Italy

Italy is a land with a long and flourishing history. Through the ages, it was home to several human groups, which through invasions, movements and expansion often found an ideal place to settle. The extremely heterogeneous geographic variability and the complex peopling of the peninsula make it an ideal place for bioarchaeological investigations aimed at reconstructing the lives and lifestyles of past human groups, which can integrate and complete the strong ‘traditional’ approach in archaeological research, based on written sources and on material culture. The origins of Italian physical anthropology date back to the early and mid-19th century,

when a new interest in prehistoric and early historical populations promoted a number of cemetery excavations, occasionally including observations on human remains (see, e.g., Delle Chiaie 1854). While most emphasis was clearly put on material culture (an issue present even today) it was in this period that some scholars began to develop an interest in human remains, creating the first collections of skulls and skeletons (Chiarelli and D’Amore 1997). However, the official recognition of physical anthropology as a scientific discipline occurs only after the National Unification (Chiarelli 2003). Following the diffusion of Darwin’s ideas, whose work was translated into Italian by Giovanni Canestrini in 1864, the value of bioanthropological research was recognized, thanks especially to the activities of physician Paolo Mantegazza (Correnti 1980-81). It was he who created the first chair of anthropology at the University of Florence in 1869, which was followed by the creation of a society, the Museo Nazionale di Antropologia ed Etnologia (1869), and of the first specialized journal, the Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia (1871), which is still published today. Later on, in 1893, Giuseppe Sergi created another significant institution, the Società Romana di Antropologia, which in 1937 was renamed the Istituto Italiano di Antropologia. The proceedings of the society were later published as Rivista di Antropologia (1911), a journal which in 2004 changed its name to the Journal of Anthropological Sciences, one of today’s most prestigious Italian periodicals in the field. The great impulse given to archaeological research was clearly related to the desire of investigating the origins of Italians (Guidi 1988; Killgrove 2005). For this reason, research was mainly on morphological type, aimed at investigating affinities and differences among populations through the study of craniometry (see, e.g., Sergi 1899-1900; Giuffrida-Ruggeri 1904; Genna 1933-34; Sergi 1933-34), a theme

that was maintained until much later (Corrain and Capitanio 1968; Passarello and Alciati 1969; Pardini et al. 1982; Lombardi-Pardini et al. 1984). After the Second World War, metric studies began to decline, slowly accompanied by new

focuses (see, e.g., Maxia and Cossu 1950). In this respect, a great contribution was provided by Antonio Ascenzi, a pathologist with a vivid interest in physical anthropology. Ascenzi played an important role, because he was the first one to apply microscopic techniques to ancient human bones, and successfully demonstrated the presence of haemoglobin fragments in historic and prehistoric remains, also contributing to the study of anaemia in ancient times (Ascenzi 1964; Ascenzi 1983; Ascenzi et al. 1991). However, it was only during the 1960s and 1970s that an increased emphasis in understanding health conditions and the reconstruction of lifestyles of past populations developed (see, e.g., Messeri 1962; Grilletto 1973; Ascenzi and Balistreri 1977; Ascenzi 1979), and eventually became established in the 1980s (see, e.g., Repetto et al. 1988; Rubini and Coppa 1991; Rubini et al. 1990). Key figures of this period were physical anthropologist Francesco Mallegni and pathologist Gino Fornaciari, the first ones to emphasize the bioanthropological importance of other aspects including stress, disease and demography (see, e.g., Fornaciari and Mallegni 1981; Fornaciari and Mallegni 1989), thus widening the ‘classical’ approach to a thorough appreciation of human remains (see, e.g., Minellono et al. 1980; Fornaciari et al. 1981; Fornaciari and Mallegni 1986; Repetto et al. 1988). This trend eventually flourished in the 1990s (see, e.g., Germanà and Fornaciari 1992; Minozzi et al. 1994; Moggi-Cecchi et al. 1994; Sonego and Scarsini 1994; Fornaciari 1997; Scattarella et al. 1997). Another relevant figure is clearly Luigi Capasso, a physician by training who has worked as a physical anthropologist since the early 1980s (see, e.g., Capasso and Piccardi 1980). Capasso’s important work not only comprises the palaeodemographic and palaeopathological study of several large populations, most notably that of Herculaneum (Capasso et al. 2000; Capasso 2001), but also the establishment of the Journal of Paleopathology (1987), the Società Italiana di Paleopatologia (1995) and the Museo di Storia delle Scienze Biomediche (1998), an institution devoted to anthropological and palaeopathological research and education. Other notable bioarchaeologists of the last three decades include Gaspare Baggieri, Maria

Giovanna Belcastro, Silvana Borgognini-Tarli, Cristina Cattaneo, Alfredo Coppa, Gianfranco De Stefano, Fiorenzo Facchini, Vincenzo Formicola, Ezio Fulcheri, Roberto Macchiarelli, Mauro Rubini, Vito Scattarella and Sandro Sublimi-Saponetti, all of whom have contributed to the development of present-day physical anthropology.