Guide Le Notti Puniche (Italian Edition)

He assumes that some allies were included in the colonies of Placentia and Cremona in , since these towns had a very large number of settlers, 12, in total. If allies had not been included, Romans and Latins alone would not have been able to furnish so many people. Some evidence suggests that the Roman state was more relaxed in its attitude towards recruiting new colonists in this period. This makes it unlikely that Latins or allies were included in such colonies, because this would mean that they would receive a grant of Roman citizenship, and in general the Roman state was very reluctant to grant this right to its allies.

In an incident occurred with some colonists for the new Roman colonies: The people of Ferentinum attempted to secure a new legal prerogative: Those who had submitted their names for Puteoli, Salernum, and Buxentum were enrolled as colonists, and because of this they comported themselves as Roman citizens.

The Senate adjudged that they were not Roman citizens. It may be that in this period, shortly after the Second Punic War, and with a large number of colonies to be settled or reinforced, the Roman state was unable to supply sufficient Roman citizens to settle in Roman and Latin colonies, and that therefore people who were not normally eligible were now admitted. However, even if non-Latin allies were not usually admitted as official colonists, either in Latin or Roman colonies, this does not mean that they could not have lived in colonial cities or the territory under their control. A very likely scenario would have been to allow former inhabitants to remain in the town which had been turned into a colony, without granting them the same rights that the Roman colonists received.

These people were then known as incolae. This term was also used for people who simply moved to a colony and took up residence there, which seems to have been a common occurrence see below. In this case the colonists and the original inhabitants lived alongside each other, in separate communities in the same territory or even in the same towns, each with their own rights. The protests of the official colonists seem to have been aimed especially at those who pretended to be colonists, thus blurring the difference between Latin and non-Latin inhabitants of the city; the fact that people had moved in was not a problem per se.

Other evidence, such as archaeological and linguistic materials, is well known, mainly from publications on the history of specific towns, but has not been brought into the general debate about the presence of non-Romans in colonies. I will therefore review the archaeological, epigraphic, and onomastic evidence for the presence of allies in the colonies, to see if they can give the assumptions based on the literary sources more substance. There are several types of evidence, but each presents us with its own problems. Sometimes written sources refer to the presence of Italians in a colony, as in the case of Narnia and Fregellae; in these two cases it seems that these people had moved in after the foundation of the colony and not been present since its foundation.

Colonies and processes of integration in the Roman Republic

The literary sources thus give us a glimpse of migration patterns in Republican Italy, but are usually not very helpful in establishing whether non-Romans were admitted as official settlers into colonies. It is clear that in the imperial period the role of non-citizens in colonial settlements was more strictly regulated by law than in the Republic, a development that seems to have set in already with 1 st -century BC colonial charters like the Lex Coloniae Genetivae Iuliae Ursonensis see below, section 7. However, we cannot use these later sources directly for the situation in the Republic, since there is no evidence that the position of incolae was strictly regulated in this period.

However, this dates from the 2 nd century BC, so that we cannot be sure that these people had lived here since the foundation of the colony in ; in any case, they were not official settlers. Further valuable information can be gathered from the names of the people living in the colonies that are recorded on inscriptions. Many apparently non-Roman names appear, which may be traced back to the non-Latin languages of Italy, such as Oscan, Umbrian, and Etruscan.

However, this evidence presents many problems: In Fabrateria Nova, which included many people from the colony Fregellae, the presence of the gens Helvia, which is also attested in Oscan inscriptions, is well attested in the late Republic and Imperial era see below, section 4.

It may be that these people were among those who had migrated from the Samnite area before , as reported by Livy, and had remained in the colony. However, some non-Romans may have been present in the colony from its foundation. Furthermore, it is often difficult to establish the exact origins of many names. Some are directly attested in inscriptions in non-Latin languages, or are mentioned in literary sources as names used by non-Roman peoples.

Others can be pinpointed to an approximate region of origin. In this article I use only those names that are directly attested as present in non-Latin areas by inscriptions in Italic languages recording them, 27 or by literary sources. Others, however, occur in a much wider region, and cannot be assigned to a specific area of origin. By this time the presence of a certain name can hardly be considered evidence for the period of the foundation of the colony: I have therefore tried to focus on inscriptions dated before the mid-1 st century BC.

However, the date of many inscriptions is not clear; sometimes they can only be dated approximately by the shape of the letters or specific aspects of the grammar or spelling, but this does not allow precise dating. Due to all these problems, the number of useful inscriptions, which would allow us to say anything about the inclusion of non-Roman inhabitants at the moment of the foundation of various colonies is very small.

If Italian allies were admitted as settlers in Latin colonies throughout the Republic, then the presence of non-Latin names does not necessarily indicate the survival of the local population, but may also indicate the immigration of Italians from other areas of Italy; this may have been the case, for example, with Ovius Fregellanus, who is attested at Ariminum see below, section 4.

In some cases, as we have seen, it is possible to pinpoint the origins of a particular name to a specific area. If so, then the presence of such a name in a colony in this area would indicate the presence of actual local people. Even if, as I have argued, Italian allies were not usually admitted into colonies, the presence of non-Roman names in the Republic can be used to reconstruct the ethnic composition of the inhabitants of a colony, as long as we are careful to use only such names as evidence that can actually be ascribed to non-Roman peoples and the Republican period.

The problems discussed for epigraphic evidence are also valid for toponyms: If they are named after an individual with a non-Roman name, we do not know whether this person had lived in the colony since its foundation or moved in later. Moreover, the origin of modern place or field names is not always known, nor whether they have been handed down continually from antiquity. The name may have changed in the intervening period and its current name may not be directly related to the pre-Roman era. This kind of evidence seems relatively clear: Again, we are faced with the problem of dating inscriptions; it is not always clear that whether an inscription should be dated before or after the foundation of a colony.

Unfortunately, there are only a few inscriptions in languages other than Latin that have been found in colonies, so this body of evidence is limited. For example, the religious landscape in Paestum did not change very much after the colonial foundation in , and many pre-existing temples remained in use. In many cases, however, the gods venerated by the indigenous inhabitants were not much different from Roman gods.

There was no strict difference in the gods venerated by the Romans and those worshipped by the Italian population; the cultures of the Italian peoples and of Rome itself were influenced by Greek religion, and many Greek gods were popular throughout Italy, for example Hercules. This god enjoyed particular popularity among the non-Roman peoples of Italy, 30 but this does not mean that his presence is automatically evidence of non-Roman presence.

Romans venerated him as well, and therefore Roman colonists may have taken over pre-existing temples dedicated to Hercules or other gods. Of course, each people also had local gods who did not enjoy popularity in a wider area, for example Mefitis in Lucania, and continuity in their cult may indicate the continued presence of local inhabitants or the migration to colonies of non-Roman people. When such gods appear outside of their normal area of popularity, as in the case of a dedication to Mefitis in Cremona see below , this constitutes important evidence for migration.

The appearance of coined money in Samnium, for example, occurred in the 3 rd century, and is sometimes ascribed to the influence of the colonies settled in the area. The first Samnite coins show various designs, influenced not only by Rome, but also by Campanian and southern Italian coinage. With the growing influence of Rome throughout Italy, locally specific cultural manifestation became less marked, and the cultures of regions in the whole of Italy became more uniform.

Thus changes in cultural manifestations, such as pottery and jewellery, but also burial practices and the use and design of money, may show the growing influence of Rome, transmitted through the colonies. In many colonies buildings in typical Hellenistic-Roman style do not appear immediately after the foundation, but only in the 2 nd or early 1 st century. This is also the case with buildings outside of colonize areas, e.

Since there does not seem to be much difference between developments inside and out of colonies, the role of the colonies, therefore, seems to have been marginal in causing such cultural changes, at least immediately after their foundation. The traditional picture assumes that colonists and indigenous inhabitants were separated from each other, and therefore could not have interacted on a daily basis. In some, such as Cosa see below, section 4 , there indeed seems to have been a spatial separation between colonists and local inhabitants, but this was not the same in all cases. However, we do not know much about the settlement pattern in most colonies.

It has long been recognized that most colonies were too small to contain the thousands of colonists sent there according to the literary sources. It has therefore usually been assumed that the colonists lived in isolated farms throughout the colonial territory, each tending their own plot of land. Because not many colonial territories have been surveyed thoroughly, it is hard to find sufficient evidence for the settlement patterns in colonies.

Ancient centuriation grids may be of use in this case: The few cases where we have evidence suggest that the settlement pattern was much more complex than is often thought, and that it offered possibilities for colonists and local inhabitants to live in close proximity. Most reliable are literary, epigraphic, and linguistic evidence, but such direct attestations of non-Roman presence are rare.

Onomastic evidence is useful but should be treated with much care; other types of evidence should also be carefully analyzed to ascertain its value in each case. It is therefore necessary to assemble as many different types of evidence as possible, so that they can reinforce each other. Since the quantity and nature of the evidence varies widely across different colonies, I will discuss only those that have a relatively large body of material available. The impact of Cales on the surrounding allied towns seems to have been small; for example, there is only limited evidence for exchange between Cales and the nearby allied town of Teanum Sidicinum.

The largest cultural influence in Teanum came not from Cales, but from Greek and Samnite areas. It cannot be ascertained that all items of pottery in the calenus -style were actually produced in Cales, although this is usually assumed. Most scholars argue that the calenus was Roman in style, 36 although it also shows Etruscan elements, which may indicate that the town contained Etruscans who had already been living in Campania; it also shows parallels with Black Gloss pottery from Teanum.

The influence of Cales on the surrounding areas was therefore rather small. Some of the letter forms and punctuation marks used on the inscriptions are similar to those used in Oscan. As already mentioned, the survival of non-Roman families is attested by the fact that after the destruction of the city in a number of Sabellian gentilicia , such as Helvius and Paccius, are recorded in Fabrateria Nova.

We have already seen that many Samnites and Paeligni migrated to Fregellae, as recorded by Livy. It may be that many of the Oscan inhabitants attested in Fregellae had migrated into the colony at a later date, and had not lived there since the foundation. Coarelli assumes that the centuriation of the colony was 2 nd. It was assumed usually that most inhabitants of the colony were Latins, because the votive deposit of Belvedere found in this temple was typical of Etrusco-Latin and Campanian culture. It is composed of veiled heads and anatomical parts, and it is often maintained that such finds do not occur elsewhere in southern Daunia and Samnium.

This would show that this style of votive was spread through Italy mostly through the medium of colonies, which influenced the surrounding areas. Such votives already appear in many parts of Italy in the 4 th century BC, before much Roman influence could have occurred.

Full text issues

The presence of such votives at Teanum, therefore, does not have to be attributed to the influence of Luceria, but may have been independently transmitted. It also contains many statuettes of horses, which were important in the economy and the foundation legends of the Apulian region; in Roman contexts horses are rare.

Some votives have Greek letters on them, showing they were made by Greek-speaking artisans. Apparently this man, with an Oscan praenomen , was magistrate at Luceria. This might have allowed some room for others than colonists. The temple of Hercules, who was popular throughout Italy, 52 is thought to have fulfilled a role in the integration between colonists and allies: Alba was an important centre for transhumant sheep rearing, with a tratturo passing through the town and a cattle market in the centre.

This type of animal husbandry was important for the people in the Apennines surrounding the colony, and Hercules was a god closely connected to transhumance. Alba was certainly an important market town and attracted many people for economic reasons, which in turn contributed to the process of integration, but this does not mean that they all lived in the town, let alone that they were official colonists.

Some non-Roman names are known from the Republican period, namely Atiedius, Herennius, Ovius, Papius, Tettienus, and Vibius, 54 but these people may have been later immigrants instead of original colonists. Several inscriptions from the late 3 rd and early 2 nd centuries BC record the existence of vici on the southern shore of the Lacus Fucinus, in the area of the Marsi.

Some scholars argue that these vici were settlements of local inhabitants, and that the quaestors were local magistrates, who had taken Roman titles because of the influence of the Roman colony nearby. Further research into the colonial territory may clarify this problem. In any case, Alba seems to have attracted many people because of its important economic functions, including non-Roman citizens. Problems are created by the statement in Dionysius of Halikarnassus: This would furthermore be supported by the fact that many sites in the territory disappeared after the foundation, which may point to a change of settlement from the countryside to the city itself, even if not all colonists lived inside the city.

This has been seen as evidence for the fact that either many non-Romans had been living in the colony from its foundation, or were included in the second settlement of the colony in ; 66 alternatively, it may be the case that many Italians had migrated into the colony over time. After the Social War some inscriptions show Sabellian or Messapian names in the local elite, such as Crepereius, Herennius, Ovius, and Statius Raius, 68 but in the period before 91 BC there is hardly any evidence for their presence.

Archaeological evidence suggests that a number of radical changes took place immediately after the conquest and the foundation of the colony. Most of these point at an active attempt by the Romans to exclude local inhabitants from the colony, making it likely that in this case the traditional image of a Latin colony — with expulsion of local population to marginal areas — is accurate to some degree.

The local inhabitants seem to have moved, on their own accord or by order of the Romans, to marginal areas. This is attested by the fact that some settlements located mainly to the north and east of the centuriated territory, e. Telamon, Ghiaccioforte, and Poggio Semproniano, remained in use and even became larger, while new settlements emerged in these areas as well fig. This may show, again, that the local population had suffered economic setbacks as a result of their conquest by the Romans.

The gods venerated were Minerva and Hercules, who were popular throughout Italy, while the Capitoline Triad appeared only later in Cosa. If there was an upper class in the colonist population, their number would have been limited and they cannot have provided work for a large number of labourers. Contrary to the situation in Cosa, the presence of non-Roman inhabitants in Paestum seems to have been great.

The city had been founded as a Greek colony in the 7 th century, and had over time attracted many Italian immigrants. Greek continued to be spoken, the bouleuterion and temples were still in use, and art in Greek style was still produced. In general the colonists seem to have respected existing cults. The sanctuary of Aphrodite at Sancta Venera was redecorated in the late 3 rd or early 2 nd century.

Other sanctuaries also remained in use, such as the temple of Athena on the forum, the temples of Apollo, Asclepius, Hercules, and the Dioscuri, that of Venus Marina, the Heraion at the mouth of the Sele River, and the rural sanctuary at Capodifiume. Oscan was still spoken after The position of the local inhabitants, the Gallic Senones, has been the subject of much debate; according to the sources, they were all executed or expelled, and this is believed by some scholars. Paolina di Filottrano show Gallic remains. On the other hand, the cult of Hercules, worshipped before the foundation of the colony, 95 remained important after , as attested by the pocola ; however, this could simply have been taken over by the colonists see above, section 3.

However, he or his ancestors may have been colonists in an earlier Latin colony, instead of local inhabitants of the area around Ariminum. One of the Ovii, for example, came from Fregellae, and may have moved from there to Ariminum. The name of the colony is derived from the Oscan name, Aisernio. The names of the magistrates in the inscription, Pomponius, Percennius, Satrius, and Marius, are non-Roman.

Some scholars argue that the delay in founding the colony, which occurred twenty years after the confiscation of the land, was due to resistance from the local Messapian population, who was still living here. It may be therefore that the indigenous elite were accepted into the colony, and that the new senate consisted of a mix of Romans and locals. This may indicate that these people were not originally from the area, but had migrated to Brundisium, either before or after the foundation of the colony. However, Rome did have some influence over the surrounding area: This may suggest that they were officially included as colonists at the foundation.

In the first years of the colony there seem to have been problems with locals still remaining in the area nearby: Certainly after the refoundation of these colonies in , it seems as if local inhabitants only remained in the marginal areas of the territory. The Celtic Insubres disappear from the archaeological record after the 3 rd century; local manufacture, which flourished in 2 nd century, shows elements characteristic of Etruscan, Latin, and Campanian art of the 3 rd -1 st centuries.

A man with an Oscan praenomen and gentilicium was N. Magius, a praefectus fabrum in 49 BC. An important indication for this is that in Cremona a sanctuary of Mefitis is attested, a goddess mostly venerated in southern Italy, e. Her presence in Cremona may show that the colonists here came from southern Italy; these people may have been included in the second foundation in BC, at a time when more Latin colonies became open to Italians.

Although the imperial inscription is very much later than the Republican era, the coincidence is interesting. Marlia was located in the centuriated territory of Luca, and in the mid-2 nd century the population still used Ligurian burial customs, ceramic traditions, and clothing habits. In the more mountainous areas of the Valdinievole and around Pistoia many settlements continued into the 2 nd and 1 st centuries BC.

There are many toponyms showing Ligurian influence, especially in the marginal mountainous territory; in the plains Roman names are more widespread. This may suggest that non-Romans were not as a rule included in the official settler body: Furthermore, if they were included as a rule, it is unlikely that there would not have been so much variation from place to place; in that case, we would expect a more evenly spread distribution of the amount and the type of evidence available, rather than the great variation occurring now. In some Roman citizen colonies similar patterns of contact between Romans and non-Romans seem to have taken place.

The only evidence for the presence of non-Romans comes from names with a non-Roman in origin. The temple was rebuilt or redecorated in the second century BC, but the palmettes used in this decoration were similar to those of the archaic temple, attesting to continuity in its use. The most important family were the Granii of Oscan descent, who are attested as members of the town elite and wealthy traders in various sources from the 1 st century BC.

As praedes guarantors for the work are mentioned, among others, Blossius, Tetteius, and Granius. The continued importance of some local elites suggests that they may have been included in the colony as official settlers; this was common in other colonies founded after the Second Punic War. Curius Dentatus, after One of the dedicators in the lucus , Mania Curia, was a member of the gens of Dentatus, which may show that settlement occurred shortly after the conquest.

Fisiu-Sacio was an important god in Umbria as well, and this may show a connection with the indigenous inhabitants. The cult of Liber was especially widespread in eastern Cisalpina; this may show the persistence of a local preference for this cult, and thus the continued presence of local inhabitants. Sta tios Tetio s , mentioned in one of the inscriptions from the lucus , has an Oscan praenomen and gentilicium. This may show again the inclusion of Italian allies as official settlers in colonies in the period shortly after the Second Punic War. However, in most cases it is not certain that these people had been living here since the foundation, similar to what we have seen for the Latin colonies.

In colonies founded after the second Punic War they may have been included from the foundation, but in other cases their presence may be due to immigration. Overview of different types of evidence and their appearance in the colonies. In some cases, such as Cosa, Ariminum, and Luna, the Roman state seems to have actively sought to separate colonists and locals, either by deporting the locals altogether, or by having them move to the margins of the colonial territory.

In other cases, such as Paestum, Brundisium, Aquileia, Minturnae, and Puteoli, the colony seems to have served as a meeting point for non-Romans and colonists. This of course raises the question of why such variations occurred. At first sight there does not seem to be a marked development through time or according to region.

Cosa and Paestum were founded in the same year, but underwent widely different developments, as did Luna and Aquileia. Some opponents, who the Romans apparently considered more dangerous than others, were deported from their original place of residence. The best documented case is Liguria, from where in a large number of people were deported to southern Italy. Other enemies were, according to the sources, simply slaughtered, like the Senones and the Gallic tribes in Cisalpina.

However, even in such cases some locals still remained; we have seen that archaeological evidence of Senonic culture was still visible in the marginal areas around Ariminum, that Boii still lived around Cremona, and that Ligurians were still present around Luna.

Gauls, Senones, and Ligurians were all enemies who had offered considerable resistance against Roman occupation, and it may have been felt that it would have been unsafe if they remained in close contact with the Roman settlers. Aquileia, for example, was a flourishing trade community before it was settled as a colony, and already had a mixed population of Gauls, Veneti, and Etruscans. If all these people had been expelled to marginal areas, the Romans would have lost valuable trade opportunities, and they preferred to let the new settlers profit from the trade networks already established by the locals.

In the case of Brundisium, Zonaras states: They wished to get possession of Brundisium; for the place had a fine harbour, and for the traffic with Illyricum and Greece there was an approach and landing-place of such a character that vessels would sometimes come to land and put out to sea wafted by the same wind. Furthermore, those colonies that developed into important trade centres, such as Brundisium, were attractive for immigration, thus leading to a large presence of non-Roman people in these towns. As I have argued above, Roman colonies are unlikely to have contained non-Romans as official settlers, but the development of some of these colonies suggests that they were allowed to remain in the territory or to move into these colonies.

In Roman colonies, as well as in Latin, the evidence for the presence of non-Romans is strongest in the colonies that developed into important trade centres, especially Brundisium, Aquileia, Puteoli, and Minturnae.

It would make sense that the Romans would not object to the presence of allies if these people contributed to the economic welfare of the colonies. Those colonies which did not become flourishing commercial centres did not attract as many people, and therefore did not develop into the multi-ethnic communities that some colonies became. In some cases, such as Brundisium, the town was already important before its foundation as a colony, and so the local population may simply have remained when the colony was created.

Other colonies, like Puteoli and Minturnae, only developed into prospering centres later on, and would therefore not have been attractive from the beginning. This variety between colonies in the treatment of non-Romans makes it unlikely that there was an official, set policy of the Roman state with regard to these people. The state is more likely to have decided on its policy as each case demanded.

mercury, the night and alabaster.
Falling For You;
Pathways through Literature - Italian writers - Giacomo Leopardi?
.
Numéros en texte intégral;
!

Therefore, most non-Romans that are attested in colonies were not official settlers in these towns, at least not before the 3 rd century BC. In this section I will make some suggestions as to how such contacts could have occurred and have influenced cultural change in Italy. Some recent work has been done on this issue, but further research is necessary. If people lived close to each other, it would make sense that they would trade their surplus products with each other.

It is often thought that the fact that allies did not possess the ius commercii would have formed an obstacle for them to trade with Romans. However, I have argued elsewhere that this right was far less important in trade between Romans and non-Romans than is usually assumed. We may assume that this happened more often; in the case of Ariminum, for example, it may be that some unofficial migration to the area had already occurred before any official settlement had taken place. It is now recognized that many large estates producing for the market were owned by Italian elites.

In Cosa, for example, the presence of people of non-Roman descent, who formed part of the local elite, is attested by names such as the Titii, Gavii, and Pacuvii, who owned figlinae brick factories and produced wine in the territory. For example, trade between Roman and Italian elites may have been conducive to further integration, and, for instance, have led to intermarriage.

Whereas in the case of trade, the absence of commercium may not have played a large role in daily business, the absence of conubium seems to have had more serious consequences. Nevertheless, it may be that some colonists were not concerned about such limitations, and formed relationships with noncitizens living nearby. Further study of marriage patterns between non-Romans and colonists may clarify this problem. Cicero suggests that incolae did not have much to do with local politics: On the other hand, if non-Romans had lived together with official colonists for a long time, we may assume that various ties of friendship and family relations had been formed, and this may have given them informal ways of influencing the political decisions of the local magistrates and senate.

This shows that the Oscan inhabitants of Pompeii participated in local politics and were called upon to vote in the local elections. A man named Herennius, apparently of Oscan descent, ran for this office, and was promoted by inscriptions in Oscan and Latin. We have seen that the temple at Telamon near Cosa seems to have been occupied by local inhabitants even after the colony was founded in , and the temple here remained Etruscan in style, even when it was redecorated after It is not clear who commissioned the decorative reliefs — Etruscans or Romans — but in any case the temple would have been on the border between territory used by Romans and that used by Etruscans, allowing both groups access to it.

These places of worship may have formed another point of contact where colonists and non-Romans could meet each other. If, for example, the priests of the temple were part of the colonist body, then all inhabitants would have had to contact them in order to sacrifice; conversely, non-Romans may have remained on duty as priests, and the Roman colonists would then have to deal with them.

We have seen that for many colonies there is in fact not a great deal of evidence for the presence of non-Romans — in some cases, such as Cosa and Ariminum, the evidence even points at a spatial separation between Romans and non-Romans, at least at the foundation stages. Only in a few colonies, such as Brundisium, Paestum, Aquileia, Puteoli, and Minturnae we find early evidence for the presence of locals from the colonial foundation onwards; however, in the 2 nd century BC the Romans were more wiling to admit non-Romans as official colonists, so for colonies founded in this period, their inclusion was most likely common.

It is striking that the presence of non-Romans is most strongly attested in those colonies that developed into prospering trade communities, mostly in the 2 nd century, which strengthens the idea that these people moved here only after these towns started to flourish, rather than had been living here from their foundation.

Navigation

However, Rome did have some influence over the surrounding area: This may suggest that they were officially included as colonists at the foundation. In the first years of the colony there seem to have been problems with locals still remaining in the area nearby: Certainly after the refoundation of these colonies in , it seems as if local inhabitants only remained in the marginal areas of the territory.

The Celtic Insubres disappear from the archaeological record after the 3 rd century; local manufacture, which flourished in 2 nd century, shows elements characteristic of Etruscan, Latin, and Campanian art of the 3 rd -1 st centuries. A man with an Oscan praenomen and gentilicium was N. Magius, a praefectus fabrum in 49 BC.

An important indication for this is that in Cremona a sanctuary of Mefitis is attested, a goddess mostly venerated in southern Italy, e. Her presence in Cremona may show that the colonists here came from southern Italy; these people may have been included in the second foundation in BC, at a time when more Latin colonies became open to Italians.

It was an important trade port in the pre-Roman period, as reflected in many inscriptions by people with Greek or eastern names. Some local inhabitants are attested in the epigraphic record: Enastellius in AD may have been related to the Ligurian Enistale who is attested on a cup from the 3 rd century BC. Although the imperial inscription is very much later than the Republican era, the coincidence is interesting. Marlia was located in the centuriated territory of Luca, and in the mid-2 nd century the population still used Ligurian burial customs, ceramic traditions, and clothing habits.

In the more mountainous areas of the Valdinievole and around Pistoia many settlements continued into the 2 nd and 1 st centuries BC. There are many toponyms showing Ligurian influence, especially in the marginal mountainous territory; in the plains Roman names are more widespread. This may suggest that non-Romans were not as a rule included in the official settler body: Furthermore, if they were included as a rule, it is unlikely that there would not have been so much variation from place to place; in that case, we would expect a more evenly spread distribution of the amount and the type of evidence available, rather than the great variation occurring now.

In some Roman citizen colonies similar patterns of contact between Romans and non-Romans seem to have taken place. The only evidence for the presence of non-Romans comes from names with a non-Roman in origin. The temple was rebuilt or redecorated in the second century BC, but the palmettes used in this decoration were similar to those of the archaic temple, attesting to continuity in its use. The most important family were the Granii of Oscan descent, who are attested as members of the town elite and wealthy traders in various sources from the 1 st century BC.

The cult of Liber was especially widespread in eastern Cisalpina; this may show the persistence of a local preference for this cult, and thus the continued presence of local inhabitants. Sta tios Tetio s , mentioned in one of the inscriptions from the lucus , has an Oscan praenomen and gentilicium. This may show again the inclusion of Italian allies as official settlers in colonies in the period shortly after the Second Punic War. However, in most cases it is not certain that these people had been living here since the foundation, similar to what we have seen for the Latin colonies.

Some opponents, who the Romans apparently considered more dangerous than others, were deported from their original place of residence. The best documented case is Liguria, from where in a large number of people were deported to southern Italy. Other enemies were, according to the sources, simply slaughtered, like the Senones and the Gallic tribes in Cisalpina. However, even in such cases some locals still remained; we have seen that archaeological evidence of Senonic culture was still visible in the marginal areas around Ariminum, that Boii still lived around Cremona, and that Ligurians were still present around Luna.

As I have argued above, Roman colonies are unlikely to have contained non-Romans as official settlers, but the development of some of these colonies suggests that they were allowed to remain in the territory or to move into these colonies. In Roman colonies, as well as in Latin, the evidence for the presence of non-Romans is strongest in the colonies that developed into important trade centres, especially Brundisium, Aquileia, Puteoli, and Minturnae. It would make sense that the Romans would not object to the presence of allies if these people contributed to the economic welfare of the colonies.

Those colonies which did not become flourishing commercial centres did not attract as many people, and therefore did not develop into the multi-ethnic communities that some colonies became. In some cases, such as Brundisium, the town was already important before its foundation as a colony, and so the local population may simply have remained when the colony was created. Other colonies, like Puteoli and Minturnae, only developed into prospering centres later on, and would therefore not have been attractive from the beginning.

This variety between colonies in the treatment of non-Romans makes it unlikely that there was an official, set policy of the Roman state with regard to these people. The state is more likely to have decided on its policy as each case demanded.

Storia Romana -- Le Guerre Puniche tra Nevio e Polibio

It is now recognized that many large estates producing for the market were owned by Italian elites. In Cosa, for example, the presence of people of non-Roman descent, who formed part of the local elite, is attested by names such as the Titii, Gavii, and Pacuvii, who owned figlinae brick factories and produced wine in the territory.

For example, trade between Roman and Italian elites may have been conducive to further integration, and, for instance, have led to intermarriage. Whereas in the case of trade, the absence of commercium may not have played a large role in daily business, the absence of conubium seems to have had more serious consequences. Nevertheless, it may be that some colonists were not concerned about such limitations, and formed relationships with noncitizens living nearby.

Further study of marriage patterns between non-Romans and colonists may clarify this problem. Cicero suggests that incolae did not have much to do with local politics: On the other hand, if non-Romans had lived together with official colonists for a long time, we may assume that various ties of friendship and family relations had been formed, and this may have given them informal ways of influencing the political decisions of the local magistrates and senate.

In either case contacts between them and the official colonists would be conducive to integration between Romans and Italians. Unfortunately, there is no decisive evidence for the involvement of non-colonists in 1 st colonial politics before the century BC. In Pompeii, a colony of the Sullan era, such involvement is securely attested. This shows that the Oscan inhabitants of Pompeii participated in local politics and were called upon to vote in the local elections. A man named Herennius, apparently of Oscan descent, ran for this office, and was promoted by inscriptions in Oscan and Latin.

We have seen that the temple at Telamon near Cosa seems to have been occupied by local inhabitants even after the colony was founded in , and the temple here remained Etruscan in style, even when it was redecorated after It is not clear who commissioned the decorative reliefs — Etruscans or Romans — but in any case the temple would have been on the border between territory used by Romans and that used by Etruscans, allowing both groups access to it. These places of worship may have formed another point of contact where colonists and non-Romans could meet each other. If, for example, the priests of the temple were part of the colonist body, then all inhabitants would have had to contact them in order to sacrifice; conversely, non-Romans may have remained on duty as priests, and the Roman colonists would then have to deal with them.

It may be that non-Romans played an important role in, for example, extracting local stone for temple building, producing and trading in votive statuettes, providing religious services such as divination, et cetera. Evidence for their presence occurs in many colonies, even if its interpretation is often problematic. We have seen that for many colonies there is in fact not a great deal of evidence for the presence of non-Romans — in some cases, such as Cosa and Ariminum, the evidence even points at a spatial separation between Romans and non-Romans, at least at the foundation stages.

Only in a few colonies, such as Brundisium, Paestum, Aquileia, Puteoli, and Minturnae we find early evidence for the presence of locals from the colonial foundation onwards; however, in the 2 nd century BC the Romans were more wiling to admit non-Romans as official colonists, so for colonies founded in this period, their inclusion was most likely common.

If they had been, we would expect their influence to be much more visible from the moment of the foundation, instead of only later. The total amount of evidence for the 4 th and 3 rd centuries is limited, but at present there is, in my view, not sufficient material to support the idea that Italian allies were admitted into colonies as official settlers.

Furthermore, the difference in treatment of local inhabitants from colony to colony is too large to assume that they were normally accepted as official colonists: Whereas the traditional model, with its emphasis on spatial separation between colonists and Romans, is inadequate to explain the spread of Roman culture and Latin language throughout Italy, a model which supposes more widespread contacts between Romans and Italians would be better suitable to explain in which contexts these two groups came into contact with each other. By investigating in which contexts Romans and Italians met each other in their daily lives, we may be able to explain how such contacts may have encouraged Romanization.

Another issue that needs clarification is the role of viritane distributions of land and unofficial migration in the Romanization of Italy. Traditional scholarship presents colonization as a state-regulated process, in which movements of Roman and Latin settlers were determined by the state. However, we get glimpses of unofficial migration, as in the example of Agrigentum cited above. A related issue is the settlement pattern that appeared in colonies, viritane land distributions, and other areas where Romans and indigenous inhabitants may have lived in close proximity.

People are likely to interact mostly with their close neighbours, so if various groups lived close together, this would have stimulated integration. We have seen that in the case of Alba, recent archaeological research shows some fascinating possibilities for interaction, but research on settlement patterns shortly after the Roman conquest has only just begun. I have indicated ways in which we may attempt to solve these issues, but it is clear that a great amount of work still needs to be undertaken. Topografia storica, archeologia, arte, Bari, , p.

Ricerche sulla colonizzazione romana della Gallia Cisalpina. Le fase iniziali e il caso aquileiese, Roma-Trieste. The end of the peoples of Italy? Bradley, E Isayev and C. Regions without boundaries, Exeter, , p. De Ligt and S. Etruschi e Romani fra e a.

Territori e centuriazioni, in A. Etruschi, Liguri, Romani nella Valle del Serchio fra iv e ii secolo a. Nuovi prospettive di valorizzazione, Lucca, , p. Pontrandolfo, The Lucanians in Paestum, Paestum, Problemi storici ed archeologici, in Atti del Convegno: Le fonti, la storia, il territorio, Rome, , p. Politics, religion and historiography c. Paysage et structures agraires, Paris, Zwischen Mythos und Wirklichkeit, Mainz-Stuttgart, Italy and the Mediterranean economy, London, Di Cocco, Pesaro romana: Untersuchungen zu Akkulturationsprozessen vom 6.

Am Beispiel eines daunischen Heiligtums, Heidelberg, Matteini Chiari and C. Evidence and experience, Edinburgh, b, p. Cosa and the idea of the city, in E. Creation, transformations and failures, Portsmouth RI , , p. Jacques, Saturnia, la centuriazione, in A. Franchi de Bellis, A. Die Beziehungen Roms zu den italischen Gemeinden vom Latinerfreuden v. Le vicende della colonia di Rimini ai suoi albori, in F. Scavi , Florence, , p. Una lettura archeologica della romanizzazione, Mantova, Magistrates and ceremony in the regulation of public lands in Republican Rome, Chapel Hill, Evidence and experience, Edinburgh.

Greek and native perceptions of the threat to their cultural identities, in R. Rom und Italien in republikanischer Zeit, Frankfurt am Main, Comparative issues in romanization, Oxford, Problemi del sistema politico-amministrativa dello stato romano, Pisa, Sabbatini, Venusia Forma Italiae , Florence La centuriazione romana nella piana Apuo-Versiliese, Viareggio, A crossroads of men and ideas, in: Neue Funde und Forschungen, Mainz am Rhein, , p. Voza, Le iscrizioni latine di Paestum, Naples, Quando poi scese il silenzio Rom und Italien in republikanischer Zeit, Frankfurt am Main, , p.

Greeks and Romans in southern Italy, London, Livy 34,42,; revisited, in Historia, 36, , p. Quilici Gigli and G. De Souza and J. Mezzana del Cantore Forma Italiae , Florence, Livy 34,42,, in Journal of Roman Studies, 44, , p. A contextual approach to religious aspects of rural society after the Roman conquest, Amsterdam, A reconsideration of current images and the archaeological evidence, I n BABesch, 85, , p. Bilan et perspectives, Brussels-Rome, , p. Hayes, Settlement patterns and society, in J.

The role of power and tradition, Amsterdam, , p. See Cornell , p. See Salmon , p. Many scholars assume the presence of local inhabitants of colonies, but they unfortunately do not discuss the legal position of these people: However, Rich has recently suggested that not all towns in Italy had treaties with Rome, and that our evidence for their existence is actually very limited.

Furthermore, I will discuss colonies founded before the Sullan era only, since again, the nature of 1 st -century veteran settlements was very different from that of the colonies in the previous period. See for pre colonies Torelli , p. Novum ius eo anno a Ferentinatibus temptatum, ut Latini qui in coloniam Romanam nomina dedissent cives Romani essent: Puteolos Salernumque et Buxentum adscripti coloni qui nomina dederant, et, cum ob id se pro civibus Romanis ferrent, senatus iudicavit non esse eos cives Romanos. For a comprehensive discussion of the definition and rights of incolae and accolae see Laffi ; Gagliardi Et Narniensium legatis querentibus ad numerum sibi colonos non esse et immixtos quosdam non sui generis pro colonis se gerere.

See Broadhead , p. Franchi De Bellis , p. Numerius is attested in many non-Latin inscriptions, e. Rix Um 38, tCm5 Abella. See Vine , , See Suolahti , p. Paccius, Paconius, and Pacuvius, derived from the Oscan praenomen Pakis, are widely distributed, e. See Morel , p. Trebellius Fregellanus was commander of a contingent of soldiers from Fregellae in , see Liv. See also CIL The name Trebellius is not directly attested in Oscan inscriptions, but the name Trebius is very common, see Ve 15 Rix Po 7 from Pompeii, where Trebiis is used as a family name derived from the praenomen Trebis.

Trebatius, an allied leader in the Social War, Ap. See Coarelli , p. See Wightman and Hayes p. It was used in Oscan mostly as a praenomen ; e. As a gentilicium , see Casinum? See also Stek , p. The Herennii were also the patrons of Marius, see Plu. Atiedius, Papius, and Tettienus: Atiedius also on CIL 1 2. Atiedius is best known from the Tabulae Iguvinae. Papius Mutilus was one of the allied leaders in the Social War, see Ap. Supinum Ve a-b, Rix VM 4.

Vibius as a praenomen: However, they assume p. Petro is attested on Ve a-b Supinum. Anaiedius and Staiedius are not directly attested in Oscan inscriptions, but are probably not Latin in origin. Raius is also attested in Oscan inscriptions, e. See Grelle and Giardina , p. In other areas of Italy votive deposits continued into the 1 st century BC, and the connection between the timing of the decline in Telamon and the Roman conquest is close enough to assume that the Roman intervention influenced the economy of the temple. On the other hand, there is not always a clear relation between the use of a non-Latin name for a colony and the presence of local inhabitants in it.

Other colonial towns also kept their earlier names, such as Aesernia. See Sartori , p. However, Cipriani et al. For inscriptions, see Ceppius: Mello and Voza , nos. In Oscan, from Melito Rix tHi 1. Digitius was tribunus militum in BC, Liv. It is probably related to the Oscan name Dekius, e. Mello and Voza , no. The Numonii are also attested on 3rd-century graffiti on pottery from Paestum, see Torelli , p. It is most likely related to Suettius, attested in Corfinium Rix Pg See Cipriani et al. The expulsion of the Senones is accepted by many scholars: The actual number of settlers is not attested, but 6, is also attested for Alba.

See Franchi De Bellis , p. See Buonocore , p. However, Cosa was also derived from an Etruscan word, but did not have much continuity of previous settlement. Satrius is known from Bantia CIL 1 2. Herius Asinius, leader of the Marrucini in the Social war: Buonocore , 89; CIL 9. Some assume he was a citizen, e.

Guzzo , 82; Lamboley , p. On the other hand, Suolahti , , assumes he was not a citizen, and indeed it was not necessary for him to be a citizen in order to command a garrison of allies; see Galsterer , Even if he was not a citizen, he must have been an important individual in Brundisium. The name or title Dasius and variants are widely attested in the Messapian area, e.