M.J. Strazzulla, 'Le terrecotte architettoniche: le produzioni dal IV al I sec. a.C.', Société romana e produzione schiavistica, II. Merci, mercati e scambi nel Mediterraneo (Bari, 1981) 189 claims that they are solely employed in sacred building from the fourth to second centuries BC. But note the antefix on a building at M. Vairano of c. 200-50 BC, the so-called 'casa di 'LN" (Dench, Barbarians 132).
Strazzulla, 'Terrecotte architettoniche' 187. For instance Manconi, 'Terrecotte architettoniche'.
regions, because the moulds used were extremely similar. Little more has been established to date.^"^
There are other problems with using architectural terracottas as evidence of temples in this region. Some architectural terracottas, such as those from Assisi, lack any provenance and can only be assigned in general to the town in which they turn up, but the possibility that they were brought from elsewhere in a later period should be kept in mind. They could, for example, come from rural religious sites although excavated examples, such as M. Ansciano and M. Acuto, suggests that their use in rural sanctuaries was uncommon. If the real provenance was another settlement centre, my central point (that this is material evidence for the beginning of urbanisation) remains unaffected.
Later building on ancient cities in Umbria means that almost all of the attested architectural terracottas are chance survivals from the decay and subsequent destruction of the temples (or other buildings) associated with them. The remains of temples found outside medieval and modem urban areas, such as Colle di Bettona, Collemancio and S. Maria in Canale, generally have more surviving structures. Inside town centres only odd architectural terracottas or podia blocks tend to be preserved, unless a large amount of material was buried together in antiquity, as seems to have happened at Todi. The destruction of ancient buildings and the difficulty of excavation make it likely that the terracottas attested represent only a small proportion of the Republican temples that once existed in Umbria.
Despite these problems with the source material some tendencies are detectable from this small sample. Perhaps predictably building activity before the Social W ar seems to have been restricted to the sub-Appennine zones of Umbria, as opposed to the more mountainous areas. In the latter no traces of temples on the Etrusco-ltalic model from before the Social W ar have been found to date.^® Furthermore, except for Jesi and Civitalba, there is no evidence from the eastern side of the Appennines, where urbanisation seems to have been largely confined to the post-Social W ar period. Most evidence for building activity comes from the Valle Umbra, an area dominated by Perugia at one end and Spoleto at the other. By the end of the third century there were probably monumental buildings at Ama, Assisi, Bettona, Bevagna, Collemancio and Spoleto. Gubbio and Todi, away from this valley, are also likely to have had temples before 200 BO. The most significant evidence in quantitative terms is for Bettona, Civitalba,
Manconi, Terrecotte architettoniche' 64.
This mountainous zone stretches to the east of the Iguvium - Spoletium axis (see map 1). The rural sanctuaries found in this (and other) areas are examined in section 6 below.
Collemancio, Spoleto and Todi. At all of these sites except Civitalba the groups of terracottas have been found by excavation. At Todi, the discoveries may relate to a refuse dump; according to Tamburini, the terracottas' quality and quantity could suggest a school of craftsmen working within the town.^® In the case of Spoleto, the finds probably come from more than one temple. There is obviously much less certainty in deducing the presence of temples from single terracotta fragments; but where there has been no excavation, very few pieces are likely to be casually found or preserved by chance.
The graph of the evidence shows a steady increase in the number of temples from the fourth to the second century BC.^^ Although the numbers involved are very small, they seem to be in the sort of proportion that we might expect. This growth in building is something that, apart from a little activity in the archaic period, began in the century before the Roman conquest. The progressive increase from the fourth century onwards also shows that the building boom of the second and first century common to much of Italy had a background of gradually increasing activity in the previous centuries in this region. From the first century onwards, the evidence of architectural terracottas becomes less representative as monumental buildings began to be built totally out of stone, such as the so-called 'Temple of Minerva' in Assisi (40-20 BC).^® Architectural terracottas are still produced, however, as is clear from the restoration of the older style, predominantly wooden, temples of Collemancio and Bettona in the first century BO.
In theory, the designs of the architectural terracottas should give us some idea of the contacts between Umbrian centres and other regions before the Social War. This in turn might help us to identify some of the sources of inspiration for the building of temples in this region. As I have noted above, the architectural terracottas of Umbria have been subject to little study, except for those from Collemancio and Todi. Nevertheless the picture from these two sites correlates with that given by other elements of material culture: that is to say, the dominant influence on Umbria in the fourth century BC is Orvieto.^® In all probability, the designs of the fourth century
P. Tamburini, in Todi. Verso un museo 54. He also documents the substantial ceramic