Sophie Crawford-Brown’s book examines the temple terracottas of Central Italy between the third and the first centuries b.c.e., with a chapter on the so-called Campana reliefs. The body of materials is very large, but so far has not attracted the same attention as the Archaic terracottas, mainly because of its repetitive nature.

C.-B.’s central thesis is that, far from representing a lack of artistic creativity or the diffusion of a model originating from Rome as the expression of control and loyalty, the standardisation of the temple decorations with a kit referencing older terracottas through the use of archaising designs seeks to convey an aura of sacred dignity, tradition and antiquity, concepts that were particularly valued in a time of sweeping transformations. This is certainly a convincing argument, which is supported by other contemporary cases of archaising, such as the fortune of polygonal masonry for city walls and public architectures. C.-B. also persuasively argues that the vegetal patterns that dominate temple decorations should not be seen as generic ornamentation, but rather as images with strong religious associations.

The second recurring theme, which is not always well integrated with the main thesis, is that temple decoration functioned as an emphatic statement of identity and even a form of political discourse. In some cases, it is suggested that it may have represented a proud response to Roman conquest. Thus, the idea that those terracottas were the expression of ‘Romanisation’, duly criticised in the second chapter, is reintroduced, albeit in reverse. In the case of Falerii, the decoration of the temple of Scasato I is connected to the tensions between Rome and Falerii prior to the fall of the city in 241 b.c.e. However, there are multiple issues with this assumption. First, what actually happened between Rome and Falerii is anything but clear and there are serious arguments that run counter to the traditional narrative of aggression, destruction and displacement. Second, it is certain that the sanctuaries of Falerii continued to function. Thus, dating the decoration of Scasato I to before 241 b.c.e. rests on highly problematic typological considerations and the questionable notion that the imagery expressed an anti-Roman programme. However, if, as this book convincingly suggests, temple decorations primarily conveyed the venerable antiquity of the cult, the system of Scasato I works just as well, if not better, in the period after the development of the ‘New Falerii’, when the old sanctuaries maintained the connection between the community and its religious past. Lastly, the very fact that the ‘kit’ found at Falerii was replicated countless times across Italy for centuries seriously undermines the idea that it might have had any polemical and anti-Roman overtones.

C.-B. takes up this same line of reasoning again in pointing out that the terracotta systems, in their general standardisation, can include elements of more local diffusion. For instance, at Cosa she points out the preference — not exclusive — for shell antefixes over those with a winged female figure flanked by two felines (potnia theron). This and other elements of the religious buildings of Cosa are found in the adjacent areas. She concludes that ‘the purportedly “Roman” town of Cosa seems to have consciously shaped its sacred structures in relation to the preexisting traditions, aesthetics, and iconographies of its neighbors’ (133). Since Cosa was a Latin colony, this is not framed in overt anti-Roman terms but is still used as an argument to question the ‘Romanness’ of the city, at least culturally. Frank Brown considered the material culture of Cosa quintessentially Roman because it was a colony of Rome. Paradoxically, C.-B. has issues with the idea of a Roman Cosa because its material culture is not purely and distinctly ‘Roman’. However, the idea of deliberate departure from or rejection of the Roman model is problematic because a temple aesthetic that was distinctly and recognisably ‘Roman’ as opposed to ‘Etruscan’ simply did not exist. In more general terms, rigid labels such as ‘Etruscan’ and ‘Roman’ are of little value in the study of the material culture of Central Tyrrhenian Italy. The antefixes with potnia theron were certainly not a symbol of Rome, and there is no reason to believe that shell antefixes and other elements that were locally popular — none of them exclusively Etruscan — were perceived as ‘Etruscan’ and not simply as customary and current in the workshops responsible for the decoration of the Cosan temples, which were part of a larger artisanal network.

In any case, these are only variations in a largely standardised kit. The temples of Cosa would have hardly looked unfamiliar to a visitor from Rome. There is no doubt that temples contributed to local pride and identity; however, as convincingly shown throughout this book, this was not achieved through differentiation but in countless variations of the same template. For the communities of Central Italy, investment in sanctuaries was not a delusional act of defiance against Rome but the assertion of their role in the Roman system, in agreement with views shared by the Roman ruling class (which was replete with Italians) and expressed in works such as Cato’s Origines.

There is much more in Religious Architecture and Roman Expansion that deserves further in-depth discussion, alas impossible within the constraints of this brief review. Moreover, the divergent views expressed above in no way detract from its importance. The author has produced a scholarly milestone on the topic which is sure to generate discussions for years to come.