engleski

Late Antiquity hilltop sites in central and southeastern Alpine region – historical point of view

The paper is aimed at briefly discussing the main points from the three case studies that are concerned with late antique hilltops sites in central and southeastern Alpine region. The intention is to briefly examine the conclusions in each study and to offer some observations. The survey will follow the east-west geographical orientation. The first study (by Tina Milavec) is set to survey the state of research and open questions with regard to late antique hilltop settlements in the Southeastern Alps (modern-day Slovenia). Two or three chronological phases may be discerned when it comes to the late antique hilltop settlements in Southeastern Alps: the late 3rd century through to the 5th century (which also may be divided into two phases, the one in the late 3rd century, and the other in the 4th to 5th centuries), and the late 5th through to the early 7th century, which is also said to have been the main settlement phase at the majority of known sites. The main open questions revolve around dating, interpretation of who stood behind the initiative to construct the sites and with what purposes, the everyday function of these hilltop settlements, and the fate of the lowland settlements especially after the mid-5th century. The sites in eastern Slovenia and Croatia show that the settlements were abondoned in the late 6th century, while in western Slovenia they persisted into the early Middle Ages. The sites were often previously occupied in prehistoric or earlier Roman times as well as in later periods, and in some cases medieval castles were built in the vicinity. As for their function, based on the typology proposed by S. Ciglenečki, the sites were used in late Roman times as refuges (refugia), military posts and other short term settlements, while in the 5th and 6th centuries there was a shift toward permanent settlement with various combinations. The sites usually show shared principal architectural features: church(es), defence walls, dwelling houses, water cisterns, even though they also display some specific traits which are due to peculiarities of the terrain and the climate. There are exceptions to the general rule: some sites have only wooden structures, with no church or defence walls. There are several hypotheses concerning the why, the what and the who. Thus it is thought that, around dangerous crossroads of mainland connections betwen Italy and the neighboring northeastern provinces, people were probably ordered in late Roman times to move to safer locations, for which evidence may apparently be deduced from literary sources. The existing archaeological material finds seem not to support the interpretations of the sites being seen as elite locations and status symbols. As for the question of initiative, rare cases allow for the interpretaton that the state stood behind the construction, but subsequently only the clergy seems to have been capable of taking the lead in such projects. The second study (by Elisa Possenti) is centered on the Southern Central Alps (modern-day Trentino Alto Adige with Friuli). What may be observed is that hilltop sites were less numerous in earlier Roman times and there were two reasons for their appearance: control of the road network and militarization of the region. This seems to reflect primarily the terrestrial road system that already in earlier Roman times used the slopes rather than the valley floors. As for the hilltop settlements, they are said not to have been many in earlier Roman times. One of such settlements is the 1st-3rd century hilltop settlement at Doss Penede, which seems to have been abondoned in the 3rd century. It is characterized by monumentality and its construction is thought to have been linked to a state initiative. From the 4th through to the 6th centuries the situation changed, and new hilltop sites sprung, even though their dating is only sometimes precise. Two of such late antique hilltop sites that have been sufficiently researched are the one on the lake island of S. Andrea di Loppio and the other is S. Martino di Lundo (both dating from the mid-/late 5th to early 7th century). Both sites seems to have served as to control the road network and were monumentally fortified. Their construction is believed to have been commissioned by state authorities and led by military architects. That there seems not to have been fortified hilltop sites in the 4th century Trentino is explained by the fact that the Tractatus Italiae circa Alpes system is linked to the 5th century, whereas the Claustra Alpium Iuliarium system made the situation in modern-day Friuli different. However, hilltop sites developed in the 4th century Trentino as well. Such is San Martino ai Campi di Riva, a later 4th century village with no fortifications located along an important road, which may have have served an administrative managerial function in support of military activities. This would also presuppose a presence of people with official authority. In the late 5th century a different kind of hilltop sites was constructed in Trentino. These are generally small sites always situated along the main road, with a surrounding enclosure with tower (possibly a defensive wall?) and sometimes a church. The third paper (by Annina Wyss) is focused on the Central Alpine region (modern-day eastern Switzerland). In the spotlight are hilltop settlements between the late 3rd and the 8th centuries. The regional hilltop sites were already occupied in prehistoric times, experienced decline in the 1st to 3rd centuries but were never completely abandoned, and were resettled in the late 3rd and especially during the 4th century. This seems to have been due to the the region's mountainous topography, which made hilltop sites a necessity. Material evidence is however sparse and the circulation of coins stops completely at the end of the 4th century. These hilltop settlements are characterized by different settlement forms. Some settlements are with and some are without surrounding enclosure that may have had (or not) fortification (defensive) function. In most cases there is no indication of their economic source. Some of these settlements may have been in use only seasonally. Their military purpose can be (almost entirely) excluded, even though many of these settlements were situated along important traffic routes, and it is doubtful whether the settlement location was chosen for its defensive/strategic purposes. Only in two cases the settlement had a church, and ecclesiastical buildings seem not to have been a feature of this type of settlement. As one of the first synthesizing remarks it may be inferred that the cases in nothern Italy and Slovenia show more mutual similarity than to the case in eastern Switzerland, since for the period which is usually seen as connected to the phenomenon of late antiquity hilltop sites, that is the 4th through to the late 6th/early 7th century, these two cases present, up to a point, similar situations and motives as far as the types and function of hilltop settlements go. This may be easily explained by the fact that these two regions are geographically much closer. However, there are also hilltop sites in Slovenia that may resemble to those in eastern Switzerland as they have no enclosures and no church, meaning they were probably not intended to be permanent settlements as well. The 5th-6th century hilltop settlements in Slovenia seem to have been primarily designed to fulfil the role of refuges and strategic places, and this strategic function appears to have been the main characteristic in the case of northern Italy as well. Moreover, the hilltop settlements were largely permanent. The pecularity of the eastern Switzerland case may have been a result of the vicinity of the limes with its protective role as well as a gradual (but over a shorter period of time) degradation of its defensive effectivity, which caused a withdrawal of local population that was connected to and dependent on local troops. The circulation of coins ceased at the end of the 4th century, and notwithstanding the fact the previous coin issues were probably used for several decades to follow, this could indicate a permanent departure of troops and officials as there were no new influx of coinage. Thus it may be ventured to say that the remaining population seems to have chosen to adapt to new power relations in the region and apparently felt no need to seek additional or even permanent security on more elevated positions. Nothing appears to have changed after the region came under the control of Ostrogoths as a dux Raetiarum is known from the time of Theoderic the Great, or after it was taken over by Franks. (For the situation in the 5th and 6th century Raetia, see Reindel 1966 ; Castritius 1982 ; on the dux Servatus who is mentioned in Cassiodorus' Variae 1.11, with 7.4, see Lotter 2003, 129-130 ; for the Ostrogothic and Frankish control of modern-day eastern Switzerland, see Clavadetscher 1979, 160- 168). As for the typology of the hilltop sites, I would suggest that an additional differentiation be made between the sites that only came into existence from the late 3rd through to the 6th centuries (the late antique hilltop sites proper) and other hilltop sites that show continued settlement from earlier Roman times and are not directly linked to the phenomenon. In determening the characteristics of hilltop sites in relation to their possible functions several factors need to be taken into account: size ; defensibility ; living conditions ; remoteness / connectivity (closeness to roads / travel routes) ; control of local resources ; visibility in the landscape. As another avenue of analysis the concepts of continuity / persistence (see Schlanger 1992) / resilience (see Redman 2005) should also be adduced. In connection to the question who gave the initative for the construction I believe that the concept of elites in late Roman and post-Roman provincial societies should be rethought. The senatorial and provincial aristocracy as customary urban elites should give way to the variously defined elites in local contexts. That is to say, both the medium and small landowners as well as lower echelons of clergy could be regarded as elites capable of instigating and financing such efforts. In the case of clergy this is particularly conceivable when the hilltop site includes more than one ecclesiastical building. Furthermore, adducing the existing literary evidence in support of a possibility that the construction of hilltop settlements was centrally directed (cf. Cassiodorus, Variae 1.17, 3.48 for two castella, one in the vicinity of Dertona/Tortona in Liguria and the other called Verruca near the Adige River, where local inhabitants are ordered to build houses for themselves) seems far-fetched, given the lack of such testimonies for earlier times. There is notably a law dated to 11 April 408 and preserved in the Codex Theodosianus (11.17.4), addressed to the praefectus praetorio Illyrici, Herculius, which is concerned with the obligation of all provincials of Illyricum to provide money for the construction of walls, but this seems to refer to city and military fortifications in specific circumstances following another move by the Gothic leader Alaric who in 408 left Epirus and set out for Italy. As for the testimony from the Variae, the mention of the castella is a clear indication that those were military strongholds, now refurbished to offer local inhabitants a refuge when necessary (see Bierbrauer 2008, 645-647, with Brogiolo 2014, 143), and not sites originally built as hilltop settlements. In any case, the focus in Ostrogothic times was on fortifications, both of towns and forts, as well as on the restoration of urban life (see Brogiolo 1999, 105- 108). In relation to the question of political, social and economic conditions for the establishment of the hilltop settlement it is obvious that not only an immediate (real or perceived) danger was responsible for the construction of these sites. Even though the current knowledge does not seem to support the idea that some of the sites in central and southeastern Alpine region were new places of power in the late antique context, this cannot be excluded. One may perhaps even talk of a change in settlement habits (a return to pre-Roman times), where hilltop settlements may have also functioned in some instances as sort of a way for local elites to emulate the senatorial aristocracy and their move to fortified villas (this does not mean that the aristocracts permanently relocated to the countryside but they alternated between city and country, see Wickham 2005, 467-468). Additionally, the transformation of territorial organization, coupled with the process of militarization of space and shrinking of urban areas in general, may have also had an impact on the emergence of hilltop settlements. Finally, when it comes to a possible explanation of why hilltop settlements in southeastern Alpine region were more or less abandoned by the late 6th century, one of the answers might lie in a significant population drop, which would have been a result of the mid- 6th century crisis due to the outbreak of plague. Such demographic crisis would have had a vast impact on the ability of local communities to sustain hilltop settlements. Furthermore, the advent of new conquering populations (Avars, Slavs) might have also contributed to the demise of late antique hilltops settlements in southeastern Alpine region since their settlement habits differed from those of previous populations.

hiltop sites ; Late Antiquity ; southestern Alpine region ; historical point of view

nije evidentirano