ProQuest Dissertations - Historia Antigua
ProQuest Dissertations - Historia Antigua ProQuest Dissertations - Historia Antigua
Chapter 4: Religious Landscape and Community BuildingI. IntroductionColonization as a phenomenon involves not only the people occupied with creating a newcolony, but also the local population that is host or neighbor to the colony and, equally asimportant, the landscape in which the colony is founded. As seen in Sluyter's model (cf.chapter 1), the concept of 'landscape' encompasses the material and physical features ofthe land as well as the definitions imposed on the land by its human inhabitants. 1Such alandscape can be described at the macro level, through the use of generalizing models, orat the micro level, through examination of specific sites and contexts. Chapter 3introduced the commissioners' influence over the colonial landscape in general.Expanding on this discussion, the purposes of the first two sections of this chapter are toexplore the ancient Roman definition of what a city landscape contained and also wherein the landscape religious action occurred.After this treatment of the macro-level models of ancient religious landscapes, thechapter turns to examples of certain colonies in Southern Italy: Fregellae, Paestum, andSora. These three studies suggest that the religious landscape of each colony, althoughunique in every case, acted to define boundaries, demarcate colonial space, claimcommon identities, and integrate various inhabitants into one, unified group. Moreover,each colonial pantheon had a unique level of correlation (or lack thereof) with the'Sluyter(2002),p.23.2 Riva and Stoddard (1996), p. 93. I follow Riva and Stoddard in embracing discussion of both the macroand micro level of landscapes (contra Tilley 1994). While the specific context landscape analysis is usefulfor understanding a single site, the generalized models offered in this chapter assist in illuminating trends,insofar as they exist, in colonial religious practices.145
eligious system at Rome. This suggests that there was no set policy of imposing Romanreligion on the mid-Republican colonies.II.Romans and the Landscape: City, Citizens, and GodsAs seen in chapter 1, the study of landscape in terms of religion and colonization iscurrently a popular topic in modern scholarship. It remains to verify that the importanceof religious spaces in a landscape is not an anachronistic imposition on a study of thecolonies of the period in question. Thus, the following section analyzes how a city wasdefined in the middle Republic and its historiography.The answer to how the Roman elite defined a city and its landscape lies withintheir treatment of cities that surrendered to the people of Rome. Two passages in Livy, inparticular, suggest that the Romans 4 considered a city to include people and theirbelongings as well as the natural and built landscape. Livy 1.38 presents a formula ofsurrender which King Tarquin demanded of the people of Collatia."Deditisne vos populumque Collatinum, urbem, agros, aquam, terminos, delubra,utensilia, divina humanaque omnia, in meam populique Romani dicionem? " Livy1.38.2."Do you surrender into my power and that of the People of Rome yourselves, and thepeople of Collatia, your city, lands, water, boundaries, temples, sacred vessels, allthings divine and human?" [C. Roberts, trans.]3 Examples include Crumley in Ashmore and Knapp (1999), Gargola (1995), Laurence in Wilkins (1996),Sluyter (2002), and Zanker (2000).4 The use of the collective noun "Romans" in the first two sections of this chapter is not intended to indicatethat each person living in Rome can be assumed to have held the same definition of landscape during themiddle Republic. Rather it follows the convention of authors such as Livy or Appian, who sometimesdiscuss the Roman people as a collective. For ease of discussing a general model of what a city wasaccording to the evidence we have from some members of the Roman elite or the historiographers of theRepublican period, the generalization "Romans" will be allowed to stand.146
- Page 103 and 104: their enemies, it certainly seems t
- Page 105 and 106: Chapter 3: Commissioners and Foundi
- Page 107 and 108: This chart completes the human half
- Page 109 and 110: first century BCE. The lex coloniae
- Page 111 and 112: political and personal motivations
- Page 113 and 114: through the authority of the senate
- Page 115 and 116: L. Cornelius Lentulus, the brother
- Page 117 and 118: of settlement in Gaul and Liguria d
- Page 119 and 120: their names to the presiding magist
- Page 121 and 122: praetor, except in a supervisory ro
- Page 123 and 124: familiarity with enrolling men, as
- Page 125 and 126: sed occurrebat artimis quantos exer
- Page 127 and 128: probably not a regulated endeavor,
- Page 129 and 130: usually attended the consecration o
- Page 131 and 132: et ab supero mari Senensis. cum uac
- Page 133 and 134: colleges of these priests. In the c
- Page 135 and 136: which one or more men on each commi
- Page 137 and 138: games and sacrifices.In keeping wit
- Page 139 and 140: a limited number of the priests in
- Page 141 and 142: the possible layout of early Roman
- Page 143 and 144: the cattle would have been kept in
- Page 145 and 146: such a small or make-shift altar mi
- Page 147 and 148: and for taking over the duties asso
- Page 149 and 150: BCE.Finally, M. Aemilius Lepidus vo
- Page 151 and 152: this. 143 Some of the reasons why t
- Page 153: magistrate as a pre-formed committe
- Page 157 and 158: A later dialogue elucidates the div
- Page 159 and 160: ETTIOVTES, Tct 5E XOITTCX KQSEXCOUE
- Page 161 and 162: passive element in the act of colon
- Page 163 and 164: the object of control and the arena
- Page 165 and 166: worship as well as continuing their
- Page 167 and 168: destroyed by the Roman praetor, L.
- Page 169 and 170: erstwhile monuments of Fregellae im
- Page 171 and 172: mentions of the Fregellan emissarie
- Page 173 and 174: etween the mixed Sabellic and Latin
- Page 175 and 176: more often in the Eastern Aegean, f
- Page 177 and 178: To summarize, then, the original co
- Page 179 and 180: The Religious Landscape ofPaestumTh
- Page 181 and 182: community. This was very different
- Page 183 and 184: In addition to these politico-relig
- Page 185 and 186: and an inscription found somewhere
- Page 187 and 188: that place, it represented the indi
- Page 189 and 190: the "clear hegemony of the city ove
- Page 191 and 192: Even more so than the example of Fr
- Page 193 and 194: that encompassed the area from the
- Page 195 and 196: proximity to the forum boarium fits
- Page 197 and 198: on the mouth of the Garigliano rive
- Page 199 and 200: although the Soran Hercules was a n
- Page 201 and 202: Italian communities, they also some
- Page 203 and 204: through the actions of one of the c
eligious system at Rome. This suggests that there was no set policy of imposing Romanreligion on the mid-Republican colonies.II.Romans and the Landscape: City, Citizens, and GodsAs seen in chapter 1, the study of landscape in terms of religion and colonization iscurrently a popular topic in modern scholarship. It remains to verify that the importanceof religious spaces in a landscape is not an anachronistic imposition on a study of thecolonies of the period in question. Thus, the following section analyzes how a city wasdefined in the middle Republic and its historiography.The answer to how the Roman elite defined a city and its landscape lies withintheir treatment of cities that surrendered to the people of Rome. Two passages in Livy, inparticular, suggest that the Romans 4 considered a city to include people and theirbelongings as well as the natural and built landscape. Livy 1.38 presents a formula ofsurrender which King Tarquin demanded of the people of Collatia."Deditisne vos populumque Collatinum, urbem, agros, aquam, terminos, delubra,utensilia, divina humanaque omnia, in meam populique Romani dicionem? " Livy1.38.2."Do you surrender into my power and that of the People of Rome yourselves, and thepeople of Collatia, your city, lands, water, boundaries, temples, sacred vessels, allthings divine and human?" [C. Roberts, trans.]3 Examples include Crumley in Ashmore and Knapp (1999), Gargola (1995), Laurence in Wilkins (1996),Sluyter (2002), and Zanker (2000).4 The use of the collective noun "Romans" in the first two sections of this chapter is not intended to indicatethat each person living in Rome can be assumed to have held the same definition of landscape during themiddle Republic. Rather it follows the convention of authors such as Livy or Appian, who sometimesdiscuss the Roman people as a collective. For ease of discussing a general model of what a city wasaccording to the evidence we have from some members of the Roman elite or the historiographers of theRepublican period, the generalization "Romans" will be allowed to stand.146