Parts 1 and 2 || [untitled]

La Tombe Gallo-Romaine: Recherches sur les Inscriptions et les Monuments Funéraires Gallo-Romains des Trois Premiers Siècles de Notre ère by J-J. HattReview by: Joyce ReynoldsThe Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 42, Parts 1 and 2 (1952), pp. 128-129Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/297531 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 23:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Journal of Roman Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 23:38:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sprs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/297531?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


I28 REVIEWS AND NOTICES OF PUBLICATIONS

along the Rhine itself, from Basel to the Bodensee, or on the lines of communication further south (cf. especially Abb. 63).

There is one small point on which S.'s reasoning is difficult to accept. He still advances, as a reason for assigning the amphitheatre at Augst to the Flavian period, that its masonry is far more rough and primitive in style than that of the theatre which preceded it or that which followed it, and concludes that for that reason it is likely to have been built by the troops who were in any case stationed there in that period (p. 22I). It may be reasonable nowadays that professional masons should be expected to produce finer walling than military workmen; but in Roman times all the best work, in the western provinces at least, was surely done by the skilled masons which every legion included in its establishment. It would be simpler to suppose that the amphitheatre was put up by the inhabitants of the colony, without official 'assistance, at a time when its tastes were low and its resources limited, and that the new theatre, like its predecessor in the Augustan colony, was provided with official support and designed and erected by legionaries; the evidence for the date of the amphitheatre will need to be reconsidered.

Since the foregoing lines were written, Felix Stahelin has died, at the ripe age of 79. His book will be a lasting memorial to the great scholar; those of us who had the privilege of knowing him will join with our Swiss colleagues in honouring the memory of a kindly and generous personality.

ERIC BIRLEY.

J-J. HATT, LA TOMBE GALLO-ROMAINE: RECHERCHES SUR LES INSCRIPTIONS ET LES MONUMENTS FUNERAIRES GALLO-ROMAINS DES TROIS PREMIERS SIECLES DE NOTRE ERE. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, I95I. Pp. XI + 329, with 8 plates, ii maps, and 3 graphs. Francs 2,000; 45s. M. Hatt's subject is Gallo-Roman society; he has chosen the monumental tomb as his evidence

for a study in the process and content of its romanization. Nomenclature, funerary practices, artistic fashions and achievements are his measures. Eschatological beliefs he reserves for later treatment. The book, it should be said, is for reading within reach of CIL and Esperandieu.

He argues for the strongly indigenous character of Gallo-Roman civilization, liable to assert itself crudely during administrative failures, but always effective, since foreign ideas and techniques were, he holds, used to express native traditions. The precise evaluation of elements in a civilization is inevitably controversial. On the whole, and despite a special interest in the Celts, H. is very reasonable in his adjudication of honours.

His main case is presented by two complementary methods: first a statistical and philological analysis of names and systems of nomenclature recorded on tombs, with a geographical and chronological breakdown to show distribution and development; and second a stylistic examination of funerary art and architecture in which he uses the evidence of his statistics as a pointer to the origins of specialities, like tombs in the form of a house, appearing in particular areas.

For the statistical section, the introductory statement of criteria for dating is fundamental. The system offered, chiefly by use of epigraphic formulae, though obviously not watertight, is roughly acceptable. The philology I cannot test, but H. has used the established text-books. Given the size of CIL xii and xiii, there can be no doubt that the evidence available for the whole of Gaul throughout- the Roman period is statistically significant. It is not so clear that this applies to all his geographical and chronological groups. It would have been more satisfactory if H. had quoted the total figures on which these percentages are calculated, so that we could make e.g. a juster assessment of his conclusion that, in the second and third centuries, the proportion of names of Celtic origin, though lower in general than in the first, rose in the towns.

A further point of principle is that results of this kind are not confined in relevance to the funerary field. Is it therefore wise to omit evidence from non-funerary monuments ? H. is convinced that inscribed tombs were, throughout, commissioned by a fair cross-section of the population (which is perhaps arguable-his second to third-century increase in Celtic names in towns, e.g., may mean, not simply migration from country to town, but that there was, in the first century, an urban group unable or unwilling to afford the new-fangled luxury); but, even so, is there really so much evidence that we can neglect any of it ?

Pendant to this section, which offers a rough estimate of surviving Celtic influences, is one on Greco-Orientals. Their influence, chiefly on religion, emerges from a study of the religious significance of many of their cognomina, which demonstrate their very close connection with the cult of Magna Mater.

This is followed by a section on funerary practices. Inscriptions indicate that the rich accepted



REVIEWS AND NOTICES OF PUBLICATIONS 129

from Rome practices such as annual feasts in memory of the dead ; but the appearance of Celtic terms in some of the relevant texts suggests that these were in part assimilated to previous usages. H. claims a still closer association with native usage for the ascia. This he regards as a sign that the tomb was placed under divine protection ; and he believes that the deity of a Celtic rite was identified for the purpose with Magna Mater. He offers much epigraphic evidence for the arrival of the ascia in Gaul in her entourage.

In his treatment of funerary art, H. attempts to trace for the whole of Gaul outlines of development such as have been established for the Rhineland, and to show that, in the second and third centuries, Rhineland art was the product of a Gallo-Roman art widely diffused through the Tres Galliae. This he presents as a syncretism of native and foreign elements. In the first century, funerary art was confined to Germany, Narbonensis, and the Rhone valley; legionaries in Germany, colonists further south, introduced to native craftsmen techniques and motifs from Italy (Constans' theory of surviving Hellenic traditions at Arles is largely discounted-Hellenism, when it appears, comes as part of empire-wide movements) ; by the end of the century, these craftsmen were meeting civilian demand in Germany no longer with imitations but with adaptations of legionary models, and in Provence had acquired a mastery of their repertoire which they were ready either to take or to transmit northwards in pursuit of the potters and prosperity; there in the more conservative Tres Galliae the native's taste for pattern and his simultaneous powers of sensitive observation made themselves more strongly felt, while in some most conservative rural communities distinctively native forms appear. The argument, though sometimes necessarily subjective, is attractive ; and some of the incidental points are of interest in themselves, as, e.g., the strong reasons which H. puts for deriving the incised contours of first-century Proven9al monuments from a guide-line of drilled holes necessitated by the employment of semi-skilled natives.

H. has made a stimulating use of archaeological matter for social history. It is a pity that its reading is interrupted by a number of printer's errors (not often seriously misleading but occasionally resulting in a wrong reference as on p. 44, footnote i, where for p. I67 read 467), and slips (thus the classification of epigraphic formulae on pp. I4 ff. is unhappily presented, e.g. the wording suggests that service in Legio I Minervia is being used to justify first-century dating on p. I4 and second or third on pp. i6, I7; on p. I4 this legion is credited with the titles P.F. in A.D. 89, but on p. I7 not until after the death of Domitian ; Legio VIIII Hispana is twice cited as VIII). There are excellent charts and some good plates, though unfortunately no regular indication when the monument under discussion in the text is illustrated among them.

JOYCE REYNOLDS.

A. E. VAN GIFFEN, INHEEMSE EN ROMEINSE TERPEN: OPGRABINGEN IN DE DORPSWIERDE TE EZINGE EN DE ROMEINSE TERPEN VAN UTRECHT, VALKENBURG Z.H. EN VECHTEN. (Offprint from Jaarverslag van de Vereeniging voor Terpenonderzoek, nos. xxix-xxxii.) Groningen: J. B. Wolters, I948. Pp. i-66, Summary in English pp. 49-66, figs. I-20, pIs. I-I3 (in separate case).

The very remarkable excavations by Professor Van Giffen at Valkenburg in the Dutch province of South Holland, first described in parts xxv-xxvIII of the Society's publication quoted above, are here selectively studied in a volume which, while briefly summarizing the story of seven periods, deals more particularly with the first period of the Roman fort at Valkenburg, established about A.D. 42 in anticipation of the invasion of Britain. On the flat and waterlogged plain of North Holland ancient occupied sites tend to grow into high mounds, miniature replicas of the Mesopotamian 'tell'. The lower strata of the Dutch mounds are usually wet and contain an astonishing amount of timber and vegetable remains. In Britain only bogs or crannogs compare with them in preservative capacity.

Normally the Terpen, to give them their Dutch name, are confined to Friesland, and the excava- tion of such a mound at Ezinge, in the province of Drente, is described in the first part of this volume. Its six periods, running from the fourth century B.C. to the thirteenth century, give a detailed picture of a hamlet of homesteads, of which the main timber work, the wattle partitions and the floors of logs or wicker-matting were recovered. It was the familiarity with such sites, the recognition of the archaeological opportunity presented by them and, above all, the skill gained in their recovery which enabled and induced Professor Van Giffen to transfer his skilled team of workers to the Roman fort- sites on the Rhine here described (below, p. 130, fig. I4). It would be fair to say that, while Utrecht is interesting, Valkenburg is of first-class importance for the variety and detail of its remains and in particular its timber structures.

In general plan the Claudian fort (pl. xv), facing east, is broader than it is long, while the retentura and praetentura are of equal size. As in a legionary fortress, the headquarters are flanked by



JRS Vol. XLII (19S2)

VALIKETNBVKWG Z.H. PE P-IODE I

=T. ' . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ai .' ." IL

v .............. TT -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ..

S S

t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a = * -. '\1ii1iS~I1):l~~,__ ____ _ ____ i, ~ ~

~- v

E X W s 0f

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,M 1,1 | ll

2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1; 02 L; IF

1X~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I. rH C;

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j A \ r^W L

M YNI\>

q F g\t\NNX ,1 I ooct' u t L

X ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 u C2-0 ALtj a j X F igi\R

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'13 C, Ca q g F t!,/fh k N



rv~~~~~~~~~~~v

~ ~~ V tIl V V V V V V V V V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z. Vt '

0 ~i::: L: * h

R.IA

r- --I @

EL-- - C=

L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ A

u~~ J A OR -

J CI 1 ___i___________

J11 U i e D P--: '17 Xt <---- - ''> i,l)

-fT 15H 'c9



PLATE XV

,i?f9I,

, ,

WI I

15

20 :~~~~?::.:...... .

I 1 e -YL; LNLD' ';UiL'iiuitU''?



* 1 * -yffVS W4lIUGTIWII .4uJPIMIv'III ''aI I~IIIY I IIn\11111IIlWI?I' I \1DI IIj IJ *UI *~Ij lWUl. 'l 1 l

C,~~~~~J

I C C

~~~~~~~~t311 0 ; ~ I)1 a l I ;12

WB 3r courty o Prj*

S

g t S- d''' I! I l! r ] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. oA '0

**3 F g:ggt~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 1.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U) LI C :t A C BlO?@ARU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0BTU [ : ,

EJ O] L

H~~~~~~~~~~~~~ M R

N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TZB W.~~~Byctey fPo



WI I t] E i N 4 ; e;

.. ......... JI a te -; ''j )-E iE

0 ;:

LH : :1/a.' l1

LULU U

r

-

IE

....-..<iYi

1

2 [9 1UkiFCJ..htX t i ,

9 Ad11 1 1\1(tlL.'A- T TTt t

(1D t0--XX t

3. ,, ,-.. . . .

w z a e J THE ARLY-CLAUDIAN FtORT AT VA (uwD-HoI) (TT p. T9)

By cortesy of Professor Van Guffen and the' aarverslag Un de Vereegng voor Terpenonderoek'



20

2 5

3 0

W~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 55

19'41- 19L13 19'6 198 L

R. C(Jou d,, tra

p . I 39) aT Terpenond.vzouA



Documents

Parts 1 and 2 || [untitled]