1. THE GENERAL
TOPOGRAPHY
OF THE ITALIAN
PENINSULA
In the Roman period
“Italy” tended (until
quite a late date) to
mean ONLY the area
south of the wide
valley of the River
Po (in the north)

2. EARLY ITALY (BEFORE ROME’S RISE): WHAT EVIDENCE DO WE HAVE?
LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE 1. The linguistic pattern in the Italian peninsula can tell us which languages were spoken ONLY from about 600 BC when the first written evidence (in the form of inscriptions) begins to appear. 2. Since the first PERMANENT settlement on the site which became Rome belongs to a little after 1000 BC, we can get some sense of what languages may have been spoken in the peninsula only later than that – in fact not much earlier than 600 BC.

3. THE LINGUISTIC GROUPS OF EARLY ITALY ca 600 BC (BUT NOT
NECESSARILY EARLIER)

4. 3. Before going BACK in time to look at what other evidence we have for very early Italy, we might perhaps spend a short time only looking at what peoples those developing a community from soon after 1000 BC on the site of Rome would eventually come into contact with. 4. If the linguistic evidence is anything to go by, then by soon after 600 BC we have a very complex picture of peoples speaking both INDO-EUROPEAN and NON-INDO-EUROPEAN languages.

5. THE GENERAL
LINGUISTIC
PATTERN FROM
ABOUT 600 BC

6. THREE of the INDO-EUROPEAN languages were late arrivals:
Working backwards,
THREE of the INDO-EUROPEAN
languages were late
arrivals:
CELTIC (or GALLIC)
[including LEPONTIC] in the far north -
resulting from significant migrations about 600 BC
GREEK resulting from Greek colonization in the south which began after 700 BC
MESSAPIC (in the south-east) which probably resulted from migration from across the Adriatic

7. But OTHER INDO-EUROPEAN languages seem to be earlier - namely
i) The great swathe of OSCAN-UMBRIAN languages and dialects of central Italy, especially in the higher Apennines.
ii) VENETIC in the far north-east.
iii) LATIN (with its ‘dialect’ FALISCAN) in a very small area on the west coast.
When the people of these regions began to speak these
languages is unknown.
If the languages came with people migrating in large
numbers, there is NO EVIDENCE about WHEN any such
immigrants came (certainly NOT after about 1800 BC).

8. The OTHER Indo-
European languages
appear to be earlier:
The great swathe of OSCO-UMBRIAN
languages and
dialects in central Italy.
VENETIC - in the far north-east.
LATIN (with
FALISCAN) in a
small area in the
west.

9. The THREE
major NON-
INDO-EUROPEAN
languages cause their
own problems.
LIGURIAN (in the far north-west) and
RAETIC (in the
far north) seem to be “survivals” [like Basque] from
a time before the
Indo-European migrations.
Finally there is
ETRUSCAN

10. ETRUSCAN as a language presents
its own unique problems tied up with the question “Who were the
Etruscans?”
It is probably the language of those who had long populated the north-west (below the Apennines) and whose culture evolved, as a result of outside influences, to become “Etruscan”.

12. SUMMARY While showing us the huge diversity of languages spoken in Peninsular Italy from about 600 BC onwards, the linguistic map tells us nothing about the origins of the peoples of Italy as Rome began to rise. And it is important to note (as we will see) that, ARCHAEOLOGICALLY, there is no solid evidence of any mass movement of new peoples into the peninsula after about 1800 BC until the Greeks began founding new communities (“colonies”) in the south after about 700 BC.

13. WRITTEN ACCOUNTS Any hope that surviving literary accounts from the pens of Greek and Roman writers might throw light on very early Italy is shattered by two considerations: 1. They are all VERY LATE - the most detailed belonging to “the Augustan Age” (30 BC – AD 20) or later. 2. Those who produced them, even where they depended on earlier written accounts, had NO SERIOUS INFORMATION available to them and did little more than engage in wild speculation – even when they purported to be describing the population of early Italy.

14. A. There were no Roman writers at all until almost 200 BC and even those Greek writers who began to take an interest in Italy as the Roman state began to attract their attention do not predate the Roman writers by more than 100 years. B. To give two examples only from amongst the Greek writers: a) one of the best is said to have been TIMAEUS OF TAUROMENIUM - a western Greek from eastern Sicily writing in the early 200s BC. He is praised because he is said, unlike other Greek writers, to have collected facts! Where he got them from is anybody’s guess – and nothing suggests they were “facts” anyway.

15. b) And in the Augustan age (27 BC – AD 14) there was the
historian DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS:
He eagerly has waves of Greeks (for which there is NO
EVIDENCE whatsoever) moving westwards to Italy, the
first coming from Arcadia before 1750 BC, the last being
the Trojans moving to Italy under Aeneas soon after
1200 BC (although, of course, Trojans were not ‘Greeks’)
– if it is Dionysius’ aim to show that the Romans too
[allegedly descended from the Trojans] were really Greeks!
[It is worth repeating that there is no evidence of any mass
movement of peoples into Italy between 1800 and 700 BC]
Generally, then, the literary accounts (like the linguistic
map) can tell us little that is reliable about early Italy.

16. It is to the archaeological record that we must turn to get
ARCHAEOLOGY
It is to the archaeological record that we must turn to get
any sense of who the early peoples of Italy were.
THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD FOR EARLY ITALY
Leaving aside the earliest known hunter-gatherers who
lived in the Italian peninsula, the evidence suggests that the
Neolithic Age was well in evidence by 5000 BC.
1. The NEOLITHIC Age (ca 5000 – 2200 BC)
By about 5000 BC there is evidence that immigrants have
come to the peninsula bringing with them
a) knowledge of agriculture; and
b) knowledge of husbandry.

17. More new peoples appear to have arrived in the
With the beginnings of the knowledge of metal working, the Italian peninsula entered “the Copper Age” about 2200 BC.
2. The COPPER Age (ca 2200 – 1800 BC)
More new peoples appear to have arrived in the
peninsula during the Copper Age - the last mass
movement of population [until the Greeks came soon after 700 BC]
arriving by about 1800 BC. And “Copper” transitioned to
“Bronze” as it was understood how to mix tin with copper.
3. The BRONZE Age (ca 1700 – 900 BC)
The “Bronze Age” in Italy saw a high level of cultural
uniformity south of the Apennines for at least seven
centuries - which did not begin to break down completely
until just after 1000 BC.

18. THE ITALIAN BRONZE AGE (1700 – 900 BC)
Characteristics
South of the Po Valley the very high level of cultural uniformity is referred to as “Apennine” (at least until BC) [except in two small area: a) the Grotta Manacorra, and b) the area around Taranto]
The population is sparse.
The largest inhabited places are small villages.
Inhumation (burial) is the norm.
The main economic activity is transhumant pastoralism.
There is no evidence of new immigrants into the peninsula during the entire period.

19. [In the Po Valley the culture was different (as seen in artefacts, especially pottery) and is referred to as “Terramara”; where the two cultures met there is a small area of mixed culture known as “Pianello”] THE PO VALLEY
The two areas
(south of the
Apennines)
where the culture
of the BRONZE
AGE was not
uniform were the
area of the Grotta
Manacorra and
that around
Taranto

20. THE LATE BRONZE AGE (1200 – 900 BC)
1. After at least 500 years (1700 – 1200 BC) of cultural uniformity south of the Apennines, we find, in the Late Bronze Age (1200 – 900 BC) changes are occurring which suggest that a slow transition is under way. 2. This period heralds the coming IRON AGE. 3. a) The number of inhabited sites increases noticeably. b) Cremation begins to replace inhumation. c) Cultural variants increase, especially the closer we get to 900 BC. 4. BUT (again) there is NO EVIDENCE of any newcomers in significant numbers.

21. THE EARLY IRON AGE (900 BC onwards)
By the time iron is being more generally used (from at least 900 BC), in cultural terms the uniformity of the Bronze Age has gone and archaeologists distinguish six distinct cultural regions.
a) In three of them INHUMATION (burial) predominates.
b) In three of them CREMATION predominates.
INHUMING (BURYING) CULTURES
i) “FOSSA” culture in southern Campania and in Calabria.
ii) “APULIAN” culture in Apulia (Puglia) [in the far south east].
iii) “PICENE” (or “ADRIATIC”) culture in the Marche,
Abruzzi, and Molise (with some evidence of a warrior
society)
[All three cultures appear to have evolved from the culture of the Bronze Age, with
some modest influences from the other side of the Adriatic in two of the three cases]

22. INHUMING
CULTURES
PICENE (ADRIATIC)
culture in the Marche,
Abruzzi, Molise
APULIAN culture in
Apulia (Puglia)
FOSSA culture in
Calabria and parts of
Campania

23. THE THREE CREMATING CULTURES
i) “GOLASECCA” culture in Lombardy and Piedmont
(with some evidence of influence from Hallstatt Culture
beyond the Alps).
ii) “ESTE” (or “ATESTINE”) culture in the north-east of
the Po Valley.
iii) “VILLANOVAN” [by far the most advanced] in
Emiglia Romana and, especially, in Tuscany and
Lazio.
Since in southern Lazio (south of the River Tiber),
in ancient LATIUM there was a variation, this
more southerly region of “Villanovan culture” is
sometimes said to display “LATIAL” culture.

24. culture in the north-east Po Valley
CREMATING
CULTURES
ESTE
GOLASECCA
culture in Lombardy
and Piedmont
GOLASECCA
ESTE (or ATESTINE)
culture in the north-east
Po Valley
VILLANOVAN
VILLANOVAN
culture in Emilia Romana
and in Tuscany and
Lazio

25. VILLANOVAN CULTURE
Two very specific characteristics of the region where Villanovan culture developed from about 900 BC onwards were: 1. a) Village settlements became GROUPED – that is the villages, through a process of coalescence, came together to form a more obvious, much larger ‘nuclear’ settlement; but, b) surprisingly, there is often a lack of continuity in the sites of Villanovan settlements north of the Tiber compared with the Bronze Age settlements of the area. 2. Advanced metal working soon became more and more common, the area being very rich in ores (especially iron). Clearly there was increasing specialization too, accompanied by greater stratification of society.

26. 1. Eventually (soon after 700 BC) in the Villanovan area north of the River Tiber a) settlements go through an process of extreme and rapid “orientalization” as a result of contacts from outside the Italian Peninsula, especially with cultures much farther to the East; b) dominant aristocratic groups establish their control; c) before the late 600s BC true cities have developed; and d) the culture has become ETRUSCAN. 2. The Villanovan area south of the River Tiber, with its slightly different “Latial” culture, remains about 100 years behind. It does eventually see similar changes - however without “Etruscanization”. 3. An emerging ROME, on the Tiber itself, is in many ways between the two.

27. VILLANOVAN CREMATION PRACTICES
Before we turn to the site where ROME developed, let us
glance at what made “Villanovan” cremation practices
distinct - and it is from cemeteries that most of our
knowledge about Villanovan life comes.
Characteristics
Both sexes seem to have been treated equally in terms of burial.
With both males and females grave goods reflecting their sex are found:
a) males have weapons, razors, fibulae (pins);
b) females have rings, bracelets, fibulae, spindle
whorls, needles.

28. c) the cremated remains are found in cinerary urns placed in pit graves lined with stone; d) sometimes the grave-goods are outside the urns, sometimes in the urns – especially when they are in miniature form; e) the urns themselves are bi-conical and topped with either a bowl or a helmet.

29. f) In the southern area, especially in ancient LATIUM (south of the Tiber) [and this is what helps define “LATIAL” culture as a variant of VILLANOVAN], the urns in which the cremated remains are deposited are in the shape of HUTS, without doubt of the sort the living dwelt in.

30. Sometimes the ‘hut-urn’
was buried, along with other grave objects (often
miniatures), in a larger
urn sunk into the ground

31. These hut-urns (combined occasionally with surviving post-holes) have made it possible to gain some impression of the sorts of dwellings occupied by those responsible for Villanovan culture.

32. ANCIENT LATIUM AND NEIGHBOURING REGIONS
SITES IN
WESTERN
CENTRAL ITALY (OUTSIDE
ETRURIA)
WHERE
THERE
SEEM TO
HAVE
BEEN
IRON-AGE
COMMUNITIES
IN THE 700S AND 600s BC
ROME