women and the production of ceremonial textiles: a reevaluation of ceramic textile tools in...

Women and the Production of Ceremonial Textiles: A Reevaluation of Ceramic Textile Tools inEtrusco-Italic SanctuariesAuthor(s): Gretchen E. MeyersSource: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 117, No. 2 (April 2013), pp. 247-274Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3764/aja.117.2.0247 .

Accessed: 03/08/2013 16:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.122.253.212 on Sat, 3 Aug 2013 16:27:02 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3764/aja.117.2.0247?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


American Journal of Archaeology 117 (2013) 247–74247

Women and the Production of Ceremonial Textiles: A Reevaluation of Ceramic Textile Tools in

Etrusco-Italic SanctuariesGRETCHEN E. MEYERS

ARTICLE

Abstract

Ceremonial textiles in the ancient Mediterranean are well attested in literature and visual representations but are often difficult to document because of the limited preservation of the textiles themselves. Several depictions of textile production in elite contexts from pre-Roman Italy, as well as the common occurrence of textile tools in assemblages of prestige grave goods, have traditionally been used to illustrate the social significance of textile skills for Etrusco-Italic women. Less attention has been directed to the actual practice of such skills in ritual or social ceremonies. This study brings forth new evidence from the numerous tools for spinning and weaving found in Etrusco-Italic sanctuaries to elucidate the relationships between textiles, women, and the sacred sphere.*

introduction

Ceramic textile tools—spindlewhorls, spools (roc-chetti ), and loomweights—are common artifacts found at both funerary and settlement sites in ancient Italy. Although at times their function has been debated, there is general consensus among archaeologists that they are the durable remnants of a production pro-

cess for textiles.1 The textiles themselves often do not survive from antiquity. This view is by no means lim-ited to the archaeology of ancient Italy but pertains to Greece and the Near East as well as northern Europe, the Americas, and Southeast Asia.2

Because there is little doubt that excavated spindle-whorls, spools, and loomweights belong in the “tool kit” of ancient producers of textiles, their archaeologi-cal interpretation has often been linked to this indus-try, as in several recent studies.3 Beyond their role in manufacture, the tools have also been interpreted through the lens of gender. With a few notable excep-tions, in the ancient Mediterranean the producers of textiles were women; in particular, women spun thread from raw wool and wove threads into textiles, for which spindlewhorls and loomweights, respectively, are evi-dence of process.4 Thus, textile tools in archaeological contexts often serve as a shorthand for female pres-ence at a site. Such gendering of artifact type informs a second aspect of the archaeological interpretation of textile tools—namely, their symbolic role as a marker of gender identity. This model is often applied when

* This article derives from my work at the sanctuary site of Poggio Colla (Vicchio), where I fi rst began to realize the potential of textile tools as evidence for ceremonial practice. I am grateful to the Soprintendenza dei Beni Archeologici della Toscana for their ongoing support of the Mugello Val-ley Archaeological Project. I am particularly indebted to my colleagues at the site, Gregory Warden, Michael Thomas, and Ann Steiner, for encouraging me to undertake this research, and to the Etruscan Foundation for providing funding that al-lowed me to conduct research in Italy. I owe special thanks to the following individuals who offered advice, assistance, and inspiration during the preparation of this manuscript: Alex-is Castor, Judith Chien, Matthew Coonan, Nancy de Grum-mond, Jess Galloway, Cassandra Holtmann, Marie-Louise Nosch, and Katherine Rask. Finally, I wish to thank Margar-ita Gleba and the anonymous reviewers for the AJA for their helpful suggestions and comments.

1 In general, throughout this article the term “textile tools” refers to the three most commonly uncovered ceramic

objects associated with textile production—spindlewhorls, spools (rocchetti), and loomweights. Some other tools used in textile production, many of them metal, have been recovered from Etrusco-Italic sites, including needles, pins, fragments of spindles, distaffs, and specialized weaving tablets. See Gleba (2008a, 91–159) for a thorough discussion of all textile tools, including a summary of various alternative uses attributed to them.

2 Barber (1991) remains the seminal work on evidence for textile production through the Iron Age. For comparative evi-dence from the Americas, see Chase et al. 2008. For Southeast Asia, see Cameron 2011.

3 E.g., Gillis and Nosch (2003) and Burke (2010) have used such tools to reconstruct the economics of textile production.

4 Mansfi eld (1985) and Barber (1992) discuss the possi-bility that male weavers produced a peplos for Athena in the quadrennial Great Panathenaic procession in Athens, where-as female weavers wove a garment for the annual procession. See also Barber (1994, 259–61) for male weaving in Egypt.



GRETCHEN E. MEYERS248 [AJA 117

the tools appear in grave assemblages or in votive de-positions in sanctuaries.5

Despite these valuable contributions to our under-standing of ancient society, textile tools have often received limited attention in Etrusco-Italic excavation reports.6 Although their presence at a site is noted and included broadly in interpretative discussions, specific typological and distributional information about tex-tile tools is often difficult to locate. The tools are rarely considered key artifact types in the overall interpre-tation of a site, except in cases where large numbers of either spinning or weaving implements are found together and point to a domestic setting or a produc-tion area where a loom may be reconstructed.7

textile tools in pre-roman sanctuaries

The rather limited attention to textile tools in archaeological contexts has marginalized their im-portance as evidence for social or ritual practices in pre-Roman Italy. Recent scholarship in the field, however, demonstrates a significant shift in views to-ward the study of these tools—most importantly the work of Gleba. Her landmark study, Textile Production in Pre-Roman Italy, is undoubtedly the most ambitious and influential work of its kind. Drawing on literary, visual, and archaeological sources, the study presents disparate evidence for textile production in ancient Italy from the Bronze Age through the Hellenistic

period.8 Using a large data set and concentrating on the technical skills and techniques involved in spin-ning and weaving, Gleba places textile production at the center of social and economic life in pre-Roman Italy and calls for a production-centered view of these tools. She stresses the importance of reconstructing aspects of the textile industry and asks archaeologists to pay greater attention to the functional properties of spindlewhorls and loomweights.9 She surveys the vari-ous archaeological contexts in which textile tools are found—specifically, burials, settlements, and sanctu-ary settings—and cautions against narrow interpreta-tions that do not take those contexts into account. For example, concerning textile tools in Etruscan burials, she focuses on symbolic associations with identity and suggests that the choice of tools in a grave assemblage may have referred not simply to biological sex but also to status and skill level.10

Gleba’s work also discusses the phenomenon of tex-tile tools found in sacred contexts, especially sanctuar-ies, and asks whether those excavated textile tools are evidence of votive practice or of sanctuary production. She separates them into three categories: votive de-posits, foundation deposits, and sanctuary workshops. She rightly notes the difficulty in determining whether an excavated textile tool was originally an ex-voto and presents only cases “with relatively secure contexts,” by which she seems to mean closed deposits containing

5 The issue of assigning gender to burials and associated grave goods is complex. Bartoloni (1989) notes the presence of textile tools in female graves from Iron Age Populonia, and Toms (1998), in her study of Villanovan burials from Veii and Tarquinia, concludes that there are distinct associations be-tween spinning/weaving objects in female tombs and weap-ons/armor in male tombs. For a summary of textile tools and gender defi nition in pre-Roman burials, including the few ex-amples of textile tools found in graves together with armor or weaponry, see Gleba 2008a, 173–74. Ginge (1996, 68–71) cautions against the practice of using grave goods to deter-mine the biological sex of the deceased, and Cougle (2009, 55–7) reminds us that current scholarship suggests there is not always a clear correlation between biological sex and so-cial defi nitions of gender. Bouma (1996, 1:394) and Gleba (2008a, 181–82) address the presumption of a female dedi-cator of textile tools in sanctuary contexts, an interpretation regularly employed in excavation reports from sites with sig-nifi cant quantities of textile tools, such as Lavinium (Fenelli 1990, 494–95), Anagni (Gatti 1996, 145), and Veii (Colonna 2002, 239).

6 My focus is the cultural entity of the Etruscans. Although I recognize the fl uidity of borders and cultural infl uence in early Italy, I am particularly interested in the role of textile production and female agency within the Etruscan cultural identity, as it evolved from its earliest manifestations in Villa-novan practice. Geographically, I limit the term “Etruscan” to the region of ancient Etruria. Because I look at comparanda

in Latium, Rome, and Magna Graecia, I use the term “Etrusco- Italic” to characterize the broad scope of textile practice un-der consideration in this study.

7 Ca. 150–160 loomweights were recovered from Area R 18 at Forcello, an Etruscan habitation at Bagnolo San Vito. Exca-vators have divided them, based on weight, into three differ-ent types and hypothesize the presence of at least one loom from this context (Vay 1988). The diverse weights may indi-cate that the same loom was used to produce textiles of differ-ent texture and thread count depending on the weights used. At Acquarossa, concentrations of loomweights were found in several of the domestic zones, including Structure A in zone B and an open courtyard of Structure C in zone L (Architettura etrusca nel Viterbese 1986, 111; 125, cat. no. 282). The weights of zone B average ca. 400 g, while those from Zone L weigh 300 g, prompting Gleba (2008a, 164–65) to suggest that looms in these different areas produced fabrics of varied fi neness. See Gleba (2008a, 161–69) for additional examples of tools in settlement contexts.

8 Gleba 2008a.9 Gleba 2004; 2008a, 101–8, 127–38. See also Mårtensson

et al. (2009) and Meyers (forthcoming) for reconstructions of ancient textile production based on functional properties and measurements of excavated tools.

10 Gleba 2008a, 171–78. See also Riva (2010, 74–84) for the convincing argument that gender-specifi c objects (including textile tools) in orientalizing burials were intended primarily as markers of status, “rather than maleness or femaleness.”



WOMEN AND TEXTILE TOOLS IN ETRUSCO-ITALIC SANCTUARIES2013] 249

other ex-votos.11 She draws two important conclusions: first, that as ex-votos, textile tools in pre-Roman sanc-tuaries are most often associated with cult sites with a wide chronological range;12 and second, that with few exceptions, they are generally present in small num-bers.13 She suggests that the meaning of ex-voto tex-tile tools in these contexts is most likely connected to the identity of the sanctuary’s divinity, often Minerva or Hera/Juno, or to the tools’ symbolic potential as markers of the domestic skill of a female dedicator.14 She highlights that such dedications are most numer-ous in Latium and are rare in Sicily, where foundation deposits are more common.15 She cautions, however, against the assumption that an object recovered from or near a site of religious function must be endowed with sacred significance. When spindlewhorls, spools, and loomweights are found in significant quantities in sanctuary contexts, Gleba argues, they might also be evidence for textile production within the sanctuary.16

Literary evidence for the weaving of sacred garments in sanctuaries is abundant in Greece, where the prac-tice most often culminated in a peplophoric ritual. This type of ritual, most familiar from the Athenian Acropolis, specifically involved the new production and presentation of a garment to the deity, usually as part of an annual or quadrennial rite. In most cases, the literary references suggest that the sacred garment was produced within the sanctuary space.17 Archaeo-logically, evidence for such a practice is known from several sanctuary sites in South Italy, where clusters of spindlewhorls or loomweights have been uncovered in enclosed structures, generally interpreted as work-shops, where women produced textiles for ritual use in the sanctuary. Although there is no literary evidence for the specific nature of textile ritual in these South Italic sanctuaries, Gleba and others interpret them as peplophoria.18 The only non-Greek sanctuary that Gleba includes among sacred production sites is the Latial site of Lavinium, although the exact nature of

sacred textile production there is less clear. It is notable that she does not find convincing evidence for similar textile production in sanctuaries north of Lavinium.19

Gleba has laid an important foundation, and her useful reminder that textile tools may indicate pro-duction sites underscores that their presence in sanc-tuaries may point to more than female votaries. This article builds on her work by reevaluating sanctuary sites north of Lavinium where quantities of textile tools have been found, and it challenges the prem-ise that textile tools in sanctuaries point to either ex-voto donations or sacred production only. Integrating ceramic textile tools and the textiles they produced into the full spectrum of Etruscan society reveals that the strict, mutually exclusive interpretative models of “votive” and “production” may not be sufficient. A less dichotomous approach permits us to view textiles and textile tools as evidence of female participation in religious life and social activity. Moreover, the greater diversity of archaeological contexts for textile tools in Etruscan sanctuaries (as opposed to Greek and South Italic sites) suggests that textile ritual, like many other types of ritual, is subject to cultural and regional dis-tinctions related to the nature of cult and the nature of female participation in society. This study employs new evidence from a northern Etruscan sanctuary at Poggio Colla to sharpen our view of weaving tools in sanctuaries. This new evidence is contextualized against evidence from Etrusco-Italic sites (Veii, Caere, Pian di Cività at Tarquinia, Roselle, Cetamura del Chianti, and Lavinium) and from South Italic cities (Francavilla Marittima, Paestum, and Foce del Sele).

defining ceremonial textiles in etrusco-italic italy

It is prudent to begin with clear definitions of cere-monial textiles and votive practice. The practice of dedi-cating a garment or textile to a divinity is well attested in Greece, and peplophoric ritual (including production

11 Gleba 2008a, 178.12 Gleba 2008a, 178.13 Gleba 2008a, 181, 184. There are a few sites where this is

not the case and larger concentrations of tools are present, but, following Greco (1997, 193), Gleba attributes these few cases of large deposits to the longevity of the sanctuary.

14 Gleba 2008a, 181–82; supra n. 5.15 Gleba 2008a, 181–83. It is interesting that only loom-

weights have been found in foundation deposits and that the practice is documented only in Sicily. Orlandini (1953) sug-gests that loomweights were primarily symbolic objects, and thus he attributes ritual meaning to their presence among foundations at Gela. Given the limited scope of evidence for textile tools in foundation deposits, it is diffi cult to consider this a completely separate category of votive practice involv-

ing textile tools.16 Gleba 2008a, 183–84.17 Paus. 3.16.2, 6.24.10. Mansfi eld (1985, 275–84) discuss-

es the possibility that textile production may not have taken place on the Athenian Acropolis and offers other potential lo-cations where Athena’s peplos may have been woven.

18 South Italic sanctuary sites where such evidence has been recorded—Francavilla Marittima, Santa Venera at Paestum, and Foce del Sele—are discussed in greater detail later in this article. The site of Halae in South Italy is also frequently men-tioned (Greco 1997; Gleba 2008a, 185–87).

19 Gleba 2008a, 187. She does not categorically rule out the possibility of textile workshops in Etruscan or other Ital-ic sanctuaries and suggests that further review of material is required.




of the sacred peplos) is the dominant model for such dedications. Neils notes, however, that Homer’s Iliad describes several circumstances in which a peplos might be used ceremonially, including as a cover for Lycaon’s war chariots (5.194) or Hector’s funerary urn (24.796). Neils also points to the famous supplication of Athena by the Trojan women: Hector instructs them to take the largest and loveliest peplos they can find and lay it along the knees of her statue in the temple to gain her sympathy.20 Similarly, evidence suggests that Roman women, like their Trojan predecessors, dedicated richly decorated garments (including those embellished with golden thread) in times of war and crisis.21 In these examples, textiles were not produced specifically for ritual dedication. Votive action instead lay in the sacrifice of women offering their valuable textiles—textiles perhaps produced for private famil-ial or social ceremony—in a time of public crisis. This reminds us that although peplophoric ritual certainly occurred, sacred textiles need not be understood only as those produced within a particular sacred space and intended for the divinity honored there.

Ceremonial textiles in the Etrusco-Italic world may be more widely construed to include not only those produced for specific religious rituals but also those fine textiles produced for familial or social rituals.22 Without specific literary evidence, Etrusco-Italic ritu-als—religious, funerary, or social—are difficult to re-construct, and archaeologists have limited evidence to reanimate lost actions. There are tantalizing clues, however, that textiles played an important role in Etruscan ceremonies. For example, it is well known that Tanaquil, the Etruscan “first lady” of Rome in the Archaic period, was recognized for her produc-tion of ceremonial garments. Pliny (HN 8.194) credits her with the first tunica recta and a royal robe for her

adopted son Servius Tullius and states that her wool-working skills were so venerated that her wool and distaff were displayed many centuries later in the Tem-ple of Sancus.23 Valerius Maximus (De praenominibus 10.7) and Festus (85L) similarly connect Tanaquil’s wool-working skills to the customs of Roman brides, which include the production of their bridal garments. Pliny (HN 19.57) tells us that the first golden textile in Italy was worn by her husband, Tarquinius Priscus, to celebrate a triumph in the early sixth century B.C.E., a garment probably produced by Tanaquil, given her textile prowess.

This anecdote from Pliny suggests that the Etrus-cans, in addition to being the most skilled gold workers in ancient Italy—as is attested by the high quality of granulation and filigree in their jewelry—used gold as an adornment for garments. It is possible, for example, that the garment worn by Vel Saties in the François tomb at Vulci is a mantle in the tradition of the toga picta, a purple dyed garment with gold borders.24 Such textiles adorned with gold reflect the Etruscans’ love of luxury materials and their high standards for pres-tige goods appropriate for elites.

The Etrusco-Italic visual record also preserves evi-dence of ceremonial textile production. For example, a bronze tintinnabulum from the Tomba degli Ori—a ca. 600 B.C.E. elite female burial from the Arsenale Militare necropolis near Bologna—depicts women performing four stages of textile production: dress-ing distaffs for spinning, spinning, weaving the start-ing border at a warp-weighted loom, and weaving at a warp-weighted loom (fig. 1).25 In the various scenes, veiled female figures appear both standing and seated in high-backed chairs. They are depicted at different scales, a contrast that suggests hierarchy and social status are important factors in textile production.26 In

20 Neils 2009, 137. Using visual and literary evidence, Neils (2009) surveys additional Greek contexts and types of textile dedications to female divinities, including funerary offerings to heroized dead, theoxenia, kosmesis, and thank offerings.

21 Paus. 5.15–16; Sil., Pun. 7.77–83. This practice is also at-tested for jewelry (Castor 2009, 250–51).

22 Bonfante (2009, 190) argues that the ritual garments of Etruscans “marked out their status as priests and priestesses, as well as some of their special ceremonies, such as weddings and funerary rituals.” She also argues that some aspects of Etruscan ritual dress may be extrapolated from Roman priest-ly garb and that, although symbolic associations may not be the same for Romans, mentions by Roman poets and anti-quarians demonstrate the importance of special ritual dress in Etruscan traditions.

23 Plutarch (Quaest. Rom. 30) refers to the same objects in the Temple of Sancus and asserts that her sandals were also on dis-play. Sancus, also known as Semo Sancus Dius Fidus, is a little-known deity whose cult may have been brought into Rome by

the Sabines (Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 2.49). The Temple of Semo Sancus Dius Fidus, purportedly located on the Quirinal Hill, is associated with Tarquinius Superbus (Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 9.60); see also Richardson 1992, s.v. “Semo Sancus.”

24 Moretti Sgubini (2004, 23, 28, fi g. 12) notes some strips of gold thread found during recent restorations in the François tomb, which is well known for its painted fi gures and the por-trayal of Vel Saties’ elaborate garment. Although some have referred to the fourth-century B.C.E. portrayal of this gar-ment as the toga picta, Bonfante Warren (1971) makes clear that it is not the toga picta, which dates to the third century B.C.E. and would have had rounded edges. She does suggest that the two garments were of similar signifi cance (Bonfante 2003, 41, 53; see also Beard 2007, 306–10).

25 Morigi Govi 1971.26 Morigi Govi (1971), Barber (1991, 116–18, 260–74), and

Gleba (2008a, 28–9) all address the depiction of the four stag-es of the textile production process on the object. There is general agreement about the interpretation of three scenes:




the upper register on one side of the tintinnabulum, a female figure sits in a throne-like chair and weaves on a monumental warp-weighted loom—the size of which is emphasized by a second female figure to the right, who must lift a container (of thread?) up to the first woman. The attributes of the figures and the size of the loom suggest a production scenario that is excep-tional and perhaps ceremonial or formal in nature.

A well-preserved wooden throne from a tomb at the Villanovan site of Verucchio represents seated women weaving at a two-story loom, together with other scenes that include men and seem to depict elite or religious activities (fig. 2). The complicated iconography, which has elicited much discussion,27 clearly depicts women at various stages of textile production, which may in-clude preparation of raw wool, dyeing, and weaving at ornate, double-sized looms. The monumental charac-ter of the looms indicates that the textiles produced were extraordinary in size and therefore probably also in social significance. Von Eles has called attention to the active role of the females in all the scenes, not simply those of textile production.28 Together, these images on the Verucchio throne suggest coordination between male and female participants of social, and perhaps ritual, activities, which included textile pro-duction, sacrifice, and ceremonial procession.

Both of these objects are complex visual documents. Because of their early date, they are important for es-tablishing and documenting textile traditions in Italy before the spread of Greek influence. Interpretations usually emphasize the symbolic correlation between female social status and textile production, particu-larly whether there is a differentiation in social posi-tion between the women who spin and the women who weave. While such a distinction remains unclear,

certain common visual features of the scenes, such as the large size of the looms depicted, the portrayal of dress, and the attributes of the women, may reflect a dominant role for women in the production of textiles for ceremonial or ritual settings.29

the dressing of the distaffs, the spinning, and the weaving. However, the scene on the lower register of side B is less clear. Morigi Govi (1971, 217) suggests that the two women are pre-paring the warp by arranging the threads based on the extent of the loom. However, Barber (1991, 116–17) suggests that the seated woman may actually be seated at a band loom—a loom suitable for weaving the heading bands necessary to se-cure the warp for a warp-weighted loom. Barber (1991, 116–17) suggests that such activity would complement the more recognizable activity of the other female fi gure warping the loom at the right. Torelli (1997, 59–61) and Bartoloni (2007, 19–21) both argue that the differentiation in the scale and placement of the fi gures corresponds to the distinction be-tween an elite matron, who spins and weaves, and her non-elite female maids, who prepare the tools.

27 A signifi cant body of scholarship exists both on the throne itself and on the interpretation of the carved scenes. See Gentili (2003, 293–311) on the contents of Tomb 89 from “la necropoli nel declivio sottostante la rocca malatestiana,” which included the throne. While interpretations of the

scenes depicted on the throne vary, all are in agreement that textile production plays a signifi cant part. Gentili (2003, 296–301) suggests that all the scenes on the back of the throne represent various stages in textile production, including the sheering of the wool, the bleaching of the raw wool in a river, the transport of the wool, and fi nally the dyeing and weav-ing of the garment. Cf. Torelli (1997) and von Eles (2002a, 259–72) for additional discussions and interpretations of the complex iconography. The elaborate looms with ornate im-agery associated with a solar cult have been reconstructed in von Eles 2002b, pl. 23.

28 Von Eles (2007a, 151) refers to these female participants as “sacerdotesse”; elsewhere, von Eles (2007b, 83) comments that through their participation in ritual, elite women of Ver-ucchio demonstrated their civil or political power. For the back braid, see Bonfante 2003, 70.

29 Von Eles (2007b, 79) specifi cally mentions both the Bo-logna tintinnabulum and the Verucchio throne as depictions that “non rappresentano solo scene di ‘lavoro’ femminile ma vanno ricondotte alla sfera della sacralità e della ritualità.”

Fig. 1. Women at the loom. Detail of a sheet-bronze tintin-nabulum from the Tomba degli Ori, Arsenale Militare, Bo-logna, ca. 600 B.C.E. Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, inv. no. 25676 (© E. Lessing/Art Resource, NY).




Also pertinent are the scenes on archaic Chiusine funerary cippi, which are rich in elite iconography.30 Many of the four-sided monuments are decorated with typical Etruscan funerary imagery—such as dancing, hunting, or a prothesis—which is often repeated on several examples with slight variation. Several of them depict assembly scenes where groups of standing and seated women face one another, many of them in elab-orate, heavy garments (fig. 3). In some cases, a central figure appears to present a garment or to drape it on two figures seated in the foreground. In all examples, the composition of the scene is dominated by textiles, both those worn by the figures and other cloths. This focus on the textiles would have been magnified by the presence of color on the monument, which may have allowed viewers to decipher specific significance

in patterns or designs represented on the cloth. While the precise interpretation of these scenes is debated, they probably depict a nuptial or funerary ritual.31 Less acknowledged by some scholars is their significance as evidence for ceremonial textiles and the social be-havior of elite women.32

The tintinnabulum, the Verucchio throne, and the cippi are often cited to demonstrate the importance of textile production within the lives of Etrusco-Italic women. The textiles in these examples, however, are anything but quotidian. Rather, this evidence reminds us that Etrusco-Italic women, particularly elite wom-en, were likely involved in overseeing and producing prestige textiles for themselves and their families for ceremonial purposes, which may have included com-munal religious rituals requiring garments for cult

30 Jannot 1984. D’Agostino (1989, 3) suggests that the rep-ertoire of images on these monuments intentionally evokes the world of the aristocratic male to “characterize his status and social position.”

31 Jannot 1984, cat. nos. B.III.4, B.III.6, C.II.14, C.II.15, C.II.30, C.II.34, C.II.35, C.III.3, C.III.19, D.II.8, D.II.12. Ini-tially, Jannot (1984, 373–80) referred to these scenes as “as-semblées des gynécée” and speculated that they may depict an aspect of funerary ritual, such as the selection of a cloth to be entombed with the deceased. In a later publication, Jannot (2004) reconsiders the scenes and argues that they belong in the corpus of images of textile production among elite Etrus-can women. He hypothesizes that the scenes may depict a type

of funeral oration on the weaving skills of a deceased woman and may feature fabrics that were made exclusively by wom-en of the aristocracy. Haynes (2000, 247–48) connects the as-sembly scenes with a unique scene on another cippus, where three fi gures stand beneath a textile with an elaborate border ( Jannot 1984, cat. no. C.I.30) and suggests that these types of depictions may elucidate rituals and clothing associated with marriage. Bonfante (2003, 198–99, fi gs. 124, 127) refers to the scenes as preparations for a wedding or perhaps a funeral.

32 The signifi cance of the elite female’s role as a producer of textiles seems assured by the presence of a seated female holding a distaff in a fragmentary example of the type ( Jannot 1984, cat. no. B.III.4).

Fig. 2. Reconstruction of scenes of textile production and ritual activity on the wooden throne from Tomba 89, Podere Lippi, Verucchio, late eighth to early seventh centuries B.C.E. (Swaddling et al. 1995, fig. 5; © The Trustees of the British Museum).




officials and cult statues. Similarly, the women would also have been involved in the production of textiles for familial rituals, such as funerals or weddings. Tex-tiles preserved in pre-Roman tombs, most notably from Verucchio, may belong to that social context. At any rate, the fragile nature of textile remains makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions.33 Ceramic textile tools, in contrast, often survive in the archaeological record and merit closer attention.

evidence of textile tools from the sanctuary of poggio colla (vicchio)

Excavations on the acropolis of Poggio Colla have uncovered textile tools that provide a richer and more complete view of all participants—male and female—in the life of an Etruscan sanctuary. Located approxi-mately 35 km northeast of Florence in the verdant Mugello Valley, Poggio Colla was on the periphery of the Etruscan cultural sphere between northern Italic and Gallic populations to the north and the heart of central Etruria in the south. The site, like other settle-ments in the area, was well connected with both local and wider Etruscan trade networks. In addition, the prominence of the Poggio Colla hill afforded sight lines with neighboring Etruscan sanctuaries at Monte Giovi and Monte Falterona. Since 1995, excavations sponsored by Southern Methodist University, Franklin & Marshall College, and the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology have un-covered a monumental building and courtyard with at least three construction phases spanning the seventh to second centuries B.C.E. (fig. 4).34

The identification of the building as a sacred place is based in part on the presence of a centralized altar in the courtyard and a number of votive deposits. Early occupation on the site is documented by orientalizing ceramics, including bucchero and a few small courses of finely cut sandstone ashlar foundation blocks. In

addition, an area on the northwest slope of the hill has provided evidence of both early habitation and a quarry for the site’s earliest architectural elements.35 Although only a few foundation courses from the earliest phase remain in situ, stone elements typical of Etruscan religious architecture, such as molded blocks and column bases, appear to have been reused in subsequent architectural phases throughout the site. In a second phase, the site was organized around an 11 x 20 m courtyard aligned to the natural rectan-gular axes of the plateau (indicated on fig. 4 by lines of single, rectangular blocks visible on the north and south). At the center is a large stone altar (3 x 2 m),36 and adjacent to it to the north is a hearth or fire pit. A structure comprising several rooms occupied the western end of the courtyard in this phase. In the latest

33 For the problems of defi ning an archaeological textile, see Good 2001. Types of evidence may include intact or de-graded examples of perishable textile materials, as well as pseudomorphs and impressions. Many archaeological tex-tiles exist from ancient funerary contexts and may be evidence of ancient ritual funerary dress. Frequently noted are the ex-amples from the Macedonian royal tombs at Vergina and the textiles from the Scythian Tomb of the Seven Brothers in the Kerch region of the Black Sea (Wild 2003). An early Greek ex-ample of a preserved textile from a funerary context with cer-emonial signifi cance is the linen cloth that surrounded the ashes from a 10th-century grave near the heroon at Lefkandi (Popham et al. 1982). Burke (2010, 105, table 4) provides a useful summary of words referring to different types of cloth in the Homeric epics. Gleba (2008a, 50–7) provides a com-prehensive list of archaeological textiles from pre-Roman

Italy, nearly all of which come from tomb contexts. For the Verucchio textiles, see Stauffer 2002, 2012; Ræder Knudsen 2012. See also Bonfante (2009) for a survey of evidence for Etruscan ritual dress from the Iron Age to Hellenistic period.

34 For discussions of the excavation history and architectur-al phases at the site of Poggio Colla, see Warden et al. 2005; Warden 2009a, 2011(with previous bibliography). Thom-as (2012, 23) suggests that recent excavations may indicate sparse remnants of an architectural phase IV that was never completed.

35 This area is currently being excavated under the super-vision of Phil Perkins of the Open University (United Kingdom).

36 The measurements of the altar include additional archi-tectural elements that were discovered in the 2011 season but are not yet published.

Fig. 3. Cippus from Chiusi depicting seated females and cloth, late sixth to early fifth centuries B.C.E. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, inv. no. HIN 81 (courtesy Ny Carls-berg Glyptotek).




phases, the courtyard was expanded and appears to have been partially surrounded by additional rooms and defensive structures. The foundations are no lon-ger composed of finely cut ashlars but are made up of undressed, irregular stones (drawn as such on fig. 4). While the distinction in building character and evidence of domestic and economic activity may indi-cate that the nature of the final phases of occupation at the site differed from previous use, the continuous occurrence of votive deposits associated with all phases of the site suggests that ritual activity remained signifi-cant throughout its history.

Two votive deposits are of particular interest here.37 The first is a natural fissure in the bedrock of the courtyard, in which was placed a deposit of a thin strip of gold and a gold wire ring (PC 2003-085, PC 2003-092) (fig. 5) and over which was placed an overturned molded sandstone block from the foundations of the earliest temple.38 Such veneration of cavities, both natural and artificial, is not uncommon in Etruscan sanctuaries, as is known from examples at Tarquinia and Volterra.39 The thin, flat strips of gold, measuring 0.15 mm in width, are comparable to other types of metallic adornment for textiles or thread in ancient

37 Warden (2009a) has documented more than 10 instancesof votive activity on the Poggio Colla acropolis and has sug-gested that many of these offerings refl ect the life of the sanc-tuary itself.

38 The ritual context of this deposition has been discussed by Warden 2009a, 113–14; 2011, 58. For the gold objects from the deposit, see Warden et al. 2005, 257, fi g. 5; Castor 2009, 248–49. A brief initial discussion of this deposit in relation to textile adornment appears in Meyers (forthcoming).

39 At several sites, veneration of cavities also coincides with the presence of textile tools. For Tarquinia, see the discussion below in the section titled “Comparative Evidence: Etrusco-Italic Sanctuaries”; see also Bonghi Jovino and Chiaramonte Treré 1997, 217–20. Bruni (2005, 15–20) documents minia-ture vessels and ex-votos, impasto ollae, parts of bronze ob-jects, fi bulae, gold, spindlewhorls, loomweights, spools, and faunal remains found within a large artifi cial cavity at the Or-taglia sanctuary at Volterra. The Semisubterranean Building

Fig. 4. Poggio Colla acropolis with monumental foundations arranged around central courtyard and altar. Plus signs indicate grid squares; numbers prefaced by “PC” indicate excavated trenches (drawing by J. Galloway; courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeo-logical Project).




Italy.40 A second deposit, to the west of the courtyard, contained a large sandstone cylinder placed upside down in the center of a pit along with two sandstone statue bases—one inscribed with the name of an Etrus-can aristocrat—and a number of metal objects. Here, strips of fine twisted gold wire that may have adorned textiles (PC 2005-121, PC 2006-022, PC 2006-025) (fig. 6) were part of an axially arranged deposit. Finds from this deposit included the sandstone statue bases, two bronze bowls, a broken bronze handle and remnant of an unidentified tool, a fragment of a bronze ornamen-tal pin, and a number of bones.41 The gold strips in this deposit are thin and wound around one another, an arrangement that differs slightly from known ex-amples of gold thread that are typically wound around an organic fiber.42 The proximity of the fissure to the first deposit and the axial placement of the metal ob-jects in the second leave little doubt of the ritual and votive nature of these two assemblages.

Warden has argued that these deposits are examples of fragmentation, a process in which broken or over-turned objects are deliberately altered and resituated according to a particular social or religious belief.43 In such an interpretation, the gold strips may be viewed as decorative remnants purposely severed from ceremoni-ally significant cloth, although it is not clear whether they were part of gold-adorned textile fragments that no longer survive or whether they were intended as a symbolic offering of component parts of raw materials. In the second deposit, the small quantity of gold strips and their unlikely shape suggest the latter. Castor, in her discussion of these two deposits among the other examples of gold votives at the site, emphasizes that the strips had little material worth and suggests that they may have been an offering of a symbolic portion of locally produced commodities, either gold textiles or jewelry.44 Certainly, both deposits of gold wire make more sense if interpreted as textile adornments rather

at San Giovanale, which dates to the end of the eighth century B.C.E., may also serve as an intriguing parallel. This room or building was constructed over a natural crevice. Although it is debated whether the space had a religious function, in the room were uncovered ceramics, a sanguisuga fi bula, spindle-whorls, spools, impasto beads, and large quantities of deer antler and bone fragments (Olinder et al. 1981, 11–18, 78–9).

40 Gleba (2008b) documents occurrences of gold thread in the ancient Mediterranean. Such fl at, strip-like examples of gold thread are somewhat rare, and it is possible that jewel-ers’ scraps could have doubled for thread. Gleba notes the striking similarities between gold thread and gold wire and suggests that further work is necessary to reconstruct the role

of goldsmiths in the production of gold thread. For gold wire used in jewelry, see Ogden 1991; Swaddling et al. 1991.

41 Warden 2009a, 111–13; 2011, 57–8; see also Meyers (forthcoming).

42 Gleba 2008a, table 1. While this arrangement is atypical for textiles, it is similarly atypical for jewelry (A. Castor, pers. comm. 2011).

43 Warden 2011, 61. This type of deposition is consistent with a votive action defi ned as “obliteration” by Bonghi Jovino (2005a, 42) in her infl uential taxonomy of votive activ-ity. An obliterated sacred object is denied its original usage but is ritually enclosed so as to maintain its sanctity.

44 Castor 2009, 248–49.

Fig. 5. Gold strip (PC 2003-085) found together with a thin gold ring at the opening of a fissure in the Poggio Colla sanctuary, fifth century B.C.E. (courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project).

Fig. 6. Twisted gold wire suitable for textile adornment (PC 2005-121) from a deposition of statue bases and ritual instruments at Poggio Colla, fifth to third centuries B.C.E. (courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project).




than as wearable jewelry. The isolated strip of gold in the fissure deposit is not wrapped around an organic core or another piece of metallic thread;45 its irregu-lar zigzag form may result from its having been woven into a fabric.46 The wire scraps of the second deposit, while not serving as threads specifically, could easily have been used as decorative attachments on textiles and may have even been twisted around one another in a circular arrangement reminiscent of the thin gold ring of the fissure deposit. The paucity of contemporary comparanda for the Poggio Colla material is vexing,47 but textile adornment of some sort is likely.

On their own, these two examples do not prove that women were producing ceremonial textiles at or for the site, although golden textiles were certainly part of the Etruscan woman’s ceremonial repertoire. However, taking into account the ritual aspect of their depositions coupled with the large quantity of ceramic textile tools uncovered in diverse contexts on the site, there is considerable evidence that ceremonial textile production had symbolic importance at Poggio Colla.

The quantity of all three types of commonly pre-served textile tools excavated at Poggio Colla is note-worthy. As of the end of the 2011 excavation season, 97 loomweights, 153 spindlewhorls, and 83 spools have been excavated from the acropolis.48 Most of them do not easily fit into either of the interpretative categories

(“votive” or “production”) proposed by Gleba for tex-tile tools in sanctuaries. In fact, only one deposit with a loomweight can be assigned to a securely documented votive context, if “votive” is strictly defined as an ex-voto offering.49 Many scholars have shown, however, that the complicated nature of votive activity goes be-yond the simple action of a single dedication.50 As this action is irretrievable, archaeologists must be careful not to define the behavior too narrowly. Textile tools may have been used to produce textiles with a ritual or ceremonial purpose, and such production may have taken place within or outside a sanctuary space. It must be remembered that their role in a sacred set-ting lies as much with the object(s) they produced as with the tools themselves.51 For these reasons, I do not limit the sacred implication of textile tools at Poggio Colla by considering only tools that can be placed in a definitive votive context. To do so ignores most of the tools uncovered within the boundaries of the site and their potential association with a range of activi-ties with various relationships to ritual.

A distribution plan of spindlewhorls, loomweights, and spools excavated on the acropolis between 1995 and 2011 (see fig. 4) prompts a number of interesting observations about textile tools at the site. The central-ized presence of the altar certainly suggests that the courtyard was a locus of ritual activity.52 Nearly all the

45 Jaro 2009.46 Walton Rogers (2007, 96–8, fi g. 3.30) discusses sixth-

century Anglo-Saxon graves that preserve similar strips of gold thread (ranging from 0.3 to 2.0 mm in width). These were used as supplementary weft threads in gold brocaded garments. The dips and curves in the strands of thread have been used to reconstruct the pattern of the weave in the lost garments. Gold brocading is one possible explanation for the gold-weaving technique used at Poggio Colla.

47 Warden (2009a, 114) suggests that this deposition dates to the end of the fi rst phase at the site. Thomas (2012, 24–5) dates the end of this phase to the fi fth century B.C.E. Gleba (2008b) dates the earliest examples of gold thread in Italy to the fourth century B.C.E. The gold strips from Poggio Col-la may thus be among the earliest examples of gold textile adornment in ancient Italy.

48 These numbers differ signifi cantly from the quantities of textile tools excavated from the Podere Funghi, the nearby domestic/artisan quarter on the slope of the hill at Poggio Colla, where one loomweight, four spindlewhorls, and one spool have been recovered. See Gleba (2009) for a survey of quantities of published textile tools from Etrusco-Italic sanc-tuaries. Poggio Colla surpasses nearly all the sites in Etruria and many others. In addition, the textile tools from Pog-gio Colla are particular in their relatively even distribution among the three main types.

49 One circular loomweight (PC 2004-258) was included in a large votive deposition in the site’s courtyard. This deposit, referred to as context 2 by Warden (2011, 60), was located southwest of the altar. It covered a natural fi ssure in the bed-

rock of the courtyard and extended nearly 10 m. Contained within were numerous fragments of bronze, iron, tile, and ce-ramics. Much of the material from the deposition was broken or abraded in some way. The single loomweight from this con-text preserves evidence of signifi cant burning on one side, while the opposite surface is free of discoloration or damage, perhaps suggesting deliberate deformation.

50 The defi ning characteristic of a votive is its association with a vow; the vow creates a link between the donor and a divinity. Bonghi Jovino (2005a, 33–44) has categorized the variety of rituals that a votive object may represent in the ar-chaeological record, from propitiation to reverence for the divine. Glinister (2000, 54) cautions, “the generic term ‘votive deposit’ can be applied in various archaeological contexts: a sealed deposit of utensils and organic remains, buried after one or several sacrifi ces, for example, or a deposit of ritual ob-jects, such as bronze statuettes and miniature pottery . . . [or] the burial of votive objects that have accumulated in a sanctu-ary over a period of time . . . and must be cleared to make way for incoming offerings.” Finally, Bouma (1996, 1:6–8) points out that votive gifts must be understood and considered in re-lationship with other gifts in a given deposit.

51 Bouma (1996, 1:392) suggests that loomweights in votive contexts may have been attached to matrimonial garments or may symbolize the work of married women (among other pos-sibilities). It follows from such a suggestion that textile tools in sanctuaries may not refer to the production of generic house-hold textiles but to specifi c textiles used in social ceremonies, such as marriages, funerals, or even religious rites.

52 In other sanctuary settings, the area surrounding the al-




textile tools from Poggio Colla were found in spaces other than the courtyard; they were not usually found with other votive material typical of personal dedica-tions, such as bronze figurines or ceramics, nor were they collected in refuge pits or depressions. Instead, they occurred throughout the acropolis in diverse spaces and contexts. While it is beyond the scope of the present study to examine the context of every tex-tile tool from the site, to ignore their significant pres-ence at a sacred site overlooks potential evidence for female participation in social and religious ceremonies. A few concentrations in particular illustrate a range of ritual associations for ceramic textile tools in Etruscan sanctuaries beyond the traditional view that they were female ex-votos.

Although there are some instances of random scat-ter,53 an obvious concentration of spindlewhorls and spools falls along the northern edge of the plateau. Reinforced walls oriented toward the northern bound-aries of Etruria suggest that in the later phases of the site, the north side of the acropolis served a defensive purpose. Excavations surrounding these walls have re-vealed a stratum of dark earth with material that may predate the architecture on the site. Of the excavated finds, 24% of the spindlewhorls and 32% of the spools come from this stratum, as do significant quantities of orientalizing bucchero fragments—many belonging to vessel shapes associated with banqueting—and large fragments of bovine and ovine bone.54 Excavators have interpreted this layer as fill containing early material removed during a successive architectural phase and brought in during the construction of the defensive walls. It thus cannot be considered the kind of closed context usually identified as a votive deposit. This does not, however, exclude the possibility that the material, when originally deposited, had religious or ceremoni-

al significance. It may very well have originated from early ritual activity and have been disposed of within the bounds of the sanctuary as a type of obliteration deposit, in recognition of its sacred character.55 The chronological horizon of the datable material in the deposit indicates that the deposition occurred before the Archaic period and most likely represents a single event. Given the secondary context of the deposition, it is impossible to document where the spinning or feasting suggested by the artifacts may have taken place; nevertheless, the dense mixture of banqueting and spinning artifacts in this stratigraphic context suggests a relationship between the activities in the earliest his-tory of the site and the presence of women at that time.

What evidence do the tools in the deposit provide about production? Experimental archaeology has shown that the most important indicator of the type of fiber produced with a particular spindlewhorl is its weight.56 Based on measurements from all whorls un-covered through the 2011 excavation season, the aver-age weight of a spindlewhorl at Poggio Colla is 13.72 g; those from the northern deposit are slightly smaller, with an average weight of 10.46 g. Both weights are typical for the production of high-quality fine yarn.57 The spindlewhorls from the northern deposit, how-ever, are notable for their fabric and design. More than half of the catalogued examples are made of fine wares, particularly bucchero, and several of them are decorated with incised scallops on the body of the whorl (fig. 7).58 The combination of weight, fabric, and design, taken together with the greater number of spools in this area, points to specialized textile pro-duction in the early phase of the site.

A recent study has reconceptualized spools as coun-terweights for the weaving of very high-quality garment borders, in a process known as tablet weaving.59 The

tar is often a location where personal ex-votos are found, es-pecially those that have been collected and buried within the sanctuary to make room for new dedications. E.g., see Nagy (2011, 114–17) for the deposit near the altar at the Portonac-cio sanctuary at Veii. Textile tools from this deposit are dis-cussed below.

53 Several of these occur in contexts from later phases, where loomweights are found near substantial pithoi frag-ments. These fi nds support the theory that loomweights can be used to anchor lids on these storage vessels.

54 The faunal remains are currently being studied by An-gela Trentacoste of the University of Sheffi eld.

55 In her categorization of votive rituals, Bonghi Jovino (2005a, 42) describes as characteristic of an obliteration rit-ual the removal of objects already belonging to a divinity to a place within the sanctuary where they will maintain their original value.

56 The formal qualities of spindlewhorls are discussed in general by Gleba 2008a, 106–8 (with bibliography); see also Bazzanella and Mayr 2009, 149–51.

57 Range is 2.00–43.81 g. Based on a survey of recent ex-perimental work, Gleba (2008a, 106) states that the weight of a spindlewhorl used for short, fi ne wool is ca. 8 g, while the limit for medium to heavy wool is ca. 33 g. In general, most experimental data confi rm that it is the weight of the spindle-whorl that affects the fi neness of the spun yarn, for both wool and fl ax (Andersson et al. 2010, 164–65). Poggio Colla mea-surements were conducted between 2008 and 2011. I am grateful to Cassandra Holtmann for her work with data col-lection. Broken or partial whorls were not included in these calculations.

58 Warden 2009b, 74–5, cat. nos. 48, 50.59 Ræder Knudsen 2002. Tablet weaving was not unique in

the ancient world (Ræder Knudsen 2002, 232–34), but prior to the fi nds from Verucchio and the work of Ræder Knudsen, it received little attention in studies of pre-Roman Italy. Gle-ba (2008a, 140–41) accepts this proposal for the function of spools and adds that their shape and fragility make them in-effi cient spools for thick yarn.




creation of diverse patterns on such narrow products requires small square-shaped tablets (usually wood-en) to make space to pass the weft through the warp. Spools would then act as weights to stabilize a row of wooden tablets and provide tension for the warp, much as a loomweight does on an upright loom. By allowing yarn from each tablet to be spun around a spool, the spools together would prevent the yarn from twisting, allowing closer work. Spools used in this way should have a relatively standardized weight. Because of the disturbed nature of the deposit along the north-ern edge of the Poggio Colla acropolis, many of the spools found there are broken at the stem. The few intact examples have weights that fall between 40.7 and 70.7 g, which is consistent with other concentrations of spools thought to be associated with tablet weaving.60 Moreover, the spools share with the spindlewhorls a connection with contemporary elite bucchero pot-tery from Poggio Colla and surrounding sites through decorative motifs, such as rosettes or spirals (fig. 8).61 This stratum at Poggio Colla yielded no actual tablets, which are quite rare in the archaeological record;62 nor did it yield any traditional loomweights, whose absence

suggests that textiles were produced by methods other than weaving on a warp-weighted loom.

Spinning and a specialized type of weaving leading to the production of fine garment borders may have been among the earliest ritual activities at Poggio Colla. Moreover, this concentration of spindlewhorls and spools, particularly those with decorative motifs that also appear on contemporary bucchero vessels, suggests that textile production (or its memory) was integrated with other ritual activities, such as banquet-ing and sacrifice—two activities associated with the other material found in this deposit. Edlund-Berry has recently pointed out that sanctuaries were noisy, cha-otic places with much attention directed toward din-ing and procuring food.63 Although we do not know precisely where any of the early ritual activities took place on the acropolis—or even whether the textile tools were used in the sanctuary itself or whether they were used elsewhere and then brought to the sanctuary

60 See Ræder Knudsen (2002, 228–29) for the weights of spools from the Verucchio tombs. Gleba (2000, 79–80) sug-gests that the unusually high number of spools (580) from the orientalizing-archaic site of Poggio Civitate (Murlo) may be due to the presence of a tablet-weaving workshop on the site. She records a weight range of 8–112 g with a mean weight of 50 g.

61 Warden 2009b, 74–5, cat. nos. 49, 52. The repertoire of stamped and incised decoration on the Poggio Colla bucche-ro is currently being studied by Phil Perkins of the Open Uni-versity. A preliminary analysis was conducted in 2000 (Gori 2002). Several common motifs and types are found on the ori-

entalizing and archaic bucchero of nearby San Piero a Sieve (Archeologia in alto Mugello 1994, 30–6; Salvini 2009, 54, cat. no. 103).

62 The few tablets recovered from pre-Roman contexts in Italy have largely come from funerary contexts—e.g., the cir-cular and triangular tablets found with a remarkable ceramic pyxis at the necropolis of Alianello di Aliano near Matera in Basilicata (von Eles 2007c, 181, cat. no. 127). To my knowl-edge, the only tablets recovered from an Etrusco-Italic settle-ment context are those from Ficana (Lipponen 2007, 4).

63 Edlund-Berry 2011, 11.

Fig. 7. Bucchero spindlewhorls from a deposit on the north-ern edge of the Poggio Colla acropolis (from left to right: PC 2004-073, PC 2005-134, PC 2005-124), late seventh to early sixth centuries B.C.E. The spindlewhorls are illustrated up-side down according to common convention, although the orientation is incorrect in terms of their usage (drawing by A. Hooton; courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project). Fig. 8. Spools (PC 2000-025, PC 2005-109) from the deposit

on the northern edge of the Poggio Colla acropolis, late seventh to early sixth centuries B.C.E. (drawing by F. Calosi and J. Boscarino; courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project).




—the presence of textile tools with eating and sacri-fice utensils situates women, and their work, in the religious life of Poggio Colla and suggests community affirmation of female participation.64

The concentration of loomweights along the south-ern edge of the courtyard also links textile production with ritual activity. Here, approximately 40 doughnut-shaped loomweights65 of similar weight and size were uncovered between the second-phase ashlar walls of the courtyard and the third-phase irregular rubble walls. The second building phase, which saw the re-alignment of the acropolis around an open courtyard with an altar at the center, is difficult to date because of a lack of ceramics, but it appears to have spanned at least the end of the fifth century and part of the fourth century B.C.E. The loomweights, which are undeco-rated and uninscribed, are relatively uniform in size, weighing 480–575 g and measuring 10.0–10.9 cm in diameter.66 The number, consistency in weight and measurement, and archaeological context strongly ar-gue that these weights were sets for several looms. Ac-cording to Barber, a warp-weighted loom typically used 6–30 weights.67 More weights likely remain in the unex-cavated part of the southern wall, and thus we cannot

know how many looms are represented by the weights. But there must have been at least two looms in the area and perhaps as many as four. The unusually uniform nature of this deposit points to relatively standardized production of similar types of cloth,68 perhaps textiles of standard dimensions intended for ceremonial use and made on multiple looms in the area. Given the placement of the weights between the two foundation walls, it is doubtful that they document the original location of looms. A more probable scenario is that the weights belonged to looms that had been set up in the second-phase courtyard—or some other nearby space large enough to accommodate them—and were deposited among the old and new foundations during the subsequent architectural phase.69

Excavation has revealed a few roof-tile fragments, a few vessel fragments, spinning tools, and metal objects, together with the weights. The ceramic fragments in-clude three examples of a miniature fine ware kyathos with a cornu cave style handle that seems to have been locally produced.70 There are, however, additional artifacts associated with textiles or textile production: three spindlewhorls, two spools, and two fibulae, in-cluding a well-preserved bow.71 In other words, most

64 Poli and Trocchi (2007) examine material evidence from funerary contexts near Verucchio to argue for an integration of food preparation and textile production. They suggest that these two quotidian activities, when performed in a commu-nal context—perhaps a context similar to the one depicted on the Verucchio throne—may have served as markers of dis-tinction for women of status and allowed for female participa-tion in social spheres beyond the domestic.

65 Gleba (2008a, 128–32) provides a detailed typology of loomweights from pre-Roman Italy. Loomweights have sev-eral different shapes, but the primary types found in central Italy are the round, doughnut-shaped weights and the tall-er, pyramidal type. Poggio Colla’s weights are nearly all the doughnut-shaped type, which is typical for northern Italy. Poggio Colla’s loomweights share typological characteris-tics with other sites in the Val Padana, such as Monterenzio (Macellari 1983) and San Vito (Vay 1988); however, the sur-faces of Poggio Colla’s weights tend to be fl at rather than rounded, creating sharper edges and a cylindrical shape.

66 For a detailed analysis of the formal properties of these weights, see Meyers (forthcoming).

67 Barber (1991, 93–104) documents evidence from the Bronze Age for sets of loomweights found in situ. She notes that sets of loomweights can number as many as 80, but such large quantities are atypical.

68 Mårtensson et al. 2009.69 There is some archaeological evidence for loomweights

used as foundation deposits; however, this evidence derives largely from Greek sites in Sicily, where loomweights have been noted in sacred and nonsacred contexts ranging from the sixth to third centuries B.C.E. (Gleba 2008a, 182–83). Or-landini (1953, 443), who was one of the fi rst to discuss the signifi cance of loomweights in sanctuary settings in ancient

Sicily, viewed them as having only a symbolic purpose, as at-tested by the use of inscriptions such as the 30 weights from Gela with the identical inscription “Theotimos” (Orlandini 1966, 20). The closest Etruscan parallel, from the city walls at Roselle, is a loomweight with the inscription “vei” (Rix 1991, 132). Although a votive function for this particular loom-weight was initially suggested, Ambrosini (2000, 158) points out that if the inscription were to refer to a deity, it would be unique among inscribed loomweights in the Etruscan world. Recent excavations at Campo della Fiera have produced an inscribed loomweight (Stopponi 2011, 35), but the practice of inscribing loomweights with the names of Etruscan divini-ties seems far from common. The absence of inscriptions on the Poggio Colla weights should not preclude their possible inclusion in a foundation deposit.

70 This particular vessel type, which has a single handle composed of two hollow chambers joined at the center, ap-pears to imitate more elaborate bucchero examples from the earliest phases on the site and is known from earlier contexts at other sites in the region, including San Piero a Sieve, Fie-sole, and Gonfi enti. Additional fi ne ware examples include PC 1999-152, PC 2001-071, PC 2001-097, and PC 2010-204. PC 2010-204 is partially vitrifi ed, which is perhaps indicative of misfi ring. Bucchero examples of the cornu cave type handles from Poggio Colla occur in strata dating to the Orientalizing period (PC 1996-105, PC 2000-132, PC 2001-005, PC 2010-142). For examples of the type from Fiesole, see Salvini 1990, 76. For San Piero a Sieve, see Salvini 2009, 28, 41–2, cat. nos. 49–52. For Gonfi enti, see Poggesi et al. 2005, 290.

71 Spindlewhorls: PC 1999-043, PC 2010-184, PC 2010-206. Spools: PC 1999-168, PC 1999-092. Fibulae: PC 2001-168, PC 2001-178.




of the material in the deposit is associated with tex-tiles. This suggests that the deposit is the result of an intentional act, rather than random fill. Indeed, the deposit may represent a deliberate act of ritual destruc-tion or fragmentation, a practice identified by Warden at several places at the site, most notably in the fissure deposit capped by the overturned architectural block and in the deposit containing the upside-down cylin-der and bases.72 The practice of deliberately burying architectural elements from destroyed or abandoned Etruscan religious structures has been documented at a number of other sites, such as Veii, Satricum, and Pyrgi.73 Edlund-Berry has argued that this practice amounts to a ritual “un-founding” of the sacred struc-ture.74 Since such behavior traditionally involved ar-chitectural elements, particularly roofing terracottas, there is a tendency to classify it as a pragmatic clearing or fill project, but Glinster argues that the singling out and isolation of particular objects in these deposits sug-gests intentionality.75 If so, this would provide a model for the textile tools under discussion.

According to Warden, these kinds of deliberate deposits of votives have as their focus the commu-nity rather than a single dedicator.76 It is possible to see the removal and deposition of loomweights from sanctuary looms in the same way. When they are not attached to the warp or in storage, loomweights are already nonfunctional, essentially “broken.” Taking looms apart, then, would eternally preserve the weights as tools of ritual within the sanctuary and would point simultaneously to votive action and the original pro-duction role of the weights.

A final example from Poggio Colla looks very much like a votive deposit as traditionally defined and demonstrates the complexity of categorizing the ar-chaeological contexts of textile tools at the site. This example is a group of pyramidal loomweights that were found in a small pit outside the southeastern wall of the monument (see figs. 4, 9). Nine small py-ramidal loomweights—an atypical shape for Poggio Colla—were positioned around a much larger pyra-midal loomweight (fig. 10).77 There were several post-holes nearby, and the ceramic assemblage in this area is among the earliest at the site; perhaps simple huts

predated the monumental structure on the acropo-lis. Two displaced column bases were also uncovered nearby. Although the relationship between architec-ture in this area and the rest of the site is not entirely clear at this time, the placement of these weights, as

72 Warden 2011, 57–62.73 Glinister 2000. This action is also a type of obliteration

votive ritual, as defi ned by Bonghi Jovino 2005a, 40–3.74 Edlund-Berry 1994. 75 Glinister 2000, 68.76 Warden (forthcoming).77 The nine small weights are not well preserved; it is thus

not possible to obtain accurate weights from them. The large one (PC 2007-054) weighs 1,025 g and measures 14.1 cm (ht.)

x 8.4 cm (wdth.). Pyramidal weights are rare at Poggio Colla. Only one other example from the acropolis has been uncov-ered—a fragmentary piece from the southwestern edge of the acropolis outside the walls of the monumental structure. It is unclear whether the pyramidal shape can be associated with an earlier phase on the site. This seems unlikely, since one pyramidal loomweight was also found in the Podere Funghi zone and has been securely dated to the Hellenistic period.

Fig. 9. Detail of the southeastern edge of the Poggio Colla acropolis, illustrating the find context of the pyramidal loomweight deposit (drawing by M. Burgess; courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project).




with the other examples, indicates a deliberate ac-tion. A group of more than 30 loomweights recently found in a fossa votiva at Pyrgi is an intriguing paral-lel. The Pyrgi weights were deposited together with fragments of a Caeretan brazier that was broken prior to deposition and with architectural terracottas that date the deposit to the beginning of the fifth century B.C.E. Excavators hypothesize that women deposited the weights to honor a female deity at a nearby (albeitat present undocumented) structure.78 Such an inter-pretation may also be applicable to the Poggio Colla deposit; however, for the weights to maintain a sacred significance it is not necessary to assume the presence of a structure. Although both the Pyrgi and Poggio Colla deposits appear to possess a strong sacred char-acter, it is important to stress that textile tools can be found in a variety of contexts within an Etruscan sanc-tuary, and their potential ritual character need not be narrowly defined.

It is uncertain whether the Poggio Colla acropo-lis continued to function as a sanctuary in its final phases, although several votive depositions from this

time period point to a continued perception of the sacred quality of the space.79 Recent excavations in rooms to the west of the courtyard have uncovered a few additional concentrations of both loomweights and spindlewhorls dated through their association with black-gloss ceramics to the third century B.C.E. Their size and weight variation is greater than that of the previously discussed concentrations. For example, the spindlewhorls tend to be larger and heavier than the examples from the orientalizing deposition along the northern boundary of the acropolis, and they are generally coarse ware rather than fine bucchero.80 The range of weight measurements suggests production of slightly heavier thread that may be evidence for greater variety in the types of textiles produced during the later phases.81 As for the loomweights, they lack the consistency of the deposit along the southern edge of the courtyard and fall roughly into two groups: one with weights ranging from 350 to 525 g and the other with weights ranging from 880 to 1,025 g.82 One par-ticular concentration of 34 loomweights seems to have been destroyed and burned in situ in a possible storage

78 Fili e tele 2010. See also Institute for Etruscan and Italic Studies (2012, 9) for a notice of this recent discovery.

79 The Hellenistic jewelry deposition discussed by Castor (2009) was found along a wall in this western region, as was a hoard of Roman silver Victoriati found in a pit and dated to the end of the third century B.C.E. (Warden et al. 2005, 258; Thomas 2012).

80 Weights range from 9.36 to 30.03 g, with an average

weight of 17.51 g. 81 This slight difference in average whorl weight may also

be the result of a change in fashion between the Orientaliz-ing and Hellenistic periods. I am grateful to Gleba for this observation.

82 Many of the loomweights from the western rooms are fragmentary. Weights for the complete examples range from 350 to 1,025 g.

Fig. 10. Pyramidal loomweights (PC 2007-054, PC 2007-050, PC 2007-051, PC 2007-066, PC 2007-115, PC 2007-118) uncovered in a pit on the southeastern edge of the Poggio Colla acropolis (courtesy Mugello Valley Archaeological Project).




room that also contained at least two pithoi, one of which was turned upside down and rested on its rim (in the area marked PC 34 on fig. 4). Barber, citing ethnographic data, argues that it was not uncommon for loomweights to be stored together when not being used on a loom.83 Although this western segment of the Poggio Colla acropolis is still under excavation, it appears that textile production continued to be an im-portant component of the site even though the ritual aspects of the sanctuary may have changed.84

This close look at the archaeological evidence for production of ceremonial textiles at Poggio Colla re-veals their role in shaping the identity and defining the activities of a sacred Etruscan site. The presence of thin gold strips in two votive depositions suggests that ornate textiles were associated with rituals at the site, and the presence of spindlewhorls, spools, and loomweights in all stratigraphic levels at the site, coupled with an early votive deposit of loomweights on the southern edge of the acropolis, confirms this picture. To date, there is no evidence for the divin-ity worshiped at Poggio Colla, although Warden has suggested that veneration of the natural cavity in the central courtyard may indicate a chthonic female de-ity.85 The number of textile tools from the site would support that attribution, since quantities of textile tools are rarely associated with male divinities in the Etrusco-Italic world.86

At Poggio Colla, the distribution and nature of the varied deposits of textile tools, as well as the votive contexts of the gold adornment and the pyramidal

loomweight deposit, may be emblematic of a wide range of votive action on behalf of a community rather than evidence of exclusive, private dedications from individual women. Such a view conforms to the close relationship between Etruscan elite families and the management of religion and ritual. For example, in her discussion of the economics of Etruscan sanctu-aries, Becker defines the sanctuary space as a center for economic display and aristocratic competition among controlling elites. In addition to proclaiming status and power through the dedication of high-value objects, she argues, members of the theocratic elite reinforced their own prominence through certain rit-ual actions, such as the communal meal of sacrifice.87 Based on epigraphic evidence, Becker notes that men frequently dominated the economics of religion; how-ever, there are also rare examples of objects inscribed by female dedicators.88

Close examination of textile tools in sanctuary set-tings expands our understanding of the role of women within this socioeconomic aspect of Etruscan life. If women were responsible for the creation of ceremo-nial textiles, whether for elite social rituals such as mar-riages or funerals or for ceremonies associated with a specific deity, this productive activity may have been promoted, or even performed, within the sanctuary space. While the precise role of Etruscan women within the sacred sphere remains uncertain, Lundeen has pro-posed that, at least with regard to evidence from Vulci, civic duties for elite Etruscan women were greater than previously acknowledged.89 Given the close relationship

83 Barber 1991, 102. In Syro-Palestinian contexts of the ninth to 10th centuries, round objects identifi ed as loomweightsand found in proximity to jars have been reconsidered. Homan (2004, 89–91) proposes that they were fermentation stoppers for the brewing of beer. This interpretation is unlike-ly to apply at Poggio Colla because of the higher weights of the examples (which are on the high end of the range common for Near Eastern fermentation stoppers) and the tradition of round loomweights in northern Etruria and the Po Valley.

84 Gleba (2008a, 199–202) proposes an economic model for textile production that pinpoints the end of the seventh century B.C.E. for a shift from elite domination of textile pro-duction, including ceremonial textiles, to a more egalitarian workshop model.

85 Warden 2009a, 114.86 Athena/Minerva and Hera/Juno were by far the most

common goddesses associated with textile production in pre-Roman Italy (Gleba 2008a, 181). In Etruria, there were several female deities whose sanctuaries produced textile tools. Two signifi cant parallels for the Poggio Colla evidence are the sa-cred complex on Pian di Cività at Tarquinia (Bonghi Jovino 2005b) and the Ortaglia sanctuary at Volterra (Bruni 2005). In both cases, textile tools have been recovered with some fre-quency, and both sites feature evidence for sacred activity in the vicinity of a cavity or fi ssure. Bonghi Jovino (2010) has

suggested a goddess with early aspects of Artumes and per-haps Turan, who later merged with (or transformed into) Uni at Tarquinia. Bruni (2005, 21–5) notes associations with the same goddesses, particularly a goddess combining aspects of Turan-Uni. Both cases rely on faunal remains, especially quantities of antler, deer, canine, and turtle remains. For a general discussion of the diverse qualities and manifestations of a chthonic female deity who is often associated with Arte-mis, see Nielsen and Rathje 2009.

87 Becker 2008.88 Becker (2008, 89) notes that at sixth-century B.C.E. Veii,

30 objects were inscribed with dedicants’ names. One object bore a female name, Venalia Slarinas.

89 Lundeen (2006) discusses evidence for the use of the term “hatrencu,” particularly its occurrence in 12 funerary inscriptions from Vulci, six of which derive from the fourth-century B.C.E. Tomb of the Inscriptions. Using comparative evidence from Rome and the Near East, as well as contem-porary political history in Vulci, she concludes that the term, long associated with “priestesses,” may in fact be a civic title for a magistracy held by women. Such an interpretation does not exclude the potential for the religious authority of Etruscan women. In fact, it is likely that such a civic title would auto-matically “possess religious and honorifi c aspects” (Lundeen 2006, 57). At Poggio Colla, the religious role of women may




between the Etruscan elite and cultic responsibility, it is possible that elite women participated in sacred cer-emonial activity. At Poggio Colla, an early deposit of material associated with banqueting includes particu-larly small spindlewhorls and spools; these objects may be interpreted as evidence for the specialized produc-tion of fine wool thread and tablet weaving among elite women in the earliest phases of the site. Whether those women labored within the precinct of the gods, imbu-ing their work with sacred protection and oversight, is impossible to know, given the deposit’s secondary con-text; but the consistency in the formal characteristics of the tools themselves, a necessary condition for weaving, as well as the lack of other typical votives among the accompanying—largely banqueting—material suggests that the tools, like the bucchero cups and plates, were functional rather than purely symbolic. The later vo-tive contexts associated with textile production and adornment at the site further attest to the production of fine garments as an integral component of the site’s earliest ritual activity and identity.

Additional concentrations of weaving tools in the later phases at Poggio Colla also point to communal votive activity rather than acts of individual dedication. The evidence of standardized loomweights along the southern walls of the courtyard is persuasive testimo-ny for some type of on-site weaving production prior to the construction of the third architectural phase. Nevertheless, to consider these tools solely as evidence of production on the site may be too restrictive, since their regular deposition between the foundations of the second and third architectural phases may signify that these weights were buried as an intentional ritual dedication. Rather than serving as personal ex-votos, they may have continued a site-wide practice of bury-ing tools or objects used within the sacred space of the sanctuary in communal recognition of the centrality of women’s work.

The evidence from Poggio Colla demonstrates the importance of adopting a broad range of interpreta-

tions for textile tools in sanctuary contexts—that is, of looking beyond the standard view of a symbolic female ex-voto. Indeed, the Poggio Colla examples can be interpreted as both personal dedications and actual production tools; these two meanings need not be mutually exclusive. In addition, their presence throughout the history of the site serves as valuable evidence for the role of textiles in Etruscan social and religious rituals outside of domestic settings.

comparative evidence: etrusco-italic sanctuaries

Specific information about spindlewhorls, spools, and loomweights is rarely published in excavation re-ports of Etruscan sanctuaries. Therefore, it appears that, relative to other types of artifacts found in Etrus-can sanctuaries, textile tools are of minor importance. In the cases where textile tools are discussed at more length, they are commonly interpreted as personal votive offerings from female dedicators to a female divinity, and they often serve to reinforce an inter-pretation of a deposit as typical of the mundus muli-ebris. Closer analysis of the archaeological contexts of textile tools in sanctuaries other than Poggio Colla, however, may broaden our view of the tools’ sacred meaning and function.

One example is the area surrounding the altar in the Portonaccio sanctuary at Veii. In a publication of the material originally excavated by Massimo Pallot-tino around the altar, Colonna documents objects that range widely in date and probably represent personal votives, such as bucchero vessels with inscriptions, jew-elry, and terracotta figurines.90 However, Colonna was not always able to determine exactly where in the vicin-ity of the altar particular objects were found,91 includ-ing 194 spindlewhorls, 4 spools, and 26 loomweights.92 The number of spindlewhorls is striking. Many of the whorls are bucchero and rather small.93 Certain groups of them are so consistent that they are catalogued with one catalogue number.94 Many of the spindlewhorls

also be referenced by a votive deposition of jewelry, which includes a pair of horseshoe-shaped earrings (Castor 2009). Castor (2010, 190–95) has argued on the basis of the iconog-raphy of terracotta votives that horseshoe earrings may have been part of a costume adopted by the Etruscan elite in pub-lic ritual roles. The presence of the deposit at Poggio Colla may suggest a continued association between women and sa-cred activity throughout the site’s history. For additional dis-cussions of the role of elite women in Etruscan religion, see Nielsen 1990.

90 Colonna 2002.91 Colonna (2002, 239) cites Pallottino’s notebook as dis-

cussing spindlewhorls in section H to the west of the altar and in section Y to the south.

92 Colonna 2002, 194–96, cat. nos. 521–46 (loomweights), 547–50 (spools), 551–83 (spindlewhorls). The spindlewhorls are grouped in concentrations. The loomweights are both rectangular and pyramidal. Many are marked with crosses and grooves. A few examples have distinctive markings, such as a fi sh-spine design or impressed rosettes. No weights are re-corded for the loomweights.

93 Of the bucchero spindlewhorls, the height measure-ments range from 1.5 to 2.5 cm, but most are ca. 2.0 cm. The width measurements range from 1.5 to 3.8 cm, with most be-tween 1.5 and 2.0 cm. Weights are not provided.

94 Colonna 2002, 195. E.g., cat. no. VTP 80 represents 60 complete examples of bucchero spindlewhorls.




possess decorative marks typical of comparable ex-amples from the Villanovan or Orientalizing periods, such as scalloped sides or incised patterns. Colonna interprets all the textile tools as typical of deposits dedicated to female divinities, Minerva in particular.95 The circumstances of the excavation and publication prevent a full understanding of the original context of these objects, but certainly the accompanying material points strongly to a votive purpose. As we have seen, however, that purpose need not be exclusive to produc-tion. The inclusion of 21 fibulae dating from the end of the seventh century to the beginning of the fifth cen-tury B.C.E., among the material surrounding the altar, suggests the possibility of actual textile donations.96 As Nagy notes, votive deposits in the vicinity of altars are often obliteration deposits composed of objects from other occasions that are collected and buried within the sanctuary space.97 The dedication of nearly 200 spindlewhorls might represent such a deposit.

A deposit of textile tools from an archaic well at Vi-gna Parrocchiale at Caere is similar.98 Here, 2 spindle-whorls, 15 spools, and 77 loomweights were found.99 The loomweights are all pyramidal, and many of them possess markings such as crosses, rosettes, and lines, decoration known in a few other sacred contexts, in-cluding southern Etruria and Latium.100 While the textile tools from this deposit have prompted specula-tion about a female divinity, the accompanying mate-rial—predominantly roof tiles rather than figurines or ceramics—is less typical of personal donations. Moscati wonders whether the loomweights are dedications at all, based on the nonvotive character of the other ob-jects from the well.101 Given that there are loomweights sufficient for several looms, I suggest that they may have been used within a common sanctuary space and then discarded in the well. Like the Poggio Colla evi-dence, this may point to a communal votive practice.

These two examples demonstrate some of the com-plexities of interpretation that should accompany any consideration of textile tools in Etruscan sanctuaries.

Although in both cases it is possible that the tools were originally offered as propitiatory gifts by female dedicators, their archaeological contexts may also in-dicate a final obliteration ritual, according to which they remained part of the sanctuary space but were put out of use through burial or enclosure in a contained space. It is therefore impossible to ascertain whether the original motivation for their presence in the sanc-tuary was votive or production, or both. In fact, I would argue that it is their productive potential as tools that distinguishes spindlewhorls and loomweights from other types of ex-voto offerings, such as figurines or miniature vessels. Whether they were used elsewhere and then left in the sanctuary or used in the sanctu-ary space itself prior to deposition, votive textile tools should not be viewed simply as generic symbols of fe-male domestic activity. Rather, their presence in sanc-tuaries may also attest to women’s productive role in the community in terms of their textile contributions to social or religious ceremonies.

Additional examples from Etruscan sanctuaries in central and northern Etruria add more nuance to the picture. The ninth- to eighth-century B.C.E. sa-cred structure and complex on the Pian di Cività at Tarquinia (the so-called Area Sacra and Complesso Monumentale), which contain a number of clearly ritual deposits of instruments and human burials, formed the core of a monumental area that continued to evolve and ultimately blended a variety of civic and sacred functions. The earliest structure, Building Beta, has been reconstructed as a two-room hut enclosed within a rectangular wall. Although it was not a temple in the traditional sense, the sacred quality of the area and its subsequent phases is not in doubt. Among the many types of artifacts uncovered in the Area Sacra/Complesso Monumentale were 32 spindlewhorls, 35 spools, and 58 loomweights. Most of the spindlewhorls and spools derive from the initial levels to the middle of the orientalizing level, while the loomweights come from archaic and later levels.102

95 Colonna 2002, 238–39. Nielsen and Rathje (2009, 269) note the chthonic and oracular aspects of the cult.

96 Such a connection, well attested in Greece, has been sug-gested in Ambrosini 2009, 283.

97 Nagy 2011, 113–14.98 Cristofani 1993.99 Moscati 1993.100 E.g., similar marks decorate loomweights from Veii (Col-

onna 2002, 194–95; supra n. 92). There are also examples from Ardea, where Piergrossi (2005) documents 35 loom-weights shaped like pyramids and parallelepipeds and deco-rated on top with rosette impressions, circles, and zigzags, as well as more than 350 loomweights (many decorated) from Lavinium (Enea nel Lazio 1981, cat. no. D189). Such decora-

tive patterns are also known from South Italy. Di Giuseppe (1995) has suggested that similar decorative patterns on loomweights from Armento may represent designs from com-pleted textiles. Patterned decoration is not exclusive to loom-weights in southern contexts, as the more than 300 ornately decorated loomweights from the Baratella deposit near Este attest (Gleba 2008a, fig. 119). See Gleba (2008a, 134–38) for additional examples and discussion. She concludes that marks on loomweights are the products of regional and chronological distinctions.

101 Moscati 1993, 474.102 Bonghi Jovino and Chiarmonte Trerè 1997; Bonghi

Jovino 2001a. A synthesis of the excavation and results is also presented in Moretti Sgubini (2001), especially in Bonghi




Some of these spindlewhorls and spools are deco-rated with motifs that correspond to locally produced impasto from the same levels. Most notable is a spindle-whorl with a graffito depicting seated figures,103 a par-ticularly evocative motif that might be compared to contemporaneous representations of elite females spinning or preparing thread for the loom. Bonghi Jovino has interpreted the presence of this locally pro-duced impasto as evidence of an emerging elite class representing a centralized power that is simultane-ously religious, political, and economic in scope. The presence of spinning tools within the deposit provides documentation for a female role in such aristocratic presentation.104 Based on the full repertoire of offer-ings, especially those from the seventh century B.C.E. (including deer antlers, bucchero vases, and other “fe-male” objects), Bonghi Jovino has argued that the chief divinity at the site initially manifested aspects of Ar-tumes and later merged with Uni.105 The spindlewhorls from Pian di Cività, like those at other sites, need not be seen solely as gifts offered from female dedicants to a female deity; since the textile tools are not specifically associated with a closed votive deposition, they may be interpreted as remnants of activity in the complex. In fact, the epigraphic mention of Uni, an inscription (“mi uni”) on the underside of a bucchero base dating to 630–600 B.C.E., corresponds with the expansion of Building Beta to include courtyards.106 Here again, as at Poggio Colla, textile production may have occurred in a centralized space and served a simultaneously sa-cred and social function comprising both a ritual that allowed for the production of thread for ceremonial garments and an activity that asserted elite authority in the changing social landscape of Tarquinia.

Many of the loomweights from Pian di Cività come from the latest levels on the site; few come from a pri-

mary archaeological context.107 They do not appear to come from specific votive contexts. None was asso-ciated with the foundations of walls. The weights are all pyramidal, and approximately 30% of them possess distinguishing marks, graffiti, or impressions.108 Their weights range from 170 to more than 800 g; most of them, however, are between 300 and 400 g. Sartori, in his discussion and catalogue of the loomweights, notes that their presence at Pian di Cività is hard to explain without assuming that they had more than a utilitarian meaning.109 The presence of textile tools at such a religious site may well attest to the continued awareness of the area as a center for social rituals that may have included ceremonial textile production.

The site of Roselle, located north of Tarquinia in the Maremma, provides more evidence for textile pro-duction in a ceremonial rather than purely domestic context. In the heart of the city, excavators uncovered an orientalizing building of crude bricks set within a wall of the same building material. This so-called Casa del Recinto has been interpreted by some as a sacred structure, perhaps a precinct of a goddess similar to Vesta.110 The material unearthed behind the structure within the boundary of the confining wall to the rear includes rich examples of bucchero and some black-figure fragments dated to the sixth century B.C.E., as well as burned animal bones and an olla rim inscribed with what appears to be a matronymic of a potential dedicator. From the same area, largely within the confines of the recinto behind and next to the struc-ture, were many pyramidal loomweights, including 70 in an outside channel adjacent to the area and an additional 29 on a nearby pavement.111 The weights are largely located outside the casa and may very well have been used for public production of ceremonial garments. In addition, it has been suggested that the

Jovino’s summary (2001c) of the Area Sacra/Complesso Monumentale. For the loomweights, see Sartori 2001. For the spindlewhorls and spools, see Bonghi Jovino, 2001b, 64–5.

103 Bonghi Jovino 2001b, 65, cat. no. 56/3, pl. 53.104 Bonghi Jovino (2001b, 88–90) hypothesizes that the im-

pasto ceramics that accompany the spinning tools may indi-cate the offering of some sort of elite meal (regnale pasto), the preparation and presentation of which would have been over-seen by an elite female. She draws parallels with Greece and the Near East for the participation of similar donne di rango in social and ceremonial activities. See Colonna (1993, 66–7) for a discussion of domine overseeing the production of ceramic objects associated with luxury and the aristocracy. The pro-duction of elaborate textiles would be a natural addition to such types of female social display through productive activity.

105 Bonghi Jovino 2010.106 Bonghi Jovino 2010, 12.107 Of the 58 loomweights from Pian di Cività, 29 come from

superfi cial levels; 12 from the third-century B.C.E. levels; 13 from the fifth-century B.C.E. levels; and only 4 from sixth-

century B.C.E. levels (Sartori 2001, 147). Such a chronologi-cal spectrum for loomweights is consistent with other sites.

108 Sartori 2001, cat. nos. 2/27, 2/29, 2/30, 2/96, 3/368, 3/619, 5/112, 6/61, 10/11, 12/97, 15/1/4, 29/1, 30/28, 30/29, 36/93, 36/131, 173/6, 192/1, 272/4. As noted above (supra n. 100), such decorative impressions are more com-mon on weights from southern Etruria or Latium.

109 Sartori 2001, 147. 110 Roselle 1975, 21–33; Bocci Paccini 1985. See Cygielman

(2009, 56–8) for a discussion of a recent rereading of this ar-chitecture as a public regal residence similar to Rome’s Regia.

111 Bocci Pacini 1985. Some spools were also recovered in the area, but no spindlewhorls. Material from the area was also featured in the exhibition Signori di Maremma (Celuzza 2009, 111–13, cat. nos. 3.1–9). The relationship of the weights to the channel is noteworthy. From the excavation context, it is unclear whether this channel was a feature of veneration, as seen at Poggio Colla and other sites with textile tools (supra n. 39), or whether it was used in some context of production.




loomweights from the adjoining pavement were them-selves being produced in the area and were set out on the pavement to dry.112 Such an interpretation suggests a close relationship between artisans and ritual. Since, as we have seen, tools utilized in Etruscan ritual may have been buried within a sanctuary after use, it fol-lows that the production of such tools may have had similar guidelines.

Finally, there are the discoveries at the site of Ce-tamura del Chianti. This hilltop site, located near Gaiole in Chianti, spans a wide chronological period but was most active between 300 and 100 B.C.E. De Grummond has documented a variety of votive prac-tices in two places at the site: an acropolis area and an artisanal quarter and sanctuary on a lower slope.113 It is in the proximity of the latter area that numerous loomweights, spindlewhorls, and spools were found, most in the area of a kiln (Structure K) used for mak-ing brick, tile, and loomweights.114 The relationship between the kiln and the sanctuary is evident, in terms of both proximity and the rituals enacted at the kiln, which include propitiatory offerings at the time of firing and of foundation and closing rituals.115 This close relationship between an artisans’ quarter and a sanctuary is particularly important when considering the role of sacred textile production. In this case, the fired loomweights may have been imbued with sacred qualities at their very origin. Such a practice, which recognizes the sacred significance of a tool with cer-emonial purpose, would serve as the inverse of the act of burying loomweights or spindlewhorls within sanc-tuaries after the task of ceremonial textile production

has been completed. Nearby, in the sanctuary building (Building L), textile tools were uncovered in a votive context on and near an altar in a courtyard. In this case, a loomweight and a spool, both cut in half, were found within carbon deposits on an in-ground hearth altar. A spindlewhorl was also recovered from the area.

De Grummond interprets this as an area used by spinners and weavers seeking success in their crafts.116 One might also view these implements as ritual tools that, like similar tools at Poggio Colla and Pian di Cività, were symbolically put out of use through frag-mentation. Furthermore, at Cetamura the kiln was not used to produce any obviously votive material, but it was used to produce loomweights, tile, and brick—all practical material. This reinforces the emphasis on production and may argue for a reconstruction of a ritual that sanctified material produced on-site and ul-timately intended for sacred or ceremonial purpose.117 The materials from Pian di Cività, Roselle, Cetamura, and Poggio Colla make the case that textile tools in sanctuaries may reflect communal ritual and not sim-ply personal dedication.118 Together, these examples illustrate a wide array of votive behavior suggestive of sacrificial meals, textile production, and other types of ritual activities within the sanctuary space. They not only place textile production more prominently among Etruscan ritual behaviors but also highlight the impor-tance of Etruscan women as producers of distinctive textiles and as important agents within given rituals.

At Rome and other sites in Latium, the model of the female votive donation has dominated the interpreta-tion of textile tools in sanctuary contexts.119 Although

112 Bocci Pacini 1985, 56.113 For a recent summary of the ritual practices at the sanc-

tuary, see de Grummond 2011.114 Ewell 2000; de Grummond 2009, 107–12.115 De Grummond (2011, 73–5) argues that the evidence

from the kiln suggests three of the four types of votive behav-ior outlined in Bonghi Jovino 2005a. This observation in itself demonstrates the importance of considering textile tools in sanctuary settings more broadly—not simply as propitiatory gifts from female donors.

116 De Grummond (2011, 80–2) categorizes the offerings associated with this votive context as propitiatory. I would also note the presence of a channel or cavity in close proximity to the altar, which appears to have been closed at the same time as the ritual destruction of the kiln, perhaps indicating a chthonic divinity (de Grummond 2011, 85–7). For addi-tional examples of such cavities in relation to concentrations of textile tools, see supra nn. 39, 111.

117 It remains unclear exactly where textile production itself took place on the site, if it took place at all. Additional loom-weights, spindlewhorls, and spools have been uncovered at Cetamura in the region of the site’s acropolis (zone I). In an initial study of textile tools at the site, Hackworth (1993, 9,

23) records fi ve loomweights and six spindlewhorls from this area of the site, but she notes that none comes from a secure context and that the tools are generally associated with later cleanup on the site. She points out that most of the tools, as well as the grinders for dyes, come from the artisans’ quarter (zone II). As a result of this study, Hackworth (1993, 39–41) proposes that the Hellenistic rooms adjacent to the kiln and Building L were used for textile production. A second possi-bility is that the site produced and sanctifi ed tools that were used elsewhere.

118 This is not an exhaustive list of sanctuary sites with ce-ramic textile tools in Etruria. Other sites could also be in-cluded. Additional recent examples include fi ve loomweights found in a room near the fifth- to fourth-century B.C.E. temple at Castiglion Fiorentino (Scarpellini 2008) and an inscribed loomweight from Campo della Fiera at Orvieto (Stopponi 2011, 35). Gleba (2009, 71–2) provides a table with additional examples. In most of these cases, the quantity of tools is small, and few publications provide extensive contex-tual information.

119 E.g., excavators associate loomweights and spindle-whorls from the sacred area at Largo Argentina with female activity (Andreani et al. 2005).




there are no known instances of votive deposits consist-ing solely of textile tools, there are several large con-centrations of textile tools among votive depositions that include other typical “female” dedications, such as vessels for unguents or objects of personal adornment. Notable examples include approximately 200 spindle-whorls from Anagni, 35 loomweights from Ardea, and numerous loomweights and a few spindlewhorls from Satricum.120 Largely because of the character of the accompanying material, these votive depositions with textile tools have been accepted as unambiguous evidence of female dedicators offering personal pos-sessions to female deities. The production aspect of these tools has rarely been considered, but Piergrossi suggests that the loomweights in the votive deposit of Casarinaccio near Ardea may have been used prior to deposition.121 Despite the strong personal votive moti-vation apparent in much of the Latial evidence, there is some indication that textile tools in sanctuaries also speak to the act of ceremonial production.

Perhaps best known for its complex of 13 well-preserved altars dating from the sixth to fourth cen-turies B.C.E., the city of Lavinium preserves several sanctuaries in and around its urban center122 and is an unparalleled source for pre-Roman ritual practic-es.123 Textile tools have been found in some quantity at nearly all the sanctuaries preserved in the city, al-though there is very little mention of them in publica-tions. Two concentrations are of particular interest. The first is a group of more than 100 loomweights and a few spindlewhorls from the eastern sanctuary.124 Reports indicate that the loomweights are rectangular or trapezoidal and that many have marks on them (in-cluding an impressed rosette, crosses of two or three intersecting lines, and a series of punctures) similar to decorative patterns recorded at other Latial sites and at southern Etruscan locations such as Caere. This site, identified by the excavators as sacred to Minerva Tritonia, produced many life-sized female terracotta votive statues, often identified as brides.125 The loom-weights and spindlewhorls were included in a large deposit of votive material that was placed together in a natural depression on the site. The inclusion of the

famous terracotta statue of Minerva Tritonia near the top of the deposit, as well as the presence of numer-ous terracottas and roof tiles, suggests that the mate-rial was gathered and deposited together at the end of the sanctuary’s life, perhaps even as a destruction ritual.126 This is probably an example of a deposit of votives dedicated by individuals.127

The second significant deposit, by contrast, seems to point to a communal dedication. It comprises more than 200 loomweights from a structure of unknown function located northeast of the 13 altars.128 Material from this first phase of the complex, which dates to 550 B.C.E., has been difficult to characterize; scholars debate whether the structure had a ritual function at that time.129 It is structurally and archaeologically simi-lar to several structures from Magna Graecia, where, it has been argued, sacred garments were woven prior to a peplophoric ritual. This similarity has led Gleba to suggest that Lavinium may provide the only non-Greek example of sacred textile production in Italy known so far.130 Certainly, the fact that the structure has par-allels in Greek sites in southern Italy strengthens this argument.131 If production of ceremonial garments was a traditional element of ritual among the Lavinian sanctuaries and even throughout the region, this struc-ture may have been established as a specific location for such activity, following Greek models. Moreover, Lavinium, because of its location, may have been an intermediary between two distinct ceremonial textile traditions on the Italic peninsula.

comparative evidence: south italic sanctuaries

The nature of ceremonial textile production manifests itself quite differently in the archaeologi-cal record of Magna Graecia. It is in some ways very straightforward. Several pre-Roman sanctuary sites there have produced particularly large quantities of textile tools from specialized areas that have been in-terpreted as production areas for sacred garments or cloth. Three examples stand out: Francavilla Marit-tima, the extra-urban sanctuary at Santa Venera, and the sanctuary at Foce del Sele. Francavilla Marittima

120 Bouma 1996, 1:390–92; Gatti 1996; Piergrossi 2005.121 Piergrossi 2005, 295.122 See Fenelli (1990) for a summary of cult areas at La-

vinium.123 Torelli 1984.124 Enea nel Lazio 1981, 218–19, cat. nos. D188, D189.125 Torelli 1984, 31–50.126 Enea nel Lazio 1981, 187–89.127 Fenelli 1990, 494–95.128 Sommella 1974, 278. Published reports give no account

of the weights or appearance of these loomweights. 129 See Bouma (1996, 3:49–51) for bibliography and discus-

sion of the scholarship on the structure. It does not appear that the textile tools continued to be an important compo-nent of the structure’s second phase; however, an association between productive and sacred activity in the vicinity is as-sured through the construction of nearby kilns used to pro-duce ex-votos and tiles.

130 Gleba 2008a, 187.131 Sommella 1974, 278.




provides the earliest material of the three. Here, Dutch archaeologists unearthed the remnants of a monu-mental structure dating to the eighth century B.C.E., when Enotrian clans dominated the area.132 The struc-ture, the so-called Weaving Hut, is roughly three times the size of normal huts on the plateau and precedes a group of Greek temples built on the same acropolis at the end of the eighth century B.C.E., which would make them the earliest temples in Italy. The sacred and communal character of the Weaving Hut is evi-dent from its relationship to the later temples, as well as from its size and the extraordinary finds within it, such as bronzes, jewelry, animal bones, and decorated loomweights.133 The weights, which were recovered in situ from the remains of a loom, are decorated with elaborate meander and labyrinth patterns and are sub-stantial enough at approximately 800–1,200 g to have been used on a monumental loom. The distinctive lab-yrinthine patterns may be related to Greek myths that connect labyrinths and weaving.134 Kleibrink consid-ers the structure to be a sacred dwelling where textile gifts (among others) were produced for and possibly presented to a local divinity. Although the structure possesses a hearth and an array of domestic pottery, it maintains a communal quality; it may have served as a center for ritual meals or dedication. After con-tact with colonizing Greeks beginning near the end of the eighth century B.C.E., original Enotrian traditions were not discarded but rather blended with the new. With the construction of the Greek-style temples on top of the Weaving Hut, the previous divinity seems to have merged with Athena. The importance of textile ritual appears to have continued, evidenced by a num-ber of votive spindlewhorls and several archaic figu-rines of female dedicators holding textile offerings.135

A second example of sacred textile production may be found at the Late Archaic sanctuary at Santa Ven-era in the area surrounding Paestum. Three buildings have been uncovered there, including the so-called Rectangular Hall, which has been interpreted as a lo-cus for ritual activities including sacrifice and dining.136 Immediately outside the rectangular structure in an anteroom, 47 loomweights were found; an additional 53 fragmentary or whole loomweights were uncovered

throughout the sanctuary.137 The weights from the anteroom of the Rectangular Hall are pyramidal and appear to be relatively small, ranging from 50 to 310 g.No mention is made of decoration or markings on them.138 Based on the size of the anteroom, the lack of systematic arrangement on a floor level, and the rather poor character of the loomweights, as well as the range in their weights, the excavators doubt that these textile tools could have been anything more than dedicatory: “[they] were evidently a cheap dedication acceptable to the divinity.”139 Nevertheless, the space of the anteroom, which lacks a clearly designated func-tion, is more than suitable for a simple loom, easily ac-commodating the small weights. Here again, evidence may point to sacred or ceremonial textile production within an enclosed space in the sanctuary and in the vicinity of an area associated with ritualized dining or banqueting. The votive terracottas from the site can-not confirm the identity of the divinity, who must in any case have been female. Ammerman favors Aphro-dite based on inscriptional evidence and the iconog-raphy of some of the figures,140 while Greco favors a Lucanian Aphrodite-Hera for whom there may have been a local custom of sacred textile production and presentation.141

The Heraion at Foce del Sele, near Paestum, in-cludes within its temenos a structure known as the Square Building, located 80 m east of the temple. More than 300 loomweights were recovered from this building.142 Some are pyramidal and others discoid, and many bear simple marks, such as an “X” or a cross pattern, on their upper surface. The original excava-tor sorted them into seven groups according to weight, and some of the concentrations are quite significant (e.g., Group V contains at least 90 examples).143 Much of the other material recovered was votive in nature, including a statue of Hera and many vessels associated with the female sphere, such as a group of unique ring-shaped askoi and numerous shapes suitable for per-fumes and unguents. Zancani Montuoro interpreted the loomweights in this context as actual weights for measuring the value of the other objects within the structure, which she viewed as a treasury.144 However, Greco has recently proposed that the weights indicate

132 This attribution to the Enotrians is largely confi rmed by graves from the area (Kleibrink 2003; Kleibrink et al. 2004).

133 Kleibrink 2003, 64–76; Kleibrink et al. 2004, 45–8, fi g. 2. 134 Kleibrink et al. 2004, 48.135 Kleibrink et al. 2004, 48–63.136 Pedley 1993, 111–16; Ammerman 2002, 2. 137 Johannowsky et al. 1983, 301.138 Ammerman (2002, 361 n. 13) states that the corpus of

loomweights from Santa Venera is to be published by Ann

van Rosevelt. 139 Pedley 1993,19. 140 Ammerman 2002, 22–6.141 Greco 1997, 196; see also Gleba 2009, 79.142 Zancani Montuoro 1965–1966.143 Zancani Montuoro 1965–1966, 73–82.144 Zancani Montuoro 1965–1966, 61. Her position is based

largely on various marks on the loomweights, which she inter-prets as indicators of the weights of the various objects being




the presence of at least three monumental looms used for the production of sacred textiles presented to Hera in a peplophoric ritual.145 She interprets the space as a production center with various groups of different-sized loomweights used to weave a variety of garments. On the basis of inscriptional and literary evidence, she argues that the creators of these garments were young women engaged in a premarriage initiation rite. Her interpretation of this evidence is particularly convinc-ing given the large number of weights concentrated in one structure, as well as the definitive attribution of the sanctuary space to a divinity associated with well-attested peplophoric rituals.

These three cases from South Italy all represent in-stances of contact between Greeks and a local popula-tion, contact that may have resulted in the blending of local textile traditions with Greek peplophoric rituals. Several important similarities are notable among the sites. First, in the examples cited above, the tools re-covered are exclusively associated with weaving rather than spinning; second, in all cases, significant num-bers of loomweights were found concentrated inside a particular structure on the sanctuary site. These pat-terns suggest that the productive activity of weaving was not incorporated into the visible life of the sanctuary but was performed by women in a secluded, enclosed location—a context markedly different from that in Etruscan sanctuaries.146

These observations about textile production in the sanctuaries of Magna Graecia conform to literary evidence for peplophoric rituals in Greece. Pausanias describes at Amyclae a chamber known as the Chiton where women weave a garment for Apollo (3.16.2) and at Elis a building called the Sixteen where women weave a garment for Hera (6.24.10). The best-known peplophoric ritual is the one for Athena Polias on the

acropolis of Athens. A peplos was created once every four years and included in the Great Panathenaic pro-cession,147 but the extant sources do not reveal exactly where it was made. Mansfield suggests that girls wove the life-sized peplos somewhere on the acropolis, ei-ther in the Temple of Athena Polias itself or in a small structure nearby.148 Sources confirm that the identity of the weavers of the peplos was a matter of great inter-est to the Athenians149 and that they worked away from the eyes of others until the garment was complete; this is very similar to the picture given by the archaeologi-cal evidence from sanctuaries in Magna Graecia.

conclusions

The role of textiles in rituals is a particularly elusive aspect of religious behavior. While rituals themselves are often slippery and difficult to define in the archae-ological record, the lack of preserved textiles used in ancient ceremonies compounds the problem. Even in Greece, the occurrence of ritual textile production is relatively rare,150 and archaeologists have lamentably few examples on which to base conclusions about the place of textiles and female producers of textiles in sacred spaces.151

Nevertheless, this study has shown that in the ab-sence of literary sources and the textiles themselves, close analysis of the archaeological context of textile tools in sanctuary settings sheds light on the role of textiles in social and religious ceremonies in ancient Etruria and Latium. In her discussion of textile tools in sacred contexts, Gleba rightly calls our attention to a division between votive and production usage in pre-Roman sanctuaries. It is clear, however, that with regard to Etrusco-Italic textile tools the categories of “votive” and “production” need not be mutually ex-clusive. Evidence presented here calls into question

measured. She also notes the presence of seven small (5.2–21.1 g) lead weights. She speculates that one of the materials being measured may have been raw wool.

145 Greco 1997. 146 Bundrick (2008, 309–20), focusing on wool-working

scenes on Athenian vases, argues for a less secluded view of Athenian women’s textile production areas. It is important to note, however, that this study particularly addresses domestic, rather than sacred, textile work.

147 See Mansfi eld’s (1985) exhaustive study of the Athenian peplos. For a summary, see Barber 1992, 112–14. For alterna-tive views, see Aleshire and Lambert 2003, 72; Neils 2009, 145.

148 Mansfi eld 1985, 275–84. He also argues that a second enormous peplos was produced once every four years by male weavers located off-site for use in the Great Panathenaic procession. Cf. Nagy (1984, 232), who argues that the weav-ers would have worked somewhere in the lower city to avoid carrying the peplos off the acropolis only to carry it back up

during the procession. 149 Much of this evidence comes from the Praxiergidai de-

cree (IG 13 7). For a recent reading of the decree that dates the establishment of the peplophoric ritual to the 460s B.C.E., see Robertson 2004.

150 Mansfield (1985, 444) comments that evidence for clothing cult statues is relatively common but that evidence for the actual production of garments as part of a particular cult ritual is more rare. Cf. Connelly (1996, 78–9), who fur-ther differentiates the Athenian peplos ceremony from more typical textile rituals by suggesting that the annual (or qua-drennial) weaving and presentation of the peplos to Athena was intended to imitate weaving of the funerary cloth for the daughters of Erechtheus, who were sacrifi ced by their father to save Athens. These examples serve to caution against the consideration of the Athenian ceremony as the prototype for all instances of sacred textile production.

151 Neils 2009.




the traditional view that textile tools in Etruscan and Latial sanctuaries represent only the personal offer-ings of women and calls for a range of interpretations when textile tools are excavated in sacred spaces. The very nature of a spindlewhorl or loomweight depends on its productive function; like other tools found in sanctuaries, a spindlewhorl or loomweight, after it had been used to produce something of cult value, was re-garded as a sacred instrument that must remain within the sacred boundary, not to be used again.

Additionally, when Greek and non-Greek evidence is compared, it becomes clear that the role of textile tools in sanctuaries is subject to regional and cultural differences. Etrusco-Italic examples of textile tools in sanctuaries suggest the inclusive participation of women within sacred spaces rather than the more se-cluded model of production evident from the Greek examples. This cultural dichotomy not only empha-sizes different ritual behaviors but also highlights dis-tinct cultural norms with regard to female agency in society and the religious sphere.

Unlike their Greek counterparts, Etrusco-Italic wom-en seem to have enjoyed an integrated role in the so-cial enactment of ritual. The role of the Etrusco-Italic woman in the sacred sphere has long been recognized in terms of divination skills and food preparation for ritual banquets.152 Based on the evidence presented here, I would add the performance of specialized spin-ning and weaving to her ritual résumé. This probably included overseeing the production of prestige cer-emonial garments, such as those depicted in early vi-sual representations. It is impossible to know whether Etrusco-Italic women produced garments to be used by priests or whether they made cloth for elite familial rituals such as marriages and funerals, or both. The appearance of spindlewhorls, spools, and loomweights in sacred locations, whether as evidence of on-site pro-duction or as a type of votive offering after such pro-duction, points to the social significance of women as producers of ceremonial cloth. It is only through the continued documentation of and increased attention to textile tools in sacred settings that we may be able to recover this important contribution of women to Etrusco-Italic ritual.

department of classicsfranklin & marshall collegelancaster, pennsylvania [email protected]

Works Cited

Aleshire, S.B., and S.D. Lambert. 2003. “Making the Peplos for Athena: A New Edition of IG II 2 1060 + IG II 2 1036.” ZPE 142:65–86.

Ambrosini, L. 2000. “I pesi da telaio con inscrizione etrus-che.” ScAnt 10:139–62.

———. 2009. Il Santuario di Portonaccio a Veio. Vol. 3, La cis-terna arcaica con l’incluso deposito di età ellenistica. MonAnt 13. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider.

Ammerman, R.M. 2002. The Sanctuary of Santa Venera at Paestum. Vol. 2. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Andersson, E., E. Felluca, M.-L. Nosch, and L. Peyronel. 2010. “New Perspectives on Bronze Age Textile Produc-tion in the Eastern Mediterranean: The First Results with Ebla as a Pilot Study.” In Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, edited by P. Matthiae, F. Pinnock, L. Nigro, and N. Marchetti, 159–76. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Andreani, C., M.P. Del Moro, and M. De Nuccio. 2005. “Contesti e materiali votivi dell’ ‘area sacra’ di Largo Argentina.” In Depositi votivi e culti dell’Italia antica dall’età arcaica a quella tardo-repubblicana, edited by A. Comella and S. Mele, 111–25. Bari: Edipuglia.

Archeologia in alto Mugello—Mugello—Val di Sieve e il caso di S. Piero a Sieve: Atti della giornata di studio S. Piero a Sieve. 22 gennaio 1994. 1994. Florence: Soprintendenza Archeologica per la Toscana.

Architettura etrusca nel Viterbese: Ricerche svedesi a San Giovanale e Acquarossa. 1956–1986. 1986. Rome: De Luca Editore.

Bagnasco Gianni, G. 1999. “L’acquisitizione della scrittura in Etruria: Materiali e confronto per la ricostruzione del quadro storico e culturale.” In Scritture mediterranee tra il IX e il VII secolo a.C., edited by G. Bagnasco Gianni and F. Cordano, 85–106. Milan: Edizioni Et.

Barber, E.J.W. 1991. Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. Princeton: Prince-ton University Press.

———. 1992. “The Peplos of Athena.” In Goddess and Po-lis: The Panathenaic Festival in Ancient Athens, edited by J. Neils, 103–17. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

———. 1994. Women’s Work: The First 20,000 Years: Women, Cloth and Society in Early Times. New York: W.W. Norton.

Bartoloni, G. 1989. “Marriage, Sale and Gift: A proposito di alcuni corredi femminili dalle necropolis populo-niesi della prima età del ferro.” In Le donne in Etruria, edited by A. Rallo, 35–54. StArch 52. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2007. “La società e i ruoli femminile nell’Italia pre-romana.” In Le ore e i giorni delle donne: Dalla quotidianità alla sacralità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., edited by P. von Eles, 13–23. Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore.

Bazzanella, M., and A. Mayr. 2009. I reperti tessili, le fusaiole e i pesi da telaio dalla palafitta di Molina di Ledro. Beni ar-cheologici del Trento 2. Trento: Soprintendenza per i beni archeologici.

Beard, M. 2007. The Roman Triumph. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

152 Nielsen 1990; de Grummond 2006, 38–9; Poli and Trocchi 2007. These instances of religious authority and participation may also be viewed as signifi cant within the social structure. An interesting example of the intersection between female authority and textile production has been proposed by Bagnasco Gianni (1999), who notes inscriptions on weaving tools as emblematic of female acquisition and use of writing skills.




Becker, H. 2008. “The Economic Agency of the Etruscan Temple: Elites, Dedications and Display.” In Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa, edited by M. Gleba and H. Becker, 87–99. Leiden: Brill.

Bocci Pacini, P. 1985. “Una casa nell’età orientalizzante a Roselle.” In Santuari d’Etruria, edited by G. Colonna, 53–7. Milan: Electa.

Bonfante, L. 2003. Etruscan Dress. Baltimore: Johns Hop-kins University Press.

———. 2009. “Ritual Dress.” In Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa, edited by M. Gleba and H. Becker, 183–91. Leiden: Brill.

Bonfante Warren, L. 1971. “Etruscan Dress as Historical Source: Some Problems and Examples.” AJA 75(3): 277–84.

Bonghi Jovino, M., ed. 2001a. Tarquinia: Testimonianze ar-cheologiche e ricostruzione storica. Scavi sistemativi nell’abitato. Campagne 1982–1988. Tarchna 1. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2001b. “Produzioni in impasto: Ceramica, utensili e oggetti dell’uso.” In Tarquinia: Testimonianze archeologiche e ricostruzione storica. Scavi sistemativi nell’abitato. Campagne 1982–1988, edited by M. Bonghi Jovino, 1–90. Tarchna 1. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2001c. “‘Area sacra/complesso monumentale,’ della Cività.” In Tarquinia Etrusca: Una nuova storia. Cat-alogo della mostra, edited by A.M. Moretti Sgubini, 21–9. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2005a. “Mini muluvanice–mini turace: Depositi votivi e sacralità. Dall’analisi del rituale alla lettura interpre-tative delle forme di religiosità.” In Depositi votivi e culti dell’Italia antica dall’età arcaica a quella tardo-repubblicana, edited by A. Comella and S. Mele, 31–46. Bari: Edipuglia.

———. 2005b. “Offerte, uomini, e dei nel ‘complesso mon-umentale’ di Tarquinia: Dallo scavo all’interpretazione.” In Offerte dal regno vegetale e dal regno animale nelle mani-festazioni del sacro, edited by M. Bonghi Jovino and F. Chiesa, 73–84. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2010. “Tarquinia: Types of Offerings, Etruscan Di-vinities and Attributes in the Archaeological Record.” In Material Aspects of Etruscan Religion: Proceedings of the International Colloquium Leiden, May 29 and 30, 2008, edited by L. Bouke van der Meer, 5–16. BABesch Suppl. 16. Leuven: Peeters.

Bonghi Jovino, M., and C. Chiaramonte Treré. 1997. Tar-quinia: Testimonianze archeologiche e ricostruzione storica. Scavi sistematici nell’abitato. Campagne 1982–1988, edit-ed by M. Bonghi Jovino. Tarchna 1. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

Bouma, J. 1996. Religio Votiva: The Archaeology of Latial Votive Religion. The 5th–3rd c. BC Votive Deposit Southwest of the Main Temple at Satricum (Borgo Le Ferriere). 3 vols. Gron-ingen: University of Groningen.

Bruni, S. 2005. “Il santuario di Ortaglia nel territorio volt-errano: Appunti sulle pratiche cultuali.” In Offerte dal regno vegetale e dal regno animale nelle manifestazioni del sa-cro, edited by M. Bonghi Jovino and F. Chiesa, 14–25. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

Bundrick, S. 2008. “The Fabric of the City: Imaging Textile Production in Classical Athens.” Hesperia 77:283–334.

Burke, B. 2010. From Minos to Midas: Ancient Cloth Production in the Aegean and in Anatolia. Oxford: Oxbow.

Cameron, J. 2011. “Iron and Cloth Across the Bay of Ben-gal: New Data from Tha Kae, Central Thailand.” Antiq-uity 85(328):559–67.

Castor, A.Q. 2009. “An Early Hellenistic Jewelry Hoard from Poggio Colla.” MAAR 54:245–62.

———. 2010. “Etruscan Horseshoe Earrings: A Native Jew-elry Type.” RM 116:159–204.

Celuzza, M., ed. 2009. Signori di Maremma: Elites Etrusche fra Populonia el il Vulcente. Florence: Edizioni Polistampa.

Chase, A.F., D.Z. Chase, E. Zorn, and W. Teeter. 2008. “Textiles and the Maya Archaeological Record: Gender, Power and Status in Classical Period Caraçol Belize.” An-cient Mesoamerica 19:127–42.

Colonna, G. 1993. “Ceramisti e donne padrone di bottega nell’Etruria arcaica.” In Indogermanica et Italica: Festschrift für Helmut Rix zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by G. Meiser, 61–8. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.

———. 2002. Il santuario di Portonaccio a Veio. Vol. 1, Gli sca-vi di Massimo Pallottino nella zona dell’altare (1939–1940). MonAnt 6(3). Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider.

Connelly, J.B. 1996. “Parthenon and Parthenoi: A Myth-ological Interpretation of the Parthenon Frieze.” AJA 100(1):53–80.

Cougle, L. 2009. “Expressions of Gender Through Dress in Latial Iron Age Mortuary Contexts: The Case of Os-teria dell’Osa.” In Gender Identities in Ancient Italy, edited by K. Lomas and E. Herring, 55–78. BAR-IS 1893. Ox-ford: Archaeopress.

Cristofani, M., ed. 1993. Lo Scarico Arcaico della Vigna Par-rocchiale. Vol. 2. Caere 3(2). Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.

Cygielman, M. 2009. “Roselle fra tarda età del ferro e peri-odo orientalizzante.” In Signori di Maremma: Elites Etrus-che fra Populonia el il Vulcente, edited by M. Celuzza, 55–9. Florence: Edizioni Polistampa.

D’Agostino, B. 1989. “Image and Society in Archaic Etru-ria.” JRS 79:1–10.

de Grummond, N.T. 2006. “Prophets and Priests.” In The Religion of the Etruscans, edited by N.T. de Grummond and E. Simon, 27–44. Austin: University of Texas Press.

———. 2009. The Sanctuary of the Etruscan Artisans at Cetamu-ra del Chianti: The Legacy of Alvaro Tracchi. Florence: Edifir.

———. 2011. “Ritual Practices at the Sanctuary of the Etrus-can Artisans at Cetamura del Chianti.” In The Archaeol-ogy of Sanctuaries and Ritual in Etruria, edited by N.T. de Grummond and I. Edlund-Berry, 68–88. JRA Suppl. 81. Portsmouth, R.I.: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

di Giuseppe, H. 1995. “I pesi da telaio.” In Armento: Archeo-logia di un Centro Indigeno, edited by A. Russo Tagliente, 141–49. Bollettino di Archeologia 35–36. Rome: Istituto poligrafico e zecca dello stato.

Edlund-Berry, I. 1994. “Ritual Destruction of Cities and Sanctuaries: The ‘Un-founding’ of the Archaic Monu-mental Building of Poggio Civitate (Murlo).” In Murlo and the Etruscans: Art and Society in Ancient Etruria, edited by R.D. De Puma and J.P. Small, 16–28. Madison: Uni-versity of Wisconsin Press.

———. 2011. Introduction to The Archaeology of Sanctuar-ies and Ritual in Etruria, edited by N.T. de Grummond and I. Edlund-Berry, 7–15. JRA Suppl. 81. Portsmouth, R.I.: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

Enea nel Lazio: Archeologia e mito. 1981. Rome: Fratelli Palombi.

Ewell, C. 2000. “An Etruscan Hellenistic Workshop: The Kiln and Artisans’ Zone at Cetamura del Chianti.” Ph.D. diss., Florida State University.

Fenelli, M. 1990. “Culti a Lavinium: Le evidenze archeo-logiche.” ScAnt 4:487–505.




Fili e tele, dee, donne e case: Un deposito rituale dallo scavo di Pyrgi. 2010. Exhibition catalogue. Rome.

Gatti, S. 1996. “Anagni (Frosinone): Località S. Cecilia—indagini nel santuario ernico. Il depositivo arcaico.” NSc 1994–1995:5–153.

Gentili, G.V. 2003. Verucchio Villanoviana: Il Sepolcreto in Lo-calità le Pegge e la necropolis al piede della Rocca Malatestiana. MonAnt Monograph 6. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider.

Gillis, C., and M.-L.B. Nosch, eds. 2003. Ancient Textiles: Production, Craft and Society. Ancient Textile Series 1. Oxford: Oxbow.

Ginge, B. 1996. “Gender Identification in the Archaeologi-cal Record: Revising Our Stereotypes.” EtrStud 3:65–74.

Gleba, M. 2000. “Textile Production at Poggio Civitate (Murlo) in the 7th c. BC.” In Archèologie des textiles des origins au Ve siècle, Actes du colloque de Lattes, oct. 1999, ed-ited by D. Cardon and M. Feugère, 77–81. Montagnac: Editions Monique Mergoil.

———. 2004. “Textile Production in Protohistoric Italy: The Use of Implements in Reconstructing the ‘Miss-ing’ Craft.” In Metodi e approcci archeologici: L’industria e il commercio nell’Italia antica, edited by E. De Sena and H. Dessales, 1–11. BAR-IS 1262. Oxford: Archaeopress.

———. 2008a. Textile Production in Pre-Roman Italy. Ancient Textile Series 4. Oxford: Oxbow.

———. 2008b. “Auratae vestes: Gold Textiles in the Ancient Mediterranean.” In Vestidos, Textiles y Tintes: Estudios so-bre la produccion de bienes de consumo en la antigüedad, 63–80. Purpurae vestes 2. Valencia: University of Valencia.

———. 2009. “Textile Tools in Ancient Italian Votive Con-texts: Evidence of Dedication or Production.” In Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa, edited by M. Gleba and H. Becker, 69–84. Leiden: Brill.

Glinister, F. 2000. “Sacred Rubbish.” In Religion in Archaic and Republican Rome and Italy: Evidence and Experience, edited by E. Bispham and C. Smith, 54–70. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Good, I. 2001. “Archaeological Textiles: A Review of Cur-rent Research.” Annual Review of Anthropology 30:209–26.

Gori, C. 2002. “Buccheri decorati da Poggio Colla, Vicchio (Firenze).” Thesis, University of Florence.

Greco, G. 1997. “Des étoffes pour Héra.” In Héra: Images, es-paces, cultes, edited by J. de La Genière, 185–99. Collection du Centre Jean Bérard 15. Naples: Centre Jean Bérard.

Hackworth, L. 1993. “Evidence of Textile Production at Cetamura del Chianti, Italy: A Catalog and a Context.” M.A. thesis, Florida State University.

Haynes, S. 2000. Etruscan Civilization: A Cultural History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Homan, M.M. 2004. “Beer and Its Drinkers: An Ancient Near Eastern Love Story.” NEA 67:84–95.

Institute for Etruscan and Italic Studies. 2012. “Fili e Tele: Dee, Donne e Case: A Ritual Deposit from the Pyrgi Ex-cavation.” 2012. Etruscan News 14:9.

Jannot, J.R. 1984. Les reliefs archaïques de Chiusi. CÉFR 71. Rome: Ecole Française de Rome.

———. 2004. “Assemblées de femmes: Une survivance clus-ienne des valeurs familiales archaïques.” RA 37:33–49.

Jaro, M. 2009. “Metal Thread Variations and Materials: Simple Methods of Pre-Treatment Identification for His-torical Textiles.” In Conserving Textiles: Studies in Honor of Ágnes Timár-Balálzy, edited by I. Éri, 68–76. ICCROM Conservation Studies 7. Rome: ICCROM.

Johannowsky, W., J.G. Pedley, and M. Torelli. 1983. “Exca-vations at Paestum 1982.” AJA 87(3):292–303.

Kleibrink, M. 2003. Dalla lana all’acqua: Culto e identità nel santuario di Atena a Lagaria, Francavilla Marittima (zona di Sibari, Calabria). Rossano: Grafosud.

Kleibrink, M., J.K. Jacobsen, and S. Handberg. 2004. “Wa-ter for Athena: Votive Gifts at Lagaria (Timpone della Motta, Francavilla Marittima, Calabria).” World Archae-ology 36:43–67.

Lipponen, S. 2007. “Textile-Making Tools from Ficana, Italy, Zone 4a.” Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 44:2–5.

Lundeen, L.E. 2006. “In Search of the Etruscan Priestess: A Re-examination of the Hatrencu.” In Religion in Repub-lican Italy, edited by C.E. Shultz and P.B. Harvey, 34–61. Yale Classical Studies 33. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

Macellari, R. 1983. “Pesi da Telaio.” In Monterenzio e la Valle dell’Idice: Archeologia e storia di un territorio. Catalogo della mostra, Monterenzio, Casa della cultura, 8 gennaio 1983, edited by D. Vitali, 119–27. Bologna: University Press.

Mansfield, J.M. 1985. “The Robe of Athena and the Pana-thenaic Peplos.” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley.

Mårtensson, L., M. Nosch, and E. Andersson Strand. 2009. “Shape of Things: Understanding a Loom Weight.” OJA 28:373–98.

Meyers, G.E. Forthcoming. “Reconstructing Ritual: The Functional Parameters of Loom Weights and Spindle Whorls as Evidence for Cult Practice in Ancient Etru-ria.” In NESAT XI: Proceedings of the Northern European Symposium on Archaeological Textiles, edited by J. Banck-Burgess. Internationale Archäologie. Buch am Erlbach: Marie Leidorf.

Moretti Sgubini, A.M., ed. 2001. Tarquinia Etrusca: Una nuova storia. Catalogo della mostra. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

———. 2004. Eroi etruschi e miti greci: Gli affreschi della Tomba François tornano a Vulci. Calenzano: Edizioni Coopera-tiva Archeologia.

Morigi Govi, C. 1971. “Il tintinnabulo della ‘Tomba de-gli Ori’ dell’ Arsenale Militare di Bologna.” ArchCl 23:211–35.

Moscati, P. 1993. “Pesi da telaio, Rocchetti, Fuseruole.” In Lo Scarico Arcaico della Vigna Parrocchiale. Vol. 2, edited by M. Cristofani, 467–76. Caere 3(2). Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.

Nagy, B. 1984. “The Peplotheke: What Was It?” In Studies Presented to Sterling Dow on His Eightieth Birthday, edited by A.L. Boegehold, 227–32. GRBS Monograph 10. Dur-ham: Duke University Press.

Nagy, H. 2011. “Etruscan Votive Terracottas and Their Ar-chaeological Contexts: Preliminary Comments on Veii and Cerveteri.” In The Archaeology of Sanctuaries and Ritual in Etruria, edited by N.T. de Grummond and I. Edlund-Berry, 113–25. JRA Suppl. 81. Portsmouth, R.I.: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

Neils, J. 2009. “Textile Dedications to Female Deities: The Case of the Peplos.” In Le donateur, l’offrande et la déesse, ed-ited by C. Prêtre, 135–47. Kernos Suppl. 23. Liège: Centre International d’Étude de la Religion Grecque Antique.

Nielsen, M. 1990. “Sacerdotesse e associazioni culturali femminili in Etruria: Testimonianze epigrafiche ed ico-nigrafiche.” Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 19:45–67.

Nielsen, M., and A. Rathje. 2009. “Artumes in Etruria—the Borrowed Goddess.” In From Artemis to Diana: The God-dess of Man and Beast, edited by T. Fischer-Hansen and B. Poulsen, 261–302. Acta Hyperboea 12. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.




Ogden, J.M. 1991. “Classical Gold Wire: Some Aspects of Its Manufacture and Use.” In Classical Gold Jewellery and the Classical Tradition: Papers in Honour of R.A. Higgins, edited by R.A. Higgins, 95–106. Jewellery Studies 5. Lon-don: Society of Jewellery Historians.

Olinder, B., I. Pohl, and C. Sorrentino. 1981. San Giova-nale: The Semi-Subterranean Building in Area B. ActaRom 4°, 26. Stockholm: Paul Åströms Förlag.

Orlandini, P. 1953. “Scopo e significato dei cosidetti ‘pesi da telaio.’” RendLinc 8:441–44.

———. 1966. “Lo scavo del Thesmophorion di Bitalemi e il culto delle divinità ctonie a Gela.” Kokalos 12:8–39.

Pedley, J.G. 1993. The Sanctuary of Santa Venera at Paestum: Il santuario di Santa Venera a Paestum. Archaeologica 104. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider.

Piergrossi, A. 2005. “I pesi da telaio.” In Ardea: Il Deposito Vo-tivo di Casarinaccio, edited by F. di Mario, 289–98. Rome: Soprintendenza Archeologica per il Lazio.

Poggesi, G., L. Donati, E. Bocci, G. Millemacci, L. Pagni-ni, and P. Pallecchi. 2005. “Prato-Gonfienti: Un nuovo centro etrusco sulla via per Marzabotto.” In Culti, forma urbana e artigianato a Marzabotto: Nuove prospettive di ri-cerca, edited by G. Sassatelli and E. Govi, 267–300. Bo-logna: Ante Quem.

Poli, P., and T. Trocchi. 2007. “Le ore dei lavori: Le atti-vità domestiche come affermazione del ruolo femminile tra nucleo familiare e comunità.” In Le ore e i giorni delle donne: Dalla quotidianità alla sacralità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., edited by P. von Eles, 139–48. Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore.

Popham, M., E. Toulopa, and L.H. Sackett. 1982. “The Hero of Lefkandi.” Antiquity 56:169–74.

Ræder Knudsen, L. 2002. “La tessitura a tavolette nella tomba 89.” In Guerriero e sacerdote: Autorità e communità nell’età del ferro a Verucchio. La Tomba del Trono, edited by P. von Eles, 220–34. Florence: Insegna del Giglio.

———. 2012. “The Tablet-Woven Borders of Verucchio.” In Textiles and Textile Production in Europe from Prehistory to AD 400, edited by M. Gleba and U. Mannering, 254–65. Oxford: Oxbow.

Richardson, L., Jr. 1992. A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Riva, C. 2010. The Urbanisation of Etruria: Funerary Practices and Social Change 700–600 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rix, H. 1991. Etruskische Texte. Tübingen: Narr.Robertson, N. 2004. “The Praxiergidae Decree (IG I3 7)

and the Dressing of Athena’s Statue with the Peplos.” GRBS 44:111–61.

Roselle: Gli scavi e la mostra. 1975. Pisa: Soprintendenza Ar-cheologica della Toscana.

Salvini, M. 1990. Fiesole: Contributi alla ricerca delle origini. Biblioteca di studi etruschi 19. Florence: Leo S. Olschki.

———. 2009. “Il sito etrusco I Monti a San Piero a Sieve.” In Museo Archeologico Comprensoriale del Mugello e della Val di Sieve, edited by L. Cappuccini, C. Ducci, S. Gori, and L. Paoli, 24–57. Florence: Aska.

Sartori, A. 2001. “Produzioni in impasto: Pesi da telaio.” In Tarquinia: Testimonianze archeologiche e ricostruzione storica. Scavi sistemativi nell’abitato. Campagne 1982–1988, edited by M. Bonghi Jovino, 137–47. Tarchna 1. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

Scarpellini, M.G. 2008. “Tanaquilla lanam fecit: Tessitura tra arte domestica, scrittura e religion.” In Larthia: La vita di una donna al tempo degli Etruschi. Atti del convegno pro-mosso dalla Quinta commissione consiliare ‘Attività culturali

e Turismo’ del Consiglio regionale della Toscana, Chiancia-no Terme (Siena), 21–22 settembre 2007, 79–86. Florence: Consiglio regionale della Toscana.

Sommella, P. 1974. “Das Heroon des Aeneas und die To-pographie des antiken Lavinium.” Gymnasium 81:273–97.

Stauffer, A. 2002. “I tessuti.” In Guerriero e sacerdote: Auto-rità e communità nel età del ferro a Verucchio. La Tomba del Trono, edited by P. von Eles, 192–219. Florence: Inseg-na del Giglio.

———. 2012. “Case Study: The Textiles from Verucchio, Italy.” In Textiles and Textile Production in Europe from Pre-history to AD 400, edited by M. Gleba and U. Mannering, 242–53. Oxford: Oxbow.

Stopponi, S. 2011. “Campo della Fiera at Orvieto: New Discoveries.” In The Archaeology of Sanctuaries and Ritual in Etruria, edited by N.T. de Grummond and I. Edlund-Berry, 16–44. JRA Suppl. 81. Portsmouth, R.I.: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

Swaddling, J., A. Oddy, and N. Meeks. 1991. “Etruscan and Other Early Gold Wire from Italy.” In Classical Gold Jew-ellery and the Classical Tradition: Papers in Honour of R.A. Higgins, edited by R.A. Higgins, 7–22. Jewellery Studies 5. London: Society of Jewellery Historians.

Swaddling, J., S. Walker, and P. Roberts. 1995. Italy in Eu-rope: Economic Relations 700 BC–AD 50. BMOP 97. Lon-don: British Museum Press.

Thomas, M.L. 2012. “One Hundred Victoriati from the Sanctuary at Poggio Colla (Vicchio di Mugello): Ritual Contexts and Roman Expansion.” EtrStud 15(1):19–93.

Toms, J. 1998. “The Construction of Gender in Early Iron Age Etruria.” In Gender and Italian Archaeology: Challeng-ing the Stereotypes, edited by R.D. Whitehouse, 157–79. Accordia Specialist Studies on Italy 7. London: Accor-dia Research Institute.

Torelli, M. 1984. Lavinio e Roma: Riti iniziatici e matrimonio tra archeologia e storia. Rome: Quasar.

———. 1997. “Domiseda, lanifica, univira: Il trono di Ver-ucchio e il ruolo e l’imagine della donna tra arcaismo e repubblica.” In Il rango, il rito e l’immagine: Alle origini della rappresentazione storica romana, edited by M. Torelli, 52–86. Milan: Electa.

Vay, I. 1988. “I pesi da telaio della casa R18.” In Gli Etrus-chi al nord del Po. Vol. 1, edited by R. de Marinis, 170–74. Mantova: Campanotto Editore.

von Eles, P. 2002a. “Il trono della tomba 89 come strumen-to di communicazione: Proposta per una analisi ed una interpretazione.” In Guerriero e sacerdote: Autorità e com-munità nel età del ferro a Verucchio. La Tomba del Trono, ed-ited by P. von Eles, 235–72. Florence: Insigna del Giglio.

———, ed. 2002b. Guerriero e sacerdote: Autorità e communità nel età del ferro a Verucchio. La Tomba del Trono. Florence: Insigna del Giglio.

———. 2007a. “Le ore del sacro: Il femminile e le donne, soggetto e interpreti del divino?” In Le ore e i giorni delle donne: Dalla quotidianità alla sacralità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., edited by P. von Eles, 149–56. Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore.

———. 2007b. “Famiglie gentilizie e donne a Verucchio: Linguaggi nascoti, rappresentazioni di ruoli e di rango.” In Le ore e i giorni delle donne: Dalla quotidianità alla sacral-ità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C., edited by P. von Eles, 71–85. Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore.

———, ed. 2007c. Le ore e i giorni delle donne: Dalla quo-tidianità alla sacralità tra VIII e VII secolo a.C. Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore.

Walton Rogers, P. 2007. Cloth and Clothing in Early Anglo-



G.E. MEYERS, WOMEN AND TEXTILE TOOLS IN ETRUSCO-ITALIC SANCTUARIES274

Saxon England, AD 450–700. Council for British Archae-ology Research Report 145. York: Council for British Archaeology.

Warden, P.G. 2009a. “Remains of the Ritual at the Sanc-tuary of Poggio Colla.” In Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa, edited by M. Gleba and H. Becker, 107–22. Leiden: Brill.

———. 2009b. “Poggio Colla.” In Museo Archeologico Com-prensoriale del Mugello e della Val di Sieve, edited by L. Cappuccini, C. Ducci, S. Gori, and L. Paoli, 62–81. Florence: Aska.

———. 2011. “The Temple is a Living Thing: Fragmenta-tion, Enchainment and Reversal of Ritual at the Acrop-olis Sanctuary of Poggio Colla.” In The Archaeology of Sanctuaries and Ritual in Etruria, edited by N.T. de Grum-mond and I. Edlund-Berry, 55–67. JRA Suppl. 81. Ports-

mouth, R.I.: Journal of Roman Archaeology.———. Forthcoming. “Monumental Embodiment: Somat-

ic Symbolism and the Tuscan Temple.” In Monumental-ity in Etruscan and Early Roman Architecture: Ideology and Innovation, edited by M.L. Thomas and G.E. Meyers. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Warden, P.G., M.L. Thomas, A. Steiner, and G. Meyers. 2005. “Poggio Colla: An Etruscan Settlement of the 7th–2nd c. B.C. (1998–2004 Excavations).” JRA 18:252–66.

Wild, J.P. 2003. “The Eastern Mediterranean: 323 BC–AD 350.” In The Cambridge History of Western Textiles. Vol. 1, edited by D. Jenkins, 102–17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zancani Montuoro, P. 1965–1966. “L’edificio quadrato nel-lo Heraion alla Foce del Sele.” AttiMGrecia 6–7:23–195.



women and the production of ceremonial textiles: a reevaluation of ceramic textile tools in...

Documents

etruscoitalic women

archaeology of ancient

numerous tools

ancient mediterranean

jstor terms

jstor archive

terms conditions of

pmall use subject