Clunia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clunia was an Ancient Roman city in the Province of Burgos in Spain. Archaeologists continue to study its remains.

Colonia Clunia Sulpicia: An Example of the Romanization of Central Spain

Ancient Inhabitants: pre-Roman tribe: Arevaci Romans

Part of what makes the study of Clunia’s ‘Romanization’ in particular, so interesting is precisely its location at the heart of the “rebellious hinterland” of Hispania, a province that was considered among the most Romanized and prosperous in the empire (and certainly was during the 1st – 2nd centuries B. C.). For two centuries prior to Clunia’s full incorporation into the empire, regions to her east and south had been enjoying all the prosperous side-effects of Roman provincial status. In these regions, even cities whose populations were primarily indigenous, by the early first century were displaying Hellenized Romanistic architecture, (such as found in Contrebia Belaisca in the Southern Ebro Valley and Carteia in the Extreme South.) By this time also there was a significant number of native Italians living in villas in an around urban areas in the South, East and especially in modern Catalonia. It is even likely that in two nearby settlements in Baetica, by the end of the second century, Iberian and Italian communities were living in distinct quarters, such as at Cordoba. Tarraco was granted colonial status at the time of Caesar.

In stark contrast to this, the existence of the Mesetan communities, rife with tribal nationalisms and who took nearly two centuries to be conquered (despite their nominal incorporation) epitomize simultaneously a Roman inability to easily assimilate her territories in their entirety and, conversely, the inevitable spread of Roman culture to even the most obstinate regions of the Empire. Clunia, as indeed her neighboring communities, cannot be looked at with the same eyes as one looks at Cordoba or even Taraco (the capital of Clunia’s province!). At the same time however, it is important to bear in mind that the Iberian peninsula, despite its vast ethnic and geographic disunity was, to the Romans, one unit, divided into two parts: Hispania Ulterior and Hispania Citerior. Cutting the peninsula, more or less in two from top to bottom, these divisions themselves failed to take into consideration the varying levels of ‘Romanization’ or ethnicities, be they Greek, Phoenician, indigenous Celt, etc. Thus the Romanization of the wild and unruly meseta cannot be viewed in a vacuum. Given the degree to which the Mediterranean regions of Spain had been incorporated into the empire by the time the first Roman structure was erected at Clunia, one cannot so easily differentiate between what is, in a sense Romanization, as opposed to say, “Tarraconization”. While the conquest, let alone the Romanization, of this central part of Spain was a long and rather bloody one, it was inevitable, by its very proximity to not only Romanized but also Hellenized, Latin speaking, prosperous and influential territory. Indeed, whatever way one looks at it, Central Spain did, in its architecture, religion, language, funerary practices, and in many cases, local government come to look and act like a Roman creation. Moreover, it did so in an extraordinarily brief space of time, moving in the course of a half a century from war-torn chiefdoms to municipia sporting Italianate fora, villas, Roman-style funerary and honorific monuments. No city in Central Spain did this more so, perhaps, than Clunia.

This paper will seek the answers to two questions. First, was the degree to which the change that came about in the city of Clunia representative of an organic impulse by the indigenous elite to transform essential aspects of their culture? Second, was Clunia at all unique in her apparent transformations when compared to the rest of the Meseta? I will look at this question with an eye to where her impulse to Romanize may have originated. My method will be centered around an analysis of architectural, epigraphic, and numismatic evidence, drawing comparisons where appropriate from parallel circumstances in the surrounding region (particularly Termes and Numantia), and from Tarraco (though it would be difficult to do this extensively), as it was both the capital of Clunia’s own Tarraconensis, and a highly Romanized urban center while the Meseta was still composed of warring and rebellious tribes.

Contents 1 The Setting 2 Historical Background 3 The Clunia Impulse 4 The Romanization of Local Government 5 The Romanization of Religion 6 Two Legal Tablets 7 A Greek Theater and a ‘Horatian’ Ode 8 Conclusions 9 Bibliography 10 External links

[edit] The Setting

Colonia Clunia Sulpicia, the skeleton of what was, during the first three centuries of our era, a thriving market town and center of Roman culture for rustic hinterland, stands on the edge of a tiny farming pueblo, Penalba de Castro, in the heart of the northern reaches of the Spanish Meseta, some thirty kilometers from Burgos, five kilometers from the nearest small town, at the edge of the Duero river valley. To date, approximately five percent of the area which would have comprised this city has been excavated. The city itself stands some 1,023 meters above its surrounding countryside. The importance which Clunia, no doubt, enjoyed in its heyday is evidenced by the significance of the finds. A steep path which probably follows the route of the original decumanus runs from Penalba de Castro, past the remains of the large rock-cut theater complex, past the first set of bath houses, past a large Tiberian villa, into the Forum. At the southern end of the forum a temple, most probably dedicated to Jupiter has been uncovered. A series of tabernae line the two sides of the Forum. A sizeable basilica, whose flank faces the temple, divides the Forum into two halves. Little is known of the half opposite the temple (the northern half) other than that a sanctuary like structure and an exquisite statue identified as Isis have been found here. If one follows a second path along what was most probably the cardo, past the south west corner of the Forum, there is a small bath complex, labeled the ‘Forum Baths’. A little further on there are the remains of two more (smaller) villas, both dating to the first century, another bath complex, and a macellum. The population of the city has been reckoned anywhere between 30,000 – 60,000 inhabitants -- very sizable for a city that was not a provincial capital.

Clunia’s closest neighbors, both geographically and in terms of relative Romanization and remoteness were Uxama to the south-east, Termes, due south of this, Numantia due east. There was certainly a major road which connected Cluina (probably from Iuliobriga on the north) to Uxama and then to Numantia. There was most probably another significant road connecting Uxama to Termes, Seguntia, Caesaraugusta and then out to the Coast.

[edit] Historical Background

The incorporation of Central Spain was a particularly bloody one, and long (especially if compared with Caesar’s conquest of Gaul). The defining characteristic, perhaps a bi-product of Republican disorganization in regard to imperial management, is that there does not seem to have been any systematic policy for campaigning and assimilation of indigenous Spanish tribes. The policies for Hispania were more or less set by the individual governors who were granted control of the region. To emphasize the disorganized and violent nature of the conquest of Central Spain, I have included at the end of this paper a timeline of campaigns and wars waged between 195 b.c. when Cato the Elder first took an active interest in the incorporation of the region, and the final (small) uprising at Clunia in 55 that more or less marked the end of active resistance to Roman rule.

What it was about the region that made this process so painfully long is worth looking at in attempting to come to terms with its Romanization. For the Roman government in the Republican period there was little about the Meseta to entice economically. Communication was difficult over a mountainous, barren landscape, prone to extreme weather. The Meseta could offer little contribution to the economic life of the peninsula as a whole. Nevertheless, as shown in Roman imperial activity in all contexts, the presence of hostile tribes within or in proximity to Roman territory is always seen as singularly undesirable. Incorporation and pacification are the only alternative.

In spite of the obstinate nature of Mesetan incorporation there is an extremely significant phenomenon that adds a distinct richness to the early Romanization of the region. There is evidence that as early as 211 b.c. Celtiberians were being enrolled as auxilia in the Roman army. The treaty of Sempronius Gracchus required a provision of soldiers from Celtiberian tribes, and there were Celtiberians who fought for Pompey during his campaign in Spain in 40b.c. Indeed, the success that certain Roman generals, such as Sertorius, enjoyed in terms of loyalty from the Mesetan natives indicates that the opposition to Roman control was not clear cut by any means. This apparent dichotomy in the attitudes of the native tribes towards Rome is not surprising, especially among the non-elites, for Rome offered to many indigenous poor the opportunity for employment and wage-earning. Moreover, the contact on individual levels with the Roman army provided a willing channel for the dissemination of aspects of Roman culture in this region. The picture that is thus painted is of tension on two levels within the indigenous community. The first is hierarchical. Rome, at first, had more to offer the poor than the rich and powerful in these local communities. The indigenous elite represented, in the early years, the major stronghold of resistance to Rome. The second tension, no doubt, existed on the generational level. Contact with Rome and more importantly with more Romanized regions of the peninsula, must have made even the elite aware of the advantages of cooperation with Rome. An opportunity to increase wealth and prestige, not now in the context of a small local community at odds with its neighbors, but in the context of a powerful empire. Moreover, it is perhaps no coincidence that the pacification of the Meseta came at the cusp of an era in Roman imperial history that saw a movement towards a higher systemization in policy in general and a much greater degree of centralization (especially with the dictatorship of Caesar and the initiation of the princiapate.) There must have been a sense of the inevitability of Roman supremacy among the Celt-Iberians made manifest by Caesar’s success in Gaul.

[edit] The Clunia Impulse

It is impossible to know what went on between the pacification in the mid first century and the region wide trend toward Romanization that occurred at the beginning of the first millennium. If we look to the foundation of Clunia as a Roman Province we might be able to acquire some clues. It is apparent from the scant literary evidence that Clunia was an important center even in pre-Roman and Republican times. It was here that Sertorius was besieged by Pompey in 75 b.c. during his revolt.

However, on the site of the city itself, absolutely no traces of any buildings which predate the Augustan period have been found. In terms of epigraphy there are only three which bear Celtiberian/ Arevaci symbols and language. . The earliest building on the site is a villa, which, by the stone work at the lowest level and fragments of Arretine pottery, has been dated to the first half of the first century a.d.

Why is this so? One possible solution to the problem lies on the opposite mesa, Alto de Cuerno, where remains of Arevaci material culture have been observed though not yet excavated. It is likely that due to the absence of Arevaci remains in the area of Roman Clunia, this was the site of the pre- Roman, indigenous city, and at some point, presumably around the time of Augustus, (at the time of Clunia’s full incorporation into the Empire), the population was relocated and the Arevaci city either fell into ruin or was destroyed. It is difficult to assess why such a transition would have occurred. Such incidences are certainly not without parallel elsewhere in the empire . Although in these cases the trend shows movement from a more fortified, less manageable location, to a less fortified, more controllable one (such as hill to plains.) There may have been tactical reasons for the transition, such as location or proximity to road systems. Or it could have been an expression of Roman domination. A more concrete explanation lies in the discovery of an underground lake beneath Alto de Castro, although it has not been proven that it was accessible in Roman times . The fact that the earliest suspected structure is a villa and not a public building might suggest that the location began as a sort of “Roman suburb”, that drew a larger population and prompted the construction of public buildings. This theory is supported by the fact that the construction of the forum seems to have intruded on another nearby house and not vice versa, indicating that the residential function of the area pre-dated the official.

Yet the brief space of time with which all these structures were erected (forum, temple, villas, bathhouses) suggests something more along the lines of an impulse on the part of the elite, rather than a general trend. Indeed the Forum, which most certainly had a Julian phase, with alterations in the Claudian and Flavian periods, is striking for the grandness of its scale and its Italiante features. The forum bears a North-West to South – East orientation bound, in true Roman fashion, on the east by the cardo and decumanus. The plaza measures 140m x 100m, making it among the largest on the peninsula. The temple facing north at the south side of the forum is assumed to have been Corinthian in style, pseudo-peripteral and hexastyle. Thus far nothing surprising. One interesting feature does emerge, however, if we compare the outlay of the forum with others on the Spanish peninsula. The plan probably predates, but is similar to those found at Uxama and Tritium Autrigonum (neighbors of Clunia). However it breaks with the plans of those fora that were previously common in the more Romanized portions of the peninsula, in cities in Baetica and the Ebro Valley. In these places, the basilica tends to placed to one side of the forum, giving a position of precedence to the temple. The preponderance of this arrangement was unique to Iberia. At Clunia however the basilica faces the temple and is in keeping with plan that was more mainstream in Italy and the western provinces. If the plan at Clunia does in fact consciously reflect ‘Italianization, over, say, Hispaniaization, it might give us a clue into the mentality of the elites as they Romanized – that they were in fact looking to Rome and Italy, seeking to realize their place not simply in the context of a province, but in the context of the empire as a whole. The extent to which this place was actualized for the inhabitants of Clunia can be somewhat understood only upon a systematic analysis of various ‘categories’ in which the assimilation into Roman Culture can take place: 1) the government and citizenship rights, 2) Religion and Funerary customs, 3) Legal procedures.

[edit] The Romanization of Local Government

It is more or less certain that Clunia was granted municipal status quite early in its history under Roman rule. Technically, the granting of municipal status meant that a city was endowed with its own magisterial system, on account of which, those holding public office would be granted Roman citizenship for themselves and their families. The remainder of the population was granted Latin citizenship. Thus the existence of magisterial positions in a city would indicate that it was in fact a municipium. Evidence from the inscriptions at Clunia corresponds to the criteria for municipal status laid out by Alfoldy. In at least two instances we have epigraphic naming of aediles from the first century. The first is to a certain Sempronius Hibernus, honored on an inscription found in the forum. There is a second honorary inscription from the same period naming one C. Calvisius Sabinus, who held the double position of magister and flamen of Roma and Divus Augustus. Considerable numismatic evidence corresponds to this, naming over one hundred quattuorviri and aediles. As is to be expected, the names of the magistrates are overwhelmingly Roman and in tria nomina form, however, there are several interesting examples of mixed pre-Roman and Latin names such as Pompeius Gustumus Ammonis, C. Saldis, Sempronius Britto, Sempronius Talaus Semproni. (Indeed, out the corpus of numismatic and epigraphic inscriptions from Clunia a total of seventy-four indigenous names have been identified as such. In the majority of cases, however, these names are given Roman declension and/or placed with more Roman names in a duo or tria nomina) In addition to the naming of magistrates, several of the honorary inscriptions list the personage as being de tribu Galeria , indicating that enfranchisement was granted to his or her family by Augustus. It is likely that Clunia’s status as a Spanish municipium granted her citizenship to her entire citizen body (at least by the Flavian period). And at the Lex Irnitana, 72, it is stated that all municipes, even freedmen, are Latin citizens, even if not Roman citizens.

Ideally, the granting of municipal status and its subsequent citizenship to a city in the early empire was a way of rewarding the political loyalty of a body of elites and more generally encouraging responsible government. It was a standard benefaction at the time of Augustus/ Tiberius as is evidenced even in this obstinate region, with not only Clunia but also her neighbors Termes, Uxama, and Numantia all rising to municipal status probably at about the same time. What does this mean in terms of the Romanization of these cities? On the one hand, the glory of the honors may be dimmed by the proximity to Tarraco, which was granted colonial status under Julius Caesar, and even the more nearby Caesaraugusta which was established as a colony under Augustus. Nevertheless, the fact that municipal status was indeed granted to Clunia and her neighbors indicates that there must have been a number of favorable conditions, most importantly, a pacified citizen body, and an elite upon whom the control of government could be entrusted. (The preponderance of mixed native and Roman names, furthermore, indicates that it was in fact the native elite who were governing Clunia.)

The importance of Clunia’s political status is better evidenced however in her role as conventual capital. The date of this is difficult to pin down. Palol believes it occurred somewhere between 41-54, as a result of Augustan administrative reforms. (Augustus redivided the two provinces of Hispania Citerior and Ulterior into three: Lusitania, Baetica, and Tarraconensis, keeping the latter under his control, while entrusting the other two to the Senate. It is believed by many that the creation of the conventual system was an outcrop of this.) Cluniensis is named as a conventus by Pliny the Elder in NH, so we know that the conventi definitely existed by the Flavian period.

At some point prior to the reign of Hadrian , but after Pliny’s composition of Historia Naturalis, colonial status was bestowed upon Clunia. Its full name, Colonia Clunia Sulpicia, is mentioned as such in an inscription honoring Hadrian. The most likely explanation for this rise in status is that it was granted to Clunia by the emperor Galba during his short reign out of affection or gratitude for the city’s support during his struggle for the principate. (Suetonius, Galba, 9 ) Indeed it was at Clunia that Galba received the news of Nero’s death and his subsequent assent to the princiapte. The conferral of municipal status upon any community is an interesting phenomenon to consider. It was an almost universally coveted rank in the administrative hierarchy, yet one which enjoyed less autonomy than a municipium. The very fact of its desirability demonstrates that under Roman control, the desire for ‘freedom’ (which had been so cherished by the Arevaci elite a century earlier) had now been displaced by that for rank and prestige. This change in attitude perhaps, on one level (universal as it may be), demonstrates the degree to which a Roman community has become Romanized.

Thus the political developments at Clunia demonstrate for us a case where a native community very rapidly made the transition from outpost of resistance to a fully functioning administrative unit within the empire. One need only examine the surface contrasts that came about between 75bc (the siege of Sertorius) and 72 ad (Clunia has most likely achieved colonial status.) Moreover, the change in attitude of its citizens is significant, both in their choice of names, and desire to be as closely linked to the empire as possible. Yet governmental Romanization is only one way of looking at it and there is much that it does not reveal to us about a change in culture. Let us turn to a discussion of the Religious transformations that occurred at Clunia.

[edit] The Romanization of Religion

There are three main points to consider in the analysis of Clunia’s religious transformations during the process of Romanization: a) the introduction of Roman deities, b) the persistence of indigenous deities, and c) the introduction of the Imperial Cult. Four exquisite statues have been discovered in, the Forum identified as Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Isis (the representation of deities in human form is itself alien to Iron Age II culture) . Moreover, total of seven distinct Roman deities are named among the corpus of votive inscriptions from Clunia : Fortuna Redux, Lares Viales, Minerva Augusta, Diana, Neptune, the ‘numen of the Theater, Dis Manes, Iuppiter Augustus Ultor and perhaps most significantly, Juppiter Optimus Maximus . When one looks to see who it was setting up these inscriptions and worshipping these Roman deities, and at what period, certain loose trends emerge. Certainly in the first century a.d. we see the Dis Manes mentioned on at least two funerary inscriptions along side names such as Gaius Pompeius Seranus and Lucius Caelius Paternus, C. Cornelius Maternus, and Cornelius Aemilianus. An altar to Minerva Augusta was erected by a man named Valerius Vegetianus, an altar to Neptune by one C. Domitius, to Fortuna Redux by a freedman named C. Taucius Moscas, to the Lares Viales by a Valerius Rebus , to Diana by Cornelius Pompeianus, and to Jupiter Optimus Maximus by a Titus Valerius Flavus and another by Pompeius Atus (found inside the villa juxtaposed to the Forum.) Of this list of names only two, Atus and Taucius Moscas, are known to be indigenous.

When we turn to the persistence of indigenous deities, there are more altars here than elsewhere in Central Spain , yet only in respect to one set of deities, the so called Matres, who take on various attributes (Matres Brigeacae, Matres Endeiterae, Matres Gallaicae). When we examine who was setting up votive altars to indigenous cults in the same period, in relation to the Matres we see names such as Abascantus, Arria Nothis, Titus Racilius Valerianus, Titus Arrius Natal, names that to a greater or lesser degree suggest Romanization in the assumption of Latin inflection, or tria nomina, but clearly suggest Indigenous origins. In addition to this we have an appearance of the very Roman name, Lucius Aelius Phainus. This analysis of names and religion may not tell us much, but the preponderance of indigenous names (albeit Romanized) in relation to the indigenous gods bears strong suggestion of a non-uniformity among the elites in regard to levels of whole hearted Romanization. Nevertheless, the fact remains that even in regards to these native deities, the behavior of religion changed dramatically. Their names were translated into the Latin Matres, votive altars were set up to them in the Roman fashion, with the Roman formulaic V. S. L. M inscription. Moreover, as Curchin points out, the quid pro quo style of votive altars indicate that the habit of negotiating with deities had been adopted.

It is difficult to come up with an explanation for the apparent tension between new and old religious systems. The whole hearted adoption of Roman deities and indeed rites, might have appealed to an indigenous people by virtue of the organized nature of Roman religion as well as the perceived power of the conqueror. The adoption of Roman modes as well as syncretism or interpretatio Romana, may have been adopted in order to heighten the prestige of the indigenous deity by association with the “more powerful” deity or “more powerful” rites. Curchin suggests that I. O. M. was in fact a syncretised indigenous deity interpreted as Juppiter . Using this as an explanation for the cults presence on the meseta, I do not think is necessary, as a cult to Juppiter existed at Tarraco . Moreover the intense level of the ‘Romanness’ of the cult would suggest that it was the Roman Juppiter that the people of Clunia had in mind.

There is evidence for the presence of the imperial cult in Clunia from quite an early period of its Romanization. There is a much debated building attached to the north side of the basilica and enclosed by a wall. It was once identified by Palol as another temple, but later as an Aedes Augusti. Evidence for this comes from descriptions of Vitruvius 5.1.7, and a similar structure at Tarraco identified as such by Fishwick. Moreover, three inscriptions offer evidence of Flamen Romae et Augusti, and Flamen Romae et Divi Augusti. Moreover, there is the In addition to this, portraits of two Julio Claudian princes, probably a young Augustus and a young Nero, were discovered in one of the tabernae on the East side of the Forum. This taberna was at the center of its row, larger and more elaborately roofed than the others. Sculptural fragments have been found in the two flanking tabernae, opening up the possibility that this was an architectural innovation (with an eye to the tria-cella temple model) intended as a shrine for the imperial family. If this taberna really was used as a shrine to the Imperial Cult, it would be in keeping with Price’s idea of the public nature of emperor worship , and the Lex Irnitana states that business was suspended during festivals in which the Imperial family was being celebrated. Moreover, excavators are more or less certain that at Segobriga (a fairly large cultic center) the gymnasium and baths had a clear association with the Imperial cult . This is in certainly in keeping with descriptions by Price of similar gymnasial functions in Asia Minor. Clunia would not be alone among the central Spanish cities for the worship of the Imperial Family. The head of Julia, daughter of Titus, found at Clunia can be paralleled with the discovery of the head of Livia at Segobriga, that of Agrippina the younger at Ercavica, and an inscription to Diva Drusilla at Valeria and Sabina Tranquilla at Uxama. All of whom at least briefly had cults at Rome. Moreover, officials of the Imperial cult were widespread on the Meseta.

It has often been supposed that in contrast to the Hellenistic trends in emperor worship, that found in the Western provinces was less organic. However it is possible to trace the practice of ruler cult, particularly in these chiefdoms of Central Spain (the Arevaci, Carpetani, Celtiberi, Pelendones, Turmogi, and Vaccaei) from a time long before the presence of the Romans in the area. Evidence has been documented for the institution of devotio, also known as fides Iberica, a leader-client relationship where by one is vowed to one’s ruler even unto dying along side him on the battle-field. Devotio took on strong religious connotations as well as military even in between Roman and Celt during the Republic. It is documented that Roman Generals such as Scipio Africanus and Sertorius, who won loyalty from among members of Central Spanish tribes were viewed with almost divine attributes , and Sertorius’ opponent Metellus insited in being worshipped as a god while he was in Spain. Thus the idea of granting divine status to a ruler was far from alien to Celt-Iberi.

Nevertheless as Alfoldy points out and Curchin concedes, there was a distinct transition (on a greater scale than that in the East) from the practice of devotio and the institution of the Imperial Cult, with its statuary, sanctuaries, and flamen. The pre-existing form of ruler worship only contributed to the ease with which, in this respect, the region of Central Spain was being incorporated into the Roman world.

There is one final enigmatic aspect of Clunia’s religious life – a supposed shrine of a kind unique in Roman archeology has been uncovered in one of the caves to the south of the Forum, ( and close enough to the forum to have held a fairly important place in the context of the city. In this cave inscriptions on thick earthenware and clay plaques on the walls, on the ground, and on ledges have been revealed. Names on these inscriptions, though at times difficult to read bear a striking correspondence to the names of magistrates known from coins from the time of Tiberius. The presence next to the inscriptions of human ithyphallic images, little phalli offerings, and two large phalli with inscriptions have led archeologists to believe that this is the place of a phallic cult related to Priapus or Liber Pater (though it is impossible to know for certain.) Moreover the theory is strengthened, on the one hand, by the proximity of the shrine to both a possible water source and a cistern (allowing one to relate the divinity to its life-giving/ fertility connotations as seen in the Hellenistic world, and on the other hand by the presence of the cult of Isis in the city.

There is much more that can be discussed about the religion of Clunia, but let this suffice for the moment, and let us turn to two other intriguing pieces of evidence for Clunia’s Romanization.

[edit] Two Legal Tablets

Two interesting tablets of a legal nature have been discovered at Clunia. The first is the very well preserved so called tabula hospitalis, a bronze plaque measuring (30 x 28 cm), dating to 40 a.d. The text is a ritualized hospitality agreement between the citizens of Clunia and a man by the name of C. Terentius Bassus. The man is most probably a citizen (though not from Clunia, as is normal for hospitium) as his named as a member of the Fabian voting tribe. Moreover, his C. Terentius Bassus is a praefectus alae Augusta, evidence of the relationship, even at this early date between the indigenous cities and the Roman military units.

The second plaque is much later, dating to 222 ad. It is the so called Tabula Patronatus and is said to be the only bronze tablet in the Roman world in which a unit larger than a city designates a patron. The honorand is a C. Marius Prudens, commander of the Legio VII Gemina stationed at Leon on account of his ‘many and great merits to one and all.’ Both these plaques represent traditions both indigenous and highly Roman. Particularly the first plaque can trace its roots to similar item, namely animal shaped tesserae hospitales that served almost precisely the same function as the one found at Clunia. Yet such an item is not without precedent in the Roman world either, or elsewhere in Spain . Moreover, the formula of the inscription is clearly Roman.

[edit] A Greek Theater and a ‘Horatian’ Ode

There are two final archeological finds which I would like to present as they for one thing particularly lovely and for another, an indication of the extent to which Roman artistic culture was embraced at Clunia. The first is the theater, cut into the side of the plateau, in Greek fashion. The theater is interesting for is amalgamation of Greek and Roman elements (it would have sported an incredible scenae frons), and for its uniqueness from traditional Roman forms.

The second find is of quite a different nature. It is a funerary inscription dating to the first century that bears four lines in iambic verse that can be thematically related to Horace. Such a find suggest a level of literary sophistication existent in Clunia even at this early date. However it is unique among the funerary inscriptions at Clunia, which are all much more simple than this one (yet are for the most part Romanized). All are in Latin, with Latin funerary formulae, several invoke the Dii Manes (who are even invoked in relation to indigenous names such as Atua Boutia, and Marcus Aureliaus Murrianus. One interesting trend has been noticed however by Palol – that in the first half of the first century there are examples of tombstones without inscription, bearing images of mounted warriors. As we move into the second century, however, we begin to see the floral decorations and exalted bust friezes common in Italy and elsewhere in the provinces.

[edit] Conclusions

Let us return briefly to our original question. What was the driving force behind the changes we have observed at Clunia? Let us first of all assume that there was no whole-scale destruction of Clunia at the time of its pacification. There is no evidence of this here (though Alto de Cuerno has not been excavated), nor was this a trend among the Romans here or in any other region, except in a few isolated occasions at the hands of individual generals. It is unlikely that Pompey would have assumed such a policy. Moreover, indigenous names continue to such an extent in inscriptions that it is more or less clear that native Arevaci constituted the elite class at Clunia. Moreover, it is unlikely that magisterial positions were held by immigrants as immigration from one town to another tended to preclude the acquisition of magisterial status . Indeed emigration from the Meseta is attested to be far greater than immigration. Twenty five percent of immigrants from Iberia came from the conventus Cluniensis! Mainly these would have comprised lower classes seeking employment elsewhere in Spain. There are only twenty seven known immigrants into the Meseta, 19 of them are from elsewhere in Spain (three from Caesaraugusta). There is only one attestation of an Italian immigrant on the Meseta (HEp 7, 941).

So what did go on? I would suggest that pacification (on top of earlier integration into the army) brought with it an increase in communication with the southern and coastal regions of Spain, particularly Tarraco, and an unprecedented exposure to Roman culture. Thus at a particular moment in History there existed a tabula Rossa in the form of mesetan communities, on which were to be painted colors of Romanization. The new found position of elites within a pacified portion of the empire prompted an ungradual process that allowed these communities to Romanize perhaps extract the most expediently Roman elements from her neighbors, and to thus go through the process in a more straight forward manner than had their counter parts in Baetica and Taraco, (who had been to an extent Hellenized and Punicized prior to Roman Control. So sudden a cultural revolution in this Mesetan hinterland would work to explain the plethora of evidence from the 1st Century (greater in quantity than that from any other century), the distinctly main-stream imperial style of the forum, and the Latinization of indigenous names. It is trickier to understand the Religious change that occurred, but this difficulty may simply be a function of more modern sensibilities.

 Richardson, pg.173-189; Curchin,1991,pg. 106-117
 (Palol: from the theater and area of the city.  Tarraco’s theater is estimated to have had a capacity of 11,000 (Curchin, 2003, 113);
 As seen in Caesar’s campaigns in Gaul and elsewhere. 
 Curchin, 2003,pg. 66, by Publius and Gnaeus Scipio (Livy, 25.32)
 This trend continued with rigor under the empire.  A cohort of Arevaci (alae Arevacorum) is attested to have served on the Danube (Curchin, 66), while legions who explicitly state their Clunia origin are found in several places elsewhere in the empire. (cf. Alfoldy)
 From whom a sizable resistance army was recruited as evidenced by the large cavalry units (Curchin, 2003)
 Livy, Per. 72; Dion Cass. 39. 54; Expaurantius, 8; Florus 2.10.9 

 Indeed, the Meseta did not pass through the La Tene phase of Celtic culture (see Wolf, Ch.4  ) (Mierse, 148), all structures would have been stone built and sizable, as those seen at Termes.
 Palol, 1987, no.1, no.2, no.3
 Palol, 1991
 See Wolf, chapter 4
 Palol, 1991, pg. 178
 Mierse (149)
 Mierse, pg. 151
 The Forum at Tarraco has not been excavated.
 Mierse, pg. 152  
 Alfoldy, pg. 27-30 (Exact Criteria equal evidence of duoviri, quattuorviri, aediles, ordo decurionum, flamines, serviri Augustales.)
 Palol,1987, no. 30
 This inscription, which is found on the base of a statue to C. Calvisius Sabinus, is to honor him for the donation of annona, to the city, perhaps in a time of shortage. (de Palol, P)
 List compiled by Palol, CluniaII, pg. 169-173
 Palol, 1987: 28,29,72,73,93,116
 A. N. Sherwin- White,  (Another reference to municipia in other places.) Sherwin- White also points out that during the 2nd century, the role once played by the granting of municipal status was replaced by that of Colonial Status.   
 There is no real evidence to indicate that native Romans moved to Clunia for the sake of her governance.  The Roman names of the magistrates found on the inscriptions can be seen as part of a wider trend in Spain and elsewhere to adopt Roman nomenclature upon receiving citizen ship, or for the non-enfranchised elites to give their children Roman names.  
 Palol, 1987,pg.183
 Pliny does not list Clunia as a colony.
 Palol, 1987, no.22
 There are a few epigraphic incidences of the Legio X Gemina (the legion associated with Galba) at Clunia.
 Curchin,2003, 172
 Palol, 1987: Diana:no.4; Fortuna Redux: no. 6; Juppiter: No. 7,8,9,10,210; Neptune: no.19,20 Lares Viales: no. 11; Minerva Augusta: no. 18; Numen Theatri, no.21
 Set up in 70 a.d. by a member of the Legio X Gemina, Lucius Valerius Paternus, a legion associated with Galba.  (de Palol)
 Palol, 1987, no. 58, no. 62
 Though it is possible that this inscription could date to as late as the third century.
 Curchin, 2003, pg.245
 Palol, 1987, no. 15, 16, 17, 12, 13, 14, 211
 Curchin, 2003, pg.77
 pg.78
 Mierse, pg. 138
 Evidence for a priestly college at Clunia (Suetonius, Galba 9.2), as well as the design of the temple.
 Curchin: 1996 148
 Palol, 1987, no. 18, 28
 Palol, 1994, pg. 54
 Meirse, pg. 147. May reflect the influence of Hellenistic- Roman gymnasia and peristyle domestic architecture forms found developed in Campania, OR, it may have as a model the Templum Pacis of Vespasian. (Ward-Perkins, 1981, p.67)
 Price: 101-125 (Chapter 5)
 Curchin, 1998, pg.151
 Curchin, Subject and Ruler, pg.150.
 A common practice outside of Spain as well, most notably among the Aquitani in Gaul. Curchin, 43, 162 (cf. Sall. Hist 1.125)
 (Sertorius and the Doe)
 Curchin, 1991, 79
 Curchin, subject and Ruler, pg. 152
 However at this point it would be too much to investigate the spread of these cults in the provinces.
 The people in Clunia seem almost universally to be members of the Galerian tribe. 
 A cavalry unit stationed on the Northern Meseta, though not a Clunia.  It was composed of native Spainsh soldiers, though this does not exclude the possibility that the praefect may have been of Roman origin, as his name may or may not suggest.
 Curchin, 2003, pg.141
 Such as have been found at Palatina (dating from 2b.c.)
 Recent findings suggest that it lacked an orchestra and due to the presence of elaborate drainage systems may have been more multi-purpose than your typical Hispano-Roman theater.
 Though the inscription lacks nomenclature, so the origins of the honorand are uncertain.
 Palol, no. 43,53,58,68,71,74,88,93,110,111
 Such decorative findings are, however, rare.
 Such as at Lagni, where it is said that Popeius destroyed the city and eliminated the elite after a conflict in 141 b.c. (Curchin, 129)
 Curchin (2003), pg,241
 Although it is believed by Garcia Merino that some of the artwork found in the region was done at the hands of Italian crafts men. A sign more of the Italic tastes of local elites than of an influx of Italian population. (Curchin, 127)

[edit] Bibliography

• Alfoldy, G. Romisches Stadtewesen auf der neukastilischen Hochebene: Ein Testfall fur due Romanisierung, Heidelberg, 1987
• Curchin, Leonard The Local Magistrates of Roman Spain, Toronto, UToronto Press, 1990
• Roman Spain: Conquest and Assimilation, New York, Routledge, 1991
• The Romanization of Central Spain, New York, Routledge, 2003
• Cult and Celt: The Imperial Cult in Central Spain;Subject and Ruler; the Cult of the Ruling Power in Classical Antiquity ed. Small, Alastair, JRS, 1996
• Mierse, William Temples and Towns in Roman Iberia: the Social and Architectural Dynamics of Sanctuary Design, Berkley, UC Press, 1999
• Palol, Pedro de Clunia0: Clunia varia Cluniensia, Burgos, Publicaciones de la Excma., 1991
• CluniaII: La Epigraphia de Clunia, Madrid, Ministerio de Cultura, 1987
• Clunia, Historia de la Ciudad y Guia de las excavaciones, Burgos, Diputacion Provincial de Burgos, 1994
• Price, S. R. F. Rituals and Power: the Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor, New York, Cambridge UP, 1984
• Richardson, J. S. Spain and the Development of Roman Imperialism, 218-82 b.c., New York, CambridgeUP,
• Wolf, G. Becoming Roman: The Origin of Provincial Civilization in Gaul, New York, CambridgeUP, 1998

[edit] External links

• Clunia website with Spanish and English versions