Episodio final

interest is the apparent discontinuity between the evidence for occupation at Cosa, where there is a dearth of material after 70 B.C., and the countryside, where a vital and flourishing landscape existed at least into the 2nd _{century A.D. albeit on a reduced scale in terms of}

absolute numbers.263 _{Although the colony of Cosa would be rebuilt, it would never again be}

261_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 180. This is the traditional explanation for the destruction of Talamone, but}

recently Bruno et al. (1980) have suggested that this community, like Cosa fell victim to an attack of pirates in the first decades of the 1st _{century B.C.}

262_{Brown 1980, 74.} 263_{Dyson 1981, 272.}

the thriving urban community seen in the 3rd _{and 2}nd _{centuries B.C.}264 _{Instead, the colonies}

of Heba and Saturnia would take over the place of prominence that the urban center of Cosa had held. This represented a reversion to Pre-Roman pattern of strong inland centers. Heba in particular saw an influx of new settlement and the monumentalization of its public spaces. Saturnia, likewise, was the focus of an expanded population while its forum was improved with a travertine pavement.265

On the whole, there was a minor retraction in rural settlement numbers within the Ager Vulcentis during the Late Republic and Early Empire. Despite this trend of decline in the absolute number of settlements, the overall population probably did not decrease since the small sites were being replaced by larger villas.266 _{Nevertheless, a number of regions did}

see an intensification of rural productive regimes. The first of these was the Valle d’Oro where a number of massive slave run villas appear to have displaced the earlier settlements of small farmers.267 _{Overall, the largest population of villas continued to be found in close}

proximity to the main Roman roads of the zone, presumably due to the need for cheap transport of surplus products.268 _{These sites were linked into an economy geared for export}

in which the villas, roads, and ports of the region constituted the backbone of the mercantile system.269 _{Despite the growth of the villa system, only three true latifundia can be identified}

within the region during the period in question.270 _{In terms of structural remains, the largest}

264_{Brown 1980, 74.}

265_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 123-124.} 266_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 181.} 267_{Celuzza and Regoli 1982, 45-46.}

268_{Cambi and Fentress 1989, 81; Carandini and Cambi 2002, 191.} 269_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 191.}

villas were located on the coast in the area immediately surrounding the colony of Cosa, and can be classed as villae maritimae rather than latifundia.271 _{Even in the territory of Cosa,}

middle and small level farms seem to have flourished even into the 2nd _{century A.D.}272 _{It is}

also interesting to note that already with the end of the 1st _{century A.D. a number of villas}

had begun to fail, presaging the eventual crisis in the management of the landscape to come.273

In contrast, the areas to the North of Heba and Saturnia saw an increase in the very sites that were disappearing from the Valle d’Oro. At Heba, a number of new farmsteads and agro-towns were founded on vacant land located outside the original zone of centuriation. This was some of the most marginal land in the region.274 _{In addition, these}

sites were of a smaller size than those that had come to dominate the Ager Cosanus, suggesting that smallholding was the primary mode of land ownership.275 _{Carandini and}

Cambi have suggested that the increase in the territory of Heba was largely due to viritane assignations of land to the veterans of Caesar.276 _{Another possibility exists, however. These}

new plots of land are just as likely the possessions of the farmers who had formerly occupied the lands of the Valle d’Oro and the immediate territory of Cosa, landscapes now dominated by other forms of cultivation. The region to the North of Saturnia, which was focused on a major village site located at Poggio Semproniano, underwent a similar

270_{Dyson 1978, 260.} 271_{Dyson 1981, 272.} 272_{Dyson 1981, 272.}

273_{Attolini et al. 1991; Attolini et al. 1982, 371; and Celuzza and Regoli 1982, 45-46.} 274_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 181.}

275_{Dyson 1981, 273.}

expansion of small farmsteads into the most marginal portions of the landscape.277 _{It is}

important to note that although the population of small farms was expanding, few villas of any size were to be found in this region.278 _{The marginal location of the new sites suggests}

not the assignation of territory to victorious soldiers, but of a population trading the fertile river valley and coastal zones susceptible to ravaging by pirates for the safety of inland hills and mountains. The epigraphic record of both sites, and especially that of Saturnia, suggests that Etruscan families dominated the population as a whole, as well as comprising a majority of the upper classes. A number of Etruscan families were involved in the euergetism that led to improvements in the civic infrastructure of the colony.279

Although the period of the late Republic and the Early Empire saw an increase in the number of villas across the landscape, it is important not to fall into the trap of overestimating their importance or the numbers of the slaves who clearly formed a large portion of their workforce. As Rathbone has noted, even Cato suggested that a large free population in close proximity to a villa was necessary for the profitable exploitation of a harvest.280 _{It is not surprising then that we see villas, farmsteads, and villages forming}

productive patterns in the landscape of the Roman Ager Vulcentis. In the case of a number of areas, such as on the periphery of the colonial territory to the North of Heba and Saturnia, villages were often surrounded by a ring of small farmsteads.281 _{These villages were}

evidently functioning as central places for the distribution of goods and services that were not able to be produced at the household level. In the few areas where villas exist at the

277_{Dyson 1981, 273-274; Cambi and Fentress 1989, 81; Carandini and Cambi 2002, 182.} 278_{Attolini et al. 1982, 377.}

279_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 193.}

280_{Rathbone 1981; Cambi and Fentress 1989, 82.} 281_{Carandini and Cambi 2002, 192.}

margins of the territories of larger urban entities, they often were situated in close proximity with village structures.282 _{These villages were a source of local labor employed at harvest}

time as well as places for the local distribution of surplus.283

Villages also continued to thrive along the previous Etruscan pattern in the Early Imperial landscape along between the Tafone and Chiarone rivers. This continuity of the native pattern of exploitation coupled with the absence of centuriation suggests that this zone was not co-opted into the territory of one of the new Roman foundations, but may have remained directly dependent on Vulci. The lack of change may also be due to the environmental conditions of the area, which favor small scale grain production over that of extensive poly-culture, such as that employed by the villas.284 _{The organization of locally}

geared small-scale agricultural production forms a second hierarchy of sites engaged in the distribution of surplus. Instead of focusing on the major villas of the regions and access to roadways and transport by sea, this local agricultural configuration consisted of small farmsteads linked by village communities, and at the top of the hierarchy the major municipia of the region.285

Cerveteri and Its Roman Landscape

A different picture emerges from the landscape of the city of Cerveteri. As with most