- Robert Leighton –
through problems of defi nition and loose usage.^21 Proto-urban is the conventional term
(in Italy), which justifi ably stresses the EIA origins of most Etruscan cities, although
“semi-urban” seems preferable to this author, since it avoids the overly evolutionistic or
potentially teleological implications of “proto-urban” as an explanation of the causes and
trajectory of subsequent growth. Likewise, while a more neutral or cautious view need
not hesitate to describe the EIA as “foundational” for Etruscan state formation, the socio-
political correlate of urbanization, the extent to which it is formative is more debatable
and subject to re-evaluation as evidence grows. Nevertheless, one may at least credit
it with an establishment or initial structuring of settlements, territorial relationships,
patterns of land and resource exploitation and some cultural traditions along lines that
sometimes anticipate, but do not predetermine, subsequent development and elaboration.
URBAN TRANSFORMATIONS, CIRCA 725–550 BCMajor changes occurred over the next 150 years, often called the “Orientalizing” period,
although the evidence is still very uneven (see Chapter 6). Separation of the living from
the dead seems stricter than before, while areas of “ritual” or ceremonial use become
visible. At Tarquinia, the large Monterozzi plateau now served for burial, not housing
as well, perhaps because it was easier to move the living elsewhere (onto the Civita-
Regina plateau), as the dead steadily required more space. At Veii, a few tombs were
added to older cemeteries, while new (seventh-century) burial grounds clustered near
site entrances and exits; those to the north (at Riserva del Bagno for example) seem to
be higher ranking than those to the south (Macchia della Comunità), perhaps associated
with a quartiere popolare on the nearby promontory (see Fig. 7.3).^22
Residential quarters, still little known, evidently coalesced on the central plateaus at
the heart of most sites (Veii, Caere, Tarquinia, Vulci). Piazza d’Armi, an offshoot of the
main promontory at Veii, was probably a higher status zone, but the houses of this period
initially were no doubt still free-standing timber-framed buildings of variable shape (oval
or quadrangular) with thatched roofs and open spaces in between. Even high-ranking
individuals of the early seventh century, who constructed large burial mounds for the
Afterlife (below), may well have lived in houses of traditional design, as represented by
those at Veii, Satricum and the “hut tomb” at Caere.^23 Growing social divisions, however,
were most likely refl ected in private housing by the mid-seventh century and more
emphatically thereafter, as suggested by increasingly elaborate funerary architecture at
Caere and by multi-roomed buildings at secondary sites, such as Acquarossa and San
Giovenale, or, most strikingly, at Murlo.^24
This also involved greater use of stone, at least for wall foundations, as shown by
excavated, but poorly preserved, structures from Veii and Caere, and the fi rst use of roof
tiles for domestic buildings in the late seventh century.^25 While it is easy to underestimate
the potential monumentality of large timber buildings, quadrangular masonry houses
with tiled roofs would have some advantages over traditional EIA houses in an urban
setting, notably in terms of durability and diminished fi re risk.^26 They also require less
timber, possibly a diminishing resource in the vicinity of major settlements, which
might help to explain the growing tendency to inhume rather than cremate at this time.
A preference for stone and tile buildings, which were probably long-term investments
intended to outlive their fi rst occupants, might also relate to changing patterns of
property ownership within the urban context, where descendents would perhaps inherit