Rasenna: Journal of the Center for Etruscan Studies Volume 4 | Issue 1 Article 1 2014 Review of Kulte – Riten – religiöse Vorstellungen bei den Etruskern und ihr Verhältnis zu Politik und Gesellschaft Daniele Maras Margo Tytus Fellow, University of Cincinnati, bullettino.curatore@gmail.com Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/rasenna Recommended Citation Maras, Daniele (2014) "Review of Kulte – Riten – religiöse Vorstellungen bei den Etruskern und ihr Verhältnis zu Politik und Gesellschaft," Rasenna: Journal of the Center for Etruscan Studies: Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 1. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/rasenna/vol4/iss1/1 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the CES Electronic Resources at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Rasenna: Journal of the Center for Etruscan Studies by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact scholarworks@library.umass.edu. Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern  und  ihr  Verhältnis  zu  Politik  und   Gesellschaft,   Akten   der   1.   Internationalen   Tagung   der   Sektion   Wien/Österreich   des   Istituto   Nazionale   di   Studi   Etruschi   ed   Italici   (Wien,   4.-­‐6.   12.   2008),   herausgegeben   von   PETRA   AMANN,   unter   der   redaktionellen   Mitarbeit   von   ELISABETH   BRUNA.   (Österreichische   Akademie   der   Wissenschaften,   philosophisch-­‐historische   Klasse,   Denkschriften,   440.   Band)   Wien,   Verlag   der  Österreichischen  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften,  2012.  ISBN-­‐10:  3700168861;  ISBN-­‐13:  978-­‐ 3-­‐7001-­‐6886-­‐7.  Pp.  446,  Ill.  29,7×21,  paperback.  €  83,00.     Reviewed  by  DANIELE  F.  MARAS,  Margo  Tytus  Fellow,  University  of  Cincinnati     This   volume   contains   the   proceedings   of   the   First   International   Congress   of   Etruscan   Studies  organized  by  the  Austrian  Section  of  the  Istituto  Nazionale  di  Studi  Etruschi  ed  Italici   of   Florence.   The   meeting   was   a   successful   scholarly   event   that   drew   the   attention   of   an   international   audience   to   recent   achievements   and   new   frontiers   in   the   study   of   pre-­‐Roman   Italy.   Etruscan  religion  was  the  topic  selected  for  the  congress,  which  was  originally  entitled:   ‘Öffentliche   und   private   Kulte   bei   den   Etruskern   und   ihre   Auswirkungen   auf   Politik   und   Gesellschaft’   (‘Public   and   private   cults   of   the   Etruscans   and   their   political   and   social   implications’).   A   large   number   of   European   scholars,   most   coming   from   Austria,   Germany,   and   Italy,   answered  the  call  of  the  organizers,  Luciana  Aigner-­‐Foresti  and  Petra  Amann.  Almost  all  of   the   contributions   were   published   in   the   proceedings,   with   the   unfortunate   exception   of   the   papers   by   Martin   Bentz   (on   the   iconography   and   function   of   the   Etruscan   priests)   and   Friederike   Bubenheimer-­‐Erhart   (on   the   self-­‐representation   of   Etruscan   proprietors   in   some   painted   tombs   of   Tarquinia).   The   resulting   volume   thus   contains   26   contributions.   Most   were  written  in  German  or  in  Italian,  which  is  the  ‘lingua  franca’  or  koinè  of  Etruscan  studies.   The  only  exception  is  a  paper  in  English  by  Larissa  Bonfante.   The   papers   were   organized   into   nine   sections,   devoted   to   many   spheres   of   religious   studies.  The  sections  are:  1)  the  Etruscan  pantheon;  2)  the  issue  of  patron-­‐deities  of  towns;   3)   the   brontoscopic   calendar   and   the   Liber   Linteus   of   Zagreb;   4)   issues   concerning   priests   and   priesthood;   5)   foundation   rituals;   6)   iconographic   studies;   7)   Etruscans,   Italic   peoples   and  Greeks;  8)  Etruria  and  Rome;  and  9)  general  considerations.   The   volume   constitutes   an   important   reference   text   for   future   studies   in   Etruscan   religion.  Although  it  does  not  cover  every  aspect  of  the  subject  and  not  all  scholarly  opinions   are   represented,   it   does   present   a   wide   range   of   points   of   view   with   a   pluralistic   configuration.   Of  course,  the  number  of  topics  and  the  density  of  information  contained  in  the  volume   as  a  whole  make  it  impossible  to  summarize  its  contents  in  the  space  allotted  for  a  review.   Therefore,  I  will  rapidly  survey  the  contents  of  each  paper,  highlighting  the  main  issues  and   2   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   at  times  adding  relevant  considerations  about  arguments  that  deserve  a  broader  exposition.   In  any  case,  I  would  like  to  stress  that  I  strongly  recommend  this  book  to  scholars  interested   in  the  aspects  of  religion  of  pre-­‐Roman  Italy.   Before   starting   my   survey,   a   general   observation   should   be   made   about   the   scholarly   framework  in  which  the  congress  and  the  subsequent  proceedings  took  place,  raising  also   the  issue  of  the  date  of  publication.  The  meeting  took  place  in  Vienna  in  December  2008;  the   book   was   published   in   2012,   almost   four   years   later.   The   delay   in   the   publication,   not   infrequent   for   proceedings   of   conferences   in   the   humanities,   creates   a   discrepancy   in   the   treatment  of  bibliography  by  different  authors.  Some  papers  were  updated  by  adding  recent   literature,  but  bibliographic  references  in  most  papers  stop  at  the  date  of  the  meeting  and   do   not   take   into   consideration   further   scholarly   developments   and   achievements.   This   is   particularly  relevant,  and  at  times  affects  the  conclusions  of  papers,  because  the  congress  in   Vienna   and   the   publication   of   its   proceedings   are   one   of   an   important   block   of   studies   on   the  Etruscans  and  the  peoples  of  pre-­‐Roman  Italy,  particularly  as  regards  religious  issues.  In   the  years  immediately  preceding  the  congress  several  volumes  appeared,  demonstrating  a   new  wave  of  interest  in  the  international  scholarly  community  with  respect  to  the  Etruscans.   I   cite,   for   example,   Jannot   2005,   Bonfante   and   Swaddling   2006,   de   Grummond   2006,   de   Grummond   and   Simon   2006,   Haack   2006,   Harvey   and   Schultz   2006,   and   van   der   Meer   2007.   Furthermore,  in  late  May  2008,  six  months  before  the  congress  in  Vienna,  a  meeting  on  the   ‘Material   aspects   of   Etruscan   religion’   took   place   in   Leiden   (Nederland);   the   proceedings   were  published  in  van  der  Meer  (2010).  Some  authors  participated  in  both  events.   Of   course,   the   authors   writing   in   Kulte   –   Riten   –   religiöse   Vorstellungen   took   into   consideration   all   of   the   recent   literature   on   Etruscan   religion,   at   times   even   creating   a   dialogue   with   it.   On   the   other   hand,   in   the   lapse   of   time   between   the   congress   and   the   publication   of   the   proceedings   a   number   of   important   volumes   on   the   subject   appeared.   I   cite,   for   example,   Becker   and   Gleba   2009,   Maras   2009a,   de   Grummond   and   Edlund-­‐Berry   2011,  Insoll  2011,  van  der  Meer  2011,  Bartoloni  2012,  and  MacIntosh  Turfa  2012.   A   few   authors,   Eichner,   Amman,   Bagnasco   Gianni,   Bonfante   and   Eibner,   updated   their   papers,   integrating   information   and   results   contained   in   more   recent   publications,   but,   regretfully,   most   papers   remained   close   to   the   form   in   which   they   were   presented   at   the   congress.   These   papers   cannot   therefore   be   considered   to   reflect   the   state   of   affairs   of   Etruscan  religious  studies  in  2012.     Heiner   Eichner   devoted   his   contribution   (17–46)   to   the   sacred   lexicon   of   the   Etruscans   and  to  the  names  of  several  deities,  thus  carrying  on  a  promising  line  of  research  explored   by  the  late  Helmut  Rix.   The  paper  begins  with  a  definition  of  the  Etruscan  language  within  the  framework  of  the   languages   of   ancient   Mediterranean,   which   includes   remarks   on   the   appropriate   transliteration   of   the   epigraphic   texts,   especially   as   regards   the   sibilants.   Although   very   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   3   acute   and   functional,   the   proposed   method   of   transcription   results   in   a   rather   esoteric   presentation  of  the  Etruscan  texts,  with  subscripts  marking  phonetic  values  and  a  series  of   additional  signs  that  mark  individual  words  as  ill-­‐preserved  (†),  hybrid  (‡),  dubious  ($),  correct   (®),  and  so  on.  The  diacritics  provide  the  transcribed  texts  with  the  disconcerting  aspect  of   mathematical  formulae.   Special   paragraphs   are   dedicated   to   the   following   words:   ais   ‘god’,   fler   and   flere,   respectively   ‘sacrifice’   and   ‘deity’   (proposing   Indo-­‐European   etymologies),   and   farθan   ‘genius’.   As  for  the  gods,  the  author  analyzes  the  name  Tina/Tinia  (transcribed  as  Tiña)  in  relation   with   the   word   tin   ‘day’   and   the   name   Śeθlans   (transcribed   as   Σeθlans),   proposing   again,   although  with  some  hesitation,  Kretschmer’s  etymology  from  *Situlanus,  god  of  the  situlae,   bronze  ‘buckets’  of  archaic  northern  Italy.     Dominique   Briquel’s   paper   on   the   relationship   between   the   god   Voltumna   and   the   federal   cults   of   the   Etruscans   (47–65)   is   a   particularly   rich   offering;   it   is   full   of   interesting   suggestions   and   new   perspectives   for   future   studies.   The   contribution   springs   out   of   the   necessity  of  explaining  the  role  of  Voltumna  as  the  patron  of  the  Etruscan  league  and/or  of   its  annual  concilium.   In   the   short   introduction   Briquel   points   out   the   existence   of   a   plurality   of   federal   sanctuaries  among  the  peoples  of  ancient  Italy  that  could  have  had  a  place  also  in  Etruria.   Further   bibliography   on   the   subject   can   be   found   in   the   proceedings   of   the   congress   Nomen   Latinum,   held   in   Rome   in   1995,1   and   also   in   the   proceedings   of   the   congress   Il   fanum   Voltumnae  e  i  santuari  comunitari  dell’Italia  antica,  held  in  Orvieto  in  2011.2   In   my   opinion,   more   attention   should   be   paid   to   the   difference   between   ethnic   sanctuaries   and   federal   sanctuaries.   As   a   matter   of   fact,   literary   sources   seem   to   refer   to   Etruscan  federations  in  the  Po  valley  and  in  Campania  too,  which  could  have  had  their  own   federal   cults   and   institutions,   although   we   have   no   evidence   for   this.3   On   the   contrary,   sacred   places   connected,   for   instance,   to   the   legend   of   Tarchon   and   Tages   should   be   regarded  as  having  an  ethnic  relevance  (at  the  level  of  the  nomen).4   Most  valuable  is  Briquel’s  analysis  of  the  name  of  the  god  Voltumna/Vertumnus  as  that  of   a  ‘Rahmengott’,  patron  of  the  flowing  of  the  annual  cycle  (Prop.  4.2.11–2),  whence  the  ‘false’   1  See  Zevi  1997:  123–142  and  Coarelli  1997:  199–211.   The  volume  was  published  in  Della  Fina  (ed.)  2012.   3   But   see   Schol.   Veron.   ad   Verg.   Aen.   10.200:   ‘<T>archon   …   locum   consecravit   qup   duodecim   oppida   condere’   (Briquel,  pg.  59,  note  83).   4   A   visual   reference   to   the   distinct   role   of   ethnic   (national)   and   federal   (political)   deities   is   provided   by   the   famous  mirror  from  Tuscania,  represented  on  the  cover  of  the  book  I  am  reviewing.  Represented  on  the  mirror   is  a  scene  of  divination,  connected  with  the  hero-­‐founder  Tarchon,  that  is  performed  ‘in  the  (sacred  place)  of   Rath’   (presumably   at   Tarquinia)   and   in   front   of   Veltune   (whom   I   still   think   corresponds   to   Voltumna,   nothwithstanding  the  objections  of  de  Simone  and  Briquel  [pg.  56,  note  58]).   2   4   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   etymology  from  Latin  uertere  ‘to  turn’.  The  parallel  between  the  twelve  months  of  the  year   and   the   twelve   peoples   of   Etruria   is   suggestive   and   provides   a   reasonable   explanation   for   the   insistence   of   the   literary   sources   on   the   number   twelve   in   relation   to   the   Etruscans.5   Finally,   some   doubt   is   cast   on   the   identity   of   Voltumna   with   Tina,   as   deus   Etruriae   princeps   (Varro,  L.L.,  5.46),  generally  considered  to  be  the  case  since  Pettazzoni  1928.   Incidentally,   I   do   not   share   the   author’s   doubts   on   the   religious   aspect   of   the   annual   concilium,  whose  proximity  to  the  fanum  Voltumnae,  as  stated  by  Livy,  should  be  regarded   only  as  topographical  information.  In  fact,  the  famous  passage  of  Livy,  in  which  he  declares   that  the  Etruscans  were  ‘the  most  religious  of  peoples’,  refers  to  the  actions  of  the  king  of   Veii   at   the   concilium   (5.1.3-­‐9),   and   is   not   far   from   the   passage   in   which   the   fanum   is   mentioned  as  the  actual  location  of  the  concilia  (4.61.2).     The   contribution   by   Petra   Amann   (69–83)   is   dedicated   to   the   reception   of   the   cult   of   Apollo   in   Etruria   within   the   framework   of   the   Hellenization   of   the   Etruscan   religion.   The   paper  contains  important  remarks  regarding  the  cult’s  political  relevance  through  divination,   especially  in  connection  with  the  Delphic  oracle.   A  theoretical  premise  of  the  paper  seems  to  be  the  belief  that  the  Etruscan  pantheon  has   progressively  expanded  by  way  of  the  introduction  of  foreign  deities  and  features,  especially   coming   from   Greece,   in   order   to   cover   functions   and   components   that   were   previously   uncovered.   From   this   perspective,   the   contrast   between   the   relatively   sparse   evidence   for   the  cult  of  Apollo  with  his  Etruscanized  name  Aplu  and  the  relevance  of  the  Delphic  Apollo   according   to   the   literary   sources   needs   to   be   explained   through   an   investigation   of   the   available  sources.6   The  author  concludes  that  the  god  was  never  part  of  the  main  pantheon  of  the  Etruscans   (78),   but   had   a   secondary   role,   at   times   through   the   assimilation   to   other   deities,   such   as   Śuri,  Manth  and  Veiovis.  Eventually  the  cult  of  Apollo/Aplu  entered  through  the  ‘back-­‐door’   with  Roman  and  Latin  colonists.   Such   a   conclusion,   in   my   opinion,   cannot   be   accepted,   for   it   is   undermined   by   a   misinterpretation   of   the   phenomena   of   assimilation,   which   should   be   considered,   on   the   contrary,   as   the   actual   core   of   the   process   of   Hellenization   of   the   pantheon.   The   Greek   divine   figures   worshipped   in   Etruria   were   regularly   assimilated   to   deities   with   an   Etruscan   name.   This   is   the   case,   for   instance,   for   Zeus/Tina,   Hera/Uni   and   Aphrodite/Turan.   Only   a   few   Greek   gods,   for   example,   Herakles/Hercle   and   the   Dioscuroi/*Tinas   Cliniar,   have   been   introduced  into  the  Etruscan  pantheon  with  no  apparent  assimilation.   5  See  also  Tassi  Scandone  2001:  151–196,  spec.  173–182,  in  relation  to  the  number  of  the  fasces  in  Rome  and  their   Etruscan  origin.   6  To  the  list  provided  by  the  author  should  be  added  also  the  fragment  of  a  bronze  statue  from  the  sanctuary   of   Castelsecco   (Arezzo),   probably   inscribed   with   a   dedication   to   Aplu:   1[-­‐-­‐-­‐]velus[-­‐-­‐-­‐]   2[-­‐-­‐-­‐]aplu[-­‐-­‐-­‐]   (Rix   1991,   Etruskische  Texte,  Ar  3.3);  cf.  Cherici  1996:  459–464.   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   5   From   this   perspective,   it   is   not   the   figure   and   the   cult   of   Apollo   that   was   introduced   late   into   Etruria,   but   his   Greek   name,   in   the   form   Aplu,   probably   through   Faliscan   mediation   already  in  the  5th  century  BCE.7  The  need  to  provide  the  Etruscan  deity  with  a  Greek  name   went   hand   in   hand   with   the   Hellenization   of   his   figure   in   visual   representations   on   engraved   mirrors   and   vases   as   well   as   statuettes   thus   showing   a   discrepancy   between   the   god   worshipped  in  cult  and  the  corresponding  figure  of  myth  and  iconography.8     The   beautiful   paper   by   Gertraud   Breyer   (85–104)   offers   a   detailed   analysis   of   the   evidence  available  for  the  historical  development  of  Dionysiac  cults  in  Etruria  as  background   for  the  affair  of  Bacchanals  in  186  BCE  as  described  by  Livy  (39.8–19).   The   epigraphic   sources   are   reviewed   in   thorough   fashion,   highlighting   the   earliest   documentation  from  Vulci,  which  dates  from  the  middle  to  the  end  of  the  5th  century  BCE,9   and  analyzing  the  documentation  of  public  cults  and  institutions  in  Tarquinia  during  the  3rd   century  BCE.10   Unfortunately,   the   author   chooses   to   give   credit   to   the   traditional   interpretation   of   *Paχa  as  the  Etruscan  name  of  Dionysos/Βάκχος,  although  Steinbauer  already  showed  that   this  is  in  actuality  the  transliteration  of  Βάκχα  (the  Doric  form  for  the  Bacchant),  as  Breyer   notes   herself   (86,   note   11).11   As   far   as   we   know,   Dionysos   was   worshipped   in   Etruria   only   with  the  name  Fufluns,  which  in  the  case  of  the  cult  of  Vulci  was  Hellenized  by  adding  the   epithet  Paχie.   The  author  dedicates  very  interesting  pages  to  the  historical  framework  of  the  reaction   of   Rome   against   the   Dionysiac   cults   in   186   BCE,   in   which   she   ultimately   compares   the   coniuratio  of  the  initiates  to  other  coniurationes  seruorum,  such  as  the  one  of  196  BCE,  which   characterizes  the  late  society  of  Etruria  before  the  Romanization.12     7   See   Maras   2009b:   246–247.   The   hypothesis   that   considers  apalu   as   a   gentilicium   in   –alu,   of   the   type   spread   in   the   Po   valley,   is   even   more   problematic   than   recognizing   in   it   the   earliest   witness   of   the   Etruscan   name   of   Apollo.   On   the   other   hand,   the   latter   hypothesis   is   supported   by   the   contemporary   Faliscan   cult   of   Apollo   in   Falerii  (see  Amann,  pg.  73  and  notes  63–64).  Incidentally,  the  praenomen  apulas  from  Pontecagnano,  which  is   mentioned  on  pg.  69,  is  not  related  to  Apollo,  but  rather  to  the  archaic  Etruscan  name  apu.   8  But  this  is  not  the  right  place  to  go  deeper  into  the  subject.   9  The  author  also  records  the  alternative  dating  suggested  by  Rix  to  the  beginning  of  the  5th  century  BCE,  but   does  not  take  into  consideration  the  chronology  of  the  Attic  vases  that  support  the  inscriptions.   10  Also  in  this  case,  Rix’s  dating  does  not  fit  with  the  archaeological  context  of  tombs  and  sarcophagi.   11  Further  evidence  for  this  correspondence  comes  from  the  name  of  the  Etrusco-­‐Campanian  priestess  who  was   persecuted   as   responsible   for   introducing   Dionysiac   rites   in   the   Roman   Italy,  Paculla   Annia,   which   is   apparently   a  diminutive  form  of  *Paca,  identical  to  the  Etruscan  *Paχa  (cf.  Maras  2009a:  149,  fn.  7).  A  possible  epigraphic   witness  of  a  Latin  Βάκχος,  initiated  to  the  mysteries,  comes  from  a  graffito  on  a  jug  found  in  the  sanctuary  of   Portonaccio  (Veii),  dating  from  the  3rd  century  BCE,  which  reads:  paco  (cf.  Ambrosini  2001:  84,  n.  I.F.7.8,  with   the  unlikely  integration  paco(nius)).   12   However,   it   should   be   kept   in   mind   that,   as   far   as   we   know   from   the   testimony   of   the   Tarquinian   sarcophagi   of   the   3rd   century   BCE,   the   aristocracy   controlled   the   Dionysiac   mysteries   in   Etruria   and   the   mysteries   were   not   likely  to  be  the  cause  of  uprisings  among  the  lower  classes.   6   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   Lammert  Bouke  van  der  Meer  dedicates  a  short,  though  dense,  contribution  (105–115)  to   sub-­‐urban   and   extra-­‐urban   rituals   in   Falerii   based   on   literary   sources.   This   is   accompanied   by   some   general   considerations   on   Etruscan   and   Italic   religion.   The   parallel   texts   of   Ovid   and   Plutarch  provide  an  interesting  witness  on  ancient  rituals,  with  the  features  of  mystery  cults,   still  performed  in  the  Roman  period.  The  author  compares  this  information  with  other  data   on   the   religion   of   the   Faliscans   with   special   regard   to   the   goddess   Iuno   Curitis.   The   combination  of  procession  (pompa)  and  games  (ludi)  is  thus  considered  a  recurring  feature   of   extra-­‐urban   cults,   often   in   relation   to   sacred   woods   (luci).13   The   author   gives   additional   consideration  to  the  Etruscan  and  Italic  terminology  that  may  refer  to  such  rituals.     Two  papers  focus  on  the  deities  who  are  patrons  of  Etruscan  towns.   Gerard   Capdeville   (119–142)   makes   use   of   his   broad   knowledge   of   the   Classical   literary   sources  in  order  to  analyze  the  names  of  some  major  cities  of  Etruria  deriving  from  founder-­‐ heroes   (such   as   Tarquinia/Tarχna   from   Tarchon   and   Capua   from   Capys)   or   from   patron-­‐gods   (such   as   Mantua   from   Mantus/Manθ   and   Vetulonia/Vatluna   from   Vatl-­‐).14   Special   relevance   is   given   to   Populonia/Pupluna,   which   is   believed   to   have   been   named   after   the   god   Fufluns,   notwithstanding  the  considerations  of  Rix  (1998:  207–229,  spec.  215),  and  Veii,  whose  name   tallies   with   that   of   the   Etruscan   goddess   Vei,   corresponding   to   Demeter/Ceres   and   worshipped  in  the  area  of  the  town.  As  for  Cortona,  according  to  the  author,  the  mention  of   an   Uni   Curtun   in   a   votive   dedication   (ET   Co   4.6-­‐7)   is   evidence   for   the   existence   of   an   eponymous  patron-­‐deity  of  the  town,  assimilated  to  Hera/Iuno.   On   the   other   hand,   Stephan   Steingräber’s   paper   (143–150)   is   much   more   concrete,   for   it   is   based   upon   architectural   and   iconographic   elements   relating   to   city-­‐gates   and   funerary   contexts.   After   a   short   paragraph   on   the   recent,   magnificent   discovery   of   a   sanctuary   of   Demeter  in  the  countryside  in  southern  Etruria  (near  Vetralla),  the  author  reviews  the  cases   of  city-­‐gates  decorated  by  heads  of  deities,  dating  from  the  Hellenistic  period.   Such   deities   had   apparently   a   protecting   function   and   presumably   received   a   public   cult;   but   of   course   it   cannot   be   taken   for   granted   that   the   patron-­‐god   (or   goddess)   of   a   town   tallies  with  its  eponymous  deity,  or  that  he  (or  she)  has  the  largest  or  most  important  sacred   place.15   13  Incidentally,  the  reference  to  cow  pasturing  in  the  area  of  the  sanctuary,  in  the  texts  of  Plutarch  and  Ovid,   does   not   necessarily   indicate   a   sub-­‐   or   extra-­‐urban   cult   (106),   for   in   antiquity   grazing   lands   existed   even   in   urban  areas  (as  well  as  small  green  zones  considered  as  luci).  Moreover,  Ovid’s  tale  takes  place  in  the  (then)   abandoned  town  of  Falerii  Veteres.   14   The   deity   Vatlmi,   mentioned   in   three   Etruscan   dedications,   cannot   be   considered   as   a   dative   form   of   *Vatl(u)m,  which  would  rather  be  expected  as  *Vatl(u)m(e)si  or  *Vatl(u)m(a)le;  cf.  Maras  2009a:  142-­‐143,  with   additional  bibliography.   15   Even   though,   according   to   Vitruvius   (Arch.   1.7.1),   the   temple   of   the   patron-­‐deity   should   be   on   the   highest   point  of  the  town.   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   7   A   final   remark   concerns   the   iconography   of   the   urn   of   a   Vel   Rafi   from   Perugia.   In   the   relief,   the   deceased   holds   a   ruler   (regula)   and   stands   in   front   of   a   gate   adorned   with   two   heads.  Even  though  this  is  an  allusion  to  the  gate  of  the  underworld,  it  cannot  be  denied  that   the  representation  recalls  the  aspect  of  the  ‘Porta  Marzia’,  one  of  the  Hellenistic  city-­‐gates   of  Perugia,  thus  suggesting  that  perhaps  Vel  Rafi  could  have  been  its  architect.     Peter  Siewert’s  contribution  on  the  brontoscopic  calendar  of  John  the  Lydian  (153–161)   suffered  more  than  others  from  the  delay  in  the  publication  of  the  proceedings,  for  in  the   interim  the  beautiful  book  by  MacIntosh  Turfa  (2012)  was  published,  confronting  the  topic  in   depth  and  from  many  angles.16   At   any   rate,   the   line   chosen   by   the   author   of   evaluating   the   political   aspects   of   some   responses  of  the  divinatory  calendar  is  sharp  and  promising,  and  the  contribution  provides  a   very   useful   and   informative   review   of   the   Greek   terms   used   in   the   calendar   to   define   the   state  and  the  res  publica,  trying  to  retrieve  the  original  meaning  of  the  Latin  text  (154-­‐156).17   The  title  of  the  paper  may  be  misleading,  as  the  calendar  is  said  to  be  the  work  of  John   the   Lydian,   a   learned   man   of   the   Byzantine   period,   even   though   it   is   a   Greek   translation   of   a   Latin   original   by   Nigidius   Figulus,   dating   from   the   1st   century   BCE.18   The   Etruscan   core   of   the   calendar,   from   which   Nigidius   derived   his   text,   was   certainly   much   earlier.   In   fact,   according   to  Siewert,  Nigidius  wrote  the  calendar,  presumably  making  use  of  existing  Roman  and  non-­‐ Roman   religious   material   (154);   on   the   other   hand,   in   her   recent   monograph,   MacIntosh   Turfa   maintains   that   Nigidius   translated   an   ancient   Etruscan   text   adapting   it   to   his   time   period  and  culture.   In  my  opinion,  the  conception  of  a  divinatory  calendar  based  on  brontoscopy  was  very   ancient,19  and  it  is  probably  impossible  for  us  to  reconstruct  its  original  form  from  the  text   translated   by  John   the   Lydian.  As  a  matter   of  fact   the  task  of   the  Etruscan  haruspices  was   not   only   to   preserve   and   hand   down   the   disciplina,   but   also   to   update   and   adapt   the   religious  and  divinatory  texts  over  the  course  of  time.  Presumably,  the  text  of  the  calendar   with   its   list   of   responses   underwent   a   long   and   steady   stratification,   generation   after   generation:  only  this  can  explain  the  coexistence  of  references  to  the  Roman  Civil  Wars  as   well   as   to   the   period   of   the   triumvirate,   with   somewhat   anachronistic   references   to   kings   and  the  monarchy.     The   paper   on   the   presence   of   Umbrian   religious   elements   in   the   text   of   the   Liber   Linteus   of   Zagreb   by   Gerhard   Meiser   (163–172)   stands   apart   from   the   other   contributions.   The   16  See  also  MacIntosh  Turfa  2007.     In   this   regard   I   wonder   if   the   term   démos   should   not   be   translated   at   times   as   plebs   rather   than   populus   (Siewert,  pg.  160),  with  reference  to  political  and  class  struggles  in  Republican  Rome.   18  On  the  Etruscan  divination  in  the  late  Republican  period,  see  now  Santangelo  2013.   19  Presumably  taking  place  already  in  the  Orientalizing  period,  when  it  derived  from  the  Near  Eastern  divinatory   science,  as  MacIntosh  Turfa  observed.   17 8   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   author  adopts  a  linguistic  approach  to  the  text  and  continues  a  line  of  research  initiated  by   H.  Rix  several  years  ago.20  Some  recurring  passages  or  sentence-­‐patterns  of  the  Liber  Linteus   are   analyzed   into   their   components   and   compared   to   relevant   passages   of   the   rituals   described   in   the   Umbrian   Tabulae   Iguvinae,   thus   highlighting   similarities   and   discrepancies,   and  yielding  some  interesting  results.   It   is   worth   mentioning   here   the   defense   of   Rix’s   hypothesis   of   interpreting   un   as   the   Etruscan  second  person  pronoun  (166)  and  the  translation  of  Umbrian  erus  as  ‘the  ones  who   wish  (to  take  part  in  the  ceremony)’,  in  the  dative  plural  (167).   Additionally,  an  interesting  hypothesis  concerns  the  Latin  expression  humano  ritu,  used   by   Aulus   Gellius   in   relation   to   the   sacrifice   of   a   goat   to   Veiovis.   According   to   the   author,   it   does   not   refer   to   a   ritual   used   for   human   beings,   but   rather   to   the   locative   humi   ‘on   the   ground’,  that  is  to  say,  not  on  the  altar  (169).     Tina   Mitterlechner   confronts   the   issue   of   the   existence   of   gentilician   deities   (‘Gentilgottheiten’)  in  Etruria,  often  referred  to  in  literature,  because  of  some  epithets  that   strongly   resemble   gentilicia.   The   author   collects   the   sparse   epigraphic   evidence   for   this   phenomenon  and  analyzes  the  available  literary  sources,  particularly  as  regards  family  cults   in  Rome,  with  the  famous  cases  of  the  Potitii  and  Pinarii,  and  of  the  Aurelii.21  She  stresses,   correctly   so   in   my   opinion,   that   the   sources   authorize   us   to   identify   the   occurrence   of   ‘gentilician   priesthoods’   (that   is   to   say,   priesthoods   held   by   specific   aristocratic   families)   from   time   to   time   dealing   with   cults   of   public   relevance,   but   she   lets   herself   be   dragged   along  by  her  fervor  in  denying  the  existence  of  gentilician  epithets  in  Etruscan.22   Eventually,   the   author   proposes,   correctly   in   my   opinion,   that   scholars   should   speak   of   ‘gentilician   cults’   rather   than   deities,   and   pay   attention   to   the   features   of   the   cults   and   their   significance  in  a  private  and  public  context.     Ingrid   Krauskopf   offers   a   sharp   and   thorough   contribution   to   the   role   of   Etruscan   women   in   cult,   with   special   regard   to   the   evidence   existing   for   women’s   priesthoods   and   religious  colleges.  The  purpose  of  the  paper  is  to  determine  what  features  can  be  detected   in  burials  and  in  visual  representations  in  order  to  identify  feminine  priestly  figures.   A   special   case   is   provided   by   the   Tomba   delle   Iscrizioni   at   Vulci,   where   two   of   the   six   chambers  hosted  women’s  burials,  in  several  cases  marked  by  the  term  hatrencu,  which  was   added  to  the  name  of  the  deceased.  Since  the  women  buried  there  have  different  gentilicia,   it  can  be  considered  very  likely  that  the  word  refers  to  a  collegial  priesthood.  Other  terms,   20  See,  for  instance,  Rix  1985  and  1998.     Additional   references,   e.g.,   Santi   1991,   de   Simone   2009,   and   Torelli   2010,   should   have   been   included   in   the   bibliography.   22   As   a   matter   of   fact,   the   list   of   the   available   evidence   is   longer   than   that   used   by   the   author;   cf.   Maras   2009a:   143–149  and  466.   21 Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   9   such  as  tame[r]u,  eθvis,  and  *snenaziula  can  be  supposed  to  relate  to  priestly  women,  even   though  with  a  lesser  degree  of  certainty.   Women  acting  in  religious  rituals  are  represented  in  very  early  monuments,  such  as  the   wooden   throne   from   Verucchio   and,   possibly,   the   terracotta   friezes   from   Murlo.   Possible   attributes   indicating   a   priestly   role   for   women,   as   results   from   iconographic   sources,   are   (sacrificial)  knives,  carts,  and  perhaps  also  foldable  chairs  (diphroi).  Of  course  the  presence   of   one   of   these   objects   in   funerary   goods   may   hint   at,   but   is   not   evidence   for,   the   sacred   functions  of  the  deceased.   The   author   also   supposes   a   priestly   nature   for   the   married   couple,   Larth   Tetnies   and   Tankhvil   Tarnai,   sculpted   on   the   sarcophagus   in   the   Boston   Museum   of   Fine   Arts   because   of   features   represented   on   the   capse:   the   man’s   paraphernalia   are   a   magistrate’s   chair   (sella   curulis),   a   scepter,   and   a   lituus;   the   woman’s   a   bucket   (situla),   a   parasol,   and   a   fan.   All   together  such  attributes  seem  to  point  out  a  political  as  well  as  religious  role  for  the  couple,   that  is  therefore,  unconvincingly  in  my  opinion,  compared  to  the  Roman  rex  sacrorum  and   the  Athenian  archon  basileus  (191).     Friedhelm   Prayon’s   paper   explores   the   orientation   of   the   altars   and   the   priests   who   use   them  in  archaic  Etruria  (199–214).  Since  the  topic  is  one  of  the  author’s  specialties,  he  deals   in   a   masterly   fashion   with   the   argument,   incorporating   new   evidence   from   recent   discoveries  into  the  framework  of  the  previous  scholarly  studies.23   Not   only   altars   in   sanctuaries,   but   also   funerary   contexts―either   tumuli,   or   chamber-­‐ tombs,  or  sacred  areas―are  analyzed  by  the  author,  introducing  the  hypothesis  of  the  cyclic   mutation  of  the  cardinal  points  East  and  West  in  different  periods  of  the  year  (that  would   explain  the  range  of  different  orientations  of  the  altars  from  E-­‐SE  to  E-­‐NE).24   As  regards  the  altars  provided  with  ramps  for  access  by  officiants  and  victims,  it  is  usually   taken  for  granted  that  the  direction  of  the  ramp  indicates  the  orientation  of  the  ceremony;   still   it   is   possible   that   in   certain   rituals   the   direction   was   determined   by   religious   considerations  and  was  different  than  that  suggested  by  the  ramp.25     The  contribution  that  follows,  by  Hans  Taeuber  (215–220),  is  slightly  out  of  place  in  the   volume,   for   it   deals   with   the   political   relevance   of   Greek   priestly   figures   and   can   be   connected   to   Etruscan   civilization   only   in   order   to   look   for   comparanda.   This   complex   and   important   subject   is   rapidly   investigated   in   the   pages   of   this   short   paper,   founded   exclusively  upon  literary  sources,  and  without  reference  to  the  archaeological  data.   23  If  a  piece  of  criticism  can  be  leveled  at  the  paper,  since  it  deals  mostly  with  orientation,  it  would  be  that  the   same  orientation  should  have  been  used  for  the  all  of  the  maps  shown  in  the  illustrations.   24  See  Stevens  2009:  153–154.   25  See  Maggiani  2009:  221–238.  On  the  topic  of  altars  in  Etruria  see  Rafanelli  2013:  566–593.   10   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   The   term   ‘priests’   of   the   paper’s   title   (‘Priester’   in   German)   is   to   be   understood   in   its   broad   and   general   meaning,   comprehending   cult-­‐officiants,   sacrificers,   priest-­‐kings,   seers,   and   so   on;   therefore   the   paper   in   effect   concerns   the   interrelation   between   politics   and   the   sacred  in  Greece  through  the  role  of  the  mediating  priestly  figures.     A  few  pages  by  Adriano  Maggiani  are  dedicated  to  the  archaeological  contexts  of  three   Etruscan   foundation   deposits   in   relation   to   city-­‐walls,   with   some   general   remarks   on   such   category  of  finds  (223–234).  Although  short,  this  paper  is  particularly  rich  and  purposeful;  it   draws  attention  to  the  kinds  of  offerings  that  are  found  in  connection  with  foundation  rites,   at  times  surprisingly  modest  in  nature.   Offerings  (such  as  coins)  and  sacrifices  (of  pigs  as  well  as  fishes)  were  seemingly  usual  in   Hellenistic   Etruria,   although   the   evidence   is   still   too   little   to   draw   general   conclusions.   Some   archaeological  finds  in  Roman  contexts  show  that  the  ritual  was  different  there;  and  I  would   like   to   stress   that   it   is   dangerous   to   use   Greek   categories   and   definitions   for   the   Etruscan   finds   (226),   for   it   is   known   that   the   Etruscan   Libri   Rituales   prescribed   ‘what   rite   was   to   be   used   to   found   towns,   or   to   consecrate   altars   and   temples,   what   inviolability   attached   to   walls,   what   law   to   gates’   (Festus,   358   L.).   We   should   therefore   expect   that   Etruria   had   its   own  rites  and  practices  to  perform  such  ritual  actions  (228).26     The   two   following   papers   are   linked   to   one   another   for   the   latter   seems   to   answer   a   question  posed  by  the  former.   Giovannangelo   Camporeale   surveys   the   origin   of   the   visual   motif   of   the   ‘solar   boat’,   which   made   its   way   into   Etruscan   arts   and   crafts   from   Bronze   Age   Europe.   The   motif,   representing  a  floating  boat  with  bird-­‐heads  at  both  ends  and  a  circle  or  disc  in  the  middle,   decorates  Etruscan  urns  as  well  as  razors,  pendants,  and  tools.   The   quick   ‘destructuration’   of   this   motif   (in   Italian   ‘destrutturazione’),   soon   losing   its   central  disc,  or  further  stylizing  the  bird-­‐heads,  or  changing  the  boat  itself  into  a  linear  sign,   shows   that   the   original   sacred   value   of   the   decoration,   if   any,   was   soon   lost   on   Etruscan   craftsmen,  and  any  reference  to  the  cult  of  the  sun  should  be  considered  hypothetical.  On   the  other  hand,  the  motif  preserves  its  connection  with  the  elites  even  over  the  Villanovan   period.   Taking   over   from   Camporeale,   Arianna   Medoro   Kanitz   (253–271)   carries   out   an   investigation   of   the   meanings   of   the   representations   of   birds   from   the   Iron   Age   to   the   Orientalizing  period.  The  author  presents  a  thorough  and  systematic  analysis  of  the  motifs,   schemes   and   variants   of   the   figures   of   birds   on   locally   produced   objects,   from   the   ‘solar   boat’   to   the   water-­‐birds,   and   to   the   so-­‐called   ‘aironi’   decorating   several   classes   of   Orientalizing  pottery.  She  spots  the  origin  of  different  variants  from  Europe  as  well  as  from   26  On  the  concept  of  sanctitas  in  relation  to  city-­‐walls,  see  Tassi  Scandone  2013:  105–118.   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   11   Greece,   pointing   out   specific   cases   in   which   birds   occur   in   ‘narrative’   contexts,   at   times   interacting  with  human  beings  or  other  animals  (257).   As   a   result   of   her   survey,   the   author   maintains   that   the   elaboration   of   types   and   combined   versions   of   the   bird-­‐motif   derives   from   a   convergence   of   different   ideologies,   spread   from   the   Mediterranean   to   central   Europe,   and   matching   in   the   Etruscan   culture.   Eventually,  the  cross-­‐reference  to  sky  and  water,  marking  the  boundary  between  the  human   world   and   the   divine,   as   well   as   the   afterlife,   seems   to   fade   and   to   lose   its   emblematic   function  in  coincidence  with  the  act  of  anthropomorphizing  the  gods.27     An   interesting   methodological   contribution   by   Cornelia   Weber-­‐Lehmann   (273–286)   encourages   scholars   to   verify   accurately   what   can   be   connected   to   religious   rituals   in   the   figural  representations  of  the  painted  tombs  of  Tarquinia.   The   author   surveys   scenes   of   mourning,   dance   and   music,   and   sacrifice   and   worship,   confronting  different  models  of  interpretation  proposed  by  Torelli,  Jannot  and  Colonna.  She   wisely  observes  that  the  categories  of  cult  and  ritual  are  indeed  appropriate  in  the  process   of  interpretation,  but  that  they  are  not  the  only  ones  (281).     A   long   and   systematic   paper   by   Giovanna   Bagnasco   Gianni   (and   collaborators)   is   devoted  to  the  possible  role  as  divinatory  tools  held  by  some  selected  items  represented  in   the  figural  scenes  engraved  on  Etruscan  mirrors  (287–314).  The  basis  of  the  research  is  the   acknowledgment  of  the  multifaceted  meaning  that  the  mirror  had  in  the  ancient  society  as  a   means   for   divination,   as   well   as   a   component   of   women’s   toiletry,   a   wedding   gift,   and,   in   funerary  contexts,  a  religious  object.   She   examines   mirrors,   eggs,   (lifted)   cloths,   styluses   or   pins,   and   alabastra:   to   each   is   dedicated   an   appendix,   listing   occurrences   on   mirrors   and   commenting   on   their   possible   divinatory   function.   According   to   the   author,   the   study   was   intended   to   encourage   researchers  to  take  into  consideration  the  different  functions  of  mirrors  when  interpreting   their   representations   in   mythical   contexts.   As   a   matter   of   fact,   mythological   scenes   engraved   on   Etruscan   mirrors   often   do   not   match   up   with   the   narratives   of   Classical   literature.     The  contribution  by   Alessandro  Naso  also  appears  to  me  out  of  place  in  the  proceedings   of  a  congress  on  the  Etruscan  religion,  for  it  deals  with  the  discovery  of  Etruscan  and  Italic   materials  in  the  Aegean  region  (317–333).   The  original  title  of  the  paper  presented  at  the  congress  was  ‘Doni  etruschi  nei  santuari   greci’,   which   focused   specifically   on   the   religious   contexts   of   the   find-­‐spots.   By   extending   the   coverage   also   to   the   (small   number   of)   objects   not   found   in   sacred   places,   for   example,   27  See  Cristofani    1993:  9–21.   12   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   bronze   thrones,   weapons,   fibulas,   and   bucchero   vases,   the   author   provides   a   comprehensive  review  of  the  Etrusco-­‐Italic  presence  in  the  Greek  area  from  the  Iron  Age  to   the  Archaic  period.     Larissa  Bonfante’s  paper  focuses  on  the  phenomenon  of  the  ostentation  of  wealth  and   high  rank  through  precious,  refined,  and  at  times  exotic  components  of  dress,  exhibited  in   the   grave   goods   (335–344).   Such   items   were   not   simply   parade   displays,   as   the   Greek   sources  seem  to  suggest  by  accusing  the  Etruscans  of  tryphe,  unrestrained  luxury,  but  they   acquired  also  special  significance  in  relation  to  their  ritual,  funerary  context.   The   author   stresses   the   peculiar   symbolic   value   of   amber―at   one   time   believed   to   be   magical  material―in  the  production  of  fibulas,  pendants,  and  gems,  often  placed  in  tombs   of  women  and  children.  After  the  great  diffusion  of  such  objects  in  Etruria  and  Italy  in  the   Orientalizing   period,   it   is   remarkable   that   the   necropolises   of   Puglia   show   amber   objects   from  the  last  quarter  of  the  6th  to  the  4th  century  BCE.  And  even  in  the  Roman  period  some   of  these  symbols  of  funerary  luxury  and  magic  show  a  striking  continuity  with  the  tradition   of  the  Iron  Age.     Continuing   the   theme   of   the   symbolism   of   power   and   religion   in   archaic   Italy,   Alexandrine   Eibner   devotes   her   contribution   to   the   visual   world   of   the   ‘Situlenkunst’   of   northern   Italy   (345–378).   As   a   matter   of   fact   some   of   the   ancient,   emblematic   status   symbols  of  the  Orientalizing  elites  can  be  found  in  representations  incised  on  situlae,  such  as   thrones,  crowns  and  scepters,  rings,  necklaces  and  torques,  and  special  items  of  clothing.   After  a  systematic  review  of  every  single  occurrence  of  each  of  these  items―and  with  an   impressive  apparatus  of  footnotes  and  bibliography―the  author  presents  a  concise  survey   of   the   corresponding   realia   found   in   archaeological   excavation,   and   adds   a   section   on   written  sources  and  comparanda  among  the  neighboring  peoples  of  Italy  and  Europe.     The  paper  presented  by  Cesare  Letta  (379–390)  is  dedicated  to  the  religious  tradition  of   the   central   Italic   peoples,   the   Marsi,   the   Vestini,   the   Paeligni,   and   the   Marrucini,   in   the   Hellenistic   period,   before   the   admission   to   the   Roman   citizenship   in   90   BCE.   The   author   is   primarily   interested   in   the   information   drawn   from   epigraphic   sources   and   the   analysis   of   the  Classical  literature.  The  endurance  of  genuine  Italic  features  of  the  cult,  intertwined  with   a   steady   influx   of   Greek   influences,   shows   that   Romanization   found   a   flourishing   and   persisting   religious   tradition   that   only   partially   and   rather   superficially   was   affected   by   the   contact  with  the  Roman  religion.     The   genesis   of   the   Roman   triumph   and   its   early   development   are   the   subject   of   the   contribution   by   Mauro   Menichetti   (393–406).   The   author   surveys   the   recent   bibliography   in   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   13   order  to  reassess  the  theory  of  attributing  Etruscan  roots  to  the  ceremony  and  a  connection   with  the  cult  of  Dionysus.   The  author  presents  a  case  study  of  the  most  remarkable  funerary  displays  of  weapons   and   symbols   of   rank   in   Etruscan   and   Latin   tombs   of   the   8th   and   7th   century   BCE,   highlighting   the   central   position   of   the   chariot.   On   the   other   hand,   the   link   between   the   ritual   consumption  of  wine  and  the  military  victory  is  stressed  by  some  literary  sources.  And  some   iconographic   sources   show   that   aristocratic   ideology   praised   the   victorious   principes   as   comparable  to  the  heroes  of  the  myth.   Eventually,   these   seemingly   separate   threads   allow   the   author   to   reconstruct   the   development  of  the  ceremony  of  the  Etrusco-­‐Roman  triumph  in  the  context  of  the  kingdom   of  the  Tarquinii  and  the  cult  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus.     Santiago   Montero’s   paper   (407–419)   analyzes   the   relationship   between   the   Etruscan   haruspices  residing  in  Rome  and  in  the  Capitoline  temple.  He  focuses  on  the  prodigies  that   occurred  in  relation  to  the  temple  throughout  the  centuries  and  on  their  interpretation.  In   particular,   the   author   highlights   the   role   that   the   haruspices   had   fighting   against   the   introduction   of   foreign   religious   practices   (externae   superstitiones),   such   as   in   the   case   of   the   cults   of   Isis   in   the   1st   century   BCE.   A   steady   collaboration   between   the   Senate   and   the   haruspices   throughout   the   Imperial   period   is   thus   detectable   by   means   of   the   available   sources,  collected  by  the  author  in  a  detailed  appendix.     A  short,  interesting  contribution  by  Ekkehard  Weber  is  devoted  to  the  evidence  for  the   practice   of   the   Etruscan   Disciplina   in   the   Roman   provinces   outside   of   Italy   (421–426).   A   selection   of   epigraphic   testimony   from   different   parts   of   the   Roman   empire   is   presented   and   then   discussed   by   the   author,   thus   showing   that   the   ancient   religious   tradition,   now   become  a  Roman  cultic  feature,  was  still  broadly  practiced  in  a  public  and  military  context   until  the  late  Imperial  period.     The   editors   selected   Gerhard   Dobesch’s   contribution   (429–443)   as   the   concluding   paper   in   the   volume.   Its   title   declares   that   his   aim   is   to   present   ‘general   considerations’   on   the   relationship  between  cult  and  state  in  Classical  antiquity  (‘Polis,  Staat  und  Kult’  in  German).   Public  religious  practice  was  an  essential  component  of  the  ancient  Greek  polis  as  well  as   the   Roman   res   publica.   As   the   author   remarks,   there   was   no   distinction   between   political   and  religious  power,  but  they  were  intertwined  and  at  times  integrated  in  the  same  public   figures.   This   complex   system   had   its   historical   roots   in   ancient   Near   Eastern   cultures   and   was   preserved  through  a  changing  apparatus  of  symbols  and  ceremonies  throughout  the  Roman   Empire,  even  leaving  its  stamp  on  the  development  of  medieval  and  modern  society.     14   Review  of  Kulte  –  Riten  –  religiöse  Vorstellungen  bei  den  Etruskern   REFERENCES     AMBROSINI,   LAURA.   2001.   n.   I.F.7.8.   In   Veio   Cerveteri   Vulci:   città   d’Etruria   a   confronto,   p.   84.   Roma:  L’Erma  di  Bretschneider.   BARTOLONI,  GILDA  (ed.).  2012.  Introduzione  all’etruscologia.  Milano:  Hoepli.   BONFANTE,   LARISSA,   and   JUDITH   SWADDLING.   2006.   Etruscan   Myths.   Austin,   TX:   University   of   Texas  Press.   CHERICI,   ARMANDO.   1996.   Un   frammento   iscritto   di   statua   bronzea   dal   santuario   di   Castelsecco.  La  Parola  del  Passato  291:  459–464   COARELLI,   FREDERICO.   1997.  Vie  e  mercati  del  Lazio  antico.  In  Nomen  Latinum,  Proceedings  of   the  International  Congress  (Rome,  1995).  Eutopia  4:  199–211.   CRISTOFANI,   MAURO.   1993.   Sul   processo   di   antropomorfizzazione   nel   pantheon   etrusco.   In   Miscellanea  Etrusco-­‐Italica  I  (QuadAEI  22):  9–21.   DE   GRUMMOND,   NANCY   T.,   and   INGRID   E.M.   EDLUND-­‐BERRY   (eds.).   2011.   The   Archaeology   of   Sanctuaries  and  Ritual  in  Etruria  (JRA  Suppl.  81,  2011).  Portsmouth,  RI:  Journal  of  Roman   Archaeology.   DE   GRUMMOND,   NANCY   T.   2006.   Etruscan   Myth,   Sacred   History,   and   Legend.   Philadelphia,   PA:   University  of  Pennsylvania  Press.   DE   GRUMMOND,   NANCY   T.,  and  ERIKA   SIMON  (eds.).  2006.  The   Religion   of   the   Etruscans.  Austin,   TX:  University  of  Texas  Press.     DE   SIMONE,   CARLO.   2009.   Etrusco   ušil   ‘sole’   e   il   gentilizio   latino   Aurelius:   problemi   storico-­‐ linguistici.  Incidenza  dell’Antico  7:  109–135.   DELLA  FINA,  GIUSEPPE  M.  (ed.).  2012.  Il  fanum  Voltumnae  e  i  santuari  comunitari  dell’Italia  antica.   Annali  della  Fondazione  per  il  museo  C.  Faina  di  Orvieto  19.   GLEBA,   MARGARITA,   and   HILARY   BECKER   (eds.).   2009.   Votives,   Places   and   Rituals   in   Etruscan   Religion.  Studies  in  Honor  of  Jean  MacIntosh  Turfa.  Leiden/Boston:  Brill.   HAACK,   MARIE-­‐LAURENCE.   2006.   Prosopographie   des   haruspices   romains   (Biblioteca   di   studi   etruschi,  42).  Pisa/Roma:  Istituti  editoriali  e  poligrafici  internazionali.   INSOLL,   TIMOTHY.   (ed.).   2011.   The   Oxford   Handbook   of   the   Archaeology   of   Ritual   and   Religion.   Oxford:  Oxford  University  Press.   JANNOT,   JEAN.-­‐RENÉ.   2005.   Religion   in   Ancient   Etruria.   Madison,   WI:   University   of   Wisconsin   Press.   MACINTOSH   TURFA,   JEAN.   2007.   The   Etruscan   Brontoscopic   Calendar   and   Modern   Archaeological   Discoveries.  Etruscan  Studies  10:  163–173.   MACINTOSH   TURFA,   JEAN.   2012.   Divining   the   Etruscan   World.   The   Brontoscopic   Calendar   and   Religious  Practice.  Cambridge:  Cambridge  University  Press.   MAGGIANI,   ADRIANO.   2009.   Deorum   sedes:   divinazione   etrusca   o   dottrina   augurale   romana?   Annali  della  Fondazione  C.  Faina  di  Orvieto  16:  221–238.     MARAS,   DANIELE   F.  2009a.  Il  dono  votivo.  Gli  dei  e  il  sacro  nelle  iscrizioni  etrusche  di  culto  (Pisa-­‐ Rome.   MARAS,   DANIELE   F.  2009b.  Note  in  margine  al  CIE  II,  1,  5.  Studi  Etruschi  73,  2007  (2009):  246– 247.   Rasenna,  Volume  4,  2014   15   PETTAZZONI,  RAFFAELE.  1928.  La  divinità  suprema  della  religione  etrusca.  In  Studi  e  Materiali  di   Storia  delle  Religioni  4:  179–192.   RAFANELLI,   SIMONA.   2013.   Archaeological   Evidence   for   Etruscan   Religious   Rituals.   In   JEAN   MACINTOSH  TURFA  (ed.),  The  Etruscan  World,  pp.  566–593.  London:  Routledge.   RIX,   HELMUT.  1985.  Descrizioni  di  rituali  in  etrusco  e  in  italico.  In  L’etrusco  e  le  lingue  dell’Italia   antica,  Atti  del  Convegno  della  Società  Italiana  di  Glottologia,  pp.  21–37.  Pisa:    Giardini.   RIX,  HELMUT.  1991.  Etruskische  Texte.  Editio  Minor.  Tübingen:  Gunter  Narr.   RIX,   HELMUT.   1998.   Teonimi   etruschi   e   teonimi   italici.   Annali   della   Fondazione   per   il   museo   Claudio  Faina  di  Orvieto  5:  207–229.   SANTANGELO,   FEDERICO.   2013.   Divination,   Prediction   and   the   End   of   the   Roman   Republic.   Cambridge:  Cambridge  University  Press.   SANTI,   CLAUDIA.   1991.   A   proposito   della   ‘vocazione   solare’   degli   Aurelii.   Studi   e   Materiali   di   Storia  delle  Religioni  57:  5–19.   SCHULTZ,   CELIA   E.,   and   PAUL   B.   HARVEY   (eds.).   2006.   Religion   in   Republican   Italy.   Cambridge:   Cambridge  University  Press.   STEVENS,   NATALIE   L.C.   2009.   A   New   Reconstruction   of   the   Etruscan   Heaven.   American   Journal   of   Archaeology  113:  153–164.   TASSI   SCANDONE,  ELENA.  2001.  ‘Auspicium’  o  ‘augurium  Romuli’?  Sul  problema  del  rapporto  tra   ‘auspicium’   e   ‘imperium’.   In   Iuris   vincula.   Studi   in   onore   di   Mario   Talamanca,   pp.   151-­‐196.   Roma:  Jovene.   TASSI   SCANDONE,   ELENA.   2013.   Quodammodo   divini   iuris.   In   Per   una   storia   giuridica   delle   res   sanctae,  pp.  105–118.  Napoli:  Jovene.     TORELLI,   MARIO.   2010.   La   ‘Grande   Roma   dei   Tarquini’.   Continuità   e   innovazione   religiosa.   Annali  della  Fondazione  per  il  Museo  Claudio  Faina  di  Orvieto  17:  305–335   VAN   DER   MEER,  LAMMERT   BOUKE.     2007.  Liber  Linteus  Zagrabiensis.  The  Linen  Book  of  Zagreb.  A   Comment  on  the  Longest  Etruscan  Text.  Leuven:  Peeters.   VAN   DER   MEER,  LAMMERT   BOUKE  (ed.).  2010.  Material  Aspects  of  Etruscan  Religion,  Proceedings   of  the  international  Colloquium  (Leiden,  2008).  Leuven/Paris/Walpole,  MA:  Peters.   VAN   DER   MEER,   LAMMERT   BOUKE.   2011.   Etrusco   Ritu.   Case   studies   in   Etruscan   ritual   behavior.   Leuven/Walpole,  MA:  Peeters.   ZEVI,  FAUSTO.  1997.  I  santuari  ‘federali’  del  Lazio:  qualche  appunto.  Eutopia  4:  123–142.     Margo  Tytus  Visiting  Scholar  Fellow              [Received  6/30/2014   Department  of  Classics                    Accepted  7/7/2014   403  Blegen  Library                        Published  7/17/2014]   University  of  Cincinnati   Cincinnati,  OH  45221-­‐0226   [email:  bullettino.curatore@gmail.com]