Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Etruscan dancer, Tomb of the Leopards, Tarquinia, Italy

Main article: Etruscan civilization

Etruscan society is mainly known through the memorial and achievemental inscriptions on monuments of Etruscan civilization, especially tombs. This information emphasizes family data. Some contractual information is also available from various sources.^[1] The Roman and Greek historians had more to say of Etruscan government.^[1]

Aristocratic families

Society of the tombs

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Etruscan Civilization dancer in the Tomb of the Augurs, Tarquinia, Italy

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Etruscan dancers in the Tomb of the Triclinium near Tarquinia, Italy (470 BC)

The population described by the inscriptions owned the tombs in which their relatives interred them and were interred in turn. These were the work of craftsmen who must have gone to considerable expense, for which they must have been paid. The interment chambers also were stocked with furniture, luxury items and jewelry, which are unlikely to have been available to the ordinary citizen. The sarcophagi were ornate, each one a work of art. The society of the tombs therefore was that of the aristocrats. While alive they occupied magistracies recorded in the inscriptions. Their magisterial functions are obscure now, but they were chief men in society.

The Etruscans did not always own sufficient wealth to support necropolises for their chief men and stock them with expensive items to be smashed and thrown away. People of the Villanovan culture lived in poor huts concomitant with subsistence agriculture and owned plain and simple implements. Their simple ware is known as bucchero, plain black undecorated pots. In the 8th century BC, the orientalizing period began, a time of influx of luxuriously living Greeks. They brought their elegant pottery styles and architectural methods with them.

Yet the rise of Etruscan civilization cannot entirely be explained by immigrants from Greece. The Etruscans became a maritime power. By the 7th century they had imported methods and materials from the eastern Mediterranean and were leaving written inscriptions. Groups of Villanovan villages were now consolidated into Etruscan cities. Elaborate tomb cities began to appear.^[2]

Rise of the family

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Etruscan couple (Louvre, Room 18)

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Etruscan mother and child, 500–450 BC

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

The Mars of Todi, a life-sized bronze sculpture of a soldier making a votive offering, late 5th to early 4th century BC

The princely tombs were not of individuals. The inscriptional evidence shows that families were interred there over long periods, marking the growth of the aristocratic family as a fixed institution, parallel to the gensat Rome and perhaps even its model. It is not an Etruscan original, as there is no sign of it in the Villanovan. The Etruscans could have used any model of the eastern Mediterranean. That the growth of this class is related to the new acquisition of wealth through trade is unquestioned. The wealthiest cities were located near the coast.

The Etruscan name of the family was lautn.^[1] At the center of the lautn was the married couple, tusurthir. The Etruscans were a monogamous society that emphasized pairing. The lids of large numbers of sarcophagi (for example, the « Sarcophagus of the Spouses« ) are adorned with sculpted couples, smiling, in the prime of life (even if the remains were of persons advanced in age), reclining next to each other or with arms around each other. The bond was obviously a close one by social preference

It is possible that Greek and Roman attitudes to the Etruscans were based on a misunderstanding of the place of women within their society. In both Greece and Republican Rome, respectable women were mostly confined to the house and mixed-sex socialising did not occur. Thus the freedom of women within Etruscan society could have been misunderstood as implying their sexual availability.

It is worth noting that a number of Etruscan tombs carry funerary inscriptions in the form ‘X son of [father] and [mother]’, indicating the importance of the mother’s side of the family.

Development of names

Etruscan naming conventions are complex and appear to reveal different stages in the development of names.^[3] The stages apply only to aristocratic names, attested in the inscriptions. Whether the ordinary people followed suit or were perhaps in the earliest stage remains unknown.

Praenomen

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

Painted terracotta Sarcophagus of Seianti Hanunia Tlesnasa, about 150–130 BCE

Everyone at all times had a praenomen, or first name, which was a simple descendant of an ancient name, or a compound comprising a meaningful expression.^[4]They were marked for gender: aule/aulia, larth/lartha, arnth/arntia. There is no evidence that girls were named for males, as in Roman society; that is, a girl did not take her father’s or husband’s name. Some names were entirely female.

Patronymic and matronymic

As in Proto-Indo-European, individual males were further distinguished by a patronymic, which could be formed in a few different ways:

• the genitive case: larth arnthal, « Larth son of Arnth. »
• the genitive case with clan, « son »: larth clan arnthal.
• the nominative case formed from the genitive with a patronymic suffix: -isa, -sa, -sla, which the Bonfantes regard as a suffixed demonstrative pronoun: arnth larthal-isa.

Females were further identified with either the husband’s name (gamonymic) or the son’s name in patronymic construction. Unlike the Indo-Europeans, the girls had a matronymic, same construction. Sometimes males are identified with a matronymic, thus leaving some doubt as to whether early Etruscan society was patrilinear. The men were perhaps dominant (patriarchy); there was a word for « wife », puia, which ties a woman to her husband conceptually, but none for husband. These names and conventions must have prevailed in the Villanovan culture.

Nomen gentile

The nomen gentile, or family name, dates to the orientalizing period. Recorded names are minimally binomial: Vethur Hathisna, Avile Repesuna, Fasti Aneina. Patronyms and other further specifications are added after it: Arnth Velimna Aules, « Arnth Velimna son of Aule. » In those contexts double patronymics can be used, naming the father and grandfather: Arnth Velimna Aules clan Larthalisla, « Arnth Velimna son of Aule son of Larth. »

The nomen gentile was formed in a number of ways, most often with a -na suffix, -nas in south Etruscan (possibly the genitive case). The suffixed nomen might refer to an individual of the family: Arnth/Arnth-na, spure/spuri-na; or it might be a mythological figure: usil/usel-na; or a geographic location: Velch/Vels-na.

The nomen gentile was an adjective and could be used alone as a noun, the name in this case, as though it were a praenomen. In that case male and female forms appear, perhaps the closest linguistic feature to agreement of gender: a male would be in the vipina family, named after a previous individual, Vipi, but a female in the Vipinei, or a male in the Velthina, named after Vel, and a female in the Veliana. The male and female names refer to the same family.^[5]

Probably in deference to Italic, the nomen gentile could also be formed with -ie for males or -i and -a for females, perhaps from Italic -ios or its later form -ius, which can be made feminine: -ia.^[6] Typically of Etruscan^[1] both suffices can be used together: -na-ie.^[7]

The serious study of nomina gentilia is just beginning, due to the accumulation of sufficient names on which to base hypotheses. A family might be concentrated at one location or appear in a number of cities, and be spelled in as many as a dozen different ways. The Romans themselves identified a good many gentes at Rome that were originally Etruscan and since then scholars have spotted more. It is not unlikely that much of the patrician class, which was most powerful under the Etruscan kings, was or was derived from an Etruscan model, which dated to no earlier than the 8th century BC.

Kinship

Kinship is defined with relation to the ego, or « I ». I then may state whatever « I » am or you are to me. Females could state that they were the daughter of a father, sec or sech, and the wife of a husband, puia. Conversely, a man was never described as a husband of a woman. Etruscan society therefore was patrilineal and probably egalitarian.

Kinship among the Etruscans was vertical, or generational. They kept track of six generations. In addition to the mi (“I”) an individual recognized a clan (“son”) or a sec (“daughter”), a neftś (“grandson”), and a prumaths (“great-grandson”). Every self had an apa and ati(“father” and “mother”) and relatives older than they.

A division of relatives as maternal or paternal seems to have existed: the apa nachna and the ati nachna, the grandfather’s and grandmother’s relatives. On the level of the self, the lack of any words for aunt, uncle or cousins is notable. Very likely, apa was a generational word: it meant father or any of father’s male relatives. Similarly, ati would have meant any female relative of mother’s age or generation. Ruva (“brother”) is recognized, but no sister. It is possible, though hard to determine, that ruva had a broader meaning of « any related male of the self’s generation ».

This horizontal telescoping of relatives applies indirectly to the self as well. The telals are the grand offspring, either male or female, of the grandmother, and the papals of the grandfather. It is difficult to determine whether neftś means « grandson » or « nephew » although there could be cross-cultural contamination here with Latin nepōs (< IE *nepōts) which derives from a kinship system of the Omaha type. In the Omaha type, the same word is used for both nephew and grandson but this kinship type does not typically exhibit terminology used for « kin of a particular generation » as suspected in Etruscan kinship terms.

The Etruscans were careful also to distinguish status within the family. There was a stepdaughter and stepson, sech farthana and clan thuncultha (although this may in fact mean « first son » based on the root thun- « one »), as well as a stepmother, ativu (literally « little mother »), an adopted son, clanti, and the universal mother-in-law, netei. Other terms were not as high or democratic in status. The system was like that of the Roman. The etera were slaves, or more precisely, foreign slaves. When they had been freed they were lautni(male) or lautnitha (female), freed men or women, who were closely connected to the family and were clients of it in return for service and respect.

Of the several formal kinship classifications, the Etruscan is most like the Hawaiian, which distinguishes sex and generation, but otherwise lumps persons in those classes together. The lack of a sister does not fit;^{[citation needed]} however, construction of the Etruscan dictionary is still in progress.

Government

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan society

The Orator, c. 100 BC, an Etrusco-Roman bronze statue depicting Aule Metele (Latin: Aulus Metellus), an Etruscan man wearing a Roman toga while engaged in rhetoric; the statue features an inscription in the Etruscan alphabet

The historical Etruscans had achieved a state system of society, with remnants of the chiefdom and tribal forms. In this they were ahead of the surrounding Italics, who still had chiefs and tribes. Rome was in a sense the first Italic state, but it began as an Etruscan one. It is believed that the Etruscan government style changed from total monarchy to oligarchic democracy (as the Roman Republic) in the 6th century BC. It is important to note this did not happen to all the city states.

The Etruscan state government was essentially a theocracy. The government was viewed as being a central authority, over all tribal and clan organizations. It retained the power of life and death; in fact, the gorgon, an ancient symbol of that power, appears as a motif in Etruscan decoration. The adherents to this state power were united by a common religion. Political unity in Etruscan society was the city-state, which was probably the referent of methlum, “district”. Etruscan texts name quite a number of magistrates, without much of a hint as to their function: the camthi, the parnich, the purth, the tamera, the macstrev, and so on. The people were the mech. The chief ruler of a methlum was perhaps a zilach, earlier times also lucumo (laukum), a sacral monarch (the infinitive of verb « to rule » is lucair).

All the city-states of the Etruscans were gathered into confederacies, or “leagues”. The sources tell us there were three. A league for unknown reasons, likely religious, had to include 12 city-states. The word for league was mech rasnal. Once a year the states met at a fanu, or sacred place (Latin fanum) to discuss military and political affairs, and also to choose a head of confederation, zilath mechl rasnal, who held the office for one year. The Etrurian confederacy met at the fanum Voltumnae, the « shrine of Voltumna ». Their league was called the “duodecim populi Etruriae” or the “twelve peoples of Etruria”.

The relationship between Rome and the Etruscans was not one of an outsider conquering a foreign people. The Etruscans considered Rome as one of their cities, perhaps originally in the Latian/Campanian league. It is entirely possible that the Tarquinsappealed to Lars Porsena of Clusium (Clevsin), because he was the head of the Etrurian commomwealth for that year. He would have been obliged to help the Tarquins whether he liked it or not.

The Romans attacked and annexed individual cities between 510 and 290 BC. This apparent disunity of the Etruscans was probably regarded as internal dissent by the Etruscans themselves. For example, after the sack of Rome by the Gauls, the Romans debated whether to move the city en masse to Veii, which they could not even have considered if Veii was thought to be a foreign people. Eventually Rome created treaties individually with the Etruscan states, rather than the whole. But by that time the league had fallen into disuse, due to the permanent hegemony of Rome and increasing assimilation of Etruscan civilization to it, which was a natural outcome, as Roman civilization was to a large degree Etruscan.

See also

• Roman naming conventions

Notes

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d See under Etruscan language.
2. ^ This standard view of the rise of Etruscan civilization is presented for example on page 5 of the Bonfantes (2002).
3. ^ A good presentation of the subject of Etruscan names can be found in the Bonfantes (2002), pages 88–89.
4. ^ The Bonfantes (2002), page 88.
5. ^ Wallace.
6. ^ The Bonfantes, pages 88–89.
7. ^ Marchesini.

References

• Bonfante, G.; L. Bonfante (2002). The Etruscan Language. An Introduction. Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-0902-2.
• Marchesini, Simona. « New Studies on Etruscan Personal Names: Gentium Mobilitas » (PDF). Etruscan News. University of Massachusetts.
• Pallottino, M. (1975). The Etruscans. London: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-253-32080-1.
• Swaddling, Judith; Bonfante, Larissa (2006). Etruscan Myths. University of Texas Press. ISBN 0-292-70606-5. Preview Google Books.
• Torp, Alf (1906). « Etruscan Notes ». Skrifter Udgivene af Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiana. Oslo: Historisk-filosofisk Klasse, Norsk Videnskaps-Akademi. pp. 1–66.. View at Google Books.
• Wallace, Rex (2006). « Etruscan Inscriptions in the Royal Ontario Museum » (PDF). Etruscan News. University of Massachusetts Amherst (5): 5–6.

• Etruscology at Its Best, the website of Dr. Dieter H. Steinbauer, in English. Covers origins, vocabulary, grammar and place names.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_society

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

Giacobbe Giusti, RUNNERS, Villa of the Papyri, Herculaneum

 

The Villa of the Papyri(Italian: Villa dei Papiri, also known as Villa dei Pisoni) is named after its unique library of papyri (or scrolls), but is also one of the most luxurious houses in all of Herculaneum and in the Roman world.^[1] Its luxury is shown by its exquisite architecture and by the very large number of outstanding works of art discovered, including frescoes, bronzes and marble sculpture^[2]which constitute the largest collection of Greek and Roman sculptures ever discovered in a single context.^[3]

It is located in the current comune of Ercolano, southern Italy. It was situated on the ancient coastline below the volcano Vesuvius with nothing to obstruct the view of the sea. It was perhaps owned by Julius Caesar‘s father-in-law, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus.^[4][5] Barker 1908 suggested Philodemus was owner of the Villa of the Papyri Library.^[6]

In AD 79, the eruption of Vesuvius covered all of Herculaneum with some 30 m of volcanic ash. Herculaneum was first excavated in the years between 1750 and 1765 by Karl Weber by means of underground tunnels. The villa’s name derives from the discovery of its library, the only surviving library from the Graeco-Roman world that exists in its entirety.^[7] It contained over 1,800 papyrus scrolls, now carbonised by the heat of the eruption, the « Herculaneum papyri« .

Most of the villa is still underground, but parts have been cleared of volcanic deposits. Many of the finds are displayed in the Naples National Archaeological Museum. The Getty Villa is a reproduction of the Villa of the Papyri.

1.  Maiuri, Amedeo. Herculaneum and the Villa of the Papyri. Italy (1974): 35-39.
2. Jump up^ https://sites.google.com/site/ad79eruption/herculaneum-1/villa-of-the-papyri
3. Jump up^ The Villa dei Papiri at Herculaneum: Life and Afterlife of a Sculpture Collection, Carol C. Mattusch (Los Angeles, California, 2005, ISBN 0892367229 p 359
4. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Hornblower, Simon and Antony Spawforth. Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd ed. New York (1996).
5. Jump up^ « Unlocking the scrolls of Herculaneum ». BBC. 2013.
6. Jump up^ Ethel Ross Barker (1908). « Buried Herculaneum ».
7. Jump up^ « Archived copy ». Archived from the original on October 30, 2015. Retrieved September 8, 2015.
8. ^ Jump up to:^a b c http://www.herculaneum.ox.ac.uk/?q=De%20Simone
9. Jump up^ Stewart, Andrew. Greek Sculpture. Yale University Press (1990).
10. Jump up^ « Buried Herculaneum ». 1908.
11. Jump up^ https://sites.google.com/site/ad79eruption/herculaneum-1/villa-of-the-papyri/catalogue-of-sculptures
12. Jump up^ See Erlend D. MacGillivray, « The Popularity of Epicureanism in Late-Republic Roman Society », The Ancient World XLIII (2012) 151–172.
13. Jump up^ See conservation issues of Pompeii and Herculaneum.
14. Jump up^ Feasibility Study^{[permanent dead link]}
15. Jump up^ In search of Western civilisation’s lost classics Archived 2008-12-29 at the Wayback Machine., The Australian, August 6, 2008
16. Jump up^ Vergano, Dan (January 22, 2015). « X-Rays Reveal Snippets From Papyrus Scrolls That Survived Mount Vesuvius ». National Geographic.
17. Jump up^ Bukreeva, I.; et al. (2016). « Enhanced X-ray-phase-contrast-tomography brings new clarity to the 2000-year-old ‘voice’ of Epicurean philosopher Philodemus ». arXiv:1602.08071 .
18. Jump up^ Mocella V, et al. (2015). « Revealing letters in rolled Herculaneum papyri by X-ray phase-contrast imaging » (PDF). Nature Communications. 6: 5895. Bibcode:2015NatCo…6E5895M. doi:10.1038/ncomms6895.
19. Jump up^ Bukreeva I, et al. (2016). « Virtual unrolling and deciphering of Herculaneum papyri by X-ray phase-contrast tomography ». Scientific Reports. 6. Bibcode:2016NatSR…630364B. doi:10.1038/srep30364.
20. Jump up^ Mocella V, et al. (2015). « Revealing letters in rolled Herculaneum papyri by X-ray phase-contrast imaging » (PDF). Nature Communications. 6: 5. Bibcode:2015NatCo…6E5895M. doi:10.1038/ncomms6895.
21. Jump up^ The Getty. 2005. J. Paul Getty Museum. 11 May 2007 http://www.getty.edu/visit/see_do/architecture.html.
22. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Ethel Ross Barker (1908). « Buried Herculaneum ».

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_of_the_Papyri

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

 

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

Roman copy from the 1st–2nd centuries AD after a Greek original from the 4th century BC.

 

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

 

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

 

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Cleveland Museum of Art

Apollo Sauroktonos (Lizard-slayer) attributed to Praxiteles, c. 350-275 BCE, bronze, copper and stone inlay, Cleveland Museum of Art

Giacobbe Giusti, APOLLO

Apollo with a lizard on a string on a mosaic from Roman Africa

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

Artiste	Praxitèle
Date	Ve siècle av. J.-C. ou années 350 av. J.-C.
Matériau	bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, PRAXITELE: Apollon sauroctone, Louvre

 

Le Sauroctone Borghèse du Louvre

L’Apollon sauroctone est un type statuaire grec traditionnellement attribué à Praxitèle, représentant le dieu Apollon s’apprêtant à tuer un lézard, principalement connu par le Sauroctone Borghèse conservé au musée du Louvre (Ma 441), le Sauroctone du Vatican conservé au musée Pio-Clementino (Inv. 750) et plus récemment, par l’Apollon en bronze conservé au Cleveland Museum of Art (Inv. 2004-30).

D’un point de vue historiographique, l’œuvre a été à l’origine de la Kopienforschung (« recherche des copies »), démarche consistant à recomposer un prototype perdu à partir de l’étude des copies, variantes, représentations sur d’autres supports (intailles, monnaies, etc.) et textes littéraires.

Histoire

À Rome, au xvii^e siècle, est découverte une statue grandeur nature d’un adolescent menaçant un lézard rampant sur un tronc d’arbre, laquelle rejoint rapidement les collections du cardinal Scipione Borghese. En 1720, le baron von Stosch rapproche une pierre gravée de ses collections d’un passage de Pline l’Ancien : « (Praxitèle réalisa aussi en bronze) un Apollon jeune, guettant avec une flèche un lézard en train de ramper, et qu’on appelle sauroctone¹. » En 1760, Johann Joachim Winckelmann étend le rapprochement à l’Apollon Borghèse et à une statuette en bronze de la collection Albani. Après avoir pensé à cette dernière², il reconnaît dans son Histoire de l’art (1760) un original de Praxitèle en l’Apollon Borghèse. La découverte quelques années plus tard d’autres sauroctones, et notamment d’une autre statue grandeur nature — le Sauroctone du Vatican — ruine cette hypothèse. Winckelmann et son collègue italien Ennio Quirino Visconti déterminent alors qu’il s’agit de copies romaines d’un même type. En 1807, le Sauroctone Borghèse fait partie des statues que le prince Camille Borghèse, en proie à de graves difficultés financières, est contraint de vendre à son beau-frère Napoléon I^er. L’œuvre rejoint alors le musée du Louvre, où elle se trouve toujours.

En 2003, l’étude du type est relancée par la mise sur le marché d’une statue jusque-là inconnue, qui se révèle être le seul Sauroctone grandeur nature en bronze. Selon son vendeur, il provient d’une résidence privée située dans l’ancienne RDA, où il était considéré comme une copie du xviii^e ou du xix^e siècle³. Acquis en 2004 par le Cleveland Museum of Art, l’« Apollon de Cleveland », comme on l’appelle bientôt, est daté par les premières analyses comme appartenant au second classicisme, et présenté par Michael Bennett, conservateur du département des antiquités grecques et romaines au CMA, comme pouvant avoir été la statue vue par Pline⁴. La statue fait également l’objet d’une controverse sur son origine, des rumeurs affirmant qu’elle a été en réalité pillée en Italie ou en Grèce, ce qui a amené le Conseil central archéologique (KAS) grec à demander officiellement au Louvre de ne pas l’accueillir dans le cadre de son exposition Praxitèle du printemps 2007⁵.

Notes

1. ↑ « Fecit et pubertem Apollinem subrepenti lacertæ cominus sagitta insidiantem, quem sauroctonon vocant. » Histoire naturelle [détail des éditions] [lire en ligne [archive]] (XXXIV, 70). Traduction issue de Marion Muller-Dufeu, La Sculpture grecque. Sources littéraires et épigraphiques, Paris, éditions de l’École nationale supérieure des Beaux-Arts, coll. « Beaux-Arts histoire », 2002(ISBN 2-84056-087-9), n^o 1406, p. 487.
2. ↑ Haskell et Penny, p. 177.
3. ↑ Communiqué de presse [archive] du Cleveland Museum of Art, 22 juin 2004.
4. ↑ M. Bennett, « Une nouvelle réplique de l’Apollon Sauroctone au musée de Cleveland », catalogue de l’exposition Praxitèle, p. 206.
5. ↑ « Louvre backs down on ancient statue here » [archive], article de The Plain Dealer, quotidien de Cleveland.

Bibliographie

• Francis Haskell et Nicholas Penny (trad. François Lissarague), Pour l’amour de l’antique. La Statuaire gréco-romaine et le goût européen [« Taste and the Antique. The Lure of Classical Sculpture, 1500–1900 »], Paris, Hachette, coll. « Bibliothèque d’archéologie », 1988 (édition originale 1981) (ISBN 2-01-011642-9), n^o 79, p. 177-179.
• Bernard Holtzmann et Alain Pasquier, Histoire de l’art antique : l’art grec, la Documentation française, la Réunion des musées nationaux et l’École du Louvre (ISBN 2-11-003866-7), p. 212-213.
• Jean-Luc Martinez, « L’Apollon sauroctone » dans Praxitèle, catalogue de l’exposition au musée du Louvre, 23 mars-18 juin 2007, éditions du Louvre & Somogy, 2007 (ISBN 978-2-35031-111-1), p. 203-235.
• (en) Brunilde Sismondo Ridgway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture, Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 1997(ISBN 0-299-15470-X), p. 265.
• Claude Rolley, La Sculpture grecque, vol. II : La période classique, Manuels d’art et d’archéologie antiques, Picard, 1999(ISBN 2-7084-0506-3), p. 248-250.

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_sauroctono

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Expansion of the Urnfield Culture in Europe.

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

• 
• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Simbols from the Urnfield culture.

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Roman museum Kastell Boiotro ( Passau ). Urnefield culture helmet from Pocking.

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Roman museum Kastell Boiotro ( Passau ). Urnefield culture helmet from Pocking.

Elmo da Pocking

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Historical Museum of the Palatinate, « Bronze wheels of Hassloch », BC 900-800, permanent exhibition display case, Speyer, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

German National Museum ( Nuremberg / Germany ). Bronze scull-cap helmet, Urnfield culture, 12th century BC, from Thonberg ( Kronach / Bavaria )

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Bronzekultwagen, aus Acholshausen

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Bronze wheel pendants, Zürich, c. 1550–1000 BC.

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture 

Geographical range	Europe
Period	Bronze Age Europe
Dates	c. 1300 — c. 750 BC
Major sites	Burgstallkogel (Sulm valley)
Preceded by	Tumulus culture
Followed by	Hallstatt culture, Villanovan culture

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Approximate historical map of the spread of the spoke-wheeled chariot, 2000–500 BC

Bronze Age v t e

↑ Chalcolithic

Near East (c. 3300–1200 BC) Anatolia, Caucasus, Elam, Egypt, Levant, Mesopotamia, Sistan, Canaan Late Bronze Age collapse South Asia (c. 3300–1200 BC) Indus Valley Civilization Bronze Age South Asia Ochre Coloured Pottery Cemetery H Europe (c. 3200–600 BC) Aegean (Cycladic, Minoan, Mycenaean),Caucasus, Catacomb culture, Srubna culture, Beaker culture, Unetice culture, Tumulus culture, Urnfield culture, Hallstatt culture, Apennine culture, Canegrate culture, Golasecca culture, Atlantic Bronze Age, Bronze Age Britain, Nordic Bronze Age East Asia (c. 2000–300 BC) Erlitou, Erligang, Gojoseon, Jomon, Majiayao, Mumun, Qijia, Siwa, Wucheng, Xindian, Yueshi

arsenical bronze writing literature sword chariot

↓Iron Age

The Urnfield culture (c. 1300 BC – 750 BC) was a late Bronze Ageculture of central Europe, often divided into several local cultures within a broader Urnfield tradition. The name comes from the custom of cremating the dead and placing their ashes in urns which were then buried in fields. Over much of Europe, the Urnfield culture followed the Tumulus culture and was succeeded by the Hallstatt culture.^[1] Linguistic evidence and continuity with the following Hallstatt culture suggests that the people of this area spoke an early form of Celtic, perhaps originally proto-Celtic.^[1][2]

Chronology

It is believed that in some areas, such as in southwestern Germany, the Urnfield culture was in existence around 1200 BC (beginning of Ha A), but the Bronze D Riegsee-phase already contains cremations. As the transition from the middle Bronze Age to the Urnfield culture was gradual, there are questions regarding how to define it.

The Urnfield culture covers the phases Hallstatt A and B (Ha A and B) in Paul Reinecke‘s chronological system, not to be confused with the Hallstatt culture (Ha C and D) of the following Iron Age. This corresponds to the Phases Montelius III-IV of the Northern Bronze Age. Whether Reinecke’s Bronze D is included varies according to author and region.

The Urnfield culture is divided into the following sub-phases (based on Müller-Karpe sen.):

date BC
BzD	1300–1200
Ha A1	1200–1100
Ha A2	1100–1000
HaB1	1000–800
HaB2	900–800
Ha B3	800–750

The existence of the Ha B3-phase is contested, as the material consists of female burials only. As can be seen by the arbitrary 100-year ranges, the dating of the phases is highly schematic. The phases are based on typological changes, which means that they do not have to be strictly contemporaneous across the whole distribution. All in all, more radiocarbon and dendro-dates would be highly desirable.

Origin

The Urnfield culture grew from the preceding tumulus culture.^[1] The transition is gradual, in the pottery as well as the burial rites.^[1] In some parts of Germany, cremation and inhumation existed simultaneously (facies Wölfersheim). Some graves contain a combination of tumulus-culture pottery and Urnfield swords(Kressborn, Bodenseekreis) or tumulus culture incised pottery together with early Urnfield types (Mengen). In the North, the Urnfield culture was only adopted in the HaA2 period. 16 pins deposited in a swamp in Ellmoosen (Kr. Bad Aibling, Germany) cover the whole chronological range from Bronze B to the early Urnfield period (Ha A). This demonstrates a considerable ritual continuity. In the Loire, Seine and Rhône, certain fords contain deposits from the late Neolithic onwards up to the Urnfield period.

The origins of the cremation rite are commonly believed to be in Hungary, where it was widespread since the first half of the second millennium BC.^[3] The neolithic Cucuteni–Trypillia culture of modern-day northeastern Romania and Ukraine were also practicing cremation rituals as early as approximately 5500 BC. Some cremations begin to be found in the Proto-Lusatian and Trzciniec culture.

Distribution and local groups

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Europe in the late Bronze Age.

The Urnfield culture was located in an area stretching from western Hungary to eastern France, from the Alps to near the North Sea. Local groups, mainly differentiated by pottery, include:

• Knovíz culture in western and Northern Bohemia, southern Thuringia and North-eastern Bavaria
• Milavce culture in southeastern Bohemia
• Unstrut culture in Thuringia, a mixture between Knovíz-culture and the South-German Urnfield culture
• Lusatian culture in northern Bohemia, Lusatia and Poland

South-German Urnfield culture

• Northeast-Bavarian Group, divided into a lower Bavarian and an upper Palatinate group
• Lower-Main-Swabian group in southern Hesse and Baden-Württemberg, including the Marburger, Hanauer, lower Main and Friedberger facies
• Rhenish-Swiss group in Rhineland-Palatinate, Switzerland and eastern France, (abbreviated RSFO in French)

Lower-Rhine Urnfield culture

• Lower Hessian Group
• North-Netherlands-Westphalian group
• Northwest-Group in the Dutch Delta region

Middle-Danube Urnfield culture

• Velatice-Baierdorf in Moravia and Austria
• Čaka in western Slovakia
• Gáva culture
• Piliny culture
• Kyjatice culture
• Makó culture

Sometimes the distribution of artifacts belonging to these groups shows sharp and consistent borders, which might indicate some political structures, like tribes. Metalwork is commonly of a much more widespread distribution than pottery and does not conform to these borders. It may have been produced at specialised workshops catering for the elite of a large area.

Important French cemeteries include Châtenay and Lingolsheim (Alsace). An unusual earthwork was constructed at Goloring near Koblenz in Germany.

Related cultures

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Villanovan cinerary urn from Chiusi9th-7th century BC.

The central European Lusatian cultureforms part of the Urnfield tradition, but continues into the Iron Age without a notable break.

The Piliny culture in northern Hungary and Slovakia grew from the Tumulus culture, but used urn burials as well. The pottery shows strong links to the Gáva culture, but in the later phases, a strong influence of the Lusatian culture is found. In Italy the late Bronze Age Canegrate and Proto-Villanovan cultures and the early Iron Age Villanovan culture show similarities with the urnfields of central Europe. Urnfields are found in the French Languedoc and Catalonia from the 9th to 8th centuries. The change in burial custom was most probably influenced by developments further east.

The Golasecca culture in northern Italy developed with continuity from the Canegrate culture.^[2][4] Canegrate represented a completely new cultural dynamic to the area expressed in pottery and bronzework, making it a typical western example of the Urnfield culture, in particular the Rhine-Switzerland-Eastern France (RSFO) Urnfield culture.^[2][4] The Lepontic Celtic language inscriptions of the area show the language of the Golasecca culture was clearly Celtic making it probable that the 13th-century BC language of at least the RSEF area of the western urnfields was also Celtic or a precursor to it.^[2][4]

Placename evidence has also been used to point to an association of the Urnfield materials with a Proto-Celtic language group in central Europe, and it has been argued that it was the ancestral culture of the Celts.^[5] The Urnfield layers of the Hallstatt culture, Ha A and Ha B, are succeeded by the Iron Age « Hallstatt period » proper (Ha C and Ha D, 8th-6th centuries BC), associated with the early Celts; Ha D is in turn succeeded by the La Tène culture, the archaeological culture associated with the Continental Celts of antiquity.

The influence of the Urnfield culture spread widely and found its way to the northeastern Iberian coast, where the nearby Celtiberians of the interior adapted it for use in their cemeteries.^[6] Evidence for east-to-west early Urnfield (Bronze D-Hallstatt A) elite contacts such as rilled-ware, swords and crested helmets has been found in the southwest of the Iberian peninsula.^[7] The appearance of such elite status markers provides the simplest explanation for the spread of Celtic languages in this area from prestigious, proto-Celtic, early-Urnfield metalworkers.^[7]

Migrations

The numerous hoards of the Urnfield culture and the existence of fortified settlements (hill forts) were taken as evidence for widespread warfare and upheaval by some scholars. Written sources describe several collapses and upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, Anatolia and the Levant around the time of the Urnfield origins:

• End of the Mycenean culture with a conventional date of c. 1200 BC
• Destruction of Troy VI c. 1200 BC
• Battles of Ramses III against the Sea Peoples, 1195–1190 BC
• End of the Hittite empire 1180 BC
• Settlement of the Philistines in Canaan c. 1170 BC

Some scholars, among them Wolfgang Kimmig and P. Bosch-Gimpera have postulated a Europe-wide wave of migrations. The so-called Dorian invasion of Greece was placed in this context as well (although more recent evidence suggests that the Dorians moved in 1100 BC into a post Mycenaean vacuum, rather than precipitating the collapse). Better methods of dating have shown that these events are not as closely connected as once thought.

More recently Robert Drews, after having reviewed and dismissed the migration hypothesis, has suggested that the observed cultural associations may be in fact partly explained as the result of a new kind of warfare based upon the slashing Naue II sword,^[8] and with bands of infantry replacing chariots in warfare. Drews suggests that the political instability that this brought to centralised states based upon maryannu chariotry caused the breakdown of these polities.

Settlements

The number of settlements increased sharply in comparison with the preceding tumulus culture. Unfortunately, few have been comprehensively excavated. Fortified settlements, often on hilltops or in river-bends, are typical for the Urnfield culture. They are heavily fortified with dry-stone or wooden ramparts. Excavations of open settlements are rare, but they show that large 3-4 aisled houses built with wooden posts and wall of wattle and daub were common. Pit dwellings are known as well; they might have served as cellars.

Open settlements

The houses were one or two-aisled. Some were quite small, 4.5 m × 5 m at the Runder Berg (Urach, Germany), 5-8m long in Künzig (Bavaria, Germany), others up to 20 m long. They were built with wooden posts and walls of wattle and daub. At the Velatice-settlement of Lovčičky (Moravia, Czech Republic) 44 houses have been excavated. Large bell shaped storage pits are known from the Knovíz-culture. The settlement of Radonice (Louny) contained over 100 pits. They were most probably used to store grain and demonstrate a considerable surplus-production.

Pile dwellings

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Site of a hill fort, Urnfield Culture, Burgstallkogel (Sulm valley)

On lakes of southern Germany and Switzerland, numerous pile dwellings were constructed. They consist either of simple one-room houses made of wattle and daub, or log-built. The settlement at Zug, Switzerland, was destroyed by fire and gives important insights into the material culture and the settlement organisation of this period. It has yielded a number of dendro-dates as well.

Fortified settlements

Fortified hilltop settlements become common in the Urnfield period. Often a steep spur was used, where only part of the circumference had to be fortified. Depending on the locally available materials, dry-stone walls, gridded timbers filled with stones or soil or plank and palisade type pfostenschlitzmauer fortifications were used. Other fortified settlements used rivers-bends and swampy areas.

At the hill fort of Hořovice near Beroun (CR), 50 ha were surrounded by a stone wall. Most settlements are much smaller. Metal working is concentrated in the fortified settlements. On the Runder Berg near Urach, Germany, 25 stone mouldshave been found.

Hillforts are interpreted as central places. Some scholars see the emergence of hill forts as a sign of increased warfare. Most hillforts were abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age.

As far as we know, there are no special dwellings for an upper class, but few settlements have been excavated to any extent. In the Franche-Comté, caves were used as dwellings, perhaps in times of trouble.

Material culture

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Urnfield pottery

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Urnfield weapons

Pottery

The pottery is normally well made, with a smooth surface and a normally sharply carinated profile. Some forms are thought to imitate metal prototypes. Biconical pots with cylindrical necks are especially characteristic. There is some incised decoration, but a large part of the surface was normally left plain. Fluted decoration is common. In the Swiss pile dwellings, the incised decoration was sometimes inlaid with tin foil. Pottery kilns were already known (Elchinger Kreuz, Bavaria), as is indicated by the homogeneous surface of the vessels as well. Other vessels include cups of beaten sheet-bronze with riveted handles (type Jenišovice) and large cauldrons with cross attachments. Wooden vessels have only been preserved in waterlogged contexts, for example from Auvernier (Neuchâtel), but may have been quite widespread.

Tools and weapons

Further information: Frankleben hoard

The early Urnfield period (1300 BC) was a time when the warriors of central Europe could be heavily armored with body armor, helmets and shields all made of bronze, most likely borrowing the idea from MycenaeanGreece^[9]

The leaf-shaped Urnfield sword could be used for slashing, in contrast to the stabbing-swords of the preceding tumulus culture. It commonly possessed a ricasso. The hilt was normally made from bronze as well. It was cast separately and consisted of a different alloy. These solid hilted swords were known since Bronze D (Rixheim swords). Other swords have tanged blades and probably had a wood, bone, or antler hilt. Flange-hilted swords had organic inlays in the hilt. Swords include Auvernier, Kressborn-Hemigkofen, Erbenheim, Möhringen, Weltenburg, Hemigkofen and Tachlovice-types.

Protective gear like shields, cuirasses, greaves and helmets are extremely rare and almost never found in burials. The best-known example of a bronze shield comes from Plzeň in Bohemia and has a riveted handhold. Comparable pieces have been found in Germany, Western Poland, Denmark, Great Britain and Ireland. They are supposed to have been made in upper Italy or the Eastern Alps and imitate wooden shields. Irish bogs have yielded examples of leather shields (Clonbrinn, Co. Wexford). Bronze cuirasses are known since Bronze D (Čaka, grave II, Slovakia). Complete bronze cuirasses have been found in Saint Germain du Plain, nine examples, one inside the other, in Marmesse, Haute Marne (France), fragments in Albstadt-Pfeffingen (Germany). Bronze dishes (phalerae) may have been sewn on a leather armour. Greaves of richly decorated sheet-bronze are known from Kloštar Ivanić (Croatia) and the Paulus cave near Beuron (Germany).

Chariots

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Miniature bronze wagon.

About a dozen wagon-burials of four wheeled wagons with bronze fittings are known from the early Urnfield period. They include Hart an der Altz (Kr. Altötting), Mengen (Kr. Sigmaringen), Poing (Kr. Ebersberg), Königsbronn (Kr. Heidenheim) from Germany and St. Sulpice (Vaud), Switzerland. In Alz, the chariot had been placed on the pyre, pieces of bone are attached to the partially melted metal of the axles. Bronze (one-part) bits appear at the same time. Two-part horse bits are only known from late Urnfield contexts and may be due to eastern influence. Wood- and bronze spoked wheels are known from Stade (Germany), a wooden spoked wheel from Mercurago, Italy. Wooden dish-wheels have been excavated at Corcelettes (fr), Switzerland and the Wasserburg Buchau (de), Germany (diameter 80 cm).

In Milavče near Domažlice, Bohemia, a four-wheeled miniature bronze wagon bearing a large cauldron (diameter 30 cm) contained a cremation. This exceptionally rich burial was covered by a barrow. The wagon from Acholshausen (de) (Bavaria) comes from a male burial.

Such wagons are known from the Nordic Bronze Age as well. The Skallerup wagon (da), Denmark, contained a cremation as well. At Pekatel (Kr. Schwerin) in Mecklenburg a cauldron-wagon and other rich grave goods accompanied an inhumation under a barrow (Montelius III/IV). Another example comes from Ystad in Sweden. South-eastern European examples include Kanya in Hungary and Orăştiein Romania. Clay miniature wagons, sometimes with waterfowl were known there since the middle Bronze Age (Dupljaja, Vojvodina, Serbia).

The Lusatian chariot from Burg (Brandenburg, Germany) has three wheels on a single axle, on which waterfowl perch. The grave of Gammertingen (Kr. Sigmaringen, Germany) contained two socketed horned applications that probably belonged to a miniature wagon comparable to the Burg example, together with six miniature spoked wheels.

Hoards

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Bronze wheel pendants, Zürich, c. 1550–1000 BC.

Hoards are very common in the Urnfield culture. The custom is abandoned at the end of the Bronze Age. They were often deposited in rivers and wet places like swamps. As these spots were often quite inaccessible, they most probably represent gifts to the gods. Other hoards contain either broken or miscast objects that were probably intended for reuse by bronze smiths. As Late Urnfield hoards often contain the same range of objects as earlier graves, some scholars interpret hoarding as a way to supply personal equipment for the hereafter. In the river Trieux, Côtes du Nord, complete swords were found together with numerous antlers of red deer that may have had a religious significance as well.

Iron

Crescent shaped Urnfield razor^{[clarification needed]}

An iron ring from Vorwohlde (Kr. Grafschaft Diepholz, Germany) dating to the 15th century BC is the earliest evidence of iron in Central Europe. During the late Bronze Age, Iron was used to decorate the hilts of swords (Schwäbisch-Hall-Gailenkirchen, Unterkrumbach, Kr. Hersbruck) and knives (Dotternhausen, Plettenberg, Germany) and pins. The use of iron for weapons and domestic items in Europe only started in the following Hallstatt culture. The widespread use of iron for tools only occurred in the late Iron AgeLa Tène culture.

Economy

Cattle, pigs, sheep and goats were kept, as well as horses, dogs and geese. The cattle were rather small, with a height of 1.20 m at the withers. Horses were not much bigger with a mean of 1.25 m.

Forest clearance was intensive in the Urnfield period. Probably open meadows were created for the first time, as shown by pollen analysis. This led to increased erosion and sediment-load of the rivers.

Wheat and barley were cultivated, together with pulses and the horse bean. Poppy seeds were used for oil or as a drug. Millet and oats were cultivated for the first time in Hungary and Bohemia, rye was already cultivated, further west it was only a noxious weed. Flax seems to have been of reduced importance, maybe because mainly wool was used for clothes. Hazel nuts, apples, pears, sloes and acorns were collected. Some rich graves contain bronze sieves that have been interpreted as wine-sieves (Hart an der Alz). This beverage would have been imported from the South, but supporting evidence is lacking. In the lacustrine settlement of Zug, remains of a broth made of spelt and millet have been found. In the lower-Rhine urnfields, leavened bread was often placed on the pyre and burnt fragments have thus been preserved.

Wool was spun (finds of spindle whorls are common) and woven on the warp-weighted loom; bronze needles (Unteruhldingen) were used for sewing.

There is some suggestion that the Urnfield culture is associated with a wetter climatic period than the earlier Tumulus cultures. This may be associated with the diversion of the mid-latitude winter storms north of the Pyrenees and the Alps, possibly associated with drier conditions in the Mediterranean basin.

Funerary customs

Giacobbe Giusti, Urnfield culture

Excavated tumulus at Marburg.

An urn for the ashes and dishes for grave offerings.

Typical burial of cremation urn.

Graves

In the tumulus-period, multiple inhumations under barrows were common, at least for the upper levels of society. In the Urnfield period, inhumation and burial in single flat graves prevails, though some barrows exist.

In the earliest phases of the Urnfield period, man-shaped graves were dug, sometimes provided with a stone lined floor, in which the cremated remains of the deceased were spread. Only later, burial in urns became prevalent. Some scholars speculate that this may have marked a fundamental shift in people’s beliefs or myths about life and the afterlife.

The size of the urnfields is variable. In Bavaria, they can contain hundreds of burials, while the largest cemetery in Baden-Württemberg in Dautmergen has only 30 graves. The dead were placed on pyres, covered in their personal jewellery, which often shows traces of the fire and sometimes food-offerings. The cremated bone-remains are much larger than in the Roman period, which indicates that less wood was used. Often, the bones have been incompletely collected. Most urnfields are abandoned with the end of the Bronze Age, only the Lower Rhine urnfields continue in use in the early Iron Age (Ha C, sometimes even D).

The cremated bones could be placed in simple pits. Sometimes the dense concentration of the bones indicates a container of organic material, sometimes the bones were simply shattered.

If the bones were placed in urns, these were often covered by a shallow bowl or a stone. In a special type of burial (bell-graves) the urns are completely covered by an inverted larger vessel. As graves rarely overlap, they may have been marked by wooden posts or stones. Stone-pacing graves are typical of the Unstrut group.

Grave gifts

The urn containing the cremated bones is often accompanied by other, smaller ceramic vessels, like bowls and cups. They may have contained food. The urn is often placed in the centre of the assemblage. Often, these vessels have not been placed on the pyre. Metal grave gifts include razors, weapons that often have been deliberately destroyed (bent or broken), bracelets, pendants and pins. Metal grave gifts become rarer towards the end of the Urnfield culture, while the number of hoards increase. Burnt animal bones are often found, they may have been placed on the pyre as food. The marten bones in the grave of Seddin may have belonged to a garment (pelt). Amber or glassbeads (Pfahlbautönnchen) are luxury items.

Upper-class graves

Upper-class burials were placed in wooden chambers, rarely stone cists or chambers with a stone-paved floor and covered with a barrow or cairn. The graves contain especially finely made pottery, animal bones, usually pork, sometimes gold rings or sheets, in exceptional cases miniature wagons. Some of these rich burials contain the remains of more than one person. In this case, women and children are normally seen as sacrifices. Until more is known about the status distribution and the social structure of the late Bronze Age, this interpretation should be viewed with caution, however. Towards the end of the Urnfield period, some bodies were burnt in situ and then covered by a barrow, reminiscent of the burial of Patroclus as described by Homer and the burial of Beowulf (with the additional ship burialelement). In the early Iron Age, inhumation became the rule again.

Cult

The Kyffhäuser caves in Thuringia contain headless skeletons and split human and animal bones that have been interpreted as sacrifices. Other deposits include grain, knotted vegetable fibres and hair and bronze objects (axes, pendants and pins). The Ith-caves (Lower Saxony) have yielded comparative material.

In the Knovíz-culture, human bones with cut-marks and traces of burning have been found in settlement pits. They have been interpreted as evidence for cannibalism. As these bones form a large part of the burials known this may have been a quite regular treatment including the ritual manipulation and dismemberment of human corpses. Moon-shaped clay fire dogs are thought to have a religious significance, as well as crescent shaped razors.

An obsession with waterbirds is indicated by numerous pictures and three-dimensional representations. Combined with the hoards deposited in rivers and swamps, it indicates religious beliefs connected with water. This has led some scholars to believe in serious droughts during the late Bronze Age. Sometimes the water-birds are combined with circles, the so-called sun-barque-motif.

• Beaker culture
• Sorothaptic language
• Urnfield culture numerals

References

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Chadwick and Corcoran, Nora and J.X.W.P. (1970). The Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 28–29.
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Kruta, Venceslas (1991). The Celts. Thames and Hudson. pp. 93–100.
3. Jump up^ Gimbutas, Marija (1965). Bronze age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe. Mouton Publishers. pp. 274–298.
4. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Stifter, David (2008). Old Celtic Languages (PDF). p. 24.
5. Jump up^ Chadwick with Corcoran, Nora with J.X.W.P. (1970). The Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 28–33.
6. Jump up^ Cremin, Aedeen (1992). The Celts in Europe. Sydney, Australia: Sydney Series in Celtic Studies 2, Centre for Celtic Studies, University of Sydney. pp. 59–60. ISBN 0-86758-624-9.
7. ^ Jump up to:^a b Koch, John T. (2013). Celtic from the West 2 – Prologue: The Earliest Hallstatt Iron Age cannot equal Proto-Celtic. Oxford: Oxbow Books. pp. 10–11. ISBN 978-1-84217-529-3.
8. Jump up^ Drews. R (1993) « The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C. » Princeton University Press ISBN 0-691-04811-8
9. Jump up^ « Bronze Age cultures in Central and Eastern Europe ». google.dk.

Bibliography

• J. M. Coles/A. F. Harding, The Bronze Age in Europe (London 1979).
• G. Weber, Händler, Kieger, Bronzegießer (Kassel 1992).
• Ute Seidel, Bronzezeit. Württembergisches Landesmuseum Stuttgart (Stuttgart 1995).
• Konrad Jażdżewski, Urgeschichte Mitteleuropas (Wrocław 1984)
• Association Abbaye de Daoulas (eds.), Avant les Celtes. L’Europe a l’age du Bronze (Daoulas 1988).
• Frans Theuws, Nico Roymans (eds.), Land and ancestors: cultural dynamics in the Urnfield period and the Middle Ages in the southern Netherlands, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies, Amsterdam University Press, 1999, ISBN978-90-5356-278-9.

Urnfield culture at Wikimedia Commons

Authority control	GND: 4062146-7

Categories:

• Urnfield culture
• Bronze Age cultures of Europe
• Archaeological cultures of Central Europe
• Archaeological cultures of Southern Europe
• Archaeological cultures of Southeastern Europe
• Archaeological cultures of Southwestern Europe
• Archaeological cultures of Western Europe
• Celtic archaeological cultures
• Archaeological cultures in Austria
• Archaeological cultures in Belgium
• Archaeological cultures in Croatia
• Archaeological cultures in the Czech Republic
• Archaeological cultures in France
• Archaeological cultures in Germany
• Archaeological cultures in Hungary
• Archaeological cultures in Italy
• Archaeological cultures in the Netherlands
• Archaeological cultures in Poland
• Archaeological cultures in Romania
• Archaeological cultures in Slovakia
• Archaeological cultures in Slovenia
• Archaeological cultures in Spain
• Archaeological cultures in Switzerland
• Archaeological cultures in Ukraine
• 13th-century BC establishments
• 2nd-millennium BC establishments
• 8th-century BC disestablishments

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

Rotating image

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

The gilded side of the Trundholm sun chariot.

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

The left side of the disk shows no traces of gilding.

The Trundholm sun chariot(Danish: Solvognen), is a Nordic Bronze Age artifact discovered in Denmark. It is a representation of the sun chariot, a bronze statue of a horse and a large bronze disk, which are placed on a device with spoked wheels.

The sculpture was discovered with no accompanying objects in 1902 in a peat bog on the Trundholm moor in Odsherred in the northwestern part of Zealand, (approximately 55°55′N 11°37′E). It is now in the collection of the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen.

Description

The horse stands on a bronze rod supported by four wheels. The rod below the horse is connected to the disk, which is supported by two wheels. All of the wheels have four spokes. The artifact was cast in the lost wax method.

The whole object is approximately 54 cm × 35 cm × 29 cm (21 in × 14 in × 11 in) in size (width, height, depth).^[1]

The disk has a diameter of approximately 25 cm (9.8 in). It is gilded on one side only, the right-hand side (when looking in the direction of the horse). It consists of two bronze disks that are joined by an outer bronze ring, with a thin sheet of gold applied to one face. The disks were then decorated with punches and gravers with zones of motifs of concentric circles, with bands of zig-zag decoration between borders. The gold side has an extra outer zone which may represent rays, and also a zone with concentric circles linked by looping bands that « instead of flowing in one direction, progress like the steps of the dance, twice forward and once back ». The main features of the horse are also highly decorated.^[2]

The two sides of the disk have been interpreted as an indication of a belief that the sun is drawn across the heavens from East to West during the day, presenting its bright side to the Earth and returns from West to East during the night, when the dark side is being presented to the Earth. A continuation around a globe would have the same result. It is thought that the chariot was pulled around during religious rituals to demonstrate the motion of the sun in the heavens.^[3]

Date

The sculpture is dated by the National Museum to about 1400 BC,^[4] though other dates have been suggested. Unfortunately it was found before pollen-dating was developed, which would have enabled a more confident dating.

A model of a horse-drawn vehicle on spoked wheels in Northern Europe at such an early time is surprising; they would not be expected to appear until the end of the Late Bronze Age, which ranges from 1100 BC to 550 BC. This and aspects of the decoration may suggest a Danubian origin or influence in the object, although the Nationalmuseet is confident it is of Nordic origin.^[5]

Possible function as a calendar

Giacobbe Giusti, Trundholm sun chariot

Rotating image

Klaus Randsborg, professor of archeology at the University of Copenhagen, has pointed out that the sum of an addition of the number of spirals in each circle of the disk, multiplied by the number of the circles in which they are found, counted from the middle (1×1 + 2×8 + 3×20 + 4×25), results in a total of 177, which comes very close to the number of days in six synodic months, only 44 min 2.8 s shorter each.

The synodic cycle is the time that elapses between two successive conjunctions of an object in the sky, such as a specific star, with the sun. It is the time that elapses before the object will reappear at the same point in the sky when observed from the Earth, so it is the apparent orbital period observed from Earth.

He asserts his belief that this demonstrates that the disk was designed by a person with some measure of astronomic knowledge and that the sculpture may have functioned as a calendar.

Sun chariot in Indo-European mythology

Sun chariot

Norse mythology

The chariot has been interpreted as a possible Bronze Age predecessor to Skinfaxi,^[6] the horse that pulled Dagr, the personification of day, across the sky.

Celtic Pantheon

The sky god Taranis is typically depicted with the attribute of a spoked wheel.

Rigveda

Surya’s chariot

Main article: Historical Vedic religion

The Rigveda also reflects the mytheme of the Sun chariot. RV 10.85 mentions the sun god’s bride as seated on a chariot pulled by two steeds. The relevant verses are the following (trans. Griffith):

10. Her spirit was the bridal car; the covering thereof was heaven: Bright were both Steeds that drew it when Suryaapproached her husband’s home.
11. Thy Steeds were steady, kept in place by holy verse and Sama-hymn: All car were thy two chariot wheels: thy path was tremulous in the sky,
12. Clean, as thou wentest, were thy wheels wind, was the axle fastened there. Surya, proceeding to her Lord, mounted a spirit-fashioned car.^[7]

• Egtved Girl
• Golden hat
• Håga Kurgan
• Nebra skydisk
• Nordic Bronze Age
• Phaëton
• Sól (sun)
• Sun worship
• The King’s Grave
• Urnfield culture
• Cult Wagon of Strettweg

Notes

1. Jump up^ Nationalmuseet
2. Jump up^ Sandars, 184-185
3. Jump up^ Sandars, 184; see also Nationalmuseet video
4. Jump up^ http://natmus.dk/historisk-viden/danmark/oldtid-indtil-aar-1050/bronzealderen-1700-fkr-500-fkr/solvognen/
5. Jump up^ Nationalmuseet video; Sandars, 183-185 favours Danubian influence, and a date at the end of the 13th century.
6. Jump up^ Lindow, John. (2001) Norse Mythology: A Guide to the Gods, Heroes, Rituals, and Beliefs, page 272. Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-515382-0.
7. Jump up^ Mandala 10/Hymn 85

References

• Sandars, Nancy K., Prehistoric Art in Europe, Penguin (Pelican, now Yale, History of Art), 1968 (nb 1st edn.)

Trundholm Sun Chariot.

• Reconstructing the Trundholm Sun Chariot, Anders Söderberg, Sweden, 2002. Söderberg demonstrates how part of the chariot might have been made using the lost-wax method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trundholm_sun_chariot

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan language

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan language

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan language

 

Etruscan
mekh Rasnal
Native to	Ancient Etruria
Region	Italian Peninsula
Extinct	>AD 180[1]
Language family	Etruscan
Writing system	Old Italic script
Language codes
ISO 639-3	ett
Glottolog	etru1241[2]
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA.

The Etruscan language(/ɪˈtrʌskən/)^[3] was the spoken and written language of the Etruscan civilization, in Italy, in the ancient region of Etruria (modern Tuscanyplus western Umbria and northern Latium) and in parts of Campania, Lombardy, Veneto, and Emilia-Romagna, where the Etruscans were later displaced by Gauls. Etruscan influenced Latin, but was eventually completely superseded by it. The Etruscans left around 13,000 inscriptions which have been found so far, only a small minority of which are of significant length, some bilingual inscriptions with texts also in Latin, Greek, or Phoenician, and a few dozen loanwords, such as the name Roma (from Etruscan Ruma),^{[citation needed]} but Etruscan’s influence was significant.

Attested from 700 BC to AD 50, the relation of Etruscan to other languages has been a source of long-running speculation and study, with it being referred to at times as an isolate, one of the Tyrsenian languages, and a number of other less well-known possibilities. Grammatically, the language is agglutinating, with nouns and verbs showing suffixed inflectional endings and ablaut in some cases. Nouns show four cases, singular and plural numbers, and masculine and feminine genders. Phonologically, Etruscan appears uncomplicated, with a four-vowel system and an apparent contrast between aspirated and unaspirated stops. The language shows phonetic change over time, with the loss and then re-establishment of word-internal vowels due to the effect of Etruscan’s strong word-initial stress.

Etruscan religion influenced that of the Romans and many of the few surviving Etruscan language artifacts are of votive or religious significance. Etruscan was written in an alphabet derived from the Greek alphabet; this alphabet was the source of the Latin alphabet. The Etruscan language is also believed to be the source of certain important cultural words of Western Europesuch as ‘military’ and ‘people’, which do not have obvious Indo-European roots.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_language

http://www.lplnews24.com/2016/03/a-cortona-una-mostra-evento-per.html

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Medici-Riccardi horse

Giacobbe Giusti, Medici-Riccardi horse

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, ANDREA del VERROCCHIO: David

Giacobbe Giusti, ANDREA del VERROCCHIO: David

David (Bargello, Florenz)

David (Bargello, Florenz)

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Lampadario etrusco – particolare, sec. V a.C.

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Dettaglio lampadario etrusco

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Giacobbe Giusti, Étrusque lustre en bronze

Le musée de l’Académie étrusque de Cortone (MAEC, Museo dell’Accademia Etrusca e della Città di Cortona en italien), est le musée étrusque de la ville de Cortone, en Toscane.

Il est situé dans le Palazzo Casali, qui accueillait auparavant le Museo della Città Etrusca e Romana di Cortona, qui fut ensuite réuni au Museo dell’Accademia Etrusca (datant de 1727 à la suite du legs de l’abbé Onofrio Baldelli de sa collection et de sa bibliothèque), puis fondé en MAEC (Museo dell’Accademia Etrusca e della Città di Cortona).

Malgré son nom précis (dû au passé historique de la ville), le musée n’est pas exclusivement consacré aux vestiges étrusques (on remarquera malgré tout le lustre étrusque à 16 brûleurs à huile à figuration d’Achéloüs et de dauphins ainsi que la Tabula Cortonensis^[1], une plaque en bronze en huit morceaux gravée d’un texte étrusque, découverte en 1992).

http://www.cortonamaec.org/percorsi/scheda.php?id=ae12

https://giacobbegiusti.wordpress.com/category/giacobbe-giusti-cortona/

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Chevaux de Saint-Marc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chevaux de Saint-Marc

Chevaux de Saint-Marc

Chevaux de Saint-Marc (répliques).

Artiste	Lysippe
Date	IIe siècle ou postérieur
Type	Cuivre
Technique	Sculpture
Lieux de création	Rhodes, Chios
Mouvement	Sculpture hellénistique (d)
Localisation	Basilique Saint-Marc, Venise (Italie)
Coordonnées	45° 26′ 04,17″ N, 12° 20′ 21,73″ E

Localisation sur la carte de Venise

• voir sur la carte de Venise

 

Les chevaux de Saint-Marc sont quatre statues antiques de chevaux de cuivre coulé^[1], faisant partie d’un quadrige qui ornait autrefois l’hippodrome de Constantinople. Les Vénitiens les enlevèrent en 1204 et les placèrent sur une galerie, au-dessus de la porte principale de la basilique Saint-Marc de Venise. Ils sont aujourd’hui remplacés par des répliques, les originaux étant conservés à l’intérieur de la basilique.

Historique

Les quatre chevaux ont une origine toujours débattue : selon certains historiens, ils auraient été réalisés en Grèce, pour l’île de Rhodes ou celle de Chios, au IV^e siècle av. J.-C. alors que pour d’autres, ils seraient romains et dateraient du IV^e siècle apr. J.-C. Lors de la première restauration contemporaine (1977-1981), des fragments de terre en fusion prélevés à l’intérieur laissent plutôt penser à la première hypothèse. Lysippe pourrait en avoir été le sculpteur. Il s’agit de l’une des rares sculptures métalliques aujourd’hui existantes, la majorité ayant été fondues depuis l’Antiquité^[2].

Ils furent transportés à l’hippodrome de Constantinople, que l’empereur Constantin érigea en nouvelle capitale de l’Empire à partir de 330.

En 1204, après le sac de Constantinople durant la Quatrième croisade, le doge Enrico Dandolo les fit transporter à Venise sur des galères. Ils furent installés sur la façade de la basilique Saint-Marc en 1254, « pour symboliser le triomphe de l’Église » selon Ettore Vio, actuel architecte chargé de leur entretien^[2].

• 
• 
• 

En 1797, Napoléon Bonaparte, alors général en chef de l’armée d’Italie du Directoire, prend Venise durant la première Campagne d’Italie (1796-1797) et emporte les chevaux. Devenu empereur, il les fait installer sur les grilles des Tuileries, puis sur l’arc de triomphe du Carrousel, édifié à Paris en hommage à la Grande Armée, entre 1807 et 1809^[3].

Quadrige de l’Arc de triomphe du Carrousel à Paris, copies du XIX^e siècle.

En 1815, après la bataille de Waterloo et la chute de Napoléon, à la suite du congrès de Vienne, les chevaux sont rendus à Venise par les Autrichiens^[4]. Ils sont alors remplacés sur l’Arc de triomphe du Carrousel par des copies, réalisées par le sculpteur François Joseph Bosio : La Paix conduite sur un char de triomphe (1828)^[2]. Les originaux regagnent la façade de la basilique Saint-Marc.

Pendant la Première Guerre mondiale, les chevaux sont cachés au palazzo Venezia de Rome et pendant la Seconde, au monastère de Praglia, près de Padoue, afin d’être protégés^[2]. En 1981, les chevaux originaux ont été placés dans le musée de la basilique et remplacés par des répliques pour les préserver de la pollution atmosphérique. Déjà ternies au bout de vingt ans, les répliques ont dû être nettoyées et restaurées en 2006^[5]. Une nouvelle campagne de restauration du quadrige est initiée en avril 2013 par le Groupe des Jeunes du Comité français pour la sauvegarde de Venise. Elle prend fin en septembre 2013, après un dépoussiérage complet du bronze doré des sculptures.

Description

Répliques en place à Venise.

Les chevaux de Saint-Marc sont les éléments restants du seul quadrige de bronze qui nous reste de l’Antiquité.

Des analyses pratiquées lors d’un tour du monde d’expositions au début des années 1980 ont montré que les chevaux sont en bronze à très faible teneur d’étain, du cuivre quasi pur à 98 %, allié à environ 1 % d’étain et 1 % de plomb, métal extrêmement difficile à couler, peu apte à remplir les fins détails des moules, alors que le bronze antique est habituellement constitué de 85 % de cuivre, 10 % d’étain, une faible quantité de plomb et autres impuretés. Chaque cheval est différent, les têtes ont été coulées à part et ne sont peut-être pas à leur place d’origine. Les colliers, qui cachent la jonction, sont plus récents, mais certainement la réplique des éléments antiques^[1].

La surface des chevaux a été dorée au mercure, puis volontairement grattée en stries parallèles de largeur constante à l’aide d’un ciseau, très probablement pour un meilleur effet de reflet au soleil^[1].

Notes et références

1. ↑ ^{a, b et c} Les Chevaux de Saint-Marc, Venise, Galeries nationales du Grand Palais.
2. ↑ ^{a, b, c et d} Alexie Valois, « La fabuleuse épopée des chevaux de Saint-Marc », Le Figaro Magazine, semaine du 18 avril 2014, pages 78-81.
3. ↑ Luce-Marie Albigès, Présence des chevaux de Venise à Paris, de 1798 à 1815 [archive], L’Histoire par l’image
4. ↑ Corinne Herskovitch, Didier Rykner, La restitution des œuvres d’art : solutions et impasses, éd. Hazan, 2011
5. ↑ Restauration des chevaux de Saint-Marc [archive], Comité français pour la sauvegarde de Venise.

Voir aussi

• Chevaux de Saint-Marc

• Basilique Saint-Marc
• Époque hellénistique
• Art hellénistique
• Comité français pour la sauvegarde de Venise

Bibliographie

Collectif, Les Chevaux de Saint-Marc, Venise, Galeries nationales du Grand Palais, 1981,

 

http://lnx.whipart.it/html/articolo-1602.html

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevaux_de_Saint-Marc

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com