When a Local Legend Is (Mis)Appropriated in the Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

Archaeologies Journal of the World Archaeological Congress ISSN 1555-8622 Volume 6 Number 3 Arch (2010) 6:447-467 DOI 10.1007/ s11759-010-9148-2

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by World Archaeological Congress. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your work, please use the accepted authors version for posting to your own website or your institutions repository. You may further deposit the accepted authors version on a funders repository at a funders request, provided it is not made publicly available until 12 months after publication.

1 23

Author's personal copy

Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress ( 2010) DOI 10.1007/s11759-010-9148-2

Akira Matsuda, Sainsbury Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts and Cultures, SOAS, Russell Square, London, WC1H 0XG, UK E-mail: akiramtsd@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

sume Selon le contexte, les experts arche : ologues doivent-ils relayer les Re tations arche ologiquement incorrectes du passe Au cours de cet ? interpre tude de cas base sur e article, jaborde cette question au travers dune e rience que mes colle `gues et moi-me me avons ve cue lors de la fouille lexpe ologique de la villa dAuguste a Somma Vesuviana, en Italie. En 2003 ` arche alise et 2004, nous avons re que certains visiteurs du site de fouille lavaient te gende se culaire a Somma Vesuviana du ` interpre en sappuyant sur la le resse par ce s tunnel de la reine Giovanna. Bien quinitialement inte nome `ne, nous avons rapidement compris la ne cessite de faire des choix phe ponse a apporter a la population locale, qui demandait si le ` ` concernant la re te couvert au cours des fouilles. Nous avons pre sente deux tunnel avait e de tation du site: lun base sur larche ologie et lautre sur la axes dinterpre
2010 World Archaeological Congress

447

ARCHAEOLOGIES Volume 6 Number 3 December 2010

Context permitting, should public archaeologists allow archaeologically incorrect accounts of the past? In this paper I discuss this question through a case study based on the experience of myself and my colleagues at the excavation of the Villa of Augustus in Somma Vesuviana, Italy. In 2003 and 2004, we became aware that some visitors to the excavation interpreted the site by reference to a legend of the tunnel of Queen Giovanna, which had existed in Somma Vesuviana over the centuries. Although initially interested in this phenomenon, we soon realised that we needed to make certain judgements as to how to respond to local people asking whether the tunnel had been discovered in the excavation. We presented two different ways of interpreting the site, one based on archaeology and the other on the legend, and both as equally meaningful, while at the same time stressing what we as archaeologists believed, based on what we had found. In this process we decided to adhere to the principles of archaeology, even in embracing the multivocality of material remains.

RESEARCH

When a Local Legend Is (Mis)Appropriated in the Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

Author's personal copy

448

AKIRA MATSUDA

gende, en prenant soin de leur donner une importance e quivalente mais le ologues, avions de duit de tout en insistant sur ce que nous, en tant quarche couvertes. Ce faisant, nous avons de dadhe cide rer aux principes de nos de ologie, en embrassant me me la multivocalite des vestiges mate riels. larche
________________________________________________________________

Resumen: Siempre que lo justifique el contexto, deberan los arqueologos publicos permitir descripciones del pasado incorrectas desde el punto de vista arqueologico? En este trabajo, analizo esta cuestion a la luz de un estudio de caso basado en la experiencia que, tanto mis companeros como yo, tuvimos en la excavacion de Villa Augustus en Somma Vesuviana, Italia. En 2003 y 2004, nos dimos cuentos de que algunos visitantes de la excavacion interpretaban el yacimiento en funcion de una leyenda sobre el tunel de la Reina Juana, con varios siglos de antiguedad en Somma Vesuviana. Aunque inicialmente nos interesamos por este fenomeno, pronto nos percatamos de que debamos valorar la respuesta que dabamos a los lugarenos que nos preguntaban si el tunel haba sido descubierto en la excavacion. Presentamos dos interpretaciones distintas del yacimiento: una basada en la arqueologa y la otra, en la leyenda, las dos igualmente significativas, aunque dejando claro nuestra opinion como arqueologos en funcion de los descubrimientos realizados. En este proceso decidimos adherirnos a los principios de la arqueologa, aunque aceptando la multivocalidad de los restos materiales.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

KEY WORDS

Archaeology and folklore, Local legend, Multivocality of archaeological materials, Somma Vesuviana, Villa of Augustus
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Introduction
Over the last decade or so, public archaeologists have embraced the concept of multivocality and examined a variety of ways in which different members and groups of the public interpret material remains (ColwellChanthaphonh 2006; Gazin-Schwartz and Holtorf 1999; Holtorf 2005b; Pokotylo and Brass 1997; Schadla-Hall 2004; Talalay 2004). The rationale for this is twofold: it allows public archaeologists to gain a deeper understanding of what the past means to a wide range of people; and it helps them to make a more socially inclusive and informed judgement in managing archaeological resources in the public interest. Embracing multivocality, however, does not simply mean that the more interpretations, the better. Most of those who argue for the exploration of

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

449

various possibilities of interpreting archaeological materials simultaneously stress the importance of distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable interpretations (Colwell-Chanthaphonh 2006:23; Holtorf 2005a:549; Merriman 1999:4, 2004:7; Schadla-Hall 2004:268269; Trigger 1995:278279). If one accepts this then the key question is how to decide what is acceptable and what is not, and how archaeology, as a discipline, can influence that decision-making activity. It could be argued that such decisions are not subject to universal, uniform rules and that ultimately they depend on the context (Holtorf 2005a:249). This is probably correct, but it would nevertheless be reasonable to maintain that public archaeologists need to know at least how to deal with interpretations of material remains that are judged erroneous according to the generally accepted logic and methodology of archaeology, since it directly concerns the raison-detre of their profession. Context permitting, should public archaeologists accept archaeologically incorrect accounts of the past? One of the situations in which a clear answer to this question is needed is the appropriation of folklore for interpretation of archaeological remains. Folklore rejects a linear concept of time and reanimates peoples collective memory of the past in the present (Gazin-Schwartz and Holtorf 1999:1519; Layton 1999:2728). It is often appealing, and informative in anthropological terms, yet archaeologically incorrect. Should public archaeologists accept or reject an interpretation of material remains based on folklore, or is there any alternative solution? In this paper I wish to explore this question through a case study of the experience of myself and my colleagues at the excavation of the Villa of Augustus in Somma Vesuviana, Italy.

The Excavation of the Villa of Augustus in Somma Vesuviana and the Legend of Queen Giovannas Tunnel
The site of the Villa of Augustus is located on the northern slope of Mt Vesuvius (Figure 1). The site was first excavated in the 1930s, during which the remains of a monumental building and objects of the Roman Imperial Period were discovered (Della Corte 1932). Examining these finds in relation to Roman literary sources, the director of the excavation came up with a hypothesis that the first emperor Augustus (63 BCAD 14) died in the building, and that it was subsequently converted into a temple dedicated to him and thereafter buried by the eruption of Mt Vesuvius in AD 79 (Della Corte 1936[1933]). Following this hypothesis, local people soon began calling the site the Villa of Augustus (Villa di Augusto). The excavation then ran short of funds and was suspended in 1935, with the entire site being backfilled in 1939 (DAvino 1979:48). Despite

Author's personal copy

450

AKIRA MATSUDA

Figure 1. Map of the Vesuvian area: the Villa of Augustus is located in Somma Vesuviana

several attempts to re-investigate the Villa in the post-war period, the land remained an agricultural field until the summer of 2002, when a team from the University of Tokyo finally reopened the excavation. The excavation has since been undertaken each season (Figure 2) and made a number of new findings. Most importantly, it has been established that the buried building was constructed in the second to third century AD, abandoned in the late fifth century AD (Aoyagi et al. 2006:94; Aoyagi et al. 2007; De Simone 2009), and then buried by several eruptions in and after the late Roman period (Kaneko et al. 2005). It has also become clear that the building was architecturally more complex than a villa; however, since the name of the Villa of Augustus has been and is still commonly used by local people, it is referred to as the Villa of Augustus or simply the Villa in this paper. The excavation has been normally closed to the public for reasons of safety and the risk of looting. However, the team organised Open Days each season since 2003, during which the site is open to the public for a few days and visitors are given an explanation of the Villa as well as the excavation work. On the Open Day seasons from 2003 to 2008, well over 1,500 visitors attended each time, mostly from Somma Vesuviana. During the Open Days of 2003 and 2004 it came to our attention that some visitors asked if Queen Giovannas tunnel and her golden coach had been found in the excavation. Intrigued by this enquiry, we studied the source of the information and discovered that there is a widely accepted legend in Somma Vesuviana that there is a tunnel in the town, where Giovanna, the Queen of Naples, kept her golden coach. It soon became apparent that a number of local people, particularly the elderly, interpreted the Villa with reference to the legendary tunnel.

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

451

Figure 2. General view of the excavation of the Villa of Augustus in 2005 (Photo by courtesy of the Archaeological Mission of the University of Tokyo)

Considering that this appropriation of the legendor folklorein the interpretation of the Villa could serve as a case study to examine the extent to which public archaeologists should accept the multivocality of material remains, I decided to collect relevant information through interviews and from the publications of local historians. I held interviews during the Open Days in 2006 with 20 visitors to the excavation, all residents in Somma Vesuviana, who had heard about the Queen Giovannas tunnel and/or her golden coach.1 As examined later, they provided various types of information regarding different versions of the legend. I also studied all the available books and articles on the history of Somma Vesuviana written by local historians from the 1920s up to the present day. Several of them made mention of Queen Giovannas tunnel and allowed me to gain an insight into the historical context in which the legend came into existence. Based on the results of this research, in what follows I shall first examine the formation and transformation of the legend and discuss the meaning it has today to local people in Somma Vesuviana. This will be followed by a discussion as to why a number of local people interpreted the Villa by reference to the legendary tunnel. Finally, returning to the question raised in the introduction, I shall review the judgement that we, the excavation team, made in deciding how to respond to visitors when they asked whether the tunnel had been found in the excavation.

Author's personal copy

452

AKIRA MATSUDA

Data collected from the interviews, all in Italian or Neapolitan, will be presented in English translation.2 As regards the interviews, round brackets are used to indicate words added by the author for clarification, and square brackets are used to indicate comments and notes added by the author to aid explanation of the original statement. Double dashes () are used for pauses and incomplete sentences in interviews, and ellipses () for omitted words, edited out for brevity.

The Formation of the Legend: Between Story and History

Although there are many different versions of the legend, most share several common elements. Synthesising these elements, the legend typically goes as follows:
A tunnel has existed for a long time underneath the former palace of Starza della Regina and/or the church of Santa Maria del Pozzo. The tunnel connects with other buildings in Somma Vesuviana, and in some versions places outside the town. Queen Giovanna used to keep a golden coach in the tunnel so that she could escape from attacks by enemies. In times of peace, she used the tunnel to revel in secret lechery with her favourite soldiers.

The core of the legend seems to have developed from historical accounts relating to the four queens of Naples: two Angevin queens, Giovanna I (13271382) and Giovanna II (13731435), and two Aragonese queens, Giovanna III (14551517) and Giovanna IV (14781518). It is a historically established fact that each queen spent or lived in Somma Vesuviana for certain periods (Coppola 2006:1619, 2327; Greco 1974:8791, 99102, 139146, 159170). According to Coppola (2006:28), the four queens were intertwined to give birth to a single myth of Queen Giovanna. Of the four queens, Giovanna III and IV in particular were closely related to the town of Somma Vesuviana. Giovanna III was patron for the construction of the upper church of Santa Maria del Pozzo (Greco 1974:159167), and Giovanna IV and King Ferdinand II were married in the palace of Starza della Regina (Greco 1974:139142), where the queen lived in later years (Angrisani 1928:64). These facts partly account for the association between the legend and the two historic buildings, although some specific aspects of the buildings need to be considered, as will be done later. Certain elements of the legend seem to have originated from the (hi)story concerning the Aragonese queens. For example, the golden coach probably derives from the documented elaborate coach with six horses for the queen (Coppola 2006:24), presented to King Ferdinand I on his

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

453

marriage with Giovanna III. Likewise, Queen Giovannas alleged lechery was likely to be based on a centuries-old Neapolitan folktale about Giovanna IV, summarised by Greco (1974:169) as follows:
The unfortunate circumstances of her [i.e. Giovanna IVs] life made bad tongues say that she, not being able to stand the spur of lechery, provided herself with people with whom she gave vent to her desire. It was even said that in the Palace in Somma Vesuviana there was a trebuchet where, after she had satisfied her desire with some lover, she threw him to die (Greco 1974:169).

The unfortunate circumstances refers to Giovanna IVs loss of her consort immediately after their wedding. The trebuchet mentioned in the folktale was supposedly used by Giovanna IV, a widow, in the palace of Starza della Regina.

The Transformation of the Legend: Gradual, Contingent Fusion of New Historical Elements
What distinguishes the legend of Queen Giovanna from various existing Neapolitan folktales about the four queens is its concern with a subterranean tunnel that allegedly connected several places in and outside Somma Vesuviana. Different versions of the legend refer to different places, among these the two most commonly cited are Starza della Regina and the church of Santa Maria del Pozzo. Other places mentioned in the interviews were: the Aragonese castle, the church of San Domenico, the Villa of Augustus, ` the church of Madonna della Sanita in the neighbouring town of Mariglianella, and three other towns, Naples, Portici and San Giorgio a Cremano (see Figures 1, 3 for the location of each place). The diversity of the places considered as tunnel links suggests the contingency with which the legend had transformed over time. Changes presumably occurred as various elements of fact and fiction relating to the history of Somma Vesuviana, including the four queens named Giovanna, entwined with each other. In this context it is worth examining how these elements have been blended into the multiplying versions of the legend; this examination provides clues to understanding why some local people associated the excavation of the Villa of Augustus with the legend. Beneath the upper church of Santa Maria del Pozzo, another church, the so-called lower church, has been below ground since a fifteenth-century flood raised the level of the surrounding area by several metres (Greco 1974:335). The origin of the lower church is unclear; historical documents suggest its construction in 1333 (Greco 1974:327), but the oldest fresco

Author's personal copy

454

AKIRA MATSUDA

Figure 3. Topographical map of Somma Vesuviana (based on cartography of province of Naples n.d.)

paintings conserved in its apse date to the eleventh century AD (Coppola 2006:4547; DAvino 1991:156). Below the lower church is a rectangular room known as the well (il pozzo), which is connected to the lower church by stairs. Although later converted into a chapel, it is unlikely to have been originally used for religious purposes (Greco 1974:328). Most local historians concur that the room represents the remains of a Roman villa rustica (Angrisani 1936:37; DAvino 1991:156, 1995; Coppola 2006:35), whereas Greco (1974:328329) argues that it might have been part of a secret passage of the palace of Starza della Regina or a branch of the Augustan aqueduct. Given the history of the upper church relating to Queen Giovanna III, and the lower church, now underground, of unidentified origin and with an eerie atmosphere, connected to the enigmatic rectangular room, it is unsurprising that many local people consideras Greco suggeststhat the

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

455

legend of Queen Giovannas tunnel is linked with the complex of Santa Maria del Pozzo. This is borne out by interviews, for example:
Old members of my family were saying that at Santa Maria del Pozzo there was a stone with her [i.e. Queen Giovannas] statue. Queen Giovanna with horses and with the coach, all golden, were designed on this stone. And then, no one knows what has happened with this stone. Ive never seen it. What I saw below (at the church) , there were tombs and stuff like that. And I know, I remember, that there were flutes of columns. And then, there was a cave. There were three caves. I saw their arches (Interviewee A). People were saying to us that at Santa Maria del Pozzo, under the main door, there is a big trapdoor. (Through the trapdoor) they went down. But they did not keep going. Have you seen it? There is a tunnel (Interviewee B).

In these statements there is the fusion of the imaginary vision of the tunnel and what the interviewees had actually seen at the church. Although the tombs, flutes of columns and the main door are observable in the church, neither a statue of Queen Giovanna in the lower church nor a big trapdoor under the main door of the upper church exist. The Augustan aqueduct, which Greco tentatively associates with the well of Santa Maria del Pozzo, passed through what is now the town of Somma Vesuviana (Abate 1864; Angrisani 1936:36; DAvino 1993). Originally connecting the Roman towns of Serino, Naples and Misenum, and over 92 km, it remains visible at several points along its length. In Somma Vesuviana, although no remains survive, it ran near the northern end of the town, at some distance from the Villa and the church of Santa Maria del Pozzo. Despite that, two interviewees associated the aqueduct with Queen Giovannas tunnel, and one mentioned the possibility that the tunnel might have been part of the remains of the Augustan aqueduct:
One of the hypotheses of the tunnel, of the legend, is this. In fact, a Roman aqueduct once existed here. It passed here, supplying water to the imperial fleet in Misenum. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the viceroy of Naples, the Spanish governor , viceroy , wanted to restore this aqueduct. There were engineers of the king who tried to find the aqueduct and reinstate it as much as possible. So, we can say, the legend, the whole story about Queen Giovanna, are in fact this [i.e. the aqueduct]. This could be the passageway of the famous coach (Interviewee C).

This detailed knowledge of the aqueduct suggested that the interviewee had read some relevant literature, probably articles written by local historians, and that he used this knowledge as a framework for interpreting the legend.

Author's personal copy

456

AKIRA MATSUDA

Interviewee D gave two different accounts of the legend:

When I was a little girl, they were talking about these tunnels, which started from the mountains and came to Starza of Queen Giovanna. The tunnels were used for the secret escape of the , the secret lovers of Queen Giovanna. This is what I know. However, then I read in articles that , the tunnel, in fact, has something to do with water passage of the Roman period. So, it could be a channel for the collection of water, or an aqueduct (Interviewee D).

It should be noted that she demonstrated two types of knowledge that are epistemologically different: knowledge about the legendary tunnel that had been acquired through oral communication, and knowledge about the Roman aqueduct gained from reading historical studies. The two types of knowledge remained unintegrated in her understanding of the tunnel. Some local people confused the Augustan aqueduct with the Bourbon aqueduct that also runs through Somma Vesuviana. Constructed in the nineteenth century, this aqueduct took water from several sources in the Vesuvian area and supplied the royal palace in Portici (Officio Topografico del Regno di Napoli 18361840). Interviewees who mentioned that Queen Giovannas tunnel supposedly connected with Portici seemed to base their ideas on what they had heard about the Bourbon aqueduct. Some of the water sources for the Bourbon aqueduct were located in Somma Vesuviana, close to Santa Maria del Pozzo. Interviewee C mistook one of these sources as part of the Roman aqueduct:
Until some years ago, until the 1920s, near Santa Maria del Pozzo there was an area where there is a small hole (in the ground), in which there were these wells, from which they could explore the aqueduct. Until the 1920s there was still this hole. I dont know its location. All old people know it [i.e. the location]. The legend (of Queen Giovannas tunnel) could be this (Interviewee C).

His knowledge of the Augustan aqueduct was conflated with what he knew about the hole, which was part of the Bourbon aqueduct. Probably unconsciously, he used his conflated knowledge about the two aqueducts to make sense of the legend. A number of local people believed that Queen Giovannas tunnel passed beneath the former royal palace of Starza della Regina; this is not surprising given the historical fact that Giovanna IV was married and lived there. The presence of a large cellar at the lowest level of Starza della Regina also helped strengthen the association between the former palace and the legendary tunnel. Interviewee E who had lived in Starza della Regina before suggested that the cellar related to the tunnel:

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

457

You have to remember that in this building there is a big cistern. This is the reality. I was there, going inside, in that cistern. There was an entrance that went down, going down in the cistern. There was a room, used as a kind of cellar, to keep things cool. And there was a big doorway that faced the cistern. Its still there, unless theyve knocked it down. Theyve done restoration work, but before, you could go down. Few people actually went down. In the cellar, in the last cellar in the end, going down, on the left, youll see. There must still be something there now (Interviewee E).

He also talked about a mysterious pit that he had seen in front of Starza della Regina:
In front of the main door (of Starza della Regina), there used to be a big farmyard. One evening, a pit was created in the farmyard. I can tell you, all water coming down from the mountain went into the pit. We were anxious and threw into it stones, blocks, and firewood, in order not to let anyone fall in there. We dont know where water was going. I am talking of 40 years ago. Its a long time (ago). Already then, they were saying that there was something below (Interviewee E).

For him, the large cellar and the mysterious pit, both of which he had seen, provided reason enough to believe that Starza della Regina was linked to the legendary tunnel. An old man whose family had lived in Starza della Regina for several generations said that he had heard about Queen Giovannas tunnel since his childhood: Author: Can you tell me about the famous legend of Queen Giovannas tunnel? Interviewee F: Well, it has always been a legend, something that has been told. But nothing precise has been known. They say that there was a tunnel leading from here [i.e. Starza della Regina] to Santa Maria del Pozzo, Casamale, eh , even other places, far away. Author: And in this tunnel there is . Interviewee F: Yes, there should be the coach of Queen Giovanna. Author: So, you have heard about this since you were little. Interviewee F: Yes, yes. I have always heard of it. It has always been said. My father was saying that for many years. My grandfather (too) . (But) Never, never, no one has ever found anything. He then gave an interesting account of his fathers attempt to find Queen Giovannas golden coach, which was supposed to be kept in the tunnel:

Author's personal copy

458

AKIRA MATSUDA

Interviewee F: My father made a spiritual medium come from Naples in order to see this coach, where this is. But, these [i.e. the legend] were just rumours. He spent a lot of money (to dig up different places). (He made) A hole here, a hole there. But they didnt find anything of the coach. (He tried to) See and find something. But he didnt find anything. Rumours, only rumours. Author: Where did he dig? Interviewee F: Exactly where you have just been. The cellar. Several interviewees suggested that there were links between the legendary tunnel and underground holes and passageways existing in Somma Vesuviana. Such holes and passageways have been recognised in different parts of the town. Three interviewees talked about the discovery of a hole/ tunnel in the main piazza of the town, Piazza Trivio:
In the centre of Somma Vesuviana, I remember, 20 years ago, they found a hole. There, they could see more or less how deep it was (Interviewee G).

Interviewee H: Once, I remember, when they started the first development work in Somma Vesuviana, they began to make the piazza, near the street Via Aldo Moro. They began to dig. And, digging and digging, a tunnel came out. I remember it. I was going to a junior high school then. A tunnel came out. Here, were talking about the 1970s, more or less. Author: Was the tunnel big? Interviewee H: Well, it was more or less of the height of a human, like this . [indicating size by gesture] I think the golden coach could not pass through it. I dont know if it was an aqueduct of that period. But I remember, there was something there. Interviewee I: In fact, the piazza, where there is the piazza . Author: (Do you mean Piazza) Trivio? Interviewee I: Piazza Trivio, exactly. When they re-covered the piazza (after the digging for development work), they needed many truckloads of soil because there was a tunnel underneath. Development works took place in the piazza in the 1970s, but without any records it is difficult to verify whether a tunnel or hole was discovered then, and, even if this was the case, what it looked like. After Santa Maria del Pozzo and Starza della Regina, local people associate Queen Giovannas tunnel most commonly with the Aragonese castle. Whilst this might be because the castle is one of the most recognised heritage sites of Somma Vesuviana, the existence of a well in its premises also

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

459

seem to make some local people think that there might be something under the castle, as illustrated by the following statements:
When we were kids, they were saying that there was this , this tunnel that connected the Aragonese castle with Starza della Regina. And even more, when we were little, we saw, there was a well in the Aragonese castle, where there should be a tunnel, an entrance to the tunnel (Interviewee J). Regarding Queen Giovanna, it is known that this tunnel linked the Aragonese castle with Starza della Regina. It is even known that there is an unexplored tunnel underneath the well of the castle (Interviewee K).

Interviewee L said that the legendary tunnel related to numerous underground passageways in the town, and gave an example of a cellar in his uncles house, which he said was connected to a church in the historic centre of Casamale with a tunnel.
My uncle has a house in Casamale. Under it, there is a tunnel that goes directly to the church, well, that church, the church called San Pietro. In the cellar, down in his house, there is a hole that is walled up. In the past, they were saying that several mansions were directly connected with the church. Well, this is true, as I can testify it (Interviewee L).

Another man spoke of subsidence that occurred in the high street about a decade ago.
In the middle of (the street) Via Aldo Moro, once the street fell down. Policemen and other technicians went under the street and moved along a lot. They walked for a long time. Then they returned, as they became afraid of walking. Because there was a tunnel that continues all along. This happened in 1994, 199 , 10 years ago, 12 years ago (Interviewee I).

The numerous accounts of subterranean holes and passageways in Somma Vesuviana suggests that local people have good reason to believe that there is something underneath their town. This belief is presumably strengthened by the memory of numerous eruptions of Mt Vesuvius that have affected Somma Vesuviana over the centuries: repeatedly covered by eruptive materials, the town may well hide something underneath.

Why Did the Villa of Augustus Come to be Associated with Queen Giovannas Tunnel?
Given the various historical facts and conjectures relating to the legend of Queen Giovannas tunnel, it is not surprising that many people in Somma

Author's personal copy

460

AKIRA MATSUDA

Vesuviana still talk about, and some even believe in, the legend. This gives a clue as to why some visitors to the excavation of the Villa of Augustus were curious to know whether Queen Giovannas tunnel had been discovered. Seeing the Villa emerging, those visitors were reminded of the legend: because the tunnel might exist somewhere in the town. Indeed, there were several factors that could specifically associate the excavation with the legend: the depth of the excavation, the age and mysteriousness of the Villa of Augustus, its vicinity to Starza della Regina, and the collective memory of the first excavation in the 1930swhich meant something in the ground had already been seen in the past. Interviewee M mentioned that the tunnel directly connected with the Villa of Augustus.
When I was little, you know, they were saying that , that there was this tunnel, the tunnel that connected the Villa of Augustus, this one here, with the church, with the church of Santa Maria del Pozzo, and also, with the Aragonese castle, that one up there (Interviewee M).

Since the Villa of Augustus had not been recognised until the 1930s, this version of the legend must have emerged in or after that period. Presumably, those who saw or heard about the Villa then associated it with the legendary tunnel, which resulted in a further transformation of the legend, generating a new version. A marriage between knowledge of the legend and knowledge of the Villa was also observed at the present-day excavation. Interviewee B made the following statement during his visit to the excavation: Interviewee B: Now, obviously it can be hoped that the tunnel is connected with this. Author: This site (of the Villa of Augustus)? Interviewee B: Yeah. It should be noted that he associated the Villa with the legendary tunnel in a contingent manner; not entirely certain of the tunnels connection with the Villa, he only hinted at its possibility on the basis of what he saw ` at the excavation. His words it can be hoped (si puo sperare) are also of interest as they indicate that he found a positive meaning in linking the Villa to the imaginary tunnel; this implies that the legend was relevant to him. Given these points, it can be argued that for those local people who believe that the tunnel might exist, the legend is alive today. They thus can potentially adapt the legend to new historical realities observed in the townthis is presumably what happened when local people wondered

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

461

whether the legendary tunnel had been found in the excavation of the Villa; they essentially created a new version of the legend by associating it with the Villa.

How Did We Respond to Local People Asking Whether the Tunnel Had Been Discovered in the Excavation?
On discovering that a number of local people associated the Villa with the legend, most of the excavation team (i.e. we) were initially intrigued and interested. However, as they kept asking if the tunnel had been found in the excavation, we came to realise that we could not remain merely interested in that phenomenon, but needed to make a judgement as to how to respond to those who interpreted the Villa with reference to the living legendthey were expecting us, the archaeologists, to give some explanation as to the relationship between the Villa and the tunnel. It was clear that relating the Villa to the legend was archaeologically incorrect. Given the thousands of years that separated the Villa from the four queens Giovanna, the tunnel, even if it existed, could not connect to the Villa. Judging from the stratigraphy of the excavation, it was obvious that no tunnel would ever be found in or near the excavation area. Topographically, the Villa was not located on any of the lines connecting the three sites most commonly associated with the legend. Finally and most importantly, the legend was epistemologically incompatible with archaeological thinking because it was not structured along the concept of linear chronology, to which the study of archaeology strictly adheres. The question for us was whether we should explain these points to local peopleand if we were to, how we would do it. To consider this, several issues entered into the discussion. Firstly, we confirmed that various (hi)stories of Somma Vesuviana were amalgamated into the legend. Secondly, we agreed that the legend was not a so-called indigenous belief in that the people narrating it were not self-identified as ethnically distinctive, and we also established that those who believed the legend had not been marginalised by the so-called socially dominant. Finally, we reflected on our professional duty to communicate to local people accurate information from an archaeological point of view. When considering these points, we felt that there was no need to defend the legend for socio-political reasons, and that we should rather fulfil our responsibilities as archaeologists by correcting its inaccurate elements. However, we were also aware that the legend did not, and would not, harm anyone, and it could in fact be regarded as a legitimate way of interpreting the Villa. Besides this was the consideration that the imposition of the archaeological interpretation of the Villa upon local people might result

Author's personal copy

462

AKIRA MATSUDA

in the eradication of the legend, which had existed in Somma Vesuviana for several centuries. Further, we reflected on the fact that we were intervening in local peoples places and lives through our excavation. The key element in this reflection was that most of us were foreignersJapanese and as such the least local of people (Matsuda forthcoming). When considering these points, we felt that we should not deny or detract from the special meaning that local people recognised in the legend, but preserve it in one way or another. Having thus thought through this series of considerations, we finally decided on a strategy that consisted of two elements. First, we issued a statement that it was unlikely that a tunnel existed in the area we were excavating, and explained why we thought so. Second, we presented the findings of the research I had carried out on the legend to visitors to the excavation during the Open Days. The text used for this presentation was as follows:
While we have been working on the excavation, many local people have asked us whether we have found Queen Giovannas tunnel and her golden coach. The answer, unfortunately, is no; we have not found, at least to date, any trace of such a tunnel. In fact, the architectural complex we are bringing to light is that of the Roman imperial period (from the first to fifth century AD), in other words about 1,000 years before Queen Giovanna was alive! However, we cannot say for certain that the tunnel did not exist. Given the lack of relevant clues, the tunnel is unlikely to exist in the land where we are excavating or in its surrounding areas. Further, we think it is very unlikely that such a tunnel, big enough to contain a coach, exists in this excavation site. However, a legend that has been passed down through the words of local people is often originally based on a real historical fact, which has been transformed and changed over the centuries. Since we, as archaeologists, have the responsibility to provide scientific information, and as we want to neither impose our own point of view nor destroy local tradition and oral heritage, we have collected information on this legend through interviews. Here are some of the most interesting results. (Summary of the interviews shown above were presented here) Considering these results, we now think that the legend was created on the basis of historical facts relating to Queen Giovanna and then gradually mixed with other types of information, both real and imaginary, which have resulted in different versions, including those in which the tunnel connected with the Villa of Augustus. Although we believe that the Villa is unrelated to Queen Giovannas tunnel from an archaeological point of view, the tunnel exists, at least, in your memories.

This text was not based on a good-or-bad judgement of the legend; it presented two different ways of interpreting the Villa, one with reference

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

463

to the legend and the other from an archaeological point of view, treating both as equally meaningful. However, the text made explicit what we as archaeologists believed, based on what we had found. Thus, we went beyond the position in which we only listened to local people, and spoke our own interpretation of the Villa. This implies that we did not assume our authority to decide the correct interpretation of the Villa, but argued for it (Hodder 1998:217), following the logic and methodology of archaeology.

Conclusion
The legend of Queen Giovannas tunnel is likely to have transformed over the centuries as various elements of fact and fiction regarding the history of Somma Vesuviana have been blended into it. A number of local people still regard the legend as relevant to themselves, and this explains why some visitors to the excavation of the Villa of Augustus appropriated it for an interpretation of the site. Despite its appeal as folklore that has locally existed for a long time, the legend is fundamentally incompatible with archaeological thinking in several aspects, and we therefore needed to consider carefully how to respond to local people who asked whether the tunnel had been found in the excavation of the Villa. The conclusion we reached was that we, as archaeologists, should not surrender our adherence to the principles of archaeology, even in embracing the multivocality of material remains. We thus treated the two different ways of interpretation of the Villa, one based on the logic and methodology of archaeology and the other on the legend, as equally meaningful, but at the same time stressed what was deemed correct from an archaeological point of view. I would certainly not claim that our solution was perfect; it could be argued, for example, that we altered the essence of the legend by analysing and explaining it in written language, whereas it should have been spontaneously and orally transmitted by local people themselves. Neither would I claim that the same solution would work in other cases. In different contexts, in particular where native indigenous peoples are concerned, archaeologists might have to be less insistent on their way of interpreting material remains. Conversely, in other contexts archaeologists might have to argue for their scientific interpretation more strongly. However, through the case study we came to realise two types of responsibility that public archaeologists ought to bear in mind in any social context: the responsibility for being sensitive to the customs and tradition of the locality where they work; and the responsibility for providing accurate information according to the generally accepted principles of archaeology.

Author's personal copy

464

AKIRA MATSUDA

Returning to the question raised in the introduction, I wish to argue that archaeologists would indeed need to accept archaeologically incorrect interpretations of material remains in certain social contexts. However, this does not necessarily mean that archaeologists need to agree with them or that they should not present, at the same time, archaeologically correct interpretations. Listening to different voices of the public is important and should be encouraged. But listening alone does not constitute a dialogue, and public archaeologists also need to speak out, of course sensibly, if archaeology is to have any relevance in the contemporary world.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my colleagues at the excavation of the Villa of Augustus, in particular Masanori Aoyagi, the director of the excavation, and Girolamo F. De Simone, for helping me with the research on the legend. I am grateful to Jenny Moore and Tim Schadla-Hall for kindly proofreading my English. I also appreciate the useful comments received from the two anonymous reviewers.

Notes
1. Data collected from thirteen interviewees (A, B, C L and M) are examined in this paper. Interviewees A, B, C, E, F, G, H, I, J and L were men, and Interviewees D, K and M were women. 2. The translation of the Italian and Neapolitan was done by the author.

References Cited
Abate, F. ` 1864. Studi sullacquedotto Claudio e Progetto per fornire dacqua potabile la citta di Napoli. Stamperia del Giornale di Napoli, Naples. Angrisani, A. ` 1928. Brevi notizie storiche e demografiche intorno alla citta di Somma Vesuviana: Con la bibliografia, cronologia, documenti, tavole geografiche, ed illustrazioni. G. Barca, Naples. ` 1936. Somma: le origini e le antichita classiche di Somma. In La Villa Augustea in Somma Vesuviana, edited by M. Angrisani, pp. 3140. Nicola Nappa, Aversa.

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

465

Aoyagi, M., C. Angelelli, and S. Matsuyama 2006. Nuovi scavi nella Villa di Augusto a Somma Vesuviana (NA): campagne 20022004. Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia: Rendiconti 78:75109. Aoyagi, M., T. Mukai, and C. Sugiyama 2007. Ceramique de lantiquite tardive dun site romain de Somma Vesuviana, Italie. In LRCW 2 Late Roman Coarse Wares, Cooking Wares, Amphorae in the Mediterranean: Archaeology, Archaeometry Volume I, edited by M. Bonifay and J.-C. Treglia, pp. 439450. Archeopress, Oxford. Cartography of Province of Naples (Cartografia della Provincia di Napoli). n.d. Topographic Map (Scale 1:2000). Colwell-Chanthaphonh, C. 2006. Dreams at the Edge of the World and Other Evocations of Oodham History. Archaeologies 2(1):2044. Coppola, E. 2006. Santa Maria del Pozzo: storia, architettura, arte, letteratura, miti e leggende. Tipografia Felice Alaia, Somma Vesuviana. DAvino, R. 1979. La reale villa di Augusto in Somma Vesuviana. Anarcord, Naples. 1991. Somma Vesuviana: la storia nei suoi monumenti. In Saluti da Somma Vesuviana: Somma ieri attraverso la cartoline postali delle collezioni di Raffaele DAvino e Bruno Masulli, edited by R. DAvino and B. Masulli, pp. 9207. Marigliano, Anselmi. 1993. Lacquedotto Augusteo Campano e i pozzo-spiraglio nel territorio di Somma. Summana 29:26. 1995. Villa romana rustica a S. Maria del Pozzo. Summana 34:24. Della Corte, M. 1932. Somma Vesuviana: Ruderi Romani. In: Atti della Reale Accademia Nazio` nale dei Lincei: Notizie degli scavi di Antiquita, series VI, vol. VIII, pp. 309310. Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome. ` 1936 [1933]. Dove mor Augusto? In: La Villa Augustea in Somma Vesuviana, edited by M. Angrisani, pp. 1727. Nicola Nappa, Aversa. De Simone, A. 2009. Ricerche e scavi a Somma Vesuviana. In Apolline Project Vol. 1: Studies on Vesuvius North Slope and the Bay of Naples, edited by G. F. De Simone and R. T. Macfarlane, pp. 157171. Suor Orsola Benincasa, Naples. Gazin-Schwartz, A., and C. Holtorf 1999. As Long As Ever Ive Known it!: On Folklore and Archaeology. In Folklore Archaeology, edited by A. Gazin-Schwartz and C. Holtorf, pp. 325. Routledge, London.

Author's personal copy

466

AKIRA MATSUDA

Greco, C. 1974. Fasti di Somma: Storia, Leggende e Versi. Delfino, Naples. Hodder, I. 1998. Whose Rationality? A Response to Fekri Hassan. Antiquity 72:213217. Holtorf, C. J. 2005a. Beyond Crusades: How (Not) to Engage with Alternative Archaeologies. World Archaeology 37(4):544551. 2005b. From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek. Kaneko, T., S. Nakada, M. Yoshimoto, T. Fujii, A. Yasuda, M. Yoneda, and M. Aoyagi 2005. Determination of burial age of the Augustus villa (Italy). Geochemical Journal 39:573578. Layton, R. 1999. Folklore and World View. In Archaeology and Folklore, edited by A. GazinSchwartz and C. Holtorf, pp. 2634. Routledge, London and New York. Matsuda, A. forthcoming. Archaeology by the (Far) East in the West: What Do Local People Think If Japanese Archaeologists Excavate the Villa of Augustus in Italy? In New Perspectives in Global Public Archaeology, edited by K. Okamura and A. Matsuda. Springer, New York. Merriman, N. 1999. Introduction. In Making Early History in Museums, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 111. Leicester University Press, London and New York. 2004. Introduction: Diversity and Dissonance in Public Archaeology. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 117. Routledge, London. Officio Topografico del Regno di Napoli. 18361840. A Map of Surrounding Areas of Naples (Scale 1:2000). Pokotylo, D., and G. Brass 1997. Interpreting Cultural Resources: Hatzic Site. In Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths, edited by J. H. Jameson Jr., pp. 156165. Altamira, Walnut Creek, London and New Delhi. Schadla-Hall, T. 2004. The Comforts of Unreason: The Importance and Relevance of Alternative Archaeology. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 255271. Routledge, London.

Author's personal copy

Interpretation of an Archaeological Site

467

Talalay, L. E. 2004. The Past as Commodity: Archaeological Images in Modern Advertisement. Public Archaeology 3(4):205216. Trigger, B. G. 1995. Romanticism, Nationalism, and Archaeology. In Politics Nationalism the Practice of Archaeology, edited by P. L. Kohl and C. Fawcett, pp. 263279. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.