of farms and hamlets that were previously dispersed over a wider geographic area. This consolidation led to the formation of larger and more populous settlements that were often situated at high elevations and protected by man-made walls. The earliest of these urban settlements are located in the region of Massalia, for instance Tamaris and Saint-Blaise in the region of Berre Etang.11 The development of urbanized settlement radiates outwards from Massalia through the region with the continued development of grouped settlements in the middle of the sixth century and in the very end of the sixth century. The process of urbanization, often described as a phenomenon, appears to be a result of the development of Mediterranean commerce in the region, and of the foundation of Massalia in particular. That is, these new settlement patterns are likely a response to the founding of Massalia, which increased the need for control of the landscape. That is to say, the consolidation of people into easily defendable settlements is a response to the increase in trade in the area and the subsequent need of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $1!L7?("*!,$--%0!31/2!Pliée essentiellement au rythme de l’épuisement des sols ou plus simple- ment saisonnière."! $$!Garcia (2005) 121. /!! ! ! the indigenous people to safeguard their land and goods for commercial purposes. These hilltop settlements provided for the control of the surrounding landscape and protection of cultivated land, pastoral land, and trade routes. The location at a high elevation allows for the inhabitants to monitor their land from a distance and maximize the area controlled. As previously mentioned, this "phenomenon" began in the coastal regions of the south of France in the sixth century BCE and became widespread in the late fifth century BCE.12 In the second century BCE, when the habitat of Entremont was established, this type of settlement is the norm. Thus, the settlement of Entremont is typical of the location of indigenous sites during this time period. It is during the period of the foundation of Massalia that the Greeks first write about the inhabitants of the south of France, whom they refer to as the "Ligurians". Ancient sources, such as Strabo, state that the Salluvii belong to this group of people. Therefore, in order to better understand the way in which the Greeks perceived the Salluvii, it is necessary to first understand the way in which the Greeks viewed the Ligurians. One of the earliest accounts concerning the Ligurians is a fragment of an early Greek source embedded in a poem of the fourth century CE, Ora Maritima, written by a Roman proconsul of Africa, Rufus Festus Avienus.13 Although the poem was written relatively late, the piece of the poem concerning the Ligurians is thought to come from an earlier Greek account that no longer exists in its original text.14 The date for this original Greek poem depends upon a fragment that discusses a voyage from Tartessus to the Greek settlement of Massalia. When discussing the route from Tartessus to Massalia !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12 Garcia (2005) 121.! $3!L#"?*E=!M)=!proconsul of Africa in 366 CE 14 Rankin (1987) 1-8. -!! ! ! references to the settlement of Emporiai are conspicuously absent from Avienus' poem. Given that one of the goals of Avienus' poem was to highlight the author's own breadth of knowledge, it is unlikely that he would have opted to leave out references to the trading settlement of Emporiai if such information was present in his source. Therefore, because the poem makes no mention of Emporiai, which is thought to have been established around the middle of the sixth century BCE, this particular fragment and the information it contains reflects the Greek knowledge of the south of France anywhere from 600 BCE to just before 550 BCE, making it contemporary with the arrival of the Greeks and the founding of Massalia.15 Drawing useful information from this poem is complicated by the overall vague nature of the references and a lack of any precise geographical information concerning the origin of the Celts and the Ligurians. However, despite these drawbacks it does provide useful pieces of information concerning the Greek perception of the Ligurians. First, the poem distinguishes between the Celts and the Ligurians, discussing them as two different entities. As a Greek author originally wrote this poem in the early sixth century, it is likely that the passage reflects the contemporary Greek understanding of the Celts and Ligurians as separate groups of people. However, the basis for this distinction has been a point of debate among scholars. One theory is that of H.D. Rankin who argues that the distinction between "Celt" and "Ligurian" in the texts of early Greek authors may suggest an awareness of cultural or linguistic differences between these two groups of people. This theory is significant because if the ancient Greeks distinguished between these two people on such a basis then the Ligurians and the Celts may indeed be !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 15 Rankin (1987) 3.! $1! ! ! ! two different and distinct cultures, as they are portrayed in the text. However, early writers, such as Avienus' Greek source, do not provide the reader with any cultural or linguistic information for either the Celts or the Ligurians and so it is not possible to determine the reasoning behind this distinction by examining the text alone. A more recent theory concerning the identity of the Ligurians, however, is that of Dominique Garcia who suggests that the term "Ligurian" was simply the name given by the early Greeks to those indigenous people with whom they first came into contact.16 Those with whom the Greeks did not have direct contact were therefore termed "Celts". According to Garcia, Liguria was the term applied to "the area frequented, as a place of exchanges and confrontation", whereas "Celtica" was the geographical concept of the peripheral area.17 It is interesting to note that this theory does not take into account any linguistic or cultural differences among the non-Greeks, but rather depends solely on the degree to which the Greeks were in contact with the indigenous peoples. Therefore, it may be possible that the people described as Celts and those describes as Ligurians may share the same culture and origins. This theory has roots in some of the early scholarship of the twentieth century, which demonstrates the difficulty of distinguishing between the early Celts and the Ligurians based on early archaeological research and linguistic studies of place-names. In the 1940's French archaeologist Albert Grenier noted that when the Ligurians are compared to the Celts they appear to have very similar language and origins.18 Likewise, Celticist John Rhys argued as early as 1909, that the differences in !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $.!Garcia (2005) 64.! $B!Garcia (2005) 64. 18 Grenier (1940) 163. $$! ! ! ! Celtic languages and the language of the Ligurians are relatively insignificant.19 Furthermore, in more recent years prehistoric archaeologists have noted that examinations of Hallstatt burial mounds associated with the Celts do not differ significantly from those of the Ligurians in the Rhône region.20 Yet, despite these different theories, Avienus' poem demonstrates that the ancient Greeks who wrote about these people in the sixth century BCE were able to distinguish between the Celts and the Ligurians on some basis. The second piece of information that Avienus' poem provides is that the Ligurians were both expelled from their territory and replaced by the Celts, characterizing them as a pre-Celtic, or indigenous.21 This passage describes a situation where the Ligurians have been forced out of their original territory and settlements, and have been pushed down towards the sea, by the Celts who have settled somewhere in the north.22 However, Avienus' poem does not provide a specific geographical location for the original home of the Ligurians, and simply states that the home of the Ligurians was somewhere beneath the pole of Lycaon, which places it somewhere in the north of Europe.23 It is easy to read this passage as a record of the migration of the Ligurians into the south of France and the migration of the Celts into the areas to the north of the Ligurians. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 19 Rhys (1908). Rhys' discussion of the Ligurian language is based on epigraphic evidence. 20 Jannoray (1955) 380 and Déchelette (1927) 150.! %$!Ora Maritima, 132-135: Celtarum manu...Ligures pulsi... In this passage, Avienus describes the Ligurians as having been pushed (pulsi) out by the "hand", or power, of the Celts (Celtarum manu). 22 Ora Maritima, 143: ...in marinos iam locos descendere. According to this piece of Avienus' writing, the Celts descended toward the sea, after having been expelled from their original location. 23 Ora Maritima, 130: axe... lycaonis $%! ! ! ! Indeed, the traditional view of the Ligurians throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth century is that they were an "ethnic substratum" or the "original people" in the south of France, whom successive waves of other populations, such as the Celts and the Iberians (west of the Rhône), would eventually come to replace.24 In the nineteenth century Karl Müllenhoff and Henri d'Jubainville originally proposed that the Ligurians were a pre-Indo-European population, and the Celts were the Indo-European population which came to supplant them as the inhabitants of the south of France and the Rhône basin. This theory has led some scholars to interpret the information in Avienus' poem as evidence of some awareness of migrations in the memory of the Ligurians with whom the Greeks traded.25 However pre-historians have challenged this theory and determined that this interpretation is chronologically problematic based on archaeological excavations of Iron Age sites. That is, the indigenous peoples with whom the Greeks came into contact at the time of the founding of Massalia were already well established in the south of France before the sixth century BCE, making it unlikely that the "memory", or any oral account, of the original migrations into Provence would survive. Another sixth century source of information about the Ligurians are the fragments of the Greek writer Hecataeus of Miletus, which have been conserved in the Ethnika of Stephen of Byzantium. One fragment refers to the "Elisycians" who Hecataeus states are an "ethnos of the Ligurians"26. Thus, Hecataeus offers another account of ancient Ligurians and insight into one of their "ethnos", the Elisycians. The reference to the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 The traditional view of the Celto-Ligurians is that during the Celtic migrations of the fourth century BCE they were largely displaced by the Celts, with the Celts becoming the dominant group in the region formerly occupied by the Ligurians. 25 Rankin (1987) 8.!! %.!Fragment 61, Hecataeus in Europe. See Husband (2006) 393 and Garcia (2005) 67. $3! ! ! ! "Elisycians" is vague and partial but it may refer to some sub-stratum of the Ligurians, perhaps a tribe or social group. Hecataeus also states that Massalia was a "city of Liguria, in the lower Celtic world, a colony of the Phocaeans".27 Therefore, Hecataeus tells us that in the end of the sixth century BCE, the "Elisycians" are not only a people associated with the Ligurians, but also that the Greek city of Massalia lies within the territory of the Ligurians, who are a part of the Celtic world. This quote supports the hypothesis that the people known by the Greeks as "Celts", and those known as the Ligurians, were not easily differentiated in the minds of the early Greeks. Yet it is important to note that the account of Hecataeus is fragmentary and the degree to which Hecataeus was familiar with Ligurians, or the south of France, is highly questionable. It is likely that Hecataeus' account may be based on secondary accounts, or skewed do to cultural unfamiliarity and misunderstanding. Therefore, one must be skeptical when relying on Hecataeus as a source for information about the Ligurians of this period. These early texts demonstrate that the people and the territory of Liguria were not well defined in the mind of the Greeks at the time of their early encounters in the sixth century BCE. Perhaps the most reasonable hypothesis concerning the early Greek concept of Liguria comes from R. Dion who suggests "Liguria is the name that the Greeks gave to the people with whom their colonial enterprises in the western Mediterranean brought them into contact."28 This definition of the term "Liguria" parallels that of Dominique Garcia who suggests that the term Liguria refers to the coastal strip of land where the Greeks came into direct contact with the indigenous people !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 27 Fragment 62, Hecataeus in Europe: )*++*%,*, -.%/( 01( 2/3&+0/41(, 4*05 067 4'%0/467, 89!/4!( :;4*<;7. "Massalia, a city of Liguria, beneath Celtica, a colony of Phocaea." 28 Dion (1959) 506.! $4! ! ! ! through trade and expansion. This theory does not separate the Celts from the Ligurians based on any perceived cultural or linguistic differences between the two groups, but depends solely on the extent to which the Greeks were familiar with the indigenous people through trade and colonization. In this scenario the Ligurians would be the indigenous people with whom the Greeks were living amongst and trading with, and the Celts were those further north, whom they may have traded with and come to know through intermediaries. In the fourth and third centuries BCE the Greeks, Celts, and Ligurians came in closer contact with one another through trade, migration, and politics. In 390 BCE the Celts moved down from the Alps into Italy and raided Rome. In 280 BCE the Celts attacked Delphi, one of the most sacred places known to the Greco-Roman world. These attacks brought the Celts directly into the Greco-Roman world. As a result, in this period the depiction of the Celts develops in a negative light characterizing them as the antithesis to civilized Greco-Roman society. Although the Celts of Gaul and the Ligurians of southern France were not involved in these attacks, the authors of the Greco- Roman world did not distinguish between them. Thus, from this point on the Greek and Roman writers reflect this new perspective in their depictions of the Celts and the Ligurians. Furthermore, whereas the earliest sources for information focus mainly on the geographical location and origins of the Celts and the Ligurians, ancient sources written after the third and fourth centuries BCE focus more closely on the customs and people of the region. However, it is during the second century that sources such as Strabo provide information concerning the people known as "!" #$%&'(". Scholars have had difficulty $5! ! ! ! determining what the term "Salluvii" refers to. The term is often thought to represent a single tribe, yet in more recent scholarship it is used as an overarching term for the tribes living in the Rhône region of Provence. This ambiguity is complicated by the fact that there are no written records of the Salluvii and all the written information about these people comes from Greco-Roman literature. The Greeks and Romans were not consistent in their use of tribal names and their accounts reflect such confusion. The archaeological sites that are attributed to the Salluvii are Entremont, Glanum (Saint-Rémy-de-Provence), Tarasco (Tarascon), Arelate (Arles), Roquepertuse, and Ernaginum (Saint-Gabriel), La Cloche, and Constantine.29 There is a great deal of variation in the location of these sites. For instance, Glanum is located in a low-lying valley, whereas Entremont is situated high atop a plateau. Glanum and Arelate show signs of mixed Greek and native occupation. Moreover, the foundation dates for these sites range from approximately the sixth century to the early second centuries BCE. Yet not all of the sites have been excavated in great detail and so far there remains much research to be done in these areas. The Greek geographer Strabo lived several centuries after the founding of Massalia30 and nearly a century after the founding of the Celtic oppidum at Entremont.31 Strabo's Geographica, in which he discusses the Salluvii, is a comprehensive work of geographical knowledge written for elite and educated Greeks and Romans. Although the main focus of the text is to give an extensive overview of the geography of foreign regions, the author does include information about other topics relevant to the places he !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! %-!Ptolemy, Geographica. II.9. The geographer Ptolemy provides a list of the settlements associated with the Salluvii, Entremont and Glanum are two of these sites. 30 c. 600BCE 31 c. 180BCE! $.! ! ! ! discusses, such as historical and ethnographic information. The information Strabo includes concerning the Salluvii in his discussion of the south of France is useful in that it outlines the territory belonging to various tribes. It is necessary to note that archaeological evidence shows that the most prominent site associated with the Salluvii, the settlement of Entremont, was abandoned by the time Strabo wrote his work Geographica.32 Therefore much of his information concerning the Salluvii is thought to come from earlier accounts, particularly those of the Greek writer Poseidonios who visited the south of France in person during the first century BCE. However, the writings of Poseidonios have been lost to scholars making it is difficult to determine the extent to which Strabo borrowed information, or how closely Strabo stayed to the information originally provided by Poseidonios. Yet it may be safe to say that the description of the territory of the Salluvii, and the relationship between the indigenous people and the Greek settlers, is valuable to our purposes as it reflects the viewpoint of an educated Greek writing for a Greek or Roman audience. Moreover, if one accepts that Strabo relied on Poseidonios for most of his information, and did not stray too far from what Poseidonios wrote, then when Strabo speaks of the Salluvii he refers to the status of the indigenous people before 124 BC, and not the situation as it was in his own time. According to Strabo, the land that belonged to the Salluvii stretched as far south as the lands bordering Massalia, and as far north as the river Durance.33 To the east he !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3%!Entremont was destroyed in 123/124 BCE and Geographica was written over one hundred years later around 20 BCE- 7 BCE. Therefore, the accounts of Strabo and Diodorus must have relied on earlier accounts, or, these accounts may reflect Celtic society as it was in their own lifetime, one hundred years after the destruction of Entremont. 33 Strabo, Geographica, 4.1.11: =9> )*++*%,*( 0!,7&7 =?@*µ<7!/( 4*A 9?!B!C+/7 D9A 067 µ'0*@E FG?*7 0H7 0' I%9';7 4*A 0!C J!K*7!C µ Geographica was to explain the geography and topography of foreign lands to audiences who were unfamiliar with such places, it is possible that Strabo places greater emphasis on geographic features than the tribes of southern France would have. That is, Strabo characterizes these features as territorial boundaries, but it is difficult to know the degree to which the Salluvii, or the Greeks of southern France, would have viewed these geographic features as boundaries. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !N4!C+/7 D9A 9'70*4!+,!&( +0*K,!&(. "Beginning from Massalia, and advancing towards the land between the Alps and the Rhodanus until the Durance River, the Salluvii inhabit the land for a distance of five hundred stadia." 34 Strabo, Geographica. 4.1.3: 0O KL 7!0,P 9?.+4'/0*/ 9*?5 0> %'FQL7 +F1µ* R DS'@1( 9*?*%,*, T7 UF!&+/7 !V 0' )*++*%/H0*/ 4*A !" #$%&'( µ Figure 1: Map of Salluvian territory From: Coutagne, 1987, p. 99 Strabo provides some insight concerning the territorial relationship between the Massaliotes and the Salluvii. According to Strabo, “The seacoast follows next, which is inhabited by both the Massaliotes and the Salluvii, as far as the Ligurians, to the parts that lie toward Italy and the Varus River. That is, Strabo states that both the Massaliotes and the Salluvii occupied the coastal region of the south of France.35 In doing so he suggests a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 35 Strabo, Geographica, 4.1.3: UF!&+/7 !V 0' )*++*%/H0*/ 4*A !" #$%&'(. Strabo states that both Massalia and the Salluvii have the land. Strabo is likely referring to the close $-! ! ! ! degree of joint territorial occupation and perhaps even possession. At the very least this statement suggests that the Greeks and the Salluvii were not excessively hostile to one another as it is unlikely both would have occupied the same territory, or have been considered as sharing the same territory by outsiders such as Strabo, if they were actively competing for control of the land. Moreover, there existed several other Massaliote cities spread along the length of the coast towards the Varus River that were situated in territory also occupied by the Ligurians. According to Strabo, "The seacoast, which extends from Massalia to the Varus River, and to those Ligurians who live in the region of the River, has these cities of Massalia; Tauroentium, Olbia, Antipolis, Nicaea and also the port called the Forum Julium."36 Therefore, the cities of the Massaliotes were dispersed across the same territory that was associated with Ligurian tribes. This demonstrates that the Salluvii and the Massaliotes were in close proximity and contact with one another as they occupied the same general area. Perhaps one of the most useful pieces of information that Strabo provides is his clarification of the terms "Ligurian" and "Celt". Strabo explains that the ancient Greeks, such as Avienus' Greek source, named the Salluvii "!" 2,3&'(" and the area they inhabited they named "2/3&+0/4c", however, he states that later Greeks began to refer to the Salluvii as "d'%0!%,3&'(" or "Celto-Ligurian".37 Strabo does not offer any explanation for this !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! proximity in which Salluvian oppida and Massaliote offshoots were located, and possibly the joint use of the surrounding territory. 36 Strabo, Geographica, 4.1.9: D9A 0>7 Z&[?!7 9!0*µ>7 4*A 0!E( 0*W0e M,3&*( 0$( 0' 0H7 )*++*%/;0H7 UF'/ 9.%'/( f*&?!<70/!7 4*A Z%b,*7 4*A g70,9!%/7 4*A a,4*/*7 4*A 0> 7*W+0*Qµ!7 0> d*,+*?!( 0!C #'b*+0!C, h 4*%!C+/ :.?!7 X!W%/!7. 3B!Strabo, Geographica, 4.6.4: 4*%!C+/ KL 0!E( #$%&*( !" µL7 9*%*/!A 0H7 i%%c7;7 2,3&*( 4*A 067 FG?*7, T7 UF!&+/7 !" )*++*%/H0*/, 2/3&+0/4c7, !" K] j+0'?!7 d'%0!%,3&*( k7!µ$l!&+/. Strabo states that ancient Greeks called the Salluvii "Ligurians" (2,3&*() and the land they inhabited "Liguria" (2/3&+0/4c7), yet now they are called the "Celto- %1! ! ! ! shift in terminology. However, as previously stated, it has been argued that the distinction between "Celt" and "Ligurian" by the early Greek authors may suggest awareness of cultural or linguistic differences between these two groups of people.38 Therefore, with this argument in mind, since by Strabo's lifetime in the first century BCE the Salluvii were no longer described as solely "Ligurian" by the Greek authors, this may suggest the blurring of cultural or linguistic elements between these two groups as perceived by the Greeks. Moreover, this may be a result of the movements of the Celts towards the south during the third century BCE. If the Celts came closer into the sphere of contact with the Ligurians they may have adopted Celtic traits making them Ligurians with Celtic aspects. Or, if the Celts settled in the area, the term may refer to a people of mixed Celtic and Ligurian descent. However, Dominique Garcia's argument may also apply to this situation. That is, if the term "Ligurian" was used by the Greeks to first describe the people with whom they directly came in contact, and the term "Celt" applied to those beyond their zone of direct contact further inland in Europe, then as the scope of Greek trade and contact shifted, so too would the significance of this distinction. Thus, the more familiar the Greeks became with the "Celts" the less significance the distinction between Celt and Ligurian would carry. Moreover, Strabo states, "4*0 067 X0*%,*7 +&7$90!70'( 2,3&'(, 9'?A n7 %'FQc+'0*/ µ'05 0*C0*." Here the author distinguishes between the Salluvii and other Ligurians by stating that the Salluvii inhabit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ligurians" (d'%0!%,3&*(). He does not offer any explanation for this change, but states that few people know that the name of the Ligurians changed over time. Thus, Strabo is "updating", or adding to, the information that is already known about the Celts and Ligurians. 38 Rankin (1998) 8.! %$! ! ! ! the lands in western Provence and other Ligurians, who do not belong to the group known as the Salluvii, occupy the lands that border Italy. In fact, Strabo distinguishes between the two stating that the Celts are one group of people or "UQ7!(" and the Ligurians are of another group or "o0'?!'Q7'm(".39 Yet he also states that both of these different ethnos share a similar way of life.40 It is important to note that he does not state what characteristics distinguish the Ligurians from the Celts, only that they share a similar way of life. Thus, Strabo tells us that by the end of the first century BCE the Salluvii are considered by the Greeks to be both Ligurians and Celts, or Celto-Ligurians. Likewise, he tells us that other Ligurians, who do not belong to the Salluvii, occupy the eastern region of Provence. It is also important to note that although Strabo tells us that the Salluvii are Celto-Ligurian he does not include the eastern Ligurian tribes, for instance the Oxybii and Deciates, under the same term. Moreover, in Geography 4.1.3, Strabo distinguishes between the Salluvii and other Ligurians in his discussion of their territory by stating, "T7 UF!&+/7 !V 0' )*++*%/H0*/ 4*A !" #$%&'( µ Therefore, Strabo draws a distinction here between the Salluvii and the other Ligurians. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 39 Strabo, Geographica, 2.5.29 40 Strabo, Geographica, 2.5.29: 9*?*9%c+/!/ KL 0!m( b,!/(. Here Strabo states that the Celts and Ligurians were similar (9*?*9%c+/!/) with respect to their lifestyle (0!m( b,!/(). This may suggest that there were perceivable similarities in the daily life of and customs of the people Strabo understood to be either Celto-Ligurians or Ligurians. Strabo does not elaborate on what these similarities are. It is interesting that the material remains of eastern Ligurian cities do not contain evidence for the cult of the severed heads or spun pottery such as at the sites associated with the Salluvii. Therefore, based on material remains these two groups, the eastern Ligurians and the western Celto-Ligurians, are at the very least likely to have differences in their military practices, based on the absence of the têtes coupées cult in the east. Moreover, there are likely to have been technological differences due to the lack of spun pottery among the eastern Ligurians. ! %%! ! ! ! Thus, it appears that the Salluvii are the only Ligurians to be considered both Celtic and Ligurian. As previously mentioned, Strabo Geographica IV, 1, 10 states that the Greeks established settlements in areas associated with Ligurian occupation and therefore lived in close proximity with one another. Yet, it should also be mentioned that the Greeks and Ligurians both utilized the same trade routes running through the region of Provence. In 154 BCE conflict erupted between the Greeks and Ligurians in the east of Provence, as the Greek inhabitants of Massalia appealed to Rome41 for aid against the Ligurian tribes of the Oxybii and Deciates, who they claimed were harassing their eastern settlements of Antibes and Niece.42 As a result, the Roman Consul Quintus Opimius in 154 BCE defeated these two Ligurian tribes. It is useful to note that only thirty years earlier, in 181 BCE, the Roman Consul Aemilius Paullus defeated the Cisalpine Ligurian tribes. This defeat opened up the region allowing for Quintus Opimius to cross into the Var region and take control of the territory controlled by the Oxybii and Deciates, the Argens valley, and the Port of Fréjus. Therefore, the Romans had defeated several Ligurian tribes to the east of the Salluvii and had effectively eliminated any indigenous threat to their presence in the area. Yet, in 125-124 BCE hostilities broke out once more, this time between the Massalia and the Salluvii located further west in Provence. The cause of this conflict was !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4$!The Greeks of Massalia had been connected with the Romans by ties of friendship since the Second Punic War, when Massalia joined with Rome in order to destroy Carthaginian maritime supremacy. 42 Periochae of Livy, 47.11: Q. Opimius cos. Transalpinos Liguras, qui Massiliensium oppida, Antipolim et Nicaeam, vastabant, subegit. "Consul Quintus Opimius subdued the Transalpine Ligurians, who had attacked two towns of the Massaliotes, Antipolis and Nicaea."! %3! ! ! ! once again related to the control of trade routes running through the region. However, this time the conflict involved not only Massaliote interest, but that of the Romans as well. The Salluvii were allegedly restricting the flow of trade and traffic through the east-west route that linked Italy to Spain, therefore preventing the Romans from moving supplies through the area. Consuls Marcus Fulvius Flaccus in 125 BCE and Gaius Sextius Calvinus in 123 BCE led military expeditions against the Salluvii, successfully defeating the tribe and destroying their chief settlement at Entremont.43 From this point on the population of the oppidum of Entremont declined and returned to rural occupation. By 90 BCE the site was abandoned. Thus, the period of occupation lasts only about eighty years. Moreover, the Romans founded a castellum in nearby modern-day Aix-en- Provence, Aquas Sextias Salluviorum, named for the consul responsible for the victory.44 It is interesting to note that the campaigns of M. Fulvius Flaccus, 125-123 BCE coincide with the change in policy of the Roman state. That is, Massalia's appeal for Roman aid coincided with the period of conflict following the reforms of Tiberius Gracchus. Although Tiberius Gracchus was dead by this point in time, his lex agraria was still in place, despite the opposition of the Senate.45 M. Fulvius Flaccus, consul in 125 BCE, was a prominent and powerful member of the Populares and a Gracchan supporter. Thus, when the Massaliotes appealed to Rome for aid, the Senate may have !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 43!Benedict (1942) 38-42. 44 Livy, Epitome, LXI: C. Sextius procos. victa Salluviorum gente coloniam Aquas Sextias condidit, ob aquarum copiam e caldis frigidisque fontibus atque a nomine suo ita appellatas." Having defeated the tribe of the Salluvii, proconsul Cnaeus Sextius founded the colony Aquae Sextiae, which had been called this because there is much water from warm and cold springs." Aquae Sextiae is referred to by Strabo as a permanent garrison or a "S?!&?$ 'p;µ*,;7" in Geog. IV.1.5. The date at which the site became a colonia is uncertain. 45 Benedict (1942) 38-50.! %4! ! ! ! been eager to grant the request. The Senate, which was in charge of managing military affairs, placed Flaccus in charge of the military campaigns in Provence in order to remove a powerful political rival from Rome. Thus, M. Fulvius Flaccus led the first Roman campaigns against the Salluvii and was awarded a triumph in 123 BCE. Yet, in the years 123-122 the Romans led another campaign against the Salluvii, this time under the leadership of C. Sextius Calvinus.46 The continuation of the campaigns against the Salluvii suggests that the efforts of M. Fulvius Flaccus did not effectively put down the Salluvian threat. Therefore, with the final defeat of the Salluvii at their principal oppidum of Entremont in 123/124 BCE, Calvinus founded the castellum of Aquas Sextias Salluviorum, the first site in Gaul that was permanently settled by the Romans.47 The establishment of Aquae Sextiae was undoubtedly influenced by the need of the Romans, and not just the Massaliotes, to ensure the trade route into Spain remained open. Moreover, the establishment of a permanent Roman presence in the region marks a distinct change in the policy of the Romans. That is, until this point the Romans had intervened on Massalia's behalf when the indigenous tribes of the region attacked Massaliote trade. Of course, it is likely that Roman trade was also disrupted on these occasions, and Rome had its own motives for intervening. However, until this point Rome had never established a permanent presence in the region. The continuation of Roman campaigns against the Salluvii suggests that they were not easily defeated. Moreover the establishment of a permanent garrison in Salluvian territory may be evidence that the Salluvii were viewed to be a significant threat capable of further damaging Roman interests in the area. Strabo recorded the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4.!Consul in 124 BCE 47 Benedict (1942) 41.! %5! ! ! ! details of this conflict between the Salluvii and the Romans, and he even provides information about the military capabilities of the Salluvii, characterizing them as both organized and strong. He states that the Salluvii were divided into ten parts48 and were capable of raising troops49. This division of the tribe into ten parts may be evidence of the internal structure of the Salluvian confederacy. For instance, the ten parts of the Salluvii may represent ten local tribes that made up the tribal confederation. He also explains the conflict between Rome and the Salluvii by telling the reader that the Salluvii closed all of the roads leading into Iberia to the Romans preventing them from passing through. According to Strabo, the Salluvii became so powerful that they were able to carry on this war with the Romans for eighty years.50 However, eventually the Romans were able to gain a length of twelve stadia in order to make a new road, and at this point they were able to defeat the Salluvii and impose tribute.51 All of this suggests that the Salluvii posed a formidable threat to Roman interests in the region, as well as to Roman troops. Furthermore, the fact that the Romans had to construct a road through the region after fighting for eighty years against the Salluvii suggests that the Romans were forced to establish a more permanent presence in the region in order to maintain control. It is interesting to note that Strabo does not characterize the Salluvii as particularly barbaric or primitive. In fact, he does quite the opposite. Strabo's depiction of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4/!Strabo, Geographica, 4.6.3: ...'N( K<4* µ7 K] U0!( 9!%'µ!C70'(... 51 Strabo, Geographica, 4.6.3: K/'9?$@*70! µ.%/( q+0] D9A KGK'4* +0*K,!&( 0> 9%$0!( =7'm+Q*/ 067 rK>7 0!m( rK'W!&+/ KYµ!+,s. µ'05 0*C0* µ<70!/ 4*0<%&+*7 t9*70*( 4*A K/<0*@*7 *u0!A 05( 9!%/0',*(, D9/+0c+*70'( S.b!7. This quote by Diodorus states that the Romans imposed fear (S.b!7), yet other interpretations say tribute (S.?&7). The imposition of harsh tributes was cited as one of the reasons for the Salluvian revolt of 90 BCE. ! %.! ! ! ! the Salluvii portrays them as an organized and militarily strong people who were able to withstand the Roman army for nearly eighty years. However, even this flattering characterization serves to benefit Roman interests. That is, there would be little glory in a Roman victory over a weak and disorganized people. Therefore, by depicting the Salluvii as strong and intelligent, Strabo makes the Roman victory that much more impressive and important. However, given the repeated efforts of the Romans in the area, and the establishment of a Roman garrison in Salluvian territory, it is likely that Strabo's characterization of the Salluvii as organized and powerful is accurate. Like Strabo, Diodorus of Sicily also wrote about the conflict between Rome and the Salluvii, which eventually led to the fall of Entremont. Diodorus was an educated Greek historian who wrote a comprehensive history about various peoples of the world. Like Strabo, he lived and wrote after the decline of the main Salluvian settlement at Entremont and is likely to have relied on the writings of previous authors, particularly Poseidonois, for most of his information. In the fragments of Diodorus' Bibliotheca Historica he records an event surrounding the capture of Entremont by the consul C. Sextius Calvinus in 124 BCE, in which he refers to Entremont simply as "the city of the Gauls".52 In this passage Diodorus states, "When Sextius had captured the city of the Gauls and was selling its inhabitants as booty, a certain Crato,53 who had been a supporter of the Roman cause ...was being conducted in chains together with the rest of the captives. When he saw the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5%!Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, XXXV, 22, 23: 0H7 v*%*0H7 9.%/7. 53 It is important to note that Crato(n) is a Greek name. This person may be a Salluvian with ties to the Greek community or a Greek living among the Salluvii of Entremont. The presence of a person with a Greek name in Entremont suggests that there may have been close ties between the Greek and Salluvian communities, and that Entremont was not as exclusively Salluvian, either in culture or population, as previously thought. %B! ! ! ! consul at his duties, and disclosed who he was and that, as a supporter of Roman policy he had gone through many and frequent perils at the hands of his fellow citizens, not only was he, along with his kindred, released and their property restored, but because of his loyalty to Rome he was granted permission to exempt nine hundred of his fellow citizens from slavery." This passage from Diodorus is meant to show the leniency and benevolence of the Romans, particularly the consul Sextius Calvinus towards those he conquered. The passage should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt. That is, the depiction of the Romans as benevolent and just towards the barbarians they conquered likely meant to draw a sharp contrast between the two peoples. This passage, like the passage concerning the defeat of the Salluvii by Strabo, serves to depict the Romans in a positive light. In Epitome LXI, Livy states that the Roman conflict with the Salluvii continued on after the establishment of Aquae Sextiae and the triumph of C. Sextius Calvinus in 122 BCE. According to Livy, "Proconsul Gnaeus Domitius successfully fought against the Allobroges at the town of Vindalium. The reason for starting this war was that the Allobroges had received the fleeing king, Toutomotulus, of the Salluvians, and had supported him with all means when he devastated the fields of the Aedui, an ally of the Roman people."54 In this excerpt, Livy tells us that the Romans pursued the king of the Salluvii, Toutomotulus, who fled to an allied tribe, the Allobroges. It is also likely that a portion of the Salluvian elite fled from Entremont with Tuotomotulus. This passage shows that the king of the Salluvii, and the Salluvian nobles, were still a threat to the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 54!Livy, Epitome LXI: Cn. Domitius proconsul adversus Allobrogas ad oppidum Vindalium feliciter pugnavit. quibus bellum inferendi causa fuit, quod Tutomotulum, Salluviorum regem, fugientem recepissent et omni ope iuvissent quodque Aeduorum agros, [sociorum] populi Romani, vastavissent. ! %/! ! ! ! Romans and Roman allies. That is, despite having been chased from Salluvian territory, Toutomotulus was still capable of inflicting damage and potentially driving the Romans out of their territory. Based on the information provided in these accounts, the strength of the Salluvian confederation and the influence of their king Toutomotulus posed a significant threat to Roman presence in the south of France. Roman expansion into southern France began in 154 BCE with the defeat of the eastern Ligurians by Quintus Opimius. The defeat of the Oxybii and Deciates eliminated the obstacles standing between Rome and the territory of the Salluvii. When the Massaliotes appealed for Roman aide in 125 BCE against the Salluvii, the way had been cleared for Rome's advance. Moreover, political turmoil in Rome and the Salluvian threat to Roman commerce between Spain and Italy strongly influenced Roman activity in the area. However, it was the threat of the Salluvii that influenced the establishment of a permanent Roman garrison at Aquae Sextiae. That is, the because of the instability of the region and the threat of the Salluvian king and nobles supporting the Allobroges, Rome had no choice but to create an outpost in the region from which to protect their access to Spain. Livy does not comment on the ethnicity of the Salluvii as other authors do; however his passages concerning the Salluvii provide insight into the way in which he characterized them. For instance, in Epitome LX he states, "Fulvius Flaccus was the first to subdue the Transalpine Ligures, having been sent in aid to the Massaliotes against the Salluvian Gauls".55 In this passage Livy clearly describes the Saluvii as being both Gauls !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 55!Livy, Epitome, LX: Fulvius Flaccus primus Transalpinos Ligures domuit bello, missus in auxilium Massaliensibus adversus Saluvios Gallos, qui fines Massiliensium populabantur. Livy tells us that the Salluvii were Transalpine Ligurians and also Gauls. %-! ! ! ! and Transalpine Ligurians. This, however, may be representative of the Roman perspective of the Salluvii, and all Celts, as Gauls. That is, Caesar clearly states in his Comentarii de Bello Gallico, "All of Gaul is divided into three parts, the Belgae inhabit one part, the Aquitani another, and the third is inhabited by those who are called in their own language Celts, and in our language Gauls."56 Therefore, Caesar tells us that the people referred to as "Celts" by the Greeks, are considered to be "Gauls" by Latin speakers. This is no doubt why Livy characterizes the Salluvii as such. After examining these various quotes related to the inhabitants of the south of France it appears that there is a great deal of variation in the way in which the Greeks and Romans conceptualized these people. The perception of the Ligurians, Celts, and Salluvii fluctuates based on the time period in which they are observed. Likewise, the way in which they are characterized varies depending on the author, whether he is Greek or Roman, or whether he is a geographer or a historian. The history of the region of Provence is one of continuous changes and cross- cultural interaction. Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the study of the indigenous inhabitants of the south of France relied mainly on ancient sources incorporating very little archaeological information. This method provided a skewed view of the indigenous people. Moreover, during the predominant geopolitical concepts of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries led scholars to try and match ethnic and !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Furthermore, he tells us that they occupied the area at the limits of Massalia. Much like Strabo, Livy places the Salluvii and the Massaliote Greeks in close proximity. ! 56 Caesar, De Bello Gallico, 1.1: Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur. "All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, in the third, those who in their own language are called Celts, in ours Gauls." 31! ! ! ! territorial information drawn from ancient texts to specific cultures and well-defined regions. However, recent scholarship has emphasized the notion of overlapping territories and fluid boundaries. In order to better understand the Salluvii, Celts, and Ligurians it is now necessary to re-evaluate them as the product of social, political, and economic variables, and not as unchanging entities or permanent divisions of people. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 3$! ! ! ! III: Entremont The interpretation of artifacts is affected by the archaeologist’s own experiences and ideas.57 The argument that Glanum is a predominantly Greek settlement is based on the expectation of what kinds of material remains a Greek or Salluvian settlement is supposed to contain. For instance, Glanum is interpreted as a Greek settlement based upon the assumption that the Hellenistic architecture found at the site can only be attributed to Greeks. Likewise, Salluvian art and architecture have generally been defined by what material remains archaeologists have found in settlements such as Entremont, which do not feature strong elements of Greco-Roman or Hellenistic architecture. By comparing and contrasting the observed archaeological remains of Glanum and Entremont with the expected pattern of Salluvian and Greek archaeological remains, archaeologists such as Henri Rolland and Trevor Hodge have hypothesized that the Hellenistic remains of Glanum are proof of Greek occupation. However this interpretation relies on the assumption that the Salluvian people were not open to Greek influence and would have rejected such outside forces. For instance, Hodge's argument that the Salluvian population of Glanum would not have been the inhabitants of the Greek-style homes is based upon the assumption that these Salluvian would have been opposed to living in, and therefore using, this Greek technology.58 It is necessary to note that the Rolland's theory concerning the nature of Glanum was formed in the 1940's. This is important as the scholarship of this period generally took a more colonialist approach toward understanding the cultural interaction between indigenous peoples and outside !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5B!Hodder (2001) 1-11. 58 Hodge (1998) 153-155.! 3%! ! ! ! influences.59 By contrast, Roth Congès interpretation of Glanum takes the post-colonial perspective by emphasizing the cultural exchange and interaction between these two cultures, rather than a disparity in the influence of one culture as opposed to another. This chapter will argue that the site of Entremont, despite being a predominantly Salluvian settlement, shows evidence of Salluvian openness to Greek elements from an early point. This chapter will attempt to show that the Salluvian oppidum of Entremont contains evidence of Greek influence, which resulted from the selective incorporation of Greek technology and style by the inhabitants of the settlement.60 By identifying the outside influences present in Entremont it is possible to show that the Salluvii were receptive to Greek influences prior to the Roman period, and that the settlement of Glanum reflects the Salluvian use of Hellenistic elements. This chapter will attempt to take a more holistic approach to the interpretation of the Salluvian site of Entremont by incorporating the theory of cognitive archaeology61 to show that the Greek elements found in the archaeological remains of Entremont are evidence of the Salluvian openness to outside !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 59 See Morris (2010) 239-241. According to Ian Morris, the approach taken by many scholars of the early twentieth century tends to see the development of cities and states in the western Mediterranean as the result of colonization. Conversely, the post-colonialist approach generally views these developments as a result of indigenous resistance to colonization by which the native inhabitants transform their own societies. Morris argues that the development of urbanization in the west was in fact, "a bit of both". Local initiatives combined with the arrival of the Greeks. 60 Hodder (1996) 151. Human intelligence is employed in the making of objects, therefore by examining the archaeological remains of a site one may be able to discern something of the motivations or decision-making processes which led to the creation of such items. 61 Hodder (1996) 351: "Cognitive Archaeology is the study of all those aspects of ancient culture that are the product of the human mind; the perception, description, and classification (religion); principles, philosophies, ethics, and values by which human societies are governed (ideology); the ways in which aspects of the world, the supernatural, or human values are conveyed in art (iconography), and all other forms of human intellectual and symbolic behavior that survive in the archaeological record."!! 33! ! ! ! cultural influences. Furthermore, the incorporation of these Greek elements was the result of the decision-making Salluvian elite who adopted Greek art and architecture because it was considered to be the most cutting-edge technology available. The settlement of Entremont was founded in the beginning of the second century BCE.62 It is located 3.5 km north of the modern city of Aix-en-Provence, on a plateau rising 365 m above sea level and 100 m above the plain below. The settlement is triangular in shape and occupies an area of roughly 3.5 ha that provided natural defenses on two sides. The steep slopes at the south of the plateau, which also serve as a natural defense, delimit the southern border of the town. In the north end of the plateau the slope is more gradual and is compensated for by the construction of a limestone wall constructed in large rough cut blocks. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .%!Approximately 190 BCE based on the almost total absence of Campanian ceramics Type A (late third century beginning of II) does not allow one to date the settlement of the first village before the beginning of the second century.!! 34! ! ! ! Figure 2: Site of Entremont From: Arcelin, 1987, p. 58 The settlement was also located at the intersection of two important trade routes, one extending to the Alps by way of the river Durance; the other route running east and west through the Argens and Arc valleys. The location of Entremont allowed the Salluvii to monitor and control the traffic moving through their territory. LAYOUT In 1947, Fernand Benoît identified and distinguished two distinct quarters at Entremont, the Ville Haute and Ville Basse, each of which was surrounded by a stone rampart. He hypothesized that these two chambers signified areas with specific functions and different social importance. Benoît originally characterized the Ville Haute as the section of the settlement associated with the elite and the sacred functions of the city 35! ! ! ! whereas the Ville Basse was the area for production and manufacturing.63 However, in the 1980's the director of excavations, Patrice Arcelin, renamed these areas "Habitat 1" and "Habitat 2", suggesting that these areas actually represent successive phases of occupation.64 The Ville Haute, or Habitat 1, being the original settlement and the Ville Basse, or Habitat 2, being a later expansion of the original settlement. The date for the foundation of the original settlement was, until recently, thought to be in the fourth century BCE with the expansion of the settlement coinciding with the Celtic incursions in the south of France in the middle of the third century BCE. However, the date for the foundation of the site has been revised following recent excavations. Habitat 1 is now generally considered to date to ca. 190-180 BCE, and Habitat 2 to 150- 140 BCE.65 The total period of occupation for the site was thus some one hundreds years with the final phase of occupation extending from the defeat of the Salluvii in 123/124 BCE until the final abandonment of the settlement in 90 BCE. Habitat 1 shows signs of advanced and complex urban development featuring streets and blocks arranged according to a pre-determined layout. The streets and blocks are aligned in a uniform pattern that corresponds to the "Hippodamian", or organized grid layouts, of Greek cities. Archaeologists have compared the grid layout of Habitat 1 to that of the Massaliote trading settlement at Olbia in Hyères.66 No such grid layout has been observed at Massalia; however the modern city of Marseille rests atop much of the ancient settlement, making it difficult to identify the actual plan. Nevertheless, the pre- determined organization of Habitat 1 in a grid pattern suggests a close understanding of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .3!Arcelin (1987) 61. 64 Arcelin (1987) 61-62. 65 Arcelin (1987) 65. 66 Hodge (1998) 201.! 3.! ! ! ! Greek city planning and the intentional incorporation of this technology by the inhabitants of Entremont. There are no signs of earlier habitation either on the plateau or in the immediate vicinity that suggest the gradual development of grid-style urban planning. Therefore, the organized urban planning was most likely not developed by the inhabitants of Entremont but rather imported from the Greeks. That is, the Greek settlement of Olbia, which is also located in the south of Provence, demonstrates the use of the grid like system among the Greeks. The Greeks used this settlement for trade purposes, and it is therefore not unreasonable to imagine that the Salluvii may have learned of this form of organization and urban planning from the Greeks via trade relations with Olbia.67 The houses of Habitat 1 are separated into blocks by streets that are generally 2.5- 3.5 m wide. Each block consists of two rows of about five to seven houses.68 The streets were paved with small stones, pebbles, and broken ceramics. The walls of many houses, particularly those of blocks XIII and XVI, were connected directly to the rampart, which provided the means of support.69 Thus, it is generally accepted that the fortification wall was the first phase of construction with the houses having been built later. The homes of Habitat 1 are relatively simple and consist of a single room with one door opening directly to the street. The lack of subdivided rooms and the single street entrance gives these homes an archaic quality, as the majority of Greek cities feature homes with multiple rooms. One unique feature of the city is that wherever the streets intersect, the edges of buildings are curved. It has been suggested that this modification allowed for !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .B!Hodge (1998) 174-175. 68 Arcelin (1987) 62-65. 69 Arcelin (1987) 62-65.! 3B! ! ! ! carts and traffic to move more easily throughout the town.70 This unique feature is not found at other Greek cities that feature Hippodamian layouts, such as Olbia, and is likely a local innovation. The use of the Hippodamian grid in the urban planning of Entremont is evidence of Greek technology being employed by the native inhabitants. It is interesting to note however that these homes are not the sort one might expect to find in a Greek city. They are simple and clearly indigenous in their construction. Thus, although Entremont shows signs of urban planning, it appears to be in a very early stage. Moreover, the curved corners of buildings at places where there are intersections show a uniquely indigenous adaptation of this technology. Figure 3: Map of Habitat 1 From: Arcelin, 1987, p. 60 The lower town, or Habitat 2, is less rigorously aligned and ordered than Habitat 1. The blocks are roughly twice as large than those of Habitat 1. The houses of Habitat 2, especially those of block VIII, are generally larger than those of the earlier settlement and !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B1!Arcelin (1987) 62-63.! 3/! ! ! ! are subdivided into two to three rooms.71 Similar to Habitat 1, block I of Habitat 2 features houses that are built abutting the rampart for support. These houses also feature drainage culverts in order to deal with the accumulation of water on the plateau. The network of hydraulic drainage in Habitat 2 presupposes not only technical but also political organization. That is, the implementation of such a grid like plan and the construction of buildings according to this pattern would have required planning prior to construction and organization of a workforce to build the settlement. It also shows the ability of the inhabitants to incorporate their own adaptations to Greek technology in order to accommodate life on a plateau. Figure 4: Map of Habitat 2 From: Arcelin, 1987, p. 60 While the surrounding rampart walls delimit Habitat 1 and 2, this does not mean that there were no homes or other buildings outside of the enclosures. Although the area !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B$!Arcelin (1987) 62-65.! 3-! ! ! ! beyond the circuit wall has not been excavated, it is generally believed that a portion of the population lived outside the walls for agricultural and pastoral purposes. 72 FORTIFICATIONS Both Habitat 1 and 2 show signs of fortification, most notably in the form of large ramparts. The earliest rampart of Entremont, that of Habitat 1, is lost except for the base. However, these partial remains do provide useful information concerning the first phase of the city's fortifications. The base of this first rampart rests directly on the surface of the plateau. It is constructed of large square blocks of stone and had an average thickness of 1.5 m.73 The stone used to construct the wall was quarried from the plateau. The northeast and northwest walls were set parallel to the southeast and southwest slopes forming a parallelogram. The northwest face of the wall shows evidence of four large square towers set 19 m apart from one another.74 However, the northeast wall does not show any signs of such towers. It is still uncertain whether or not there originally were towers on this face of the wall. These towers could have been removed at the time of the expansion of Habitat 2 in order to open up the area between both enclosures, however either way there is little evidence to support the presence of towers on the northeast wall. The rampart of Habitat 2 is larger than the original wall. The new wall was situated directly on the north edge of the plateau and was 2.5 m thick.75 The choice of north edge is obvious as the gradual slope of the plateau on this side makes it the least defensible area. The wall extended an impressive 380 m across the north edge with 160 m !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B%!Benoît (1975) 236. 73 Arcelin (1987) 66. 74 Arcelin (1987) 66-67. 75 Arcelin (1987) 66-67.! 41! ! ! ! of the wall remaining visible today.76 The wall of Habitat 2 was constructed from a mix of small and large worked stones, and is faced on both sides with a rubble interior. The wall was built using the typical local dry stone technique. Many of the stones were poorly cut though the exterior of the wall is more finely finished. The foundation of the wall was not leveled prior to construction. The towers of the wall are evenly spaced 19 m apart, just as in the earlier wall surrounding Habitat 1.77 However, whereas the original wall only had four towers, archaeologists estimate that there were thirteen or fourteen towers on the North face of the second wall. Moreover the second wall was built twice as thick as the first. In addition to this, a curvilinear shape that is designed to withstand the force of battering rams characterizes the exterior face of each of the towers. Drainage holes were also added beneath towers 4, 5, and 6 for water runoff.78 This shows the implementation of more advanced technology and increased defenses in the second wall. Moreover, the height of the ramparts is estimated to measure 6-7 m high, giving the wall an impressive and monumental appearance.79 It is important to note that the walls of Entremont are the only monumental structures found on the site. This contrasts sharply with the numerous monumental remains found at Glanum. Furthermore, the regularly spaced towers indicate an attempt by the inhabitants to preserve some aesthetic quality. That is, in order to be effective a defensive wall only needs towers situated in strategic locations, such as weak or hard to defend areas. So, the regular spacing of towers exceeds the military needs of the settlement in order to create an aesthetically pleasing and powerful appearance. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B.!Benoît (1975) 232-233. 77 Benoît (1975) 233. 78 Benoît (1975) 233-234. 79 Benoît (1975) 233.! 4$! ! ! ! However, this regularity also implies that the community of the oppidum was sufficiently prosperous, organized, and technologically advanced enough to build monumental structures. Therefore, it is not only the defensive strength of the wall that is important to the inhabitants but also the image that it projects to the outside world. It is interesting to note that these curved towers are not unique to Entremont and can also be found in the ramparts of other indigenous oppida such as Ambrussum, Nages, and Constantine.80 These towers were also characteristic features of indigenous communities in western Provence during this time period. The expansion of the oppidum into Habitat 2, and the construction of the more advanced second wall, date to approximately 150 BCE. This is contemporary with the fall of the eastern Ligurian tribes of the Oxybii and the Deciates to the Romans. It may be that the defeat of these tribes created a heightened awareness of the threat from Rome among the western tribes, the consolidation of the community and expansion of the defensive structures at Entremont being a direct reflection of this anxiety. The choice to construct a more advanced wall was a result of the decision-making body of the Salluvii, and the choice to build a Greek-style wall was due to the fact that this was the most advanced type of fortification available. Although the walls of Entremont, and even those of Ambrussum, Nages, and Constantine, are visibly different from the walls of nearby Greek cities, this may simply be a result of the lack of skilled masons among the Salluvii. That is, the Greek walls surrounding St. Blaise, Glanum, Olbia, and the wall of Crinas at Marseille,81 are all constructed of larger stones, cut more precisely, featuring a herringbone pattern on the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! /1!Hodge (1998) 204-205. 81 Hodge (1998) 144.! 4%! ! ! ! exterior suggesting the work of highly skilled masons. At Entremont, although the stones are smaller and more roughly cut, the sides of the walls have been carefully hewn faces indicating perhaps an attempt to replicate the walls of Greek cities. Therefore, although executed in a local technique the walls of Entremont were in all probability influenced by Greek models. Furthermore, the masons responsible for the construction of the wall at Entremont are likely to have been Salluvian, and not the Greek or Sicilian trained masons responsible for the other walls.82 This recalls the statement by Pompeius Trogus, a native of southern Gaul, who states, "From the people of Massalia, therefore, the Gauls learned a more civilized way of life, their former barbarity being laid aside or softened; and by them they were taught to cultivate their lands and to enclose their towns within walls."83 The Celts were often portrayed as barbaric and uncivilized people, but Pompeius' audience would not expect to hear an account of how the Celts cleverly adapted foreign technologies, or even developed their own technology, in order meet their needs. Nevertheless, despite the inherent biases in Trogus' account, the architecture of the fortifications shows the selective incorporation of fortifications resembling those of the Greek inhabitants with whom they were in contact. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! /%!Hodge (1998) 144. Hodge states that the blocks of the wall at St. Blaise carry a mason's mark in Greek letters and are likely to have been the work of a Sicilian mason. This shows that Massalia and the communities of its hinterland were well connected to Mediterranean societies beyond the south of France, and there may have been a diverse population, at least at Massalia if not in other sites. 83 Justinus, Epitome of Pomeius Trogus, XLIII 4.1: Ab his igitur Galli et usum uitae cultioris deposita ac mansuefacta barbaria et agrorum cultus et urbes moenibus cingere didicerunt... "From these (The Greeks of Marseille), therefore, the Gauls learned a more civilized way of life, their former barbarity being laid aside or softened; and by them they were taught to cultivate their lands and to enclose their towns with walls." 43! ! ! ! ART/Sculpture When considering the artwork of the indigenous peoples, the sculptures of Entremont stand out due to their quality and originality. The sculptures of Entremont are numerous and have provided archaeologists with a great deal of insight into not only the artistic work of the Salluvii, but their society as well. For this reason it will be useful to discuss these statues in general terms. The main sculptural groups discovered at the site are the detached heads of statues,84 the seated warriors,85 and the severed heads.86 Each of these sculptures, or fragments of sculptures, was found in the road in front of the hypostyle hall in Habitat 2. Figure 5: Map of Entremont. Sculptures located at C From: Salviat, 1987, p. 167 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! /4!Salviat (1987) 170: Têtes détachées des statues 85 Salviat (1987) 168: Les guerriers assis 86 Salviat (1987) 199: Têtes coupées! 44! ! ! ! To date, there have been several detached heads of statues found at Entremont. Each of these heads was carved from local limestone. The limestone is soft making it easy to work but sensitive to moisture and prone to breakage. It is unknown whether or not these heads were originally carved from the same block of limestone as the bodies, or if they were carved separately and attached upon completion. Archeologists have divided the heads into two groups, male and female. The group of sculptures considered to be male consists of five heads all of which share several stylistic similarities. For instance, the faces tend to be elongated, the eyes are large, the eyelids protrude, the ears are long, and the mouths are all pursed giving the statue as stern or serious expression. Two of the statues are characterized by curly hair whereas another two wear a large band, or diadem, around the head. The final statue, although displaying the same facial characteristics as the other four heads, was carved wearing a helmet covering the hair and ears. The curly hair of the first two statues is reminiscent of similar hairstyles represented in Greek art, particularly Heracles and Apollo. The statues wearing a diadem, or band, around the head were originally interpreted as women based on the elaborate hairstyles they exhibit.87 However, more recent scholarship has characterized these statues as male. The final statue wearing a helmet has been studied in great detail as it provides a representation of the armament worn by the Salluvii. In order to gain a better understanding of these sculptures it will be helpful to examine each one briefly and in very general terms. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! /B!Salviat (1987) 176. 45! ! ! ! The head considered to be in the best condition is head 1.88 Despite breakage resulting in the loss of the nose and cheek, this sculpture exhibits the features generally associated with the statuary of Entremont. The face is visibly elongated, and the eyes are large with protruding eyelids. The ears of the statue are awkwardly rendered and appear oval in shape. The hair is intricately carved in short curls and drilled to give greater definition. The mouth of the statue is closed with the lips set in a stern or serious expression. Head number 2 is similar to head 1 but with proportions that are less life- like.89 The differences in proportion suggest that this head was made by a different sculpture than the individual responsible for statue 1. Figure 6: Front of Statue 1 Figure 7: Back of Statue 1 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 172 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 170 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 88 Salviat (1987) 172. Numbers of sculpture are based on the number of the exhibit in the Musée Granet.! /-!Salviat (1987) 174.! 4.! ! ! ! Statue number 3 and 4 differ from the two previous sculptures in that they both feature a diadem or wide band circling the head. Head number 4 is heavily damaged and is square or "box-like" in shape. The expression of the mouth is lost due to damage yet the eyes are the same as in statues 1 and 2. The hair and diadem are the most distinguishing features of statues 3 and 4 and separate them most distinctly from numbers 1 and 2. It is debatable what the band, or "diadem", is meant to represent. It may be a roll of hair or a metallic band used to hold the hair in place. Figure 8: Front of statue 3 Figure 9: Side of statue 3 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 178 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 177 Statue number 5 is the most distinct in that it is the only head found which depicts a presumably Salluvian helmet.90 Like all the other carved heads an elongated face characterizes this statue. Additionally, the eyes and eyelids share the same exaggerated features. However, the flaps of the helmet cover the ears. The helmet is rounded in shape !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -1!6)(#")8!,$-/B0!$B-2! 4B! ! ! ! and slightly conical at the very top. Due to slight damage it is unknown whether or not the top of the helmet originally featured any additional attachment, although wearing and erosion of the stone leaves this a possibility. The rim of the helmet is features a guilloche, or braided, pattern. Figure 10: Front of statue 5 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 179 The second group of heads, those considered female, shares their own set of distinguishing characteristics. There are three of these heads in total, however one was stolen at the time of excavation and sold to a private collector in Switzerland. Therefore, this sculpture is only known through photographs. This sculpture was statue number 40 and it is unique in that it shares many features in common with those of the male statues, but with a more subtle, or "soft", rendering of the features.91 The mouth of head number !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -$!Salviat (1987) 226.! 4/! ! ! ! 40 is closed in a straight line, just as the male statues, but the cheeks and the angle of the jaw are more gradual and less dramatic. The eyes and eyelids are also similar to the first group, however the brows line protrudes less. The most significant feature that distinguishes statue number 40 from the male heads is the presence of a veil covering the hair. With the exception of statue number 5, all of the statues categorized by archeologists as male show intricately carved hair. In contrast, statue number 40 features a veil that covers not only the hair, but the ears as well. Figure 11: Female statue 40 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 228 The range of expression featured by these sculptures is extensive and demonstrates highly skilled craftsmanship.92 The representations of human facial expressions are intricate, expressive, and lean towards realistic details. The quality of the craftsmanship is such that one can distinguish "personalities", or individual traits, in the faces. The representation is also developed to a point that reveals the personal style of the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -%!Salviat (1987) 229. 4-! ! ! ! artist. For instance, François Salviat has suggested that the similarities in dimension and level of skill found in both sculpture number 1 and number 40 may indicate that they are the work of the same sculptor.93 Similarly, the technique and representation of these portraits is highly unique. It has often been suggested that these portraits were inspired by Greek sculpture and reveal a conscious effort by the sculptor to imitate Greek style. This can be seen especially in the treatment of curly hair and the use of the drill to add a more refined sense of definition to the sculpture. Yet, although the style of hair may evoke Greek comparisons the diadems worn by statues 3 and 4 are reminiscent of Celtic jewelry styles. Another type of sculpture found in great quantities at Entremont are the "seated warriors". These sculptures are the most numerous form of statue found at site. However, all of these statues are fragmentary and are mainly reduced to the torsos. It has been suggested that these torsos may correspond to the heads previously described. However, due to the fragmentary state of both the seated warriors and the necks of the heads, no definitive connection can be determined. Yet despite their fragmentary condition, the torsos provide archaeologists with a great deal of information concerning the culture of the Salluvii. The best preserved of these statues, warrior 6, consists of a torso and legs crossed in a seated position.94 All of the remaining statues are simply torsos or fragments. However, given the similarities in shape, size, and design among these statues, it is assumed that they were all seated in the same manner as statue number 6. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 93 Salviat (1987) 228-229.! -4!Salviat (1987) 182.! 51! ! ! ! Figure 12: Seated warrior 6 Figure 13: Torso 10 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 182 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 191 All of the "seated warriors" are depicted wearing military apparel most notably a type of overcoat or breastplate. This armor extends to the waist and features "scapular flaps", or shoulder coverings, covering both the shoulders and upper chest. This covering is meant to provide extra protection to the upper body and is held together by a clasp. Each of these statues has a highly stylized clasp in the center of the chest, particularly statue number 8, which features a clasp shaped like a human head. The armor of statue number 6 is unique from the others in that it shows the pockmarked texture of the material made by a drill.95 It is unknown what material these markings are meant to depict however leather or type of chain mail are two of the most likely possibilities. These statues also show several examples of jewelry worn by the warriors. Statue number !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -5!Salviat (1987) 182.! 5$! ! ! ! 10 shows several armbands on the biceps of each arm and statues 8 and 10 also feature torques around the neck. The armor of these warriors is highly stylized in Celtic motifs. For example, the head-shaped clasp of statue 8 and the torques and armbands of 8 and 10. The severed head motif found on the clasp of warrior 8 is highly characteristic of the artistic motifs of the tribes of western Provence, and can frequently be found in the artwork of sites such as Glanum and Roquepertuse. Similarly the presence of torques on the arms of the warrior statues calls to mind the description of the Celts as recorded by Diodorus.96 That is, Diodorus writes that the Celts were very fond of wearing gold and jewelry and often wore bracelets and necklaces. He even mentions that it is not only the women who wear such jewelry but the men too. This would certainly correspond to the male statue heads that are depicted wearing diadems, and the warrior statues with bracelets on the arms and necklaces, or torques. It is also interesting note that Diodorus states that the Celts often sit on the ground and not on chairs.97 This description corresponds with the way in which the warrior statues are portrayed as sitting cross-legged on the ground. Therefore, the sculptures found at Entremont reflect the description of Celtic characteristics and manners as described by Diodorus. Therefore, assuming these statues are representative !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -.!Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, V, 27: 0!W0P KL 0O 0?.9P +;?'W!70'( F?&+!C 9%1Q!( 4*0*F?H70*/ 9?>( 4.+µ!7 !u µ.7!7 *" 3&7*m4'(, =%%5 4*A !" 87K?'(. 9'?A µL7 35? 0!E( 4*?9!E( 4*A 0!E( b?*F,!7*( w<%/* S!?!C+/, 9'?A KL 0!E( *uF<7*( 4?,4!&( 9*F'm( r%!F?W+!&( 4*A K*40&%,!&( =@/!%.3!&(, U0/ KL F?&+!C( QG?*4*(. "In this way they accumulate a masses of gold, which not only the women use for ornamentation, but also the men. For around their wrists and arms they wear bracelets, around their necks heavy necklaces of solid gold, and huge rings they wear as well, and even corselets of gold." 97 Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, V, 28: K'/97!C+/ KL 4*Qcµ'7!/ 9$70'( !u4 D9A Q?.7;7, =%%] D9A 01( 31(, x9!+0?Gµ*+/ F?Gµ'7!/ %W4;7 y 4&7H7 K These seated warriors are not unique to Entremont and also can be found in other indigenous occupied sites in western Provence. For instance, archaeologists uncovered an early third century BCE statue at Roquepertuse that closely resembles the seated warrior sculptures of Entremont. The statue shares several features in common with those of Entremont, particularly the long armor, or overcoat, and the additional shoulder padding and chest protection. However, the dimensions of this statue are less realistic and more stylized than those of the statues at Entremont and the overall appearance is that of an earlier attempt. Moreover the shoulder and chest protection looks to be a more primitive type than depicted in the Entremont warriors. Thus, the statue at Entremont shows more developed and skilled craftsmanship of an old form of sculpture. Although it is possible that difference in the level of skill between the Roquepertuse and Entremont warriors may be a result of the difference in time between their creation, it is also likely that it is a reflection of Greek influence. That is, sculptures of the heads show clear Greek influence and it is likely that the warrior statues at Entremont owe their more realistic dimensions to a general Hellenizing trend in Salluvian sculpture. 53! ! ! ! Figure 14: Seated warrior from Roquepertuse From: Cunliffe, 1997, p. 202 The final sculpture fragments found at Entremont, which are of particular interest, are the fragments of severed heads, or the "têtes coupées". These sculptures are representations of the severed heads of enemies conquered by Salluvii warriors. One particularly important piece is a fragment of five heads arranged in two rows with two heads on the bottom row and three on the top.98 These heads resemble the previously mentioned sculptures of heads that have been detached from statues. However, all of the eyes are closed in order to signify that they are representations of the dead. Due to breakage on the left side of the statue it is generally accepted that another head was originally attached to the top row, creating a row of four heads on the top and two on the bottom. The top right head also shows the remains of a hand that has been broken off. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -/!N9"=!;"?7?!"=!("=8?+!)=!number 22 in the Musée Granet.! 54! ! ! ! This interesting fragment is thought to link the statue of the seated warriors with the severed heads, particularly torso 8, which shows the remains of the left arm, stretched foreword. That is, this group of severed heads fits onto the lap of the seated warrior with the left hand of the warrior placed on the top row of heads. In this way, the seated warrior would be displaying the group of severed heads that are presumably representations of his conquered enemies. Besides this group, six other individual têtes coupées have been discovered. These heads are likely to have been a part of the original seated warrior statues, similar to the combination of torso 8 and group 22. Since the discovery of these sculptures, scholars have debated over what, or who, the faces of the detached sculpture heads and the torsos are meant to represent. Today, the most widely accepted theory is that of F. Benoît, who originally hypothesized that these statues represent the leading figures from the city, prominent men and women who are depicted wearing the local attire and sometimes even displaying their war trophies. That is, they are a type of portrait of an actual individual of Entremont, specifically an elite or heroic figure. It has also been suggested that these statues may represent divinities of some sort, however, such theories have generally been dismissed for lack of clear evidence. Thus, the simplest explanation is that they are a type of honorary statue representing a deceased individual of importance. The sculpture of Entremont shows a blending of Greek and Salluvian elements. The faces and hairstyles of the detached statue heads show strong Greek elements, yet the jewelry and ornamentation reflects Celtic styles. The sculptures relating to warriors such as the seated warrior statues and the detached statue head 5, all reflect styles of Celtic military clothing. However, when the seated warriors of Entremont are compared to that 55! ! ! ! of Roquepertuse they show a general increase in the influence of Greek influence in the artwork of the Salluvii of Entremont. CIVIC SPACE/RELIGIOUS SPACE To date, archaeologists have not located any definite artistic or sculptural representations of local divinities in Entremont. Moreover, although several aspects of Greek culture can be seen in the layout and artwork of the town, there are no temples or places of worship such as one might find in a Greek city. Likewise, there is no evidence of public buildings or areas of communal activity. However, archaeologists have discovered one building in Habitat 1 that at the very least suggests cultic or communal purposes.99 This building is not the monumental structure that one associates with Greek cults and it does not exhibit any of the typical qualities of Greek temples, such as alters for sacrifice or representations of the gods. In fact, the objects that have been uncovered at this building exhibit iconography closely associated with the Celts and even matching the descriptions of Celtic practices as described by Diodorus. Thus, although Greek elements can be found in many aspects of the Salluvian settlement, the sacred and religious elements of Greek life do not appear to have been adopted by the inhabitants of Entremont. This structure is a portico, or hypostyle hall, located in Habitat 1, and it is often referred to as a "sanctuary" due to perceived associations with cultic or communal activity. Although there is no hard evidence for the sacred functions of this building, the numerous images of severed heads that have been found in the stylobate and the lintels of the portico have led some to suggest that the building had some form of cultic !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --!Salviat (1987) 209.! 5.! ! ! ! significance. Moreover, it is in the road directly in front of this building that the statuary of Entremont was discovered. Such as discovery only adds to the importance of the hall. Figure 15: Map of Habitat 1 and Habitat 2 From: Arcelin, 1987, p. 60 The portico is located in Habitat 1 and leans against the inside of the northwest rampart between towers 3 and 4. The rampart supported the rear of the portico and the front was sustained by a series of supports that were set in groups of two, or "twinned".100 The front of the portico was open and was one single hypostyle room. On the inside of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $11!Salviat (1987) 209.! 5B! ! ! ! the portico there was a stone bench that ran along the length of the rampart. Opposite the portico, block XI has been pushed further back, perhaps in order to accommodate a large crowd. The building was originally two stories and pieces of plaster belonging to the second floor have been recovered. Two blocks of carved limestone were found during the excavation of the portico that are of particular importance. The first of these is a pillar that was found in the stylobate. The pillar measures 2.58 m high x .35 m wide x .42 m deep.101 The most striking feature of this object is the image of twelve heads carved into it. The heads line the front of the pillar from top to bottom. At the top of the pillar the heads are arranged in a single line and at the bottom they are grouped. All of the heads have horizontal lines depicting closed eyes and the very last head on the bottom of the pillar is turned upside down, both of which scholars such a F. Benoît have suggested are symbols for death. Figure 16: Pillar Figure 17: Lintel From: Salviat, 1987, p. 211 From: Salviat, 1987, p. 210 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $1$!Salviat (1987) 211.! 5/! ! ! ! A fragment of a lintel was also used in the construction of the portico.102 This lintel features an engraved face just like the twelve heads of the repurposed pillar. However, the lintel is interesting in that it has skull shaped holes carved into on both sides of the engraved face. The skull shaped holes suggest that they were niches meant for displaying actual human skulls. The holes run horizontally across the front of the lintel presumably for the display of the human heads. Archaeologists have unearthed twenty human skulls inside the portico and in the upper levels of the road directly in front of the portico. Three of the skulls show signs of puncture holes, which F. Benoît suggested were made by nails used to mount the skulls around the portico. Both Strabo and Diodorus record the observations of Poseidonius, who visited the south of France in person and recorded that the Celts decapitated their enemies and mounted their skulls for display.103 According to Diodorus, "When their enemies fall they cut off their heads and fasten them to the necks of their horses; and turning over to their attendants the arms of their opponents, all covered with blood, they carry them off as booty, singing a paean over them and striking up a song of victory, and these first-fruits of battle they fasten by nails upon their houses, just as men do, in certain kinds of hunting, with the heads of wild beasts they have mastered. The heads of their most distinguished enemies they embalm in cedar-oil and carefully preserve in a chest, and these they exhibit to strangers, gravely maintaining that in exchange for this head some one of their ancestors, or their father, or the man himself, refused the offer of a great sum of money. And some men among them, we are told, boast that they have not !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $1%!Salviat (1987) 211. 103 Strabo IV, 4.5 and Diodorus V, 29.! 5-! ! ! ! accepted an equal weight of gold for the head they show, displaying a barbarous sort of greatness of soul; for not to sell that which constitutes a witness and proof of one's valor is a noble thing, but to continue to fight against one of our own race, after he is dead, is to descend to the level of beasts."104 Diodorus' description of the Celtic practice of decapitating enemies and keeping their skulls closely reflects the archaeological finds of severed skulls with puncture holes at the portico of Entremont. Moreover, these skulls were likely mounted in the same way as Diodorus described, around the frames of doors, or in the lintels like the one found at Entremont. The processes described by Diodorus in this passage so closely resemble the archaeological remains of Salluvian sites such as Entremont, Glanum, Roquepertuse, and La Cloche that it is likely that this description is an accurate representation of Celto- Ligurian practices. The way in which the pillar and lintel were incorporated into the portico implies that these pieces were originally from an earlier building, and were repurposed at the time of the of the portico's construction. Therefore, it is very likely that there was an earlier structure predating the portico and perhaps even predating the foundation of Habitat 1, which given the similar motifs may have occupied a similar role as the portico. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $14!Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, V, 29: 0H7 KL 9'+.70;7 9!%'µ,;7 05( 4'S*%5( =S*/?!C70'( 9'?/$90!&+/ 0!m( *uF<+/ 0H7 V99;7: 05 KL +4C%* 0!m( Q'?$9!&+/ 9*?*K.70'( zµ*3µ<7* %*S&?*3;3!C+/7, D9/9*/*7,l!70'( 4*A {K!70'( jµ7!7 D9/7,4/!7, 4*A 05 =4?!Q,7/* 0*C0* 0*m( !N4,*/( 9?!+Y%!C+/7 q+9'? !" D7 4&7Y3,!/( 0/+A 4'F'/?;µ<7!/ 05 QY?,*. 0H7 K] D9/S*7'+0$0;7 9!%'µ,;7 4'K?G+*70'( 05( 4'S*%5( D9/µ'%H( 0Y?!C+/7 D7 %$?7*4/, 4*A 0!m( @<7!/( D9/K'/47W!&+/ +'µ7&7.µ'7!/ K/.0/ 01+K' 01( 4'S*%1( 0H7 9?!3.7;7 0/( y 9*06? y 4*A *u0>( 9!%%5 F?cµ*0* K/K.µ'7* !u4 U%*b'. S*+A K< 0/7*( *u0H7 4*&F[+Q*/ K/.0/ F?&+>7 =70,+0*Qµ!7 01( 4'S*%1( !u4 DK<@*70!, b$?b*?.7 0/7* µ'3*%!w&F,*7 D9/K'/47Wµ'7!/: !u 35? 0> µ6 9;%'m7 05 +W++Yµ* 01( =?'01( 'u3'7<(, =%%5 0> 9!%'µ'm7 0> rµ.S&%!7 0'0'%'&0Y4>( QY?/HK'(. ! .1! ! ! ! However, although it is commonly accepted that the original structure predated that of Habitat 1, it is also possible that the portico is a makeshift version of a structure contemporary to Habitat 1 or Habitat 2. That is, the portico could have been constructed from pieces of the original structure salvaged after the destruction of Entremont 124 BCE. According to this hypothesis the remaining inhabitants of the city would have used the portico from the fall of Entremont until 90 BCE. ECONOMY F. Benoît originally characterized Habitat 2 as the production center of the settlement. Although evidence of artisanal work has been found in both habitats, Habitat 2 contains the majority of evidence pertaining to production. In block XI of Habitat 2, rooms 5, 6, and 7 have all revealed archaeological evidence for local production.105 Each one of these rooms was found to contain a furnace attesting to the use of these rooms as workshops. In addition to the furnaces they also contained slag and led. In block XXIX of Habitat 1 a group of mixed items related to manufacturing were found. These items included over 500 fragments of bronze objects (rough casting rings, bands, ornamental elements, etc.) and a batch of about 800 glass beads containing obvious failures.106 Therefore, given the exceptionally large quantity of materials, archaeologists have hypothesized that this block was home to one or more artisans, possibly jewelers and glassmakers. Also, in Habitat 2 in the southern half of street IX, between blocks VIII and X, a large group of dolia were found. An especially large group of Italian amphorae were located near the door of room 12 in the sector X. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $15!Willaume (1987) 112-114. 106 Willaume (1987) 112-116.!! .$! ! ! ! According to Arcelin, the absence of any signs of cooking in the vicinity suggests that the room had a commercial purpose that may have included the resale of Italian wine. Evidence for the production of olive oil has been found at Entremont. Archaeological excavations have unearthed fifteen blocks of stone that belonged to olive presses, all of which were found in Habitat 2. Only three of these were found in rooms and assumed to have been at use at the time of the city's abandonment.107 All of the remaining blocks were found reused in the streets, doors, and other areas of the city. These items are important not only because they provide insight into the production capabilities of the settlement, but also the information they provide concerning the relationship between Massalia and Entremont. The presence of olive presses in Entremont attests to the influence of Massalia in the region. The Greeks commonly employed the olive oil in their cooking, and for other uses such as in lamps. The Greeks who settled in Provence started importing olive oil as early as the sixth century BCE, shortly after the establishment of Massalia. The ancient Celts used animal fat for the same purposes and there is little evidence for the development of early forms of olive presses in the region of Provence.108 The use of presses in Entremont for the production of olive oil implies that the local indigenous population was using and consuming olive oil. Thus, the presence of olive production in Entremont suggests that the inhabitants must have developed a taste for olive oil. The source of indigenous exposure to olive oil must undoubtedly be Massalia. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $1B!In Habitat 2, block I contained an "ara" or base. In block X, room 4 also contained an ara. A counterweight was located in block XI. 108 Brun (1987) 101-102.! .%! ! ! ! Moreover, the lack of any evidence for early or "primitive" olive presses suggests that olive oil production in Entremont did not develop independently of Massalia. That is, there is no evidence for preceding forms of olive press technology in Entremont and the presses that have been found are all of an advanced form. This form of press is uniformly that of the Greek type characterized by a lever, operated by winches and with attached counterweights. Thus, it is likely that the technology for production was borrowed directly from the Greeks. Furthermore, the spread of this Greek technology is not unique to Entremont and can be found in other indigenous communities, particularly those in the region of Marseille.109 Therefore, the development of olive oil production among the native population of the south of France is centered around the region of Massalia and suggests that it resulted from close contact with the Greek community. According to Pompeius Trogus, the Gauls learned a more civilized way of life from the people of Massalia. Trogus claims that it was the Greeks who taught the indigenous people to cultivate their lands and as a result they learned to prune vines and plant olive trees.110 Thus, Trogus credits the Greeks with introducing olive cultivation to !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 109 Brun (1987) 104. Other proto-historic sites show remains of oil presses: St. Marcel in Marseille, Martigues, St. Blaise, and Pierredon. All these mills are located in the area of Massaliote influence. 110 Justinus, Epitome of Pomeius Trogus, XLIII, 4.1: Ab his igitur Galli et usum uitae cultioris deposita ac mansuefacta barbaria et agrorum cultus et urbes moenibus cingere didicerunt; tunc et legibus, non armis uiuere, tunc uitem putare, tunc oliuam serere consuerunt, adeoque magnus et hominibus et rebus inpositus est nitor, ut non Graeci in Galliam emigrasse, sed Gallia in Graeciam translata uideretur. "Therefore, the Gauls learned a more civilized way of life from these (people of Massalia), their former barbarity had been put aside or tamed; and they learned to cultivate their fields and to enclose their towns with walls. Then too, they grew accustomed to live according to laws, and not by violence; then they learned to prune the vine and plant the olive; and thus a radiance had been shed over both men and things, that it was not Greece which seemed to have immigrated into Gaul, but Gaul that seemed to have been transported into Greece." ! .3! ! ! ! the Gauls who lived near Massalia. Although this quote must be examined critically, it may in fact reflect the situation as demonstrated in the archaeological remains at Entremont. That is, Trogus was writing from a clearly Roman perspective and one must be wary of the depiction of the indigenous people in his accounts, as it is unlikely that he had first hand knowledge of the agricultural capabilities of the Salluvii. However, based on the archaeological remains relating to the production of olive oil, it appears as though the technology used by the Salluvii was adopted from the Greeks. That is, the lack of primitive olive presses and the close resemblance of the olive presses found at Entremont to those used by the Greeks suggests that this technology was introduced to the Salluvii by their Greek neighbors. In the case of Entremont, the economy, artwork, city layout and organization all reflect Greek influence. The incorporation of Greek elements was a result of the choices made by the decision making body of the Salluvii, most likely the elite. The choices made by these elite Salluvii indicate that Greek features were selected because they were considered to be advanced or "cutting-edge" technologies, which could improve and modernize the defenses and organization of the site. For example, the use of circuit walls, if not adopted directly from the Greeks, was certainly influenced by contemporary Greek models. Likewise, the layout of the town and the organization of each habitat into Hippodamian-style grids is undoubtedly evidence of Greek technological influence on the Salluvii. Even the artwork shows the adoption of Greek artistic techniques. However, the extent of Greek influence on the Salluvii and the settlement of Entremont ends there. Although the Salluvii adopted Hippodamian style urban planning they included their own innovations and incorporated it in a way that fit their own specific needs. The curvature .4! ! ! ! of the houses at intersections and the loose adherence to the rigid grid plan indicate a unique adaptation of foreign technology. Moreover, although the facial characteristics of Salluvian statuary draw comparisons to Greek work, there is little attempt by the artist to represent their subjects in foreign dress or style. The diadems on the two male sculptures are characteristically Celtic and would appear visibly foreign to the Greeks. Similarly, the seated statues of warriors and the sculptures of the severed heads show a clear adherence to Celtic traditions and practices. Furthermore, it is important to note that these particular Celtic motifs, the severed head and the seated warrior, are unique to the western tribes of Provence and are absent from the Ligurian tribes of eastern Provence. This further distinguishes the Salluvian inhabitants of Entremont from the eastern tribes of Provence by characterizing them as particularly Celtic or Celto-Ligurian. Perhaps the most distinct feature of Entremont is the presence of the portico as a place for the display of the têtes coupée and the seated warriors. The public display of the severed heads and the sculptural representation of local heroes is without a doubt a uniquely Celtic practice. Likewise, the lack of public style temples and civic space separated Entremont from Greek cities of Provence and illustrates that although the Salluvii clearly lived within the Greek sphere of contact, they were far from Hellenized and were distinctively Celtic. Yet more importantly, the Salluvii did not adopt this new technology simply because it was Greek, or because they wanted to represent themselves as Greek, but because it was the most advanced technology available. ! ! ! .5! ! ! ! !IV: Glanum Like Entremont, Glanum is another settlement associated with the Salluvii.111 However, the site of Glanum differs from Entremont in many ways. Unlike Entremont, whose character comes across as predominantly Celtic, Glanum shows evidence for indigenous, Greek, and Roman influence. Glanum is located approximately 50 km away from the site of Entremont and 1 km south of modern St. Rémy-de-Provence in the valley of Notre-Dame-de-Laval. It is situated within the triangle of land formed by the Rhône and Durance rivers and the Alpilles mountain chain. It is also located a short distance from a trade route to the north that linked Italy with Spain from prehistoric times up through Roman occupation as the later Via Domitia.112 To the south of the site ran another trade route that extended along the coast of Provence eventually moving north to intersect the Via Domitia at Tarascon.113 So, like Entremont, Glanum lies at the intersection of two important trade routes. However, unlike Entremont, which is situated directly at the intersection, Glanum is set further back from the road. The reason for this seemingly inconvenient location is that Glanum developed as a result of nearby a spring reputed to be sacred for its healing purposes.114 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 111 Ptolemy, Geographica, II. 9. The geographer Ptolemy states that Glanum is a settlement of the Salluvii. 112 Roth Congès (2001) 7. 113 This route would eventually become the Roman Via Julia. 114 Hodge (1998) 151.! ..! ! ! ! Figure 18: Map of Provence with trade routes After Congès, 2001, p. 7 The location of Glanum in relation to the two nearest roads was convenient in that it provided access through the Alpilles for travelers and merchants. That is, the valley of Notre-Dame-de-Laval provides an easy north-south route through the Alpilles, which not only connects the Via Domitia and the Via Julia Augusta, but also provides a short cut for north-south traffic going to and from Massalia.115 Therefore, the pass through the Alpilles would be useful for merchants or travelers wishing to make a quick transition from one route to the next. Moreover, for merchants traveling north or south it may have been more convenient to take the pass through the valley of Notre-Dame-de-Laval, instead of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $$5!Roth Congès (2001) 7.! .B! ! ! ! traveling the 30 km west to the intersection of the two routes at Arles and Tarascon. Although the location of Glanum may have been a result of the spring and its reputation for healing, the growth of the town must have resulted, at least in part, from the traffic passing through the valley. For this reason, it is not unreasonable to assume that there may have been a Greek presence at the site, even if it was only temporary and established for trading purposes. The history of the settlement of Glanum is much more obscure than that of Entremont and is complicated by layers of Salluvian, Greek, and Roman architecture. Over the course of excavations at Glanum these layers have been interpreted in different ways by different archaeologists. In fact, Henri Rolland and Anne Roth Congès have both served as the directors of excavations at Glanum and they have both interpreted the history of the site in different ways. As previously mentioned, Rolland, reflecting earlier views of Celtic-Greek interaction, interpreted the predominant culture at Glanum as Greek and characterized the Salluvian population as the secondary, or less influential, population.116 However, Roth Congès' interpretation is almost the exact opposite. Roth Congès sees the Hellenic character of Glanum as a conscious effort by the Salluvian inhabitants to adopt Greek elements and incorporate them into their own architecture, art, and forms of expression. According to her, the Hellenic characteristics of the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $$.!Rolland (1946) 20: ces relations commerciales furent à l'origine d'un établissement grec, contigu à l'agglomération indigène, et qui vraisemblablement temporaire à ses débuts devint permanent dès que Marseille se fut assuré la possession de tout le pays longeant le cours du Rhône, entre la Durance et la mer.! ./! ! ! ! archaeological remains at Glanum do not necessarily prove the existence of Greeks living at the site.117 In order to better understand the Hellenistic character of Glanum it will be helpful to examine the site in relation to the overview and interpretation of Entremont provided in the previous chapter. In regards to the earlier argument of Rolland, Entremont and Glanum existed as relatively independent Salluvian sites. That is to say, although both of these sites were Salluvian and most likely part of a well-connected indigenous community, the fate of Entremont did not have a significant impact on Glanum. However, Roth Congès interpretation views the state of Glanum after 123/124 BCE as a direct result of the fall of Entremont and the Salluvian conflict with Rome. As discussed in the preceding chapter, the site of Entremont was destroyed by the Romans in 123/124 BCE and remained sparsely inhabited until 90 BCE. The fate of the majority of the population of Entremont remains unknown. According to Roth Congès it is possible that a portion of this population fled or relocated to a nearby site, such as Glanum, and that Glanum operated as a base of Salluvian resistance against Rome in the conflict of 90BCE.118 Moreover, based on inscriptions found at Aquae Sextiae it is clear that there were Salluvii who lived in this site after the fall of Entremont. It is very likely that these Salluvii were a portion of the inhabitants of Entremont who were displaced after the destruction of the city. As previously discussed, Aquae Sextiae was founded by the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $$B!Roth Congès (1992) 352-353. Roth Congès argues that there did not necessarily need to be a Greek population at Glanum in order for there to be Hellenistic architecture at the site. However, it is equally possible that there was a Greek presence at Glanum, even if it only constituted a minority of the population. 118 Dietler (1997) argues, "Oppressive taxation and other heavy-handed measures gave rise to several revolts which had to be put down by the army." And also, "The most serious of these included rebellions of the Salluvii in 90 BCE."! .-! ! ! ! Roman general C. Sextius Calvinus who was partially responsible for the fall of Entremont. Thus, the Salluvii who relocated to Aquae Sextiae were living in a Latin colony along side Romans and also probably Greeks.119 The argument made by Roth Congès is particularly intriguing if one considers the quote from Diodorus concerning the defeat of the Salluvii at Entremont. That is, Diodorus states that a Salluvian named Crato, a Roman sympathizer, won the release of nine hundred captives from Entremont.120 Although this account may be little more than an exaggerated story of Roman benevolence, it does suggest the possibility that a large portion of the population of Entremont remained free after the fall of the city. It is not unreasonable then to imagine that these refugees would have abandoned the fallen city and moved further west, away from the advancing Romans, to settle at a familiar location. Moreover, it is hard to deny the appeal of the sanctuary site of Glanum, known for its sacred spring, which may have been viewed as a favorable and welcoming location. Furthermore, the name "Crato" or "Craton" was a Greek name and therefore this person may have been a Greek living at Entremont. As discussed in the preceding chapter the site of Entremont shows elements of Greek influence in the art, architecture, and economy of the city and it is therefore not entirely unlikely that Entremont may have had Greek inhabitants as well. Furthermore, this quote suggests that there was at least one member of the Salluvian population, and perhaps more, who sympathized with the Romans. This may suggest that there was a diversity of political views present among the inhabitants of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $$-!The date that Aquae Sextiae became a colonia is unknown. However it is generally accepted that Caesar was responsible for the introduction of Roman law into southern France as early as 46-45BCE and as late as 43-40 BCE. 120 Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, XXXV.22.23.! B1! ! ! ! Entremont. It also suggests that at least a portion of the population was receptive to outside influence. That is to say, not all of the inhabitants of the city rejected the Romans. Of course, the motivation for supporting the Romans may have been little more than opportunism influenced by the desire for advancement within the new socio-political structure created by the arrival of the Romans. In addition to this quote, Livy states that the king of the Salluvii fled from Entremont to the nearby Celtic tribe of the Allobroges after the fall of the city.121 This suggests that the Salluvii who were left behind either to inhabit the fallen city, or to flee to another location, were deprived of their former king. It is possible that a certain degree of political instability would follow the loss of such an important figure. Moreover, Livy does not mention whether or not any of the warrior elite fled with the king to the Allobroges. If the elite did accompany the king, then this could have exacerbated the problems facing the remaining Salluvii who were deprived of their governing class. However, if a portion of the elite remained, they would then have to face the question of how to assert their status and identity in this new society. Although Diodorus and Livy hint at the fate of the Salluvii after the fall of Entremont, the Greek and Roman sources are generally silent on the matter. Therefore, in order to better understand these two arguments it will be necessary to examine the archaeological remains of Glanum in comparison to those found at Entremont. This discussion will focus mainly on the buildings, structures, and artwork of Glanum, which are central points of disagreement in the interpretations of both Rolland Roth Congès. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $%$!Livy, Epitome LXI: Cn. Domitius proconsul adversus Allobrogas ad oppidum Vindalium feliciter pugnavit. quibus bellum inferendi causa fuit, quod Tutomotulum, Salluviorum regem, fugientem recepissent et omni ope iuvissent quodque Aeduorum agros, [sociorum] populi Romani, vastavissent. ! B$! ! ! ! Layout As previously mentioned Glanum is situated at the bottom of a gorge surrounded by the peaks of rocky cliffs. Archaeological investigation of the site shows evidence of several successive phases of occupation. Some of the oldest buildings of the site remain side by side with more recent ones. The chronology proposed by H. Rolland categorized Glanum I as the Hellenistic period from the second century BCE to the destruction of the city around 100 BCE.122 The second phase, or Glanum II, was the period from about 100 BCE to 49 BCE. Glanum III extended from 49 BCE to the destruction of the city in 270 CE. Archaeologists have divided the site of Glanum into three main areas.123 The first is the sanctuary area in the southernmost section of the valley.124 The second area is known as the monumental area.125 And finally the northernmost area of the valley is referred to as the residential quarter.126 There are two entrances to Glanum; one is located in the lowest and northernmost section, whereas the other is in the south where the ground gradually slopes upwards. The layout of Glanum does not reflect the Hippodamian style grid employed at Entremont, perhaps due to the inevitable restrictions provided by the narrow shape of the valley. However, the less organized layout may also be a result of the gradual development of the site over a long period of time. That is, Glanum shows evidence of indigenous occupation dating as far back as the Iron age, whereas Entremont's earliest !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $%%!Rolland (1946) 20. 123 Roth Congès (2001) 1-46. 124 See figure 18, number 1 125 See figure 18, number 2 126 See figure 18, number 3! B%! ! ! ! period of occupation dates only to the beginning of the second century BCE.127 Because of the narrowness of the valley, Glanum features only one main road running through the length of the site. There are no other major roads and no cross-streets such as at Entremont. Therefore, in terms of the layout and planning of the town, Glanum does not exhibit any overtly Greek qualities. Figure 19: Map of Glanum From: Bromwich, 1993, p. 203 Fortifications Unlike Entremont, which is located on a high plateau, Glanum is situated in a gorge. All of the natural defenses of the typical hilltop oppidum are absent from Glanum. In fact, Glanum is located in a highly vulnerable position, as the surrounding hills would easily allow enemies to attack from above. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $%B!Salviat (1979) 3-4.! B3! ! ! ! Between the sixth and the second centuries BCE, a dry-stone circuit wall was constructed on the crest of the hills surrounding the gorge.128 The rampart stretched 300m in length, enclosing about 20 ha of land.129 Part of this circuit wall crossed the entry to the gorge. Around the end of the second century BCE and the beginning of the first century BCE the city had expanded beyond the original wall. In order to cope with this expansion an extension was added on to the pre-existing rampart. The expansion of the wall doubled the total area enclosed. The second enclosure continued to follow the crests of the hills. The new walls dating to the end of the second century BCE featured large well-cut stone masonry in contrast to the smaller stones used in the original construction. The walls were crowned with crenellations or merlons with rounded tops and some remains of towers have been found. The faces of the wall show the same herringbone pattern that can be found on the ramparts of the walls at St. Blaise, Olbia, the Wall of Crinas at Marseille, as well as sites on mainland Greece.130 Therefore, the original stone wall does not reflect the same style of masonry as the later one, but rather appears more indigenous in style and technique. However, given the similarities between the later wall and the walls of various Greek settlements, it is clear that the second wall was constructed in the same style as those of Greek cities. It is important to note that the expansion of the second wall dates to the time period after the fall of Entremont. The growth of the city and the need to encompass the newly settled territory may be a response to the arrival of refugees from western !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $%/!Roth Congès (2001) 6. 129 Roth Congès (2001) 6. 130 Hodge (1998) 144.! B4! ! ! ! Provence. This is reminiscent of the expansion of Entremont in about 150 BCE, which could have been a result of conflict between the Romans and the eastern Ligurians. The sanctuary region of Glanum is separated from the rest of the site by the original circuit wall dating anywhere from the sixth to third centuries BCE. This wall was enhanced with the expansion of the original rampart at the end of the second century BCE. The new wall contained a gateway at the entrance to the sanctuary area featuring a gate large enough for chariots, a square tower, and a smaller gate for pedestrians. Perhaps the oldest structures on the site are the remains of indigenous houses found in the southernmost end of the valley, or "the sanctuary area".131 These houses are located on both the east and west sides of the main road. The houses are comparable to those found in Habitat 1 at Entremont. That is, each of the houses consisted of only one room just as in Habitat 1. In addition to this, the houses were built up against the surrounding rock walls of the valley. This is reminiscent of the way in which the houses of blocks XIII and XVI in Habitat 1 and block I of Habitat 2 were built leaning directly on the ramparts of Entremont for support. According to Roth Congès, these indigenous houses are the remnants of the original Celto-Ligurian village that preceded the construction of the monumental city.132 The length of time that the houses were occupied is longer than those of Entremont. That is, Roth Congès argues that these houses remained occupied into the first century CE. Due to the conflict with Rome towards the end of the second century, the houses of Entremont were mostly abandoned at this point. Moreover, archaeological excavations have found evidence of even earlier structures !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $3$!Roth Congès (2001) 36. 132 Roth Congès (2001) 37.! B5! ! ! ! beneath these foundations that date to the First Iron Age.133 Therefore, indigenous occupation in the southernmost area of the valley dates as far back as the first Iron Age, whereas the site of Entremont appears to be a development of the early second century. According to Roth Congès, the remains of earlier habitation beneath the foundation of these houses indicated that they that several phases of habitation existed on this site, and new habitats were rebuilt over older foundations. It is important to note that the situation of the earliest habitats near the "sacred spring" illustrates the early importance of the spring to the first Salluvian inhabitants and reaffirms the theory that the spring was the focal point of the early settlement. In addition to the indigenous houses found in the sanctuary sector of Glanum, several other houses have also been discovered that date to the Hellenistic period of Glanum.134 These houses have been the subject of great debate by scholars as they are built in a style highly reflective of Greek homes and not in the style typical of Salluvian settlements. One of the most debated houses is known as the "Delian house" or "the house of the antae".135 This house is considered to be an excellent example of a typical Mediterranean style home. The house is square in shape and features an interior courtyard with a central impluvium. Colonnaded porticos surround the impluvium and the remnants of Tuscan style columns have been identified. A staircase found by archaeologist suggests that the house was two stories high. The house takes its name from the two antae of Corinthian columns on the west side of the structure, which framed both sides of an exedra. The western side of the portico was constructed in what Vitruvius called the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $33 ca. 600 BCE 134 Roth Congès (1991) 159. 135 Salviat (1979) 14-15.! B.! ! ! ! "Rhodian" style.136 That is, the columns were taller and stronger the west side of the building in order to allow better sunshine into the rooms located on this side. This "Rhodian" style portico was popular in Greece during the Hellenistic period. Moreover, both the plan of this house and the portico are very similar to those of Hellenistic Greek houses, particularly those known in Delos.137 Archaeologists such as Henri Rolland and François Salviat have interpreted the presence of this house at Glanum as evidence for Greek penetration into the region beyond Massalia. The elaborate and detailed style of construction and the adherence to architectural styles found on mainland Greece led Rolland to argue "One comes to doubt...the building of these houses for the natives, even for wealthy Hellenized Gauls, but rather for Massaliotes established at Glanum in the interest of their business, or, perhaps better, grouped around a sanctuary to ensure the service and its benefits."138 According to this interpretation, Greeks built these houses for other Greeks. That is, the chief occupants of these structures would be Greek merchants settled at Glanum for commercial purposes. Similarly, Hodge argues that "Even allowing that the local Celts may have been more sophisticated and receptive to innovation than we normally give them credit for, I at least find it difficult to look at these dwellings so characteristically Greek and then believe that Glanum was a completely Celtic town with no Greek element in it."139 Moreover, although Roland does not deny the original settlement developed as a Celto-Ligurian site centered around the spring, he argues that a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 136 Salviat (1979) 15. 137 Winter (2006) 173-174. 138 Rolland (1949) 7: On en vient à douter, ajoutait-il trois ans plus tard, de l'édification de ces demeures pour des indigènes, même pour de riches Gaulois hellénisés, mais plutôt pour des Massaliotes établis à Glanum dans l'intérêt de leur négoce, ou, peut-être mieux, groupés autour d'un sanctuaire pour en assurer le service et en retirer les avantages. 139 Hodge (1998) 157.! BB! ! ! ! settlement of Greeks existed adjacent to the Salluvian town. The argues that the Greek occupation of the site was most likely temporary in the beginning, however, as Massalia's influence extended further into the Celto-Ligurian hinterland, the settlement became more permanent.140 Although these houses are significantly more sophisticated than the houses of Entremont, or even the indigenous houses of Glanum, there is no evidence to suggest that only Greeks inhabited them. In fact, the theory that Rolland argues is based upon the assumption that the Salluvii would not choose to live in such characteristically Greek structures. However, as demonstrated in the preceding chapter the Salluvii of Entremont adapted the very layout of their town to a Greek model. There is nothing in the archaeology of Entremont to suggest that the Salluvii were opposed to Greek innovation. In fact, the Greek innovations discovered at Entremont would suggest that the Salluvii may have been open to adopting more sophisticated architecture when it suited their needs. The site of Glanum, which may have seen more visitors following the fall of Entremont, could have provided the Salluvii with the opportunity to build more luxurious housing based on a familiar Greek model. However it is important to mention that although Roth Congès that there is no need for these homes to have been built for Greek inhabitants, there is still a possibility that there were Greeks at Glanum as well as Salluvii. That is to say, there is no clear evidence that suggests Greeks were entirely absent from Glanum and the popularity of the sacred spring may have attracted both Greeks and Salluvii to the site. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $41!Rolland (1946) 19. !! B/! ! ! ! ART One particularly interesting piece of sculpture found at Glanum is a seated warrior statue, very much like those found at Entremont. To date there has been one seated warrior torso found at Glanum and two fragments presumed to be the bases and legs of seated warrior statues. Therefore, the total number of seated warriors found at Glanum is three, whereas the fragments of six individual torsos have been found at Entremont. The torso found at Glanum strongly resembles those of Entremont. This statue is seated in the same cross-legged position wearing a tunic and a torque around its neck. The arms are missing making it impossible to know if the statue was also depicted holding a severed head, or a group of severed heads. Additionally, the statue also shows the same style of shoulder and chest covering depicted on the statues at Entremont. Each of the seated warrior statues found at Entremont, Glanum, and Roquepertuse show the warrior in a tunic with a form of upper chest protection fastened by a clasp with torques around the neck and bands around their arms. However, despite the fact that all of these warriors are missing their heads, the armor and jewelry they are wearing is individualized. For instance, the upper chest covering on the statue found at Glanum is shaped similarly to the one depicted on the statue at Roquepertuse, but coming to a narrow point in the center of the chest and without the square-shaped pattern. The tunic of the Glanum warrior is also unique in that the lower half features carved vertical lines indicating a pattern in the material. This is reminiscent of the seated warrior statue 6 at Entremont, which features markings all over the tunic in order indicate the texture of the material. B-! ! ! ! The seated warrior statues are uniquely indigenous and contrast with the capitals found near the prytaneum. That is, the capitals show a blending of Salluvian and Hellenistic iconography, whereas the seated warriors appear to be a solely indigenous creation. One possible reason for the distinctly Celtic character of these seated warriors is that they pre-date the Hellenistic architecture of the site and were used in a uniquely Celtic context. The capitals however, are of a later date and like the other Hellenistic architecture of the site, may have been meant to "advertise" the wealth of the settlement to visitors. Religion At Entremont there is only one building that strongly suggests communal activity. However, Glanum contains structures with much clearer communal and sacred purposes. For instance, Glanum contains both the remains of a Salluvian shrine and a spring revered for its sacred qualities. The sacred spring was known for its powers believed to heal the sick. This spring was the basis for the foundation of the site of Glanum and the source of its prosperity. The spring was originally a simple basin in the ground. However in the second century BCE it was covered by a building featuring blocks of stone that were faced with the same herringbone pattern that could be found on the walls. The sanctuary at Glanum was located at the top of a steep hill that led from the spring at the bottom. The sanctuary was accessible by a series of terraces carved out of the stone to form stairs. It is at the sanctuary that the stone statues of the seated warriors are though to have been originally located. Located to the right of the base of the staircase was a retaining wall that bordered the street. This wall contained a niche that featured statues of /1! ! ! ! women, perhaps representations of the "Glanic Mothers" to whom many dedications were left. Public Buildings The "paved courtyard" is one of the few pre-Roman public buildings discovered on the site. This structure was originally interpreted by Rolland and Salviat as a market or "agora". However, it is described by Roth Congès as a possible prytaneum. The courtyard, or prytaneum, is shaped like a large trapezoid and is surrounded on four sides by colonnaded porticos. The northwest corner is particularly well preserved. The irregular shape of this court was mandated by the adaptation of the structure to the shape of the valley and the main road.141 The colonnades surrounding the paved courtyard are of great interest to archaeologists as they featured columns topped with capitals decorated with representations of Salluvii, similar to those found at Entremont. In addition to the representations of Salluvii the capitals also features the gods Apollo and Mercury as well as the head of a Cyclopes and an elephant. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $4$!Salviat (1978) 27-28.! /$! ! ! ! Figure 20: Capital at Glanum Figure 21: Image of Salluvian in capital From: Roth Congès, 2001, p. 10 From: Roth Congès, 2001, p. 51 The presence of a prytaneum need not necessarily suggest the presence of Greeks at Glanum. The prytaneum was a Greek structure originally associated with monarchy in ancient Greece and at later times with the rulers of the city. The prytaneum also had important religious significance to the city in which it belonged and could also be used as a place for holding trials. Given the aristocratic governmental structure of the Salluvii, this building could have been easily adapted for use by the indigenous political institution. It was at this site that skulls were found by archaeologists similar to those found in Entremont near the portico. Several of these skulls also featured puncture holes indicating that they were mounted for display, just as at Entremont. The presence of these skulls strongly suggests that this building was used by the indigenous population, despite being a Greek type of structure. The portico at Entremont, which was explored in the preceding chapter, featured not only the mounted skulls but also the seated warrior sculptures thought to represent the warrior elite. The seated warrior statues located at /%! ! ! ! Glanum are generally thought to have been located along the stairway leading to the shrine and the skulls were located at the prytaneum, instead of at the shrine with the seated warriors. However, at both of these sites the skulls were located in places where visitors would clearly see them. That is, at Entremont the portico, seated warriors, and skulls were all located on the main road running through Habitat 2. Therefore, when any visitor entered the site and traveled along the main road they would have to pass by the portico featuring these items. In this way, the inhabitants of Entremont were able advertise the strength of their community to visitors. At Glanum the monumental character of the prytaneum and the blending of Greek and Celto-Ligurian motifs in the design of the structure, suggests that it was intended to appeal to both Greeks and Salluvii alike. Moreover, the importance of such a building and the familiarity of a prytaneum to Greeks may suggest that Greeks also frequented the building. Either way the location of the skulls at this site, a site associated with government and politics, fulfilled the same function as at Entremont. That is, by locating the skulls at the prytaneum the Salluvii ensured that they would be highly visible to visitors, thus advertising the strength of their community to their neighbors. Another building that is of great interest to archaeologists is the bouleuterion. The bouleuterion was also constructed in the Hellenistic period and dates to the end of the second to the beginning of the first centuries BCE. It is a rectangular room featuring stone steps around the periphery, including an entrance to the east and a central altar with three interior supports for the roof. This type of building was well known in the Greek world and was the public space for deliberation and also the official governing body. Therefore, according to H. Rolland, the existence of a bouleuterion at Glanum suggests /3! ! ! ! the presence of a Greek style of government.142 However, Roth Congès disagrees with this interpretation. According to Roth Congès the bouleuterion may have served the Salluvian population at Glanum. In this interpretation the bouleuterion would have been used by members of the Salluvian population who settled in Glanum after having been displaced from their homes due to the loss of Entremont. According to this interpretation the use of the bouleuterion may be evidence of the response to the influx of new people to the site. That is, the increase in the population and the arrival of people from various different Salluvian settlements following the loss of Entremont may have necessitated the construction of a designated place for political deliberation. So why then did the Salluvii choose to create a bouleuterion, a structure that is closely associated with Greek cities and Greek government? As suggested in the discussion of the prytaneum, the aristocratic and warrior society of the Salluvii may have adopted these Greek buildings while retaining their indigenous governing institutions. That is to say, it is possible that the Salluvii, particularly the elite or governing classes, adopted the architectural forms associated with a Greek bouleuterion because it satisfied similar political functions as those already in place in the Salluvian community. In this interpretation, the presence of Greek governmental structures does not imply that the indigenous socio-political structure was replaced with a Greek one. Rather, it suggests that these indigenous institutions may have remained in use, but were now housed in Greek structures that were adopted by the Salluvii because they were perceived as fulfilling similar roles. For instance, Massalia, like Salluvian society, was governed by an aristocratic hierarchy.143 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $4%!Rolland (1968) 112-113.! $43!Dietler (1997); Massalia was ruled by an aristocratic government of six hundred men, known as the Timouchoi, who ruled for life. Immediate business and government was /4! ! ! ! The Salluvii could have easily been introduced to the structures of the bouleuterion and prytaneum through their interaction with Massalia and could have viewed these structures as appropriate for their own settlements because of similarities in their function and usage by the Massaliotes. Figure 22: Bouleuterion From: Roth Congès, 2001, p. 46 To the east of the prytaneum, is an area that has yet to be fully explored by archaeologists. It is in this region that Rolland anticipated the existence of a Hellenistic theater. This hypothesis was based on the concave slope of the edge of the valley, which seems to resemble the shape of theatre and would have been a logical site for such a structure.144 One interesting aspect of this building is that it is oriented parallel to the east gallery of the supposed prytaneum. The location of these two sites adjacent to each other raises the question of whether or not they were a part of the same building program. Because the remains of these two structures date to the Hellenistic period they would, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! conducted by fifteen of these men who in turn presided over three other men who were at the top of the "pyramid of power".!! $44!Salviat (1979) 28.! /5! ! ! ! according to Roth Congès theory, be the result of Salluvian initiatives. However, unlike the introduction of monuments or Greek artistic motifs, the construction of a theatre inevitably introduces Greek plays and performances. If one recalls the discussion of Entremont, the lack of public building or signs of communal activity is striking. In Fact, there is nothing in the archaeological remains of the site of Entremont to suggest that Celto-Ligurian society had anything resembling theatre or live public performance. However, this is not to say that the Salluvii of Entremont did not have such things. It may be possible that the Salluvii were familiar with Greek plays through their relations with Massalia. It is even possible that the Salluvii adopted Greek style plays at Entremont, as the performance of a play does not necessarily require the existence of a Greek-style theatre. The existence of a theatre does not necessarily prove the presence of Greeks at Glanum, but it is possible that Greeks would have visited such a venue whether as visitors passing through to watch such events or as performers. Moreover, if there was a Greek minority at Glanum then the presence of a theatre would no doubt have been a familiar and popular building. The choice to use Greek structures may also have been influenced by the desire of the Salluvii to advertise the wealth and prosperity of Glanum, and Salluvian culture, to those who visited the site for its sacred qualities. In this way, the Hellenistic architecture of Glanum is the result of the choice of the Salluvian elite to adopt the more cosmopolitan forms of Greek art and architecture known to the Mediterranean network, in order to express their own wealth and prosperity. Additionally, the location of Glanum in a mountain pass connecting two trade routes, along with the presence of the sacred spring, is likely to have drawn tourists from Greek and Salluvian settlements alike. /.! ! ! ! Therefore, this site would be a place or cultural interaction and thus an ideal location for the construction of such monumental structures as a means of advertising the prosperity of the Salluvian community. The lack of such monumental Hellenistic structures at Entremont may be due not only to the earlier age of the site, but also to the fact that the site of Entremont was not a "tourist destination" as Glanum was. /B! ! ! ! V. The Salluvii and Rome The arrival and permanent settlement of Greeks in the south of France has an undeniable effect on the development of indigenous societies within the Greek sphere of contact. Likewise, the arrival of Romans following the Roman conquest of southern France brought significant changes to Salluvian society. However, the "Hellenizing" influences of the Greeks, as present in the material remains of Glanum, Entremont, and the Salluvii in general, appear to be mainly a result of the commercial relationships between the two peoples.145 During this period preceding the establishment of Roman colonies, the Salluvian elite were able to maintain their local identity while trading and interacting with neighboring Greeks. However, in contrast, the Roman conquest brought the settlement of Roman garrisons in Salluvian occupied territory, as well as the settlement of colonists, the integration of the indigenous people into the Roman army,146 the expropriation of land,147 and the deportation of native populations.148 These actions significantly threatened the indigenous socio-economic structure and eventually led to the failure of indigenous hierarchical and ideological structures.149 The result of which, was the increased integration of the Salluvii into the Roman imperial system and the ethnogenesis of a new Salluvian identity as a result of Roman imperialism.150 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $45!Häussler (2008) 13: Différence importante entre hellénisme et romanisation: le pouvoir de Rome (cela implique par conséquent que les symboles de pouvoir voir romain ne valent rien en dehors de l'empire romain. 146 Häussler (2008) 11. As mercenaries and auxiliaries. 147 The expropriation of land is evident in the creation of Roman colonies such as those of Arelate and Aquae Sextiae. 148 Such as that of the Salluvian captives of Entremont in the story concerning Crato(n). 149 Häussler (2008) 11: face à l'intégration dans l'armée romaine et à l'autorité d'Auguste et sa During the republican period, in the second to mid-first centuries BCE, Rome's influence in the Salluvian occupied areas of southern France was generally limited to trade, and eventually military interference in order to protect this trade. It was during this time that the region was given the status of provincia. However, in this period the term provincia did not yet reflect the concept of a clearly defined division of territory, but was rather "simply the sphere of operations assigned to a Roman magistrate."151 Moreover, the processes of cultural interaction and exchange occurring between the Greeks and the Salluvii continued uninterrupted throughout this period, as evident in the aforementioned archaeological remains of Glanum.152 Under the republic, indigenous communities employed various methods of consolidating their authority that were often experimental, and the repertoire of choice for the expression of identity through art, language, and other similar elements was large.153 This process is reflected in the culturally diverse remains of Glanum where the choice of architecture and artistic styles is a blend of Hellenistic, Celtic, and even occasionally Punic elements.154 In contrast, under the empire, the repertoire and choice of elements for such expression became more limited and were increasingly defined by the Roman "ideal".155 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 151 See Dietler (1997) 152 Dietler (1997): "It appears that, contrary to what happened in Italy several decades earlier, there had still been no attempt to impose any other form of social integration, such as broad scale granting of Ius Latii (Latin Rights), in southern France as late as Pompey's administrative form decrees or Cicero's comments in the Pro Fonteio in 70 BCE." 153 Häussler (2008) 11. 154 Hodge (1998) 158. Punic elements can be seen in the rounded merlons of the circuit wall crenellations, as well as the depiction of an elephant in the capital of one of the columns surrounding the "prytaneum". Hodge suggests that the elephant is an allegorical representation of Africa. 155 Häussler (2008) 13: République/Hellénisme: un répertoire de choix très large: l'invidu fait des choix plus arbitraires, plus spontanées, plus innovants... Haut-Empire: un choix /-! ! ! ! Romanization was not automatically initiated with the conquest of the region. Moreover, it was not a form of imperialism imposed by the Romans, but rather an internal process that occurred among the indigenous peoples.156 However, with the imposition of tributes and new offices the local politics of the indigenous people were inevitably affected by Roman intervention. That is, the financial and military obligations imposed by the Romans had a significant impact on the indigenous population that was unparalleled in their relationship with the Greeks.157 Additionally, as a result of the expansion of the empire and the increased political interference of Rome, the status of an individual depended more and more on the relationship of the individual to the Roman authorities.158 Epigraphy is one of the main sources for information concerning the processes occurring at this time. In Provence, the use of epigraphy in Latin is rare prior to the first century BCE, and when it appears it is generally in the indigenous language. The choice of Latin for inscriptions became more popular in the first century BCE, perhaps as a result of its diffusion through the army and its use as a lingua franca. The use of Latin over the indigenous language is generally considered by scholars to be a conscious choice of the individual or community responsible for the inscription. Thus, when Latin was used it is likely that it was done because the individual or community wanted to assert !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! de plus et plus limité, motivé par l' Roman identity. This would be increasingly important for individuals or communities seeking increased status or wishing to assert citizenship. Thus, it is likely that the proliferation of Latin by the indigenous society was largely the result of a conscious choice by the Salluvii who wanted to assert a particularly Roman status. Even so, this is not to say that Roman forms replaced all traces of Salluvian identity and expression. For instance, even though an indigenous person may have adopted a Latin name they may have still retained a Salluvian name. The use of the each name depended largely on the context in which the individual used it. For instance for dedications to the god Iupiter, a Roman name would be appropriate. Conversely, if one was making a dedication to an indigenous deity, an indigenous name may have been preferable. Thus the Salluvian identity of the native people was not necessarily erased by the adoption of Roman forms, but rather it took on additional layers of complexity as it was adapted and redefined by both Salluvian individuals and communities who were forced to deal with the introduction of foreign Roman influences. The epigraphy of this era shows the emergence of new religious identities and the adoption of Roman forms in the local religious repertoire. However, this should not be interpreted as the Romanization of indigenous religion, as many of these inscriptions are simply the translation of a théonym into Latin, or the identification of a god or a divine concept by a Roman name.159 This may suggest an increase in the association of Celtic and Roman gods who shared similar functions.160 At the same time, many Celtic théonymes could still be found in the epigraphy. However, the persistence of these Celtic !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $5-!Häussler (2008) 16. 160 Häussler (2008) 17. The author gives the examples of Mars Cocidios, Mars Belatucadros, or Apollo Grannus, which he argues show the fusion of Roman divinities with Celtic divinities. -$! ! ! ! théonymes should not be interpreted as indigenous resistance to Rome, as the Romans were not actively imposing their own religion on the conquered Celts.161 Rather, the presence of Celtic théonymes is likely to be evidence for continuity and perseverance of local identity in the cult. Yet even so, the cult of the têtes coupées fades from the archaeological record under the Roman period, and it is difficult to understand exactly why this cult disappears. It might not be unreasonable to see the decrease in popularity and use of this cult as a response to the incorporation of the Salluvii in the Roman military, either as auxiliaries or as mercenaries. That is, the cult of the têtes coupées is strongly associated by modern archaeologists with the cultic practices surrounding the warrior elite of the Salluvii. However, as the Salluvii became more and more integrated into the Roman army the training, practices, and culture of the Roman military would have become more familiar. These changes may have led to a change in the practices of the Salluvian military elite, and perhaps a change in the organization of these people, which in turn led to the decline of the pre-Roman cult. The Salluvian elite adopted Hellenistic characteristics in their art and architecture as a means of asserting the wealth and prosperity of their community. Likewise, the adoption of Latin epigraphy and the taking of a Roman name were ways by which the Salluvian elite could assert status within the Roman Empire. Yet despite the "Romanizing" processes, evidence of indigenous names and Celtic inscriptions attests to the persistence of Salluvian identity. However, as with the arrival of the Greeks, this identity was reshaped by the arrival of new socio-political forces. Thus, the imposition of Roman governmental positions, taxes, colonies, and the incorporation of the indigenous !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 161 Häussler (2008) 16.! -%! ! ! ! Salluvii into the Roman military, led to the restructuring of Salluvian society and the adaptation of the former Salluvian elite to new Roman forms as a means of asserting their position in a new society, while retaining elements of their pre-Roman culture. ! ! -3! ! ! ! VI: Conclusion The architecture, layout, artwork, and economy of the Salluvian site of Entremont all indicate that the Celto-Ligurian inhabitants incorporated Greek art, architecture, and innovation into their own society, in order to meet their own needs. The Hellenistic architecture of Glanum is a continuation of this process with the incorporation of even more modern and cosmopolitan elements of monumental Hellenistic art, architecture, and technology by the Salluvii. In this way, the character and development of the urbanized indigenous sites of Entremont and Glanum was not only as result of local initiatives, but also the presence of, and interaction with, neighboring Greeks. In regards to the original interpretation of the site of Glanum as a predominantly Greek settlement, the archaeological remains of Glanum do not necessarily suggest that the site was mainly Greek, or a part of the Massaliote chora. The Hellenistic remains are the result of the wealth and prosperity of the sacred spring and the popularity of Glanum as a type of pilgrimage, or tourist, destination. The expression of this wealth and prosperity in Hellenistic art and architecture was not a result of Greek initiatives, or the desire of the Salluvii to represent themselves as Greeks. Rather, it was the choice of the decision-making elite of the Salluvii at Glanum, who chose to build their city in a style well known throughout the Mediterranean. However, this is not to say that Glanum was necessarily an entirely Salluvian settlement. The sacred spring also made Glanum an appealing destination for Greeks as well as Salluvii. It is even likely that the popularity of the site among the Greeks encouraged the Salluvian elite to build in the Hellenistic style as a means of advertising the wealth and prosperity of their community in the most modern form of architecture and design. Nevertheless, the decision-making elite -4! ! ! ! responsible for the construction of this Hellenistic art and architecture were Salluvian, and not Greek. The interpretation of Glanum as a predominantly Salluvian site is also persuasive as it accounts for the fate of the Salluvii who inhabited Entremont in the years following the destruction of Entremont. For instance, if one considers that the population of Entremont, as well as perhaps other Salluvii west of Glanum, were displaced after the defeat of the city in 124/123 BCE, then the growth of sites such as Aquae Sextiae and Glanum may be seen as a result of the Roman conquest. That is, because the site Glanum was well known for the sacred qualities of the spring, it may have been of increasing popularity during this period, and therefore would have received more visitors to the site, and greater wealth as a result. Likewise, the Roman site of Aquae Sextiae became home to some of the displaced Salluvii who formerly inhabited Entremont, which attests to the movement and relocation of many Salluvii in this period. Furthermore, it is difficult to explain the rationality behind the destruction of Glanum by the Romans in 90 BCE without attributing the site of Glanum to the Salluvii. For instance, if Glanum was associated primarily with the Greeks then the destruction of the site does not make sense, as the Romans were allies of the Greeks of Massalia.162 However, if the site was mainly associated with the Salluvii, then its destruction can be explained as a result of the ongoing Roman conquest of the region. It is possible that the site may have been targeted by the Romans due to its religious significance to the Celto-Ligurian community, or as a result of the presence of Salluvii who may have been a part of the indigenous resistance !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! $.%!The nearby Greek city of Massalia was not destroyed at this period and was treated as a civitates foederata by the Roman state giving it semi-autonomous political status. Therefore, the treatment of Glanum in 90 BCE appears harsh in comparison. -5! ! ! ! to Rome. Likewise, the destruction of the Hellenistic and indigenous architecture of Glanum in the year 90 BCE coincides with the final abandonment of Entremont. It is hard not to imagine that the final abandonment of Entremont and the destruction of Glanum were the result of the Roman response to the Salluvian revolt of 90 BCE.163 This is not to say that the growth of Glanum in the Hellenistic period was a result of the fall of Entremont. As previously mentioned, the fame of the sacred spring was the main source of the growth and prosperity of the site. Nevertheless, the destruction of Entremont may have been a contributing factor. The reason behind the visibly different styles of architecture, art, and design at Glanum and Entremont is that Glanum was a popular sacred destination, whereas Entremont was a relatively typical Celtic oppidum. These differences did not result from the initiatives of two different groups, such as Greeks and Salluvii. In fact, the same processes occurred at both of these sites, albeit on different scales. For example, in Entremont, just as in Glanum, elements of Greek features are evident in the fortifications, urban planning, and artwork of the site. Yet in Entremont these elements are not as monumental, or noticeable, as in Glanum because Entremont lacked the wealth and popularity that the sacred spring brought Glanum. Additionally, the Salluvian elite did not choose these Greek elements because they wished to represent themselves as Greeks, but rather because this Hellenistic architecture was considered the most fashionable and advanced style known in the Mediterranean network to which the Salluvii belonged. It is also important to note that identity, and the expression of identity, is not fixed but can fluctuate throughout time and in response to political and economic factors. The !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 163 See Dietler (1997)! -.! ! ! ! difference in the material remains of Glanum and Entremont do not necessarily suggest a shift in the ethnic identity of the Salluvian elite from Salluvian to Greek, but rather are evidence of the way in which the Salluvian elite redefined the symbols by which they expressed their elite status. For instance, the Salluvii were familiar with Greek forms of identity that were in operation within in the joint Greek and Salluvian occupied territory of Provence, and the adoption of these monumental Greek elements of expression was not meant to express the Greek identity of the Salluvii, but the elite status of the Salluvian aristocracy. Thus, the Salluvian elite were responsible for the incorporation of modern Hellenistic elements and cutting-edge Greek technology at both Entremont and Glanum, and these two sites appear different because the sacred spring of Glanum brought greater wealth and prosperity to the site, enabling the Salluvii to incorporate such elements of elite expression on a greater scale than at the more typical Celtic oppidum of Entremont. -B! ! ! ! Bibliography Arcelin, Patrice. From "L'habitat d'Entremont: urbanisme et modes architecturaux." In Archéologie d'Entremont Au Musée Granet. Edited by Denys Coutagne, 57- 98. Aix-en-Provence, France: Musée Granet, 1987. Arcelin, Patrice. From “Sociétés indigènes et propositions culturelles massaliotes en basse Provence occidentale”. In Marseille grecque et la Gaule. Colection Etudes massalie!tes. 1992, 305-336. Barth, Fredrick. "Los grupos étnicos y sus fronteras. La organización social de las diferencias culturales. Introducción." Biblioteca Virtual de Ciencias Sociales. (1976): 9-49. Benoît, Fernand. L'Art Primatif Méditérranéen de la Vallée du Rhône. Aix-en- Provence: Annales de la Faculté des Lettres, 1969. Benoît, Fernand. Le Symbolisme Dans Le Gaule Sanctuaires De La Gaule. Bruxelles: Latomus Revue D'Études Latines, 1970. Benoît, Fernand. "La "Tête Coupée" De Libourne." Bulletin De La Société Préhistorique De France 46.3/4 (1949): 95-100. Benoît, Fernand. Recherches Sur L'Hellénisation du Midi de la Gaule. Aix-en- Provence: Annales de la Faculté des Lettres, 1965. Benoît, Fernand. From "The Celtic oppidum of Entremont, Provence." In Recent archaeological excavations in Europe. Edited by Rupert Bruce-Mitford, 227-259. Boston: Routledge & Keegan Paul LTD, 1975. Bromwich, James. The Roman Remains of Southern France. New York: Routlegde, 1993. Brun, Jean-Pierre. From "Les huileries d'Entremont." In Archéologie d'Entremont Au Musée Granet. Edited by Denys Coutagne, 101-105. Aix-en-Provence, France: Musée Granet, 1987. Coulon, Gérard. Les Gallo-Romains: Au Carrefour de Deux Civilisations. Paris: Armand Colin, 1985. Cunliffe, Barry. The Ancient Celts. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Déchelette, Joseph. Manuel d’archéologie préhistorique, celtique et gallo-romaine. Paris: Picard, 1908. DeWitt, Norman J. "Massalia and Rome." Transactions and Proceedings of -/! ! ! ! the American Philological Association 71 (1940): 605-15. Dietler, Michael. "The Iron Age in Mediterranean France: Colonial Encounters, Entanglements, and Transformations." Journal of World Prehistory 11.3 (1997): 269-358. Dion, R. "Géographie historique de la France." Annuaire du Collège de France 59 (1959): 494-506. Elderkin, G. W. "La Sanctuaire Préromain De Roquepertuse by H. De Gérin- Ricard." American Journal of Archaeology 33.1 (1929): 151-52. Fay, George Emory. Glanum: A Hellenistic, Gallo-Roman City in Southern France. Greeley, CO: University of Northern Colorado, Museum of Anthropology, 1981. Garcia, Dominique. "Du Village à La Ville Protohistorique Dans Le Sud-est De La France." Revista D'Arqueologia de Ponent 15 (2005): 119-32. Garcia, Dominique. "Les Celtes de Gaule méditerranéenne: Définition et caractérisation." Errance (2004): 63-76. Graham, A. J. "Patterns in Early Greek Colonization." The Journal of Hellenic Studies 91 (1971): 35-47. Grenier, Albert. "Ligures et italo- celtes. De d’Arbois de Jubainville à Camille Jullian." In: Mélanges de philologie, de littérature et d’histoire ancienne offerts à Alfred Ernout. 159-169. Paris: 1940. Gwynn, Aubrey. "The Character of Greek Colonization." The Journal of Hellenic Studies 38 (1918): 88-123. Harding, D. W. The Archaeology of Celtic Art. London: Roultedge, 2007. Häusler, Ralph. Romanization et Epigraphy : Etudes interdisciplinaires sur l'acculturation et l'identité dans l'Empire romain. France: Montangnac & Mergoil, 1998. Hodder, Ian. Archaeological Theory Today. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 2001. Hodder, Ian. Contemporary Achaeology in Theory; A Reader. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. Hodos, Tamar. "Greek Identity in the Western Mediterranean. Papers in Honour of Brian Shefton." The Classical Review 55.01 (2005): 202. --! ! ! ! Husband, Richard Wellington. "Kelts and Ligurians." Classical Philology 6.4 (1911): 385. Insoll, Timothy. The Archaeology of Identities. New York: Routledge, 2007. Jannoray, Jean. Ensérune: contribution à l’étude des civilisations préromaines de la Gaule méridionale. Paris : Bibliothèque des Ecoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 1955. Julian, Camille. Histoire de La Gaule. Paris: Hachette et Cie, 1920. Kleiner, Fred S. "Gallia Graeca, Gallia Romana and the Introduction of Classical Sculpture in Gaul." American Journal of Archaeology 77.4 (1973): 379-90. Krieger, William Harvey. Can there be a Philisophy of Archaeology? Processual Archaeology and the Philosophy of Science. New York: Lexington Books, 1969. Latouche, Robert. Gaulois et Francs de Vercingétorix à Charlemagne. Paris: B. Arthaud Paris-Grenoble, 1965. Leveau, Philippe. "Villas et aristocraties municipales dans les cités d'Arles, de Glanum, d'Aix et de Marseille." MacKendrick, Paul. The Roman Remains of Southern France. London: G. Bell & Sons LTD., 1971. Malkin, Irad. A Small Greek World: Networks in the Ancient Mediterranean. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Momigliano, Arnaldo. Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization. London: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Morris, Ian. Why the West Rules -For Now. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2010. Rankin, H. D. Celts and the Classical World. London: Croom Helm, 1987. Rhys, John. "The Celtic Inscriptions of France and Italy." The Proceedings of the British Academy, (1908). Ridgeway, William. "The Greek Trade-Routes to Britain." Folklore 1.1 (1890): 82-107. $11! ! ! ! Rolland, Henri. "Inscriptions antiques de Glanum." Gallia 2.2 (1944): 167-223. Rolland, Henri. Les fouilles de Glanum (Saint-Rémy-de-Provence). Paris: Boccard, 1946. Rolland, Henri. "Sculptures hellénistiques découvertes à Glanum." CRAI, (1968): 94- 114. Roth-Congès, Anne. Glanum: De L'oppidum Salyen à La Cité Latine. Paris: Ed. Du Patrimoine, 2001. Roth Congès, Anne. “Un centre monumental de Glanon ou les derniers feux de la civilisation salyenne”. In Marseille grecque et la Gaule. Collection Etudes Massaliètes, 1992, 15-25. Roth Congès, Anne. “Monuments publics d’époque tardo- hellénistiques à Glanon (B.-du-Rh.)”. DAM, 15, 1992, 50-56. Salviat, François. From "La Sculpture d'Entremont." In Archéologie d'Entremont Au Musée Granet. Edited by Denys Coutagne, 165-240. Aix-en-Provence, France: Musée Granet, 1987. Salviat, François, and Marianne Charrière. Glanum: Saint-Rémy-de-Provence. [S.l.]: Caisse Nationale Des Monuments Historiques Et Des Sites, 1978. Strong, D. E. "The Art of Roman Gaul, a Thousand Years of Celtic Art and Culture by M. Pobé; J. Roubier." The Journal of Roman Studies 53.1/2 (1963): 252. Thollard, Patrick. La Gaule Selon Strabon : Du Texte à l'Archéologie. France: Errance, 2009. Wells, Peter S. "Contact and Change: An Example on the Fringes of the Classical World." World Archaeology 12.1 (1980): 1-10. Wheeler, R.E.M. "Entremont: Capitale Celto-Ligure Des Salyens De Provence by F. Benoît." The Journal of Roman Studies 48.1/2 (1958): 211-12. Willaume, Martine. From "Les objets de la vie quotidienne." In Archéologie d'Entremont Au Musée Granet. Edited by Denys Coutagne, 107-140. Aix -en-Provence, France: Musée Granet, 1987. Winter, Frederick E. Studies in Hellenistic Architecture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. $1$! ! ! ! Ancient Sources Caesar, Gaius Julius. De Bello Gallico. Translated by H. J. Edwards. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1919. Livius, Titus. Periochae. Translated by A. C. Schlesinger. Loeb Classical Library L404. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959. Poseidonius, Volume 1: The Fragments. Translated by Ludwig Edelstein and I.G. Kidd. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. Ptolemy, Claudius. Geographia. Translated by Edward Luther Stevenson and Joseph Fischer. New York: Dover, 1991. Siculus, Diodorus. Bibliotheca Historica. Translated by F.R. Walton and R. M. Geer. Loeb Classical Library L423. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. Strabo, Geographica. Translated by Horace L. Jones. Loeb Classical Library L050. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1923. Trogus, Pompeius. Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus. Translated by Rev. John Selby Watson. London: York Street, Convent Garden, 1853. $1%! ! !