Aomoroso - Crustumerium Characteristics of a Frontier Settlement

Bollettino di Archeologia on line I 2010/ Volume speciale F / F6 / 1 Reg. Tribunale Roma 05.08.2010 n. 330 ISSN 2039 - 0076

www.archeologia.beniculturali.it/pages/pubblicazioni.html

1

Angelo Amoroso

Crustumerium: Characteristics of a Frontier Settlement

Introduction

I have defined Crustumerium as a frontier settlement. This is an incorrect term if used in the modern meaning of demarcation line, separation, obstacle, boundary. In fact, we must not consider an ancient frontier in our case the course of the Tiber exclusively as a physical element which separated and distinguished those who lived on the opposite banks of the river1.

I would like to return to some aspects relating to the geographical position and characteristics of a Latin centre the study of which was published together with Francesco di Gennaro and Andrea Schiappelli, with reference to the Early Iron Age2, in order to update the picture published at the time. Recent data has made it possible to ascertain how the Early Iron Age at Crustumerium is not just documented mainly by surface survey material. Excavations undertaken within the settlement3 and on the necropolis of Monte Del Bufalo4, confirm that there are no known ma-terials from the proto-urban centre that are earlier than sub-phase IIB2 of the Latium cul-ture. To date there are no attestations of the

1 COLONNA 1986; TORELLI 2003.

2 DI GENNARO ET ALII 2002, 162176.

3 BARBARO ET ALII 2008.

4 BELELLI MARCHESINI 2008; DI GENNARO, BELELLI MARCHESINI, in these conference papers.

Fig. 1 The territory on both sides of the lower Tiber valley, between the Aniene, lake Martignano fosso della Bufala, the Monti Lucretili and Tibutini. Main PF2 centres, settlement limits (red) (drawing by Author).

A. Amoroso - Crustumerium: Characteristics of a Frontier Settlement



2

Final Bronze Age and the initial period of the Early Iron Age.

Crustumeriums characteristics can be fully understood by placing it within the territorial context examined as a whole, where the main ethnic groups in the lower Tiber valley (Etruscans, Latins, Sabines and Capenites) faced each other.

On the right bank of the great river the proto-Etruscan population was con-centrated in the vast proto-urban centre of Veii from the beginning of the Early Iron Age onwards. By contrast the territorial or-ganisation on the left bank only changed radically with respect to the settlement organisation in the Final Bronze Age during the course of the later part of the Early Iron Age (fig. 1)5. Moreover, on the left bank of the Tiber no less than eight centres of varying size (Crustumerium, Fidenae, Nomentum, Marco Simone Vecchio, Mon-

tecelio, Tibur, Cretone and Colle Lupo) are attested beginning in the IIB-III periods of the Latium culture. Amongst these the medium-large settlements (Crustumerium and Fidenae) (fig. 1) stand out. They are comparable to other proto-urban centres in ancient Latium (Gabii, Lavinium, Ardea and Antium) and in some ways with the larger centres of Rome and south Etruria (figs. 2-3)6.

0 50 100 150 200 250

NomentumTibur

SatricumAntium

FidenaeLavinium

ArdeaCrustumerium

GabiiRomaVulci

TarquiniaCaere

Veii

Fig. 3 Proto-urban centres in south Etruria (blue) and Latium Vetus (red) in the PF2 period. A comparison of size (in hectares). 5 This article makes a particular analysis of the territory between the rivers Tiber and Aniene, the Fiora torrent (or della Bufala) and the

slopes of the Monti Lucretili and Tiburtini, where the Latium Apennines begin. 6 AMOROSO 2008.

Fig. 2 Proto-urban centres in south Etruria (blue) and Latium Vetus (red). A comparison between settlements (drawing by Author).

XVII International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Roma 22-26 Sept. 2008

Session: Crustumerium: I Latini tra Etruschi e Sabini

Bollettino di Archeologia on line I 2010/ Volume speciale F / F6 / 1 Reg. Tribunale Roma 05.08.2010 n. 330 ISSN 2039 0076


3

Proto-urban development in South Etruria and Latium Vetus

In south Etruria and Latium Vetus the birth of proto-urban centres during the course of the Early Iron Age also determined a revolution in the territorial organisation. The polycentric settlement system of the Bronze Age gave way to the monocentric system typical of the Iron Age, when each territorial sphere was controlled by a dominant centre. This dynamic was probably the result both of a territorial division deriving from conflicts between earlier settlements of the Final Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, and from an ethnic administration of the territory.

The proto-urban centres grew up out of a different need on the part of the community to control and manage the territory7. The small parcels of land present within the proto-urban centres were not sufficient to satisfy the entire communitys needs (extensive cultivations and specialised stock-raising, hunting, availability of raw materials such as: water, wood, building materials etc.). Therefore, a proto-urban centre presupposes the existence of a corresponding proto-ager, the control of which was one of the fundamental elements of the proto-urban centre itself. It was the beginning of new modes of control, management and above all of exploitation of the territory based on a dual system: the large inhabited centre and the land surrounding it. The first existed in function of the second, within the sphere of a landscape that would lead to the urbs-ager system which would fully mature in the late archaic period with the widespread occupation of the territory through farms and villae8.

During the later part of the Early Iron Age there was also a radical reorganisation of the territory on the left bank of the lower Tiber. The Latins reacted to the Villanovan revolution which saw the birth of the first proto-urban centres on the Tibers right bank. The Latins took up position on the left bank and occupied ex novo or considerably reinforced strategic sites. Latin centres such as Rome, Fidenae and Crustumerium, became proto-urban centres with the function of controlling crossing points on the Tiber. These centres intercepted inter-regional traffic and exploited the advantages deriving from it.

Thus the Latins, with a targeted project, controlled strategic points and concentrated the majority of their population in proto-urban centres, veri e propri motori della produzione e della distribuzione delle merci9.

In the Early Iron Age the Tiber constituted a physical element that should not be considered as a demarcation line between opposing blocks. Furthermore, whilst the proto Etruschi perceived the Tiber as a border, on the contrary the Latins, who conservano un concetto assai fluido della propria territorialit10, living in a densely populated area, seemed to exercise an erosion of the territory occupied by the inhabitants of the opposite bank. In particular Fidenae faced the territory of Veii (at the height of the fosso della Valchetta) and controlled part of the course of the river Aniene, which formed another strong physical boundary. Fidenae off set the presence of Antemnae, a secondary centre situated on the opposite bank which was soon to come under the influence of Rome11. Crustumerium also faced Veiis territory, but from the Early Iron Age was intent on the control of the alluvial plain below. The territory of Crustumerium reached as far as the area under the influence of the enclave of Capena, where the Tiber could be easily crossed at the height of Ponte del Grillo12. Crustumerium constituted the northern bastion of the Latins and bridgehead in the direction of the Sabine and Faliscan territory, across the territory of Capena13.

7 PERONI 1988; 2000.

8 CARAFA 2004; CARANDINI ET ALII 2007.

9 GUIDI 2003, 46.

10 COLONNA 1986, 94.

11 PACCIARELLI 2001, 124.

12 DI GENNARO ET ALII 2007, 135144.

13 For a synthesis regarding Faliscan and Capenate territory cf. COLONNA 1974, 9192; 1988, 520524; MAETZKE 1990; AA.VV. 1995;

CIFANI 2003, 180182 with bibliography.




4

The situation outlined for the Early Iron Age was soon to be shattered by the voracious expan-sionism of Rome intent on en-larging its own territory, which was initially limited with respect to the area occupied by the vast proto-urban centre (over 200 hectares)14 and by the successive incur-sions of the Sabines. Only in the historic period did the latter react to Latin pressure, exercised in the area under examination during the course of the Early Iron Age, creating on the right bank of the Tiber the territorial wedge which made the Faliscans the fratelli separati dei Latini15.

Crustumerium: the characteristics

This section will highlight the characteristics shared by Cru-stumerium with the main Latin centres and the characteristics di-stinguishing it from the centres along the course of the lower Tiber, including Crustumerium, which have been defined as frontier settlements.

Common characteristics: Morphological characteristics

The uplands of Crustumerium, which are part of the system of the Sabine volcanic zone16, have suffered heavy erosion effecting the vertical stratification of the ancient deposits and the lines and profiles of the hills (fig. 4). Landslides have occurred on the north-western and north-eastern slopes of the settlement, where the original morphology appears greatly altered. This is a range of rolling hills with an irregular profile that is well provided with natural defences.

The main Latin centres (for example: Rome, Lavinium, Ardea, Satricum, Fidenae) had good natural defences on all sides with the exception of the side linking them to the hinterland17.

14

CARANDINI 2007, 22, fig. 8. 15

COLONNA 1988, 522. 16

VENTRIGLIA 2002. 17

GUAITOLI 1984.

Fig. 4 Crustumerium. The range of hills on which the settlement stood. Present state (aerial photograph: Google Earth).





5

Common characteristics: Artificial defences

Crustumerium had defensive structures in correspondence with the sectors that were not naturally protected by the sites morphology. Of these structures a ditch (at least 9 m wide and over 3 m deep), partially excavated in 2007 is known, as well as terracing structures comprising parallel walls in tufa opus quadratum, probably datable to the archaic period, known from excavations undertaken in 199918.

Similar defensive structures are attested in other Latin centres (in particular Lavinium, Ardea, Castel di Decima, Acqua Acetosa Laurentina, Ficana19 and Rome20), in correspondence with the least naturally defended side of each settlement.

It is known that defensive structures, in particular the earliest known to date in Latium Vetus, did not necessarily comprise a ditch with embankment and associated walls in ashlar blocks21. The structures found on the northern slopes of the Palatine22 and on the southern side of Fidenae23, attest the existence, beginning in the later part of the Early Iron Age, of walled structures with ritual and/or defensive functions. Clearly the ancient murus Terreus of the Carine at Rome, known from literary sources (Varro, ling. 5, 48), is not just a scholarly memory.

Common characteristics: The road cutting

The hypothesis formulated by Francesco di Gennaro, according to which the settlement of Crustumerium was crossed in the centre by a monumental road cutting24, has been confirmed by the results of the excavation undertaken with the University of Oulu25. Roads, with the appearance of tagliate (cuttings) connected to settlement entrances, are attested in many Latin centres (for example the tagliate known at Fidenae26, Antemnae27, Castel di Decima, Laurentina Acqua Acetosa28, Satricum29).

Future investigations will clarify whether the niche tomb dating to the orientalising period, found immediately to the west of the southern cutting30, was part of a vast necropolis (indication of the southern limit of the settlement in the 7th century B.C.), was an isolated tomb or was part of a small nucleus of burials within the settlement. In this case we are faced with one of those anomalies which document how there are exceptions to the usual procedure (codified in Rome, in the early Republican period in the laws of the Twelve tables), which imposed the burial of dead adults outside the inhabited area: Hominem mortuum in urbe ne sepelito neve urito31. Archaeological research, in terms of ancient topography, should not consider the position of burials exclusively as a marker distinguishing between the city of the living and the city of the dead32.

18

DI GENNARO 1999, 24. 19

CIFANI 2003, with preceding bibliography. 20

BARBERA ET ALII 2008, with preceding bibliography. 21

QUILICI 1994. 22

CARANDINI ET ALII 2000, 139159; CARANDINI ET ALII 2000, 275280. 23

AMOROSO ET ALII 2005. 24

DI GENNARO 1988, 113. This interpretation, as is known, has important implications for the understanding of the extension of the settlement area. 25

JARVA ET ALII 2008; JARVA in these conference papers. I would like to thank Eero Jarva who kindly welcomed me to his site each year and illustrated the results of his research. 26

QUILICI ET ALII 1986, tabs. C-CI, 226227. 27

QUILICI GIGLI 1990. 28

BEDINI 2003, 270. 29

GUAITOLI 2003, 283289. 30

JARVA ET ALII 2008; JARVA in these conference papers. 31

Cf. HUMBERT 2005 on the contents of the Twelve Tables with ample bibliography. 32

With reference to Latium Vetus cf. CARAFA 2008; CARANDINI 2008; GALLONE 2008; GUIDI 2008.




6

Distinguishing characteristics: Geographical position

Left bank of the Tiber:

Settlement Distance from river (km)

Extension (hectares)

Foundation date

Cures Sabini 5 1,5 PF2

Eretum 0,2 4 PF2

Nomentum 7,8 11,3 PF2

Crustumerium 1,4 60 PF1 late

Fidenae 0,2 40,7 PF1 late

Antemnae 0,2 13 PF2

Rome 0,3 205 PF1 Acqua Acetosa Laurentina 3,0 5 PF2

Ficana 0,1 5 PF2

Right bank of the Tiber:

Settlement Distance from river (km)

Extension (hectares)

Foundation date

Nazzano Romano 0,4 7 PF2

Capena 6,0 20 PF2 (?) Veii 9,0 180 PF1 early

The table shows how the centres that grew up on the left bank of the Tiber (Ficana, Acqua Acetosa, Rome, Antemnae, Fidenae, Crustumerium, Eretum in Sabina) were situated next to the river or close to it. These centres controlled a tract of the Tiber valley, in contrast to the known centres on the right bank where the second line position of the dominant centre of Veii stands out.

Crustumerium incorporated a tract of the international route between Etruria and Campania which passed through the settlement in the monumental tagliata mentioned above33.

The frontier settlements frequently intercepted international routes, in fact their presence is one of the factors contributing to the success of these centres. In particular, roads passed through Ficana, Fidenae and Crustumerium which made it possible to cross the ancient region of Latium Vetus in a transverse direction at docking/crossing points on the river. Rome, a frontier settlement par excellence, also grew up on a site where it could control the crossing point which, via several routes, connected the coast and the right bank of the Tiber to the hinterland, in the direction of the Sabina, the Alban hills and Campania34.

33

AMOROSO 2002a. 34

COLONNA 1988, 448449; CARANDINI 2007, 1721.





7

Distinguishing characteristics: The material culture

The presence in burial contexts at Crustumerium of red impasto jars and cups used in ritual banqueting is significant35. These pottery forms were produced in Latium and had painted white-on-red decoration. This decorative technique was widespread in southern Etruria (especially in the ancient Etruscan towns of Caere and Veii) and in the Faliscan-Capenate territory36.

The presence of two large red impasto cistae is exceptional. Decorated with white painted geometric and vegetal motifs on the bodies and procession of fantastic animals on the handled lids, they were among the grave goods in tomb 111 of Monte Del Bufalo37. These artefacts, if imported, attest the level of wealth reached by Crustumerium in the orientalising period thanks to contacts gained via the international route. If of crustumina production they document the high level of skill attained by local craftsmen thanks to contacts with the artisans of Veii, Falerii and Capena. It cannot be excluded that these artefacts are indirect evidence for the arrival at Crustumerium of foreign artisans, specialised in refined decoration. It may also be the case that the tomb belonged to an individual whose origins lay on the right bank of the Tiber38.

There were products specific to Crustumerium which are also attested outside of the Latin centre: the crustumine bowl was present amongst the tomb groups in the necropolis of Pizzo Piede at Narce39. The small Latium amphora with the very pronounced spikes, widely documented in the tomb groups at Crustumerium - characteristic of the Latin territory north of the river Aniene - is also present in Rome40 and in the territory of Capena (monte Tufello di Vacchereccia)41.

The material culture is distinguished by the co-existence of local and non-native elements, the latter documenting contacts with the areas of Veii, Falerii and Capena. By contrast, to date the material culture has not provided evidence regarding the relationship between Crustumerium and Sabine centres, which must also have existed, as the literary sources attest. The latter mostly allude to episodes of conflict with the Sabines, in particular at the beginning of the 5th century B.C.42

Distinguishing characteristics: Funerary architecture

Burial types which were not characteristic of the Latin area were predominant at Crustumerium in the orientalising period. These are the numerous trapdoor tombs with lateral niche (Narce and Montarano types), also attested in one of the eastern cemeteries at Fidenae43), that were particularly widespread in the territories of Veii, Falerii and Capena44.

The presence of non-native funerary architecture has often been noted at Tibur, also a Latin frontier settlement, although it had a material culture typical of Latium45. The known a circolo burials found at the cemetery of Rocca Pia of this Tiburtine settlement have similar characteristics to the earth-dug graves with a tumulo covering that were particularly widespread in the Early Iron Age in Umbrian territory (Terni, the Acciaie-

35

See in particolar DI GENNARO 2006a; BELELLI MARCHESINI 2008; Iidem in these conference papers. 36

MICOZZI 2004. 37

AMOROSO 2002b, 38, figs 5-6; DI GENNARO ET ALII 2007, 140; DI GENNARO 2006b. 38

NIJBOER ET ALII 2008, 4; NIJBOER in these conference papers: the composition of the vessel group in tomb 232 at Monte Del Bufalo characterised by the unusual presence of a holmos in white-on-red ware of probable Faliscan production, also attests the presence of non-native elements at Crustumerium. Also to be noted is the presence of a holmos a bulla, of the Veian-Faliscan type in tomb 20 of the eastern cemetery at Fidenae: IAIA 2006. 39

AMOROSO 2002a, 310, note 52; DI GENNARO ET ALII 2007, 155. 40

DANTI 2001, 333, fig.10. 41

DI GENNARO ET ALII 2007, 158159. 42

QUILICI ET ALII 1980, 20. For an analysis of the literary sources. 43

DI GENNARO ET ALII 2004, 9496. 44

DI GENNARO 2007; BELELLI 2008. 45

FACCENNA ET ALII 1976; FULMINANTE 2003, 4550.




8

rie necropolis)46 and in the middle Adriatic area (in particular the necropolis at Fossa)47. The adoption of non-native funerary architecture constitutes a characteristic of a number of frontier settlements in Latium Vetus, which merit further investigation.

Crustumerium, port of the Latins

Its position as a frontier settlement represented an element of strength from which Crustumerium gained undeniable advantages and was perhaps also the reason for its foundation, as a proto-urban centre which in the beginning acted as bastion against possible Villanovan expansion on the left bank of the river, an expansion which never took place. This frontier, ably exploited, constituted an enriching factor which made Crustumerium the Latins port, especially in the direction of the territories of Veii, Falerii and Capena.

The inhabitants of Crustumerium appear to have been inclined to: 1) intercept experiences, materials, products elaborated elsewhere and to re-elaborate them according to their own usage and tastes; 2) distribute their own products (for example the crustumine bowl from Pizzo Piede); 3) welcome people from other centres and ethnic spheres; 4) look for fortune beyond the river, forming relationships of mutual exchange and reciprocal convenience.

In this light it may be possible to justify the fact that the literary sources allude, as also in the case of Fidenae, to the Etruscan town of Crustumerium (Paul, Fest. 55, 12) and to the existence of an ager Crustumerium in Etruria (Plin. NH 3, 68). Just as unusual, and not perhaps without significance, is the attestation of the river Clustumium in Umbria between Rimini and Pesaro (Plin. NH 3, 111-112, 115; Lucan 2, 406, Vibius Seq. p. 10)48.

Elements of ipseit49 (strictly correlated to the need for autonomy and territorial defence) co-habited with the need for contact with bordering settlements. These were relationships and alliances, where ethnic distinction between Latins, Etruscans, Sabines, Faliscans and Capenates even if present - one thinks of the significant linguistic differences50 - seems to have gradually disappeared. For the inhabitants of Crustumerium relations with the inhabitants of Veii and other Faliscan and Capenate centres could have been more advantageous than neighbourly relations, not always peaceful, with the other Latins. Rome conquered Crustumerium three times51; Fidenae, for its position and morphology, constituted an alternative settlement reality with respect to that of Crustumerium.

The archaeological data highlights the existence of a horizontal mobility between southern Etruria and Latium Vetus from the Early Iron Age onwards52. This horizontal mobility increased in the orientalising and archaic periods and persisted until the beginning of the 5th century B.C. Attius Clausus moved with his 5,000 clients from the Sabina into the territory of Fidenae, which had been recently conquered by Rome53.

The known archaeological picture of ancient Latium together with what is known from the literary sources makes it possible to appreciate how Crustumerium was well integrated into this dense network of contacts. Matrimonial alliances between members of different gentes from bordering settlements and agri played an important role. The presence of bronze suspension rings, of Latin production, in Early Iron Age burials attested in the territory of Capena may be interpreted as evidence of this54. The well known episode of the rape of the Sabines and of the women of Crustumerium, Caenina and Antemnae by Romulus, the first

46

LEONELLI 2003. 47

COSENTINO ET ALII 2001. 48

cf. COLONNA 1986, 94, on this subject. 49

CRISTOFANI 1999. 50

COLONNA 1988. 51

QUILICI ET ALII 1980, 1820 for an analysis of the literary sources. 52

DE SANTIS 1995. 53

AMOROSO ET ALII 2003. 54

cf. COLONNA 1988, 522; IAIA 2007.





9

king of Rome, can probably also be interpreted in this light (Liv. 1, 9, 8-9; 1, 10, 1-3; 1, 11, 3-4; Dion. Hal. 2, 32, 2; 2, 36, 1-2; Plut., Rom, 17, 1).

The archaeological evidence described here shows how the inhabitants of Crustumerium also used knowledge of, and comparison with the non-Latins to construct their own identity.

Angelo Amoroso Collaboratore della Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma

Bibliography

AMOROSO A., 2002a. Nuovi dati per la conoscenza dellantico centro di Crustumerium. Archeologia Classica, 53, 286329.

AMOROSO A., 2002b. Crustumerium. In S. RIZZO (ed.), Roma. Citt del Lazio, (exhibition catalogue). Rome, 3738.

AMOROSO A., 2008. Il territorio di Crustumerium e dei centri limitrofi nella prima et del Ferro. Dati e prospettive. In Alla ricerca dellidentit di Crustumerium. Primi risultati e prospettive di un progetto internazionale. Atti della giornata di studio organizzata dall'Institutum Romanum Finlandiae e dalla Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma (Roma, 5 marzo 2008). 111 (http://www.irfrome.org/ita/temp_06.asp?IdCat=35).

AMOROSO A., BARBINA P., 2003. Listituzione della trib Claudia e Clustumina nel Latium Vetus. Un esempio di gestione del territorio da parte di Roma nel V secolo a.C. BCAR, 104, 1936.

AMOROSO A., DE GROSSI MAZZORIN J., DI GENNARO F., 2005. Sepoltura di cane (IX-VIII sec. a.C.) nellarea perimetrale dellantica Fidenae. In I. FIORE, G. MALERBA, S. CHILARDI (eds), Atti del 3 Convegno Nazionale di Archeozoologia (Siracusa 3-5 novembre 2000). Studi di Paletnologia 2. Roma, 311327.

AA. VV., 1995. Capena e il suo territorio. Bari. BARBARO B., BARBINA B., BORZETTI M. R., 2008. Labitato di Crustumerium: nuove acquisizioni. In Alla ricerca

dellidentit di Crustumerium. Primi risultati e prospettive di un progetto internazionale. Atti della giornata di studio organizzata dall'Institutum Romanum Finlandiae e dalla Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma (Roma, 5 marzo 2008). 111 (http://www.irfrome.org/ita/temp_06.asp?IdCat=35).

BARBERA M., MAGNANI CIANETTI M. (eds), 2008. Archeologia a Roma Termini. Le mura serviane e larea della stazione: scoperte, distruzioni e restauri. Roma.

BARTOLONI G., BENEDETTINI M. G. (eds), 2008. Sepolti tra i vivi. Evidenza ed interpretazione di contesti funerari in abitato. Atti del Convegno Internazionale (Roma, 26-29 aprile 2006). ScAnt, 14/2.

BEDINI A., 2003, Laurentina, Acqua Acetosa. In GUAITOLI 2003, 270272. BELELLI MARCHESINI B., 2008. Necropoli di Crustumerium: bilancio delle acquisizioni e prospettive. In Alla

ricerca dellidentit di Crustumerium. Primi risultati e prospettive di un progetto internazionale. Atti della giornata di studio organizzata dall'Institutum Romanum Finlandiae e dalla Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma (Roma, 5 marzo 2008). 115 (http://www.irfrome.org/ita/temp_06.asp?IdCat=35).

CARAFA P., 2004. Il paesaggio etrusco-italico. In PATTERSON 2004, 4559. CARAFA P. 2008. Uccisioni rituali e sacrifici umani nella topografia di Roma. In BARTOLONI, BENEDETTINI 2008,

668703. CARANDINI A., 2007. Roma. Il primo giorno. Roma.




10

CARANDINI A. 2008. Uccisioni rituali sacrifici umani a Roma, tra centro protourbano e prima citt stato. Abbozzando una sintesi. In BARTOLONI, BENEDETTINI 2008, 705710.

CARANDINI A., CAPPELLI R. (eds), 2000. Roma. Romolo e Remo e la fondazione della citt (exhibition catalogue). Roma.

CARANDINI A., CARAFA P. (eds), 2000. Palatium e Sacra Via, I. Bollettino di Archeologia, (1995), 3133. CARANDINI A., DALESSIO M.T., DI GIUSEPPE H. (eds), 2007. La fattoria e la villa dellAuditorium nel quartiere

Flaminio di Roma. Roma. CIFANI G., 2003. Storia di una frontiera. Roma. COLONNA G., 1974. Intervento. In P. SANTORO (ed), Civilt arcaica dei Sabini nella valle del Tevere, II, Terzo

incontro. Per un inquadramento culturale della Sabina arcaica (4 luglio 1973). Roma, 9192. COLONNA G., 1986. Il Tevere e gli Etruschi. In S. QUILICI GIGLI (ed), Il Tevere e le altre vie d'acqua del Lazio

antico, QuadAEI 12. Roma, 9097. COLONNA G., 1988. I Latini e gli altri popoli del Lazio. In Italia Omnium Terrarum Alumna. Milano, 409528. COSENTINO S., DERCOLE V., MIELI G., 2001. La necropoli di Fossa. I. Le testimonianze pi antiche. Celano. CRISTOFANI M., 1999. Litterazione e processi di autoidentificazione etnica fra le genti dellItalia arcaica. La

colonisation grecque en Mditerrane occidentale. In Actes de la rencontre scientifique en hommage Georges Vallet, organise par le Centre Jean-Brard, l'Ecole franaise de Rome, l'Istituto universitario orientale et l'Universit degli studi di Napoli "Federico II" (Rome-Naples, 15-18 novembre 1995). Rome, 345360.

DANTI A., 2001. Lindagine archeologica nellarea del tempio di Giove Capitolino. In AA.VV., Primi risultati delle indagini archeologiche in Campidoglio nellarea del Giardino Romano e del Palazzo Caffarelli (giornata di studio presso lIstituto Archeologico Germanico di Roma, 3 maggio 2001). BCAR, 102, 323346.

DE SANTIS A., 1995. Contatti tra Etruria e Lazio Antico alla Fine dellVIII sec. a.C.: la Tomba del Guerriero di Osteria dellOsa. In N. CHRISTIE (ed), Settlement and economy in Italy, 1500 BC-AD 1500: Papers of the Fifth Conference of Italian Archaeology. Oxford, 365375.

DI GENNARO F., 1988. Primi risultati degli scavi nella necropoli di Crustumerium. Tre complessi funerari della fase IVA. In QuadAEI 16 (Archeologia Laziale IX), 113123.

DI GENNARO F. (ed), 1999. Itinerario di visita a Crustumerium. Roma. DI GENNARO F., 2006a. Le olle a coppette e la ceramica di impasto a superficie rossa dipinta in bianco. In

TOMEI 2006, 228. DI GENNARO F., 2006b. Grande pisside con coperchio. In TOMEI 2006, 229. DI GENNARO F., 2007. Le tombe a loculo di et orientalizzante di Crustumerium. In F. ARIETTI, A. PASQUALINI

(eds), Tusculum. Storia di Archeologia, Cultura e Arte di Tuscolo e del Tuscolano. Atti del primo incontro di studi (27-28 maggio e 3 giugno 2000). Roma, 163176.

DI GENNARO F., AMOROSO A., TOGNINELLI P., 2007. Crustumerium e Fidenae tra Etruria e Colli Albani. In F. ARIETTI, A. PASQUALINI (eds), Tusculum. Storia Archeologia Cultura e Arte di Tuscolo e del Tuscolano. Atti del primo incontro di studi (27-28 maggio e 3 giugno 2000). Roma, 135144.

DI GENNARO F., DELLERA F., FRAIOLI F., GRIESBACH J., BARBINA P., 2004. Strutture insediative e tracce di uso agrario del territorio fidenate in et romana. In Atti del IV Congresso di Topografia Antica. Insediamenti e strutture rurali nellItalia Romana (Roma, 7-8 Marzo 2001). Rivista di Topografia Antica, 14, 83148.

DI GENNARO F., SCHIAPPELLI A., AMOROSO A., 2004. Un confronto tra gli organismi protostatali delle due sponde del Tevere. Le prime fasi di Veio e di Crustumerio. In PATTERSON 2004, 147-177.

FACCENNA D., FUGAZZOLA DELPINO M. A., 1976. Tivoli. In G. COLONNA (ed), Civilt del Lazio Primitivo, (exhibition catalogue). Roma, 188212.

FULMINANTE F., 2003. Le sepolture principesche nel Latium Vetus tra fine della prima et del Ferro e linizio dellet orientalizzante. Roma.





11

GALLONE A., 2008. Sepolti tra le mura della prima Roma. Il caso delle tombe sulla pendice palatina. In BARTOLONI, BENEDETTINI 2008, 653665.

GUAITOLI M., 1984. Lurbanistica. In QuadAEI 6 (Archeologia Laziale IV), 364381. GUAITOLI M. (ed), 2003. Lo sguardo di Icaro. Le collezioni dellAerofototeca Nazionale per la conoscenza del

territorio. Roma. GUIDI A., 2003. La presenza delluomo: dalleconomia di sopravvivenza alla nascita dello stato. In P.

SOMMELLA (ed), Atlante del Lazio Antico. Un approfondimento critico delle conoscenze archeologiche. Roma, 2755.

GUIDI A., 2008. Sepolti tra i vivi. Levidenza laziale. In BARTOLONI, BENEDETTINI 2008, 711723. IAIA C., 2006. Sepolcreto orientale di Fidene (propriet Porta di Roma, area 123). Tomba 20. In TOMEI 2006. IAIA C., 2007. Elements of female jewellery in Iron Age Latium and southern Etruria: Identity and cultural

communication in a boundary zone. Situla, 44, 520531. JARVA E., KUUSISTO A., LIPPONEN S., TUPPI J., 2008. Excavations in the road trench area and research

prospects in the future. In Alla ricerca dellidentit di Crustumerium. Primi risultati e prospettive di un progetto internazionale. Atti della giornata di studio organizzata dall'Institutum Romanum Finlandiae e dalla Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma (Roma, 5 marzo 2008). 1-15 (http://www.irfrome.org/ita/temp_06.asp?IdCat=35).

LEONELLI V., 2003. La necropoli della prima et del Ferro delle acciaierie a Terni. Firenze. HUMBERT M., (ed) 2005. Le Dodici Tavole. Dai Decemviri agli Umanisti. Pavia. MAETZKE G. (ed), 1990. La civilt dei Falisci. Atti del XV Convegno di Studi Etruschi ed Italici (Civita

Castellana Forte San Gallo 28-31 maggio 1987). Firenze. MICOZZI M., 2004. White-on-red. Una produzione vascolare dellorientalizzante etrusco. Roma. NIJBOER A. J., ATTEMA P. A. J., VAN OORTMERSSEN G. J. M., 2008. Two excavation campaigns of the

University of Groningen at Monte Del Bufalo, Crustumerium. Preliminary results and future plans. In Alla ricerca dellidentit di Crustumerium. Primi risultati e prospettive di un progetto internazionale. Atti convegno Institutum Romanum Finlandiae e dalla Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma (5 marzo 2008 Rome), 1-10 (http://www.irfrome.org/ita/temp_06.asp?IdCat=35).

PACCIARELLI M., 2001. Dal villaggio alla citt. Firenze. PATTERSON H. (ed), 2004. Bridging the Tiber. Approaches to Regional Archaeology in the Middle Tiber

valley. Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 13. London. PERONI R., 1988. Comunit e insediamento in Italia fra et del Bronzo e prima et del ferro. In A.

MOMIGLIANO, A. SCHIAVONE (eds), Storia di Roma, 1. Torino, 737. PERONI R., 2000. Formazione e sviluppo dei centri protourbani medio-tirrenici. In A. CARANDINI, R. CAPPELLI

(eds), Roma. Romolo e Remo e la fondazione della citt 26-30 (exhibition catalogue). Roma. QUILICI L., 1994. Le fortificazioni ad aggere nel Lazio Antico. Ocnus, 2, 147158. QUILICI GIGLI S., 1990. Antemnae. In M. CRISTOFANI (ed), La Grande Roma dei Tarquini (exhibition

catalogue). Roma, 152153. QUILICI L., QUILICI GIGLI S., 1980. Crustumerium. Roma. QUILICI L., QUILICI GIGLI S., 1986. Fidenae. Roma. TOMEI M. A. (ed), 2006. Roma. Memorie dal sottosuolo. Ritrovamenti archeologici. 1980/2006 (exhibition

catalogue). Verona. TORELLI M., 2003. Preface. In CIFANI 2003, 1720. VENTRIGLIA U., 2002. Geologia del territorio del comune di Roma. Roma.

Documents

Aomoroso - Crustumerium Characteristics of a Frontier Settlement