cosa excavations: the 2013 report

1. Introduction

fter a long hiatus, new excavations at the Latincolony of Cosa, modern Ansedonia (Fig. 1), in centralItaly began in June 2013, thanks to a partnershipamong Florida State University, Bryn Mawr College,and Universität Tübingen.1 The site of Cosa, situatedalong the western coast of Italy about 140 km north-west of Rome, overlooks the Tyrrhenian Sea and theislands of Giglio and Giannutri.2 For many years theflagship of American archaeology in Italy, Cosa boastsa remarkable history spanning more than 1,300 years.Founded in 273 a.C. on the eve of the first Punic war,it was sacked around 70 a.C. and then substantially re-settled under Augustus. Occupation at the site, albeitin intermittent fashion, continued through Late An-tiquity into the Middle Ages.

Excavations were first undertaken at Cosa in 1948under the direction of Frank Brown and the auspicesof the American Academy in Rome.3 Over the nextfifty years they revealed the remains of a grid-plantown, including a portico-lined forum with the typicalbuildings of a colony such as a comitium, curia, basili-ca, and atrium-style structures.4 The town’s built envi-ronment has long attracted the interest of the scholar-ly community at large: its temples, forum, and housescan be rightly deemed legitimate reflections ofRome’s urban image during the Republican period, es-pecially in the second century a.C. It follows that plansand reconstructions of Cosa’s urban décor have madetheir way into virtually every survey of Roman archi-tecture, attesting to the importance of the site. Simplyput, much of what we know about Roman Republicancity planning, colonial architecture, and Roman life inEtruria stems from these seminal excavations.

Fieldwork resumed at Cosa in June 2013 in order toexplore some of its most conspicuous archaeologicalremains in grid squares vi/vii-d: a bath complex justnorthwest of the Forum. While recent scholarship has

dramatically furthered our understanding of Romanbathing facilities both in terms of design and social im-plications,5 gaps remain. The genesis of an architec-tural form that soon became the enduring hallmark ofRoman civilization throughout the Mediterranean is aconcern that currently resonates in scholarly discus-sions. Whether and how the baths at Cosa may havefused a Hellenistic architectural blueprint with a Ro-man building tradition is a primary inquiry of the proj-ect. It may also provide insight into architectural inno-vation, urban planning, the engineering of hydraulicsystems, and, not least, social practices in a Romancolony.

2. Previous Research on the Cosa Baths

In his initial survey of Cosa, Brown recognized a smallbath of unknown size and date in Squares vi/vii-d.6The extensive remains of the complex can now beshown to have fronted on three streets (N, O, and 5),and to exhibit the characteristic hard mortared lime-stone rubblework associated with public buildings ofthe second century a.C. at Cosa, as well as the opus la-tericium characteristic of the Early Empire. Engaged inthe more pressing investigations of the forum and arxof Cosa, Brown soon abandoned the idea of investi-gating the bath complex, except tangentially.

In the 1980s, J. P. Oleson visited the site and men-tioned the Cosa bath in his study of ancient water lift-ing devices. Based on his examination of the remainsvisible at the time, Oleson suggested that a simplebucket and chain installation could have provided thecomplex with water,7 leaving the question of its sourc-ing open.

In the early 1990s, Giulio Ciampoltrini of the So-printendenza della Toscana conducted a systematic sur-vey of bathing complexes in Tuscany tentatively datedto the Early Empire. He asserts that the bath at Cosareflected a clear division between the hot and cold

1 We are indebted to many people and institutions for enabling thisresearch. In particular, we thank Landon and Leslie Thorne, as well asthe Thorne Foundation for their generosity and support in the field. Also, we gratefully acknowledge Dr. Andrea Pessina and Dr.ssa PamelaGambogi at the Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana,whose encouragement and suggestions were fundamental for this research.

2 The arx and its structures are cataloged in Brown, Richardson,Richardson 1960. The vista that the site affords was no doubt a largeattraction for the site of Cosa, as it still is today; some large, modern villas hug the coastline in Ansedonia, immediately under the acropolisof ancient Cosa.

3 Initial excavations are detailed in Brown 1951.4 For more on the buildings of the Forum, see Brown et alii 1993.5 See Fagan 1999; Lucore, Trümper 2013; Yegül 1992 and 2010.6 Brown (1951, pp. 83-84) writes, «The Bath … was quite small, con-

fined to the west quarter of the block, though perhaps having in thesouth quarter, where no walls appear above ground, an exercise court.Little of its plan can be made out. That the principal rooms were vault-ed is evident from the fallen masses, particularly thick toward the westcorner of the building. Perhaps the caldarium occupied this position, forbeside it in the street lay a fragment of a circular labrum of white lime-stone. The chief remains are those at the south corner of a group ofsmall rooms, which supported in part an elevated masonry tank for wa-ter supply. A few meters northeast lay a tiny circular room, probably afrigidarium and near the entrance. Its walls were built solidly of brokenrooftile and mortar and were originally adorned with sixteen flat pi-lasters, six of which are still to be seen. The fragments of vaultingwhich lie about it seem to indicate that it was covered by a segmenteddome corresponding to the pilasters. Some six meters beyond, a heavywall, likewise of opus testaceum, and more fallen vaulting may mark thelimit of the building». 7 Oleson 1984, p. 201.

Cosa Excavations: the 2013 Report

R. T. Scott, A. U. De Giorgi, S. Crawford-Brown, A. Glennie,A. Smith

A

Orizzonti XVI 2015.qxp_Impaginato 31/10/14 08:52 Pagina 11

rooms, based on his interpretation of the one compo-nent of the bath suite visible8 The presence of a lacon-icum, interpreted by Brown as frigidarium (discussedbelow), may suggest that the hot zones of the bathsuite were assigned to its eastern portions, with thecolder areas located at the western end of the site.9

3. 2013 Excavations

3. 1. Introduction

Excavations in 2013 (Fig. 2) focused on the previouslyunexcavated bathing complex for a number of rea-sons. Public bathing in antiquity was deeply rooted inthe hygienic, social, and cultural habits of thepopulus.10 In the Mediterranean, baths arose in con-nection with the Greek gymnasium,11 and so were as-sociated not only with exercise, but also with commu-nal and educational activities. By the fourth centurya.C., bathing complexes were typically given a centralposition near the agora.12 These Greek predecessorsbecame the models for Roman baths, and the resultingexperimentation in bath construction led Romans to

achieve many of the architectural feats for which theyare remembered.

Additionally, bathing complexes were important tocivic life, as they encouraged social interaction andwere governed by community-wide policies of main-tenance and water-consumption.13 Roman bathingculture was especially important for colonies andcities outside Rome that wished to show themselves ashomogenous with their capital city. Despite the per-ceived inclusivity of baths, however, questions remainregarding their control and access, particularly duringthe Republic.

Finally, the presence of a bathing block demandssome means of water collection and transportation.One of the most important questions addressed dur-ing the initial season was access to water at the site.Cosa, after all, is a hill without a natural watersource.14 While it is peppered with cisterns, some ofmonumental size,15 it is not readily apparent how thequantity of water necessary to supply the bath washarnessed and brought to it. Further work will focuson how this challenge was met. In 2013 work was di-rected to the following areas.

12 r. t. scott, a. u. de giorgi, s. crawford-brown, a. glennie, a. smith

8 Ciampoltrini 1993, p. 443.9 Vitruvius, on the other hand, recommends that the warm baths

should be oriented towards the southwest, or, if the situation preventsit, towards the south (5.1.1).

10 Yegül 1992, p. 1.11 Yegül 1992, p. 7. 12 Yegül 1992, p. 9.13 Scarborough 1991, pp. 101-154.14 Brown 1951, pp. 84-85. 15 Brown 1951, pp. 84-88.

Fig. 1. Map of Cosa with grid plan; note the area of the bath complex in vi/vii-d.


3. 2. Façade Sounding

In the southern sector of the complex, two soundingswere initiated in order to locate the façade relative tothe original street grid originally recognized byBrown.16 The first, Facade Sounding I, measured 3 by3 m, while the second, Facade Sounding ii, measured7 by 3 m at the end of the excavation season. The twosoundings revealed a single wall 0.60 m in width run-ning approximately northwest to southeast for a dis-tance of 5.50 m (Fig. 3). While an initial description ofthis wall follows here, its function within the complexremains a question to be addressed in the 2014 season.

Facade Sounding I uncovered the eastern section ofthis wall and an eroded cocciopesto floor. Against thewall was a long shelf or bench, made of plastered tileand rubble footed directly on floor (Fig. 4). The benchis 0.40m wide and 0.40m high as preserved. Given itsproximity to the street uncovered at the southern edge

of Façade Sounding II, this bench might suggest thearea’s use as either an apodyterium or, less likely be-cause of its position, an immersion pool.17 The exca-vation limits in 2013 preclude a secure identification ofthe use of space, but the recovery of its full dimen-sions in future should lead to one.

Tracing the wall south into Facade Sounding ii, itwas seen to join two less substantial walls that extendeast and west at right angles to it. A feature, possibly aplatform, was built against the western face of themain wall and turns to corner with the western wallthat continues beyond the limit of excavation. Theplatform is about 0.45 m wide and 0.40 m high, but isnot footed on a finished pavement, rather on a roughpacking or rudus for a floor. The platform also lacks afinished top coat, but preserves broken fragmentsfrom a finished cocciopesto floor with inlaid whitelimestone tesserae in a geometric design that consti-tutes its top.

cosa excavations: the 2013 report 13

16 Brown 1951, pp. 24-27. 17 In the North Baths at Morgantina, a mid-3rd century a.C. com-plex, a similar bench was found and interpreted as part of an immersionpool (Lucore in Lucore, Trümper 2013, p. 165).

Fig. 2. Area of excavation in 2013.


A smaller wall runs approximately eastward andperpendicular to the northwest-southeast wall; it isconstructed of smaller, irregular blocks – likely a lateraddition. To its north, a large room with tile flooringextends beyond the 2013 excavation limit. The floorconsists of pan tiles, tegulae, generally with the flangesbroken off at the base, and measuring approximately0.45 by 0.50 m. This might have been the subfloor ofthe room, or potentially indicate the presence of ahypocaust system beneath the tegulae. Again, furtherexcavation is needed in order to determine the use ofthe space.

Perhaps most interesting in terms of phasing wasthe discovery at this level in Facade Sounding II of twomassive foundation blocks in travertine laid at rightangles to one another and aligned to Street O. Onemeasures 1.40m in length and supports a rubbleworkpier 0.70 m wide; the other runs parallel to the line ofthe street and extends beyond the western limit of thesounding. Their future investigation has significant ar-chitectural and chronological potential for this area.

3. 3. East Terminal Wall

A 2.5 by 4 m trench designated East Terminal Wall wasestablished abutting a portion of exposed wall to de-termine whether it was in fact an external and load-bearing wall of the bath complex (Fig. 5). Excavationin this area yielded considerable destruction debris, in-cluding fallen bricks, some still mortared together, andthick fragments of window glass.18 The wall was ex-

posed to a depth of about 3 m. It preserves an articu-lated façade with a thick plaster revetment preservedfor the top 0.75 m. As the wall extends towards its foun-dations it reveals an opus latericium facing over an opuscaementicium core in limestone rubblework. At a depthof 1.5 m, the width of the wall increased by 0.10 m; thisstepping out of the wall by 0.10 m happened again ata depth of 2.7 m. At the lowest excavated depths in2013, a concrete foundation was exposed which pre-serves the imprint of the wooden framework used forthe wall’s construction.

Although its overall length remains unknown, itwas possible to establish its function as a terminal wall,based on its robust width of 0.90 m, deep footings, anda broad external storm drain with vaulted cover builtagainst it that follows a parallel course sloping offfrom Southeast to Northwest. The interior width ofthis drain is about 1 m, and attests to the presumablyconspicuous circulation of water within the bathingcomplex. Time constraints and safety concerns limit-ed excavation of the wall and its features, but thesewill be more thoroughly investigated in 2014.

3. 4. Laconicum

A round room, 3.5 m in diameter, interpreted as a frigi-darium in Brown’s initial investigations,19 is situated inthe northern sector of the complex. The 2013 excava-tions confirmed Ciampoltrini’s identification of thebuilding as a laconicum of circular shape and probabledomed roof, which are typical of laconica in Italy.20Large segments of collapsed mortared brickworkvaulting were removed with a large crane and movedto the perimeter of the excavation area for future


18 For the comprehensive analysis of glass from Cosa see Grose,forthcoming. 19 Brown 1951, p. 83.

20 See Pappalardo 1999 and Adam-Veleni 2013, p. 207 for Romanlaconica.

Fig. 3. Wall running northwest to southeast from FacadeSounding i (background) into Facade Sounding ii (foreground).

Fig. 4. Bench feature in Facade Sounding i.


study. Several of them clearly exhibit constructiontechniques developed for lightening loads in imperialvaulted architecture, such as the use of wedges oflight volcanic tufa. It is apparent that the room wasvaulted, although whether its dome was segmented orsmooth requires further study.

Examination of these and other fragments in addi-tion to the walls of the laconicum itself, however, showthat a considerable amount of building material usedin the opus latericium was apparently collected fromthe town site and consisted of cut pan and cover tilesin addition to limestone rubble. The use of regularbricks is also attested by a number of stamps on loosebricks, and two stamped bricks found in situ in the fab-ric of the laconicum. All of them, except for a fragmentof a late Julio-Claudian stamp re-used in a fragment offallen vaulting, belong to the second century d.C. Likeothers associated with repairs to the Capitolium ofCosa, most are roughly Hadrianic in date.21

Once the vaulted segments were lifted fromaround the laconicum, it was possible to investigate itsinterior (Fig. 6). The 3.50 m diameter is a size suitableto its function, and shallow pilasters articulate the in-terior. Their intervals may also have served to directcondensation of water vapor back down to the floor.It appears that the progressive collapse of the upperwalls and vaulted roofing system has destroyed mostof the laconicum floor, mere scraps of which are pre-served toward the northern end of its eastern hemi-sphere. The remains of the floor are in tile, but sinceexcavation was halted at this level, it has yet to be de-termined whether there was an upper floor carried onsuspensurae over a subfloor to facilitate the circulationof hot air.22

At the southern end of the eastern hemisphere,about 0.20 m above the level of the floor, is an opening0.90 m in width that may have provided access fromthe laconicum to another room in the bath suite. Itsmargins are sealed with quarter round cocciopestomoldings, just as is its upper surface. Excavation in thelaconicum was terminated once the area was deemedunsafe because of a large segment of fallen vaultingthat rests on its upper limit, but further excavation isplanned once the piece can be removed.

3. 5. Western Cistern

The investigation of the southern quarter of the bathcomplex was cursorily undertaken to test if there hadbeen a coherent organization of the area with a properentrance to an integrated bath and exercise facilityfrom Street O to the south. Three soundings weremade: two extending from the northern margin andcurb of Street O and a presumed facade line for thebath building back toward the draw shafts of the largesubterranean cistern, and a third immediately north ofthe northwestern extension to document additionalremains that could be assigned to the phase ofmortared limestone rubblework construction.

Altogether, the results to date indicate a sequenceof development that may be summarized as a Repub-lican phase subsequently modified by the installationof the bath. Signs of the process are as follows. In thearea of the underlying western cistern, a working, herringbone brick floor was uncovered just above thecistern vault with a drain in cocciopesto leading to aninlet now lost. The brick floor had been suppressedsubsequently and largely robbed out when the space itoccupied was reshaped at a higher elevation. Thiswork included a new cocciopesto floor and a doorwaythat permitted movement in the direction of other


21 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960, p. 139; Bloch 1947,pp. 324-327.

22 Ciampoltrini (1993, p. 442) asserts: «un ambiente a pianta circo-lare, con pavimentazione certamente su suspensurae, munito nelle

pareti di nicchie per l’alloggiamento di tubuli, e coperto con volta acrociera in cui si dovrebbe riconoscere un piccolo laconicum (C)». Thepresence of a hypocaust, however, can only be determined by subse-quent excavation.

Fig. 5. East Terminal Wall showing niching and the first 0.10 mstep.

Fig. 6. The laconicum.


rooms that extended south toward the putative façadeline on Street O. As with the other areas of excavationin 2013, the environs of the cistern require further ex-ploration to understand their full extent and role with-in the complex.

4. Comparanda

4. 1. Fregellae

To the south of Rome, but still in Latium, lies the Re-publican town of Fregellae. The site is indispensablenot only to the study of ancient Italian urbanism, butespecially for the development of bathing complexes.Two baths at Fregellae provide what could be the earli-est evidence for the evolution of bathing culture onthe Italian peninsula, and, in future, may offer possiblecomparanda for the situation at Cosa.

These baths constructed in two distinct phases be-tween the third and second centuries a.C. (Fig. 7),were, like Cosa’s, located near the Forum «in the heartof the residential quarter».23 The second phase of thebathing complex, which features a plan much closer to

Italian paradigms than the first, differs from the later,archetypal Roman baths, as it includes two divisions ofheated spaces rather than three.24 As excavation atCosa progresses, it will be interesting to learn whetherthe emerging plan of the bath aligns itself with themore established and pervasive model of three sepa-rate bathing spaces, or follows the second phase atFregellae.25

5. Chronological Assessment

5. 1. Brick stamps

Nine stamped bricks recovered at Cosa during the 2013season provide strong evidence for the dating of the laconicum, and expand the chronology laid out in Edward Jan Bace’s 1983 Michigan dissertation, Cosa: Inscriptions on Stone and Brick-Stamps. Most were foundin a collapse layer inside the laconicum. Although fragmentary, the stamps are sufficiently preserved toenable a reconstruction of the text based on compar-isons with more complete examples. Most are lunatein shape, and include the phase ex praediis or ex figlinis


23 Tsiolis 2013, p. 89. While the bath currently under investigationat Cosa occupies a space much closer to the Forum than those at Fregellaewhich are located about one mile from the Forum and their excavationis much more complete, the placement of the two towns’ baths in a res-idential zone could offer a good comparison as further investigation ofthe Cosa bath and its environs advances in the coming seasons.

24 Tsiolis (2013, p. 89): «Notable is the presence of only two mainbathing rooms in each section (apodyterium/tepidarium and caldarium),while other Republican establishments of slightly later date (from thesecond half of the 2nd century B.C.) generally feature three basic spaces(apodyterium, tepidarium, caldarium)».

25 Room A1 of the Phase I Fregellae Baths, which acted as one ofthe entrance rooms to the complex, features a tessellated opus signinumpaving which is markedly similar to traces of similar paving in a trenchopened at the Cosa bath in 2013, which were also an entrance most like-ly, given their proximity to Street O at the southern end of the com-plex. «Because of its location Room A1 could have functioned original-ly as a taberna or two tabernae and therefore not as part of the bathingfacility proper. Yet if we read this space within the total plan, its posi-tion would seem to be ideal for a vestibule or reception area, the loca-tion of the cella ostiaria or the office of the balineator who was respon-sible for, among other things, the payment of entry tickets to thebaths» (Tsiolis 2013, p. 98).

Fig. 7. Fregellae Phase i and ii. Phase ii (at left) is superimposed upon Phase i.


– conventional descriptors that became especially pop-ular for indicating the brickyard and its location to-wards the end of Hadrian’s reign.26

The stamped bricks excavated in 2013 were pro-duced in large-scale operations, and suggest a healthylevel of trade and connectivity in second century d.C.Cosa. C13.6 and C13.7, for example, were produced inthe figlinae Oceanae Maiores, and may be identifiedwith cil XV 368 (Fig. 8):

ex fic ocea mai caes n op doq pervsi pvderamus palmae

Ex fic(linis) Ocea(nis) Mai(oribus) Caes(aris) n(ostri) op(us) do(liare)Q. Perusi Pude(ntis)27

The figlinae Oceanae Maiores were a major manufactur-er whose stamps have been recovered from a numberof sites in and around Rome. This appears to be theearliest stamp type in which the Oceanae Maiores arementioned by name, and thus belongs at the begin-ning of that manufacturer’s long history.28 Q. PerusiusPudens, the officinator, is attested in another stamptype from 148 d.C. (cil xv 369).29 Because stampedbricks identical to C13.6 and C13.7 have been found insitu in contexts datable to the first years of AntoninusPius, we may suggest a date for C13.6 and C13.7 some-where in the decade following 138 d.C.30 Interestingly,later stamps of the figlinae Oceanae have also been uncovered at Cosa’s Capitolium, and date between 161and 169 d.C.31

Three stamped bricks found in the 2013 season(C13.8, C13.25, and C13.28) date to 145 d.C., and may beclassified with cil xv 1071 a/b:32

o d ex pr dom lvc ver cl qvant iiii et vero ii

cos

O(pus) d(oliare) ex pr(aediis) Dom(itiae) Luc(illae) Ver(i) Cl(audi)Qu(inquatralis) Ant(onino) IIII et Vero II cos.33

Stamps of the gens Domitia, «the most prominent fam-ily in the history of the Roman brick industry», spanthe death of Caligula through the reign of Com-modus.34 They appear in countless subtypes, and areknown from private villas as well as public structuressuch as the Baths and Markets of Trajan and the Atri-um Vestae in Rome.35 In the early second century muchof the family’s property came into the hands of Domi-tia Cn. f. Lucilla, who eventually bequeathed it to herdaughter, Domitia P. f. Lucilla. The younger Lucillamarried M. Annius Verus and bore the future emperor

Marcus Aurelius in 121 d.C. After Lucilla’s death (c. 155-161 d.C.) most of the land went to Marcus Aurelius,with a portion reserved for his sister.36

Bace catalogues two discrete stamp types of Lucillaat Cosa, most of which come from the Capitolium anddate to 123 d.C.37 The stamps found in 2013 share theaffiliation with Lucilla, but are apparently of a differ-ent officinator. Such variation suggests that bricks ofthe Domitiae Lucillae were used on a number of differ-ent occasions at Cosa, for temple repairs on the arx aswell as in the forum baths. This parallels the situationdescribed above regarding the figlinae Oceanae Maiores.

Cosa’s earliest brick stamps appear to be largely oflocal manufacture. Suitable clay beds abound in theager Cosanus, making the region «a logical center forthe brick trade».38 Local clay was also used for therevetments of temples at Cosa.39 By the second centu-ry d.C., however, Cosans appear increasingly to haveimported their bricks from figlinae in and aroundRome.40 The finds from 2013 reflect this trend andwere produced not by local manufacturers, but inlarge-scale imperial operations.

Five stamps are of the powerful and well-estab-lished figlinae Oceanae Maiores or of Domitia Lucilla.C13.26 was produced by the figlinae Marcianae, and


26 Bloch 1948, p. 10. See also Helen 1975, p. 37 ff. on the meaningof figlinae.

27 Both C13.6 and C13.7 are fragmentary, and are preserved as fol-lows: ex fic ocea [mai caes n op do]/q per[vsi pvde] (C13.6); [ex]fic ocea [mai caes n op do]/q per[vsi pvde] (C13.7).

28 Steinby 1977, p. 70. 29 Steinby 1977, p. 70.30 Bodel 1983, p. 31. 31 Bace 1983, pp. 149-150.32 cil xv, 1071a includes the full vero on line two, whereas cil xv,

1071b has ver. While C13.25 may confidently be assigned to type a, C13.8and C13.28 do not preserve enough of the second line to enable an ac-curate identification. All three stamps are likely of the same subtype,but are in any case identical in chronology, origin, and manufacturer.

33 The stamps are preserved as follows: [o d ex] pr dom lvc ve[rcl qv]/[an]t iiii et v[ero ii]/[cos] (C13.8); o [d ex pr dom lvc]ver cl qv/a[nt iii]i et vero ii/cos (C13.25); o d ex pr do[m lvcver cl qv]/ant iiii [et vero ii]/cos (C13.28).

34 Bodel 1983, p. 41.35 Bloch 1947, pp. 36-49 («Le terme di Traiano»), pp. 49-57 («I mer-

cati di Traiano»), pp. 67-85 («L’Atrium Vestae»), for example.36 On the Domitiae Lucillae, Setälä 1977, pp. 107-109.37 Bace 1983, p. 154 A13 and A14. 38 Bace 1983, p. 146.39 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960 passim; Bace 1983,

p. 145. 40 Bace 1983, p. 147.

Fig. 8. Stamped brick (C13.6) of the figlinae Oceanae Maioresnaming Q. Perusius Pudens as officinator, found in the collapselayer of the laconicum.


should date to the reign of Trajan.41 The figlinae Mace-donianae are represented by one stamped brick datingto the end of Hadrian’s reign or the beginning of An-toninus Pius’.42 Taken as a whole, these stamps attestto Cosa’s integration within the broader network ofRoman building and manufacture during the secondcentury d.C. Contrary to its traditional depiction as atown in decline, the stamps confirm that not onlywere building projects underway in the second centu-ry d.C., but that the Cosans were using the same build-ing materials as their wealthy contemporaries in thecapital and elsewhere.

At the time of Bace’s study in 1983, relatively fewbrick stamps of Trajanic, Hadrianic, and Antoninedate had yet been found at Cosa. Bace contrasts thisscarcity with the corresponding abundance of earlysecond century brick stamps known from villas in theager Cosanus. Seven of the nine stamped bricks uncov-ered in 2013, however, are of Trajanic date or later.Three are separate copies of the same stamp (C13.8,C13.25, and C13.28), and may indicate an early Anto-nine building phase in the bath complex. These find-ings, coupled with the evidence of Hadrianic stampsfrom the Capitolium, the portrait head of Hadrian, thespike in coinage between the reigns of Hadrian andCommodus, and the Severan inscription recovered in2013, suggest that Cosa’s ‘decline’ may have been lessdramatic than previously thought or, at any rate, someefforts were made to address it. Instead of abandoningtheir public buildings, the Cosans continued to build,

rebuild, and restore. The degree to which imperialbenefaction assisted in such projects will likely be clar-ified by future seasons at the site.

5. 2. Inscriptions

Fragments of three marble inscriptions were recov-ered during the clearing of the southern sector.

1. A first fragment was recovered during the clear-ing operations of Façade Sounding I, and presumablyout of context. Luni marble, fine lettering and cutting,height of letters 4 cm. Thickness of plaque. 2.4 cm.

avgAug[ustus]?

2. Seven joining fragments (Fig. 9). Luni marble,40 × 37 cm, height of letters 6 cm. Lime film and rootmarks on front. Mortar for attachment on back.Thickness of plaque: 1.7-1.9 cm.

imp∙m∙avrantoninfel∙imp∙i

The inscription may refer to Caracalla.

3. Fragment of inscription. Luni marble, height of let-ters 6 cm plus serifs. Mortar on back.

sa

5. 3. Dating

Ciampoltrini has suggested that the mid-second cen-tury date hazarded by Brown for the bath complex ofCosa should be taken with caution, noting that thebath in the nearby villa of Settefinestre shows a strongsimilarity in construction and plan, yet is dated secure-ly to the Antonine era.43 The discovery of a Hadrian-ic/early Antonine phase in the area of the presumedRepublican bath, however, raises the question of thepossible extent of this Imperial intervention at Cosa.Previously Hadrianic brick stamps had been found onthe arx, a number of 123 d.C., which apparently docu-ment a repair to the principal temple.

Furthermore, a headless, cuirassed statue wasfound during the early excavations on the arx; while itappears to be stylistically earlier than the Hadrianicperiod, a head of Hadrian had also been found therebefore Brown’s work for the American Academy be-gan. In addition, a monumental inscription of whichonly two letters are preserved, NH, likewise found onthe arx, possibly referred to him as his titulature con-sistently names him Traianus Hadrianus (see Appen-dix below). There is also an upsurge in the coinagefrom the time of Hadrian through Commodus thatmay indicate «a period of revived if transient prosper-ity».44 Despite – or perhaps because of – the inscrip-


41 imp ca[e t]ro [avg]/[ex] figli m[arc doli]/[c] ca[l favo-ris]; cf. Bace 1983, p. 149.

42 An identical example is catalogued in Bace 1983, p. 148. The 2013example was found in situ in the laconicum, but may represent a later

phase of repairs. Further investigation of the laconicum is necessary todetermine its original context.

43 Ciampoltrini 1993, p. 443; cf. Brown 1980, p. 58 and Brown etalii 1993, p. 236. 44 Buttrey 1980, p. 33.

Fig. 9. Inscription discussed in section 5. 2. 2.


tions of Caracalla found on the siteand in its environs, the status ofthe town in the Severan period isquestionable. Buttrey reports twocoins of Severus in a total numberof ten pieces for the dynasty to 235d.C., the last year in which build-ing activity in the forum is record-ed. Yet, the present evidence andthe elusive status of the Res PublicaCosanorum, dismissed by Fentressas a fluke, deserve proper re-dis-cussion.45

6. Further Questionsand Tentative Conclusions

As noted above, no heating sourcehas yet been localized for the bathcomplex. During the 2013 excava-tions, fragments of window glassand tubuli were common in the de-bris, particularly in the area of thelaconicum. Though these artifactsstrongly suggest the presence of aheating system, further excavationis needed to discover it.

Of great importance is thequestion of how water wasbrought to and circulated withinthe bath, given that the hill ofCosa is waterless and shows no ev-idence of being fed by an aque-duct.46 South of the bath is alarge, rectangular reservoir meas-uring 17.20 m by 13.30 m47 whichmust have supplied the complexacross the street (Fig. 10 and Fig.11). A smaller cistern, approximate-ly 3.80 m wide and 15.18 m long, lo-cated in the southeast area of thebath complex, communicates with the reservoirthrough a cuniculus and most likely furnished thebaths with a large portion of its needed supply. A con-duit can be seen well up in the southeastern cornerof the reservoir that carried collected water from theForum porticoes to its east.

Additionally, the reservoir appears to have been ei-ther partially or completely covered, as four brick andmasonry piers stand in the center of its floor. The ex-tent of the covering of this space is not yet clear, butthere are certainly attested covered cisterns in the Ro-man world, with a variety of covering systems.48Work in subsequent seasons will also consider howmuch water may have been necessary to manage thesebathing facilities.

Although Cosa’s lack of a consistent water supply orevidence for an aqueduct does present difficulties, thetown is not the only example of a waterless inhabitedarea in the Roman period. Parallel sites at Ampurias inSpain and Tiddis in Algeria demonstrate the use ofchannels to collect rainwater and runoff to supplypublic fountains and baths in the absence of any aque-ducts.49 The large reservoir to the southeast of Cosa’sbath complex was not the only means of holding wa-ter for the bath in the area. Elevated catchments adja-cent to the laconicum could hold and deliver water tothe bath.50 The cocciopesto lining of these catchmentsprovides further support for their water-holding func-tion, as the material is impermeable and well attestedin Roman bathing contexts.51


45 On the survival of Cosa in the third century d.C. see Scott 1981,pp. 309-314.

46 Dyson 2013, p. 474. 47 Brown 1951, p. 86.48 Hodge 2002, p. 62. 49 Hodge 2002, p. 61.

50 Hodge 2002, p. 265: «Baths supplied by lifting devices in this wayhave been found at Pompeii, Herculaneum, Ostia, Cyrene and AbuMena (Egypt)». 51 Ciampoltrini 1993, p. 442.

Fig. 10. Plan of reservoir south of bath complex.


The elevated rectangular catchment basins withcocciopesto lining and thick cocciopesto floors arefour in number. Their interior measurements at floorlevel are approximately 1.90 by 1.40 m, the thickness oftheir walls 0.45 m. The catchments, arranged in asquare in communicating pairs, are placed atop a se-ries of high walls constructed in hard mortared lime-stone rubble work, with the floor of one higher thanthe other to give momentum to water flow from westto east.

So far, no coherent, overall organization of the ar-eas excavated in 2013 within the bath has emerged.There is currently evidence in the architectural re-mains for operation and modification of the complexfrom the late Republican to Imperial Period. The ma-terial evidence recovered in 2013 complements the ar-chitectural: ceramics include second and first centurya.C. black glaze pottery (both local and imported), Ar-retine ware, African Red Slipped pottery, cookingwares, and transport amphorae of western prove-nance of Republican and Imperial date.

Although the material unearthed this season be-longs largely to the late Republican and Imperial Peri-ods, there remains a strong possibility that Cosa’s orig-inal bath block dates to the second century a.C., whenthe town underwent a period of increased prosperityfollowing the arrival of a new wave of colonists. Exca-

vation of this colonial bath therefore might afford aglimpse of both the early Roman engineering of a typ-ically Greek architectural and social form, and, subse-quently, the evolved design of the typical Roman bath.Further excavation is needed to investigate the full his-tory of the complex and its uses.

Appendix

Cosa: A New Inscription

During excavations on the arx of Cosa in 1965, a mutilated, cal-cined block of Vulci tufa was retrieved from one of a numberof walls attesting to mediaeval occupation there, which, on ex-amination, proved to be ancient and preserved two letters, nh,of a monumental Latin inscription (inventory 213457 Soprinten-denza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana). The block as pre-served measures 0.48 m in length, 0.34 m in height, and 0.20 min thickness. Saw marks are visible on the top; the left side andback of the block are finished, the right side and bottom arebroken.

The two letters are carved in a finished field 0.30 m high andare themselves 0.18 m high. The maximum width of the shaftsis 0.025 m and their depth is the same. There are no indicationsof holes for the securing of metal letters and their materialmust for the moment remain problematic. The interpretationof the letters, however, does not seem so. Eleven Hadrianicbrick stamps of the year 123 d.C. were found on the arx of Cosaduring the American excavations conducted by Brown, which


Fig. 11. Proximity of the large cistern (at left) to the bath complex (at right).


led him to conclude that repairs had been made around thattime to the only remaining temple there, the large three-cella‘Capitolium’.52

The renewal of excavations in the baths adjacent to the Fo-rum of Cosa in 2013 has led to the discovery of further activityon the site during the principate of Hadrian, perhaps associatedwith his praetorship in Etruria,53 so it seems appropriate to re-turn to the inscription at this point. First, its placement. A num-ber of blocks were required to carry the text, whatever itslength, and the most suitable location for its display would havebeen in the pediment of the temple, as no other suitable struc-ture existed for it on the arx. The text itself would most likelyhave commemorated the restoration of the temple by the em-peror whose name fits the proposed date of 123, Hadrian,whose titulature regularly styles him Traianus Hadrianus, or,especially on the coinage, Traian Hadrianus, which I would re-store here. Finally, a portrait head of Hadrian was found on thearx before the arrival of the American excavators followingWorld War II.54

The stone on which the inscription is carved is anachronisticand curious for the period; one may legitimately wonderwhether it is reused material, as the excavations in the bathshave shown that trimmed roof tiles were recycled to supple-ment the bricks brought to the site for the imperial opus lateri-cium visible there, and because Vulci tufa was used in the con-struction of the Cosa Capitolium.55 This block shows no signs ofreworking, but may nevertheless represent reuse.

The presentation of the inscription, however, its somberbackground and dark lettering may have been intended to recallthe archaic aesthetic and origins of the building type. This rais-es as well the question, in what shape was the fabric of Cosa’sCapitolium by then? The history of its decoration effectivelyended before the Augustan period and only repairs to its dete-riorating roof have been documented in the sequel. The greysandstone of its exterior that one sees today must also have be-gun to emerge from its stucco revetment in antiquity itself. Theearlier liveliness of the building produced by its brightly painteddecorations was lost, and its essential later form would havebeen as first described by Brown: «Broad and squat, hooded bythe overwhelming mass of its roof» which, as has been seen,continued to attract sporadic attention.56

Bibliography

Adam-Veleni 2013: P. Adam-Veleni, The Hellenistic Balaneionat the Roman Form of Thessaloniki, in Greek Baths and BathingCulture: New Discoveries and Approaches, S. K. Lucore, MonikaTrümper eds., Leuven, 2013, pp. 201-210.

Bace 1983: E. J. Bace, Cosa: Inscriptions on Stone and Brick-Stamps, Ann Arbor, 1983.

Bodel 1983: J. P. Bodel, Roman Brick Stamps in the Kelsey Museum, Ann Arbor, 1983.

Bloch 1947: H. Bloch, I bolli laterizi e la storia edilizia romana:contributi all’archeologia e alla storia romana, Roma, 1947.

Bloch 1948: H. Bloch, Indices to the Roman Brick-Stamps Published in Volumes xv 1 of the Corpus Inscriptionum Lati-narum and lvi-lvii of the Harvard Studies in Classical Philolo-gy, «Harvard Studies in Classical Philology», lviii/lix, 1948,pp. 1-104.

Brown 1951: F. E. Brown, Cosa i: History and Topography,Rome, 1951.

Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960: F. E. Brown, E.H. Richardson, L. Richardson, Cosa ii: the Temples ofthe Arx, Rome, 1960.

Brown 1980: F. E. Brown, Cosa: the Making of a Roman Town,Ann Arbor, 1980.

Brown et alii 1993: F. E. Brown, E. H. Richardson, L. Ri-chardson, Cosa iii: the Buildings of the Forum, Rome, 1993.

Buttrey 1980: T. V. Buttrey, Cosa: The Coins, «maar», xxxiv,1980, pp. 11-153.

Ciampoltrini 1993: G. Ciampoltrini, Le terme pubbliche nellecittà dell’Etruria centro-settentrionale fra i e ii secolo d.C., «StudiClassici e Orientali», xliii, 1993, pp. 427-446.

Dyson 2013: S. L. Dyson, Cosa, in A Companion to the Archaeol-ogy of the Roman Republic, ed. J. DeRose Evans, Oxford, 2013,pp. 472-484.

Fagan 1999: G. G. Fagan, Bathing in Public in the Roman World,Ann Arbor, 1999.

E. Fentress, Cosa V: An Intermittent Town, Excavations 1991-1997,Ann Arbor, 2003.

Grose: D. Grose, Cosa: The Glass, Ann Arbor, forthcoming.Helen 1975: T. Helen, Organization of Roman Brick Production

in the First and Second Centuries A.D.: An Interpretation of Ro-man Brick Stamps, Helsinki, 1975.

Hodge 2002: A. T. Hodge, Roman Aqueducts and Water Supply,London, 2002.

Lucore, Trümper 2013: S. K. Lucore, Bathing in HieronianSicily, in Greek Baths and Bathing Culture: New Discoveries andApproaches, eds. S. K. Lucore, M. Trümper, Leuven, 2012, pp.151-180.

Oleson 1984: J. P. Oleson, Greek and Roman Mechanical Wa-ter-Lifting Devices: the History of a Technology, Toronto, 1984.

Pappalardo 1999: U. Pappalardo, The Suburban Baths of Herculaneum, in Baths and Bathing: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Roman Baths Held at Bath, England,30 March-4 April 1992, Portsmouth, 1999, pp. 229-238.

Scarborough 1991: V. L. Scarborough, Water ManagementAdaptations in Nonindustrial Complex Societies: An Archaeolog-ical Perspective, in Archaeological Method and Theory, 3, Tucson,1991, pp. 101-154.

Scott 1981: R. T. Scott, A New Inscription of the Emperor Max-iminus at Cosa, «Chiron», 11, 1981, pp. 309-314.


52 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960, pp. 137-139.53 SHA, v. Hadriani, 19.54 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960, pp. 137-139.55 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960, pp. 59-84 and n. 17, p. 32.56 Brown, Richardson, Richardson 1960, p. 94.

Graphic references: Fig. 1: by Brown et alii 1993, Plan i; Figg.2-6, 8-9, 11-12: by Auctors; Fig. 7: Tsiolis 2013, p. 96; Fig. 10: Brown etalii 1993, p. 117.

Fig. 12. Inscription found in 1965 showing letters, nh (Inventory213457 Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana).


Setälä 1977: P. Setälä, Private Domini in Roman Brick Stampsof the Empire: A Historical and Prosopographical Study ofLandowners in the District of Rome, Helsinki, 1977.

Spawforth 2012: A. J. S. Spawforth, Greece and the AugustanCultural Revolution, Cambridge, 2012.

Steinby 1977: M. Steinby, La cronologia delle ‘figlinae’ doliari ur-bane della fine dell’età repubblicana fino all’inizio del iii secolo,«Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale diRoma», lxxxiv, 1977, pp. 7-132.

Tsiolis 2013: V. Tsiolis, The Baths and Fregellae and the Transi-tion from Balaneion to Balneum, in Greek Baths and Bathing Culture: New Discoveries and Approaches, eds. S. K. Lucore, M.Trümper, Leuven, 2013, pp. 89-112.

Yegül 1992: F. Yegül, Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity,Cambridge, 1992.

Yegül 2010: F. Yegül, Bathing in the Roman World, Cambridge,2010.



cosa excavations: the 2013 report

Documents