Download - The Art of Reconstruction and the Image of Power

THE ART OF RECONSTRUCTION AND THE IMAGE OF POWER

di Patricia S. Lulof

Architectural terracottas…by far the most abundantand significant category of finds from the non-funerary

sites of pre-imperial Italy outside the Greek colonies;their potential as a source of information (of many dif-

ferent kinds) is correspondingly enormous.(RIDGWAY 2000, p. 560)

Roofs cannot be without architecture, and like Maria Bonghi Jovinosaid to me the last time we met at the exhibition of the Etruscans in2011in Amsterdam: “we need to do more, combine our knowledge andmake reconstructions of whole buildings”. This article discusses the pos-sibilities of reconstructing and creating virtual reality temples in 3D, sci-entifically correct, and properly published. I hope to honour Maria BonghiJovino with this article and hope even more that we meet in future col-laborations.

Introduction

Pre-Roman sanctuaries can be identified and categorized accordingto their form, location and functions. From the late sixth century BC theold nature sanctuaries were joined by new urban sanctuaries, represent-

Acme 134 - 08 Lulof:Acme 134 - 0x 18-11-2012 11:38 Pagina 111

ing city-based communities, such as the Ara della Regina in Tarquinia1.There were also sanctuaries located just outside the city walls by one ofthe gates, often near a spring or river so people could undergo ritual cleans-ing before entering the city. Other sanctuaries were built to serve as fron-tier markers on the boundaries of the territory controlled by the city towhich they belonged, functioning as frontier sanctuaries or emporia or aspolitical centres2. During the archaic period temples in Etruria and Latiumwere made of wood and sundried clay. This vulnerable structure - thewooden roof frame in particular - required protection from wind andweather. Terracotta was an exceptionally suitable material for this pur-pose, being strong and waterproof, as well as easy to work and paint. Roofterracottas were produced since the early seventh century BC. They com-bined a protective function with a decorative role, incorporating a wealthof figurative ornament in the terracotta roof covering. Large terracottafigures were placed on the ridgepole, reliefs covered all the wooden beamsand rafters, while antefixes (upright, semicircular plaques) were affixedalong the eaves. Even the roof tiles and columns were decorated in a rangeof colours, such as red and black, blue and yellow3. A great deal is nowknown about the architecture of Etruscan temples and their developmentfrom small, simple buildings in the second half of the seventh centuryBC to the monumental structures of the early fifth century BC.

In the first century BC the Roman architect Vitruvius described indetail the archetypal Etruscan temple, which he dubbed the Tuscan or-der, in his tract De Architectura: a temple with an almost square floor plan,three cellae (chambers) for gods, a closed back wall, a podium with a flightof steps at the front and a wide, deep portico with two rows of fourcolumns. The foundations were made of tuff blocks, the superstructurechiefly of wood and sundried mud bricks. Another characteristic featurewas the low, overhanging roof, designed to protect the vulnerable build-ing beneath. Foundations of temples have been found which resemble thefloor plan described by Vitruvius, although these are often later, datingfrom the fifth century BC and later, such as many temples in Latium4. Itwas probably these temples which Vitruvius observed and used as the

Patricia S. Lulof112

1 BONGHI JOVINO - CHIESA 2009.2 EDLUND 2011.3 WINTER 2009.4 CECCARELLI - MARRONI 2011.


template for his description of the Tuscan order. The largest temple incentral Italy, the renowned Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on theCapitol in Rome, was apparently built according to the principles of theTuscan order. Legendarily commissioned by Tarquinius Superbus and ded-icated in 509 BC, it has always been regarded as the icon of Etruscan ar-chitecture. However, recent research has demonstrated that many tem-ples, especially in Etruria, had a very different floor plan, inspired by tem-ple architecture in Campania and the Greek colonies of South Italy.

Recent excavations have also required a different reading of the floorplan of the Temple of Jupiter on the Capitol. Formerly reconstructed asa temple entirely in the square footprint of the Tuscan order, this monu-mental edifice is currently regarded as a rectangular temple enclosed bycolumns, also at the back, on an enormously high podium of gigantic di-mensions5. Although the number of cellae for the gods has not been es-tablished with certainty, this temple must have served as a model for manyother temples in Etruria, such as perhaps the Ara della Regina at Tarquiniaand probably also the Second temple of Satricum in Latium6.

Reconstructing roofs and virtual reality

Archaic temples are beyond doubt the most monumental and presti-gious buildings in the city-districts. Above all, they were manifestationsof power. Such a general statement requires qualification: first of all, tem-ples had a religious purpose; second, the position of the temples withinthe city on higher grounds and next to important roads suggests that theyhad a public purpose. Thus, central urban sanctuaries reflect and empowerthe order of a society, and can, therefore, be used for the interpretation ofthe elite who created these monuments. The elite from this region of Italyplayed a central role in the economic and administrative changes that oc-curred during the eventful period in the second half of the 6th centuryBC. These developments have left their marks in the building, decora-tion, re-building and restoration of temples.

Recently, research on ancient architecture has shifted from studyingprocesses of production (chaîne de production) to the analysis of structural

The art of reconstruction and the image of power 113

5 SOMMELLA MURA 2009; HOPKINS 2012.6 LULOF 2011a and 2011d.


development and visual effects of architecture and decoration. Innovativeand dynamic reconstructions with the help of 3D and virtual reality sim-ulations offer great possibilities in studying these transformative processes.The sixth-century temples under study are almost invisible except fortheir foundations and fragmentary roofs. These roofs, however, were neverfully reconstructed, although some attempts were made (Fig. 1). Theproblem with archaeological reconstructions is to retrieve the maximumpossible amount of information from the material culture, so as to re-capture its non-material aspects as well, such as the sensation of space andthe impact of imagery. Like Colin Renfrew said in his Foreword in theimpressing publication on Virtual Archaeology, edited by Maurizio Forte7,pioneer in computer applications for archaeological purposes:

In every case it is the archaeologist who has to supply the data. If the aimis to reconstruct a ruin to show how it originally looked, then ultimatelythe archaeologist is responsible for providing the missing elements. If thereis guesswork involved, the archaeologist does the guessing. But now he (orshe) has to do it in a logical and structured and ultimately more fruitful way.The very task of setting up computer-aided reconstructions obliges the ar-chaeologist to pose the right questions, and then to answer them. This wholeprocedure makes the computer reconstruction a valuable research tool.

Digital 3D reconstructions of ancient monumental buildings with akey function for identifying identities of power offer a productive new setof research possibilities, especially with the help of new IC techniquesand digitization. These are much more suitable than the usual combina-tion of photographs and drawings. It is now possible to create an illumi-nating three-dimensional image of the incomplete object and study itfrom multiple viewpoints. The virtual building can be situated in its spa-tial context, both in the landscape and in its urban context. In addition,it becomes possible not only to bring individual building phases intoview, but also the transformations and transitional situations.

Finally, the digitized image of architectural heritage can be used toserve the modern audience through exhibitions, presentations at fixed in-stallations and digital publications, offering a valorisation of this inno-vative method. The relevance also derives from current public interest in


7 FORTE 1997.



Figure 1 – Graphical reconstruction of the roof of an Etruscan Temple (FENGER

1909, pl. 1).


virtual reality (VR) reconstructions of ancient sites. And it is now alsopossible to virtually bring together fragments and pieces from differentcollections, both private and from museums all over the world through3D scanning (see website below). Frequently, however, the specialists inthe field of ancient architecture regard these reconstructions unreliablebecause most of the time they have been created on the basis of data thathave not been thoroughly checked and double-checked with the latestpublications in the field of research.

Project SARA

In 2002, a project was initiated, in collaboration with SARA (the Am-sterdam Academic Computing Center) which resulted in a 3D recon-struction in a life-size scale of an Archaic temple in the so-called CAVE8.The reconstructed temple was the first monumental temple of the sanc-tuary dedicated to Mater Matuta at Satricum, in Latium, Italy.

The choice which temple to use for this project was an easy one, sincethe building was under study since the eighties of the last century andthe plan of the temple was a relatively simple one, without many dis-crepancies or insecurities: a peripteros sine postico; 15 x 35 m with four columsat the front and 8 columns along the sides. The roof had been recently re-constructed (Fig. 2), showing a full decoration in colourful terracotta,with twenty different classes of decorative and functional elements9. Theconstruction date of the building is still under discusssion, but it musthave been erected around 540 BC.Temple and roof had been executed inthe so-called Campanian tradition and technique, produced by architectsand coroplasts trained by Greeks in Campania, but working in an Italictradtion. The roof was in its entirety, most probably, imported from thegreat terracotta production centers in Cumae or Capua and transportedby ship, over sea10. Temple I was not destined to have a long life: shortlyafter its erection it must have been destroyed by fire. Foundations andcolumn bases (0,80 m. in section) were built with local tufa stone, theentire elevation and roof structure were made from wood and thus not


8 RATTO 2009; RATTO 2012.9 DE WAELE 1981; KNOOP - LULOF 2004.10 LULOF 2006.


preserved. Comparisons with contemporary temples from Southern Italyin stone, architectural votive models of temples in terracotta , as well asdetails of the elevation and formats of Archaic temples described by Vit-ruvius (De Architectura, IV.7).

The final result, a life-size monument in 3 D, not only presented aprecise and a correct reconstruction of architecture and roof of a Pre-Ro-man temple, but also gave the opportunity to answer a series of impor-tant archaeological and technical questions, most of which came forwardduring the process of reconstructing and virtually digital building of themonument.


Figure 2 – Decorative elements of Temple I in Satricum and the reconstructionof the pediment (LULOF 2011b, fig. 7).


These questions have been discussed with specialists in the field andarchitects during the building process, in the CAVE and in several meet-ings, suggesting the following solutions. All colours of the roof and itsdecorative elements could be reconstructed after studying the fragmentsof the rooftiles and architectural terracottas in the field and the store-rooms, presenting a sobre palet of colours in white, red and black. Theroof itself was black. The wooden columns must have been red, tradi-tionally coloured as shown in vasepainting and contemporary wallpaint-ing. The wooden elevation of the cella must have been covered with stuccoand probably coloured as well, perhaps white-washed. Revetmentplaqueswith floral motives protected the wooden beams and wallplates. A seriesof three standard Campanian antefixes, a palmette, a gorgonmask and afemale head, all in tongue frames were alternately placed along the longsides of the roof, at the lower border. Key-pieces in the terracotta roof el-ements gave proof of an inclination of the saddle-shaped roof of 17 de-grees, considered relatively low, but nevertheless also suggested by Vit-ruvius. Both the front and the back of the roof had an open structure withso-called pedimental roofs, which protected the entrance as well as theclosed backwall of the cella against weathering, and gave place to twospecial classes of extra antefixes (Fig. 2). This open structure also gave thepossibility to ventilate the wooden structure of the roof itself, prevent-ing dry rot and mould. The roof with its terracotta load must have veryheavy, probably over 40 tons. However, a wooden structure with a trusswith beams, tensors, and rafters, has a large carrying potential. Architectsspecialised in wooden building constructions garanteed this proposed re-construction was able to carry the roof without any problem.

Visibilty visualized

The result of the reconstruction of the Campanian temple of Satricumis, indeed, spectacular). One final question remained, however. An ex-traordinary and rare set of figurative relief plaques covering the ends ofthe wooden beams in the open pediment at the front of the temple, fig-uring the Greek hero Perseus with the beheaded Medusa, chased by herangry sisters, the Gorgons, had absurd small proportions, being only 0.40m square (Fig. 3). This phenomenon raised questions on the visibility ofthese figural scenes, especially since the myth was traditionally explainedas a victory of the aristocracy or an elitegroup. Should we explain this dec-



oration as political propagande, and for whom to see and understand11?Two dimensional drawings are not adequate to analyse the visibility orimpact of images. The full-blown 3D reconstruction of the temple in theCAVE showed that, in orderto see Perseus and the Gorgons, one must en-ter the temenos of the sanctuary up to 5 meters before the entrance of thetemple. This position must have been only qualified for those in powerand the religious elite.

The political message of the imagery of the temple, if any, could neverhave been meant for the public; it remained invisable for them (Fig. 4)and see also the website with the 3D animation of Tempel I of Satricum,below. Reconstructing an ancient temple, using 3D simulation and in alife-scale format, is an unique possibility and a scientifically valid methodto study architecture. The visual impact during the process gives way toholistic and conceptual experiences, which makes it possible to confrontthe specialists with problems and mistakes that hitherto remained un-noticed and forces to take decisions and make choices. This was also theimpression of many specialists from Italy, colleagues and architects who


11 LULOF 1999.

Figure 3 – Decorative elements of Temple I in Satricum, bullantefix and detailof a reliefplaque, head of Medusa (KNOOP - LULOF 2004, fig. 6; LULOF - KNOOP

1995, fig. 1).


visited the CAVE during demonstrations and looked at (and walkedthrough) the Campanian temple of Satricum, although some of them dis-agreed on the shallow columns, the low inclination of the roof or thecolour of the tiles12.

The temple of Caprifico

On account of the results of the 3D reconstruction project of the Cam-panian temple in Satricum, a new reconstruction project will take placein 2012 at the University of Amsterdam. Under the guidance of the au-thor a 3D Research Lab has been installed and a pilotproject will be ex-ecuted in reconstructing a, to the Satrican Campanian temple contem-porary, Archaic Latin temple in 3D, that was literary and intentionallydestroyed, in the sixties of the last century. The once magnificent roof, of


12 RATTO 2012 on the disagreement between Humanities and Computal Sciences.

Figure 4 – Reconstruction in 3D of temple I in Satricum with the Campanianroof (still from film made in the “cave” of Sara, reworked by Loes Opgenhaffen).


the Rome-Caprifico type had been sold in hundreds of fragments, dis-persed all over Europe and the USA. The roof has recently been recon-structed graphically (Figg. 5-6). Notwithstanding its history of destruc-tion and theft, it has been shown that the roof is one of the most com-plete one known from this period and region13. The temple of Caprifico(close to Cori, only 15 kms away from Satricum) is interesting and im-portant for more than one reason only. The temple is completely destroyedand worthwhile to be rebuilt, albeit virtually. The other important rea-son for studying this invisable monument is the fact that the temple ispart of a large group of similar temples with exactly the same roofs andprobably the same architecture, all dated in the third quarter of the 6thcentury BC, in a turbulent period, among which one of the most famous:the Archaic sanctuary of Sant’Omobono (Fig. 7). From this period theterracotta roof decorations became quite distinctive, displaying a clearimagery in their reliefs, and incorporating series of female heads alongthe eaves and figures on the roof. It was from this type of temple that theEtrusco-Italic model soon developed, from 530 BC onwards, based on aclearly rectangular floor plan whose columns at the front and along thelong sides rapidly evolved into a version with columns all around. Thisspecific style is associated with roofs with figurative scenes and mould-made antefixes with female heads and gorgon masks14. Military scenes ofdeparting warriors or armed horsemen, processions with carriages, horseracing and chariot racing were very popular. Roof acroteria comprised fig-ures of sphinxes at the corners and a central decoration of gods and heroes,in most cases Athena and Heracles. This kind of roof decoration spreadover a wide area around Rome and was immensely popular. The roof ele-ments were all made from the same moulds and had the same format, form-ing a very distinctive roofing system containing revetment plaques, lion-head spouts, antefixes and always the same set of acroteria between vo-lutes15. A list of roofs of Rome-Veii-Velletri and Rome-Caprifico decora-tive systems can be found in Winter16. Many instances are known of statelyfigure groups of Athena and Heracles, in combination with reliefs of pro-cessions and carriages, scenes of triumph and military power (Fig. 8).


13 QUILICI 2004, P.S. Lulof in PALOMBI 2010, pp. 25-111.14 WINTER 2009, chapter 5.15 WINTER 2009, pp. 555-556; LULOF 2011c.16 WINTER 2009, pp. 313-314, Table 5.1-2.



Figure 5 – Reconstruction of the four moulds used to produce the figurative re-vetment plaques from the roof of the destroyed temple of Caprifico, Latium (P.S.Lulof in PALOMBI 2010, figg. I-IV).



Figure 6 – Reconstruction of the pediment and the details of the roof of the tem-ple in Caprifico, Latium (P.S. Lulof in PALOMBI 2010, fig. XIb).


It is possible that this type of roof came from workshops in Rome (usingthe same clays and moulds17) and played a role in the politics and busi-ness interests of the last Etruscan king of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus.Exactly in the period of his reign, from 535 BC onwards, all these tem-ples were built in conquered or befriended cities around Rome, while inRome itself also several temples were built with exactly the same roofsand imagery. Athena, Heracles and even the processions may have formedpart of the personal imagery deployed by Tarquinius Superbus, symbol-izing the divine permission for tyrannical power18.


17 WINTER - ILIOPOULOS - AMMERMAN 2009.18 Lubtschansky in PALOMBI 2010, pp. 133-171; LULOF 2011b-c.

Figure 7 – Reconstruction of the Archaic temple of Sant’Omobono in Rome;front (after La Grande Roma, drawing Loes Opgenhaffen).


Future Research

Digital techniques and cultural heritage connect in an innovative waynew and old within the Humanities. Modern ICT is a major research toolin reconstructing major monuments within their successive phases of cre-ation, function, renovation, and destruction. In addition this technologycontributes to present the new knowledge to a wider public in the formof websites, virtual reconstructions and apps. Presentation and publica-tion of virtually reconstructed ancient architecture are, however, not yetfully developed, that is, many virtual reconstructions exist, but there isno format available wherein the different phases of reconstruction may bevisualized, nor accounted for in a scientifically accepted manner. And, lit-tle or no methods or formats are available to adequately express degreesof accuracy and interpretative steps that led to the final (illustration of


Figure 8 – Distribution of the Roma-Veii-Velletri-Caprifico systems (540-520a.C.) with Athena and Herclas acroterion and volute acroterion (Rome,Sant’Omobono) and revetment plaque with procession (Velletri) (La GrandeRoma, tav. IX, cat. n. 5.1.6; WINTER 2009, fig. 5.20).


the) reconstruction19. This future research project focuses on the investi-gation and, eventually, the development of a new, interchangeable formatand method to publish digital 3D reconstruction of (ancient) architec-ture and cityscapes. A challenge will be to combine such functionalitywith an interactive 3D/VR environment to finally create a comprehen-sive and immersive model of spatial and built-up environments, with aninteroperability that can be used by specialists in architecture and cityscapearchaeology, as well as be presented in heritage institutions and publicplatforms. The relevance of this project goes far beyond the visualisationof ancient key monuments.

The most important goal is to define virtual reconstruction as a re-search tool (to improve the understanding of the buildings and their rolein society) and as a tool to structure and exchange knowledge within theresearch community but also towards the society through museums andother memory institutions (such as Europeana). Although some work hasbeen done on the conceptual aspects of this process (the so-called LondonCharter), this project is one of the first that tries to implement this processfrom within the archaeological and architectural research community,and that seeks to investigate, understand and visualise the meaning of an-cient key monuments for the societies that build them.

Patricia S. LulofUniversity of Amsterdam

Bibliografia di riferimento

BONGHI JOVINO - M. BONGHI JOVINO - F. CHIESA (a c. di), L’Ara della F. CHIESA 2009 Regina di Tarquinia. Aree Sacre Santuari Mediterranei,

Milano 2009.

CECCARELLI - MARRONI L. CECCARELLI - E. MARRONI, Repertorio dei Santuari 2011 del Lazio, Rome 2011.

DE WAELE 1981 J.A. DE WAELE, I templi della Mater Matuta a Satricum,in MededRom 43, N.S.8, 1981, pp. 5-68.


19 LIMONCELLI 2012.


EDLUND 2011 I. EDLUND-BERRY, Introduction, in N.T. DE GRUM-MOND - I. EDLUND-BERRY (edd.), The Archaeology ofSanctuaries and Ritual in Etruria, Portsmouth, RI(JRA suppl. 81), 2011, pp. 7-16.

FENGER 1909 L. FENGER, Le temple ‘etrusco-latin’ de l’ Italie centrale,Copenhague 1909.

FORTE 1997 M. FORTE (ed.), Virtual Archaeology. Re-creating An-cient Worlds, New York 1997.

La Grande Roma M. CRISTOFANI (a c. di), La grande Roma dei Tarquini,catalogo della mostra, Roma 1990.

HOPKINS 2012 J.N. HOPKINS, The Capitoline Temple and the Effects ofMonumentality on Roman Temple Design in M. THOMAS

- G. MEYERS (eds.), The Ideology and Innovation of Mon-umental Architecture in Etruria and Early Rome, UTPress, 2012.

KNOOP - LULOF 2004 R.R. KNOOP - P.S. LULOF, Bulls on the Roof: addendato the Campanian roof at Satricum, in S.T.A.M. MOLS

- E.M. MOORMANN (a c. di), Omni Pede Stare. Saggiarchitettonici e circumvesuviani in memoriam Jos de Waele,Roma 2004, pp. 127-136.

LIMONCELLI 2012 M. LIMONCELLI, Il Restauro Virtuale in Archeologia,Roma 2012.

LULOF 1999 P.S. LULOF, The Image of Perseus in Archaic Roof-deco-ration in Central Italy, in R.F. DOCTER, E.M. MOOR-MANN (edd.), Proceedings XVth International Congressof Classical Archaeology, (Amsterdam 12-17 July,1998), Amsterdam, pp. 183-187.

LULOF 2006 P.S. LULOF, Roofs from the South. Campanian Architec-tural Terracottas in Satricum, in Deliciae Fictiles III (Pro-ceedings of the Third International Conference onCentral Italic Architectural Terracottas, 2002), Ox-ford 2006, pp. 235-243.

LULOF 2011a P.S. LULOF, The Late Archaic Miracle. Roof decorationin Central Italy between 510 and 450 BC, in P.S.LULOF - C. RESCIGNO (edd), Architectural Terracottasfrom Ancient Italy. Images of Gods, Heroes and Mon-sters. Deliciae Fictiles IV (Proceedings of the Inter-national Conference Rome and Syracuse 2009), pp.23-32.



jerrobino

Evidenziato

trattino

LULOF 2011b P.S. LULOF, Symbols of Wealth and Power e l’imagery deisistemi di prima fase di Satricum e Caprifico, in OfficinaEtruscologia 5 (2011), pp. 255-262.

LULOF 2011c P.S. LULOF, Il tempio di Caprifico a confronto. L’immagineritrovata, in Officina Etruscologia 5 (2011), pp. 263-273.

LULOF 2011d P.S. LULOF, Un miracolo d’immagini. Il tempio cosidettotardoarcaico di Satricum, in E. MARRONI (ed.), SacraNominis Latini. Un trentennio di scoperte nei santuari diarea latina tra l’età arcaica e la tarda repubblica (Attidel Convegno Roma, 19-21 febbraio 2009), Ostraka2011, pp. 427-440.

LULOF - KNOOP1995 P.S. LULOF - R.R. KNOOP-, A Dead Negro or a Decap-itated Medusa? An Iconographical Enigma Solved, inMededRom. Antiquity 54, pp. 39-52.

PALOMBI 2010 D. PALOMBI (a c. di), Il tempio arcaico di Caprifico diTorrecchia (Cisterna di Latina). I materiali e il contesto(testi di Joost H. Crouwel, Natacha Lubtchansky, Pa-tricia S. Lulof, Domenico Palombi, Nancy A. Win-ter), Pontinia 2010.

QUILICI 2004 L. QUILICI, Caprifico di Cisterna di Latina. Una cittàarcaica nella Piana Pontina, in Ocnus 12, 2004, pp.247-262.

RATTO 2009 M. RATTO, Epistemic commitments, virtual reality, andarchaeological representation, in A. FIGUEIREDO, H.KAMERMANS (edd), Proceedings of the XV World Con-gress UISPP, Technology and Methodology for Ar-chaeological Practice: Practical applications for thepast reconstruction (Vol. 37, Session C04 (Lisbon, 4-9 September 2006), BAR Archaeopress, Chapter 4.

RATTO 2012 M. RATTO, CSE as Epistemic Technologies: ComputerModeling and Disciplinary Difference in the Humanities,in J. LANG, W. SHARROCK (edd), Handbook of Researchon Computational Science and Engineering: Theory andPractice, IGI Global, pp. 567-586.

RIDGWAY 2000 F.R.S. RIDGWAY, Review: Archaic Italian Roofs. TheClassical Review, New Series, 50(2), pp. 560-563.

SOMMELLA MURA 2009 A.M SOMMELLA MURA, Il Tempio di Giove Capitolino.Una Nuova Proposta di Lettura, in AnnFondFainaXVII, 2009, pp. 330-371.L



jerrobino

Evidenziato

elimina

jerrobino

Evidenziato

trattino

WINTER 2009 N.A. WINTER, Symbols of Wealth and Power: Archi-tectural Terracotta Decoration in Etruria and CentralItaly, 640-510 B.C. (Supplement to the Memoirs ofthe American Academy in Rome 9), AnnArbor 2009.

WINTER - ILIOPOULOS - N.A. WINTER - I. ILIOPOULOS - A.J. AMMERMAN, AMMERMAN 2009 NewLlight on the Production of Decorated Roofs of the 6th c.

B. C. at Sites in and around Rome, in JRA 22, pp. 7-23.

