Warrior identity

and the materialisation of power in Early Iron Age Etruria

Cristiano Iaia

INTRODUCTION
The subject matter of this paper is the material identity of warriors and warriorhood in Early Iron Age central Italy. In particular, I shall focus on the way in which war as a social activity is incorporated into the material culture through rituals. Hence, rather than discussing weapons and warfare, this paper mainly deals with burial rites and artefacts that were chosen to be symbolically manipulated through the rites with the explicit intention of transmitting messages to an audience. I am aware that this approach does not allow a deep treatment of issues widely debated in current prehistoric archaeology and anthropology, such as violence, aggression and combat techniques (e.g. Vankilde 2003; Jockenhvel 2006; Harding 2007). Yet, focussing on the symbolic dimension of weapons does not entail diminishing or masking the importance of aggressiveness and physical violence in warfare. In fact, this is only one side of a more complex picture, that encompasses not only violence in war, but even more subtle instruments for asserting authority and coercion, such as ideological naturalisation/ legitimisation and, last but not least, consensus on ideal values, reinforced through ritual activity and the active, emotionally charged, use of visual means. Before starting any discussion on this topic, it is worth remembering that Early Iron Age Etruria, synonymous with the so-called Villanovan Culture, has been the subject of different scholarly traditions. Scholars of pre-Roman Italy, mainly inspired by a traditional classicist point of view, tend to emphasise the role of this cultural complex as the early manifestation of the Etruscans (e.g. Torelli 1981; Bartoloni 1989; 2003). Since the hugely influential paper on the archaic facies of Etruria by Massimo Pallottino (Pallottino 1939), the general direction of research, influenced by a strong cultural/historical paradigm, has focussed on the concept of the Villanovan culture as a discrete entity and on its transformations, through archaeological phases of increasing sophistication (Periods I to III), into a truly historical civilisation. From this perspective though with a range of different positions (compare Bartoloni 1989 and Camporeale 2000: 71) the birth of Villanovan culture during the 9th century BC (in conventional absolute chronology) has been viewed for a long time

72 CRISTIANO IAIA

as a gradual change from great confederations of prehistoric villages to cities, whose final evolution, coinciding with the emergence of the Etruscan ethnos, was determined by the intensification of trade and cultural contact with the Greeks. Ethnogenesis is a dominant theme of this tradition affecting the interpretation of several aspects of material culture (for a critical overview, see G. Bradley 2000). From a different perspective less focussed on the mortuary record some prehistorians have during the last thirty years emphasised the revolutionary character of the process that, at the transition from the Bronze Age into the Early Iron Age 1 (late 10th to 9th centuries BC), led to the formation of large-scale demographic concentrations, or proto-urban centres (e.g. Guidi 1985; Peroni 1989: 426517; Pacciarelli 1991; 2001; Vanzetti 2004). According to this view, partly embraced by some classical archaeologists (e.g. Colonna 1986: 387), the crucial phenomenon of this period is not ethnic formation but the rapid upsurge of a strong centralisation process, involving increasing competition for territorial control. Other scholarly traditions, partly connected to the latter, have added the issue of Early State formation to the centralisation theme. They include a range of different approaches. Most notable of all these is the Romano-centric perspective of Andrea Carandini (Carandini 1997), chiefly, though not exclusively, founded on written sources; and the prehistoric world-system perspective of Anna Maria Bietti Sestieri which is more influenced by Anglo-American processualism, but possesses a strong cultural historical background (Bietti Sestieri 1997). Thanks to its geographical extension and complexity of formation, Villanovan culture might be considered an entity with multiple ramifications (Fig. 1), spatially ranging from Etruria proper to the southern Po Plain and southern Campania, with an isolated presence in the Marche (Fermo). These local manifestations were part of a strong network of connections, involving aspects of funerary ideology and formal features of artefacts (especially prestige metalwork), but sometimes unfolded through highly diverse historical trajectories. This has led to radically divergent interpretations of the phenomena, ranging from a sort of koin lacking any ethnic and definite cultural significance (Peroni 1992), to an ethnic core-periphery system with Etruria as the privileged zone (Bietti Sestieri 1997). For the scope of this paper, a crucial point to note is that the funerary representation of the warrior identity in the above-mentioned area was remarkably determined by local choices besides some wide-ranging commonalities. For example, at Bologna in the 10th and 9th centuries references to warriorhood in burials are totally absent. They become exceptional from the 8th to the 7th century BC, and are mainly aimed at highlighting the social excellence of specific individuals in the form of sword deposition (Morigi Govi et al. 1996). This is in sharp contrast not only with the situation in south Etruria but also with that of the other huge northern Villanovan centre, Verucchio (Bentini et al. 2007) which only goes to stress the imperative one must observe, to locate evidence carefully within well defined sociocultural contexts.

BUILDING WARRIOR IDENTITY IN RITUALS

(930850 BC) In the Italic peninsula weapons and war activities increased in importance throughout the Bronze Age, according to a picture consistent with that of continental Europe (Kristiansen & Larsson 2005; Harding 2007). To restrict the inquiry to the Late Bronze Age, our knowledge of weapon sets and armour is only indirect, particularly limited to finds in hoards, settlements and wet places, due to an ideological paradigm, which was itself inherently linked to the cremation rite that for many centuries did not allow the regular use of war elements in tombs (Pacciarelli 2006). This is particularly striking for the Recent Bronze Age (13th initial 12th centuries BC), a period which saw the first remarkable diffusion of Urnfield-like cemeteries, especially in northern and north-central Italy.

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA73

Fig. 1 Simplified map showing sites mentioned in the text

The significance of this phenomenon in relation to ritual ideology has recently received unexpected illumination, through the recovery of a vast cremation cemetery pertaining to the Terramare culture (southern Po plain), viz. that of Casinalbo near Modena (Cardarelli et al. 2006). Here, in the course of complex ritual activities that involved banqueting, elite groups burned and fragmented bronze swords, daggers and ornaments, scattering their residues on the burial ground, while those very same categories of artefacts were almost completely absent in the graves, which as a rule consisted merely of cinerary urns and vessels used as lids. Other impressive evidence is that of the 12th century hoard found at NogaraPila del Brancn in Veneto, which includes many fragmented weapons and pieces of armour, interpreted by some authors as a cult deposition of war spoils (Salzani 1998; Cupit & Leonardi 2005). It is therefore possible to observe an inverse relationship between the uniform character of cremation graves and the contemporary existence of sacrificial

74 CRISTIANO IAIA

and votive practices which involved the destruction of weapons (for a similar picture in continental Europe and Britain see for example R. Bradley 1998). In the course of the Final Bronze Age (12th10th centuries BC) this sort of interdiction against the deposition of real weapons in cremation graves continued, although in central Italy we have other considerable evidence, especially from contemporary hoards, of the increasing generalisation of bronze spearheads and javelins as the standard component of weaponry, followed by short swords (Pacciarelli 2006). The cremation rite in Final Bronze Age south Etruria is still characterised by this lack of weapons and armour (Pacciarelli 2001: 202). The mainly ritual nature of this choice appears more explicit if one takes into consideration other features of the burial rite. In particular, within the graves all references to social life assume the character of a mise-en-scne set up through the use of miniaturised pottery items, such as house furniture (tables etc.), small-scale reproductions of houses (so-called hut urns), or part of them (roof-shaped lids for urns). Ancient Latium, the region immediately south of Etruria, expressed the most coherent variant of this ritual practice which consisted of miniature reproductions of whole panoplies of arms (Bietti Sestieri & De Santis 2003; De Santis 2005a). These panoplies included weapons such as swords, lances and display armour, such as shields and greaves, that in the original version might have been of organic matter, for example leather, wicker and wood. In fact, the likely existence of defensive panoplies made of organic materials is a point worth remembering in many cases (Stary 1981: 54; Martinelli 2004: 23). Even in Iron Age contexts, this kind of organic object is generally not preserved in the archaeological record (although they might be reconstructed from indirect sources); consequently our knowledge of defensive weapons is incomplete insofar as evidence is restricted to metal examples. This picture explains many characteristics of the burial rite in Villanovan Etruria during the initial phase of the Early Iron Age (930850 BC approximately). Typical of this rite is a regular lack, or at least a scarcity, of weapons deposition which I also noted for the Late Bronze Age. A rapid estimate of metal weapons found in Villanovan contexts during this period illustrates this assumption well (see diagrams in Fig. 2). At Tarquinia, among 69 male burials of initial phase 1 that are archaeologically recognised (from older excavations), real weapons amount to 11.2% of the total (for analytical data, see Iaia 1999: 33). They include an isolated sword (1 grave), a sword and a spear (2 graves), an isolated spear (1 grave), and, in one instance, 3 bronze helmets associated with one sword and one spear. In the Pagliarone necropolis (Gastaldi 1998), a peripheral burial ground relating to the large proto-urban centre of Pontecagnano (Salerno), a similar phenomenon came to light, though in the framework of more variable burial practices, including a mixture of cremations and inhumations (the latter mainly reserved for young individuals and females). There, only 6.1% of the total number of male graves recognisable on the basis of anthropological and archaeological data contained functional weapons (all offensive). A comparison with other contemporary burial contexts in Italy illuminates the close link to ritual customs of this lack of weapons in burials (data summarised in Fig. 2). For instance, the TerniAcciaierie necropolis in southern Umbria dated to the initial phase of the Early Iron Age is characterised by a totally different ritual, mostly including inhumations in grave pits beneath mounds, often surrounded by stone circles (Leonelli 2003). In that cemetery functional weapons were normally deposited in graves, and symbolic reproductions of these were unknown. Taking into consideration the available data from older excavations it is calculated that, among 33 burials assigned to male individuals, 57.5% were furnished with weapons, only 21% of which included a sword, the remainder with a spear or a javelin. Even more widely distributed and diversified were the weapon sets in the Torre Galli necropolis in southern Calabria (Pacciarelli 1999) that belonged to a funerary tradition characterised by inhumations in pits and much greater evidence of social stratification than at Terni. These graves regularly included javelins and spears, supplemented in the most eminent examples with swords, knives and sheet bronze greaves in various combinations.

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA 75

Torre Galli

Terni

no weapons weapons
Pagliarone

Tarquinia

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fig. 2 Percentages of male burials with weapons from four Italian Early Iron Age sites

Notwithstanding these data, to judge from the limited number of graves with elements of weaponry, there is no reason to contemplate the existence in Etruria of fighting techniques substantially different from those of the rest of protohistoric Italy. As a rule, such techniques comprised the use of the spear as the basic weapon for most combatants, complemented by the sword only for a limited number of higher-status warriors (Stary 1981). By contrast, the way in which Villanovan groups elaborated a conceptual framework for the use of some items connected to warfare was truly specific. This framework was mainly of a ritual nature and intended to communicate, through the adoption of foreign techno-stylistic models and a sophisticated manipulation of material culture, messages of prominence of the warrior component (Iaia 2012). Throughout the entire Early Iron Age, we witness an increasing importance of defensive armour, particularly of helmets in Etruria. In later prehistory, helmets, especially when made of metal, are the most typical insignia of the high-status warrior and may assume a notable status as authority markers, possibly with a political significance. The protohistoric ancestors of the Etruscans were the first in Italy to employ this kind of armour on a semi-regular basis (e.g. Hencken 1971). There are many reasons for arguing that, for the most part, they were of perishable material such as leather, while only a restricted number were made of bronze. Some scholars (Hencken 1971; Martinelli 2004) have observed that the presence of holes near the rim of many metal helmets indicates that they were furnished as a rule with a substantial padding of perishable material, giving an effective protection to the warriors head. This assumption is confirmed by many examples, direct and indirect, especially by the occasional recovery of organic remains inside the sheet bronze helmet (one example comes from the recent excavations at Verucchio: Bentini et al. 2007: 220). In fact, the only specimens of functional helmets that are preserved for the initial phases of the Early Iron Age, are of sheet bronze with a knob over-cast on top of the cap (Fig. 3, b & c). These helmets might have been surmounted by a feather crest as shown by some ceramic replicas, and furnished with a leather or wicker padding. In this case, we are clearly dealing with sophisticated items, manufactured by metalworkers who imported the form and techniques from central Europe (Iaia 2005: 47ff; Iaia 2012). In particular, as demonstrated since Gero von Merharts and Hugh Henckens studies, there are many parallels for these

76 CRISTIANO IAIA

Fig. 3 a: ceramic helmet-lid from Tarquinia, Villa Bruschi Falgari tomb 73 (adapted from Trucco et al. 2005: fig. 3, n.3); b, c: bronze bell helmets from Tarquinia, Arcatelle (Tarquinia, Museo Archeologico Nazionale)

drawings by C. Iaia

helmets in the Urnfield cultures of the Carpathians (von Merhart 1941; Hencken 1971; Schauer 1988; Clausing 2003). These helmets were deposited in a very restricted group of graves, mainly concentrated at Tarquinia, where they possibly represented the peak of an emerging power structure (Iaia 1999; 2005). It was probably the exotic origin of the model and the high level of the craft that triggered an emulation phenomenon in south Etruria and in some regions linked to it by cultural relationships, such as northern Etruria and southern Campania. As a consequence, several graves of eminent male individuals in those areas dated to the 10th9th centuries contained a pottery replica of a bell helmet, employed as a lid for the cinerary urn (e.g. DAgostino & De Natale 1996; Gastaldi 1998; Iaia 2005: 107). It is however difficult to disconnect the social meanings of those objects from their ritual manipulation, as attempted by some studies that treat weaponry as a separate field of inquiry (e.g. Stary 1981). The funerary use of helmets, whether real or replicated in pottery as a lid placed on the mouth of the cinerary urn, is strictly linked to the specific

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA77

anthropomorphic conception of Villanovan cremation burials, in which the urn takes on the symbolic function of a surrogate of the deceaseds body (Delpino 1977b; Toms 1996; Iaia 1999). This concept, neither new or exclusive to Villanovan culture, accounts for the attitude that conceives of armour and offensive weapons as an extension of the warriors body, not only in burial contexts (e.g. Treherne 1995). In particular, the recurrence of decorative motifs reproducing eyes and mouths on the helmets, sometimes with a clear terrifying purpose, demonstrates the identification of these helmets with the head of the warrior. Other symbolic implications of the use of the pottery helmet are indicated by the apparently bizarre practice, found especially in south Etruria and Campania, of hybridising the helmet image with that of the house (Iaia 2012). In particular, many bell helmets have a schematic or naturalistic roof on the top of the apex (Fig. 3a) or designs located on the front, imitating doors (Gastaldi 1998; for the polysemous implications of these objects, see DAgostino & De Natale 1996: 111). This might suggest the assimilation of two distinct symbols: first, the dwelling as a double reference to both the household and a domesticated after-life; secondly, helmets as materialisation of a large social category, the armed men. In fact, the great importance of house representations within the mortuary rituals of Early Iron Age south Etruria is demonstrated by broader evidence including hut-urns, grave stone markers and so on (Colonna 1986: 393; Bartoloni et al. 1987; Iaia 1999). In the early Villanovan symbolic system the funerary custom of helmet lids seems to refer to the general social category of weapon-bearers or warriors, that does not have a unique relationship with a specific economic level. In analysing the funerary record of Early Iron Age 1 Tarquinia based on older excavations, I have observed a great variability in grave assemblages (Iaia 1999), corresponding to a wide range of social positions. In those contexts, graves with helmet-lids, usually characterised by a moderate lavishness and a certain care in ritual attributes (such as stone receptacles etc.), can be classified according to three levels of complexity of grave furnishings:
(a) without any grave-goods or with fibulae and/or a razor (b) with functional weapons (also with bronze vessels) (c) with a bronze helmet and variable status markers (horse-bits, bronze vessels, ritual paraphernalia)

At the same time, it is plausible to suppose that those who practised this funerary custom enjoyed some kind of status distinction, in the general sense indicated by Max Weber (for sharing of life styles and of honours, see Weber 1991: 186), while they did not constitute a stratified status group or a social class. The spatial distribution of these graves within the cemeteries of Tarquinia is poorly recognised, but some data are of interest. For the cemetery of Le Rose it is possible to identify the recurrence of short-lived nuclei, each probably belonging to nuclear or scarcely extended families, focussed on couples consisting of a male with the pottery helmet and a female provided with fibulae and ornaments (Pacciarelli 2001: 24250). Around them were tombs without grave goods or with a few items. Although there were no weapons, or prominent indications of social differentiation, the graves of deceased males marked by helmet-lids can be considered as belonging to leaders of the family groups on the basis of their ritual features. This kind of funerary organisation, with its apparently egalitarian character, may suggest a relation to non-elite groups with an agrarian base, in which the weapon-bearers held the most important roles. Other funerary sites at Tarquinia show a more articulated and dynamic picture. A very peculiar spatial patterning has been recognised in the recently excavated necropolis of Villa Bruschi Falgari (Fig. 4), so far known from a number of preliminary papers (Trucco 2006; Trucco et al. 2005). Here, some densely-arranged groups of cremation graves dated to the 10th9th centuries BC indicate extended families or lineages. These dense clusters comprised many adult male depositions with pottery helmets, nearly all lacking functional weapons,

78 CRISTIANO IAIA

Fig. 4 Distribution of ceramic helmets in the Villa Bruschi Falgari cemetery at Tarquinia

(modified drawing from Trucco et al. 2005: fig. 2)

but usually provided with a number of markers of socio-ritual prominence, such as stone containers and rich vessels sets including ritual paraphernalia (Trucco et al. 2005: fig. 2). Adult male graves with ceramic helmets were arranged in close relation to female graves,

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA79

which were also characterised by ceremonial attributes and associations of wealthy ornaments, suggesting that a stratification process was developing. Though not so easy to interpret, this spatial configuration clearly points to a concentration of warrior roles in the hands of some families, in particular those with many helmet graves. Moreover, the spatial closeness of some of the helmet graves, particularly the presence of double graves of this kind (in one case including two urns, each one covered by a helmet) might suggest that the warrior role was inherited within the socially differentiated kin groups. The significance of this picture can be gauged only by comparing it to the presence of markedly wealthier tombs at Tarquinia in the contemporary cemetery of Le Arcatelle, on the Monterozzi plateau (Iaia 1999: 69). The latter was characterised by a striking concentration of bronze helmets, up to six (two of which appear in Fig. 3, b & c), inside male graves that were further marked by other features of socio-political and socio-economic distinction, such as bronze vessels, real weapons and horse gear (Iaia 2005: 131; Iaia 2012). Commenting on this evidence, Marco Pacciarelli (2010: 26) has argued for the emergence of a process of political centralisation, through which some restricted groups gained power over the entire proto-urban community. It can be added that the situation seems to have been very fluid and competitive. In particular, some less prosperous corporate groups, such as those using the Villa Bruschi Falgari cemetery, seemed to emulate the most powerful ones through the adoption of imitations of helmets and unusual ritual paraphernalia.

WARRIORS CHARISMA AND THE RITUALISATION OF WARFARE

(850720 BC) In South Etruria the transition from phase 1 to phase 2 of the Early Iron Age and the overall picture of Early Iron Age 2 is marked by a rapid and dramatic increase in the levels of socio-political and economic complexity. The development of salient social hierarchy, along with the growth of trade relations with the Aegean world, have been the main themes in the literature on this period (e.g. Bartoloni 1989; 2003 with references), seen as a sort of prelude to the Orientalising phase. This viewpoint, partly determined by the overwhelmingly funerary nature of the evidence, has overshadowed a deep inquiry into the economic basis of the rapid insurgence of wealth and social stratification. In spatial terms the centralisation process of EIA 1 was followed by an expanding trend towards the foundation of new secondary settlements on defensible positions that were especially concentrated in the hilly hinterland, with the clear purpose of controlling areas crucial for resource exploitation and strategic needs (Iaia & Mandolesi 2010). This was a first step towards the development of more functionally integrated territorial entities and necessarily involved an increasing pressure on the exploitation of resources, of which specific groups took advantage. On the other hand, the burial evidence suggests that the proto-urban communities, while witnessing a huge demographic growth, were developing an economic organisation far more diversified than in the past (for example from the point of view of division of labour) and capable of triggering an intensification of production conducive to a remarkable surplus accumulation (Torelli 1981: 55). Furthermore, the highly competitive nature of the social context made weaponry and war-related symbols an essential element in driving social and political dynamics. Plenty of burial evidence indicates that during EIA 2 the interdiction against the deposition of weapons in graves was abandoned in favour of an explicit representation of the warrior (Stary 1981: 53; Iaia 1999: 126; Pacciarelli 2001; 2010). In fact, this phenomenon, accompanying the spread of the inhumation rite, was relatively gradual and in the first part of phase 2 found much opposition especially amongst the cremating communities of the northern area of south Etruria such as Tarquinia and Vulci (Iaia 1999). A similar phenomenon of persistent concealment and overshadowing of the warrior function can also be found in some iconographic documents. In the early phase of the Iron

80 CRISTIANO IAIA

Fig. 5 Early Iron Age hunting scenes from bronze sword scabbards and razors; (a), (b) not to scale

(modified drawings from Bianco Peroni 1970; 1979)

Age, we know of no war scenes or representations of warriors in combat. Towards the end of the same phase and at the start of Early Iron Age 2 the situation partially changed. In a series of elite Villanovan graves, mainly distributed within Campania and South Etruria, there is a significant occurrence of hunting scenes (Fig. 5), which were incised on a particular category of prestige sword scabbard (Bianco Peroni 1970; Camporeale 1984: 1729; Gastaldi 1998: 40). They represented, in a truly schematic style, isolated male individuals hunting mainly red deer or boar. The warriors are armed with spears and bows (a weapon never deposited in graves) and sometimes accompanied by dogs. Other scabbards represent only animals, but the reference to hunting remains clear due to the presence of red deer and dogs (Bianco Peroni 1970: nos 2067, tab. 60). From this moment on, the iconography of warriors hunting with lances and axes lasted for centuries in Etruscan art as a marker of a typical aristocratic activity (Camporeale 1984). Judging from the archaeozoological evidence from Etruria (De Grossi Mazzorin 2006), in the early first millennium BC hunting was a restricted activity, mainly linked to the procurement of raw materials for craft production and especially to the manifestation of an elite life style. It is reasonable to think that hunting trips were among the main engaging activities, a kind of game, that might have accompanied the achievement of adulthood by children or adolescents, for example in the framework of rites of passage. This assumption seems to be confirmed by another category of artefact, the razors, which are found only in male burials and also have comparable depictions on the blade (Fig. 5c), sometimes connected to isolated representations of axes on the opposite side (Bianco Peroni 1979), as a possible reference to the sacrificial sphere. On the other hand, a relationship with the widely attested rites of hair- or beard-cutting is suggested even by the presumed function of razors (Iaia 1999: 117).

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA81

According to a widely accepted interpretation (Treherne 1995; Kristiansen & Larsson 2005: 228) razors are included in the category of body care tools which, from the European Late Bronze Age, were intended to enhance the appearance of warriors, not only in everyday life but also in death. This aestheticisation of masculinity and warrior power, also seen in the ideal of the Homeric epic, has been recently criticised as a paradigm hiding the real nature of violence and dominance, which appears in particular when considering anthropological perspectives and osteological data (Hanks 2008). However, I think that acknowledging the importance of heroicisation and idealisation of war for the history of the archaic western world (and not only for this: see for example the Samurai of Japan) does not rule out disclosing the ideological nature of the general concepts of masculinity and the warriors beauty, which, if not universal, are at least widespread in traditional societies. This argument can be widened. In ranked societies, especially in those characterised by political centralisation, such as Chiefdoms and Early States, the top level in military, religious and political authority expresses itself through strong visual means, that enhance its charisma and its capacity to inspire awe and respect, usually in connection with a sacralisation of the warrior figure (see the extreme instance of the Aztec of Mexico: Carrasco 1995). In Late Bronze Age Europe, for example in Mycenaean civilisation and in central Europe, parade armour, especially in bronze, played a key role in this respect (e.g. Bouzek 1985: 92117) and in Villanovan Etruria such armour seems to have inherited the same role. In general terms, prestige weapons, whether functional or aimed at display, were intended as a means to separate aesthetically the high-status warrior from the mass of middle- and low-rank warriors. This concept also marks a remarkable difference from the hoplitic, urban usage of armour in Archaic Greece, in that the latter is sociologically embedded in the power-sharing between aristocrats and an emerging middle class of landowners (a clear definition of this can be found in Bintliff 1999: 52). Without denying the risk of a stereotyped celebration of the mystics of warfare (Vankilde 2003), this picture is based upon evidence of remarkable consistency. In the late 9th century BC, an impressive flourishing period of Villanovan armour began. At first, we only find isolated burials with weapons that are a totally new phenomenon. The major innovation in the field of display and prestige weaponry is the bronze crested helmet (Fig. 6), followed by the solid-hilted sword. These two types of weapons are both present in a 9th century grave of the Arcatelle necropolis at Tarquinia (Hencken 1968: 86; Iaia 1999: 41, fig. 9b), which is probably by far the most ancient of all warrior graves. The creation of the early Etruscan warriors material identity resulted from a complex blending of trans-cultural forms and locally-elaborated models. Solid-hilted swords of the antenna type are typical trans-cultural items demonstrating close links to highly specialised bronze workshops across a large part of continental Europe, from north to south (Mller-Karpe 1961; Bianco Peroni 1970; Kristiansen 1993). In contrast, sheet bronze crested helmets are an original elaboration of Villanovan smiths, although a fairly generic model of the type was already present in Late Bronze Age west-central Europe (Hencken 1971: 58). The Villanovan model of the bronze crested helmet lasted for about 150 years, or a little more (von Hase 1988; Iaia 2005: 65), and became one of the most sophisticated metal production classes of protohistoric Italy (some specimens are shown in Fig. 6). The latest developments are still visible in the 7th century at Verucchio in Romagna (von Eles 2002; 2007) (Fig. 6c). In the long run, formal and technical evolution contributed to make it an item more suitable for display, characterised by an increase in the high proportion of the crest, complexity of ornamental patterns and thinness of the sheets (Stary 1981: 22; Iaia 2005: 63)(Fig. 6). A comparable phenomenon is found in the class of bronze round shields, which appeared in the early 8th century beside other different and more traditional shapes, oval or elliptical, which had to be made of leather or wood (Schauer 1980; Bartoloni & De Santis 1995; Geiger 1994). This is another striking innovation that was accompanied by an increasing development towards a bronze-making craft capable of making large

82 CRISTIANO IAIA

10cm

c
Fig. 6 Evolution of bronze crested helmets from the 9th to the 7th centuries BC a: Tarquinia, Impiccato tomb 1; b: Bisenzio, Bucacce, tomb 1; c: Verucchio, Lippi tomb 89

(drawings by C. Iaia)

decorated items of exceptionally thin bronze sheets, a virtuoso technology unparalleled in contemporary Europe. This evolution was associated with a resurgence of the custom of the votive offering of weapons, in which shields, and secondarily helmets, had a prominent role (Bergonzi 1990; Iaia 2005: 249, with references).

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA83

Pottery imitations of crested helmets employed as covers of funerary urns at the transition between the late phase 1 and the initial phase 2 constitute a phenomenon which seems to continue the earlier ritual custom of pottery bell-helmets (Frey 1990; Iaia 1999; 2005), but with an enhancement of diversity in grave assemblages. Hence, in this period, at least at Tarquinia, we see a sharp contrast between the large mass of tombs belonging to low-rank or middle-rank warriors, poor and without any real element of war except for the earthenware helmet, and a few strikingly rich burials with real weapons and armour (Iaia 1999: 53). Among the latter, the two cremation graves I and II placed in the Impiccato necropolis at Tarquinia, dating to c.800 BC, are by far the most impressive examples (Hencken 1968, 11523; 1728; Delpino 2005; Iaia 1999; 2007, with references). They are distinguished by a complex and lavish ritual, in which the urns, laid on their sides in a rectangular cist or pit, and dressed with clothes adorned with fibulae and golden plates, were complemented by prestige weapons and armour and by very rare sets of bronze vessels, including incense burners, linked to the ceremonial consumption of beverages (for the Impiccato II tomb. see Fig. 7). On this basis it is possible to suggest that in the decades around 800 BC the formation of the material identity of Villanovan high-authority warriors was at a developed stage, at least in some proto-urban centres of south Etruria. In the above-mentioned burials at Tarquinia, the occurrence of military insignia, prestige objects and ritual instruments such as incense burners, could indicate reciprocally related political and cult functions of the buried individual. Among these, the very peculiar hemispherical helmet of the Impiccato II tomb (see Fig. 7, top left) shows the essence of power in this period. The reproduction of a frightening face with eyes in the shape of sun discs is a clear manifestation of the military force and charisma associated with the individual warrior. On the other hand, the lower frieze with the sun-bird motive, that belongs to the well known religious iconography of the Urnfield period (e.g. Bouzek 1985: 176; Wirth 2006, with references) further suggests a sacralisation of military power. These features are not totally new: I have already mentioned the existence, in Latium, of a number of male depositions of the advanced phase of the Final Bronze Age (11th10th centuries BC) in which this kind of connection seems to be already attested (Bietti Sestieri & De Santis 2003); but what is definitely new in the south Etruscan example is the association between a complex ritual and the exceptional variety of highly sophisticated artefacts. Moreover, the setting within a large cemetery (that of Impiccato) pertaining to a huge demographic agglomeration of proto-urban Tarquinia (Mandolesi 1999), seems to project this kind of symbolism well beyond the private, or gentilicial, sphere, although the extension and scale of the authority with which these individuals were invested remains unclear. This phenomenon is at the roots of later developments in iconography, dating to the period between c.770 and 720 BC. The strong individualisation of power and the links with the cult sphere led to the promotion of the high-status warrior figure to heroic status. The decoration on two bronze helmets of unknown provenance (probably from Vulci) belonging to late types, kept at the British Museum in London and at the Louvre in Paris respectively (Tamburini 1993; Iaia 2005: 140), makes this concept very clear. On the British Museum helmet, a depiction of a crested helmet is placed at the centre of the traditional cult iconography of the sun-boat, in place of the sun (Fig. 8, a & b). Turning to the second helmet, we can see the complete figure of a warrior wearing a crested helmet standing between schematic reproductions of helmets (Fig. 8, c & d); it seems as if the figure of the powerful warrior with crested helmet, the helmet itself and the symbols of cosmological entities are interchangeable. At the same time, south Etruscan burial rites were also changing. In south Etruria the burial record of the full Early Iron Age 2 (phases 2b 2c in the sequence elaborated at Veii: see Toms 1986) shows a much more diversified picture, consistent with the widespread adoption of the inhumation rite. At Veii, a pervasiveness of simple offensive weapons in

84 CRISTIANO IAIA

Fig. 7 Tarquinia, Impiccato tomb II

(drawings by C. Iaia, of artefacts in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Florence, and of photographs from Delpino 2005)

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA 85

c
Fig. 8 a, b: bronze helmet of unknown provenance (possibly Vulci), London, British Museum c, d: bronze helmet of unknown provenance (possibly Vulci), Paris, Muse du Louvre

(drawings by C. Iaia from photographs from Hencken 1971: fig. 66; Tamburini 1993: tab. I,a)

male burials, especially spears and javelins, is apparent (De Santis 2005b). In examining a large sample of grave assemblages from the Quattro Fontanili necropolis, complemented by a limited amount of osteological evidence, Marco Pacciarelli has noted a wide range of complexity levels among weapon sets, which seems to correspond to distinctions based both upon age and status membership (Pacciarelli 2001: 26176). A significant novelty in this context is the spread of weapons, especially spears, in infant burials, which suggests the emergence of stratified status groups that at the same time expressed themselves as warrior groups (Riva 2010: 84). Only a few deceased individuals are furnished with swords, and amongst those only a tiny proportion, the same marked by other prestige items, are accompanied by top-level insignia, such as bronze breast-plates, shields and wagons.

86 CRISTIANO IAIA

Yet rarer is the placement of bronze helmets in graves, a phenomenon that is linked to outstandingly wealthy tombs, such as the well-known cremation burial AA1 (Boitani 2004), which presumably belongs to a paramount leader. At the moment there is no clear evidence that allows more specific studies of combat techniques, tactics and the related social implications for this period. A wide use of spears with metal heads of variable form and dimension is attested from the burials (Stary 1981; De Santis 2005b). Although this evidence suggests the widespread occurrence of mass fighting (the origin of which goes back to the Late Bronze Age: Pacciarelli 2006), it is not sufficient to justify comparison with the phalanx-like ranks of Greek hoplites. In fact, hoplite fighting was strictly linked to far heavier and weightier equipment, and was characterised by an inherent difficulty of movement and visibility that ensured strong protection in the framework of narrowly-ordered groups of combatants (Schwartz 2009). At most, on the basis of the evidence discussed above, one could imagine a kind of manifold hierarchical structure of military organisation. However, the most difficult question, in this as in many other instances, is whether this symbolic focus on martial expression was only a manifestation of pre-existing socio-economic levels or whether warriorhood and war activities were an active, causal factor of the striking emergence of status distinctions and wealth accumulation of this period. I suggest that there was a form of feedback between these two factors. Accumulation and socio-economic differentiation, already in place, though on a limited scale in the Early Iron Age 1, were the prerequisite of distinction in military equipment, especially when considering the need of raw material procurement and the capacity to sustain the high-level craftmanship necessary for producing prestige swords and elaborate bronze helmets. At the same time, however, the authority of some powerful individuals and the increasing militarisation of some groups, mirrored in the burial record, may have fostered an escalation in war and predatory activities. Indeed, a partial and largely ideologically-biased reflection of the increasing importance of warrior groups in Etruria is visible at least since the middle of the Early Iron Age 2 in the iconographic and symbolic sphere. The most vivid evidence for 8th century warrior figures and the ideology connected to them comes from two bronze objects that were discovered in the Olmo Bello cemetery at Bisenzio, a centre of inland south Etruria. In the following and conclusive part of this paper I intend to draw attention to a number of important questions posed by these artefacts. The first item is the so-called bronze ceremonial wagon from tomb 2, a grave of a female member of the local aristocracy (Fig. 9) (Paribeni 1928: 436; Fugazzola Delpino 1984: 144). In fact, the object is a stand of Cypriot or Nuragic type, to be considered a masterpiece of early Etruscan metallurgy, although very crude in style (Woytowitsch 1978: 58, n.127; Macnamara 2002). It is part of a complex apparatus linked to convivial ceremonies, including a set of bronze vessels with unusual characteristics and a service of pottery drinking vessels probably aimed at the redistribution of beverages to a large group of people, presumably the dead ladys retinue (Iaia 2006). The uniqueness of the stand, along with the whole grave assemblage, throws light on the remarkable social standing of the deceased, adding to the image of womens integration into the commensal politics of EIA 2 south Etruscan communities. The setting of the artefact constitutes an integral part of the celebratory message indicating the top social level that the object itself was expected to convey. On the bars and rods that make up the structure of the stand is a series of bronze figurines depicting animals and humans that on the whole constitute a cosmology of the developing Etruscan aristocracy. Despite this general reading of this artefact, there has been a great debate on its interpretation, with positions ranging from viewing the stand as a simple statement of elitist ideology, to emphasising a particular mythology or narrative as illustrated by the figurines (Torelli 1997: 3846; Menichetti 1994: 21; 2000; Pacciarelli 2002). Clearly it represents an elaborate expression of a hierarchical worldview. Two groups of figurines depicting two different couples, or more probably the same couple in different

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA87

a c

Fig. 9 a: Bisenzio, Olmo Bello, plan of tomb 2 (modified drawing from Paribeni 1928) b, c: details of the bronze stand from the same grave (drawings from photographs from Pacciarelli 2002: tab. 9, 10)

situations, seem to be the focus of the representation (Fig. 9, b & c). Both couples include a warrior wearing a crested helmet and wielding a spear in attack position, while only in one of them the warrior also holds a great round shield, clearly of the metal type attested in contemporary burials (Geiger 1994). Beside the warriors stand women with vessels, a clear reference to the managing of banquets and commensality, and in one case a boy stands with a small oval shield, of a type that is known only from miniaturised reproductions of earlier date (Bartoloni & De Santis 1995: fig. 2). This shield attests the existence of small-scale weapons of perishable material, possibly employed by elite members of minor rank. The group could represent the portrait of a powerful family, inside which distinctive roles based on age and gender are overtly stated (Torelli 1997: 39). Other depictions on the Bisenzio stand are connected to typical activities of a Homeric-like aristocracy: for example, two figures of naked men are engaged in a duel with swords, possibly an agonistic game, while other men are hunting and ploughing. The manner of representation is characterised by an emphasis on nudity and phallic attributes features usually interpreted as an indication of generative power (e.g. Menichetti 1994). Generally speaking, the depictions on the Bisenzio stand have no direct reference to war and warfare; this is not surprising since they represent a ritual euphemism for a much tougher reality. All the weapons are represented either statically as attributes of function and status (crested helmets, shields) or in the framework of leisure and agonistics. In this

88 CRISTIANO IAIA

male-dominated picture, women also have an important role, viz. that of food-dispenser in ritual contexts. These characteristics are presumably deliberately portrayed, to disclose the ideology of the group which is representing itself as a civilised elite as Corinna Riva puts it (Riva 2010: 84). The second important object is a bronze amphora (Fig. 10) discovered in a female inhumation grave (tomb 22) not far from the preceding one in the same Olmo Bello cemetery. Unfortunately the grave is still unpublished, but we have some information on its assemblage and on its date, which is taken as falling within the last quarter of the 8th century BC (Delpino 1977a: 472; Fugazzola Delpino 1984: 164). The object belongs to a class of bronze neck vessels recurrent in south Etruscan burials around the middle of the 8th century (Iaia 2005: 17381), certainly older than the grave. In this case too, the amphora was found in a female burial and was associated with the banqueting context of the vessel, the vessel itself being almost certainly a wine container. A series of bronze figurines, especially of armed men, were placed on the shoulder and on the lid of the amphora. Presumably they represent a complete and unique ritual scene, with nude warriors dancing and marching in ithyphallic attitude around a big animal (possibly a bear) or a sort of demon monster placed at the top of the lid. The warriors are armed with spears, spear shafts (albeit only a few of them are preserved) and small circular shields, which we know were also made in bronze from 8th century graves at Bisenzio itself (Delpino 1977a: 468). There is even a presumed sacrifice scene with a cow being led to its death. The ithyphallic state of the figurines is a well-known feature in European prehistoric art and is associated with warriors (e.g. Nordic rock art: Harding 2007: 117; 139). A 7th century bronze lid of a ceremonial bronze situla from Pitino di San Severino (Naso 2000: 117, with references) can be referred to a similar iconography which is however in this case reinterpreted in a very different chronological and cultural milieu, viz. the late 7th century Apennine region of Adriatic central Italy. On that item, four bronze figurines of ithyphallic warriors holding a complex set of weapon including helmets, spears, bows and large shields are marching or dancing around a kind of totem pole representing a human head surrounded by horse heads. The interpretation of the depiction from the amphora of tomb 22 at Bisenzio is even more controversial than those of the stand from tomb 2 (Calvetti 1987; Camporeale 1987; Menichetti 1994; Pacciarelli 2002; Delpino 2009: 157). It is not my present intention to address the issue of the possible religious and mythological significance of this scene (for which see Calvetti 1987; Pacciarelli 2002), but merely to emphasise its unique documentary value. For the purpose of this paper there are some clear points that have to be stressed, the first of which is the warriors lack of parade armour such as helmets and big shields. The warriors wear only simple caps, albeit of two different forms, and hence do not belong to the top level of the military hierarchy, as seen in the princely couples of the stand discussed above. Nudity, simplicity of equipments, reference to war dancing are all characteristics suggesting the depiction of young warriors in a particular ritual or at a festive occasion. Furthermore, the ithyphallic stance can be explained as a manifestation of military prowess and aggressiveness (as in many prehistoric depictions) although there is also the possibility that the warriors are represented as being under the influence of alcohol, an interpretation that has the additional merit of explaining the presence of figurines on a prestige ceremonial drinking vessel. On the other hand, the funerary interpretation of the scene (Menichetti 1994), based on the erroneous identification of the vessel as a cinerary urn (the grave is an inhumation: Delpino 2009), appears less convincing. A possible thematic continuity between these scenes and the depictions of hunters with older scabbards and razors, as described above, can be seen as a common reference to the initiation rites of young males. Another striking similarity can be detected. Whatever the kind of action depicted, the scene has the realistic appearance of a feast celebrated after a hunting engagement. In this context, interpreting the animal at the centre of the lid as a prey is not unreasonable (compare Calvetti 1987, with references to bear

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA89

Fig. 10 Bisenzio, Olmo Bello tomb 22, bronze amphora (drawing by C. Iaia, from photograph from Pacciarelli 2002: tab. 13)

ceremonialism). Reference has also been made to the scenic or athletic character of the portrayal (Martinelli 2009: 87), and such an approach does not necessarily clash with the ritual performance of fighting and hunting activities. As a general comparison, especially in regard to the frenzied appearance of the warriors, it is not inappropriate to refer to Tacitus description of excited young males dancing naked with arms among the Germans (Germ. 24). As to which kind of warrior group is depicted, one may recall many ethno-historical accounts of warrior societies, ranging from the Germanic comitatus (Germ. 13) and the Celtic Fianna of Early Medieval Ireland (Mac Cana 1991), to the Mnnerbnde or Gefolgschaften of recent times (Harding 2007: 161). Although the appeal here is mostly to recent ideological constructs (for example, as employed in the Third Reich), there are several clues to the historical reality of such institutions in pre-urban societies. As demonstrated for Italy by the Nogara-Pila del Brancn hoard of the 12th century BC (Cupit & Leonardi 2005) and indirectly by the many finds of weaponry in Late Bronze Age Italy (Pacciarelli 2006), warrior bands are neither a novelty of the advanced Early Iron Age, nor of an archaic character, since they are widely attested in many socio-political contexts. Rather, they have to be considered as a functional trait involving a non-institutional hierarchical relationship between individual elite commanders and a retinue or group of followers (compare the formazione gentilizioclientelare preurbana according to Peroni 1989: 250). Their main role is to help free-floating movements by some

90 CRISTIANO IAIA

groups of armed men in situations of great competition and weak central authority, involving frequent fights and raiding actions. This interpretation is unquestionably consistent with the overall scenario of the period under discussion. Particularly for south Etruria scholars have observed a fierce socio-political and socio-economic dialectic between centralisation and decentralisation processes (Colonna 1977; Pacciarelli 1991). The rapid emergence of a number of new settlements on high grounds, foci of power and wealth, partly due to the initiative of new-born elite groups, is a specific feature of inland south Etruria in the 8th century BC, where Bisenzio was an important centre (Iaia & Mandolesi 2010). Although of great importance, this picture has its counterpart in the scanty documentation of more collective or public manifestation of military power in the main proto-urban centres in Early Iron Age 2. At the moment, the most significant example worth mentioning for south Etruria is the remains of a late 8th century agger at Vulci (Moretti Sgubini 2006: 326). The phenomenon is, at any rate, a broader one and includes the remarkable evidence of fortifications enclosing various portions of the Villanovan centre of Bologna, with particular regard to the monumental wooden structure with ramparts recently recovered at Piazza Azzarita (Ortalli 2008). Even in the burial record, scholars have envisaged indications of the emergence of a more institutionalised political power, assimilated to a form of kingship, in some exceptionally wealthy male burials (the so-called princely tombs) dated to the late 8th century BC in Etruria and Latium (De Santis 2005b). The arguments in favour of this interpretation, however the presence of an impressive range of parade armour and luxurious ceremonial paraphernalia conceal an intrinsic weakness when matched against the strangely widespread distribution of princely or regal graves inside individual centres in the Early Orientalising period (see for example the Verucchio case: von Eles 2002; Bentini et al. 2007). But issues like this, together with other aspects of the later Early Iron Age, deserve more specific investigation and are beyond the scope of this paper.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
As stated at the start of this paper, my aim was not to tackle the issue of warfare in Early Iron Age Etruria, but to examine some reflections of it in material culture. The case of this region with its rich mortuary archaeological record invites us to consider carefully the contextualisation of elements of weaponry in order to gain a clear definition of the role of armour within a specific cultural setting. In Iron Age Etruria, real weapons were constantly employed within rituals. Under this label, I also consider figurative representations that throughout prehistory were invariably an aspect of ritual. This is not to say that artefacts employed in rituals are all ritual in themselves. It is a well known fact, for instance, that many Bronze Age swords from burials and votive depositions show damage and wear traces, which means that they had been employed in everyday life prior to their placement in a ritual context (Kristiansen 2002). In any case, the final destination of these objects in burials and votive offerings was often a ritual one, involving aspects of strict selection and formalisation of procedures in handling them. Thus, for example, weapons might have been displayed, destroyed without being placed in the grave, or destroyed and deposited in the grave. Alternatively, their deposition may concern various kinds of votive spaces beside burials, as Richard Bradley (1998) pointed out some time ago. Even in burial rites there can be profound differences in the way in which significant objects were employed in order to stimulate a specific perception of them. For example, there could be a notable difference between the cremation treatment, characterised by a tendency to deny and conceal the corporeal dimension (though this is not always the case), and inhumation, with its marked emphasis on the perception of the deceaseds body that is displayed to the survivors in order to preserve its memory (Treherne 1995; Hanks 2008). Moreover, some objects are conceived as ritual implements from the start, as for example

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA91

in the case of the helmet-lids mentioned above, but their relation to items employed in life remains clear at a symbolic level (though not from the strictly functional point of view). In Etruria, from the onset of the Early Iron Age, ceramic reproductions of helmets acquired a strong iconic role, in a sense parallel to the pervasive use of hut representations in Latium. It can not be coincidental that in Etruria and southern Campania the two symbols, helmet and hut, were sometimes mixed, since that means they presumably belonged to the same conceptual sphere, in particular associated with roles that were considered important for a society which was experimenting with new forms of identities. Most of the definitely male members of the new proto-urban community were symbolically connected to the helmet. The bell helmet was a status indicator within the kin groups, but at the same time may have assumed the function of an authoritative metaphor for the whole proto-urban community. Its meaning was basically public, since it signalled membership in the broader context of a politys warrior component (in Roman terms we could employ the word populus). Instead, a probably different meaning, more strongly linked to a notion of individual power, was attached to the bronze helmets, which seems to have been a real possession for a small group of the warriors. Offensive weapons, especially swords, were rarely placed in graves and do not appear to have been as important as helmets, at least in burial representation. This is in contrast with what is known for the rest of Italy in the same period. This function of the bronze helmet as the chief political symbol continued with the introduction of the crested helmet, in the middle or late phases of Early Iron Age 1. The military dimension was enhanced by adding real elements of weaponry, armour and horse gear, with an increasing intensity in the course of the 8th century BC. At the same time, these same items were increasingly charged with ceremonial and cult connotations, and eventually detached from any direct reference to warfare. A representative example of this, from the initial phase of EIA 2, is the cap helmet from Impiccato II at Tarquinia, which is wearable headgear with elaborate decoration, but not a military item in itself. The creation of a charismatic warrior figure, subsuming warrior rites of passage in the form of hunting raids, was the main outcome of this process. In the framework of the wider process of building a consensus around elites values, the harsh reality of war was euphemised or overtly denied. During the advanced phases of the Early Iron Age, cemeteries and burial grounds increasingly became the focus of ritual activity. The deposition of complete sets of weapons and armour, including clear symbols of political authority (such as helmets, shields, wagons and so on), as well as prestigious banqueting services, can be linked to the scope of enhancing the perception of power before the eyes of those attending the funeral. It is not appropriate to explain this as a mere private manifestation of lavishness, as is usual in mainstream archaeological literature. This notion betrays an implicit contrast with contemporary Greece, in which prestige objects and wealth are mainly offered in sanctuaries, i.e. in public places. In reality, the boundary between private and public in Early Iron Age Etruria is not so clear-cut. Necropolises of many hundreds (or thousands) of pit burials, such as for instance those of 8th century Veii, cannot be considered private places, so this idea needs reassessment. Certainly, there is a sharp difference from the collective burials of urban Etruria in the Orientalising period that were at the centre of complex ritual performances and had both a private and public character (Riva 2010: 138). A comparable phenomenon is visible in the iconographic programmes deployed in the ceremonial sphere. The two bronze items from Bisenzio that I have examined are a significant expression of the emerging importance of figurative narratives at the service of ritual. The exceptional skill necessary to produce them materially and the complexity of structure are comparable to an epic bards performance. They provide us with complementary pictures of the warriors identity in this period. In the bronze amphora, the focus is on the ritual behaviour of a separate group of young warriors with its own rules and ethos. The framework might be that of initiation to a martial organisation. By contrast, the ceremonial stand focuses on a wide cosmology of hierarchy, in which each

92 CRISTIANO IAIA

personage has a definite functional position according to gender, age and rank. Beyond any fascinating comparison with Classical mythology, future studies should build on a better comprehension of these depictions within their original contexts, in particular taking into account the great complexity of drinking behaviour in which these items took part and the relationship with outstanding female burials.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper was first given as an Accordia lecture in the University of London (Senate House) on January 12th 2010. I am grateful to Ruth Whitehouse and John Wilkins for the kind invitation to give the lecture, and for giving me the opportunity subsequently to publish this paper. The text owes improvements to criticisms and remarks made by scholars that were present at the lecture. A special debt of gratitude is owed to Corinna Riva for her friendly support on many occasions, and for stimulating me to reflect on old issues from points of view that are new and refreshing to me. For a number of other suggestions and useful indications I am in debt to my colleagues and friends, among whom I would like to remember especially Marco Pacciarelli.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bartoloni, G. 1989. La cultura villanoviana. Allinizio della storia etrusca. La Nuova Italia Scientifica, Rome Bartoloni, G. 2003. Le societ dellItalia primitiva. Lo studio delle necropoli e la nascita delle aristocrazie. Carocci, Rome Bartoloni, G., Buranelli, F., DAtri, V. & De Santis, A. 1987. Le urne a capanna rinvenute in Italia. G. Bretschneider, Rome Bartoloni, G. & De Santis, A. 1995. La deposizione di scudi nelle tombe di VIII e VII secolo a.C. nellItalia centrale tirrenica In Atti dellIncontro di Studi Preistoria e Protostoria in Etruria, II (Farnese 1993): 27787. Universit degli Studi di Milano, Milan Bentini, L., Boiardi, A., von Eles, P., Poli, P., Rodriguez, E. & Trocchi, T. 2007. Introduzione a Il Potere e la Morte. Aristocrazia, guerrieri e simboli (Verucchio 2006). In von Eles, P. (ed.) Le ore e i giorni delle donne. Dalla quotidianit alla sacralit tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., Exhibition Catalogue (Verucchio 20072008): 18998. Pazzini, Verucchio Bergonzi, G. 1990. Lofferta votiva in Italia settentrionale durante let del ferro. In Anathema, Atti del Convegno Internazionale (Roma 1989), Scienze dellAntichit, 34, 198990: 41536 Bianco Peroni, V. 1970. Le spade nellItalia continentale (Prhistorische Bronze Funde, IV, 1). Beck, Munich Bianco Peroni, V. 1979. I rasoi nellItalia continentale (Prhistorische Bronze Funde VIII, 2). Beck, Munich Bietti Sestieri, A.M. 1997. Italy in Europe in the Early Iron Age. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 63: 71402 Bietti Sestieri, A.M. & De Santis, A. 2003. Il processo formativo della cultura laziale. In Le comunit della preistoria italiana. Studi e ricerche sul neolitico e le et dei metalli. In memoria di Luigi Bernab Brea. Atti della XXXV Riunione Scientifica IIPP (Lipari 2000): 74563. Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, Florence Bintliff, J. 1999. The Origins and Nature of the Greek City-State and its Significance for World Settlement History. In Ruby, P. (ed.), Les princes de la protohistoire et lmergence de ltat, Proceedings of the Round Table (Napoli 1994): 4356. Centre Jean Brard & cole Franaise de Rome, Naples & Rome Boitani, F. 2004. II.d. La tomba di guerriero AA1 dalla necropoli dei Quattro Fontanili di Veio. In Moretti Sgubini, A.M. (ed.), Scavo nello scavo. Gli Etruschi non visti, Exhibition Catalogue (Viterbo 2004): 12849. Union printing, Viterbo Bouzek, J. 1985. The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural Interrelations in the Second Millennium B.C. (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 29). Paul Astrms, Gothenburg Bradley, G. 2000. Tribes, states and cities in central Italy. In Herring, E. & Lomas, K. (eds), The emergence of state identities in Italy in the first millennium BC: 10929. Accordia Research Institute, London Bradley, R. 1998. The Passage of Arms. Oxbow, Oxford Calvetti, A. 1987. Rappresentazioni saliari nella decorazione plastica di un vaso bronzeo a Bisenzio (VIII secolo a.C.). Studi Romani: Rivista trimestrale dellIstituto Nazionale di Studi Romani, 35: 111 Camporeale, G. 1984. La caccia in Etruria. G. Bretschneider, Rome Camporeale, G. 1987. La danza armata in Etruria. Mlange dellcole Franaise de Rome. Antiquit, 99,1: 1142 Camporeale, G. 2000. Gli Etruschi. Storia e Civilt. UTET, Turin Carandini, A. 1997. La nascita di Roma. Di, Lari, eroi e uomini allalba di una civilt. Einaudi, Turin Cardarelli, A., Labate D. & Pellacani, G. 2006. Oltre la sepoltura. Testimonianze rituali ed evidenze sociali dalla superficie duso della necropoli della Terramara di Casinalbo. In Studi di protostoria in onore di Renato Peroni: 62442. AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA93 Carrasco, D. 1995. Give Me Some Skin: The Charisma of the Aztec Warrior. In History of Religions, 35, 1, Mesoamerican Religions: 126. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Clausing, C. 2003. Sptbronze- und eisenzeitliche Helme mit einteiliger Kalotte. Jarbuch des RmischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 48: 199225 Colonna, G. 1977. La presenza di Vulci nelle valli del Fiora e dellAlbegna prima del IV secolo a.C. In La civilt arcaica di Vulci e la sua espansione, Atti X Convegno di Studi Etruschi e Italici (Grosseto, Roselle & Vulci 1975): 193207. Olschky, Florence Colonna, G. 1986. Urbanistica e architettura. In Pugliese Carratelli, G. (ed.), Rasenna. Storia e civilt degli Etruschi: 371530. Scheiwiller, Milan Cupit, M. & Leonardi, G. 2005. La necropoli di Olmo di Nogara e il ripostiglio di Pila del Brancn. Proposte interpretative sulla struttura e sullevoluzione sociale delle comunit della pianura veronese tra Bronzo medio e Bronzo recente. In Attema, P ., Nijboer A. & Zifferero, A. (eds), Papers in Italian Archaeology VI (6th Conference of Italian Archaeology, Groningen, April 2003): 14355. BAR, British Archaeological Reports International Series, 1452 (I). Archaeopress, Oxford DAgostino, B. & De Natale, S. 1996. Let del Ferro in Campania. In Bietti Sestieri, A.M. & Kruta, V. (eds), The Iron Age in Europe, Proceedings XIII International Congress UISPP (Forl 1996): 10712. ABACO, Forl De Grossi Mazzorin, J. 2006. Il quadro attuale delle ricerche archeozoologiche in Etruria e nuove prospettive di ricerca. In Curci, A. & Vitali, D. (eds), Animali tra Uomini e Dei. Archeozoologia del mondo preromano, Atti del Convegno Internazionale (Bologna 2002) (Studi e Scavi 14 ns): 7796. Ante Quem, Bologna Delpino, F. 1977a. La prima et del ferro a Bisenzio Aspetti della cultura villanoviana nellEtruria meridionale interna. Memorie dellAccademia dei Lincei, 21: 45393 Delpino, F. 1977b. Elementi antropomorfi in corredi villanoviani. In La civilt arcaica di Vulci e la sua espansione, Atti X Convegno di Studi Etruschi Italici (GrossetoRoselle-Vulci 1975): 17382. Olschky, Florence Delpino, F. 2005. Dinamiche sociali e innovazioni rituali a Tarquinia villanoviana: le tombe I e II del sepolcreto villanoviano. In Dinamiche di sviluppo delle citt nellEtruria meridionale, Atti XXIII Convegno di Studi Etruschi e Italici (Roma-Cerveteri-Tarquinia, Montalto di Castro-Viterbo 2001): 34358. Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, Pisa & Rome Delpino, F. 2009. Ipotesi, intuizioni e prudenza critica. Qualche riflessione in tema di concezioni, simboli e rituali funerari protostorici. In Drago Troccoli, L. (ed.), Il Lazio dai Colli Albani ai Monti Lepini tra preistoria ed et moderna: 15362. Edizioni Quasar, Rome De Santis, A. 2005a. A Research Project on the Earliest Phases of the Latial Culture. In Attema, P., Nijboer, A. & Zifferero, A. (eds), Papers in Italian Archaeology VI, 6th Conference of Italian Archaeology (Groningen, April 2003): 15663. British Archaeological Reports International Series, 1452 (I). Archaeopress, Oxford De Santis, A. 2005b. Da capi guerrieri a principi: la strutturazione del potere politico nellEtruria proto urbana. In Dinamiche di sviluppo delle citt nellEtruria meridionale, Atti XXIII Convegno di Studi Etruschi e Italici (Roma-Cerveteri-TarquiniaMontalto di Castro-Viterbo 2001): 61531. Istituti editoriali e poligrafici internazionali, Pisa & Rome von Eles, P. (ed.) 2002. Guerriero e sacerdote. Autorit e comunit nellet del ferro a Verucchio. La tomba del trono (Quaderni di Archeologia dellEmilia Romagna 6). AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence von Eles, P. (ed.) 2007 Le ore e i giorni delle donne. Dalla quotidianit alla sacralit tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., Exhibition Catalogue (Verucchio 20072008). Pazzini, Verucchio Frey, O. H. 1990. Ein tnerner Kammhelm aus Populonia: berlegungen zur Verbreitung frher Helme in Italien. In Andrashko, M. &. Teegen, W.R (eds), Gedenkschrift fr Jrgen Driehaus: 22534. Zabern, Mainz am Rhein Fugazzola Delpino, M. A. 1984. La cultura villanoviana. Guida ai materiali della prima et del ferro nel Museo di Villa Giulia. Edizioni dellAteneo, Rome Gastaldi, P. 1998. Pontecagnano II.4. La necropoli del Pagliarone. Istituto Universitario Orientale, Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Naples Geiger A. 1994. Treibverzierte Bronzerundschilde der italischen Eisenzeit aus Italien und Griechenland (Prhistorische Bronze Funde III, 1). Beck, Munich Guidi, A. 1985. An Application of the RankSize Rule to Protohistoric Settlements in the Middle Tyrrhenian Area. In Malone, C. & Stoddart, S. (eds), Papers in Italian Archaeology, IV . The Cambridge Conference. Part III; Patterns in Protohistory: 21742. BAR International Series 245. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford Hanks, B. 2008. The Past in Later Prehistory. In Jones, A. (ed.), Prehistoric Europe:Theory and Practice (Blackwell Studies in Global Archaeology 12): 255 84. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester Harding, A. 2007. Warriors and Weapons in Bronze Age Europe (Archaeolingua 25). Archaeolingua Alaptvny, Budapest von Hase, F.W. 1988. Frheisenzeitliche Kammhelme aus Italien. In Antike Helme-Sammlung Lipperheide und andere Bestnde des Antikenmuseums Berlin-Handbuch mit Katalog (Monographien des Rmisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, Bd. 14): 195211. RmischGermanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Mainz am Rhein Hencken, H. 1968. Tarquinia, Villanovans and Early Etruscans. Peabody Museum, Cambridge (Mass.) Hencken, H. 1971. The Earliest European Helmets. Peabody Museum, Harvard Iaia, C. 1999. Simbolismo funerario e ideologia alle origini di una civilt urbana. Forme rituali nelle sepolture villanoviane a Tarquinia e Vulci, e nel loro entroterra (Grandi contesti e problemi della Protostoria italiana 3). AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence

94 CRISTIANO IAIA Iaia, C. 2005. Produzioni toreutiche della prima et del ferro in Italia centrosettentrionale. Stili decorativi, circolazione, significato (Biblioteca di Studi Etruschi 40). Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, Pisa & Rome Iaia, C. 2006. Servizi cerimoniali e da simposio in bronzo del Primo Ferro in Italia centrosettentrionale. In von Eles, P. (ed.), La ritualit funeraria tra et del ferro e Orientalizzante in Italia, Atti del Convegno (Verucchio, giugno 2002): 10310. Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, Pisa & Rome Iaia, C. 2007. Prima del simposio: vasi in bronzo e contesto sociale nell Etruria meridionale protostorica. Revista dArqueologia de Ponent, 1617: 26170 Iaia, C. 2012. Metalwork, rituals and the making of elite identity in central Italy at the Bronze AgeIron Age transition. In Alberti, E. & Sabatini, S. (eds), Exchange Networks and local Transformations. Interactions and local changes in Europe and the Mediterranean between Bronze and Iron Age: 10216 Oxbow, Oxford Iaia, C. & Mandolesi A. 2010. Comunit e territori nel Villanoviano evoluto dellEtruria meridionale. In Atti dellIncontro di Studi Preistoria e Protostoria in Etruria, II (Valentano-Pitigliano 1214 settembre 2008): 6178. Universit degli Studi di Milano, Milan Jockenhvel, A. 2006. Zur Archologie der Gewalt: Bemerkungen zu Aggression und Krieg in der Bronzezeit Alteuropas. In Arms and armour through the ages (From the Bronze Age to the Late Antiquity), Proceedings of the International Symposium (ModraHarmnia, 19th22nd November 2005): 10132. ANODOS Studies of the Ancient World, 45, 20042005, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Trnava, Trnava Kristiansen, K. 1993. From Villanova to Seddin. The Reconstruction of an Elite Exchange Network during the Eighth Century B.C. In Scare, C. & Healy, F. (eds), Trade and Exchange in Prehistoric Europe: 14351. Oxbow, Oxford Kristiansen, K. 2002. The Tale of the Sword Swords and Swordfighters in Bronze Age Europe. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 21(4): 31932 Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T.B. 2005. The Rise of Bronze Age Society. Travels, Transmissions and Transformations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Leonelli V. 2003. La necropoli della prima et del ferro delle Acciaierie a Terni. Contributi per una edizione critica (Grandi contesti e problemi della Protostoria italiana 7). AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence Mac Cana, P. 1991. Il ciclo epico irlandese. In I Celti: 64956. Bompiani, Milan Macnamara, E. 2002. Some Bronze Typologies in Sardinia and Italy from 1200 to 700 BC: their origin and development. In Etruria e Sardegna centro settentrionale tra let del Bronzo finale e lArcaismo, Atti del XXI Convegno di Studi Etruschi ed Italici (Sassari, Alghero, Oristano & Torralba 1998): 15174. Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, Pisa & Rome Mandolesi, A. 1999. La prima Tarquinia. Linsediamento protostorico sulla Civita e nel territorio circostante (Grandi contesti e problemi della Protostoria italiana 1). AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence Martinelli, M. 2004. La lancia, la spada, il cavallo. Il fenomeno guerra nellEtruria e nellItalia centrale tra et del bronzo ed et del ferro. Regione Toscana, Florence Martinelli, M. 2009. Spettacolo e sport in Etruria. Musica, danza, agonismo e rappresentazioni tra Italia e Mediterraneo. Regione Toscana, Florence Menichetti, M. 1994. Archeologia del potere. Re, immagini e miti a Roma e in Etruria in et arcaica. Biblioteca di Archeologia, Milan Menichetti M. 2000. Carrello cerimoniale da Bisenzio. In Carandini, A. & Cappelli, R. (eds), Roma. Romolo, Remo e la fondazione della citt, Exhibition Catalogue (Rome 2000): 2289. Electa, Rome von Merhart, G. 1941. Zu den ersten Metallhelmen Europas. Bericht der RmischGermanischen Kommission 1940: 442 Moretti Sgubini, A.M. 2006. Alle origini di Vulci. In Pandolfini Angeletti, M. (ed.), Archeologia in Etruria meridionale, Atti delle giornate di studio in onore di Mario Moretti (Civita Castellana 2003): 317 62. LErma di Bretschneider, Rome Morigi Govi, C., Tovoli, S. & Dore, A. 1996. Il sepolcreto villanoviano Benacci (Bologna): struttura e organizzazione interna. Note preliminari. In Bietti Sestieri, A.M. & Kruta, V. (eds), The Iron Age in Europe, Proceedings XIII International Congress UISPP (Forl 1996): 3543. ABACO, Forl MllerKarpe, H. 1961. Die Vllgriffschwerter der Urnenfelderzeit aus Bayern. Beck, Munich Naso, A. 2000. I Piceni. Storia e archeologia delle Marche in epoca preromana. Longanesi, Milan Ortalli, J. 2008. La prima Felsina e la sua cinta. In La citt murata in Etruria, Atti XXV Convegno di Studi Etruschi ed Italici (Chianciano Terme-Sarteano- Chiusi 2005): 493506. Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa & Rome Pacciarelli, M. 1991.Territorio, insediamento, comunit in Etruria meridionale agli esordi del processo di urbanizzazione. Scienze dellAntichit 5: 163208 Pacciarelli, M. 1999.Torre Galli. La necropoli della prima et del ferro (Scavi Paolo Orsi 192223). Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli Pacciarelli, M. 2001. Dal villaggio alla citt. La svolta proto-urbana del 1000 a.C. nellItalia tirrenica (Grandi contesti e problemi della Protostoria italiana 4), AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence Pacciarelli, M. 2002. Raffigurazioni di miti e riti su manufatti metallici. In Carandini, A., Archeologia del mito. Emozione e ragione fra primitivi e moderni: 301 33. Einaudi, Turin Pacciarelli, M. 2006. Sullevoluzione dellarmamento in Italia peninsulare e Sicilia nel Bronzo tardo. In Studi di Protostoria in onore di Renato Peroni: 24660. AllInsegna del Giglio, Florence Pacciarelli, M. 2010. Forme di complessit sociale nelle comunit protourbane dellEtruria meridionale. In Fontaine, P. (ed.), Ltrurie et lOmbrie avant Rome. Cit et territoire, Actes du colloque international (Louvain-la-Neuve 1314 fvrier 2004): 1733. Institut historique belge de Rome, Brussels & Rome

WARRIOR IDENTITY IN EARLY IRON AGE ETRURIA 95 Pallottino M. 1939. Sulle facies culturali arcaiche dellEtruria. Studi Etruschi, 13: 85129 Paribeni, R. 1928. Capodimonte Ritrovamento di tombe arcaiche. Notizie degli Scavi, 1928: 43467 Peroni, R. 1989. Protostoria dellItalia continentale. La penisola italiana nelle et del bronzo e del ferro (Popoli e Civilt dellItalia antica 9). Biblioteca di Storia Patria, Rome Peroni, R. 1992. Villanoviano a Fermo? In La civilt picena nelle Marche. Studi in onore di Giovanni Annibaldi (Ancona 1988): 1338. Maroni, Ripatransone Riva, C. 2010. The Urbanisation of Etruria. Funerary Practices and Social Change, 700600 BC. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York Salzani, L. 1998. Nuovi dati sul ripostiglio di Pila del Brancn (Nogara). Quaderni di Archeologia del Veneto, 14: 6871 Schauer, P. 1980. Der Rundschild der Bronze und frhen Eisenzeit. Jarbuch des RmischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 27: 196248 Schauer, P. 1988. Die Kegel und Glockenfrmigen Helme. In Antike Helme Sammlung Lipperheide und andere Bestnde des Antikenmuseums Berlin Handbuch mit Katalog (Monographien des RmischGermanischen Zentralmuseums, Bd. 14): 18194. Rmisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Mainz am Rhein Schwartz, A, 2009. Reinstating the Hoplite. Arms, Armour and Phalanx Fighting in Archaic and Classical Greece (Historia Heft 207). Steiner, Stuttgart Stary P.F., 1981. Zur eisenzeitlichen Bewaffnung und Kampfsweise in Mittelitalien (ca 9. bis 6. Jh. V . Chr.) (Marburger Studien zur Vor und Frhgeschichte Bd. 3). Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein Tamburini, P. 1993. Un elmo crestato del Louvre. Studi Etruschi, 57: 316. Toms, J. 1986. The relative chronology of the Villanovan cemetery of Quattro Fontanili at Veii. Annali Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, Archeologia e Storia Antica, VIII: 4197 Toms, J. 1996. Symbolic expression in Iron Age Tarquinia: the case of the biconical urn. In Interactions in the Iron Age: Phoenicians, Greeks and the Indigenous Peoples of the Western Mediterranean, Proceedings of the International Colloquium (Amsterdam 1992). Hamburger Beitrge z. Archologie, 19/20 1992/93: 13961. Mainz Torelli M. 1981. Storia degli Etruschi. Laterza, Bari Torelli, M. 1997. Il rango, il rito e limmagine. Alle origini della rappresentazione storica romana. Electa, Milan Treherne, P. 1995. The Warriors Beauty: the masculine body and selfidentity in Bronze Age Europe. Journal of European Archaeology, 3.1: 10544 Trucco, F. 2006. Indagini 19982004 nella necropoli tarquiniese di Villa BruschiFalgari: un primo bilancio. In Pandolfini Angeletti, M. (ed.), Archeologia in Etruria meridionale, Atti delle giornate di studio in onore di Mario Moretti (Civita Castellana 2003): 18398. LErma di Bretschneider, Rome Trucco, F., De Angelis, D., Iaia, C. & Vargiu, R. 2005. Nuovi dati sul rituale funerario di Tarquinia nella prima et del ferro. In Dinamiche di sviluppo delle citt nellEtruria meridionale, Atti XXIII Convegno di Studi Etruschi e Italici (Roma-Cerveteri-TarquiniaMontalto di Castro-Viterbo 2001): 35969. Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, Pisa & Rome Vandkilde, H. 2003. Commemorative Tales: Archaeological Responses to Modern Myth, Politics, and War. In Gilchrist, R. (ed.), The Social Commemoration of Warfare. World Archaeology, 35, 1: 12644 Vanzetti, A. 2004. Risultati e problemi di alcune attuali prospettive di studio della centralizzazione e urbanizzazione di fase protostorica in Italia. In Attema, P. (ed.), Centralization, Early Urbanization and Colonization in First Millennium B.C. Italy and Greece (Bulletin Antieke Beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology, Suppl. 9): 128. Peeters, Louvain, Paris & Dudley, Mass. Weber, M. 1991. Class, Status, Party. In Gerth, H. H.& Wright Mills, C. (eds), From Max Weber: essays in sociology: 18094. Routledge, London & New York Wirth, S. 2006. Vogel-Sonnen-Barke. In Reallexicon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, Band 32: 55263. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin & New York Woytowitsch, E. 1978. Die Wagen der Bronze und frhen Eisenzeit in Italien (Prhistorische Bronze Funde XVII, 1). Beck, Munich