J. Lopez, Ll. PIñol: Roman Architectural terracottas: the finds of the plaça de la Font...

n

'1. 't'4:'r'

"$

'J.'l

Institut Gatalà d'Arqueologia Glàssica

!

e

:,ç: .lì

T L.

'..\- t,;

a

l1

Terracotes arquitectòniques romanes Les troballes de la plaça de la Font (Tarragona)

Un assentament de la via De Italia in Hispanias

Jordi López VilarInstitut Català d’Arqueologia Clàssica

Lluís Piñol MasgoretUniversitat Rovira i Virgili

Amb la col·laboració deAureli Àlvarez Pérez

Anna Gutiérrez García-Moreno

4Universitat Rovira i Virgili

Institut Català d’Arqueologia clàssicaInstitut Català d’Arqueologia Clàssica

Tarragona, 2008

013 TERRACOTESFinal01 30/10/08 10:16 Página 3

BIBLIOTECA DE CATALUNYA - DADES CIP

López Vilar, Jordi

Terracotes arquitectòniques romanes : les troballes de la plaça de la Font (Tarra-gona). - (Hic et nunc ; 4)Bibliografia. - Text en català, resum en anglèsISBN 9788493469894I. Piñol Masgoret, Lluís II. Institut Català d'Arqueologia Clàssica III. Títol IV. Col·lecció: Hic et nunc ; 41. Escultura en terracota romana - Tarragona 2. Decoració i ornamentació roma-nes - Tarragona 3. Excavacions arqueològiques - Tarragona 4. Tarragona - Ar-queologia romana738.8.02(467.1 Ta Tarragona)

© d’aquesta edicióInstitut Català d’Arqueologia Clàssica (ICAC)

© dels textosJordi López Vilar i Lluís Piñol Masgoret; Aureli Àlvarez Pérez i Anna Gutiérrez García-Moreno

© de les il·lustracions i les fotografiesICAC, llevat que s’indiqui el contrari

© de la traducció a l’anglèsPaul Turner

CoordinacióPublicacions de l’ICAC

CorreccióPere Farrando Canals

Fotografia de la cobertaDetall d’una lastra Campana localitzada a la plaça de la Font de Tarragona, corresponent a la figura 30. (Foto: Unitat deDocumentació Gràfica de l’ICAC)

Disseny de la col·lecció i de la cobertaFormats

MaquetacióVíctor Igual, s.l.

ImpressióGrafos, s.a.

Dipòsit legalT-1.817-2008

ISBN978-84-934698-9-4

Qualsevol forma de reproducció, distribució, comunicació pública o transformació d’aquesta obra només es pot fer tenint l’autorització dels seus titulars, amb les excepcions previstesper la llei. Adreceu-vos a CEDRO (Centre Espanyol de Drets Reprogràfics, www.cedro.org) si heu de fotocopiar o escanejar fragments d’aquesta obra.


Roman Architectural TerracottaThe Finds of the Plaça de la Font

(Tarragona)

Jordi López VilarCatalan Institut of Classical Archaeology (ICAC)

Lluís Piñol MasgoretRovira i Virgili University

Abstract


The archaeological excavations carried out by the Rovirai Virgili University Archaeological Service in Tarragona’sPlaça de la Font between 1995 and 1996 uncovered a se-ries of structures and material that had been completelyunknown until that time. They contributed historical in-formation that was, at the very least, unexpected and, wewould venture to say, surprising. In the first place therewas the find of clay pits worked during the Late Repub-lican period to obtain the raw material for making thethousands of sun-dried bricks that were used fill in thecity walls. In second place, and also below the level of thearena of the Roman circus, the archaeologists found evi-dence of Julio-Claudian period potteries with large de-cantation pools and a large amount of common waremanufactured on the same site, including many firing re-jects. Another aspect that caught our attention rightfrom the start was the appearance of a large number ofarchitectural terracottas, particularly antefixes, but alsothe so-called terracotta Campana plaques.

The Plaça de la Font is located on the lower terrace ofTarragona’s Upper Part, an area occupied by the Circusarena in Roman times. Today it has a flat topography, theresult of the levelling of the whole area during the secondhalf of the 1st century AD to prepare the ground for thebuilding of the Circus.

The study of the archaeological record has allowed us tofollow the historical evolution of the land now occupiedby the Plaça de la Font and has also provided us with im-portant topographical information about Tarraco thatwas unknown up until that time, particularly about theperiod before the construction of the Roman circus.

The architectural terracottas were not found concentrat-ed in specific parts of the excavation; quite the oppositein fact, they were found spread across the whole area ofthe square. Neither can we assign them to a specificchronology. While it is certain they are not found in theLate Republican strata or in those that postdate the cir-cus arena, they are present in the constructive strata ofthe pottery workshop, dated to the second decade of the1st century AD, as well as in those of its abandonmentand subsequent filling in after 60-80/90.

As far as the iconographic models are concerned, practi-cally all are repeated in both the oldest and newest strata.The terracottas are found discarded in fill strata that con-tain practically no building material. Therefore they donot appear to have been brought here as a result of thedemolition of a specific building, although they mayhave come from the renovation of the decoration of one,or more likely, several buildings. This peculiar distribu-tion indicates that the terracottas were dumped in land-fill sites at different times and we also have to considerthat they had different origins. This idea is furtherstrengthened by the wide variety of iconographic themes;for example on the antefixes we have «Artemis Selenewithout waxing moon ii» (14), «Veiled female bust withmelon quarter hairstyle i» (6), «Female bust with longearrings» (1), «Five-lobed palmette with dolphins and so-cle with arcatures» (10) and «Five-lobed palmette withdolphins and fluted socle» (3). We cannot make any as-sumptions as to the location or nature of the building orbuildings they decorated, as they could have come fromanywhere in the city. Having said that, we could also hy-pothesise that the terracottas were made by the figlinae inthe Plaça de la Font and that the finds are pieces thatwere broken or rejected during the manufacturingprocess.

The Terracotta Campana finds belong to three differenticonographic models. The first corresponds to the «Twogirls flanking a candelabrum» model, with at least four orfive examples; the second belongs to the «Adorning of aherma» model, with only one example made up of sixfragments, half of which fit together, and the final one isprobably of the «Palestra portico scene» type, with onlyone small piece depicting a single individual. All these aredescribed in Rohden and Winnefeld’s catalogue.

The collection of forty-three architectural terracottasfrom the Plaça de la Font excavation is the largest everfound in Tarraco. It is a particularly large number if wecompare it to the findings of M. L. Ramos, who, in1996, catalogued a total of 63 examples from the wholecity. Until that time, the largest number found in oneplace had been 15 antefixes from the forum basilica.Now we have 106 terracottas from Tarraco, to which we

105

Roman Architectural TerracottaThe Finds of the Plaça de la Font (Tarragona)


still have to add the occasional find from the emergencyexcavations carried out in recent years and those from thevillae of the surrounding area. It is without a doubt thelargest number in the Tarraconense and probably in His-pania.

In the cataloguing and studying of this new batch of ter-racottas, we have identified some so far unknown vari-ants; the iconographic and archaeometric analyses, aswell as the comparison with other pieces, have allowed usto ask a series of questions about their places of manufac-ture and subsequent diffusion. It is precisely this aspect,the origin of the antefixes and the terracotta Campanaplaques, which has been one focal points of the research.

In 1991, X. Dupré and V. Revilla published an article inwhich they analysed the terracotta Campana plaquesfound in Tarraco and at two of the villas in its territory,El Vilarenc and Tomoví. At that time, this was the onlyHispanic collection with any coherence. Having evaluat-ed the different possibilities, they opted for the hypothe-sis that they were dealing with imports from Italica. Asfar as the antefixes are concerned, M. L. Ramos’ studydetermined that the vast majority found in the ProvinciaTarraconense were manufactured locally and that the fewimports came from Italica or, in one case, from Greece.In summary, an Italic origin was accepted for the terra-cotta Campana and a local origin for almost all the ante-fixes found in the Tarraconense.

The problem is further complicated by the almost com-plete absence of epigraphy on the opus doliare materialfound in Hispania. The mere de visu description of pastesdoes not usually bring results in this sense, and neither isthe iconography always a defining factor. Only when aniconographic type is found exclusively in a particular areacan it be assumed to be of local manufacture, which isthe case of some of the models studied by M. L. Ramos.On the other hand, identical types found in distant areas,as is the case of the terracotta Campana plaques or of cer-tain antefixes, present us with a series of possibilities –the import/export of finished pieces, the import/exportof moulds, or the use of imported pieces to make newmoulds that would then be used for local production. Inthis last case, the copies obtained are smaller. Given theintense trade between the Italian Peninsula and the Tar-raconense coast from early times, all the aforementionedoptions are feasible.

It is essential for us to carry out an archaeometric analy-sis in order to be able to accept or reject specific manufac-turing sites, with special emphasis on the thin sectiontechnique that allows an accurate mineralogical identifi-cation. From the outset, we were not only interested inproducing a macroscopic description of the pastes ofeach piece, but also in carrying out a series of thin sectiontests, which were limited to five for cost reasons. We se-lected three Terracotta Campana plaques corresponding

to each of the iconographic models and two antefixesrepresentative of each of the palmette models to whichwe had ascribed a possible Italic origin. The results, pre-sented in an annex by Drs Aureli Àlvarez and AnnaGutiérrez, provided us with a set of basic data, on whichwe will comment below.

There would obviously have been a certain amount ofimported material in Hispania, mainly from the ItalianPeninsula. Leaving aside a group of Hellenistic antefixesdated to the third quarter of the 4th century BC (possiblyfrom Empúries), by far the most spectacular case, interms of age and quality, is the chapel of La Encarnaciónin Caravaca de la Cruz (Murcia), published by S. Rama-llo. At this site the archaeologists found 61 plaques deco-rated with plant motifs and nine antefixes with busts ofmaenads and satyrs; they date from the 2nd century BCand document the early monumentalisation of an an-cient Iberian sanctuary.

Some years ago, a monumental building from the begin-ning of the Tiberian period, hypothetically identified asan Augusteum, was excavated in ancient Carthago Nova.Ten antefixes, probably from the roof, were found; theycorrespond to two models – theatrical masks and «Victo-ry flanked by Capricorns». These types are only found inthe Latium area and archaeometric analysis has in factconfirmed that they came from Rome. The authors ofthe study conclude that they are part of a batch that wasimported directly from the capital to decorate the afore-mentioned monumental building.

In Tarraco we also have some antefixes that are possiblyof foreign origin. One depicts the head of Helios and hasthe inscription «MELOS» on the reverse, indicating thatit may have come from the Greek island of the samename, and there are two others with the head of Silenus.The former was found in a stratum dated to the first halfof the 2nd century BC and consequently must be fromthat time or even a little earlier; the latter was found inexcavations on the Roman theatre and is also suggestedto have been imported during the Augustan period, orslightly earlier.

As can be seen by this brief account, our aim is not tomake this a comprehensive study. The export of architec-tural terracottas from the area of Italica to the westernprovinces was very sporadic and almost non-existent.The overriding trend was to imitate products from thecapital.

Terracotta Campana merits a chapter of its own. Until afew years ago, it was considered a product distributed ex-clusively in the centre and north of the Italian Peninsulaand manufactured in the figlinae of the Rome area. Bor-bein had already cautioned that some fragments hadbeen found in Egypt, Greece and Germany, but it wasnot until 1989 that a collection from the Narbonne re-

106


gion was brought to light and archaeologists began tospeak openly of a local production that imitated the Ter-racotta Campana of the Urbs. Later studies completedthe Gallic panorama, which is worth taking a close lookat for its parallels with what may have occurred in Tarra-co and its surrounding area.

In 1998, J. Mouraret published an article on a set of firedclay plaques from Clos-de-Serre. This site is a short dis-tance from Caumont-sur-Durance and near the course ofthe River Rhone. In a second article published a fewyears later, the same author incorporated new fragmentsfound in a series of excavation campaigns, bringing thoseknown to almost 150. These most recent pieces havebeen fundamental in allowing us to reconstruct both thescenes depicted and the total size of the plaques. The dec-orative motifs are a tauriform Victoria, a Dyonisiac grapecrushing scene, the so-called temple of Vesta, a frieze ofbucranea and gorgons, a plaque with large flowers, andanother with floral and plant motifs. The Italic influencein the iconographic repertory is evident. The site thus be-came the most important in Gallia in terms of the num-ber of pieces, although not the only one. The chronolo-gy, based on the associated material, places it at the timeof Augustus, more specifically in the final years of the 1st

century BC.

As far as the origin of the production is concerned, noanalysis has been made of the clays, although a local, orat the most, regional origin is proposed. In fact, with thediscovery of a pottery workshop at Saint-Just-d’Ardèche,with some twenty Terracotta Campana fragments con-taining motifs analogous to those from Clos-de-Serreand, following that, the discovery of new workshops atSaint-Lambert (Fréjus) and Mazan (Vancluse) with evi-dence of their manufacture, it has been possible for thefirst time to confirm a production centre outside Italy.For the Clos-de-Serre terracottas it has even been sug-gested that production was limited specifically to theneeds of the villa itself, quoting two examples mentionedby Tortorella – the villa of Q. Voconius Pollius in Mari-no and the villa of Forte Antenne.

The confirmed existence of various Terracotta Campanaplaque manufacturing centres in the Narbonne regiondoes not necessarily imply a large production, but ratherquite the opposite. Archaeology shows us that buildingswith groups of Terracotta Campana, such as those ofClos-de-Serre or Douzens, are highly exceptional. Theexcavation of the kilns, on the other hand, has shownthat they were used to produce common ware, amphorasand building materials, whereas Terracotta Campanaproduction was limited to a specific point in time. In thewords of Mouraret, “tout se passe comme si la fabricationde plaques architectoniques n’était qu’un moment fortu-it dans l’histoire des ateliers gallo-romains de poterie, uneréponse instantanée à une demande éphémère”, whichleads him to propose the hypothesis (quite plausible in

our opinion) that in order to meet a specific demand, thepotteries may have sought the services of an expert potterwho would have travelled from place to place, although itis also possible that the moulds were simply circulated.

Recently, at the other end of the Mediterranean, an un-expected find was made in the ancient city of Dyme inthe north-west of the Peloponnesian Peninsula. An exca-vation uncovered three kilns belonging to a workshopspecialising in ceramic construction material: tegulae,imbrices, tiles, antefixes, simas and decorated panellingplaques. The iconographic repertory of the TerracottaCampana is analogous to that of the Italic pieces: theclash between Hercules and Apollo over the tripod ofDelphos, an Amazonomachy scene, a lone feminine fig-ure, two women with archaic features, friezes of decora-tive eggs, palmettes, and floral motifs. Where the materi-al was destined for remains unknown, as no fragmentshave so far been found in any of the excavations in thenearby towns of Dyme and Patras.

In view of this precedent, it was essential to carry out an archaeometric analysis of the Terracotta Campanaplaques discovered in the excavation, in order to deter-mine their origin as far as possible. As previously men-tioned, an example of each model was taken. It shouldalso be pointed out that the different fragments of the«Two girls flanking a candelabrum» type presented iden-tical paste and degreaser, at least on a macroscopic level.The results showed that only one of the pieces, the«Adorning of a herma» type, originated in a volcanicarea; obviously, the points of reference were Latium orCampania. The absence of olivine and the abundantpresence of volcanic tufa, as well as leucite, point to theformer region. The thin section appears very similar tothose obtained from the previously mentioned Italic an-tefixes from Cartagena, in which the presence of identi-cal volcanic rocks with the «star-shaped» leucite micro-crystals common to the Roman comagmatic province,stands out. This means we can confirm the same origin.The rest of the terracottas are completely lacking in anyelements not belonging to the geology of the Tarragonaarea and they have high proportion of calcareous materi-al. This means we can rule out the areas of Latium andCampania as an origin and at the same time it fits in wellwith a possible Tarraconense production.

The stratigraphic position of the architectural terracottasfound in the Plaça de la Font indicates that they do notcome from a specific dump or building. We have alreadydescribed how the pieces were found dispersed through-out the levelled area, in strata where the absence of otherceramic building material (tegulae, imbrices, lateres) wasthe norm. On the other hand, they do appear in the stra-ta related to the construction of the figlina, and more of-ten together with the thousand of fragments of commonware rejected by the potters (either because the pieceshad been deformed by excessive heat or because they had

107

Roman Architectural Terracotta. The Finds of the Plaça de la Font (Tarragona)


been broken taking them out of the kiln), as well as inother domestic dumps.

In this respect, we believe that the Plaça de la Font kilnscould have produced Terracotta Campana on an occa-sional basis, as is the case of Gallia. An objection to thishypothesis could be the fact that architectural terracottaswere normally produced in kilns that were mainly usedto manufacture ceramic building material and amphoras,rather than exclusively common ware like ours. Anothernegative point is that no obvious firing rejects have beenfound. The location of this pottery workshop, within theperimeter delimited by the walls, could be seen as anom-alous, but we have to ask ourselves where the city legallyended and where the acropolis began. Moreover, we havethe parallel of the finds made in 1937 in the Via Galla inRome, which brought to light a large collection of archi-tectural terracottas (Terracotta Campana, antefixes, tegu-lae, bricks, etc.) that had been re-used in the walls of acistern. Some of the pieces were clearly firing rejects,which is why they were assumed to have come from afiglina dated between the middle of the 1st century BCand the Augustan period and located nearby, in otherwords, in Rome itself.

We can make a similar consideration for the antefixes.The «Bust of Artemis Selene without waxing moon» andthe «Veiled female bust with melon quarter hairstyle»types appear to belong to the Camp of Tarragona, as M.L. Ramos’ study indicates; to this we would have to addthe «Veiled female bust with long earrings». The analysiswe carried out on the two palmette antefixes, for which wehad foreseen a possible Italic origin based solely on theiriconographic appearance («Five-lobed palmette with theends turned inwards, two dolphins and a frieze with triplestraight mould» and «Five-lobed palmette with the endsturned inwards, two dolphins and a frieze of arches witha central pearl») also show a possible Tarraconense origin.

The description of the pastes, however, brought us anunexpected surprise. There are two preserved antefixes ofthe «Bust of Artemis Selene without waxing moon» mod-el. They are very fragmented and characterised by havinga different paste to the rest, with a reddish nucleus anddark grey and very smooth fracture surfaces, so purifiedthat it is difficult to see particles of degreaser with thenaked eye, except for a few very fine calcareous inclu-sions. In A13 an olivine crystal stands out, denoting avolcanic origin and thus making it an import, probablyfrom the area of Vesuvius.

Another aspect we have to stress is the role of the ruralpotteries in the production of architectural terracottas. Ithas been conclusively proven that that kilns of the Tarra-co ager mainly produced amphoras and ceramic buildingmaterial, although in some of them we have detected ev-idence of common ware manufacture. In all the ruralsites where antefixes have been found, there has also been

a pottery industry with a basic production of ceramicbuilding material and amphoras. We believe this is not acoincidence, but does in fact have further implications.Indeed, we do not believe that the antefixes found inthese rural sites were part of their decoration; in generalwe tend to believe that they were made for export to thecapital – Tarraco. There is only one exception, the villa ofEls Munts (Altafulla), in which no kilns have been foundto date and which, as we know, was a grand seaside resi-dence with a level of luxury unsurpassed by any other weknow of.

The analysis of the antefixes found in the rural sites ofthe Camp of Tarragona, and their comparison with othertypes from Tarraco, suggests to us that not only are themodels of antefix repeated, but that those that are mostabundant in Tarraco are also the most numerous in theCamp. The only exception is the type discovered at Vi-larenc with large palmettes, which is not present in thecity. The same site has also provided us with the onlymodel of Terracotta Campana not so far documented inTarragona: «Theseus recognised by his father». In view ofthe evidence from Gallia, it appears that antefixes, andpossibly Terracotta Campana plaques, were also pro-duced in rural figlinae. This is demonstrated by the findof antefix moulds at Vilarenc. Since it was discovered, thearchaeologists working on this villa have begun to con-sider the hypothesis that the Terracotta Campana plaquesfound re-used in the walls did not come from the decora-tion of the same building, but were in manufacturing re-jects; in other words, they may have been manufacturedat the same site in order to sell in other places, possiblyTarraco. The same may have happened at Tomoví, wherethere is clear evidence of kilns. The fact that identicalmotifs are found in the capital and in the surroundingpotteries, and that antefixes are only found at the siteswith figlinae, suggest that they were normally destinedfor the capital and not for the decoration of the rural set-tlement associated with the pottery workshop. The man-ufacture of architectural terracottas in villas has also beendocumented in Italy and many other places.

When dealing with the strata in which the Plaça de laFont terracottas were found, we suggest they may havebeen manufactured in the figlinae operating on that siteand that they were broken or rejected during the manu-facturing process. Despite no firing rejects with deformi-ties having being found, the thin section analysis showsthat they could easily have been manufactured in Tarracoor, if not, within its territory; this also rules out a Latianor Campanian origin.

Only three pieces escape these considerations: the Terra-cotta Campana with the «Adornment of a herma» andtwo antefixes of the «Bust of Artemis Selene withoutwaxing moon ii» type. The analysis shows that these areof Italic origin. The most plausible explanation is that thefiglina’s potters used imported models to make their own

108


pieces and probably made new moulds from them. Thetwo antefixes were found badly fragmented and the samecan be said of the Terracotta Campana. In this respect,we need to remember that all three were found in theoldest strata associated with the pottery, even located be-low the decantation pools, which were interpreted as aworking area with an abundance of ashes and clays withdifferent colourings. Unfortunately, we found no copiesof the «Adornment of a herma» Terracotta Campanamade of the local paste, which would have confirmed ourhypothesis. Neither do we know of any «Bust of ArtemisSelene without waxing moon ii» antefixes from the areaof Latium or Campania, but the presence of olivine crys-tals in the degreaser leaves no doubt as to its origin,which is also confirmed by its classical, as opposed to in-digenous, iconography. In this case we do have numerouscopies made with local paste found in various parts of thecity and surrounding countryside.

The Terracotta Campana depicting «Two girls flanking acandelabrum» found at Vilarenc and Tomoví were madewith the same mould, but using a completely differentceramic paste. This observation is important because itcould support the itinerant potter hypothesis put for-ward by Mouraret in the case of the Gallia terracottas. Ofthe Tarraconense plaques with identical depictions fromthe Plaça de la Font, there are three that allow us to makea comparison, as the same area, the head of the girl onthe left, has been preserved. All three appear to have beenobtained from the same mould. The prototype for thismodel (Borbein group 4) is the D 641 terracotta in theBritish Museum, which differs only slightly from ours.One particularity is the presence of three small circles im-printed on the ends of the taeniae in the examples knownto date from Tarraco, El Vilarenc and Tomoví. This markcannot be seen in those found in the Plaça de la Font, butit could be a characteristic of Tarraconense terracottas.On the other hand, the analysis of the different antefixesfound in our excavation shows that they were made withvarious moulds.

The presence in Tarraco of Terracotta Campana plaquesand antefixes with a palmette or classical motifs such asthe head of Artemis Selene, show us to what extent thedecoration of new buildings was immersed in the newiconography created by Augustus. This was an iconogra-phy modelled in Rome to glorify the princeps and itspread rapidly throughout the empire. Zanker has madea careful study of this process, which culminated in theformation of a new artistic language at the service of theimperial household.

One of the characteristic features of this new aestheticwas a return to the archaism and classicism that had beenovertaken by the Hellenistic Baroque. Pillaged classicalworks from the Orient were used as models and the em-peror himself placed three 4th century BC originals in thecella of the temple of Apollo Palatine – the Apollo by

Scopas, the Artemis by Timotheus and the Letona byCephisodotus. The temple of Apollo by C. Sosius, fromthe same period, had an original sculptural compositiontransported from a 5th century BC Greek temple on itsfrontispiece. This taste for archaism was used mainly ineverything that surrounded the world of religion (im-ages, rituals, etc.) and formed part of Augustus’ pro-gramme for the renovation of the pietas, knowing of thesacred connotations that inspired the archaic forms.Greek classicism also became part of the iconographyand many of the elements were merged. The TerracottaCampana found in the area of the Apollo Palatine templeoffers us good examples in this respect, with various com-positions that stand out for the hieratic attitude of thefigures that are placed in a heraldic fashion, as we have al-ready mentioned (chapter 3.2): Apollo and Herculesfighting over the Delphic tripod, two canephors next to athymiaterion, etc. The adoption of this aesthetic can alsobe seen in the cuirass of the Augustus in Prima Porta, inwhich the different figures are depicted separately on anempty background forming a symmetrical structure.They are conceptual images that give off coldness and acomplete lack of movement. The return to classicism isalso evident in the architecture; the attic of the colon-nades in the Forum of Augustus was decorated withfaithful reproductions of the caryatids from the Erec-theion and the column bases are copies of those of thePropileus of the Athens acropolis.

This aesthetic renovation programme took place in thepublic domain of Rome, but it soon passed to the privatesphere in the form of mural paintings, coins and, aboveall, small objects of daily use that disseminated decorativemotifs often taken from the new political iconography.Thanks to the low price of these objects, and their rapiddiffusion along the trade routes, the new symbols weredistributed throughout the empire: rostra of ships anddolphins, Capricorns, tripods and candelabra, Victoryon the universal sphere, the civic crown, and the clipeusvirtutis are often found on pottery vessels or depicted oncoins.

For this reason we should not be surprised that duringthe late-Augustan period in Tarraco they were reproduc-ing the same images as in the capital of the empire, andeven more so when we take into account the importanceof Tarraco, which had excellent communications withRome and in which the emperor himself had spent a longperiod. The Terracotta Campana with the «Two girlsflanking a candelabrum» motif reproduces a theme thatdecorated the porticos surrounding Augustus’ house andcorresponds completely to the neo-Attic trend we are re-ferring to. The hermaic pillar, seen on the second of theplaques from Tarragona, was an Attic creation dissemi-nated en masse throughout the Peleponnese. Various im-perial residences were decorated with Terracotta Cam-pana: the porticos in Augustus’ residence, the so-calledHouse of Livia located behind it, the Villa of Livia at Pri-

109

Roman Architectural Terracotta. The Finds of the Plaça de la Font (Tarragona)


110

ma Porta, and even the columbaria of her freedmen.Combined with the collection of terracottas from thetemple of Apollo Palatine, we find antefixes depictingpalmettes that are similar, although not identical, tothose found in our city.

It is also logical that a theme as closely linked to the Au-gustan pantheon as Selene-Diana should be found on theantefixes. Diana was a sister of Apollo, the god protectorof Augustus and as such had a statue in the temple ofApollo Palatine depicting her as a lucifera with a torch.The cult of Diana Apollo was particularly promoted byAugustus, and we often find images of both associated re-spectively with those of the Moon and the Sun, the stel-lar divinities related to them. For example, on the cuirassof the thoracatus statue of Augustus at Prima Porta there

is a depiction of Apollo and Diana; above the former theSun is riding on a chariot and above the latter we can seethe Moon carrying a large torch. Julia, Augustus’ daugh-ter, appears on coins with the quiver of Diana, and DianaAugusta is even depicted with Julia’s features and hairstylein an attempt at the mythical exaltation of the new state.

The arrival of these iconographic models in Tarraco andtheir successful adoption merely confirms the footprintleft by Augustus in the city, particularly after 26-25 BCwhen he spent time here recovering from an illness. It wasnot in vain that the colonia showed its gratitude by erect-ing an altar that was to be the scene of the famous miracleof the palm tree referred to by Quintilius, and where, afew years later, the magnificent temple of the deified Au-gustus would be built in omnis provincias exemplum.


J. Lopez, Ll. PIñol: Roman Architectural terracottas: the finds of the plaça de la Font...

Documents

Transcript of J. Lopez, Ll. PIñol: Roman Architectural terracottas: the finds of the plaça de la Font...