Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

无法识别作者。根据版权声明推断作者为Gaius Cornelius。 – 无法识别来源。根据版权声明推断为其自己的作品。

Roman soldiers: cornicen — players of the cornu (horn). From the cast of Trajan’s column in the Victoria and Albert museum, London.

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Poussin Rape SabineLouvre

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Relief scene of Roman legionaries marching, from the Column of Marcus Aurelius, Rome, Italy, 2nd century AD.

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Warrior weapons found in a tomb in Lanuvium, near Rome. Vth century BC. Kept in Diocletian’s Baths Museum, Rome

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Battaglia tra Romani e barbari all’epoca delle guerre marcomanniche
(sarcofago di Portonaccio, Roma, Museo Nazionale Romano–palazzo Massimo alle Terme).

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Rome-Capitole-StatueConstantin-nobg.png

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman army

Stèle trouvée sur le Forum Romain, à proximité du Lacus Curtius, représentant un cavalier romain du iv^e siècle av. J.-C.

 

Part of a series on the
Military of ancient Rome 753 BC – AD 476
Structural history[show]
Campaign history[show]
Technological history[show]
Political history[show]
Strategy and tactics[show]
Frontiers and fortifications[show]
Military of Ancient Rome portal
v t e

Coin showing (obverse) head of the late Roman emperor Julian(ruled 361–363 AD) wearing diadem and (reverse) soldier bearing standard holding kneeling barbarian captive by the hair, legend and Myth VIRTUS EXERCITUS ROMANORUM (“Valour of Roman army”). Gold solidus. Sirmium mint.

The Roman army(Latin: exercitus Romanus) was the terrestrial armed forces deployed by the Romans throughout the duration of Ancient Rome, from the Roman Kingdom (to c. 500 BC) to the Roman Republic (500–31 BC) and the Roman Empire(31 BC – 395), and its medieval continuation the Eastern Roman Empire. It is thus a term that may span approximately 2,206 years (753 BC to 1453 AD), during which the Roman armed forces underwent numerous permutations in composition, organisation, equipment and tactics, while conserving a core of lasting traditions.^[1][2][3].

Historical overview

 Military of ancient Rome

Early Roman army (c. 500 BC to c. 300 BC)

The Early Roman army was the armed force of the Roman Kingdomand of the early Republic (to c. 300 BC). During this period, when warfare chiefly consisted of small-scale plundering raids, it has been suggested that the army followed Etruscan or Greek models of organisation and equipment. The early Roman army was based on an annual levy.

The infantry ranks were filled with the lower classes while the cavalry (equites or celeres) were left to the patricians, because the wealthier could afford horses. Moreover, the commanding authority during the regal period was the high king. Until the establishment of the Republic and the office of consul, the king assumed the role of commander-in-chief.^[4] However, from about 508 BC Rome no longer had a king. The commanding position of the army was given to the consuls, “who were charged both singly and jointly to take care to preserve the Republic from danger”.^[5]

The term legion is derived from the Latin word legio; which ultimately means draft or levy. At first there were only four legions. These legions were numbered “I” to “IIII”, with the fourth being written as such and not “IV”. The first legion was seen as the most prestigious. The bulk of the army was made up of citizens. These citizens could not choose the legion to which they were allocated. Any man “from ages 16–46 were selected by ballot” and assigned to a legion.^[6]

Until the Roman military disaster of 390 BC at the Battle of the Allia, Rome’s army was organised similarly to the Greek phalanx. This was due to Greek influence in Italy “by way of their colonies”. Patricia Southern quotes ancient historians Livy and Dionysius in saying that the “phalanx consisted of 3,000 infantry and 300 cavalry”.^[7] Each man had to provide his equipment in battle; the military equipment which he could afford determined which position he took in the battle. Politically they shared the same ranking system in the Comitia Centuriata; which ultimately vis-à-vis placed the men on the battlefield.^{[clarification needed]}

Roman army of the mid-Republic (c. 300–88 BC)

The Roman army of the mid-Republic was also known as the “manipular army” or the “Polybian army” after the Greek historian Polybius, who provides the most detailed extant description of this phase. The Roman army started to have a full-time strength of 150,000 at all times and 3/4 of the rest were levied.

During this period, the Romans, while maintaining the levy system, adopted the Samnite manipular organisation for their legions and also bound all the other peninsular Italian states into a permanent military alliance (see Socii). The latter were required to supply (collectively) roughly the same number of troops to joint forces as the Romans to serve under Roman command. Legions in this phase were always accompanied on campaign by the same number of allied alae (Roman non-citizen auxiliaries), units of roughly the same size as legions.

After the 2nd Punic War (218–201 BC), the Romans acquired an overseas empire, which necessitated standing forces to fight lengthy wars of conquest and to garrison the newly gained provinces. Thus the army’s character mutated from a temporary force based entirely on short-term conscription to a standing army in which the conscripts were supplemented by a large number of volunteers willing to serve for much longer than the legal six-year limit. These volunteers were mainly from the poorest social class, who did not have plots to tend at home and were attracted by the modest military pay and the prospect of a share of war booty. The minimum property requirement for service in the legions, which had been suspended during the 2nd Punic War, was effectively ignored from 201 BC onward in order to recruit sufficient volunteers. Between 150-100 BC, the manipular structure was gradually phased out, and the much larger cohort became the main tactical unit. In addition, from the 2nd Punic War onward, Roman armies were always accompanied by units of non-Italian mercenaries, such as Numidian light cavalry, Cretan archers, and Balearic slingers, who provided specialist functions that Roman armies had previously lacked.

Roman army of the late Republic (88–30 BC)

Imperial Roman legionaries in tight formation, a relief from Glanum, a Roman town in what is now southern France that was inhabited from 27 BC to 260 AD (when it was sacked by invading Alemanni)

The Roman army of the late Republic (88–30 BC) marks the continued transition between the conscription-based citizen-levy of the mid-Republic and the mainly volunteer, professional standing forces of the imperial era. The main literary sources for the army’s organisation and tactics in this phase are the works of Julius Caesar, the most notable of a series of warlords who contested for power in this period. As a result of the Social War (91–88 BC), all Italians were granted Roman citizenship, the old allied alae were abolished and their members integrated into the legions. Regular annual conscription remained in force and continued to provide the core of legionary recruitment, but an ever-increasing proportion of recruits were volunteers, who signed up for 16-year terms as opposed to the maximum 6 years for conscripts. The loss of ala cavalry reduced Roman/Italian cavalry by 75%, and legions became dependent on allied native horse for cavalry cover. This period saw the large-scale expansion of native forces employed to complement the legions, made up of numeri (“units”) recruited from tribes within Rome’s overseas empire and neighbouring allied tribes. Large numbers of heavy infantry and cavalry were recruited in Spain, Gaul and Thrace, and archers in Thrace, Anatolia and Syria. However, these native units were not integrated with the legions, but retained their own traditional leadership, organisation, armour and weapons.

Imperial Roman army (30 BC – AD 284)

 Imperial Roman army

During this period the Republican system of citizen-conscription was replaced by a standing professional army of mainly volunteers serving standard 20-year terms (plus 5 as reservists), although many in the service of the empire would serve as many as 30 to 40 years on active duty, as established by the first Roman emperor, Augustus (sole ruler 30 BC – AD 14).Regular annual conscription of citizens was abandoned and only decreed in emergencies (e.g. during the Illyrian revolt 6–9 AD). Under Augustus there were 28 legions, consisting almost entirely of heavy infantry, with about 5,000 men each (total 125,000). This had increased to a peak of 33 legions of about 5,500 men each (c. 180,000 men in total) by AD 200 under Septimius Severus. Legions continued to recruit Roman citizens, mainly the inhabitants of Italy and Roman colonies, until 212. Legions were flanked by the auxilia, a corps of regular troops recruited mainly from peregrini, imperial subjects who did not hold Roman citizenship (the great majority of the empire’s inhabitants until 212, when all were granted citizenship). Auxiliaries, who served a minimum term of 25 years, were also mainly volunteers, but regular conscription of peregrini was employed for most of the 1st century AD. The auxiliaconsisted, under Augustus, of about 250 regiments of roughly cohortsize, that is, about 500 men (in total 125,000 men, or 50% of total army effectives). Under Severus the number of regiments increased to about 400, of which about 13% were double-strength (250,000 men, or 60% of total army). Auxilia contained heavy infantry equipped similarly to legionaries, and almost all the army’s cavalry (both armoured and light), and archers and slingers.

Later Roman army (284–476 AD) continuing as East Roman army (476–641 AD)

 Late Roman army

Stone-carved relief depicting the liberation of a besieged city by a relief force, with those defending the walls making a sortie (i.e. a sudden attack against a besieging enemy from within the besieged town); Western Roman Empire, early 5th Century AD

The Late Roman army period stretches from (284–476 AD and its continuation, in the surviving eastern half of the empire, as the East Roman army to 641). In this phase, crystallised by the reforms of the emperor Diocletian (ruled 284–305 AD), the Roman army returned to regular annual conscription of citizens, while admitting large numbers of non-citizen barbarian volunteers. However, soldiers remained 25-year professionals and did not return to the short-term levies of the Republic. The old dual organisation of legions and auxilia was abandoned, with citizens and non-citizens now serving in the same units. The old legions were broken up into cohort or even smaller sizes. At the same time, a substantial proportion of the army’s effectives were stationed in the interior of the empire, in the form of comitatus praesentales, armies that escorted the emperors.

Middle Byzantine army (641–1081 AD)

The Middle Byzantine army (641–1081 AD) was the army of the Byzantine state in its classical form (i.e. after the permanent loss of its Near Eastern and North African territories to the Arab conquests after 641 AD). This army was largely composed of semi-professional troops (soldier-farmers) based on the themata military provinces, supplemented by a small core of professional regiments known as the tagmata. Ibn al-Fakih estimated the strength of the themata forces in the East c. 902 at 85,000 and Kodama c. 930 at 70,000.^[8] This structure pertained when the empire was on the defensive, in the 10th century the empire was increasingly involved in territorial expansion, and the themata troops became progressively more irrelevant, being gradually replaced by ‘provincial tagmata’ units and an increased use of mercenaries.

Komnenian Byzantine army (1081–1204)

The Komnenian Byzantine army was named after the Komnenosdynasty, which ruled from 1081–1185. This was an army built virtually from scratch after the permanent loss of half of Byzantium’s traditional main recruiting ground of Anatolia to the Turks following the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, and the destruction of the last regiments of the old army in the wars against the Normans in the early 1080s. It survived until the fall of Constantinople to the Western crusaders in 1204. This army had a large number of mercenary regiments composed of troops of foreign origin such as the Varangian Guard, and the pronoia system was introduced.

Palaiologan Byzantine army (1261–1453)

The Palaiologan Byzantine army was named after the Palaiologosdynasty (1261–1453), which ruled Byzantium from the recovery of Constantinople from the Crusaders until its fall to the Turks in 1453. Initially, it continued some practices inherited from the Komnenian era and retained a strong native element until the late 13th century. During the last century of its existence, however, the empire was little more than a city-state that hired foreign mercenary bands for its defence. Thus the Byzantine army finally lost any meaningful connection with the standing imperial Roman army.^{[citation needed]}

This article contains the summaries of the detailed linked articles on the historical phases above, Readers seeking discussion of the Roman army by theme, rather than by chronological phase, should consult the following articles:

History

• Campaign history of the Roman military
• Structural history of the Roman military

Corps

• Praetorian Guard
• Roman legion
• Roman auxiliaries
• Roman cavalry

Strategy and tactics

• Defence-in-depth (Roman military)
• Roman infantry tactics

Equipment & other

• Roman military equipment
• Roman military decorations and punishments

Some of the Roman army’s many tactics are still used in modern-day armies today.

Early Roman army (c. 550 to c. 300 BC)

Early Roman army

Until c. 550 BC, there was no “national” Roman army, but a series of clan-based war-bands which only coalesced into a united force in periods of serious external threat. Around 550 BC, during the period conventionally known as the rule of king Servius Tullius, it appears that a universal levy of eligible adult male citizens was instituted. This development apparently coincided with the introduction of heavy armour for most of the infantry. Although originally low in numbers the Roman infantry was extremely tactical and developed some of the most influential battle strategies to date.

The early Roman army was based on a compulsory levy from adult male citizens which was held at the start of each campaigning season, in those years that war was declared. There were no standing or professional forces. During the Regal Era (to c. 500 BC), the standard levy was probably of 9,000 men, consisting of 6,000 heavily armed infantry (probably Greek-style hoplites), plus 2,400 light-armed infantry (rorarii, later called velites) and 600 light cavalry (equites celeres). When the kings were replaced by two annually elected praetores in c. 500 BC, the standard levy remained of the same size, but was now divided equally between the Praetors, each commanding one legion of 4,500 men.

It is likely that the hoplite element was deployed in a Greek-style phalanx formation in large set-piece battles. However, these were relatively rare, with most fighting consisting of small-scale border-raids and skirmishing. In these, the Romans would fight in their basic tactical unit, the centuria of 100 men. In addition, separate clan-based forces remained in existence until c. 450 BC at least, although they would operate under the Praetors’ authority, at least nominally.

In 493 BC, shortly after the establishment of the Roman Republic, Rome concluded a perpetual treaty of military alliance (the foedus Cassianum), with the combined other Latin city-states. The treaty, probably motivated by the need for the Latins to deploy a united defence against incursions by neighbouring hill-tribes, provided for each party to provide an equal force for campaigns under unified command. It remained in force until 358 BC.

Roman army of the mid-Republic (c. 300 – 107 BC)

Roman army of the mid-Republic

Levy of the army, detail of the carved relief on the Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus, 122-115 BC.

The central feature of the Roman army of the mid-Republic, or the Polybian army, was the manipular organization of its battle-line. Instead of a single, large mass (the phalanx) as in the Early Roman army, the Romans now drew up in three lines consisting of small units (maniples) of 120 men, arrayed in chessboard fashion, giving much greater tactical strength and flexibility. This structure was probably introduced in c. 300 BC during the Samnite Wars. Also probably dating from this period was the regular accompaniment of each legion by a non-citizen formation of roughly equal size, the ala, recruited from Rome’s Italian allies, or socii. The latter were c. 150 autonomous states which were bound by a treaty of perpetual military alliance with Rome. Their sole obligation was to supply to the Roman army, on demand, a number of fully equipped troops up to a specified maximum each year.

The Second Punic War (218–201 BC) saw the addition of a third element to the existing dual Roman/Italian structure: non-Italian mercenaries with specialist skills lacking in the legions and alae: Numidian light cavalry, Cretan archers, and slingers from the Balearic islands. From this time, these units always accompanied Roman armies.

The Republican army of this period, like its earlier forebear, did not maintain standing or professional military forces, but levied them, by compulsory conscription, as required for each campaigning season and disbanded thereafter (although formations could be kept in being over winter during major wars). The standard levy was doubled during the Samnite Wars to 4 legions (2 per Consul), for a total of c. 18,000 Roman troops and 4 allied alae of similar size. Service in the legions was limited to property-owning Roman citizens, normally those known as iuniores (age 16–46). The army’s senior officers, including its commanders-in-chief, the Roman Consuls, were all elected annually at the People’s Assembly. Only equites (members of the Roman knightly order) were eligible to serve as senior officers. Iuniores of the highest social classes (equites and the First Class of commoners) provided the legion’s cavalry, the other classes the legionary infantry. The proletarii (those assessed at under 400 drachmae wealth) were ineligible for legionary service and were assigned to the fleets as oarsmen. Elders, vagrants, freedmen, slaves and convicts were excluded from the military levy, save in emergencies.

The legionary cavalry also changed, probably around 300 BC onwards from the light, unarmoured horse of the early army to a heavy force with metal armour (bronze cuirasses and, later, chain-mail shirts). Contrary to a long-held view, the cavalry of the mid-Republic was a highly effective force that generally prevailed against strong enemy cavalry forces (both Gallic and Greek) until it was decisively beaten by the Carthaginian general Hannibal‘s horsemen during the second Punic War. This was due to Hannibal’s greater operational flexibility owing to his Numidian light cavalry.

The Polybian army’s operations during its existence can be divided into three broad phases. (1) The struggle for hegemony over Italy, especially against the Samnite League (338–264 BC); (2) the struggle with Carthage for hegemony in the western Mediterranean Sea (264–201 BC); and (3) the struggle against the Hellenistic monarchies for control of the eastern Mediterranean (201–91 BC). During the earlier phase, the normal size of the levy (including allies) was in the region of 40,000 men (2 consular armies of c. 20,000 men each).

During the latter phase, with lengthy wars of conquest followed by permanent military occupation of overseas provinces, the character of the army necessarily changed from a temporary force based entirely on short-term conscription to a standing army in which the conscripts, whose service was in this period limited by law to 6 consecutive years, were complemented by large numbers of volunteers who were willing to serve for much longer periods. Many of the volunteers were drawn from the poorest social class, which until the 2nd Punic War had been excluded from service in the legions by the minimum property requirement: during that war, extreme manpower needs had forced the army to ignore the requirement, and this practice continued thereafter. Maniples were gradually phased out as the main tactical unit, and replaced by the larger cohorts used in the allied alae, a process probably complete by the time the general Marius assumed command in 107 BC. (The “Marian reforms” of the army hypothesised by some scholars are today seen by other scholars as having evolved earlier and more gradually.)

In the period after the defeat of Carthage in 201 BC, the army was campaigning exclusively outside Italy, resulting in its men being away from their home plots of land for many years at a stretch. They were assuaged by the large amounts of booty that they shared after victories in the rich eastern theatre. But in Italy, the ever-increasing concentration of public lands in the hands of big landowners, and the consequent displacement of the soldiers’ families, led to great unrest and demands for land redistribution. This was successfully achieved, but resulted in the disaffection of Rome’s Italian allies, who as non-citizens were excluded from the redistribution. This led to the mass revolt of the socii and the Social War (91-88 BC). The result was the grant of Roman citizenship to all Italians and the end of the Polybian army’s dual structure: the alae were abolished and the socii recruited into the legions.

Imperial Roman army (30 BC – AD 284 )

 Imperial Roman army

God Bes as a Roman soldier. Sword in right hand and spear and shield in left hand. Limestone slab, in relief. Roman Period. From Egypt. The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, London

Recreation of a Roman soldier wearing plate armour (lorica segmentata), National Military Museum, Romania.

Roman relief fragment depicting the Praetorian Guard, c. 50 AD

Ancient Roman statue fragment of either a general or an emperor wearing a corselet decorated with Selene, and two Nereids. Found at èmegara, dating from 100-130 AD.

Relief scene of Roman legionariesmarching, from the Column of Marcus Aurelius, Rome, Italy, 2nd century AD

Under the founder–emperor Augustus (ruled 30 BC – 14 AD), the legions, c. 5,000-strong all-heavy infantry formations recruited from Roman citizens only, were transformed from a mixed conscript and volunteer corps serving an average of 10 years, to all-volunteer units of long-term professionals serving a standard 25-year term (conscription was only decreed in emergencies). In the later 1st century, the size of a legion’s First Cohort was doubled, increasing legionary personnel to c. 5,500.

Alongside the legions, Augustus established the auxilia, a regular corps of similar numbers to the legions, recruited from the peregrini (non-citizen inhabitants of the empire – about 90% of the empire’s population in the 1st century). As well as comprising large numbers of extra heavy infantry equipped in a similar manner to legionaries, the auxilia provided virtually all the army’s cavalry (heavy and light), light infantry, archers and other specialists. The auxilia were organised in c. 500-strong units called cohortes (all-infantry), alae(all-cavalry) and cohortes equitatae (infantry with a cavalry contingent attached). Around 80 AD, a minority of auxiliary regiments were doubled in size. Until about 68 AD, the auxilia were recruited by a mix of conscription and voluntary enlistment. After that time, the auxilia became largely a volunteer corps, with conscription resorted to only in emergencies. Auxiliaries were required to serve a minimum of 25 years, although many served for longer periods. On completion of their minimum term, auxiliaries were awarded Roman citizenship, which carried important legal, fiscal and social advantages. Alongside the regular forces, the army of the Principate employed allied native units (called numeri) from outside the empire on a mercenary basis. These were led by their own aristocrats and equipped in traditional fashion. Numbers fluctuated according to circumstances and are largely unknown.

As all-citizen formations, and symbolic garantors of the dominance of the Italian “master-nation”,^{[citation needed]}legions enjoyed greater social prestige than the auxilia. This was reflected in better pay and benefits. In addition, legionaries were equipped with more expensive and protective armour than auxiliaries. However, in 212, the emperor Caracallagranted Roman citizenship to all the empire’s inhabitants. At this point, the distinction between legions and auxilia became moot, the latter becoming all-citizen units also. The change was reflected in the disappearance, during the 3rd century, of legionaries’ special equipment, and the progressive break-up of legions into cohort-sized units like the auxilia.

By the end of Augustus’ reign, the imperial army numbered some 250,000 men, equally split between legionaries and auxiliaries (25 legions and c. 250 auxiliary regiments). The numbers grew to a peak of about 450,000 by 211 (33 legions and c. 400 auxiliary regiments). By then, auxiliaries outnumbered legionaries substantially. From the peak, numbers probably underwent a steep decline by 270 due to plague and losses during multiple major barbarian invasions. Numbers were restored to their early 2nd-century level of c. 400,000 (but probably not to their 211 peak) under Diocletian (r. 284–305). After the empire’s borders became settled (on the Rhine–Danube line in Europe) by 68, virtually all military units (except the Praetorian Guard) were stationed on or near the borders, in roughly 17 of the 42 provinces of the empire in the reign of Hadrian (r. 117–38).

The military chain of command was relatively uniform across the Empire. In each province, the deployed legions’ legati (legion commanders, who also controlled the auxiliary regiments attached to their legion) reported to the legatus Augusti pro praetore (provincial governor), who also headed the civil administration. The governor in turn reported direct to the emperor in Rome. There was no army general staff in Rome, but the leading praefectus praetorio(commander of the Praetorian Guard) often acted as the emperor’s de facto military chief-of-staff.

Legionary rankers were relatively well-paid, compared to contemporary common labourers. Compared with their subsistence-level peasant families, they enjoyed considerable disposable income, enhanced by periodic cash bonuses on special occasions such as the accession of a new emperor. In addition, on completion of their term of service, they were given a generous discharge bonus equivalent to 13 years’ salary. Auxiliaries were paid much less in the early 1st century, but by 100 AD, the differential had virtually disappeared. Similarly, in the earlier period, auxiliaries appear not to have received cash and discharge bonuses, but probably did so from Hadrian onwards. Junior officers (principales), the equivalent of non-commissioned officers in modern armies, could expect to earn up to twice basic pay. Legionary centurions, the equivalent of mid-level commissioned officers, were organised in an elaborate hierarchy. Usually risen from the ranks, they commanded the legion’s tactical sub-units of centuriae (c. 80 men) and cohorts (c. 480 men). They were paid several multiples of basic pay. The most senior centurion, the primus pilus, was elevated to equestrian rank upon completion of his single-year term of office. The senior officers of the army, the legati legionis (legion commanders), tribuni militum (legion staff officers) and the praefecti (commanders of auxiliary regiments) were all of at least equestrian rank. In the 1st and early 2nd centuries, they were mainly Italian aristocrats performing the military component of their cursus honorum (conventional career-path). Later, provincial career officers became predominant. Senior officers were paid enormous salaries, multiples of at least 50 times basic.

A typical Roman army during this period consisted of five to six legions. One legion was made up of 10 cohorts. The first cohort had five centuria each of 160 soldiers. In the second through tenth cohorts there were six centuria of 80 men each. These do not include archers, cavalry or officers.

Soldiers spent only a fraction of their lives on campaign. Most of their time was spent on routine military duties such as training, patrolling, and maintenance of equipment etc. Soldiers also played an important role outside the military sphere. They performed the function of a provincial governor’s police force. As a large, disciplined and skilled force of fit men, they played a crucial role in the construction of a province’s Roman military and civil infrastructure: in addition to constructing forts and fortified defences such as Hadrian’s Wall, they built roads, bridges, ports, public buildings, entire new cities (Roman colonies), and also engaged in large-scale forest clearance and marsh drainage to expand the province’s available arable land.

Soldiers, mostly drawn from polytheistic societies, enjoyed wide freedom of worship in the polytheistic Roman system. They revered their own native deities, Roman deities and the local deities of the provinces in which they served. Only a few religions were banned by the Roman authorities, as being incompatible with the official Roman religion and/or politically subversive, notably Druidism and Christianity. The later Principate saw the rise in popularity among the military of Eastern mystery cults, generally centred on one deity, and involving secret rituals divulged only to initiates. By far the most popular in the army was Mithraism, an apparently syncretist religion which mainly originated in Asia Minor.

Late Roman army/East Roman army (284–641)

 Late Roman army

 East Roman army

The Late Roman army is the term used to denote the military forces of the Roman Empire from the accession of Emperor Diocletian in 284 until the Empire’s definitive division into Eastern and Western halves in 395. A few decades afterwards, the Western army disintegrated as the Western empire collapsed. The East Roman army, on the other hand, continued intact and essentially unchanged until its reorganization by themes and transformation into the Byzantine army in the 7th century. The term “late Roman army” is often used to include the East Roman army.

The army of the Principate underwent a significant transformation, as a result of the chaotic 3rd century. Unlike the Principate army, the army of the 4th century was heavily dependent on conscription and its soldiers were more poorly remunerated than in the 2nd century. Barbarians from outside the empire probably supplied a much larger proportion of the late army’s recruits than in the army of the 1st and 2nd centuries.

The size of the 4th-century army is controversial. More dated scholars (e.g. A.H.M. Jones, writing in the 1960s) estimated the late army as much larger than the Principate army, half the size again or even as much as twice the size. With the benefit of archaeological discoveries of recent decades, many contemporary historians view the late army as no larger than its predecessor: under Diocletian c. 390,000 (the same as under Hadrian almost two centuries earlier) and under Constantine no greater, and probably somewhat smaller, than the Principate peak of c. 440,000. The main change in structure was the establishment of large armies that accompanied the emperors (comitatus praesentales) and were generally based away from the frontiers. Their primary function was to deter usurpations. The legionswere split up into smaller units comparable in size to the auxiliary regiments of the Principate. In parallel, legionary armour and equipment were abandoned in favour of auxiliary equipment. Infantry adopted the more protective equipment of the Principate cavalry.

The role of cavalry in the late army does not appear to have been enhanced as compared with the army of the Principate. The evidence is that cavalry was much the same proportion of overall army numbers as in the 2nd century and that its tactical role and prestige remained similar. Indeed, the cavalry acquired a reputation for incompetence and cowardice for their role in three major battles in mid-4th century. In contrast, the infantry retained its traditional reputation for excellence.

The 3rd and 4th centuries saw the upgrading of many existing border forts to make them more defensible, as well as the construction of new forts with much higher defensive specifications. The interpretation of this trend has fuelled an ongoing debate whether the army adopted a defence-in-depth strategy or continued the same posture of “forward defence” as in the early Principate. Many elements of the late army’s defence posture were similar to those associated with forward defence, such as a looser forward location of forts, frequent cross-border operations, and external buffer-zones of allied barbarian tribes. Whatever the defence strategy, it was apparently less successful in preventing barbarian incursions than in the 1st and 2nd centuries. This may have been due to heavier barbarian pressure, and/or to the practice of keeping large armies of the best troops in the interior, depriving the border forces of sufficient support.

Byzantine army (641–1081)

 Byzantine army

Komnenian Byzantine army (1081–1204)

Emperor John II Komnenos, the most successful commander of the Komnenian army.

The Komnenian period marked a rebirth of the Byzantine army. At the beginning of the Komnenian period in 1081, the Byzantine Empire had been reduced to the smallest territorial extent. Surrounded by enemies, and financially ruined by a long period of civil war, the empire’s prospects looked grim.

At the beginning of the Komnenian period, the Byzantine army was reduced to a shadow of its former self: during the 11th century, decades of peace and neglect had reduced the old thematic forces, and the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 had destroyed the professional tagmata, the core of the Byzantine army. At Manzikert and later at Dyrrhachium, units tracing their lineage for centuries back to Late Roman army were wiped out, and the subsequent loss of Asia Minor deprived the Empire of its main recruiting ground. In the Balkans, at the same time, the Empire was exposed to invasions by the Norman Kingdom of Sicily, and by Pecheneg raids across the Danube.

The Byzantine army’s nadir was reached in 1091, when Alexios I could manage to field only 500 soldiers from the Empire’s professional forces. These formed the nucleus of the army, with the addition of the armed retainers of Alexios’ relatives and the nobles enrolled in the army and the substantial aid of a large force of allied Cumans, which won the Battle of Levounion against the Pechenegs (Petcheneks or Patzinaks).^[9] Yet, through a combination of skill, determination and years of campaigning, Alexios, John and Manuel Komnenos managed to restore the power of the Byzantine Empire by constructing a new army from scratch. This process should not, however, at least in its earlier phases, be seen as a planned exercise in military restructuring. In particular, Alexios I was often reduced to reacting to events rather than controlling them; the changes he made to the Byzantine army were largely done out of immediate necessity and were pragmatic in nature.

The new force had a core of units which were both professional and disciplined. It contained formidable guards units such as the Varangians, the Athanatoi, a unit of heavy cavalry stationed in Constantinople, the Vardariotai and the Archontopouloi, recruited by Alexios from the sons of dead Byzantine officers, foreign mercenary regiments, and also units of professional soldiers recruited from the provinces. These provincial troops included kataphraktoi cavalry from Macedonia, Thessaly and Thrace, and various other provincial forces such as Trebizond Archers from the Black Sea coast of Anatolia. Alongside troops raised and paid for directly by the state the Komnenian army included the armed followers of members of the wider imperial family and its extensive connections. In this can be seen the beginnings of the feudalisation of the Byzantine military. The granting of pronoia holdings, where land, or more accurately rights to revenue from land, was held in return for military obligations, was beginning to become a notable element in the military infrastructure towards the end of the Komnenian period, though it became much more important subsequently.

In 1097, the Byzantine army numbered around 70,000 men altogether.^[10] By 1180 and the death of Manuel Komnenos, whose frequent campaigns had been on a grand scale, the army was probably considerably larger. During the reign of Alexios I, the field army numbered around 20,000 men which was increased to about 30,000 men in John II’s reign.^[11] By the end of Manuel I’s reign the Byzantine field army had risen to 40,000 men.

Palaiologan Byzantine army (1261–1453)

The Palaiologan army refers to the military forces of the Byzantine Empire from the late 13th century to its final collapse in the mid 15th century, under the House of the Palaiologoi. The army was a direct continuation of the forces of the Nicaean army, which itself was a fractured component of the formidable Komnenian army. Under the first Palaiologan emperor, Michael VIII, the army’s role took an increasingly offensive role whilst the naval forces of the Empire, weakened since the days of Andronikos I Komnenos, were boosted to include thousands of skilled sailors and some 80 ships. Due to the lack of land to support the army, the Empire required the use of large numbers of mercenaries.

After Andronikos II took to the throne, the army fell apart and the Byzantines suffered regular defeats at the hands of their eastern opponents, although they would continue to enjoy success against the crusader territories in Greece. By c. 1350, following a destructive civil war and the outbreak of the Black Death, the Empire was no longer capable of raising troops and the supplies to maintain them. The Empire came to rely upon troops provided by Serbs, Bulgarians, Venetians, Latins, Genoans and Ottoman Turks to fight the civil wars that lasted for the greater part of the 14th century, with the latter foe being the most successful in establishing a foothold in Thrace. The Ottomans swiftly expanded through the Balkans and cut off Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire, from the surrounding land. The last decisive battle was fought by the Palaiologan army in 1453, when Constantinople was besieged and fellon 29 May. The last isolated remnants of the Byzantine state were conquered by 1461.

• Ancient Rome portal

• Military of ancient Rome
• Roman legion
• Roman auxiliaries
• Equestrian order
• List of Roman legions
• List of Roman auxiliary regiments
• Late Roman army
• Byzantine army
• East Roman army

References

1. ^ The Complete Roman Army, Adrian Goldsworthy Thames & Hudson, 2011
2. ^ The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History, Pat Southern, Oxford University Press, 2007
3. ^ Companion to the Roman Army, Paul Erdkamp, John Wiley & Sons, 31 Mar 2011
4. ^ Rostovtzeff, Michael. Rome. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1960
5. ^ Vegetius, The Military Institutions of the Romans (J. Clark, transl.) Harrisburg Penn.; 1944.
6. ^ Dando-Collins, Stephen. Legions of Rome. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2010.
7. ^ Southern, Pat. The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2007.
8. ^ Heath, Ian (1979). Byzantine armies, 886-1118. Osprey. p. 19. ISBN 978-0850453065.
9. ^ Angold, p. 127
10. ^ Konstam, p. 141.
11. ^ W. Treadgold, A History of the Byzantine State and Society, 680

• Legions and Legionaries in the Age of Augustus
• The Roman Centurion
• Roman Warriors: The Myth of the Military Machine
• Roman Cavalry
• Protecting the Emperor: The Praetorian Guard
• Diocletian and the Roman Army
• The Last Legion
• Life of Roman legionary

 

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

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

Sauter à la navigationSauter à la recherche

Mur d’Aurélien Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien
Une section du mur d’Aurélien entre la Porta Ardeatina et la Porta San Sebastiano.
Lieu de construction	Rome
Date de construction	271 à 282
Ordonné par	Aurélien
Type de bâtiment	Enceinte fortifiée
Hauteur	Jusqu’à 10 m
Longueur	19 km
Le plan ci-dessous est intemporel. Tracé du mur d’Aurélien (en rouge)
Coordonnées	41° 52′ 24″ nord, 12° 29′ 56″ est
Liste des monuments de la Rome antique

Le mur d’Aurélienest une enceinte fortifiée antique protégeant la ville de Rome, en Italie, construite entre 271 et 282, sous le règne des empereursAurélien et Probus.

Cette protection n’empêcha pas plusieurs sacs de Rome au cours du v^e siècle et fut mise à contribution lors des affrontements entre les Ostrogoths et le général Bélisaireau cours de la reconquête de l’Italie par Constantinople au vi^e siècle. En revanche, elle protégea efficacement Rome contre les raids sarrasins du haut Moyen Âge.

La plus grande partie du mur d’Aurélien subsiste encore actuellement. Il constitue la limite administrative du Municipio I, baptisé « Centro Storico », dans lequel 20 des 22 rioni (quartiers historiques) se trouvent.

Caractéristiques

À sa construction, le mur s’étend sur 19 km et entoure une superficie de 13,7 km². Il est construit en béton recouvert de briques, est épais de 3,5 m et haut de 8 m, atteignant par endroits 10 m. Une tour quadrangulaire fait saillie tous les 100 pieds romains (29,6 m). Au v^e siècle, la hauteur du mur est doublée à 16 m. Vers 500, il possède 383 tours, 7 020 créneaux, 18 portes principales, 5 poternes, 116 latrines et 2 066 grandes fenêtres¹.

Il s’appuie sur le cours du Tibre et les collines à l’est du fleuve. Un bastion avancé sur le mont Janicule protège le quartier du Trastevere(Transtiberim en latin) et les principaux ponts sur le Tibre. En revanche le mont Vatican demeure sans protection. Le tracé s’appuie également sur un certain nombre de monuments existants, tels que la caserne de la garde prétorienne, un petit amphithéâtre, des tombeaux dont la pyramide de Cestius, les arches des aqueducs sur l’Esquilin, les substructions des jardins en terrasses sur le Pincio.

Le mur comporte un soubassement en blocage (opus caementicium), haut d’environ 8 mètres, surmonté de chambres voûtées appuyées contre un mur extérieur d’un mètre d’épaisseur. Un chemin de ronde couronne l’édifice. Les chambres servent de salle d’armes et de magasins, et diminuent le volume à construire.

Historique

Giacobbe Giusti, Mur d’Aurélien

Sentier de garde sur la face interne du mur, près de la porta Metronia.

Au iii^e siècle, les limites de Rome se sont étendues bien au-delà de l’ancienne muraille Servienne, construite pendant la période républicaine à la fin du iv^e siècle av. J.-C.. Rome reste non-fortifiée pendant les siècles suivants. Le besoin de défenses plus adaptées devient critique pendant la crise du troisième siècle, lorsque des tribus barbares passent les limes de Germanie et que l’armée romaine les arrête avec difficulté. L’incursion des barbares jusqu’en Italie du Nord sous Gallien (260-268), Claude le Gothique (268-270) et au début du règne d’Aurélien (270-275) laisse craindre une attaque de Rome.

En 270, les Juthunges et les Vandales envahissent le nord de l’Italie, infligeant une sévère défaite à l’armée romaine à la bataille de Placentia en 271 avant d’être finalement repoussés. Des troubles éclatent à Rome à l’été 271, lors de la rébellion des ouvriers de la monnaie ; plusieurs milliers de personnes meurent dans les combats qui en résultent². Aurélien réorganise militairement les frontières danubiennes de l’Empire et prend la décision de construire une nouvelle enceinte fortifiée autour de la capitale, la défense par le mur servien étant devenue insuffisante.

La construction du mur d’Aurélien est une mesure d’urgence face aux invasions barbares. L’historien Aurelius Victor déclare explicitement que le projet vise à soulager la vulnérabilité de la ville³. Il pourrait s’agir également d’envoyer un signal politique, Aurélien indiquant qu’il fait confiance au peuple de Rome pour rester loyal, ainsi qu’une déclaration publique du pouvoir de l’empereur. La construction du mur est, de loin, le plus grand projet de construction à s’être tenu à Rome depuis plusieurs décennies, une déclaration concrète de la force toujours présente de Rome².

Les murs sont construits en seulement cinq ans, bien qu’Aurélien lui-même meure avant la fin du projet. La construction est accélérée — et son coût diminué — en incorporant des bâtiments existant dans la structure : l’amphithéâtre Castrense, la caserne de la Garde prétorienne, la pyramide de Cestius et une section de l’aqueduc de l’Aqua Claudia près de la porta Maggiore. Des calculs indiquent que les murs sont composés à un dixième de structures pré-existantes⁴. Une zone derrière les murs est vidée et des passages pour sentinelles y sont construits afin de pouvoir le renforcer en cas d’urgence.

L’efficacité réelle des murs est discutable, du fait de la faible taille de la garnison de la ville. Les forces combinées de la garde prétorienne, des cohortes urbaines et des vigiles n’atteignent que 25 000 hommes, trop peu pour défendre l’enceinte efficacement. Le but militaire du mur n’est toutefois pas de supporter un siège prolongé : les armées barbares n’ont pas l’habitude d’assiéger des villes, étant insuffisamment équipées et fournies pour cette tâche. À la place, elles effectuent des raids contre des cibles mal défendues. Le mur d’Aurélien est une dissuasion contre de telles tactiques⁵.

Le mur fait l’objet de restaurations — reconnaissables au type de maçonnerie, généralement en opus listatum (alternance de bandes de briques et de moellons) —, sous Maxence, qui améliore également les tours de garde. En 401, sous Honorius, la hauteur des murs est doublée⁴. À cette époque, le château Saint-Ange de l’autre côté du Tibre est incorporé comme forteresse dans les défenses de la ville. Totila, roi des Ostrogoths, décide de détruire les murs en 545, afin d’enlever aux Byzantins la possibilité de défendre Rome lors de la Guerre des Goths. Selon Procope de Césarée, un tiers des murs sont détruits.

Usage ultérieur

Le mur d’Aurélien continue d’être une défense militaire significative des États pontificaux jusqu’au 20 septembre 1870 lorsque les bersagliers du Royaume d’Italie le percent près de la porta Pia et capturent Rome. Il sert également à définir les limites de Rome jusqu’au xix^e siècle, les zones construites étant confinées à l’intérieur des murs.

Le mur d’Aurélien est remarquablement bien préservé actuellement, principalement grâce à son usage constant jusqu’au xix^e siècle. Les sections les mieux conservées s’élèvent du muro Torto (villa Borghèse) au corso d’Italia et au Castro Pretorio, de la porta San Giovanni à la porta Ardeatina, de la porta Ostiensis au Tibre et autour de la porta San Pancrazio¹.

Portes d’accès intra muros

Le mur d’Aurélien est percé de 17 à 18 portes distinctes construites selon trois styles différents en fonction de leur importance et de leur époque d’édification. Les plus importantes sont constituées de deux arcs jumeaux, flanqués de deux tours cylindriques et pavées en travertin. Les portes de seconde importance ne sont constituées que d’un seul arc flanqué de deux tours cylindriques et pavées d’opus latericium. Enfin les portes mineures sont faites d’un seul arc encadré par des tours quadrangulaires communes. La porta Maggiore, avec son aqueduc, échappe cependant à cette règle.

Au cours des siècles, quelques portes changent de noms, voire sont déplacées, comme la porta Pia qui est reconstruite entre 1561 et 1565 par Michel-Ange à une centaine de mètres de distance sur ordre du pape Pie IV.

Le tableau suivant récapitule les portes en partant de la plus au nord et en tournant dans le sens horaire :

Porte	Via	Notes	Coordonnées	Illus.
Porta del Popolo (Porta Flaminia)	Via Flaminia		41° 54′ 42″ nord, 12° 28′ 34″ est
Porta Pinciana			41° 54′ 34″ nord, 12° 29′ 18″ est
Porta Salaria	Via Salaria		41° 54′ 39″ nord, 12° 29′ 53″ est
Porta Pia	Nouvelle via Nomentana		41° 54′ 33″ nord, 12° 30′ 04″ est
Porta Nomentana	Ancienne via Nomentana		41° 54′ 31″ nord, 12° 30′ 08″ est
Porta Praetoriana		Ancienne entrée de la Castra Praetoria, le camp de la Garde prétorienne	41° 54′ 30″ nord, 12° 30′ 21″ est
Porta Tiburtina	Via Tiburtina		41° 53′ 51″ nord, 12° 30′ 37″ est
Porta Maggiore(Porta Praenaestina)	Via Praenaestina	Point de rencontre des trois aqueducs de la ville	41° 53′ 29″ nord, 12° 30′ 54″ est
Porta San Giovanni		À côté de la basilique Saint-Jean-de-Latran	41° 53′ 09″ nord, 12° 30′ 33″ est
Porta Asinaria	Ancienne via Tuscolana		41° 53′ 09″ nord, 12° 30′ 31″ est
Porta Metronia			41° 52′ 57″ nord, 12° 29′ 55″ est
Porta Latina	Via Latina		41° 52′ 35″ nord, 12° 30′ 09″ est
Porta San Sebastiano(Porta Appia)	Via Appia		41° 52′ 25″ nord, 12° 30′ 05″ est
Porta Ardeatina			41° 52′ 24″ nord, 12° 29′ 50″ est
Porta San Paolo(ancienne Porta Ostiensis)	Via Ostiense	À côté de la pyramide de Cestiusconduisant à la basilique Saint-Paul-hors-les-Murs	41° 52′ 36″ nord, 12° 28′ 53″ est
Porta Portuensis		Dans le Trastevere	41° 52′ 50″ nord, 12° 28′ 12″ est
Porta San Pancrazio(ancienne Porta Aurelia)		Dans le Trastevere	41° 53′ 18″ nord, 12° 27′ 41″ est
Porta Settimiana		Dans le Trastevere	41° 53′ 32″ nord, 12° 28′ 03″ est
Porta Cornelia		Dans le Trastevere ; démolie

Notes et références

1. ↑ ^a et b (en) Amanda Claridge, Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide, Oxford, Royaume-Uni, Oxford University Press, 1998(ISBN 0-19-288003-9), p. 59, 332-335
2. ↑ ^a et b (en) Gregory S. Aldrete, Daily Life In The Roman City: Rome, Pompeii, and Ostia, Greenwood Press, 2004 (ISBN 0-313-33174-X), p. 41-42
3. ↑ (la) Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus, p. 35, 7
4. ↑ ^a et b Coarelli 1994, p. 16
5. ↑ (en) Pat Southern, The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine, Routledge, 2001 (ISBN 0-415-23943-5), p. 115

• Mur d’Aurélien, sur Wikimedia Commons

Bibliographie

• Filippo Coarelli, Guide archéologique de Rome, éditions Hachette, 1994

• Pour l’ensemble des points mentionnés sur cette page : voir sur OpenStreetMap [archive] (aide), Google Maps [archive] (aide), Bing Maps [archive] (aide) (carte limitée à 200 lieux) ou télécharger au format KML [archive] (aide).
• Museo delle Mura [archive]

 

Aurelian Walls
Part of Rome
Italy
A section of Aurelian wall between the Porta Ardeatina and Porta San Sebastiano
Map of ancient Rome with the Aurelian walls (red) and its gates highlighted. The 4th-Century BC Servian Walls (blue) are also shown.
Type	Defensive wall
Height	Up to 10 metres (33 ft)
Site information
Owner	Italian Government
Open to the public	Open to public
Condition	Remaining sections: Either semi-ruinous or partly restored
Site history
Built	271–275 AD
Built by	Roman citizens
Materials	Concrete Brick Mortar
Demolished	Some parts in the Medieval Period
Events	Sack of Rome (410) Sack of Rome (455) Capture of Rome
Garrison information
Garrison	Praetorian Guard
Occupants	Romans

The Aurelian Walls (Italian: Mura aureliane) are a line of city walls built between 271 AD and 275 AD in Rome, Italy, during the reign of the Roman EmperorsAurelian and Probus. They superseded the earlier Servian Wall built during the 4th century BC.

The walls enclosed all the seven hills of Rome plus the Campus Martiusand, on the left bank of the Tiber, the Trasteveredistrict. The river banks within the city limits appear to have been left unfortified, although they were fortified along the Campus Martius. The size of the entire enclosed area is 1,400 hectares (3,500 acres).^[1]

Construction

The full circuit ran for 19 km (12 mi) surrounding an area of 13.7 km²(5.3 sq mi). The walls were constructed in brick-faced concrete, 3.5 m (11 ft) thick and 8 m (26 ft) high, with a square tower every 100 Roman feet (29.6 m (97 ft)).

In the 4th century, remodelling doubled the height of the walls to 16 m (52 ft). By 500 AD, the circuit possessed 383 towers, 7,020 crenellations, 18 main gates, 5 postern gates, 116 latrines, and 2,066 large external windows.^[2]

History

By the third century AD, the boundaries of Rome had grown far beyond the area enclosed by the old Servian Wall, built during the Republican period in the late 4th century BC. Rome had remained unfortified during the subsequent centuries of expansion and consolidation due to lack of hostile threats against the city. The citizens of Rome took great pride in knowing that Rome required no fortifications because of the stability brought by the Pax Romana and the protection of the Roman Army. However, the need for updated defences became acute during the crisis of the Third Century, when barbarian tribes flooded through the Germanic frontier and the Roman Army struggled to stop them. In 270, the barbarian Juthungi and Vandals invaded northern Italy, inflicting a severe defeat on the Romans at Placentia (modern Piacenza) before eventually being driven back. Further trouble broke out in Rome itself in the summer of 271, when the mint workers rose in rebellion. Several thousand people died in the fierce fighting that resulted.^[3]

Aurelian’s construction of the walls as an emergency measure was a reaction to the barbarian invasion of 270; the historian Aurelius Victorstates explicitly that the project aimed to alleviate the city’s vulnerability.^[4] It may also have been intended to send a political signal as a statement that Aurelian trusted that the people of Rome would remain loyal, as well as serving as a public declaration of the emperor’s firm hold on power. The construction of the walls was by far the largest building project that had taken place in Rome for many decades, and their construction was a concrete statement of the continued strength of Rome.^[3] The construction project was unusually left to the citizens themselves to complete as Aurelian could not afford to spare a single legionary for the project. The root of this unorthodox practice was due to the imminent barbarian threat coupled with the wavering strength of the military as a whole due to being subject to years of bloody civil war, famine and the Plague of Cyprian.

The walls were built in the short time of only five years, though Aurelian himself died before the completion of the project. Progress was accelerated, and money saved, by incorporating existing buildings into the structure. These included the Amphitheatrum Castrense, the Castra Praetoria, the Pyramid of Cestius, and even a section of the Aqua Claudia aqueduct near the Porta Maggiore. As much as a sixth of the walls is estimated to have been composed of pre-existing structures.^[3] An area behind the walls was cleared and sentry passages were built to enable it to be reinforced quickly in an emergency.

The actual effectiveness of the wall is disputable, given the relatively small size of the city’s garrison. The entire combined strength of the Praetorian Guard, cohortes urbanae, and vigiles of Rome was only about 25,000 men – far too few to defend the circuit adequately. However, the military intention of the wall was not to withstand prolonged siege warfare; it was not common for the barbarian armies to besiege cities, as they were insufficiently equipped and provisioned for such a task. Instead, they carried out hit-and-run raids against ill-defended targets. The wall was a deterrent against such tactics.^[5]

Parts of the wall were doubled in height by Maxentius, who also improved the watch-towers. In 401, under Honorius, the walls and the gates were improved. At this time, the Tomb of Hadrian across the Tiber was incorporated as a fortress in the city defenses.

Later use

The Aurelian Walls continued as a significant military defense for the city of Rome until September 20, 1870, when the Bersaglieri of the Kingdom of Italy breached the wall near the Porta Pia and captured Rome. The walls also defined the boundary of the city of Rome up until the 19th century, with the built-up area being confined within the walled area.

The Aurelian Walls remain remarkably well-preserved today, largely the result of their constant use as Rome’s primary fortification until the 19th century. The Museo delle Mura near the Porta San Sebastianooffers information on the walls’ construction and how the defenses operated. The best-preserved sections of the walls are found from the Muro Torto (Villa Borghese) to Corso d’Italia to Castro Pretorio; from Porta San Giovanni to Porta Ardeatina; from Porta Ostiense to the Tiber; and around Porta San Pancrazio.^[2]

Gates

]

Sentry passage near Porta Metronia.

List of gates (porte), from the northernmost and clockwise:

• Porta del Popolo (Porta Flaminia) – here begins via Flaminia
• Porta Pinciana
• Porta Salaria – here begins via Salaria
• Porta Pia – here begins the new via Nomentana
• Porta Nomentana – here began the old via Nomentana
• Porta Praetoriana – old entrance to Castra Praetoria, the camp of the Praetorian Guard
• Porta Tiburtina – here begins via Tiburtina
• Porta Maggiore (Porta Praenestina) – here three aqueducts meet, and via Praenestina begins
• Porta San Giovanni – near Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano
• Porta Asinaria – here begins the old via Tuscolana
• Porta Metronia
• Porta Latina – here begins via Latina
• Porta San Sebastiano (Porta Appia) – here begins the Appian Way
• Porta Ardeatina
• Porta San Paolo (Porta Ostiense) – next to the Pyramid of Cestius, leading to Basilica di San Paolo fuori le Mura, here via Ostiensebegins

Gates in Trastevere (from the southernmost and clockwise):

• Porta Portuensis
• Porta Aurelia Pancraziana
• Porta Settimiana
• Porta Aurelia-Sancti Petri

Gallery

• 

  Porta Asinaria.

• 

  A section of wall near the Pyramid of Cestius.

• 

  An interior view of the Aurelian walls near Porta San Sebastiano.

• 

  A restored section between towers on the wall.

• 

  Parts of the Roman wall and its towers have become domestic properties in Rome.

• 

  The 1700-year-old walls were constructed from tiled brick and concrete.

• 

  A latrine (circled in red) built into the wall near the Porta Salaria.

• Leonine Wall, the first wall around Vatican City
• Museum of the Walls, Rome
• Sack of Rome
• Walls of Constantinople

References

Notes

1. Jump up^ https://books.google.dk/books?id=P67KFytPP5MC&pg=PT120&lpg=PT120&dq=Aurelian+Walls+1.400+hectare&source=bl&ots=_nJ1ixVPBi&sig=OKWOTu5HKJuR67hT_VRnm5y1TFc&hl=da&sa=X&ei=BVkhVd2wCoKOsAGt9IFg&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Aurelian%20Walls%201.400%20hectare&f=false
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b Claridge, Amanda (1998). Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide, First, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1998, pp. 59, 332-335. ISBN 0-19-288003-9
3. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Aldrete, Gregory S (2004). Daily Life In The Roman City: Rome, Pompeii, And Ostia, Greenwood Press, 2004, pp. 41-42. ISBN 0-313-33174-X
4. Jump up^ Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus. 35, 7.
5. Jump up^ Southern, Pat. The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine, Routledge, 2001, p. 115. ISBN 0-415-23943-5

Sources

• Mancini, Rossana (2001). Le mura Aureliane di Roma. Atlante di un palinsesto murario, Quasar, Roma ISBN 88-7140-199-9

• Museum of the Walls official website
• Newspaper article of latest collapse (1 Nov 2007) Photo gallery of latest collapse(1 Nov 2007)

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

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

The excavations of Ercolano
Shown within Italy
Alternative name	Ercolano
Location	Ercolano, Campania, Italy
Coordinates	40.8060°N 14.3482°ECoordinates: 40.8060°N 14.3482°E
Type	Settlement
History
Founded	6th – 7th century BC
Abandoned	79 AD
Site notes
Website	Herculaneum – Official website
UNESCO World Heritage Site
Official name	Archaeological Areas of Pompeii, Herculaneum, and Torre Annunziata
Type	Cultural
Criteria	iii, iv, v
Designated	1997 (21st session)
Reference no.	829
Region	Europe and North America

Located in the shadow of Mount

Vesuvius, Herculaneum (Italian: Ercolano) was an ancient Roman town destroyed by volcanicpyroclastic flows in 79 AD. Its ruins are located in the comune of Ercolano, Campania, Italy.

As a UNESCO World Heritage Site, it is famous as one of the few ancient cities that can now be seen in much of its original splendour, as well as for having been lost, along with Pompeii, Stabiae, Oplontis and Boscoreale, in the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79 that buried it. Unlike Pompeii, the deep pyroclastic material which covered it preserved wooden and other organic-based objects such as roofs, beds, doors, food and even some 300 skeletons which were discovered in recent years along the seashore. It had been thought until then that the town had been evacuated by the inhabitants.

Herculaneum was a wealthier town than Pompeii, possessing an extraordinary density of fine houses with, for example, far more lavish use of coloured marble cladding.

History of Herculaneum

Herculaneum plan showing buildings below modern town

Ancient tradition connected Herculaneum with the name of the Greek hero Heracles(Hercules in Latin and consequently Roman Mythology),^[1] an indication that the city was of Greek origin. In fact, it seems that some forefathers of the Samnite tribes of the Italian mainland founded the first civilization on the site of Herculaneum at the end of the 6th century BC. Soon after, the town came under Greek control and was used as a trading post because of its proximity to the Gulf of Naples. The Greeks named the city Ἡράκλειον, Heraklion. In the 4th century BC, Herculaneum again came under the domination of the Samnites. The city remained under Samnite control until it became a Roman municipium in 89 BC, when, having participated in the Social War(“War of The Allies” against Rome), it was defeated by Titus Didius, a legate of Sulla.

After the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD, the town of Herculaneum was buried under approximately 20 metres (50–60 feet) of ash. It lay hidden and largely intact until discoveries from wells and underground tunnels became gradually more widely known, and notably following the Prince d’Elbeuf’s explorations in the early 18th century.^[2] Excavations continued sporadically up to the present and today many streets and buildings are visible, although over 75% of the town remains buried. Today, the Italian towns of Ercolano and Porticilie on the approximate site of Herculaneum. Until 1969 the town of Ercolano was called Resina. It changed its name to Ercolano, the Italian modernisation of the ancient name in honour of the old city.

The inhabitants worshipped above all Hercules, who was believed to be the founder of both the town and Mount Vesuvius. Other important deities worshipped include Venus and Apollo, who are depicted in multiple statues in the city.

The eruption of AD 79

Herculaneum and other cities affected by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius. The black cloud represents the general distribution of ash and cinder. Modern coast lines are shown.

Bronze horse excavated at Resina Theater (Herculaneum).

Main article: Eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79

The catastrophic eruption of Mt. Vesuvius occurred on the afternoon of 24 August AD 79. Because Vesuvius had been dormant for approximately 800 years, it was no longer even recognized as a volcano.

Based on archaeological excavations and on two letters of Pliny the Younger to the Roman historian Tacitus, the course of the eruption can be reconstructed.^[3]

At around 1pm on 24 August, Vesuvius began spewing volcanic ash and stone thousands of meters into the sky. When it reached the tropopause (the boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere), the top of the cloud flattened, prompting Pliny to describe it to Tacitus as a stone pine tree. The prevailing winds at the time blew toward the southeast, causing the volcanic material to fall primarily on the city of Pompeii and the surrounding area. New studies have been carried out on the victims’ skeletons and it has been established that some of the minerals stored in the bones are preserved.^[4]Since Herculaneum lay to the west of Vesuvius, it was only mildly affected by the first phase of the eruption. While roofs in Pompeii collapsed under the weight of falling debris, only a few centimeters of ash fell on Herculaneum, causing little damage but nonetheless prompting most inhabitants to flee.

During the following night, the eruptive column which had risen into the stratosphere collapsed onto Vesuvius and its flanks. The first pyroclastic surge, formed by a mixture of ash and hot gases, billowed through the mostly evacuated town of Herculaneum at 160 km/h (100 mph). A succession of six flows and surges buried the city’s buildings, causing little damage in some areas and preserving structures, objects and victims almost intact. However, in other areas there was significant damage, knocking down walls, tearing away columns and other large objects;^[5] a marble statue of M. Nonius Balbus near the baths was blown 15 m away and a carbonised skeleton was found lifted 2.5 m above ground level in the garden of the House of the Relief of Telephus.^[6]

Recent multidisciplinary research on the lethal effects of the pyroclastic surges in the Vesuvius area showed that in the vicinity of Pompeii and Herculaneum, heat was the main cause of the death of people who had previously been thought to have died by ash suffocation. This study shows that exposure to the surges, measuring at least 250 °C (482 °F) even at a distance of 10 kilometres from the vent, was sufficient to cause the instant death of all residents, even if they were sheltered within buildings.^[7]

Archaeology

In 1709 the digging of a deep well revealed some exceptional statues at the lowest levels which was later found to be the site of the theatre. The Prince d’Elbeuf purchased the land and proceeded to tunnel out from the bottom of the well, collecting any statues they could find. Among the earliest statues recovered were the two superbly sculpted Herculaneum Women^[8] now in the Dresden Skulpturensammlung.^[9]

Small Herculaneum Woman (Dresden)

Major excavation was resumed in 1738 by Spanish engineer Rocque Joaquin de Alcubierre. The elaborate publication of Le Antichità di Ercolano (“The Antiquities of Herculaneum”) under the patronage of the King of the Two Sicilies had an effect on incipient European Neoclassicism out of all proportion to its limited circulation; in the later 18th century, motifs from Herculaneum began to appear on stylish furnishings, from decorative wall-paintings and tripod tables to perfume burners and teacups. However, excavation ceased once the nearby town of Pompeii was discovered, which was significantly easier to excavate because of the thinner layer of debris covering the site (4 m as opposed to Herculaneum’s 20 m).

Barker noted in his 1908 Buried Herculaneum, “By the orders of Francis I land was purchased, and in 1828 excavations were begun in two parts 150 feet apart, under the direction of the architect. Carlo Bonucci. In the year 1868 still further purchases of land were made, and excavations were carried on in an eastward direction till 1875. The total area now open measures 300 by 150 perches (1510 by 755 8 metres). The limits of the excavations to the north and east respectively are the modern streets of Vico di Mare and Vico Ferrara. It is here only that any portion of ancient Herculaneum may be seen in the open day.”^[10]

From 1927 until 1942 a new campaign of excavations was begun by Amedeo Maiuri, which exposed about four hectares of the ancient city in the archaeological park that is visible today.

Excavation resumed briefly in the town in 1980–81 on the ancient shoreline following which the skeletons in the boathouses were found.

From 1996–99 the large area to the north-west of the site was excavated and exposed, including part of the Villa of the Papyri, the north-west baths,^[11] the House of the Dionysian Reliefs^[12] and a large collapsed monument. This area was left in a chaotic state and from 2000–7 further work on conservation of this area was done.

Many public and private buildings, including the forum complex, are yet to be excavated.

The Site

 

Insulae numbers

The buildings at the site are grouped in blocks (insulae), defined by the intersection of the east-west (cardi) and north-south (decumani) streets. Hence we have Insula II – Insula VII running counterclockwise from Insula II. To the east are two additional blocks: Orientalis I (oI) and Orientalis II (oII). To the south of Orientalis I (oI) lies one additional group of buildings known as the “Suburban District” (SD). Individual buildings having their own entrance number. For example, the House of the Deer is labelled (Ins IV, 3).

The House of Aristides (Ins II, 1)

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

Cupids playing with a lyre, Roman fresco from Herculaneum

The first building in insula II is the House of Aristides. The entrance opens directly onto the atrium, but the remains of the house are not particularly well preserved due to damage caused by previous excavations. The lower floor was probably used for storage.

The House of Argus (Ins II, 2)

The second house in insula II got its name from a fresco of Argus and Io which once adorned a reception room off the large peristyle. The fresco is now lost, but its name lives on. This building must have been one of the finer villas in Herculaneum. The discovery of the house in the late 1820s was notable because it was the first time a second floor had been unearthed in such detail. The excavation revealed a second floor balcony overlooking Cardo III, as well as wooden shelving and cupboards; however, with the passing of time, these elements have been lost.

The House of the Genius (Ins II, 3)[edit]

To the north of the House of Argus lies the House of the Genius. It has been only partially excavated but it appears to have been a spacious building. The house derives its name from the statue of a cupid that formed part of a candlestick. In the centre of the peristyle are the remains of a rectangular basin.

The House of the Alcove (Ins IV)

The house is actually two buildings joined together. As a consequence of this it is a mixture of plain and simple rooms combined with some highly decorated ones.

The atrium is covered, so lacks the usual impluvium. It retains its original flooring of opus tesselatum and opus sectile. Off the atrium is a biclinium richly decorated with frescoes in the fourth style and a large triclinium which originally had a marble floor. A number of other rooms, one of which is the apsed alcove after which the house was named, can be reached via a hall which gets its light from a small courtyard.

College of the Augustales

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

A marble tablet from Herculaneum showing women playing knucklebones, depicting Phoebe, Leto, Niobe, Hilearia, and Agle, painted and signed by an artist named “Alexander of Athens”, now in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale (Naples)

Temple of the augustales or priests of the Imperial cult.

Central Thermae

The Central Thermae were bath houses built around the first century AD. Bath houses were very common at that time, especially in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Per common practice, there were two different bath areas, one for men and the other for women. These houses were extremely popular, attracting many visitors daily. This cultural hub was also home to several works of art, which can be found in various areas of the Central Thermae site.

Villa of the Papyri

 Villa of the Papyri

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

A fresco depicting Theseus, from Herculaneum (Ercolano), Italy, 45–79 AD

The most famous of the luxurious villas at Herculaneum is the “Villa of the Papyri.” It was once identified as the magnificent seafront retreat for Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, Julius Caesar‘s father-in-law; however, the objects thought to be associated with Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesonius correspond more closely to a greatly standardized assemblage, and cannot indicate, with certainty, the owner of the villa.^[13] The villa stretches down towards the sea in four terraces. Piso, a literate man who patronized poets and philosophers, built a fine library there, the only one to survive intact from antiquity.

Between 1752 and 1754 a number of blackened unreadable papyrus scrolls were serendipitously recovered from the Villa of the Papyri by workmen. These scrolls became known as the Herculaneum papyri or scrolls, the majority of which are today stored at the National Library, Naples. The scrolls are badly carbonized, but a large number have been unrolled, with varying degrees of success. Computer-enhanced multi-spectral imaging, in the infra-red range, helps make the ink legible. There is now a real prospect that it will be possible to read the unopened rolls using X-rays.^[14] The same techniques could be applied to the rolls waiting to be discovered in the as-yet unexcavated part of the villa, eliminating the need for potentially damaging the rolls by unrolling them.

A team spent a month in summer 2009, making numerous X-ray scans of two of the rolls that are stored at the French National Academy in Paris. They hoped that computer processing would convert the scans into digital images showing the interiors of the rolls and revealing the ancient writing. The main fear, however, was that the Roman writers might have used carbon-based inks, which would be essentially invisible to the scans. That fear has turned out to be fact. They had hoped that re-scanning the rolls with more powerful X-ray equipment would reveal the text.^[15] However, subsequent X-rays have still produced nothing legible.^[16] Still, the hundreds, possibly thousands of scrolls still buried at the site may yet prove to have legible text someday. As of 2016, research and experimentation has recovered more scrolls and it is suggested that new techniques will allow more to be read without unrolling them.

Skeletal remains

Giacobbe Giusti, Herculaneum

 

“Boat houses” where skeletons were found

“Boat houses” with skeletons

The skeleton called the “Ring Lady” unearthed in Herculaneum.

In 1981, under site administrator Dr. Giuseppe Maggi, excavations initially turned up more than 55 skeletons (30 adult males, 13 adult females and 12 children) on the beach and in the first six boat chambers. Because earlier excavations had revealed only a few skeletons, it was long thought that nearly all of the inhabitants had managed to escape, but this surprising discovery led to a change of view. The last inhabitants waiting for rescue from the sea were killed instantly by the intense heat, despite being sheltered from direct impact. The study of victims’ postures and the effects on their skeletons indicate that the first surge caused instant death as a result of fulminant shock due to a temperature of about 500 °C (932 °F). The intense heat caused contraction of hands and feet and possibly fracture of bones and teeth.^[17]

Further excavations in the 1990s revealed a total of at least three hundred skeletons huddled close together in twelve arches facing the sea and on the beach, while the town was almost completely evacuated. The “Ring Lady” (see image), named for the rings on her fingers, was discovered in 1982.

Chemical analysis of the remains has led to greater insight into the health and nutrition of the Herculaneum population. Dr. Sara C. Bisel(1932–1996) was a physical anthropologist and classical archaeologist who played a prominent role in early scientific research at Herculaneum. Her pioneering work in the chemical and physical analysis of skeletons yielded new insights into the nutrition and health of ancient populations. This was considered ground-breaking and helped advance the field of paleodemography. Quantities of lead were found in some of the skeletons, which led some to speculation of lead poisoning. Also the presence of scarring on the pelvis, for instance, may give some indication of the number of children a woman had borne.^[18]

Casts of skeletons were also produced, to replace the original bones after taphonomic study, scientific documentation and excavation. In contrast to Pompeii, where casts resembling the body features of the victims were produced by filling the body imprints in the ash deposit with plaster, the shape of corpses at Herculaneum could not be preserved, due to the rapid vaporization and replacement of the flesh of the victims by the hot ash (ca. 500 °C). A cast of the skeletons unearthed within chamber 10 is on display at the Museum of Anthropology in Naples. The most significant and extensive study of a sample of the skeletal remains of the Herculaneum victims is that published by Luigi Capasso in 2001. This study which employed X rays has superseded the earlier work by Bisel ^[19]

Issues of conservation

 Conservation issues of Pompeii and Herculaneum

Herculaneum, Ercolano, and Vesuvius

The volcanic water, ash and debris covering Herculaneum, along with the extreme heat, left it in a remarkable state of preservation for over 1600 years. However, once excavations began, exposure to the elements began the slow process of deterioration. This was not helped by the methods of archaeology used earlier in the town’s excavation, which generally centered around recovering valuable artifacts rather than ensuring the survival of all artifacts. In the early 1980s and under the direction of Dr. Sara C. Bisel, preservation of the skeletal remains became a high priority. The carbonised remains of organic materials, when exposed to the air, deteriorated over a matter of days, and destroyed many of the remains until a way of preserving them was formed.

Today, tourism and vandalism have damaged many of the areas open to the public, and water damage coming from the modern Ercolanohas undermined many of the foundations of the buildings. Reconstruction efforts have often proved counterproductive. However, in modern times conservation efforts have been more successful. Today excavations have been temporarily discontinued, in order to direct all funding to help save the city.

A large number of artifacts from Herculaneum are preserved in the Naples National Archaeological Museum.

A private-public partnership, the Herculaneum Conservation Project, has taken a lead restoring Herculaneum. In 2012, UNESCO’s director general praised Herculaneum as a model “whose best practices surely can be replicated in other similar vast archaeological areas across the world”^[20]

Photos

• 

  House Number 22 is noted for this outstanding summer triclinium with a nymphaeum decorated with coloured mosaics

• 

  Herculaneum, Neptune and Salacia, wall mosaic in House Number 22

• 

  Street paving stones in Herculaneum

• 

  Residential water pipe made of lead in Herculaneum

• 

  Wall paintings in the first style

• 

  Inlaid marble floor

• 

  Marcus Nonius Balbus The Elder, found in dwellings of Resina/Herculaneum.

• 

  Most likely a posthumous painted portrait of Cleopatra VIIof Ptolemaic Egypt with red hair and her distinct facial features, wearing a royal diadem and pearl-studded hairpins, from Roman Herculaneum, mid-1st century AD^[21][22]

Documentaries

• A 1987 National Geographic special In the Shadow of Vesuviusexplored the sites of Pompeii and Herculaneum, interviewed archaeologists, and examined the events leading up to the eruption of Vesuvius.
• A 2002 documentary “Herculaneum. An unlucky escape” – http://www.doclab.it/produzioni.php, based on a research of Pier Paolo Petrone, Giuseppe Mastrolorenzo and Mario Pagano. Co-production of DocLab Rome, Discovery Channel USA, France 3 – Taxi Brousse, Spiegel TV, Mediatred, 52′.
• A 2004 documentary “Pompeii and the 79 AD eruption”. TBS Channel Tokyo Broadcasting System, 120’.
• An hour-long drama produced for the BBC entitled Pompeii: The Last Day portrays several characters (with historically attested names, but fictional life-stories) living in Pompeii, Herculaneum and around the Bay of Naples, and their last hours, including a fuller and his wife, two gladiators, and Pliny the Elder. It also portrays the facts of the eruption.
• Pompeii Live, Channel 5, 28 June 2006, 8pm, live archaeological dig at Pompeii and Herculaneum
• Marcellino de Baggis‘ 2007 documentary “Herculaneum: Diaries of Darkness and Light”, Onionskin productions^[23]
• A 2007 documentary “Troja ist überall: Auferstehung am Vesuv”, Spiegel TV, 43’29 – http://terra-x.zdf.de/ZDFde/inhalt/3/0,1872,7122307,00.html.
• Secrets of the Dead: Herculaneum Uncovered is a PBS show covering the archaeological discoveries at Herculaneum.
• Out of the Ashes: Recovering the Lost Library of Herculaneum is a KBYU-TV documentary that traces the history of the Herculaneum papyri from the time of the eruption, to their discovery in 1752, to modern developments that impact their study.
• The Other Pompeii: Life and Death in Herculaneum is a documentary presented by Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, director of Herculaneum Conservation Project.
• Pompeii: The Mystery of the People Frozen in Time is a 2013 BBC One drama documentary presented by Dr. Margaret Mountford.

Notes

1. Jump up^ The founding myth asserted that Hercules built Herculaneum at the location where he killed Cacus, a son of Vulcan who had stolen some of Hercules’ cattle.
2. Jump up^ Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew (2011). Herculaneum: Past and Future. ISBN 978-0-7112-3142-9.
3. Jump up^ Available at the University of Arizona: Pliny the Younger, Letters 6.16 and 6.20 to Cornelius Tacitus and in Project Gutenberg: Letter LXV — To Tacitus, Letter LXVI — To Cornelius Tacitus
4. Jump up^ “A hypothesis of sudden body fluid vaporization in the 79 AD victims of Vesuvius”.
5. Jump up^http://www.herculaneum.ox.ac.uk/files/newsletters/harchissue2.pdfp 3
6. Jump up^ “House of the Relief of Telephus – AD79eruption”. sites.google.com.
7. Jump up^ Mastrolorenzo, G; Petrone, P; Pappalardo, L; Guarino, FM (15 June 2010). “Lethal thermal impact at periphery of pyroclastic surges: evidences at Pompeii”. PLoS ONE. 5 (6): e11127. Bibcode:2010PLoSO…511127M. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011127. PMC 2886100. PMID 20559555.
8. Jump up^ THE LARGE AND THE SMALL HERCULANEUM WOMAN, Universita Ca’ Foscari, Venezia, Doctoral Thesis 2014–2015, Angeliki Ntontou
9. Jump up^ The Herculaneum Women: And the Origins of Archaeology (J. Paul Getty Museum) – 7 Feb 2008, Daehner
10. Jump up^ Ethel Ross Barker (1908). “Buried Herculaneum”.
11. Jump up^ “Northwest Baths – AD79eruption”. sites.google.com.
12. Jump up^ “House of the Dionysian Reliefs – AD79eruption”. sites.google.com.
13. Jump up^ The World of Pompeii. Edited by John J. Dobbins and Pedar W. Foss 2008
14. Jump up^ “Digital Exploration: Unwrapping the Secrets of Damaged Manuscripts”. http://www.research.uky.edu. Retrieved 2016-12-16.
15. Jump up^ “UK scientists stymied in effort to read ancient scrolls”. kentucky. Retrieved 2016-12-16.
16. Jump up^ “UK scientists stymied in effort to read ancient scrolls”. kentucky. Retrieved 2016-12-16.
17. Jump up^ Mastrolorenzo, G.; Petrone, P.P.; Pagano, M.; Incoronato, A.; Baxter, P.J.; Canzanella, A.; Fattore, L. (2001). “Herculaneum Victims of Vesuvius in AD 79” (PDF). Nature. 410 (6830): 769–770. Bibcode:2001Natur.410..769M. doi:10.1038/35071167. PMID 11298433.
18. Jump up^ Recently Dr Estelle Lazer of the University of Sydney has questioned some of these findings in Resurrecting Pompeii (2009).
19. Jump up^ Capasso, Luigi (2001). I fuggiaschi di Ercolano. Paleobiologia delle vittime dell’ eruzione vesuviana del 79 d.C. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.
20. Jump up^ Hammer, Joshua. “The Fall and Rise and Fall of Pompeii”. Retrieved 2015-07-01.
21. Jump up^ Walker, Susan; Higgs, Peter (2001), “Painting with a portrait of a woman in profile”, in Walker, Susan; Higgs, Peter, Cleopatra of Egypt: from History to Myth, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press (British Museum Press), pp. 314–315, ISBN 9780691088358.
22. Jump up^ Fletcher, Joann (2008). Cleopatra the Great: The Woman Behind the Legend. New York: Harper. ISBN 978-0-06-058558-7, image plates and captions between pp. 246-247.
23. Jump up^ “Herculaneum: DVD: Diaries of Light and Darkness”. WorldCat. Online Computer Library Center, Inc. Retrieved 17 April 2013.

Further reading

• Brennan, B. 2018.Herculaneum A Roman Town Reborn. Sydney: Ancient History Seminars.
• Brennan, B. 2012. Herculaneum A Sourcebook. Sydney: Ancient History Seminars.
• Capasso, L. 2001. I fuggiaschi di Ercolano. Paleobiologia delle vittime dell’ eruzione vesuviana del 79 d.C. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider
• Daehner, J., ed. 2007. The Herculaneum Women: History, Context, Identities. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum.
• De Carolis, E., and G. Patricelli. 2003. Vesuvius, A.D. 79: The Destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum.
• Deiss, J. J. 1995. The Town of Hercules: A Buried Treasure Trove.Malibu, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum.
• Lazer, E. 2009. Resurrecting Pompeii. London: Routledge.
• Pace, S. 2000. Herculaneum and European Culture Between the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Naples, Italy: Electa.
• Pagano, M. 2000. Herculaneum: A Reasoned Archaeological Itinerary. Translated by A. Pesce. Naples, Italy: T&M.
• Pagano, M., and A. Balasco. 2000. The Ancient Theatre of Herculaneum. Translated by C. Fordham. Naples, Italy: Electa.
• Pirozzi, M. E. A. 2000. Herculaneum: The Excavations, Local History and Surroundings. Naples, Italy : Electa.
• Scarth, A. 2009. Vesuvius: A Biography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Wallace-Hadrill, A. 2011. “The Monumental Centre of Herculaneum: In Search of the Identities of the Public Buildings.” Journal of Roman Archaeology 24:121-160.

References

• National Geographic, Vol 162, No 6. Buried Roman Town Give Up Its Dead, (December, 1982)
• National Geographic, Vol 165, No 5. The Dead Do Tell Tales, (May, 1984)
• Discover, magazine, Vol 5, No 10. The Bone Lady (October, 1984)
• The Mayo Alumnus, Vol 19, No2. An Archaeologist’s Preliminary Report: Time Warp at Herculaneum, (April, 1983)
• Carnegie Mellon Magazine, Vol 4, No 2. Bone Lady Reconstructs People at Herculaneum, Winter, 1985
• In the Shadow of Vesuvius National Geographic Special, (11 February 1987)
• 30 years of National Geographic Special, (25 January 1995)
• Petrone P.P., Fedele F. (a cura di), 2002. Vesuvio 79 A.D. Vita e morte ad Ercolano, Fridericiana Editrice Universitaria, Napoli.
• Antonio Virgili, Culti misterici ed orientali a Pompei, Gangemi, Roma, 2008.
• National Geographic, Vol 212, No 3. Vesuvius. Asleep for Now,(September, 2006) http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/09/vesuvius/vesuvius-text

• Pliny the Younger’s letters on the catastrophic eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 A.D. to the Roman historian Tacitus from University of Arizona: Pliny the Younger, Letters 6.16 and 6.20 to Cornelius Tacitus and in Project Gutenberg: Letter LXV — To Tacitus, Letter LXVI — To Cornelius Tacitus

Library resources about Herculaneum

Online books Resources in your library Resources in other libraries

• The local archaeological authorities – Official website
• Herculaneum Conservation Project – Official website
• AD 79: Year of Destruction
• 62 Pompeii earthquake
• Herculaneum papyri
• Blogging Pompeii
• The Friends of Herculaneum Society
• The Philodemus Project will publish Philodemus’ works on poetry and on rhetoric.^{[dead link]}
• Brigham Young University: Herculaneum Scrolls
• Herculaneum by Iain Dickson, ‘Melvadius Macrinus Cugerni’
• Herculaneum Uncovered Documentary produced by the PBSSeries Secrets of the Dead
• Purcell, N., R. Talbert, T. Elliott, S. Gillies. “Places: 432873 (Herculaneum)”. Pleiades. Retrieved 8 March 2012.
• Romano-Campanian Wall-Painting (English, Italian, Spanish and French introduction)
• “Herculaneum Uncovered – A conversation with Andrew Wallace-Hadrill”, Ideas Roadshow, 2013
• • “How was Herculaneum Destroyed?” in Popular Science Monthly, Volume 2 (December 1872)
  • “Herculaneum“. New International Encyclopedia. 1905.
  • “Herculaneum“. The Nuttall Encyclopædia. 1907.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herculaneum
• http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Langue étrusque

Giacobbe Giusti, Langue étrusque

Face avant du cippe de Pérouse dit Cippo perugino

Étrusque
Période	viiie siècle av. J.-C. – iie siècle av. J.-C.
Pays	Italie
Région	Étrurie
Classification par famille
–
Codes de langue
ISO 639-3	ett [archive]
IETF	ett
Carte
Zones approximatives de répartition de l’étrusque et des autres langues tyrséniennes dans l’Antiquité

Face avant du cippe de Pérouse dit Cippo perugino.

La langue étrusque fut parlée par les Étrusquessur le territoire de l’ancienne Étrurie, en Italiecentrale, correspondant grosso modo à l’actuelle Toscane (qui lui doit son nom), à partir du viii^e siècle av. J.-C., jusqu’à son extinction en tant que langue vivante aux alentours du ii^e siècle av. J.-C.

Il existe un corpus, soit un ensemble d’inscriptions en langue étrusque conservées jusqu’à ce jour, dûment répertoriées et provenant pour la plupart d’entre elles de Campanie, du Latium, de Falerii et Faliscus, Véies, Caeré, Tarquinia et alentours, mais aussi d’endroits plus éloignés, hors de l’Étrurie, et avec lesquels celle-ci entretenait d’étroits rapports diplomatiques ou commerciaux : ce qui deviendra à l’époque romaine la Gallia Narbonensis (la Narbonnaise), mais aussi la Corse, la Sardaigne et l’Afrique du Nord où Carthage était souveraine.

Le seul langage attesté avec lequel on ait trouvé une parenté avec l’étrusque est celui qui fut parlé dans l’île de Lemnos, avant l’invasion athénienne(vi^e siècle av. J.-C.), où des stèles ont été trouvées, comportant des inscriptions rédigées avec des caractères proches de ceux utilisés par les Étrusques.

Description linguistique

Phonologie

Dans les tableaux, il y a en premier les lettres utilisées pour transcrire l’étrusque, suivi de leur prononciation puis de la lettre correspondant en étrusque.

Voyelles

L’étrusque avait un système vocalique simple formé de quatre voyelles distinctes. Il n’y aurait pas de distinction phonologique entre les voyelles [o] et [u] qui auraient pu simplement allophones d’un unique phonème qui ressemblait à plutôt [o] ou bien comme [u], d’après les sons adjacents. C’est aussi le cas du nahuatl et d’autres langues qui ne distinguent pas [o] et [u]. Cela est dû au fait que dans l’écriture, seulement un signe est employé pour couvrir les emprunts du grec avec [[o, u, ɔ]]. (ex. grec κωθων kōthōn > étrusque qutun « jarre »).

	Antérieure	Centrale	Postérieure
Fermée	i [i]		u [u]
Ouverte	e [e]	a [ɑ]

Consonnes

Le système consonantique étrusque distingue principalement les occlusives aspirées et les non-aspirées. Toutefois, il n’y a pas de différence entre les sourdes et les sonores, de tel sorte que [b], [d] et [g] se confondent respectivement avec [p], [t] et [k].

	Bilabiale		Dentale		Alvéolaire	Palatale	Vélaire		Glottale
Occlusives	p [p]	φ [pʰ]	t, d [t]	θ [tʰ]			c, k, q [k]	χ [kʰ]
Fricatives	f [ɸ]		s [s]		ś [ʃ]				h [h]
Affriquées			z [ts]
Nasales	m [m]		n [n]
Latérales			l [l]	r [r]
Spirantes	v [w]					i [j]

Basé sur le standard orthographique des écrits étrusques dans lesquels ne figurent pas les voyelles ou qui contiennent une série de groupes de consonnes qui paraissent impossibles à prononcer, dans des mots comme cl « de cette (génitif) » et lautn « homme libre », c’est probable que « m », « n », « l » et « r » étaient parfois écrites à l’aide de syllabes sonnantes. Ainsi, cl /kl̩/ et lautn /‘lɑwtn̩/.

Morphologie

L’étrusque est une langue agglutinante avec des cas grammaticaux.

Textes

Outre les abécédaires et les inscriptions épigraphiques (voir Alphabet étrusque) que l’on trouve sur quantité d’objets comme les poteries, les tablettes à écrire (tablette de Marsiliana) ou les miroirs de bronze, sur les parois des tombes ou des sarcophages, des « inscriptions parlantes »¹ généralement brèves et limitées aux nom et filiation des personnes auxquelles appartenaient ces objets ou ces sépultures, parmi les 10 000 textes retrouvés², les plus longs et les plus importants sont les suivants :

Le cippe de Pérouse

 Cippe de Pérouse.

Transcription du texte du Cippe de Pérouse.

C’est une stèle, un cippedécouvert à Colle San Marco en 1822, contenant, gravés sur deux faces latérales, quarante-six lignes et une centaine de mots dextroverses, relatifs à un contrat passé entre deux familles à propos des limites des domaines respectifs, avec les désignations des parties, des lois invoquées et du dignitaire les faisant appliquer³.

Quatre inscriptions sur tablettes de plomb

Celles-ci ont été trouvées :

• la première aux alentours de Rome à Santa Marinella, onze lignes, réponse oraculaire ou formule de nature rituelle ;
• la seconde, le disque de Magliano à Magliano in Toscana, dans la Maremme, incisée en spirale et faisant allusion aux offrandes en l’honneur de plusieurs divinités ;
• la troisième à Volterra comportant treize lignes et environ soixante mots, de nature vraisemblablement magico-rituelle ;
• la quatrième à Campiglia Marittima dans le nord de la Maremme, comportant dix lignes et une cinquantaine de mots, correspondant à une malédiction lancée par une affranchie à l’encontre de plusieurs personnes.

Lamelles de Pyrgi

Article détaillé : Lamelles de Pyrgi.

Incisions sur plaquettes d’or retrouvées dans le sanctuaire dédié à Astarté, deux inscriptions intéressantes en ce qu’elles ont été retrouvées avec une troisième rédigée en langue punique (phénicien), inscription bilingue donc. La première contient la dédicace, de la part d’un certain Thefarie Velianas, « magistrat » ou « seigneur » de Caeré à la déesse assimilée ici à Uni (Héra–Junon), ainsi qu’une formule augurale. La seconde fait allusion aux cérémonies qui doivent être accomplies en son honneur. Découvertes en 1964.

Momie de Zagreb

 Liber Linteus Zagrabiensis.

Les « bandelettes » du Liber linteus

Le texte le plus important qui ait été retrouvé, de par la longueur et par conséquent le contenu, vu la rareté et la brièveté des textes qui sont parvenus jusqu’à nous et qu’il est convenu d’appeler le Liber linteus. Il s’agit d’un « livre », manuscrit sur toile de lin, servant de bandelettes enveloppant une momie trouvée en Égypte et conservée au Musée National de Zagreb en Croatie, d’où son nom. Datant du i^er siècle av. J.-C. environ, il s’agit d’un texte calligraphié en rouge et noir en une douzaine de colonnes verticales et, sur les 230 lignes contenant environ 1 200 mots lisibles – plus une centaine qu’il est possible de déduire du contexte – cinq cents mots originaux émergent compte tenu des répétitions typiques des formules et invocations rituelles. On pourrait définir ce livre comme une sorte de calendrier religieux évoquant certaines divinités et les cérémonies à accomplir aux lieux et dates indiqués. Découvert en 1868 (acheté en Égypte en 1848-49).

Tabula Capuana

La Tabula Capuana ou tavola capuana, est une tablette en terre cuite datant du v^e siècle av. J.-C.contenant un texte en langue étrusque de 390 mots lisibles partagé en dix sections par des lignes horizontales, découverte en 1898 dans la nécropole de Santa Maria Capua Vetere, en Campanie, conservée auprès des Musées nationaux de Berlin.

Article détaillé : Tabula Capuana.

Tabula Cortonensis

Article détaillé : Tabula Cortonensis.

Découverte en 1992 à Cortone, elle comporte 32 lignes de texte en langue étrusque sur une plaque en bronze fragmentée en huit morceaux (dont un manque).

Stèle de Poggio Colla

En mars 2016, un groupe de chercheurs du Mugello Valley Archaeological Project a découvert sur le site de Poggio Colla en Toscane une stèle en pierre. Le bloc qui pèse 227 kg et mesure environ 1 m de haut faisait partie d’un temple sacré qui a été démoli il y a 2 500 ans pour en bâtir un autre à sa place. Restée enfouie pendant tout ce temps, la stèle est bien conservée. Elle comporte 70 lettres lisibles et des signes de ponctuation. Ces caractéristiques en font un des plus longs exemples d’écriture étrusque découverts à cette heure⁴.

Les scientifiques sont convaincus que les paroles et les concepts gravés sur la pierre sont un témoignage rarissime de cette civilisation, considérant que les connaissances actuelles sont essentiellement issues de nécropoles, tombes et objets funéraires. La stèle, de par sa provenance, pourrait fournir des détails sur la religion étrusque et sur les noms des divinités. La traduction sera effectuée par les chercheurs de l’Université du Massachusetts de Amherst⁴.

Autres traces écrites

• Le bilingue de Pesaro, en étrusque et en latin, donnant le nom du défunt et de sa fonction.
• De petits vases (encriers ?) comportant l’alphabet entier et ordonné, sur le pourtour⁵.
• Les inscriptions étrusques de l’Achensee, gravées sur les parois d’une grotte, dans le Tyrol autrichien

Classification linguistique

Il n’y a pas consensus, actuellement, sur le lien éventuel de la langue étrusque avec la famille des langues indo-européennes, qui ont la particularité d’être synthétiques (à l’exception de l’arménien), alors que l’étrusque est une langue agglutinante, comme l’élamite, son contemporain, qui n’a jamais pu être liée aux langues sémitiquesvoisines, ni aux langues indo-européennes.

Certains linguistes avancent des arguments en faveur d’un lien entre étrusque et langues indo-européennes. Ce sont tout d’abord des correspondances dans certains traits grammaticaux : formation du génitif en -s, voire d’autres cas de la flexion nominale, ordre des mots, certaines prépositions (hintha : en dessous) ou particules (-c : et ; cf. indo-européen *-k{\displaystyle ^{w}}edont est issu le latin -que). Mais ce sont aussi des correspondances dans le lexique : Θezi, hece, tece : poser, faire, radical i.-e. dhē-; clan (fils), souvent cité comme preuve du caractère indiscutablement non-indo-européen de l’étrusque, se rapproche de formes celtes et tokhariennes, dont l’éloignement géographique garantit l’origine indo-européenne (par exemple irlandais clann : enfants, famille ; tokharien B kliye : femme) ; tin, jour, de dei-n, din, le pronom personnel première personne mi, etc.

Certains chercheurs précisent le point de rattachement de l’étrusque à l’indo-européen : pour Francisco Rodriguez Adrados et Jean Faucounau, l’étrusque est apparenté au lycien, langue indo-européenne du groupe anatolien, groupe considéré comme le plus archaïque (c’est-à-dire le plus anciennement détaché du tronc commun). Cet apparentement consisterait à penser que l’étrusque s’est détaché du tronc commun indo-européen encore plus tôt que l’anatolien (pour Faucounau, et contrairement au consensus général, c’est également le cas du lycien). Pour d’autres, la proximité de l’étrusque au groupe anatolien serait plus nette si l’on prend en compte, à la suite d’Hérodote, le lydien (et non le lycien), langue parlée dans la région de la Lydie. Mais l’idée est la même : l’étrusque serait une langue issue du rameau indo-européen avant même le groupe anatolien.

Selon certains linguistes britanniques, elle appartiendrait à une « super-famille » que ceux-ci nomment « nostratique » ou « eurasienne ». Cette thèse intéressante ouvre de nombreuses perspectives puisqu’elle situerait l’origine de l’étrusque en des temps beaucoup plus reculés que l’époque à laquelle la recherche l’a généralement fait jusqu’à présent. Aussi s’agirait-il davantage non pas tant d’une langue indo-européenne, que pré-indo-européenne, proto-indo-européenne en son stade le plus avancé. Ceci expliquerait les nombreuses ressemblances qu’on a pu trouver à la langue étrusque avec soit certaines langues du pourtour de la mer Noire par exemple, soit avec des langues définies comme non indo-européennes telles que les langues finno-ougriennes (finnois) ou le basque (cette dernière appartenant à une catégorie très ancienne du continent européen). Pour certaines, il s’agirait alors davantage de langues pré-indo-européennes que non indo-européennes, langues parlées de l’Atlantique à l’Indus, cristallisées à ce stade, et connaissant par la suite une évolution autonome.

La vaste majorité du lexique étrusque n’a effectivement pas de point commun identifiable avec les racines indo-européennes reconstruites. C’est par exemple la position de Bader, Sergent, et d’autres. Ils s’appuient sur la numération étrusque (ðu 1 ; zal 2 ; ci 3 ; sa 4 ; maχ 5 ; huð 6 ; sar 10) ainsi que quelques mots relatifs à la famille (ruva, frère ; seχ, sœur ; clan, fils, lupu, mourir, tiu, lune, mois) à leurs équivalents latins (unus, duo, tres, quattuor, quinque, sex, decem, frater, soror, filius, morire, luna) et indo-européens *(oinos, duwo, treyes, kwetwores, penkwe, s(w)eks, dekmt, bhrater, swesor, sunus, mer-, mans-), mais aussi spur cité ou encore al-, donner, etc. Sachant que la numération et les noms ayant trait à la famille comptent parmi ceux qui sont le moins susceptibles d’être empruntés à des substrats primitifs en raison de leur importance et de leur emploi quotidien, on ne peut qu’examiner avec la plus grande prudence un emprunt des numéraux à une langue aborigène non-indo-européenne. Il existe en outre une somme assez importante de vestiges néolithiques dans le voisinage de l’Étrurie, ainsi que des traces de langues non indo-européennes en toponymie.

Un certain nombre de mots, nettement minoritaires, n’appartiennent pas directement à la langue étrusque ; il s’agit d’emprunts « étrusquisés », faits aux langues des divers autres peuples que côtoyaient les Étrusques.

Actuellement, selon Mallory, l’hypothèse la plus économique consiste à voir dans les Étrusques un peuple indigène, de langue non-indo-européenne, ayant sans doute entretenu des liens commerciaux avec l’est du bassin méditerranéen. Mais les faits sont têtus et les dernières recherches effectuées par les généticiens semblent prouver que les Étrusques sont bien venus d’Asie Mineure^{[réf. nécessaire]}, comme l’avait écrit Hérodote.

Le débat est parfois faussé par les nombreuses polémiques qui ont agité les linguistes à propos de la connotation idéologique qu’a pu prendre pour certains le terme « indo-européen ». D’une part, cela a contribué à jeter une ombre sur une civilisation qui n’est jamais qu’une civilisation du monde antique parmi les autres, et d’autre part, qu’elle soit ou non indo-européenne importe moins que la compréhension des textes. Or, cette langue est suffisamment connue pour que l’on puisse proposer des traductions (pas toujours consensuelles) des textes parvenus jusqu’à nous : dans l’ensemble, on sait de quoi parle un texte donné.

Étrusque, langue des Tyrrhéniens

Les Tyrrhéniens forment une composante, la troisième et dernière, du peuple étrusque recherchée par l’auteur d’une thèse, controversée quant à la méthode de recherche (dite « citophonétique ») à travers les racines de leur langue. Selon son auteur, A. Di Mario, les Tyrrhéniens seraient partis d’Asie Mineure, corroborant ainsi la légende de l’Énéide selon laquelle ceux-ci venaient de Troie à la suite d’Énée, et plus précisément de Datassa/Darhutassa, « Dardanelles ». Ils auraient émigré, sillonnant la mer Égée, laissant trace de leur passage et permanence à Lemnos, en Crèteet à travers l’Hellade, en Sardaigne et en Corseavant de débarquer dans le Latium pour y fonder Rome, non loin de la ville des Sabinsautochtones, portant avec eux leur langue, que l’auteur définit anatolique et pré-grecque.

Appelés « Tyrsenoi », Tyrrhéniens, par leurs voisins Grecs, ils se nommaient eux-mêmes Rasna (un terme démontré par des inscriptions étrusques comme meχl rasnal, « du peuple Tyrrhénien »).

Le linguiste Helmut Rix a également proposé la réunion de l’étrusque, du lemnien et du rhétique(que l’on considérait jusqu’alors comme des isolats) au sein d’une famille tyrsénienne.

Dialectes

Depuis le xix^e siècle, il existe une théorie qui propose d’apparenter l’étrusque au rhétique, un idiome non-indo-européen des Alpes orientales qui présente des similitudes avec l’étrusque, mais on ne possède que trop peu de sources écrites valables pour établir de manière significative un lien concret avec la langue étrusque. Ainsi que peut être mise en relief cette ambiguïté concernant le dialecte étrusque, l’historien et linguiste Gilles Van Heems affirme :

« De fait, si l’on met à part les études spécifiquement diachroniques, qui ont permis de définir les traits particuliers de l’étrusque « archaïque » et la mise en évidence, très tôt, de la frontière graphique, mais aussi linguistique, entre les régions septentrionales et méridionales de l’Étrurie, rares sont les étruscologues qui ont emprunté la voie dialectologique ; et ils l’ont toujours fait dans des contributions brèves et centrées sur quelques points particuliers. Au contraire, les savants ont tous souligné l’uniformité ou l’unicité linguistique de l’étrusque et, dans une mesure comparable, quoique cela n’ait pas freiné, au contraire, les études dialectologiques, des langues italiques marquant une différence très nette avec le domaine grec du I^er millénaire. Or c’est là un fait qui ne nous étonne peut-être pas assez, nous modernes, habitués que nous sommes à des langues hautement standardisées. L’uniformité linguistique apparente doit en effet apparaître comme une « anomalie », dans la mesure où toute langue obéit à un mouvement naturel de différenciation dans le temps, dans l’espace ainsi que, « verticalement », en fonction du locuteur. »

— Gilles Van Heems.

Ces différentes approches au niveau linguistique, nous laisseraient supposer un postulat d’antériorité de la présence des Étrusques dans l’Europe du Sud par rapport à celle des celto-italiques; en regard de ces derniers, les Étrusques étaient donc indigènes à l’Italie et se seraient par la suite “celto-italisés” dans leur langue d’origine par le biais du commerce et du contact culturel⁶.

Exemple de texte étrusque

Une inscription funéraire de Tarquinia, citée par Jean-Paul Thuillier, donne bien les limites de ce que nous savons et de ce que nous ignorons de la langue étrusque.

FELSNAS:LA:LETHES – SVALCE:AVIL:CVI – MURCE:CAPVE – TLECHE:HANIPALVSCLE

« Larth (prénom) Felsnas (nom de famille), fils de Lethe (nom du père, qui peut signifier esclave ou descendant d’esclave), a vécu 106 ans. Il a (x…) Capoue (y…) par Hannibal »

Si on arrive à lire sans difficulté les noms propres, les liens familiaux et certains termes sociaux comme « esclave », les verbes MVRCE (actif) et TLECHE (passif) restent mystérieux. On pourrait comprendre que le défunt a « défendu Capoue confiée par Hannibal » (il aurait combattu comme mercenaire dans l’armée carthaginoise), ou « repris Capoue conquise par Hannibal » (il aurait servi dans une cohorte auxiliaire de l’armée romaine) ou « restauré Capoue ruinée par Hannibal » (il aurait participé à la reconstruction de la ville après la 2^e guerre Punique). Peut-être trouvera-t-on un jour les mêmes verbes dans un autre contexte qui permettra de trancher.

Quelques mots connus de la langue étrusque

 Langue étrusque (vocabulaire).

Certains degrés de parentés nous sont connus grâce aux inscriptions reportées dans les tombeaux :

• papa (grand-père),
• ati nacna (grand-mère),
• clan (fils),
• sec (fille),
• tusurhtir (époux),
• puia (épouse),
• thuva (frère),
• papacs (neveu).

Quelques prénoms révélés par l’épigraphie

• féminins : Adria; Atteia; Larthia; Ram(a)tha ; Tanachilla ; Velia ;
• masculins : Larth ; Seth(re) (Setrius) ; Aruns ; Vel.; Kalatur (lat.Kalator); Kaisie (fal.Kaisos); Helve (lat. Heluus); Cavie; vipie

La numération

 Numération étrusque.

Les dix premiers nombres, dont les six premiers inscrits sur les dés⁷ (les autres nombres ont été déduits par des additions explicites) :

1. θu (thu)
2. zal
3. ci
4. huθ (huth)
5. maχ (mach)
6. śa
7. semφ (semph)
8. cesp
9. nurφ (nurph)
10. śar

Un article assez récent de S. A. Iatsemirsky [1] [archive] remet en cause l’interprétation de śarpour dix, et préfère lui substituer halχ, par comparaison avec les numéraux dizaines, qui, à l’exception de vingt (zaθrum) se forment tous en ajoutant un suffixe -alχ. Le substantif halχ étant par ailleurs attesté dans des passages ayant trait à des nombres, Iatsemirsky en conclut que halχsignifie dix, śar signifiant alors douze, par ressemblance phonétique entre śar et zal (ś et z semblent être, dans une certaine mesure, interchangeables).

Cette hypothèse est évidemment critiquable, elle s’appuie sans doute sur le même rapprochement qui existe en germanique (ancien et récent) entre 2 et 12 : All. zwei/zwölf, vieux norrois tveir/tólf.

À remarquer la ressemblance avec l’akkadien : 1. ishten 2. shena 3. shalash 4. erbe 5. h amish 6. shishshu 7. sebe 8. samane 9. tishe 10. esher, ainsi qu’avec le phénicien : 1. ʼḥd (forme féminine ʼḥt) 2. šnm (fém. non attesté) 3. šlš (fém. šlšt) 4. ʼrbʻʼ(fém. rbʻt) 5. ḥmš (fém. ḥmšt) 6. ss (fém. ššt) 7. šbʻ (fém. šbʻt) 8. šmn(h) (fém. non attesté) 9. tšʻ(fém. non attesté) 10. ʻsr (fém. ʻsrt), mais pas nécessairement dans le même ordre.

L’alphabet

L’origine de la lettre C semble être la même que celle de la lettre [[g]] ; l’étrusque ne faisant semble-t-il pas de différence entre les consonnes occlusives vélaires sourdes et sonores ([k] et [g] en API), l’alphabet étrusque utilisa la troisième lettre de l’alphabet grec, le gamma, pour transcrire leur [k].

Quelques mots étrusques conservés en latin et en français

Les Latins ont emprunté un certain nombre de mots étrusques comme haruspix (devin) et lanista(maître de gladiateurs). Quelques-uns sont encore usuels en français, comme « histrion » (comédien, devenu péjoratif), « mécène » (nom d’un ministre romain d’origine étrusque, devenu nom commun en français) et « personne » ; celui-ci viendrait du nom de Phersu, personnage masqué et barbu, à la fois menaçant et comique, qui apparaissait dans les spectacles funéraires. En latin, persona a désigné le masque de théâtre, puis le rôle, avant de prendre un sens plus général⁸.

Les noms des dieux

Ils proviennent du Panthéon Hourrite et pré-grec. Teshub par exemple, le Tarhui Hatti devenu Tarhund/Tarchun chez les Hittites devient Tarchonte (Archonte)/Tagete (Tagès) chez les Étrusques. Il en va de même des autres dieux : Turan « déesse du ciel » (Vénus) ; Laran « dieu de la tempête » (Mars) ; Fufluns « dieu soleil » ; Thesan « déesse de la lumière » (Aurore).

Divers

• Code de langue IETF : ett

Notes et références

1. ↑ Dominique Briquel, La Civilisation étrusque, p. 26.
2. ↑ « plus que l’ensemble des autres textes de l’Italie pré-romaine », Dominique Briquel, La Civilisation étrusque, p. 22.
3. ↑ Notice du musée archéologique de Pérouse.
4. ↑ ^a et b (it) « Toscana, trovata pietra di 2500 anni fa: potrebbe svelare il mistero della lingua degli Etruschi » [archive], sur Repubblica.it, 31 mars 2016.
5. ↑ Les Etrusques et l’Italie avant Rome : De la Protohistoire à la guerre sociale de Ranuccio Bianchi bandinelli, Antonio Giuliano, et Jean-Paul Thuillier, p. 165.
6. ↑ “À la recherche des indo-européens“, éd. 1997, par J.P. Mallory
7. ↑ Exemplaires conservés à la Bibliothèque de France.
8. ↑ J. Heurgon, La Vie quotidienne chez les Étrusques, 1961.

Voir aussi

Bibliographie

• Enrico Bennelli, J. Capelle et M.-L. Haack, Lire et comprendre les inscriptions étrusques, Paris, Spartacus IDH, coll. « Recherche », octobre 2015, 301 p. (ISBN 978-2-36693-006-1, lire en ligne [archive]).
• Gli Etruschi: una nuova immagine, Mauro Cristofani, Giunti, Firenze, 1984.
• Rivista di epigrafia etrusca, Mauro Cristofani (in Revue Studi Etruschi, publiée par l’Istituto di Studi Etruschi e Italici, Firenze)
• Rjabchikov, Sergei V. 2014. The Etruscan Astronomy [archive]. Etruscan Research, 1: 2-14.
• Rjabchikov, Sergei V. 2013. Ob etrusskoy “l‟nyanoy knige” iz Zagreba (On Etruscan “Liber Linteus” of Zagreb; in Russian) [archive]. Visnik Mizhnarodnogo doslidnogo tsentru “Lyudina: mova, kul’tura, piznannya”, 34(3), pp. 30-36.
• Il « mistero » della lingua etrusca, Romolo A. Staccioli (on trouvera à la fin de cet ouvrage un glossaire des mots étrusques actuellement déchiffrés avec certitude.) Newton Compton editori, Roma, 1977. 2° édition, 1987.

Articles connexes

• Étrusques
• Alphabet étrusque
• Mythologie étrusque
  • Charun
  • Vanth
• Culture de Villanova, Historiographie étrusque
• Tyrrhéniens
• Liber Linteus Zagrabiensis
• langues tyrséniennes
• linguistique
  • liste de langues
    • langues par famille

Liens externes

• Notices d’autorité : Bibliothèque nationale de France(données) • Système universitaire de documentation • Bibliothèque du Congrès • Gemeinsame Normdatei • Bibliothèque nationale de la Diète • Bibliothèque nationale d’Espagne
• Etruscan Texts Project [archive]
• Vladimir Georgiev, « État actuel du déchiffrement de la langue étrusque, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, volum 115, numér 4 » [archive], sur Persee.fr, 1971, p. 639-654

Etruskische Sprache

Etruskisch (†)
Zeitraum	9. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr.
Ehemals gesprochen in	Etrurien (im Wesentlichen heutige Toskana) und Unteritalien
Sprachcodes
ISO 639-1	–
ISO 639-2	–
ISO 639-3	ett

Sprachgebiete im Italien des 6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.

Die etruskische Sprache – auch Etruskisch genannt – ist eine vor allem epigraphisch überlieferte, ausgestorbene Sprache.^[1] Sie wurde vom 9. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis zum 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr. in der damaligen Provinz Etrurien von den Etruskern gesprochen.

Etruskische Texte stammen aus Etrurien, Kampanien, dem Latium, Falerii (Gebiet der Falisker), Veji, Cerveteri(Caere), Tarquinia und deren Umgebung, aber auch aus Gebieten außerhalb Italiens, mit denen die Etrusker diplomatische und Handelskontakte pflegten, wie z. B. die spätere Gallia Narbonensis, aber auch Korsika, Sardinien und das karthagische Nordafrika. Die nördlichste Inschrift befindet sich in Österreich in der Nähe des Guffert. Die Texte können bis heute nur in Bruchstücken übersetzt werden.

Etruskisch wurde in einer Variante des altitalischen Alphabets geschrieben (siehe etruskische Schrift).

Bekannte Texte

Außer den Inschriften, die man auf vielen Geräten und Objekten findet, wie Töpfereien und Spiegeln, auf Grabwänden und auf Särgen sowie auf Gewandfibeln (recht kurz, oft nur aus dem Namen des Verstorbenen bestehend), sind die wichtigsten erhaltenen Texte in etruskischer Sprache folgende:

• Die Zagreber Mumienbinden (lat. Liber linteus, Leinenbuch)

Der bisher längste Text, den man gefunden hat. Es ist ein regelrechtes „Buch“, auf Leinen geschrieben, das man in acht Streifen zerrissen als Binden für eine ägyptische Mumie benutzt hat; drei der Streifen sind jedoch verloren gegangen. Die Mumie befindet sich im Nationalmuseum in Zagreb. Der Text, der aus dem 1. Jahrhundert v. Chr. stammt, ist in roter und schwarzer Tinte kalligraphiert und umfasst zwölf Spalten (Kolumnen), ca. 230 Zeilen und ca. 1200 lesbare Wörter, darunter ungefähr 500 verschiedene. Die Wiederholungen erklären sich durch den rituellen Charakter des Textes. Man bezeichnet ihn auch als „religiösen Kalender“, der für jeden Tag die zur Ehrung der Götter vorgesehenen Zeremonien mit Orts- und Zeitangaben vorschreibt.

• Die Tontafel von Capua (lat. Tabula Capuana)

Dieser Text besteht aus 10 Absätzen und 62 Zeilen, von denen jede durch eine waagrechte Linie abgegrenzt ist. Etwa 300 Wörter sind heute noch lesbar. Der Text ist religiöser Natur und beinhaltet Anweisungen bezüglich der Vorbereitungen zu einem Bestattungsritus.

Cippus perusinus
(3.–2. Jahrhundert v. Chr.)

• Der Cippus von Perugia (lat. Cippus Perusinus)

Dieser Text besteht aus 46 Zeilen und ca. 150 Wörtern. Es handelt sich dabei um ein Abkommen zwischen zwei Familien, das die Grenzen zwischen ihren Grundstücken festlegt.

• Die Goldbleche von Pyrgi

Goldbleche von Pyrgi
(heute im Etruskischen Museum Rom)

Ein in zwei Goldbleche getriebener zweisprachiger Text, den man in einem der Göttin Astarte (kanaanäische Form der babylonischen Göttin Ischtar) gewidmeten Heiligtum fand. Der erste, etruskische Text, von einem gewissen Thefarie Velianas,„Magistrat“, „Statthalter“ oder „Herr“ von Caere (heute: Cerveteri) verfasst, richtet sich an die etruskische Göttin Uni (Hera-Juno);der zweite, auf Punisch verfasste Text, ist eine Anweisung bezüglich der Zeremonien, die ihr zu Ehren stattfinden sollten.

• Vier Inschriften auf Bleitafeln

Die erste wurde in Santa Marinella bei Rom gefunden und scheint eine Voraussage eines Orakels zu beinhalten. Die zweite fand man in Magliano, sie ist in Spiralenform geschrieben und ist eine Liste von Opfergaben an mehrere Götter. Die dritte fand man in Volterra, sie ist wahrscheinlich ein magisch-ritueller Text. Die vierte fand man in Campiglia Marittima, sie handelt von einem Fluch gegen mehrere Personen.

• Die Bronzetafel von Cortona (lat. Tabula Cortonensis)

Diese Bronzetafel wurde erst 1992 in der Nähe der Stadt Cortona am Trasimenischen See gefunden. Sie ist jetzt die drittlängste bekannte Inschrift nach den Mumienbinden von Zagreb und dem Ziegelstein von Capua. Der Text ist 40 Zeilen lang und stellt offenbar eine notarielle Urkunde dar.

Linguistische Klassifikation

Die genetische Zugehörigkeit des Etruskischen zu einer Sprachfamilie ist weiterhin unklar, obwohl es Versuche einer Anbindung an indogermanische und nichtindogermanische Sprachen gegeben hat.^[1] Eine Verwandtschaft des Etruskischen mit der auf der ägäischen Insel Lemnos bis zur Invasion der Athener durch Miltiades im Jahre 510 v. Chr. gesprochenen vorgriechischen lemnischen Sprache konnte nachgewiesen werden. Für beide Sprachen wird eine Verbindung zur rätischen Sprache in der Alpenregion angenommen.^[1] Daraus lässt sich eine tyrsenische Sprachfamilie folgern.

Durch die sprachliche Verbindung mit dem Lemnischen könnte die Hypothese gestützt werden, dass die Etrusker aus dem agäisch-kleinasiatischen Raum eingewandert sind; jedoch ist eine umgekehrte Wanderungsrichtung auch nicht von vornherein auszuschließen; in diesem Falle wäre das Etruskische eine autochthone Sprache Italiens. Allerdings gibt es im Verbreitungsgebiet des Etruskischen Hinweise auf ein sprachliches Substrat, das für die genannte Verbindung mit dem Rätischen verantwortlich sein könnte.

Steinbauer versucht, über westanatolische Gemeinsamkeiten eine sprachliche Verbindung des Etruskischen und Lemnischen zum Indogermanischen herzustellen.^[2]Woudhuizen hat sich insbesondere mit den Beziehungen zur anatolischen Sprache Luwisch beschäftigt.^[3]

Zu den Versuchen, das Etruskische mit anderen Sprachen und Sprachfamilien in Verbindung zu bringen, liegen folgende Theorien vor:

• Hebräische Sprache: 16. Jahrhundert
• Italische Sprachen: Luigi Lanzi (1789), E. Lattes (1869), Wilhelm Paul Corssen (1874/75) u. W. Deecke (1882)
• Finno-ugrische Sprachen: Wilhelm Deecke (1875), J. Martha (1913)
• Armenische Sprache: Sophus Bugge (1886, 1890)
• Kaukasische Sprachen: Alfredo Trombetti (1909), Vilhelm Thomsen
• Lydische Sprache: Enno Littmann (1916), Gustav Herbig
• Indogermanoid: Paul Kretschmer (1925)
• Indogermanische Sprachen: E. Goldmann (1929/30; 1936), Emil Vetter (1937)
• Turksprachen: Wilhelm Brandenstein (1937)
• Albanische Sprache: Z. Mayani (1961)
• Hethitische Sprache: Wladimir Georgiew (1962/63/79)
• Altgriechische Sprache: A. I. Charsekin (1963)
• Ungarische Sprache: M. Alinei (2003)
• Luwische Sprache: F. C. Woudhuizen (2008)
• Dravidische Sprachen: S. Konow
• Baskische Sprache: V. Thomsen
• Ägyptische Sprache: V. Wanscher
• Minoische Sprache: Wilhelm Tegethoff

Noch weniger Verbindungen lassen sich zur Makrofamilie des Nostratischen herstellen, mit der bestimmte Ähnlichkeiten zwischen verschiedenen Sprachfamilien (u. a. der indogermanischen, der afroasiatischen und der uralischen Sprachfamilie) erklärt werden sollen.

Grammatik

Deklination

Nach Helmut Rix (→ Literatur) kann man im Etruskischen folgende Kasus unterscheiden (V steht im Folgenden für einen Vokal):

Nominativ: Leersuffix (Grundform)

Akkusativ: beim Nomen identisch mit dem Nominativ; nur beim Pronomen durch -n(i) gekennzeichnet

Genitiv : -(V)s; -(a)l

Lokativ: -i

Ablativ : -is; -(a)ls

Pertinentiv : -(V)si; -(a)le

Der Plural wird bei den Substantiven durch die Suffixe -(V)r bzw. -χva/-cva/-va/-ua markiert. Der Pluralmarker steht vor dem Kasusmarker.

Konjugation

Es gibt im Etruskischen keine Personalendungen, auch der Numerus (Singular oder Plural) des Subjekts wird nicht gekennzeichnet.

ame heißt z. B. „ich bin, du bist, er/sie/es ist; wir sind, ihr seid, sie sind“.

Präsens: -e

Präteritum Aktiv: -ce

Präteritum Passiv: -χe

Imperativ: = Verbalstamm

Subjunktiv: -a

Nezessitativ: -ri

Verbalnomina werden gebildet durch: -u (Resultat), -θ (Gleichzeitigkeit), -as (Vorzeitigkeit), -e (Infinitiv).

Wortschatz

Etwa 200 etruskische Wörter sind mehr oder weniger gedeutet, die Bedeutung der restlichen etwa 300–400 Wörter ist noch unklar. Die Deutungen der einzelnen Forscher gehen z. T. immer noch weit auseinander und sollten kritisch betrachtet werden. Einige etruskische Wörter mit gesicherter Bedeutung:

Vater – apa

Mutter – ati

Sohn – clan

Tochter – seχ

Bruder – ruva

Großvater – papa

Großmutter – teta

Gattin – puia

Sonne – usil

Mond, Monat – tiur

Jahr – avil
u. a.

Ein Teil des etruskischen Wortschatzes besteht aus „etruskisierten“ Wörtern anderer Sprachen, wie z. B. der italischen Sprachen, des Griechischen, Persischen, Punischen u. a.

Etruskische Vornamen

Die Etrusker verwendeten neben eigenen Vornamen auch solche aus italischen, griechischen und anderen indoeuropäischen Sprachen.

Einige Beispiele für rein etruskische Vornamen:

Männlich: Avile/Avele/Aule, Arnθ, Larθ, Lar(e)ce, Laris, Vel, Śeθre, Tarχi

Weiblich: Larθi(a), Veli(a), Śeθr(i)a, Fasti(a)/Hasti(a), Tarχa, Θana, Θanχvil, Ramθa

Einige Zahlwörter

(nach Pfiffig 1969)

1 – θu(n)

2 – zal, esal

3 – ci

4 – śa

5 – maχ

6 – huθ

7 – semφ

8 – cezp

9 – nurφ

10 – śar

20 – zaθrum

Siehe auch

• Liste etruskischer Wörter
• Etruskische Schrift
• Etruskische Zahlschrift
• Etruskische Zahlwörter
• Etruskische Namensgebung
• Vorindogermanisches Substrat
• Ägäische Sprachen
• Minoische Sprache
• Altmediterrane Sprache

Literatur

Deutsch

• Ambros Josef Pfiffig: Die etruskische Sprache. Versuch einer Gesamtdarstellung. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz 1969.
• Ambros Josef Pfiffig: Die etruskische Sprache. Schrift, Alphabet, Formenlehre, Syntax, Übungen. VMA, Wiesbaden 1998. ISBN 3-928127-55-1
• Helmut Rix: Etruskische Texte, 2 Bände. Narr, Tübingen 1991. ISBN 3-8233-4476-5
• Helmut Rix: Rätisch und Etruskisch. Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität. Innsbruck 1998. ISBN 3-85124-670-5
• Helmut Rix: Die Etrusker. Schrift und Sprache. In: Mauro Cristofani: Die Etrusker. Belser Verlag, Stuttgart, Sonderausgabe 2006. ISBN 3-7630-2270-8
• Dieter H. Steinbauer: Neues Handbuch des Etruskischen. Scripta Mercaturae, St. Katharinen 1999. ISBN 3-89590-080-X

Englisch

• Giuliano Bonfante, Larissa Bonfante: The Etruscan Language. An introduction. New York University Press, New York 1983, 2002. ISBN 0-7190-5539-3
• Helmut Rix: Etruscan. In: Roger D. Woodard (Hrsg.): The Cambridge encyclopedia of the World’s ancient languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004, S. 943–966. ISBN 0-521-56256-2
• Rex E. Wallace: Zikh Rasna: a manual of the Etruscan language and inscriptions. Beech Stave Press, Ann Arbor 2008. ISBN 0-9747927-4-8
• Rjabchikov, Sergei V. 2014. The Etruscan Astronomy. Etruscan Research, 1: 2–14.

Italienisch

• Enrico Benelli: Iscrizioni etrusche – leggerle e capirle. SACI, Ancona 2007. ISBN 978-88-902694-0-0.
• Piero Bernardini Marzolla: L’etrusco, una lingua ritrovata. Mondadori, Mailand 1984.
• Giuliano Bonfante, Larissa Bonfante: Lingua e cultura degli Etruschi. Editori Riuniti, Rom 1985. ISBN 88-359-2819-2.
• Mauro Cristofani: Gli Etruschi, una nuova immagine. Giunti, Florenz 1984 und 2000. ISBN 88-09-01792-7.
• Carlo De Simone: I Tirreni a Lemnos – evidenza linguistica e tradizioni storiche. Olschki, Florenz 1996. ISBN 88-222-4432-X.
• Angelo Di Mario: La ricerca dei Tirreni attraverso la lingua. Cannarsa, Vasto 2002.
• Giulio M. Facchetti: L’enigma svelato della lingua etrusca. Newton & Compton editori, Rom 2000, 2001^2.. ISBN 88-8289-458-4.
• Vladimir L. Georgiev: La lingua e l’origine degli Etruschi. Editrice Nagard, Rom 1979.
• Massimo Pittau: La lingua etrusca, grammatica e lessico. Insula, Nuoro 1997. ISBN 88-86111-07-X.
• Romolo A. Staccioli: Il «mistero» della lingua etrusca. Newton & Compton, Rom 1977, 1978²; Melita, Rom 1981. (Mit einem Glossar sicher gedeuteter etruskischer Wörter).
• Koen Wylin: Il verbo Etrusco. Ricerca morfosintattica delle forme usate in funzione verbale. “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, Roma, 2000. ISBN 88-8265-084-7.

Französisch

• Maurice Guignard: Comment j’ai déchiffré la langue étrusque. Impr. Avisseau, Burg Puttlingen 1962, Bonneval 1965.
• Massimo Pallottino: La langue étrusque. Problèmes et perspectives. Société d’Edition Les Belles Lettres, Paris 1978.
• Damien Erwan Perrotin: Paroles étrusques. Liens entre l’étrusque et l’indo-européen ancien. L’Harmattan, Paris 1999. ISBN 2-7384-7746-1

Niederländisch

• Robert Stephen Paul Beekes, L. Bouke van der Meer: De etrusken spreken. Coutinho, Muiderberg 1991. ISBN 90-6283-797-2

Russisch

• Rjabchikov, Sergei V. 2013. Ob etrusskoy “l‟nyanoy knige” iz Zagreba (On Etruscan “Liber Linteus” of Zagreb; in Russian). Visnik Mizhnarodnogo doslidnogo tsentru “Lyudina: mova, kul’tura, piznannya”, 34(3), pp. 30–36.

Weblinks

 Commons: Etruskische Sprache – Sammlung von Bildern, Videos und Audiodateien

• Dieter H. Steinbauer: Etruskisch
• Rex E. Wallace: Rasenna Blog
• Massimo Pittau: Lingua Etrusca
• Glen Gordon: Paleoglot (Blog, u. a. zum Etruskischen)
• Adolfo Zavaroni: Etruscan Inscriptions (Verzeichnis der Inschriften mit Transliteration)
• Mel Copeland: Etruscan Phrases (mit vielen Abbildungen von Inschriften, allerdings indogermanisch gedeutet)
• Neil Gratton: Etruscan-English Dictionary (Memento vom 27. September 2007 im Internet Archive) (aus mehreren Quellen zusammengestellt)
• Alte Schriften: Etruskisch

Einzelnachweise

1. ↑ ^{Hochspringen nach:a b c} Hadumod Bußmann (Hrsg.): Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft. Kröner, Stuttgart 2008, Lemma Etruskisch.
2. Hochspringen↑ Dieter H. Steinbauer: Neues Handbuch des Etruskischen. Scripta Mercaturae, St. Katharinen 1999, S. 357 ff.
3. Hochspringen↑ Fred C. Woudhuizen: Etruscan as a colonial Luwian language. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft, Sonderheft 128. Innsbruck 2008.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruskische_Sprache

Giacobbe Giusti, Etruscan language

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Croatian Apoxyomenos

Giacobbe Giusti, Croatian Apoxyomenos

 

Statue of an athlete scraping himself or scraping his strigil.

Statue d’un athlète se raclant la peau ou raclant son strigile.

l’Apoxyomène de Croatie a été découvert en 1996 en mer Adriatique, remonté en 1999 et restauré jusqu’en 2005^[19]. Son apparence est proche de l’Apoxyomène d’Éphèse et de la tête se trouvant au musée d’art Kimbell de Fort Worth (Texas). La particularité de l’Apoxyomène de Croatie est d’être pratiquement complet (il lui manque l’auriculaire de la main gauche), dans un état de conservation exceptionnel et d’avoir encore sa plinthe antique^[20].

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apoxyom%C3%A8ne

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Lysippe’

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Lysippe’

Lisippo

L’Apoxyomenos, copia romana, Museo Pio-Clementino

Eros che incorda l’arco, Roma, Musei Capitolini

Socrate, busto scolpito, copia romana

Lisippo (in greco anticoΛύσιππος; Sicione, 390/385 a.C. – dopo il 306 a.C.) è stato uno scultore e bronzista greco antico. Ultimo tra i grandi maestri della scultura greca classica, fu attivo dal 372-368 a.C. fino alla fine del IV secolo a.C. Lavorò per Alessandro Magno, che ritrasse numerose volte, e terminò la propria carriera al servizio di un altro re macedone, Cassandro I, tra il 316 e il 311 a.C.

Indice

• 1 Cenni biografici
• 2 Opere
• 3 Stile
• 4 Altre opere attribuite a Lisippo e copie romane dagli originali
• 5 La scuola di Lisippo
• 6 Note
• 7 Bibliografia
• 8 Voci correlate
• 9 Altri progetti
• 10 Collegamenti esterni

Cenni biografici

Originario di Sicione, città dell’Arcadia sul golfo di Corinto, nacque nei primi anni del IV secolo a.C. e si formò verosimilmente sulle opere di Policleto e sulla scultura peloponnesiaca, nonostante Duride di Samo lo dicesse formato al di fuori di ogni scuola e maestro, ovvero studioso della natura su consiglio di Eupompo, forse enfatizzando troppo il tema letterario del genio autodidatta.

Fu soprattutto bronzista e lavorò a lungo nella sua città per poi spostarsi in vari centri della Grecia (Olimpia, Corinto, Rodi, Delfi, Atene) e dell’Italia (Roma e Taranto).

Morì in data non precisata, ma sicuramente in età molto avanzata, come testimonia la notizia di un ritratto di Seleuco I Nicatore, quindi fino alla fine del secolo

Lysippe de Sicyone (v. 395 av. J.-C.– v. 305 av. J.-C.) est un sculpteur et bronziergrec. Il est notamment le portraitiste attitré d’Alexandre le Grand, père et maître de Laippos, Boédas, Euthycratès.

Sommaire

 [masquer] 

• 1 Biographie
• 2 Galerie d’œuvres
• 3 Notes et références
• 4 Voir aussi
• 5 Bibliographie

Biographie

Sa carrière s’étend de 372 av. J.-C., date à laquelle il réalise une statue de Troïlos, un vainqueur des Jeux olympiques, à 306 av. J.-C. environ. Pline l’Ancien situe son apogée lors de la 113^eolympiade, c’est-à-dire vers 328 av. J.-C.^[1]

Théoricien, il reprit les calculs de proportions de Polyclète et les modifia, en établissant un nouveau canon plus élancé du corps humain, avec une hauteur de huit têtes : la tête fait un huitième du corps au lieu de un septième. Multipliant les recherches sur le mouvement et le rôle de la lumière, il se fit le champion d’un art expressif et réaliste.

Il est réputé pour avoir produit 1 500 œuvres^[2], et ne semble appartenir à aucune école de bronziers^[3].

Parmi les œuvres ayant survécu, Lysippe est usuellement reconnu comme l’auteur de l’Apoxyomène, de l’Hercule Farnèse, de l’Éros bandant son arc, du monument votif de Daochos, du Pugiliste des Thermes, du type de l’Alexandre Azara ou encore de l’Hermès à la sandale.

 

 

Hermès d’Atalante, copie romaine d’un original attribué à Lysippe, Musée national archéologique d’Athènes

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisippo

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Michel-Ange Pietà Rondanini’

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Michel-Ange Pietà rondanini’

Artiste

Michel-Ange

Date

vers 1564
Dimensions
(H 195 centimètres

 

 

http://www.cbccoop.it/manufatti-lapidei-mosaici/michelangelo.aspx?idmenu=lavori&idmenu2=dt3&idmenucont=38

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet%C3%A0_Rondanini
Le Pietà di Michelangelo Pietà Vaticana, San Pietro, Roma
Pietà di Palestrina, Galleria dell’Accademia Firenze
Pietà per Vittoria Colonna, Isabella Stewart-Gardner Museum, Boston
Pietà Bandini, Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Firenze
Pietà Rondanini, Castello Sforzesco, Milano

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com