Category: Archaeology

Review: Rome’s Lost Empire

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ 4 Comments

Not sure how long this one will be up on Youtube, so it might be a good idea to watch it now … my review follows:

We’ll begin by noting that when this one first appeared on the BBC a week or two ago, it seemed to be universally-panned by folks on twitter and facebook. It had been hyped by the BBC (who produced the program).and by the University of Alabama (whence comes Sarah Parcak, whose work sparked the show: Birmingham Egyptologist Sarah Parcak featured in BBC show on lost treasures rediscovered from space). In case you didn’t know, Parcak was the “space archaeologist” who was in the news a year and a half ago for finding a pile of Egyptian sites (including pyramids) using her satellite methods (e.g. Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images … BBC). She also gave a very interesting TED talk that you should check out if you get a chance: Sarah Parcak: Archeology from space ).

That said, we have to note that this particular documentary has a pile of the ‘devices’ that I find incredibly annoying in documentaries about the ancient world, and all of them are connected to trying to create ‘drama’. For example, although the thing is hosted by the very capable Dan Snow, I really don’t care about his parents dragging him around ancient sites or Dr Parcak’s imaginary space ship.  We really don’t need silly statements about Dr Parcak being an ‘ordinary lecturer’ by day, but someone who sits in front of a computer at night doing research (don’t we all do that?). I don’t like the ‘contrivedness’ of having Dr Parcak being set up in the ruins of Portus/Ostia (can’t tell which), supposedly doing the research for the first time when we all know it was all done well in advance of any footage being shot. We also don’t need the shots of her working long hours into the night or confessions of self doubt, yadda yadda yadda. The UK version of all this is an hour and twenty minutes long; when the program comes to the US this summer, it is apparently going to be shorter. If they’re looking for things to cut out, that’s a nice list.

As long as we’re talking about editing things out, I should also note that in general, the documentary puts one in the same mood as one might have been listening to the Rolling Stones’ Exile On Main Street for the first time: so much good stuff if the other bits were stripped out. In particular, the supposed unifying element in this program — the question of how Rome maintained such a vast empire with so few soldiers — is completely unneeded and the focus should have been from the start simply what the new technologies can tell us that we didn’t need to learn before. We don’t need to make it look like we are suddenly coming up with a new theory when we’re just finding evidence confirming what is already believed by a majority of scholars.

That said, there is some really good information here, but not all of it is without controversy. The first segment is devoted to Portus and is seeking to help Simon Keay and crew find things like canals and the lighthouse. Back in 2010, a canal find at Portus was big news (Major Roman Canal from Portus!). In 2011, we read about a shipyard find (Huge Roman Shipyard Found (Maybe)) .

Unfortunately, the segment with Keay and crew is just an introductory tease and we are taken to the land of the Dacians — which, of course, is more dramatically referred to as ‘Transylvania’. Outside of the use of sonar to ‘sort of” find the footings of the bridge Trajan built across the Danube (and the expected graphical recreations), what is really important here is the use of LiDAR to find evidence of rampants around Sarmizgetusa. The segment involves a big gun in Dacian archaeology (Gelu Florea) and really deserved a bit more attention than it had. But it’s really our first indication of what these new technologies can reveal to us.

Back to Portus where Parcak has (finally, it dramatically appears) located something with her infrared-enhanced satellite technology: a major canal running up the *east* side of the Tiber. This is an incredible find and it would have been very nice if they could have somehow followed it further to see how far it actually went. As with the previously-mentioned canal find (above), I can only ask  what effect all these canals had on the water levels of the Tiber. Someone needs to correlate reports of flooding of the Tiber to construction of canals like these.

Unfortunately (again), they don’t really go very deep into the matter and suddenly have a need to dash off to Jordan. There’s lots of dramatic silliness until we meet up with Chris Tuttle, who has been working in the environs of Petra over the past few years. The goal of this segment is to find evidence of “abundance” under the pax Romana and Parcak locates a promising site with the infrared satellite thing. The trio (Snow, Parcak, and Tuttle) do a quick survey and find potsherds, some of which are apparently Roman. Supposedly this is evidence of “abundance” … more detail is needed here.

Back to Portus, where Parcak identifies what is possibly a Roman amphitheatre. This is presented as a new find and is really quite dishonest as presented. In fact, Keay made the claim to have found this back in 2009 — and for some reason it doesn’t seem to have been mentioned by me. Happily, the Science Daily coverage is still up: Archaeologists Discover Amphitheatre In Excavation Of Portus, Ancient Port Of Rome … as is Mary Beard’s criticism of all the hype: The luxury amphitheatre at Portus. After the tease, we are shown the shipyards mentioned above (also not a new discovery, obviously).

Then we’re off to Tunisia, which apparently was “Rome’s granary” (as if Sicily and Egypt suddenly weren’t producing). The big name here is David Mattingly, who is pleased to learn from the satellite technology about a fort (which the gang explores … and it is apparent that some diggers have already been there). Along the way we are shown remains of a Roman frontier wall … it would have been nice to see the extent of this — does it rival Hadrian’s Wall?

Finally, we head back to Portus, where this time the LiDAR is used to identify a big platform. Keay concludes that it must be the platform the lighthouse stood on and there follows much recreation — interestingly, the Portus Project’s webpage sort of downplays the recreation of the lighthouse, although it finds it useful. Missing in this segment would have been an overlay of the harbour itself to see if this platform actually extended into the water. As presented, it’s a few dotted red lines on a satellite shot. I still can’t quite figure this one out.

In closing, I should also mention something that I found annoying in all this: there were no subtitles to identify the various archaeologists and they don’t appear to be mentioned individually in the credits (although they might be clipped from the Youtube version).  Definitely something that should have been included, if only to allow people to follow up on things. Stripped away of the docuembellishments and other shortcomings, though, the program does go far to show the utility of Parcak’s satellite-infrared approach to finding sites as well as the incredible potential for LiDAR. We’ll very likely be seeing similar docu-applications in the future.

Some other reviews:

Hadrian’s Athenaeum Dig Completed

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ 8 Comments

The Guardian seems to be alone in covering this one in English, but (as we shall see) what is being touted as a ‘new discovery’ has been in the process of excavation for at least three years now. Here’s the Guardian‘s coverage:

Archaeologists who have completed the excavation of a 900-seat arts centre under one of Rome’s busiest roundabouts are calling it the most important Roman discovery in 80 years.

The centre, built by the emperor Hadrian in AD123, offered three massive halls where Roman nobles flocked to hear poetry, speeches and philosophy tracts while reclining on terraced marble seating.

With the dig now completed, the terracing and the hulking brick walls of the complex, as well as stretches of the elegant grey and yellow marble flooring, are newly visible at bottom of a 5.5 metre (18ft) hole in Piazza Venezia, where police officers wearing white gloves direct chaotic traffic like orchestra conductors and where Mussolini harangued thousands of followers from his balcony.

“Hadrian’s auditorium is the biggest find in Rome since the Forum was uncovered in the 1920s,” said Rossella Rea, the archaeologist running the dig.

The excavations, which are now due to open to the public, are next to a taxi rank and squeezed between a baroque church and the Vittoriano, an imposing monument to Italy’s defunct monarchy, which is nicknamed the Typewriter by locals.

The complex was only unearthed thanks to excavations to build a new underground railway line which will cross the heart of Rome. “We don’t have funds for these kind of digs so this has come to light thanks to the new line,” said Rea.

Archaeologists keeping a careful eye on what gets dug up have proved to be a mixed blessing for railway engineers, who have had to scrap plans for two stations in the heart of the centre of Rome when it was discovered their exits to the surface cut straight through Roman remains.

With the discovery of Hadrian’s complex at Piazza Venezia, the line risked losing its last stop in the centre and being forced to run into the heart of Rome from the suburbs and straight out the other side without stopping. But Rea said the station and the ruins could coexist.

“I believe we can run one of the exits from the station along the original corridor of the complex where Romans entered the halls,” she said.

The site sheds new light on Hadrian’s love of poetry – he wrote his own verse in Latin and Greek – and his taste for bold architecture – an 11-metre-high (36ft) arched ceiling once towered over the poets in the central hall.

Today the performing space is riddled with pits dug for fires, revealing how after three centuries of celebrating the arts, the halls fell into disrepair with the collapse of the Roman empire and were used for smelting ingots.

At the centre of the main hall, like a prop from a disaster movie, is a massive, nine-by-five-metre chunk of the monumental roof which came crashing down during an earthquake in 848 after standing for seven centuries.

Following the quake, the halls were gradually covered over until a hospital built on top in the 16th century dug down for cellar space. “We found pots lobbed down a well after the patients using them died,” said Rea. “We could date them because the designs on the glaze were the same we see on implements in Caravaggio paintings.”

While I was reading this, I couldn’t believe that I hadn’t mentioned it in rogueclassicism before … sure I miss things and I sometimes am too quick to delete things as I try to get to ‘inbox zero’, but this struck me as too major to have been missed. And yet, I couldn’t find any mention of ‘Hadrian’s auditorium’ in the thousands of posts in our archive. There were hints, however … back in 2008 we read of a staircase being found which led to some previously-unknown building (Roman Staircase Found … cf. Roman Staircase Update). We also heard of a sixth century copper foundry (Rome Subway Finds). Was that part of this? It just might be if I’m reading this column from Il Fatto Quotidiano correctly, which seems to have the same qualms I do about this being presented as ‘new’ when it’s been going on for at least three years. Ecce:

Diversi quotidiani nazionali, nelle pagine romane, dedicano ampio spazio alla notizia del ritrovamento di un nuovo, importantissimo, monumento dell’antichità, “nel cuore della città”. L’Auditorium di Adriano, l’“imperatore-costruttore”. Un risalto giustificato anche dalla sua promessa valorizzazione, attraverso la musealizzazione all’aperto. In realtà un complesso noto almeno dal 2009. Anche al grande pubblico.

Era tutto nato con una polemica. Nel novembre del 2008. I lavori per la realizzazione della fermata e le uscite della Linea C della metropolitana in Piazza Venezia, avevano costretto all’abbattimento di dieci piante secolari, cinque pini, due palme, due cipressi e una quercia a Piazza Madonna di Loreto. Tra la Chiesa di Santa Maria di Loreto e via dei Fornari. Gli ambientalisti a gridare le loro ragioni contro quello scempio. Inutilmente. Nel frattempo, nello stesso anno, un primo sondaggio accanto alla chiesa di Santa Maria di Loreto, aveva rivelato una scala monumentale, con gradini che l’allora Soprintendente archeologo di Roma, Angelo Bottini, dichiarò sembrare “fatti più per stare seduti che per essere saliti”. Un primo significativo indizio.

Poi l’avvio delle indagini archeologiche sulla piazza liberata dagli alberi e recintata. In un settore di estremo interesse per quanto concerne il tessuto urbanistico della città antica, trovandosi nelle immediate vicinanze del monumentale complesso del Foro di Traiano. Peraltro sorprendentemente “poco esplorato” in passato.

Nel 2009 la scoperta di un’altra scalinata, consorella di quella individuata due anni prima, proprio di fronte. Scoperta e purtroppo nascosta sotto il palazzo delle assicurazioni in cui era stata inter­rata. Lo spazio compreso tra le due gradonate, ampio circa tre metri, pavimentato in lastre rettangolari di granito grigio incorniciate con giallo antico. Le due gradonate situate all’interno di un’aula rettangolare lungo i lati Nord e Sud, costituite entrambe da sei gradini, e contenute ai lati da parapetti marmorei. Una seconda aula, posta a sud della sala centrale, separata da essa da un cuneo al cui interno sono collocate le scale per accedere al piano superiore. Il rinvenimento in situ e tra il materiale di crollo di numerosi laterizi bollati recanti le coppie consolari del 123 d.C. e del 125 d.C. consentiva di porre la costruzione di entrambe le aule nella piena età adrianea. Elementi che hanno fatto ipotizzare da subito all’archeologo Roberto Egidi, della Soprintendenza di Roma, di trovarsi davanti all’esatta riproduzione dell’Athaeneum che l’imperatore Adriano aveva fatto erigere ad Atene, accanto alla grande biblioteca costruita nel 132 d.C. Poi il proseguo degli scavi. Fino a pochi mesi fa. Il quadro ormai chiaro. Certamente dal punto di vista dell’articolazione planimetrica dell’edificio. Forse non del tutto per quanto riguarda l’interpretazione funzionale. L’edificio, costituito da tre aule, con pareti alte 20 metri, si estendeva su 1500 metri quadrati.
Le ragguardevoli dimensioni, la ricchezza della decorazione interna e l’alto livello della tecnica costruttiva sono elementi che conferiscono a questo complesso un carattere dichiaratamente pubblico e monumentale. L’assetto planimetrico richiama categorie architettoniche connesse all’esercizio di attività culturali come gli auditoria, luoghi in cui si svolgevano recitationes e lezioni di retorica.

E’ dunque assai probabile che possa essere identificato proprio con l’Athenaeum adrianeo. Che però le fonti datano al 135 d. C. Quindi un decennio circa dopo le indicazioni fornite dai bolli laterizi scoperti. Slittamento cronologico che non inficia la supposta interpretazione. Un monumento del quale nessuno conosceva l’ubicazione esatta. Neanche la “Forma Urbis”, la pianta monu­mentale marmorea di Roma imperiale fatta all’epoca di Settimio Severo e di cui si conser­vano importanti frammenti, ne certifica la presen­za.

Un monumento che, secondo consuetudine in ambito urbano, ha subito numerosi utilizzi. Cambiamenti di funzione. Da quando iniziarono le spoliazioni nel VI secolo d. C. Prima forse Zecca bizantina per la produzione di monete bronzee. Successivamente una necropoli. Infine un ospedale.

Terminate le indagini e gli studi avranno inizio le opere di restauro. Per le quali sono previsti almeno tre anni e, soprattutto, un milione di euro. Intanto, si dice, arriveranno presto i pannelli didattici. Necessari per fornire le informazioni essenziali sul monumento, farne capire i mutamenti nel corso dei secoli.

Insomma la notizia sembra riguardare non tanto lo status quo del complesso antico. Riconosciuto unanimemente come di straordinaria importanza per l’archeologia romana. Quanto la vita futura. La possibilità che esso dopo essere appannaggio esclusivamente degli addetti ai lavori, possa trasformarsi davvero in Bene Comune. Divenga fruibile ai più.

A destare comprensibile perplessità è proprio questa fase. I tempi e le risorse necessarie. Tante volte è già accaduto che resti unici nel loro genere, terminate le indagini, siano rimasti a lungo rinchiusi in recinti che si era promesso provvisori. Testimonianze estremamente significative, sostanzialmente alienate alla visita. Se non alla vista. Non allontanandosi troppo da Piazza Madonna di Loreto, quel che ancora succede lungo via dei Fori imperiali, all’altezza della Basilica di Massenzio. Dove sono resti del Foro della Pace, individuati diversi anni fa, attendono ancora di essere resi accessibili al pubblico. In quanto ai fondi, dei quali si è sempre alla spasmodica ricerca per qualsiasi intervento riguardi i nostri Beni Culturali, non si può che sperare che sia possibile reperirli. Nell’attesa vien da pensare, quasi con rabbia, alle spese dissennate che la politica ha praticato negli ultimi anni. Ma anche alle risorse mal impiegate da funzionari, non sempre adeguati, del Ministero dei Beni Culturali. Intanto l’archeologia, anche a Roma, riacquista la scena.

Whatever the case, it is a major find … I can’t figure out, however, whether it is mentioned in the Severan Marble Plan or not … does anyone know?

Roman ‘Cockpit’ Theatre (maybe) from Faversham

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ 1 Comment

You know it’s going to be a strange day when the most responsible coverage of a major find is from the Daily Mail … here are the pertinent bits:

Archaeologists have discovered the remains of a Roman theatre – dating back 2,000 years.

Dr Paul Wilkinson, founder of the Kent Archaeological Field School, believes it is the first of its kind to be found in Britain.

The theatre with a nearly circular cockpit-style orchestra, which would have seated 12,000 people. It  was found in Faversham, Kent – just behind Dr Wilkinson’s back garden where his field school is based.

The site shows activity dating back to the Bronze Age, but it is the Roman theatre – which would have been used for religious occasions – that has really excited history buffs.

Dr Wilkinson is fighting to preserve the unique find for future generations and has applied for it to become an ancient monument site.

He said: ‘It really is an amazing find, the first one in Britain, and it is just beyond my garden. This is a unique and wonderful discovery, not only for Faversham but for all of Britain.

‘The theatre could have held 12,000 people and we are going to request for it to become an ancient monument site because it is so important and we can preserve it for future generations.

‘It would have been a religious sanctuary for the Romans. They would have held religious festivals there. It is called a cockpit theatre.

‘There are 150 of them in northern Europe, but none in Britain until now. We were not expecting it.’
Investigations began on the land back in 2007, but the results have only just been released. A cockpit theatre had a large nearly circular orchestra with a narrow stage set much further back than in traditional theatres.

Dr Wilkinson believes the site is the only known example in Britain of a Roman rural religious sanctuary, with a theatre actually built into the hillside. Two temple enclosures were found near by as well as a sacred spring.

Durolevum was the name the Romans gave to Faversham, and means ‘the stronghold by the clear stream.’

English Heritage spokesman Debbie Hickman said: ‘If the full analysis of the results does confirm that the site on the outskirts of Faversham is a Roman rural theatre, it would be a most remarkable find.’

Dr Wilkinson has led archaeological digs in Kent for more than a decade. In September he led a team that found an ancient ceremonial site the size of Stonehenge on the North Downs. […]

The piece goes on to talk about the henge stuff … there are also some photos from the dig which are somewhat difficult to make sense of (seats? supports for seats?)

In any event, I’m not sure who was doing the rewriting or whatever for Yahoo and the piles of spinoffs in various Indian newspapers, but here’s the headline that almost made me spew my caramel latte all over my screen:

Bronge Age Roman theatre discovered in UK

… and so, of course, I figured it was the usual case of a headline writer having his/her way — headlines often don’t get seen by editors, near as I can tell — but nooooooooo:

Archaeologists have discovered the remains of a huge Bronze Age Roman theatre ~ dating back 2,000 years ~ buried in a school garden in the UK. […]

… which, of course, made it into the Press Trust of India pool and we see:

… etc.

Studying Philip II’s Remains

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ Leave a comment

Ages ago when I first started gathering news items and the like to share in various fora, I subscribed to the Athens News Agency feeds … as they were subscribed via a very old email address (which is basically a spamtrap now) I didn’t pay much attention to them any more but out of curiosity last week I was browsing through them and found this item, which does not seem to have made it into an English newspaper source:

A small portion of the skeleton of the ancient king Philip II of Macedon,
the father of Alexander the Great, is to be taken for testing to the
Demokritos National Centre for Scientific Research, Thessaloniki’s
Archaeological Museum announced on Wednesday.

The ancient king’s remains were found inside a golden larnax, or casket,
considered one of the most valuable objects of the ancient world, found
inside the main chamber of grave II at the Vergina archaeological site
in northern Greece.

The aim of the transfer is the microscopic examination, analysis and
photography of an unknown substance covering the bones, which has
also been found in other Macedonian tombs. This is the first time
this substance will be analysed to discover its chemical and mineral
composition, with the results are expected to yield valuable information
concerning the larnax corrosion processes and the ritual materials used
in that period.

A request for the transfer of the shards of bonds from the head of
the Vergina digs was approved by the Central Archaeological Council
on Tuesday.

… I guess I’ll have to monitor this source a bit more closely …

Rebranding Troy?

~ David Meadows ~ rogueclassicist ~ Leave a comment

Okay … this one has me confused. From New Scientist comes the ‘rebranding’ spin:

EVEN ancient cities knew about rebranding. Troy was destroyed by war about 3200 years ago – an event that may have inspired Homer to write the Iliad, 400 years later. But the famous city rose again, reinventing itself to fit a new political landscape.

Troy lies in north-west Turkey and has been studied for decades. Pottery made before the war has a distinct Trojan style but after the war its style is typical of the Balkans. This led archaeologists to believe that the locals had been forced out and replaced by populations from overseas.

But when Peter Grave at the University of New England in Armidale, Australia, and his colleagues examined the chemical make-up of the pottery, they realised that both pre and post-war objects contained clay from exactly the same local sources, suggesting the same people were making the pots.

“There is substantial evidence for cultural continuity,” says Grave. So if the Trojans never left the city, why did their pottery style change?

Before the sack of Troy, the city looked east towards the powerful Hittite Empire. But this political powerhouse collapsed around the time that Troy was destroyed. Grave says the post-war pottery is Balkan in style because the Trojans were keen to align themselves with the people there, who had become the new political elite in the region.

The abstract for the very expensive article itself reads:

Changes in resource use over time can provide insight into technological choice and the extent of long term stability in cultural practices. In this paper we re-evaluate the evidence for a marked demographic shift at the inception of the Early Iron Age at Troy by applying a robust macroscale analysis of changing ceramic resource use over the Late Bronze and Iron Age. We use a combination of new and legacy analytical datasets (NAA and XRF), from excavated ceramics, to evaluate the potential compositional range of local resources (based on comparisons with sediments from within a 10 kilometer site radius). Results show a clear distinction between sediment-defined local and non-local ceramic compositional groups. Two discrete local ceramic resources have been previously identified and we confirm a third local resource for a major class of EIA handmade wares and cooking pots. This third source appears to derive from a residual resource on the Troy peninsula (rather than adjacent alluvial valleys). The presence of a group of large and heavy pithoi among the non-local groups raises questions about their regional or maritime origin.

Without having read the article, does this not seem to be reading an awful lot into things? If a new group moves into an area, do we not expect them to make use of available resources? Why should be expect a change in the fabric of the pots?