Sites HI and HII

Figure 1. RAF aerial photography and magnetometry results.

Following the observation of a perfectly oval trace on the RAF photograph of the area of Villa Magna, 280 m southeast of the casale, a short magnetometry campaign was carried out in July 2011 which revealed two anomalies corresponding roughly to the southeastern and northwestern ends of the oval, around 85 m apart (Fig. 1). The superposition of the two was sufficiently convincing to merit a brief excavation in order to understand what the anomaly corresponded to. Because of the resistance of the proprietor of the northern field, the excavation was limited to two trenches, one corresponding to the southeastern anomaly and another to a point close to the northwestern apex of the oval shown on the RAF photograph. The excavation was directed by Elizabeth Fentress and Andrea Di Miceli.

In HI, to the northeast (Fig. 2), the trench measured 15 x 2 m, aiming to intersect the anomaly on the axis of the oval. An initial removal of topsoil by mechanical means revealed clearly anthropic contexts, as well as what appeared to be a substantial cut. Using a backhoe the east end of the trench was then extended three metres to the north, and the cut was excavated to the depth of 1m. This excavation of the cut was then restricted to 1.5 m, and continued down a further .6 m, without reaching the bottom.

The second trench, HII, measured 5 x 3.5 m. This was excavated mechanically down to a horizon at which an apparently natural soil was visible. The trench was then excavated by hand, but time did not allow the completion of the excavation of the fill of the cut.

Figure 4. Linear cut 13006.

HI (Fig. 3)

The first action visible was an irregular cut running roughly north-south across the trench. This cut the white clay bedrock (13009) at an angle of c. 50˚. Above the white clay a red clay (13024) may represent upcast from the initial cut, or in situ bedrock. We can interpret this cut as the first action involved in the terracing of the site. A black clay layer (13022) covered the cut, very thin at the top but widening as it descended: this appears to have been the first fill, and may represent natural colluviation. Over it was packed a whitish-yellow clay, (13002), between .2 m thick at its highest point, to the east, and .6 m thick 4 m to the west, where it was cut vertically by 13006 and did not reappear. This clay strongly resembles the standard construction clays of the Roman villa, which appear to have been excavated near the river Sacco. 13006 is a vertical cut 3.6 m wide, filled with a very hard, dark brown clay (13005)(Fig. 4). On its east side it cut (13002) and, below it, a darker clay which may correspond to (13022). On its west side it cut (13010), a red soil, apparently natural, with white flecks and a high proportion of clay. It is similar but not identical to (13024), and continued down for 1.5 m. The bottom of the cut was not reached. In the west end of the trench the surface consisted of a grey-white clay, sloping gently to the west (13023) and covering (13010). It is possible that this represents a deliberate surface, but as it was not excavated this remains uncertain.

Figure 5. Linear cut 13003.

In addition to the larger cut, the yellow construction clay (13002) was cut by a small ditch and a series of postholes. The cut of the ditch, 13003, coincided for the first two metres with the initial terracing cut, and then turned west towards 13006 (Fig. 5). The relationship between the two is unknown, but it seems probable that 13003 intersected the larger feature. It measured 1m wide, with its sides sloping down to a small channel at the bottom, .3 m wide and .2 m deep. The purpose of this channel is entirely unclear. The small channel at the base might suggest a fistula, but it is hard to imagine its function here, while the suggestion that it was a drainage channel seems to be belied by the fact that it would have run straight into the main cut. It was filled by a dark clay, resembling (13005).

Figure 7. Modern plough scars 13001, 13002, 13003, 13004.

Figure 6. Row of postholes 13011/(13012), 13013/(13014), 13015/(13016), 13017/(13018).

Six postholes were also found. Four—13011/(13012), 13013/(13014), 13015/(13016), 13017/(13018)—were arranged in a row across the top of the trench, 4 m from 13006 (Fig. 6). They were small and shallow, although their original depth cannot be established, due to their cutting by the plough and, we may imagine, erosion. .5 m to the west two further postholes, 13008/(13007) and 13019/(13020), seem to begin a second row, and were slightly more substantial. 13008 showed at its base the pointed void of the post, or stake. Again, the function of the holes is not clear: their exiguous size suggests insubstantial scaffolding or, perhaps, a light palisade. All of these postholes were certainly under the traces of the modern ploughing, 13001, which cut across the trench on a slight diagonal, scoring all of the features and dragging up 13002 to form yellow smears in the section (Fig. 7). This ploughing must have taken place after the uprooting of the vineyard, which left no trace in the archaeological record, but whose relict vines are very visible in the field: local informants say that the particular variety of grape was only planted after the Second World War.

No archaeological materials were recovered from the site except a single fragment of eroded amphora wall and two scraps of Roman pottery.

Figure 9. Cut feature 13102, from south.

HII (Fig. 8)

Mechanical clearance revealed that the natural soil, (13103), was cut by a trench or other large feature, 13102, filled with extremely hard-packed dark brown clay (13101)(Fig. 9). This cut ran east-west, before curving towards the north. Starting at the north section, the black clay was excavated by hand, and proved to be fairly shallow, revealing the red soil at a depth of .4 m below its highest point. However, at the east-west line of the main cut, the depth of the feature increased sharply, and the cut appeared almost vertical. Although its excavation was discontinued for want of time, the shape of the cut is significant. It appears to represent a feature extending outward for a short distance beyond the main oval. This form, in conjunction with the shallow depth of the soil in the northeast corner, might suggest an entrance to the complex. No archaeological material was recovered.

Discussion

The interpretation of these two trenches hinges on that of the fills of the two large cuts, 13006 and 13102. The dark, hard packed clay inside these appears to have an anthropic origin. The geomorphologist Antonia Arnoldus-Huyzendveld, on the basis of photographs, believes that it is more likely to have been the result of a deliberate fill, possibly pounded. She argues that a natural colluvium would have seen the straight sides of the ditches deformed, and that the infil would never have a regular distribution, but show a difference in texture between upslope and downslope parts, and in any case show some form of vertical differentiation and layering (pers.com.). Further, the pounded clay would have resisted vegetation growth until the fields were eventually ploughed, which would explain the persistence of the form on the RAF photograph. At this point it seems fair to suggest that the ditch represents the pounded clay foundation for some lost structure, with an oval shape and a series of postholes to the rear.

There seem to be two plausible explanations for such a structure, if it is indeed Roman (and it is hard to imagine a later structure that would have involved the investment in labour that this represents): either a very large amphitheatre, with wooden seating, or a vivarium, where wild animals could be kept and hunts staged. Choosing between the two is based on probability: it is hard to imagine why an amphitheatre of that size – almost equal to that of Pompeii – should be built so far from an occupied centre. On the other hand, we know that Marcus Aurelius inaugurated a vivarium on the imperial estate at Centum Cellae, and it is clear from Fronto’s letter that he would use it for venationes (Fronto ep. III, 21.2).. Then, while we know of no amphitheatres without an external masonry wall, Columella suggests (r.r. IX.1) that a vivarium could be surrounded by mud-bricks or pounded earth, or, indeed, a wooden fence, Our elaborate foundation, of clean pounded clay probably deriving from a nearby outcrop, does seem to imply a more important structure, perhaps some sort of seating for the enjoyment of the venationes, the traces of whose posts would have been erased by the plough. The rows of posts at the eastern end of the trench may be the bottom of some sort of fence or other barrier. Finally, this hypothesis would allow us to explain the curved trench with its narrow channel at the bottom, which might have brought water in a fistula from the spring to the west that supplied the villa: Columella recommends that a vivarium be equipped with a constant supply of fresh water.

Parallels for an oval vivarium do not exist, although it has recently been suggested that the amphitheatrum Castrensis of the Sessorium palace, oval in form, would have subsequently served as the vivarium for the games at the Colosseum.¹ If this is true, it is in any case the only vivarium for which we have any physical trace. In effect, we might imagine that the form of the possible vivarium at Villa Magna would have been influenced by that of an amphitheatre, which shares with it the spectacular nature of the venationes. The ‘overbuilding’ of the foundations for its walling or seating are part and parcel of the relentless overbuilding we have seen elsewhere on the site, particularly in the foundations to the cella vinaria, which share with it the yellow construction clay seen outside the great ditch.