New Approaches to the Study of Village Sites in the Territory of Venosa in the Classical and Hellenistic Periods

8/18/2019 New Approaches to the Study of Village Sites in the Territory of Venosa in the Classical and Hellenistic Periods

1/29

NEW APPROACHES TO THE STUDYOF VILLAGE SITES IN THE TERRITORY

OF VENOSA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC PERIODS

J P * · M -L M **G C *** · A C ***

A H * · L L J G S *** · T D. S ***

The territory of Venosa (Potenza - Italy), ancientVenusia (291 BC), is one of the best investigat-ed Roman colonial territories in Italy. During more than a decade of intensive landscape ar-chaeological research conducted in the context of the Forma Italiaeproject an area of seven hun-dred square kilometres has been investigated and more than two thousand archaeological sitesdating from Prehistory to the Middle Ages have been mapped. This enormous quantity of datais now being used to protect and promote the cultural heritage of this area, and as a crucial ac-ademic instrument for further archaeological and historical research. Nonetheless, importanthistorical questions remain to be scrutinized further. Especially in the light of recently develop-ing research questions and improved ceramic chronologies, various facets of this ancient colo-nial landscape deserve detailed analysis. In the context of the ‘Landscapes of Early Roman Col-onization project’ new eld research has been conducted in the Venosa area, focusing on early

colonial settlement organization and in particular on the role of nucleated rural sites within it.In this paper the outlines of this new research project will be presented as well as the results fromone key site: the nucleated settlement site of Masseria Allamprese.

Irst systematic study of the territory of the Latin colony ofVenusia, established

in 291 BC, started in 1989, and was conducted in the context of the Forma Italiaeproject. The goal of the A er Venusinusproject was to map all archaeological remainswithin the ancient territory of the colony, which is situated in the modern day Melfesedistrict, in-between the Ofanto valley and the slopes of Mount Vulture. During morethan a decade of intensive research the project was able to systematically cover ve

* Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome; [email protected].

** Università degli Studi di Foggia.*** Leiden University.

On this project see S 2009, pp. 47-59.The idea of an archaeological map of Italy dates back to 1889. Obviously, the methodology of thisproject changed over the years. Especially from the1990s onwards, with the advent of information tech-

nology and satellite positioning systems ( ) a newphase of archaeological mapping began and the For-ma Italiae project started to develop a Territorial In-formation System for Archaeology in Italy (cf.M , S 1996, pp. 281-297).

This project was a joint effort of the Universi-ty of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ and the University of Fog-gia. The project was coordinated by Paolo Som-mella and Maria Luisa Marchi.

Cf. B 1982, pp. 152-160.


2/29

32 et alii

1:25.000 sheets of the region (F . 1). These results have now all been publishethree volumes of the Forma Italiaeseries.

The large amount of data collected during the A er Venusinussurvey project offers aninvaluable insight in the long occupation history of this important territory which iscurrently experiencing drastic landscape changes. At the same time it constitutes animportant source of information for broader research questions such as for exampleRoman demography and economy as well as for understanding pre-Roman forms of societal organization in the region. Most relevant in the context of this paper, is that thedata collected by the Sapienza-Foggia research team offers a unique insight in the char-

acter and impact of Mid-Republican Roman colonization. Nonetheless, our under-standing of especially the earliest colonial phase remains incomplete. One of the maindifficulties is the relatively small number of recognized colonial dwellings dated

M , S 1996; S 2000;M 2010a.

From the 1990s onwards large scale infrastruc-tural works (such as the Fiat factory on the Melfeseplain, the Bradanica road, and windmill farms) andchanging rural regimes (esp. the planting of vine- yards for the production of the famous Aglianicowine) drastically changed large parts of the Venosa

territory and destroyed most of the archaeologywith it. The A er Venusinusproject, however, wasable to record large part of the archaeological land-scape before its destruction. The data has now beenused to create an archaeological risk map of thearea (cf. A 2001, pp. 77-86).

On this see M 2014.

F . 1. Areas surveyed by the A er Venusinusteam (1989-2000).The raster base of the image is created from the 10-m-resolution for the Italian territory

named /01, (cf. T et alii 2007; T et alii 2012).


3/29

securely to the period of colonization (i.e. the third century BC). This problem is byno means specic to the territory ofVenusia, since the problem of the missing earlycolonial sites is attested in all investigated Latin colonies of the Mid-Republican period.

Although several explanations for the missing site problem have been put forward re-cently, there is now a clear need to test the validity of these various hypotheses in theeld. To this aim, and to enhance our understanding of this crucial moment in Romanand imperial history in general, in 2012 a new large-scale and interdisciplinary researchproject was started, entitled ‘Landscapes of Early Roman colonization’ (lerc ). One of the key themes this project investigates is the role of non-urban nucleated settlementsin early Roman territorial expansion. With more than 10 nucleated sites dating to theHellenistic and Republican periods, the A er Venusinusdata-set is one of the richest avail-able for central-southern Italy. Recognizing the potential and value of further in-depthstudy of these sites, in 2013 a collaborative project among the University of Leiden, theUniversity of Foggia, the Royal Netherlands Institute of Rome and theSoprintendenza per i Beni Archeolo ici della Basilicatawas initiated, thus combining the diverse knowhowof these research institutes.

In order to unravel the vicissitudes of the often neglected settlement realities of vil-lages or rural nucleated sites, a targeted multi-disciplinary research strategy has beendeveloped aimed at 1) collecting new, high resolution data from a sample of such sites by combining intensive eld survey techniques with geophysical and aerial prospection,and 2) a detailed (re)study of the collected Black Gloss pottery on those sites, using theimproved ceramic chronologies now available for this region. In this paper we presentthe rst results that this interdisciplinary research project has provided for one key-sitein the area: Allamprese (Serra Tesoro). Because the new research presented here is based strongly on the results from the A er Venusinusproject, and allows interesting methodological comparisons too, we start with describing the sampling strategy that

was adopted in the A er Venusinusproject, which also resulted in the discovery of the Allamprese village site.

R Ag er Ve nu sin us A

Being part of the larger Forma Italiae project, one of the most important aims of the A er Venusinusproject was to systematically and accurately map all archaeologicaltraces on maps of the area. To that aim, a large scale eld survey of the area wascombined with detailed bibliographic studies and with systematic analysis of aerialphotographs. All accessible elds in the research area were surveyed by eld walkers

When the available historical informationavailable on the number of settlers is confrontedwith the collected settlement evidence a notablediscrepancy becomes apparent (cf. P 2008,pp. 336-342; P 2013).

E.g. R 1981; C 1999; P2008; R 2008; P 2013.

Also S et alii in press.See http://landscapesofearlyromancoloniza-

tion.com.Cf. M 2010a, pp. 25-28. However, in the

eld Regional Technical Maps were used (Carta Tec-

nica Re ionale, ) which have a better scale of 1:10.000 or 1:5000. For some towns, but not all, digi-tal aero-photogrammetric maps were used.

At the time, Italian landscape archaeology wasin a very dynamic period, characterized above all byintense discussions on eld methodology and carto-graphic conventions (cf. P , P , W 1978,pp. 389-394; B 1994; T 1996;Q , Q G 2001, p. 45; C ,C , C 2007, pp. 13-25; M2007). The A er Venusinussurvey, although part of the tradition of the Forma Italiae project, experi-


4/29

34 et alii

divided in teams of 3 or 5 persons with 5 to 10 meters spacing between walkers. Sinccereal cultivation predominates in the Venosa area, the ideal period for eld survey wasfrom the end of the summer until late autumn, when the elds had been harvested andploughed, thus offering the best visibility. However, not all elds offered good visibilitycircumstances during this period. This was in particular true for olive and vineyardswhich were covered often with vegetation in this season. The ideal season for those ar-eas turned out to be winter and spring. As a general rule, therefore, elds with bad vis-ibility during the summer-autumn survey campaigns were revisited during the winter-spring season.

All notable artefact scatters were recorded and mapped accurately on 1:10.000 topo-graphic maps of the area. However, the large elds which characterize the area madeprecise orientation and localization rather difficult. To overcome these difficulties, theproject was one of the rst in Italian archaeology to adopt, from 1989 onwards, the use-of a . At rst 102 receivers were used that took approximately two hours to pla single location. For time concerns, in this phase the was used only to create a reliable regional measurement system, which could be precisely integrated with the coordinate system. Later on, new and much more efficient receivers became available (Trimble - Pathnder Pro ), which allowed the recording of all sites and site cotours by means of measurements. The usage of a universal coordinate systems andthe very precise localization of archaeological sites made it possible to integrate theeld data with other data sources, such as ancient cartography, geomorphologicalmaps, etc. in a .

Site classi cation

As regards the interpretation as ‘sites’ of different types of surface scatters, in the A er Venusinus project scatters were classied according to quantitative parameters such assize and density, as well as on the basis of qualitative criteria, such as the compositionof the material found in these scatters (e.g. presence of construction materials, deco-rative elements, evidence for production etc.). With regard to site sizes, only the areaswith the greatest concentration of material were recorded (a 5 shards per sq. m. thresh-old was used for historical and proto-historical periods). To systematize the interpreta-tion of the eld survey data, the A er Venusinusproject adopted the following classi-cation system. The smallest sites with artefact scatters of less than 200 sq. m.,containing only very poor material culture, were classied as ‘rural structure’, which inRoman historical terminology might correspond to the settlement realities known ascasae, tu uria orvillulae. Scatters in-between 200 and 1000 sq. m., or those smaller withclear evidence for agricultural activity were classied as ‘farms’. Larger sites were clasied as ‘villas’ or ‘villages’ using a combination of site size (over 1000 sq. m.) an

mented and applied many of these new insights in itsresearch design, such as the systematic coverage of asample area, the recording of off-site scatters and theusage of new digital and satellite technologies (see below). For the Venosa region, this intensivemethodology resulted in a 90% increase of informa-tion about the settlement history of this territory.

General visibility conditions, based mostly on

cultivation practices, have been recorded and pub-lished in visibility maps (see M , S1996, p. 107).

Cf. A 1992, pp. 747-776.L ., , 13; , 26; , 34; , 53, 8; P Nat.

Hist ., , 14; V ., Ecl., , 69; C ., R. R., ,15, 1; F , s.v.tu urium.

C ., Ad Att., , 9, 3; , 13, 2; , 27; , 2; A ., Met ., , 21.


5/29

chronological criteria. The term ‘villa’ was only applied to sites of the Roman periodwith high quality materials (such as marble, mosaics etc.). This systematic researchstrategy resulted in the detection of over 2000 archaeological sites, including the Allamprese village site, which is central to this paper.

The Allamprese villa e site in the Ager VenusinussurveyIn the 1990s the site was localized at c. 7.5 km to the south-west of Venosa, in the terri-tory of the modern communality of Ginestra (F . 2), on a ridge (alt. c. 550 m.) meas-uring approximately 40 hectares. On that distinctive landscape unit, the A er Venusinussurvey team mapped a dense cluster of small sites gravitating around one large and verydense scatter of ceramics and building material of about 3500 sq. m. (F . 3). In total 13separate sites were identied (F . 7. Sites 469-508), the majority of which measured be-tween 50 and 200 sq. m. and contained predominantely material dating to the Late Clas-sical - Early Hellenistic periods (sites 497-500 and 506 - 508). A few of these scatters, lo-cated at the centre of the hill-top plateau, however, also contained more recent material

A few smaller ones of comparable chronology have been classied as tombs (based also on the nd-ings of bones and ashes: sites 496, 504-505).

F . 2. Location of the Allamprese site. In grey the location of the modern towns in the area.


6/29

36 et alii

of Republican and Imperial date (sites 501 - 503). The complex of closely neighbourartefact scatters was at the time classied in its entirety as a pre-Roman village, whichwas abandoned in the early colonial period. After a break of several generations, in theLate Republican period, the area would have been resettled on a more reduced scale.The character of this later settlement would have been a villa that continued to existwell into the Imperial era.

N V lerc

Although it is clear that the settlement organization of the Venosa territory changedradically in the course of the Roman Republican period, important gaps remain in ourunderstanding of the precise pace and nature of these developments. This is particu-

One of which was interpreted as a burial (site 503).

M 2010a, pp. 128-134 and p. 252 adds thatmost probably the village was founded by the Sam-

nites and that it pertained to a network of similarvillages in the region. On the supposed abandon-ment of the Allamprese village in Mid-Republicantimes see M 2010a, p. 255.

F . 3. Sites mapped by the A er Venusinusteam plottedon an aerial image of 1980 (courtesy of theiccd Rome).


7/29

larly true for the transformation process of the Archaic-Classical village landscape intoa rural territory characterized by a dense network of regularly spaced farms in the Ro-man period. Recent studies have in fact argued that villages might have survived longerthan is often assumed, and may have played a crucial role in the early Roman colonialsettlement organization. In order to test this hypothesis thelerc research group re-analysed all accessible nucleated sites of the A er Venusinusdata-set with a chronologyin-between the Late-Classical and Hellenistic periods, using a multidisciplinary ap-proach.

Data collection and samplin strate y

The research focused on retrieving high resolution data that permits a better under-standing of the precise chronology and the changing morphology and organization of nucleated settlements in the late-fourth to second centuries BC. For the region andtime-period under consideration, the most important type of material culture which al-lows for the aspired chronological resolution and which is present in signicant quan-tities on the selected sites is Black Gloss ( ) pottery. We therefore decided, in the lightof the available excellent previous survey data on the extension and general characterof the site, and our specic chronology-oriented research question, to only collect Black Gloss pottery during the resurvey of the site. Focusing on one class of material cultureto reconstruct settlement dynamics has of course its obvious methodological pitfalls.On the other hand, these should probably not be exaggerated as recent research shows.Notably, Helga Di Giuseppe has argued, based on a large number of case-studies, thatthe settlement dynamics reconstructed from pottery, if corrected for general con-sumption trends, do not produce signicantly different patterns than those studieswhich include coarse wares and other types of pottery.

In light of these considerations, and the very specic research question in mind, therst phase of thelerc research aimed at a systematic collection and analysis of pot-tery from the selected nucleated sites. In order to make the results of such a diagnosticsampling strategy comparable with the regular transect survey strategy employed inthe other sample areas of thelerc project, elds were rst surveyed using a systemat-ic line walking strategy with 10 meters intervals between eld walkers. High densityartefact scatters were recorded using a 5 shard per sq. m. threshold to establish contours.This is comparable also to the method used by the A er Venusinusteam, and thus allowsfor a reliable comparison between site-contour data collected by the different teams indifferent years. Conversely, only shards were collected from the eld and analysed.The precise position of every single shard was recorded using a Topcon in or-der to be able to reconstruct the spatial distribution of collected shards. In a secondphase all elds were resurveyed in a more random manner, with the aim to collect as

On this possibility for Venosa see T1991, p. 22. In general on the presence and role of vil-lages in colonial territories see P 2008; S 2009, pp. 123-170.

The alternative would be Greco-Italian Am-phorae which have been retro-dated recently (cf.O 2004). However, both the difficult recog-nizability in the eld (they are difficult to distinguishin the eld by non-experts) and the more coarse

chronological resolution, make this class of ceram-ics less suitable for this type of research. The sameis of course true for coarse ware pottery.

D G 2012, esp. pp. 11-12.This results in a theoretical 20% coverage of

the investigated area. The survey team was com-posed by mostly experienced eld walkers.

Cf. M , S 1996, p. 134.


8/29

38 et alii

many shards as possible. The locations of these shards were also recorded using a, but they were administered separately.

Aerial remote sensin and eophysical prospection

To complement the chronological information extracted from the pottery distribu-tion patterns, the selected nucleated sites have been subjected to a combination of re-mote sensing techniques. The specic geo-pedeological properties of the Venosa terri-tory, consisting predominantely of compact layers of pebbles, embedded in clay orsandstone, are not favourable to the easy detection of sub-surface structures. The thintop-soil in combination with the poor soil permeability seriously hamper any attemptat remote sensing prospection. Also the fact that in the Hellenistic period the bedrock pebble material was used for the foundation of walls and of roads, makes it very hardto distinguish those through remote sensing techniques. In fact, a small scale experi-ment with vertical magnetic gradiometer (Bartington G601 - Fluxgate Gradiometer)survey on two nucleated sites, yielded only very limited results. Only after intensiveprocessing of the geophysical prospection data, some features could be detected. Theseremain, however, very difficult to interpret as is shown in the results section below.

More valuable results were acquired from the study of old and recent aerial images. Also in this case, the detection of sub-surface features in the form of crop and soil markonly had limited success. But the detailed 3 terrain models which could be generatedfrom this data allowed us to reconstruct the changing morphology of the hill-topplateaus on which most of the nucleated sites are located, over the last 70 years. Thiscontributed to our understanding and interpretation of the archaeological surfacerecord.

For the region fairly good historical images are available in the archives of theIstitu-to Centrale per il Catalo o e la Documentazione(iccd ) in Rome and of theIstituto Geo ra co Militare ( ) in Florence, dating back to 1953. Moreover, good satellite data of the region is now freely available on the web (GoogleEarth), for 2002 onwards. The histori-cal photographs have been studied in autoptic and stereographic / photogrammetricmode. Research has been carried out on the original printed version of photographsand in a digital environment, where specic chromatic gamma variations and hitogram renements could be modied or compared accurately and geometric shapesor recognized features could be measured in real world units. In order to enhance theground resolution of images and to be able to generate accurate 3 models we also useda Phantom 1 drone. This simple multirotor platform was equipped with a 1MegaPixel compact camera accurately synchronized with an on-board logger incontinuous recording mode. Both the historical and sets of images have bee

It is worth underlining that, for each eld sur-vey unit, the visibility conditions of the surface atthe time of coverage have been recorded, thus al-lowing for a reliable correction (if necessary) of artefact densities and site recovery rates.

For the methodological difficulties of aerial ar-chaeology in the area, cf. C , P ,S forthcoming.

Recent excavations at the nearby Casalini siteclearly show how house foundations are built fromthe pebble material found in the bedrock. Usually

those pebbles are larger than those present in the bedrock. The excavation is currently in the phase of publication (cf. G 2014).

I.e. Casalini and Allamprese. The geophysicalmapping of the sites was conducted by the Labora-tory of Geophysical - Satellite Remote Sensing & Archaeo-Environment Institute for MediterraneanStudies, under the direction of Apostolos Sarris andGianluca Cantoro (cf. S , C 2013).

Cf. F 1993, p. 55.F , G 1991, p. 11.


9/29

processed with photogrammetric software to create accurate elevation models and orthophotos.

Black Gloss pottery analysis: towards a new chronolo ical framework

Very little research has been done on Black Gloss ( ) pottery production and con-sumption patterns in the Melfese area. As a consequence, archaeologists working inthis region inevitably have relied on general reference studies such as Morel’sCéramiquecampanienne: les formes, despite the fact that several scholars have recently exposed theproblems and limits of this study for south-Italian productions. These studies argueconvincingly that regional chronologies which are based on solid stratigraphic dataneed to be developed. Regrettably, for the Melfese region such a regional chronologydoes not yet exist. However, for the wider region, various excellent new studies have been published that improve our understanding of the chronology and distribution of south-Italian pottery considerably. To illustrate the effect these new studies have onour understanding of chronologies, F . 4 provides the variations in chronolo-gies proposed by those studies for one of the most recurrent vessels found, namelythe skyphos(F . 5). The graphs illustrate clearly that marked differences exist in theproposed chronologies of the variousskyphostypes.

The main conclusion that can be drawn from this preliminary comparative exerciseis that forms with comparable morphological characteristics seem to have circulat-ed for signicant longer time periods than suggested by Morel’s seminal study. Where-as especially the Apulian stratigraphic contexts suggest that a number of types startedto be used much earlier than previously presumed, the well-dated chronologies of Tri-carico attest on the contrary to the occurrence of many types in later chronologicalcontexts. The down side of these prolonged chronologies is of course that the dating

Where ground control points were not avail-able or not sufficiently accurate, the photographswere geo-referenced with AutoGR-Toolkit , a freelydistributed tool which allows for automatic imagematching and geo-referencing (C 2012) based on algorithms (L 1999).

A notable recent study is D G 2012.M 1981. On the importance and prob-

lems of as fossil guide for surveys see for exam-ple F 2013, p. 187.

E.g. L 1994, pp. 239-241; H 1996,p. 337; Y 2001, p. 139. In general on themethod and problems with Morel’s approach seeR 2007, pp. 40-65 and D G 2012, pp. 1-8.The problem is most salient for the 3 to 1 centu-ry BC. For long, the Pyrrhic War and the defeat of Tarentum were considered to have reduced Black Gloss production in the region to a minimum andto have started an era of abandonment and strong economic decline. Since the dating of site destruc-tion layers or abandonment phases happened al-most exclusively on chronologies, the historicalimage of decline was reinforced by way of this cir-cular interpretation process (cf. R 2013).

For example, Douwe Yntema (Y 2001)proposed a new chronology based on stratiedand well dated archaeological layers at Valesio(Brindisi - Apulia); Olivier de Cazanove (DC 2008) reanalyzed the data from Tri-carico (inland Basilicata), using C14 for establishing the absolute chronology of the archaeological lay-ers. Other fundamental work in the region are:P 1992 on Gravina di Puglia; L 1994 onTaranto; S , S 2010, pp. 243-280 on San Fe-

lice and L C et alii 2011, pp. 143-270 onMetaponto. Although not about the region, thestudy of R 1997 on the Hellenistic potteryof Athens remains fundamental. For a synthetic dis-cussion of the impact these new studies have on re-gional chronologies see D G 2012, pp.14, 122-123, g. 113.

Skyphoiare the most frequent forms foundin thelerc data-set (ca. one quarter of the entiredata set).

See Y 1997 and Y 2014, p. 169, forthe positive impact these new chronologies haveon our understanding of the so-called dark periods(5th and 3 centuries BC).


10/29

40 et alii

precision of a specic form decreases and as a consequence also the chronological resolution one can aspire to attain.

F . 4. Chronologies ofskyphostypes as proposed by different scholars.

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981

Lanza Ca et al. 2011

Lippolis 1994

De Cazanove 2008

Yntema 2001

Skyphoi with solid tronco-conical body, torus base (‘A c’ A type)

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981


Skyphoi with S shaped body, projec ng torus base (‘A c’ A /‘Apulian’ type)

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981


De Cazanove 2008

Yntema 2001

Prag 1992

Skyphoi with S shaped body, in-turned torus base (‘A c’ A /‘Apulian’ type)

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981

Rotro ff 1997

De Cazanove 2008

Skyphoi with S shaped body, narrow torus base, thick bo om (‘A c’ A)

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981


Lippolis 1994

De Cazanove 2008

Yntema 2001

Prag 1992

Skyphoi with ovoid body, ared base (‘Corinthian’ type)

250 300 350 400 450 500


De Cazanove 2008

Skyphoi with ‘tulipan’ body, ared thick base (‘Corinthian’ type)

250 300 350 400 450 500

Morel 1981

Lippolis 1994

Skyphoi with S shaped body, solid torus base (‘A c’ A /‘Apulian’ type)


11/29

Nevertheless, within these prolonged chronologies there are periods of signicantlyincreased consumption. Also, it is clear that within the larger Apulian-Basilicata regiondifferent trajectories of pottery distribution occur, and that for example the early pres-

F . 5. Drawings of variousskyphostypes found during thelerc surveys.


12/29

42 et alii

ence of a specic form in Taranto does not necessarily indicate the same chronologyfor this form in the inlands of Basilicata. In order to take account of these and other factors we developed two correlated dating systems. The rst consists of an expert evalu-ation of the most likely chronology of a given shard by considering four criteria: 1) morphologic similarity between forms; 2) distance between nd locations; 3) number ofcontexts a specic form appears in; and 4) the method used to date a specic form.

To give an example: in our data-set we have 5 fragments of bowls with thickened rimand a tronco-conical body with a diameter between 16 and 22 cm (F . 6).

The form is comparable to Morel’s type 2955a1 (from Cosa, Tuscany) which he dated to 190/180-140 BC. However, similarly shaped forms have also been found at Tricarco, which in that case have been dated stratigraphically to the middle of the third cen-

tury BC. In morphological terms the closest parallel comes from Valesio in Apulia. Ithat case the excavated context suggests a late 3 -early 2 century BC date. FinallBotromagno, Gravina di Puglia, similar forms have been found in stratigraphic contextsdating to the entire 3 century BC. The totality of found parallels thus suggests a maimum chronological range of two centuries: 3 to mid 2 centuries BC. Yet, takingto account the above mentioned four criteria, a more likely date range for this shardseems to be: middle of the 3 -early 2 centuries BC (suggestedlerc chronology), thusnarrowing down the range with a century.

In order to account for the possibility that the particular pot may have been producedearlier, as seems to be suggested by fragile evidence from the Gravina di Puglia exca-vations, we added to our analysis an unequally distributed period value dating method.

This method consists of a numerical assessment of the probability that a shard occurredin a specic period, considering again the four above mentioned criteria. For each

D C 2008, similar to n. 524, p. 594with more rounded prole (from Tricarico, Basili-cata, «bols à bord épaissi», ref. to Morel’s 2978 se-ries, Lamboglia’s 30 form, Kirsopp Lake’s 17 typefrom Minturnae, Lazio, middle of the 3 centuryBC).

Y 2001, n. 268, p. 166 (from Valesio, Apulia, K21 type «deep bowls with slightly thick-ened rim»).

P 1992, n. 801, p. 291 («at-rimmed or lip-less bowls», found in layer dating to Gravina , 4th- 3 century BC and Gravina , middle and late 3century BC).

This method differs slightly from the weight-ed average method used by for example by DG 2012 (on the method see pp. 11-12), as it di-vides period values unevenly, taking four criteria in-to consideration.

F . 6. Fragment of bowl with thickened rimand tronco-conical body from the Venosa area.


13/29

criterion a value of 1 to 3 has been assigned for each 25 year period within the totalchronological range of a specic form.

Applied criteria

Morphology 3 = close morphological parallel; 1= least convincing matchDistance 3 = parallels are found close-by (< 100km); 1= over 300 kmOccurrence 3 = three or more parallels suggest this date; 1= one parallel suggests this dateQuality 3 = from well dated stratigraphic context; 1= not dated stratigraphically

and/or radiocarbon date Average Average per period of the different gradesPeriod value Correction of average in order that the total is always 1 (shard). To this aim

the average values have each been divided by the total sum of averages.

In the above described example such an assessment would result in the following values:

Period 300-275 BC 275-250 BC 250-225 BC 225-200 BC 200-175 BC 175-150 BMorphology 2 2 2 3 3 2Distance 3 3 3 2 2 1Occurrence 1 1 2 3 3 2Quality 2 2 3 3 3 1 Average 2 2 2,5 2,75 2,75 1,5Period value 0,148 0,148 0,185 0,203 0,203 0,111

We realize that this dating method is experimental and might not convince everyone.Therefore, in our analysis we have used different dating strategies: those based onMorel’s chronologies, those based on the correctedlerc chronologies, and nallythose that have been based on the unequally distributed period value dating method (cf. below).

P AThe Masseria Allamprese site was investigated in two campaigns organized in October2013 and 2014. In total an area of 30 hectares has been resurveyed, thus covering mostof the area identied by the A er Venusinusteam as pertaining to the nucleated settle-ment. Altogether 14 nuclei have been mapped with shard densities over 5 per sq. m.

In these two cases we have used the weightedaverage method of D G 2012, pp. 11-12, toreconstruct trends.

According to the owner of the eld, the area isalso known as Masseria Pallarone, after an oldMasseria with a thatched roof that once controlledthe area.

The north-eastern and less densely settled partof the ridge was not resurveyed as visibility circum-stances were not optimal. In that area the A er Venusinus team identied four small sites (i.e. sites 503, 504, 506 and 507).


14/29

44 et alii

Those recognized on the at ridge-top correspond reasonably well with the ones doc-umented by the A er Venusinusteam. The large nucleus of the settlement, in terms of its size and location, changed little in the more than two decades in-between the twosurveys. The same goes for the content of the assemblage which was still character-ized by large numbers of tiles,amphorae, coarse and ne wares including Black Gloss,Italian and AfricanSi illata. The smaller nuclei, on the other hand, proved to be less stat-ic as their positions seemed to have changed over the years. Interestingly, they movedmostly in a western direction for about 15 to 100 meters. Since the orientation of thisdisplacement corresponds with the ploughing direction, this difference is likely caused by this agricultural practice, although we cannot exclude that minor differences are theresult of georeferencing the A er Venusinusdata or of different mapping procedures. Ar-

guably, the most signicant deviancy from the A er Venusinussite map was recorded onthe south-eastern hill slope. While the A er Venusinusteam did not record sites in thisarea, our survey mapped a total of 3 small, but very dense ceramic scatters, mostly com-posed of building material and a large amount of ceramic fragments. Since these ndconcentrations are likely the result of slope wash processes (cf. below) these ndings donot alter the general understanding of this settlement reality signicantly (F . 7).

As we have outlined above, our research focused on the collection and precise record-ing of Black Gloss pottery. Overall, we were able to collect and map 449 Black Glospottery shards spread out over most of the survey area, resulting in an overall density

A er Venusinusteam: 0.35 ha;lerc team: 0. 29 ha.

F . 7. Comparison between A er Venusinusandlerc sites.The black lines indicate thelerc survey areas.


15/29

of 15 shards per hectare (F . 8). The distribution pattern of the pottery clearly in-dicates two distinct areas of high pottery concentration, of which the north-easterncluster is signicantly larger and denser. As we will discuss in more detail below, ero-sion processes are likely responsible for the concentrations on the steeper hill slopesand lower areas. Most likely the core of the settlement concentrated on the hill-topplateau, around the modern outbuilding, and covered an area of about 3 hectares. Thesouth-western cluster is considerably smaller, but the number of shards is still notablyhigher than what is usually found on isolated farms of this period, and thus suggest aclustering of activity also in this area. The overall pattern thus matches rather well theinterpretation of the A er Venusinusteam that we are dealing with a nucleated settle-

ment of considerable size which consisted of several settlement cores around whichisolated dwellings and / or graves gravitate.

Understandin the settlement landscape

Obviously, shard density patterns do not correspond directly to buried archaeology orto ancient settlement realties. As is well known, artefact assemblages are shaped by all

Small isolated farm sites produce on averageless than 3 shards (cf. site catalogue in M ,S 1996).

For a recent excavated example in the region

of such a multiple core nucleated settlement seeG 2014. In an area of 0.1 hectares theexcavation revealed the presence of 5 separate buildings.

F . 8. Density map of shards found on the Allamprese site. For the interpolation a kernelmethod was used with a search radius of 30 m. The densities represent Percent Volume

Contours, which is a method to display the % of a cumulative distribution.


16/29

46 et alii

kinds of erosion processes caused among other things by the natural properties of thelandscape and by human agricultural activities. The impact of these factors on scatterformation can be understood effectively through aerial photography analysis. For ex-ample, the micro-relief of the Allamprese hill could be reconstructed by combining historical images and new high resolution drone images processed with photogrammet-ric software. The thus created terrain model served as the basis to analyse erosionprocesses in a environment.

The historical images provide also important information on landscape transforma-tions in this area over the last 60 years (F . 9). By analysing the eld boundaries acro

time one can clearly see how the need for arable land has led farmers to push the edgesof elds tight against wooded areas or how geological depressions have been lled inorder to create more gentle slopes. Moreover, the images also provide important cluesfor understanding the morphology and location of identied shard scatters. For in-stance, the study of the 1980 aerial photographs shows there is a clear correlation be-tween erosion gullies, visible as dark bands on the southern slope, and the recorded con-tour lines of ceramic scatters (F . 10). Likewise, the abrupt ending of the site halo tthe north is explained by a terrace wall which blocked the down-hill erosion of archae-ological material. The terrace wall was removed somewhere after 2002 and now only a

Cf. the various contributions in F , P 2000.

F . 9. Sequence of historical photographs: 1953 (upper left), 1974 (upper right),1980 (lower left), 2014 (lower right). Courtesy of theiccd Rome.


17/29

dark coloured band remains visible on aerial images. These examples show how com-plex and stratied a landscape of this kind can be, and at the same time, reveal how linesor alignments in aerial photographs can easily be misinterpreted if not approached ina systematic and comparative way using the critical integration of different sources of information.

Notwithstanding the recent dynamic history of the Allamprese site it was possibleto detect several interesting crop and soil marks which seem to be unrelated to recentagricultural activities (F . 11). Most signicantly, faint traces of an orthogonal eld

system could still be identied. The grid has an almost exact north-south orientation(-3.3 Est) and a c. 40 meter spacing between the horizontal lines and c. 211 m. betweenthe vertical ones. The orientation of the grid is unrelated to modern eld systems onthe hill top, but corresponds with a predominant eld system orientation in the widerregion.

F 12 shows the four most recurrent orientations of eld systems in the Venosaarea, one of which (class A) has exactly the same north-south orientation (-3.3 E). It istempting, but at the same time dangerous, to interpret these lines as reminiscences of

Especially on the (near infrared) images takenwith the .

A comparable grid has been identied by ourresearch in the Casalini area.

F . 10. Site’s and site halos mapped by thelerc team and plotted on the aerial image from1980. In the upper right corner (2) a cut out, showing the presence of a terrace wall.

In the upper left corner (1), the same area on a satellite image of 2009 which shows thatthe terrace wall was demolished by that time. Only a dark brown soil trace remains.


18/29

48 et alii

an ancient eld division system. In fact, some scholars have indeed suggested that therecurrent north-south eld orientation in the Venosa area with a recurrent spacing of 200 to 210 meters between lines might go back to an early Roman eld system. It is truthat ancient eld systems with an interval of 200-210 meters have been identied in thenearby territory of Metapontum. In this case, the distance between these lines has beeninterpreted to reect a module of 7 Attic plethronand the whole system has been datedto the 5th century BC. The same distance also corresponds to 6 Romanactus, whichwould t more easily with the hypothesis that these lines belonged to a Roman land di-vision program.

On the other hand, it is clearly documented that more recent land reclamation

projects and deforestation activities of the 18th

and 19th

century (F . 13), also usedFor a recent study on methods to study and

interpret centuriation patterns see for exampleD ’A 2004 and D ’A 2010.

C , G , C 1979; C -1979. More cautiously, M 2010b, for the

Piano di Camera area, based on the distance be-tween discovered Republican sites.

C 2006, pp. 91-132; C 2011; P2011.

In fact, in the nearby Latin colony of Luceriapart of the ancient land division grid has been rec-

ognized with a spacing of c. 630 meters, which has been interpreted as matching 18actus (S1985). See, however, M 1991 for an alter-native interpretation. He suggests the grid is basedon thevorsus. Also C et alii 1987, pp. 142-143recognized a similarly spaced grid in the territory of Aesernia(Grid , with a module of 6× 12actus) whichthey date with some reservation to the foundationof the colony in 263 BC.

T 1962; S 1984, pp. 12-15.

F . 11. Lines: interpretation of the soil and crop marks identied on the Allamprese site. A and B: magnetic gradiometer survey areas.


19/29

F . 12. Graph showing the orientations of the eld division systemsin the territory of Venosa.

F . 13. Map showing the deforestation programs of the 19th-20th century(forest data from T 1962) and the areas of centuriation according to C 1979.


20/29

50 et alii

regularly spaced north-south eld division systems with recurrent 200 to 300 meterspacing between division lines. For example, a clear north-south orientated grid wascreated in the late nineteenth century in the area called Difesa di Messere (southernpart of area on F . 13). In Bosco di Jatta, to the north of Venosa, on the other hana grid was created with a NW - SE orientation of which the main axes are spaced at200× 40-50 meter intervals (F . 14, and F . 13 area for its location), thus deating allotments of 0.4 to 0.6 hectares. These measurements correspond closely tothose recognized on the Allamprese site. Considering this evidence it would be un-wise to connect the discovered eld division lines to a Roman land division program.The area has known a long and dynamic agricultural history in-between the Roman

period and the 1950s, and any of these interventions can have been responsible forthese traces.In an attempt to enhance our understanding of both the traces recognized on aerial

photographs and the artefact scatters mapped on the surface, we did a small magneticgradiometer survey on the site. As the geology and geomorphology of this area is notideally suited for this type of research, the main aim of this research was to test the po-tential of this technique in two small sample areas (F . 11). The results in the core

In general on the more recent agricultural history of this area see P 2005 and F ,L , L 2010.

With 8 (20× 20 m sides, with¢ x = 1 m &¢ y =0.25 m. sampling resolution) grids in total: 4 grids ina ‘L’ shape around (north-western edges) the stor-

F . 14. Cadastral map of 1911, showing the eld division gridin the deforested area called Bosco di Jatta.


21/29

the settlement (area A) were heavily inuenced by the presence of a modern storagehouse nearby. Nevertheless, a number of interesting features are visible in the northernpart of the sample area (F . 15a). These do not have a readily recognisable outline, butin terms of their magnetic signature seem to indicate anthropic activity. The positionof isolated monopoles in the southern part of the sample area may tentatively be in-terpreted as some sort of fencing, which, however, may relate to interventions of anytime period. The results in area B were equally difficult to interpret (F . 11). At thesame location where the eld survey had mapped a high density of artefacts, the mag-netic survey data shows an area measuring c. 10× 13 meter with a distinctive signature,potentially indicative of human activity (F . 15b). The quality of this data does not,however, allow any further speculation on the functional and chronological identica-tion of this feature. On the basis of these overall problematic results, it was decided tosuspend the geophysical survey for now.

Settlement dynamics and the impact of Roman colonization

Our research thus conrms the presence of a large nucleated settlement in the Allam-prese area. Yet, the detailed study of the pottery shapes and distribution patternsprovided important new insights into the chronological development of this site dur-ing the Hellenistic period, and into the issue of discontinuity of occupation of the site between the pre-colonial and colonial periods. Both the conventional chronology of Morel and the revised ones based on the new and better dated parallels from the re-gion (F . 16) show that a considerable percentage of pottery collected on this sitedates from the second quarter of the third century BC onwards; thus well after the set-tlement of the Latin colony in the Venosa area in 291 BC (e.g. Morel 44%, which risesto 55% if we accept the new chronologies). Both types of analyses do, however, sug-gest different periods of steep decline of pottery consumption. While Morel’schronologies suggest this occurred in the rst quarter of the 3 century BC, thus con-temporaneously with the foundation of the colony in the territory, the new chronolo-gies suggest a less marked drop, and that this decrease only started a generation later inthe period 275-250 BC.

Moreover, it is important to realise that the marked decline of consumption in thethird century BC is not specic for Allamprese only, but reects overall patterns of consumption and production in the wider region (F . 17). This might be partly con-nected to changing pottery demands and supplies, and thus is not necessarily indicativeof a corresponding decrease of human activity on the site. The fact that in respect tothe Italian mean, a higher percentage of the Allamprese pottery has a chronologyin-between 275-200 BC is signicant and tentatively suggests that the community living on this site thrived in this period. It is also telling that the spatial distribution pattern of the pottery datable to the third century BC (F . 18b) is comparable to that record-ed for the pre-colonial phase (F . 18a). Such a pattern ts therefore more comfortablywithin a scenario of relative settlement continuity (albeit perhaps on a less intensive

age house (covering thelerc site 02 – A er Venusinus site number 501); 4 grids for thelerc site

03 which corresponds roughly to A er Venusi-nus site number 499.

The trends based on the chronologies of

Morel were achieved by using weighted average values. On this method see D G 2012, pp.11-12, with further references.

D G 2012, pp. 115-157.D G 2012, pp. 18-19 with further ref-

erences.


22/29

52 et alii

scale), than with a model of abandonment of the pre-Roman village, related to the radical reorganization of settlement in this area as a result of the colonial foundationin the area.

F . 15a. Results of the magnetic gradiometer survey. Area A.


23/29

Another interesting trend is the small peak in consumption in the late 2 centu-ry BC (F . 16). This moderate recovery is not restricted to the Allamprese site, but istypical for the wider Venosa area and has been connected with the arrival of new set-

F . 15b. Results of the magnetic gradiometer survey. Area B.


24/29

54 et alii

tlers in this period as part of the Gracchan land distribution program. Yet, even thoughthe second century types have a more reduced dispersion, they too occur in the iden-

Lib. col., , 210, 7 (Lach.) and Lib. col., , 261, 19(Lach). Cf. M 2010b, p. 17; D G 2012,p. 126. Our data does not suggest a revival at the

start of the second century when new colonistswere recruited (e.g. L ., , 49).

F . 16. pottery consumption trends on the Allamprese site.The graph shows both the weighted averages of Morel’s chronologies (N = 133)

and thelerc unequally distributed period values (N = 136).

F . 17. pottery consumption trends on the Allamprese site.Weighted averages oflerc chronology (N =136) compared to the Italian mean (N = 27,293).


25/29

F . 18. Comparison between the distribution of pottery datable to:a) 350-275 BC, b) 275-200 BC and c) 200 - 125 BC.

For the interpolation a kernel method was used with a search radius of 30 m.The densities represent Percent Volume Contours,

which is a method to display the % of a cumulative distribution.


26/29

56 et alii

tied settlement nuclei, which again suggests that at least the two cores of the settle-ment persisted in the second century BC (F . 18c).

C

The preliminary results of the new research at the site of Allamprese seem to strength-en the recently proposed hypothesis that nucleated rural settlements played a more im-portant role in mid-Republican Roman colonial territories than previously has been as-sumed. Whereas in earlier studies the establishment of the colony has been expectedto strongly disrupt existing settlement patterns, and that especially village-type settle-ments disappeared, the case of Allamprese does point to continuity of the settlementin the early phase of the Latin colony. The potential broader signicance of these pre-liminary ndings still depends on many factors, and needs further research. A crucialnext step is to establish whether Allamprese is an exceptional case, or that the here de-tected pattern extends further also to other nucleated rural sites. However that may be, the case of Allamprese is a useful reminder of the importance of constantly re-assessing settlement models in the light of new methods and insights, and demon-strates the value of the integration of different data-sets, old and new, geared to newresearch questions.

Acknowled ements

This paper is the result of the close collaboration of different researchers and institutes.The project is part of the larger research project Landscapes of Early Roman Colonizationwhich is nanced and co-organized by the Dutch Research Council ( ), Leiden Uni-versity (director: T. D. Stek) and the Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome (co-director: Jeremia Pelgrom). The research in the Venosa area was coordinated by Jeremia Pelgrom

in close collaboration with Maria Luisa Marchi, who kindly gave us access to the A er Venusinus data (pp. 33-36), Antonio de Siena (director of theSoprintendenza dei Beni Ar-cheolo ici della Basilicata) and Tesse D. Stek. Responsible for the analysis of the aerialphotography is Gianluca Cantoro; the geophysical prospection was conducted by Gi-anluca Cantoro and Apostolos Sarris (pp. 38 and 45-47); the study of the Black-Gloss ptery by Lucia Lecce (pp. 39-43) and the study of modern eld divisions by Arthur Ham(pp. 48-50). The team leaders in the eld were Anita Casarotto and Jesús García Sánchewho also did most of the analyses (pp. 43-45). We thank the other survey team mem bers: Frank Beijaard, Annachiara Fiore, Mike de Heij, Kristel Henquet, Stefan KooiBianca Olteanu, Niels Stoffels, Ivar Svensson, and Ties Verhoeven. We are also gratefuto Tonia Giammatteo, the staff of Museo Archeolo ico Nazionale di Venosa, theIstituto Cen-trale per il Catalo o e la Documentazione(iccd ) in Rome and of theIstituto Geo ra co Mil-itare (ig m ) in Florence for their kind assistance. Finally, we sincerely thank the commu-nality of Venosa for their warm hospitality.

B A G. 1992,Tecnolo ie carto ra che avanzate applicate alla topo ra a antica, in B M.

(ed.), Archeolo ia del paesagio, Ciclo di Lezioni sulla Ricerca applicata in Archeologia, Cer-tosa di Pontignano (Siena 1991), Firenze, pp. 747-776.

A G. 2001,Verso lo standard: ri essioni in mar ine al caso dellafiat di Mel , in Rischio ar-cheolo ico: se lo conosci lo eviti, Atti del Convegno di studi su cartograa archeologica e tuteladel territorio (Ferrara, 24-25 marzo 2000), ed. M. P. Guermandi, Firenze, pp. 77-86.

B O. 1994, La rico nizione sul terreno, «RTopAnt», 4, pp. 68-84.


27/29

B A. 1982,Il melfese fravi i e v secolo a.C., «DdA», n. s., 4, 2, pp. 152-160.C F. 1999, Demo raphy and romanization in Central Italy, in Reconstructin past population trend

in Mediterranean Europe (300 BC - AD 1800), eds. J. L. Bintliff, K. Sbonias, Oxford, pp. 115-129.C G. 2012, A free set of tools for automated ima ery recti cation, «International Society of

Archaeological Prospection ( )», 30, pp. 9-11.C G., P , J., S T. D. forthcoming, Readin a difficult landscape from the air. Amethodolo ical case-study from a WWII air eld in South Italy.C A., C P., C M. C. 2007,Il pro etto “Archeolo ia del Suburbio per la

ricostruzione dei paesagi a rari Antichi”. Impostazione e metodolo ia della ricerca, inIl territoriotra la Via Salaria e l’Aniene, il Tevere e la “Via Salaria Vetus”, a cura di C. Cupitò, Roma, pp.13-25.

C J. C. 2006, Discoverin the Greek Countryside at Metaponto, Michigan.C J. C. 2011,The 1999 Pizzica Excavation: The Division Lines Reconsidered, inThe Choraof

Metaponto 3. Archaeolo ical eld survey. Bradano to Basento, eds. J. C. Carter, A. Prieto, , Austin,pp. 1027-1053.

C B. A., G G., C M. 1979, L’asse nazione di Venosa attraverso l’analisidella struttura ambientale, produttiva e storica, in Foto ra a aerea e storia urbanistica, a cura di M.Coppa, G. Alvisi, Roma, pp. 87-128.C G., C -L M., F F., V J.-P. 1987,Structures A raires en ItalieCentro-Méridionale. Cadastres et Paysa es Ruraux , Roma.

C M. 1979, Formazione della struttura territoriale dell’a ro di Venosa, in Foto ra a aerea e storiaurbanistica, a cura di M. Coppa, G. Alvisi, Roma, pp. 119-28.

D ’A P. L. 2004, Perché studiare la centuriazione, «ACe», 1, pp. 17-21.D ’A P. L. 2010,Centuriazione e eo ra a sica, «ACe», 6 (2009), pp. 279-299.D C O. 2008,Civita di Tricarico i . Le quartier de la maison du monolithe et l’enceinte

intermédiaire, Roma.D G H. 2005, Villae, villulaee fattorie nella Media Valle del Tevere, in Roman Villas around

the Urbs. Interaction with landscape and enviroment , Proceedings of a conference at the SwedishInstitute in Rome (Roma 2004), eds. B. Santillo Frizell, A. Kjynne, Roma, pp. 7-25.

D G H. 2012,Black-Gloss Ware in Italy. Production mana ement and local histories, Oxford.F M. 1993,Ima e Processin Applications in Archaeolo y: Classi cation Systems of Archaeolo ical

Sites in the Landscape, inComputin the Past. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeolo y, eds. J. Andresen, M. Torsten, I. Scollar, 92, Aarhus, pp. 53-62.

F M., G A. 1991, Fotointerpretazione aerea di itale e archeolo ia, «Pixel», 10, pp. 11-14.F H. 2013,Survey, Settlement and Land Use in Republican Italy, in A Companion to the

Archaeolo y of the Roman Republic. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World, ed. J. De RoseEvans, Oxford, pp. 181-197.

F R., P H. 2000, Extractin Meanin from Plou hsoil Assembla es, Oxford.F P., L A., L E. M. 2010 (a cura di), Note di storia sul paesagio a rario

della Basilicata tra xi x e xx i secolo, Lavello (Potenza).

G T. 2014, La forma d’insediamento di Masseria Casalini Sottana, inI Guerrieri di Palazzo. Modalità insediative e rituali funerari di un abitato italico nel territorio di Palazzo S. Gervasio (Pz),a cura di A. de Siena, Digital publication: http://www.comune.palazzo.pz.it, pp. 8-13 (last accessed: 30-1-2015).

H G 1996,Taranto: La ceramica a vernice nera ‘ hrf ’ e a ‘pasta ri ia’, in Arte e arti ianato. I Greci in Occidente. Arte e arti ianato in Ma na Grecia, a cura di E. Lippolis, Napoli, pp. 336-345.

L C E.et alii 2011, Archaic and Black-Gloss Fine Ware, in The Choraof Metaponto 3, Archaeolo ical Field Survey. Bradano to Basento, eds. J. C. Carter, A. Prieto, , Austin, pp. 143-270.

L E. 1994,Taranto. La necropoli: aspetti e problemi della documentazione archeolo ica travi i ei sec. a.C., , 1, Taranto.

L D. G. 1999,Object reco nition from local scale-invariant features, « », 2, pp. 1150-1157.M D. 1991, La centuriazione di Lucera, in Pro li della Daunia antica, 7º ciclo di Con-

ferenze, Foggia, pp. 49-66.


28/29

58 et alii M D. 2007,Il sito archeolo ico: fra ricerca e valorizzazione, Roma.M M. L., S G. 1996,Venusia, in Forma Italiae, 37, Firenze.M M. L. 2010a, A er Venusinusii , in Forma Italiae, 43, Firenze.M M. L., 2010b, Modi cazioni del paesagio antico: il territorio diVenusiae Luceria. Inda ini

e metodi per lo studio di due comprensori coloniali, «ACe», 7, pp. 13-33.

M M. L. 2014, Le colonie diLuceriae Venusia. Dinamiche insediative, urbanizzazione e assettia rari, in Roman Republican Colonization. New Perspectives from Archaeolo y and Ancient History,eds. T. D. Stek, J. Pelgrom, Roma, pp. 233-255.

M J.-P. 1981, La céramique campanienne: les formes, «Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaisesd’Athènes et de Rome», , Paris-Roma.

O G. 2004, Anfore Greco-italiche antiche: alcune osservazioni sull’ori ine e sulla circolazione allaluce di recenti ricerche archeolo iche e archeometriche, in Metodi e approcci archeolo ici: l’industria eil commercio nell’Italia antica, a cura di E. C. De Sena, H. Dessales, Oxford, pp. 173-192.

P J. 2008,Settlement Or anization and Land Distribution in Latin Colonies before the Second Punic War , in People, Land and Politics. Demo raphic Developments and the Transformation of Roman Italy 300 BC-AD 14, eds. L. de Ligt, S. J. Northwood, Leiden, pp. 333-372.

P J. 2013, Population density in mid-Republican Latin colonies: a comparison between text-based population estimates and the results from survey archaeolo y, « », 23, pp. 1-12.P V. 2005, Paesagio a rario e assetti colturali in Basilicata tra Ottocento e Novecento, Bari.

P F., P S., W W. 1978, Decision Makin in Modern Surveys, « », 1, pp. 383-421.P A. J. N. W. 1992,Black Glazed Ware: Introduction, inGravina. An Iron A e and Republican

Settlement in Apulia, ii . The Artifacts, ed. A. Small, «Archaeological Monographs of the BritishSchool at Rome», 5, pp. 67-70.

P A. 2011, Aerial Photo raphy and the Or anization of theChora, inThe Choraof Metapon-to 3. Archaeolo ical eld survey. Bradano to Basento, eds. J. C. Carter, A. Prieto, , Austin, pp.1115-1137.

Q L., Q G S. 2001, La Carta Archeolo ica della valle del Sinni: dalle premesse alla realizzazione, « », suppl., 2000-2003, Roma, pp. 19-51.

R D. W. 1981,The development of a riculture in the ‘A er Cosanus’ durin the Roman Republic: Problems of evidence and interpretation, « », 71, pp. 10-23.

R D. W. 2008, Poor peasants and silent sherds, in People, Land and Politics. Demo raphic Developments and the Transformation of Roman Italy 300 BC-AD 14, eds. L. de Ligt, S. J. North-wood, Leiden, pp. 305-332.

R R. 2007,Stylin Romanisation, Pottery and Society in Central Italy, Cambridge.R R. 2013,Tradin identities? Re ionalism and commerce in Mid-Republican Italy (third-early

second century BC), inCreatin Ethnicities and Identities in the Roman World, eds. A. Garner, E.Herring, K. Lomas, London, pp. 93-113.

R S. I. 1997,Hellenistic Pottery: Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material, « », , Princeton.

S G. 2000, A er Venusinusi , in Forma Italiae, 40, Firenze.

S M. 1984,Venosa: un parco archeolo ico e un museo. Come e perché, Taranto.S A., C G. 2013,Geophysical Investi ations at Venosa, Italy (2013), Technical report,GeoSat ReSeArch Lab, - , Rethymno, Crete (Greece).

S G. 1985, Le centuriazioni di Lucera e Aecae, «L’Universo», 65, 2, pp. 260-304.S A., S C. 2010,The Black-Gloss Pottery from the Iron A e Site of San Felice, South Italy,

«Museion Series», , 10, pp. 243-280.S P. 2009, Esperienze documentali nel territorio da li anni ’80 ad ogi. Alcune considerazioni,

«Archeologia e Calcolatori», 20, pp. 47-59.S T. D. 2009,Cult places and cultural chan e in Republican Italy: a contextual approach to reli ious

aspects of rural society after the Roman conquest , Amsterdam.S T. D.et alii in press, An early Roman colonial landscape in the Apennine mountains: landscape ar-

chaeolo ical research in the territory of Aesernia(Central-Southern Italy), «Analysis Archaologica»,1, pp. 229-281.


29/29

T S.et alii 2007,tinitaly /01: a new Trian ular Irre ular Network of Italy, «Annals of Geo-

physics», 50, pp. 407-425.T S.et alii 2012, Release of a 10-m-resolutionde m for the Italian territory: Comparison with

lobal-covera ede m s and ana lyph-mode exploration via the web, «Computers & Geosciences», 38,pp. 168-170.

T N. 1996, Field survey methods in central Italy (Etruria and Umbria). Between local knowl-ed e and re ional traditions, «Archaeological Dialogues», 3, pp. 216-230.T F. 1962, Die Walder der Basilicata und die Entwaldun im 19. Jahrhundert , «Heidelberger

Geographische Arbeiten», 8, Heidelberg.T M. 1991, La fondazione di Venosa nel quadro della romanizzazione dell’Italia meridionale, in

Il Museo Archeolo ico Nazionale di Venosa, a cura di M. Salvatore, Matera, pp. 17-29.Y D. 1997,Constructin a Dark A e. The 5th century BC in Southern Italy, «Caeculus. Debating

Dark Ages», 3, pp. 103-111.Y D. 2001, Pre-Roman Valesio, Excavations of the Amsterdam Free University at Valesio, Province

of Brindisi, Southern Italy, Volume 1: The Pottery, Amsterdam.Y D. 2014,The Archaeolo y of South-East Italy in the First Millennium BC , Amsterdam.

Documents

New Approaches to the Study of Village Sites in the Territory of Venosa in the Classical and Hellenistic Periods