Fascist Architectural Remnants in Rome’s Contemporary Cityscape: Dissonant Heritage between Negligence and Re-use

Keywords: Fascist architecture, Rome, Italy, Foro Italico, Piazza Augusto Imperatore, Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana, EUR, negligence, re-use, Italian cultural memory.

Master’s Thesis Heritage and Memory Studies 2015-2016, University of Amsterdam

Author: Sophie van Doornmalen Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Ihab Saloul Second Reader: Dr. Tamara van Kessel Date: 20 May 2016 Word amount: 23.072

Abstract

The purpose of this master’s thesis is to examine how the architectural remnants of the fascist era (1922-1943) in Rome have been physically and ideologically neglected and reused in both their treatment and the way in which they are discussed in the public debate. Through the examination of three case-studies, namely the Foro Italico, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana, it is made clear how changes in the treatment of fascist architectural heritage reflect the changes in the collective memory of and attitude towards the fascist past in general. After the Second World War, fascist architecture has simultaneously been reused out of practical reasons and neglected in order to not emphasize the divided memories that exist of the fascist era and the Second World War. Fascist heritage has been in a frozen state, being too dissonant and politically difficult to handle. However, since the 1990s, the Italian political life changed drastically, because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the demise of communism in Italy and the re-emergence of far-right. These developments have opened up the debate on the meaning of the fascist past and have made way for revisionism. As a result, the fascist past is being normalized and the ideological connotation of fascist heritage is being downplayed and marginalized. Because of this, fascist architecture has gotten out of its isolation and is being reused and refurbished. This ideological neglect is not necessarily a negative development, as it has become a dynamic of preservation of the dissonant heritage of the fascist past.

2

Acknowledgements

This thesis would not be possible without the much appreciated help, advice and support from several people. First, I would like to thank dr. Ihab Saloul for inspiring me to write about this subject, your always giving honest and direct critiques and supporting me throughout this thesis project. Also, I would like to express my gratitude to dr. Tamara van Kessel for the extra time and effort she put in discussing the subject with me and helping me contextualize the subject. I truly enjoyed working with both Ihab and Tamara, and without their help and encouragement, this thesis would not have been possible.

I would especially like to thank my parents and family for the motivational speeches and discussions on the subject, as well as supporting me all throughout my studies. Also, a big thank you to my friends and my Hardcore Heritage classmates for listening, getting me through stressful times and making writing this thesis even more enjoyable with coffee breaks and laughter in the library. Further, I would like to express my gratitude to my roommate Jeroen Krul for the illustration on the cover.

In addition, I would like the thank the Royal Dutch Institute in Rome (Koninklijk Nederlands Instituut Rome), and especially dr. Arthur Weststeijn, for introducing me to the subject of fascist heritage as well as offering the best courses in Rome, which always nourished my curiosity and passion for Rome’s cultural heritage and its many secrets and treasures.

3

Content

Abstract ...... 2

Acknowledgements ...... 3

Content ...... 4

Introduction ...... 6

Research question ...... 7

Methodology ...... 9

Chapter 1: What is fascist architectural heritage? ...... 14

How ‘fascist’ is ‘fascist architecture’? ...... 15

Divided Memory ...... 17

Dissonant Heritage ...... 19

Chapter 2 - Case 1: Foro Italico ...... 24

Reuse without damnatio memoriae ...... 25

The 1960 Olympics ...... 26

Physical neglect ...... 30

Removing fascist writings anno 2015 ...... 31

Chapter 3 - Case 2: Piazza Augusto Imperatore ...... 40

Erasure INI and fasces ...... 42

Manufacturing the new Ara Pacis Museum ...... 43

Remaking the piazza in 2015 ...... 45

Chapter 4 - Case 3: EUR ...... 54

The revitalization and reuse of EUR ...... 56

Aestheticization of the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana ...... 58

Fendi Headquarters 2015 ...... 59

Chapter 5 – Comparison of the case-studies ...... 68

4

Conclusion ...... 72

Bibliography ...... 76

Literature ...... 76

(Newspaper) Articles ...... 79

Additional sources ...... 82

Dictionaries ...... 82

Video ...... 82

Websites ...... 82

Additional ...... 83

List of Images ...... 84

5

Introduction

Scattered around Rome are the physical remains of the fascist era (1922 -1943), such as buildings, iconography, sculptures, mosaics, obelisks, inscriptions etc., which can still be seen in the contemporary cityscape. Rome’s cityscape, or urban environment, is the backdrop against which daily life takes place and where past events of fascism have taken place and left their traces.1 Rome has often been called an ‘urban palimpsest’, a city that reflects different histories as they have been ‘written on, partly erased, added to, and rewritten time and again.’2 Huyssen uses the term ‘palimpsest’ as the visible and invisible traces that fashion the city’s memorial landscape. A palimpsest simultaneously displays and hides memories and multiple layers of meaning. Over the years, the remains of fascist heritage have become part of Rome’s palimpsest, and linger both visibly and invisibly in the cityscape. The presence of fascist heritage in Rome has caused some dispute over the years, as there has never been a consensus on how the fascist past should be perceived and how the fascist remnants should be treated. The remains of fascism have been controversial over the years, and because of the dissonance they create, they have been dealt with in an often conflicting manner. In my thesis, I will look at look at two main ways of dealing with these fascist remnants in contemporary Rome, namely neglect and reuse. Neglect can be defined as the act of not giving ‘enough care or attention to something’ or not giving ‘enough care or attention to people or things that are you responsibility’.3 Neglect thus, is a subjective term, since there is not a standard for what ‘enough care’ should entail, or even that care should be given in the first place. The idea of what ‘enough care’ encompasses depends on the viewpoint, since different groups of people may have different ideas about the treatment of fascist remnants. Also, neglect can mean not paying attention to or care for something at all. Neglect can take on multiple forms and occurs in a physical and ideological form. Heritage can be physically neglected, which means that the physical appearance of the site, or parts thereof, are deteriorating, because of lack of upkeep. The protection of the site through upkeep and security is substandard, leading to vandalism and damage to the site by overuse and erosion. Also, the ideology of a site can be neglected,

1 ‘Cityscape’ [Def. 1 and 3.0] (n.d.) Merriam Webster. Retrieved from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cityscape 2 Foot (2009), 4. And A. Huyssen (2003) Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 7. 3 ‘Neglect’ [Def. 1]. (n.d.) Cambridge Dictionaries Online. Retrieved from: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/neglect and ‘Neglect’ [Def. 1 and 6.]. (n.d.) Dictionary.com. Retrieved from:http://www.dictionary.com/browse/neglect?s=t 6 meaning that the set of ideas and beliefs of a (political) group, related to or embodied in fascist heritage, can be neglected.4 This ideological neglect is thus an indifference or unconcern of the things that fascist heritage symbolizes, namely the fascist ideology, its values, and the memories that are connected to this heritage. This neglect generally arises from the political difficulty and sensitivity of the subject, which makes it easier to avoid these problems than to start an unpopular discussion. Many fascist buildings have been reused, which is the act of using a building after it has fallen in disuse, or after a change of regime. This reuse can either be conventional, thus retaining its former function, or creative, where the use is different from the former function. Like neglect, reuse can also be subdivided in physical and ideological; physical reuse is the reuse of a structure, regardless of the ideological message it might convey. Often, when a site is physically reused, the meaning of the site is being altered and detached of its previous meaning. Reuse is not limited to the physical site, since the ideology linked to a site and the messages it exalts can also be reused. With this ideological reuse, the ideas and belief of a group, which are expressed through or are encapsulated in heritage, are restated. In the case of fascist heritage this identification with ideas and belief of fascism, expresses itself in neo- fascist tendencies. The concepts of neglect and reuse are paradoxical. When something is neglected, it implies that it is not re-used, as ‘neglect’ suggest a passiveness, since something is not being done, or being done poorly, while ‘reuse’ hints at activity. Likewise, when something is re- used it is implied that it is not neglected. But as we will see, there are different levels of neglect and re-use that often go hand in hand when it comes to fascist architectural remnants in Rome. Neglect and reuse stand side by side, and can be seen simultaneously in several possible combinations. For example, a heritage site is physically reused, but ideologically neglected, or a site is physically neglected and ideologically reused. We will encounter different combinations in this thesis.

Research question

The concepts of neglect and reuse are particularly interesting for fascist architecture in Rome, because, for a long period of time, ideological neglect has been the tactics of postponing the problem of dealing with the fascist heritage. This heritage has been so ideologically charged

4 ‘Ideology’ [Def. ‘Simple’ and 2b]. (n.d.) Merriam Webster. Retrieved from: http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/ideology 7 that the treatment and discussion on this heritage was difficult, unpopular, and would expose the division in Italian society. At the same time, however, many fascist structures have been reused but are not being dealt with. It is interesting to look at these cases of Italian fascist architecture now, because after an extensive period of abandonment, there seems to be a change going on in the treatment of fascist heritage the past decades. In 2015 alone, three cases of fascist heritage sites have been in the media, because of a change, or a proposed change, in its treatment. First, the ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk at the Foro Italico was under discussion, as politician Laura Boldrini suggested that the inscription on the obelisk should be removed. (Fig. 1.) Second, after years of neglect and decay, the area surrounding the mausoleum of Augustus at the Piazza Augusto Imperatore is being refurbished into a pedestrian area. (Fig. 2.) And third, after more than 70 years of abandonment, the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana, commonly known as the ‘Square Colosseum’, has a new purpose as the new headquarters of the Italian fashion brand Fendi. (Fig.3.) In order to examine these changes more closely, I have formulated the following question:

How does the neglect and reuse of fascist architectural heritage in Rome’s contemporary cityscape reflect changes in the Italian debate on and the memory of the fascist era?

Many monument have been altered over time, by renaming them or removing fascist reminders. Just like the city itself, these monuments have visible and invisible layers, and the monuments in themselves become palimpsests as well.5 As part of the memorial landscape of a city, these individual architectural sites can be seen a catalysts of public opinion, mourning and recognition.6 The way in which fascist heritage is treated and debated tells us a lot about how the fascist era is being remembered. According to Pierre Nora, memory is defined in its opposition to history. Memory is borne by living societies, is in permanent evolution, open to remembering and forgetting, vulnerable to appropriation and manipulation. Memory is by nature multiple, collective, plural, and yet individual.7 Nora elaborated on Maurice Halbwachs, who argued that apart from individual memory, there is also a ‘collective memory’ of a group, which is dependent upon the framework of a group or society and exists beyond the individual.8 Jan Assmann also analysed the concept of collective memory, and

5 J. Foot (2009) Italy’s Divided Memory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 4. 6 Ibidem 7 P. Nora (1989) “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire”, in: Representations, 26, 8-9. 8 M. Halbwachs (1992) On Collective Memory. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 7-9. 8 made a distinction between communicative and cultural memory. Communicative memory is made up of the oral transmitting of memory in our daily communication. Meanwhile, cultural memory refers to the historical stories that people share within a cultural group. These memories are being transferred through historical sources, inscriptions, buildings, art and other media. The cultural memory fosters the group identity; the sense of sameness and a shared generic character or set of beliefs among a group, for example national identity.9 Thus, when referred to memory in this thesis, it concerns the cultural, public and collective form, as the relation between a national community and how they perceive and reflect on their communal history.10 Collective memory is closely linked to place. These Lieux de mémoire ‘where memory crystallizes and secretes itself’, are physical, tangible places of memory, where people are in connection with the past.11 Memory is formed and manifests itself through different forms and it takes root in the concrete, in spaces, gestures images and objects.’12 Mammone argues that ‘historical studies—together with other key vectors such as mass media, cinema, novels, political debates, commemorations, museums, and monuments— contribute to the establishment of a country’s memory.’13 By looking at these actors, we can analyse what is being remember and what is being forgotten. It is established that ‘buildings, as well as objects, places and things, enshrine memory.’14 In this thesis I will especially focus on how the architectural remnants are dealt with and how public and political debates discuss this heritage, in order to find out how the fascist past is being memorized. Thus, in this thesis, I will look at how heritage has being dealt with through the forms of neglect and reuse and how the presence of this heritage and the reaction towards it in public debate takes shape. The treatment and public debate reflect how fascism is being perceived and what is being remembered. I want to see if there is a change going on in the treatment.

Methodology

In the first chapter, I will discuss what ‘fascist architectural heritage in Rome’s contemporary cityscape’ entails. The history of fascism will be briefly discussed in relation to Mussolini’s building program. I will explain how people have dealt with the remains of fascism after the

9 J. Assmann (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’, in: New German Critique 65, 126-130. 10 A. Mammone (2006) ‘A Daily Revision of the Past: Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and Memory in Contemporary Italy’, in: Modern Italy 11 (2), 212. 11 Nora (1989), 12. 12 Ibidem, 9. 13 Mammone (2006). 14 Benton (2010), 25. 9 fall of the regime and how this lead to the contemporary cityscape. Also, I will consider if there even is such a thing as ‘fascist architecture’. Furthermore, I will explain how fascist architecture relates to Italy’s divided memory on the fascist era and the Second World War, and how this divided memory has led to a dissonance in the management of fascist heritage. Then, in order to answer how the neglect and reuse of fascist heritage reflects changes in how the fascist past is perceived, I will look at three case studies of fascist architectural heritage in Rome, namely; the Foro Italico complex (Chapter 2), the Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the abutting Ara Pacis Museum (Chapter 3), and the area Esposizione Universale di Rome ’42, also called EUR, with an emphasis on the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana (Colosseo Quadrato) and the Palazzo Uffici (Chapter 3). I have selected these cases for multiple reasons. First, all three of these sites are important, well-known fascist heritage sites in Rome, that consist of both iconographic and topographic architectural remnants. Rome has many layers of history in its cityscape of which many are visible, but even more are invisible. Of the fascist remains, Arthurs makes a distinction between iconographical remnants, the ‘explicit visual or textual referents to Fascist ideology’ and topographical remnants, ‘meaning the spaces and places created by the regime’.15 Topographic remnants do not necessarily visibly remind of the fascist regime, whereas iconographic remnants remind directly of the regime and tend to ‘“speak” more loudly’.16 Also, iconographic remains are more movable than topographic remains, which are embedded in the structure of the city and cannot be easily altered. I will especially focus on the iconographic architectural remnants. These can entail inscriptions and imagery that directly relate to fascism. All three of the sites have explicit iconographic features, either mosaics, reliefs, inscriptions etc., which visibly link the site to the fascist era, and which make their presence today controversial and debatable. Second, they all have been in the media recently, as previously mentioned. Third, the three cases owe most of their current appearance to the constructions made during the fascist era, and have been relatively frozen or unaltered since the fall of the fascist regime. In each of these case studies I will examine how the sites have been neglected and reused (both physically and ideologically) since the fall of the fascist regime in 1943. I have selected several important moments in the history of the sites, where there were circumstances concerning the physical sites, which triggered an extensive public debate, while I will also address the absence of public debate where one would expect one. The scrutiny of the public

15 J. Arthurs. (2015b) ‘‘Voleva essere Cesare, morì Vespasiano’: The Afterlives of Mussolini’s Rome’, in: Civiltà Romana Rivista pluridisciplinare di studi su Roma antica e le sue interpretazioni 1, 286. 16 Ibidem. 10 debate has mostly been based on Italian and foreign newspaper articles, which have been selected on availability and relevance. I have attempted to make a wide selection of newspapers, as well as different points of view in the concerning debates. Furthermore, I will base my research on secondary literature, which is mostly in English due to the resources available to me at the point of writing. Although I speak Italian, I unfortunately did not have the opportunity to make use of the abundance of Italian literature that exists on the subject. In Chapter 5, I will compare the neglect and re-use of the three case-studies and will consider what these ways of dealing with fascist remains tells us about the place fascism holds in Italian society, debate, and memory. Then, in the conclusion, I will argue that there is a normalization going on, that has developed parallel to the revisionism of the of the fascist past. Normalization and Revisionism are trends that are not just limited to Rome, but count for the dealing with Italy’s cultural memory in general. With this thesis, I thus contribute to the debate on how fascist heritage in Rome is being dealt with and the place this fascist heritage holds in society and in the public memory.

11

Figure 1. Aerial view of the Foro Italico complex. (Photo retrieved from: http://tennisopolis.com/forum/topics/rome-foro-italio-men-s-main-draw).

Figure 2. Aerial view of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the mausoleum of Augustus. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.touringclub.it/notizie-di-viaggio/roma-mausoleo-di-augusto-aprira-mai-quella- tomba%20).

12

Figure 3. Aerial view of the EUR district being built in 1939. The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana is on the center left of the photo. (Photo retrieved from: https://archiwatch.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/e42.jpg).

13

Chapter 1: What is fascist architectural heritage?

Fascist architectural remnants refer to the architectural structures and ornaments which have been built in 1922-1943, under the reign of Benito Mussolini, and which have remained until this day. Fascism is a far-right totalitarian nationalist movement, which emerged around the 1920s in the aftermath of the First World War. Mussolini and his Partito Nazionale Fascista (PNF) rose to power in government, starting from the March on Rome in October 1922.17 In a matter of years, Mussolini had established a legal and executive dictatorial authority.18 He had destroyed most of the political opposition through his secret police and violent Blackshirts and turned Italy into a one-party dictatorship. Since 1925 he adopted the title of Dictator and was commonly referred to as ‘Il Duce’ (the leader). In order to justify his authority and to gain public support, Mussolini made use of propaganda, amongst others through an extensive building program in Rome, which was based on three principle ideas of Italian fascism: romanità, the rhetoric of imperialism and war, and Mussolini himself. Mussolini wanted to transform Italy into ‘the Third Roman Empire’, rivalling the First Roman Empire of ancient Rome and the Second Rome of the Popes. The capital was to be the centre of both the nation and the Third Roman Empire and therefore he wanted to make the city once more a place of greatness and grandeur worthy of Rome’s imperial past. 19 This glorification of Ancient Rome’s imperial past is called romanità. The idea of Italian unification based on the shared past of Ancient Rome was not a new notion, as it was expressed in the nineteenth century throughout the Risorgimento. However, it was mostly during the Ventennio that the city’s rich history, monuments, and sites were opened up and put in more prominent positions, in order to define and display the new fascist Italy.20 For example, the Colosseum was opened up with the construction of the Via dei Fori Imperiali, the area around the theatre of Marcellus was cleared for the Via del Mare and the Mausoleum of Augustus was highlighted by the creation of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. By focussing on exposing these ancient buildings, Mussolini made a direct link with the ancient Rome, legitimizing the fascist rule as inheritors of the Roman Empire. The idea of empire was not limited to Rome. Mussolini envisioned Italy as a powerful nation,

17 For a detailed overview on the history of fascism, see: J. van Osta (1989) Geschiedenis van Het Moderne Italië : Tussen Liberalisme En Fascisme. Den Haag: Nijgh & Van Ditmar Universitair. 18 Van Osta (1989). 19 B.W. Painter (2005) Mussolini’s Rome: Rebuilding the Eternal City. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 5. 20 Ibidem, 2. 14 respected by the great international powers and worthy of the Roman Imperial tradition.21 Because the fascist regime glorified the nation-state, war and violence and was also in need of international recognition, it was only a natural consequence that Mussolini would seek oversees expansion, as demonstrated by the colonial wars in Libya and Ethiopia.22 These messages of imperialism were celebrated through iconography as well. Not only were there several sites named after empire, such as the ‘Piazzale dell’Impero’ or the ‘Via dell’Impero’, but also several inscriptions and mosaics refer to the imperial ambitions of the regime. For example, the mosaics in the Foro Italico portray several images of indigenous people in Libya, as well as armed youths and military. (Fig. 5.) To celebrate the successes in Ethiopia and to showcase them to the international community at the World Exhibition, the regime even constructed the entire area of EUR. The third principle idea of fascism was the figure of Mussolini, who was the centre of fascist propaganda. This cult of Mussolini, or mussolinismo, revolves around the admiration and imitation of the person or the politics of Mussolini. From the very beginning of fascism, public identification with il Duce was encouraged. Mussolini was the face of fascism, resulting in abundant iconography, reliefs, sculptures and inscriptions of either the face or the name of Mussolini.23 The most prominent remnant is perhaps the ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk. (Fig. 6.)

How ‘fascist’ is ‘fascist architecture’?

The buildings and sites constructed during the Ventennio are mentioned here as ‘fascist architecture’. However, the notion of ‘fascist architecture’ is controversial, as it is unclear what exactly makes architecture built during the fascist era ‘fascist’. ‘Fascist’ in this sense signifies architecture that is purely a product of the fascist regime or that speaks the ideological propaganda message as intended by the totalitarian regime. Is all that has been built under Mussolini’s regime ‘fascist’? First, the architectural style was not determined by Mussolini or fascist officials, instead there was a ‘relatively open cultural climate’.24 There was no such thing as ‘state art’, since ‘neither Mussolini nor one of his officials set in motion an overall preconceived program to guide all individual initiatives’.25 At the opening of a

21 Ibidem, 115. 22 N. Carter (2010) Modern Italy in Historical Perspective. London: A Hodder Arnold Publication, 83. 23 Carter (2010), 139. 24 Ibidem, 152. 25 C. Lazzaro and R. J. Crum (eds.) (2005) ‘Introduction’, in: Donatello among the Blackshirts. History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 5. 15 group exhibition on Novecento art in Milan 1923, Mussolini declared that ‘it is far from my idea to encourage anything like a state art. Art belongs to the domain of the individual. The state has only one duty: not to undermine art, to provide humane conditions for artists, to encourage them from the artistic and national point of view.’26 Rather than a univocal style, architecture under Mussolini’s regime consisted of collaborative projects with different architects and artists ‘representing a range of traditional and avant-garde trends.’27 Italian architecture in the Ventennio thus incorporated a variety of stylistic trends, such as a Traditionalist, Novecento and Rationalist style.28 This mixture of styles was based on romanità, using classical proportions and rectangular symmetry, but also on vernacular and rural Italian building traditions, which are pure and simple forms without ornaments.29 Buildings of the fascist era are often large and imposing, conveying a sense of astonishment and intimidation and are usually made of durable, (plain) white materials, such as marble and limestone. Although there are sculptures and mosaics to be found, the design is simplified and lacks ornaments. Depictions mostly show heroic scenes, in line with romanità, imperialism and war, modernism and industrialism, and they are modelled after the classical example. Since there is not one specific state regulated style, the buildings constructed during the fascist era are seen as expressions of interwar modernism. As the importance of interwar Rationalist architecture is stressed, the ideological charge is lifted from the buildings themselves, as we will come to see in the case studies.30 Second, many building projects were conceived before the fascist era and were carried out in the interwar period. Most urban transformations had been proposed during the Risorgimento. For example, there had been advanced plans on opening up the mausoleum of Augustus in the Piano Regolatore of 1909,

26 ‘Alla Mostra del ‘Novecento’’, speech of 26 March 1923, published in Il Popolo d’Italia, 27 March, 1923. Printed in: E. Braun (2000) Mario Sironi and Italian Modernism: Art and Politics under Fascism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1. 27 C. Lazzaro (2005) ‘Forging a Visible Fascist Nation: Strategies for Fusing Past and Present’, in: C. Lazzaro and R. J. Crum (eds.) Donatello among the Blackshirts. History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 27. 28 Rationalist architecture was popular in the 1920s-1940s. It was a compromise between the classicism of the Novecento Italiano movement and Futurism, finding a synthesis between the nationalistic values of Italian Classicism and the structural logic of the machine age. Novecento was a style based on the rhetoric of Mussolini’s fascism. It lacked a vast artistic programme and included different artists and styles. It aimed to promote a renewed and yet tradition Italian art. For more on these Italian interwar styles, read: K. Frampton (1980) Modern architecture. A critical history. London: Thames and Hudson, 203-218. and R.A. Etlin (1991) Modernism in Italian Architecture, 1890-1940. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press. 29 Lazzaro (2005), 27. For more on rural and ’vernacular’ architecture, read: Lazzaro (2005) 27-31. 30 J. Arthurs (2010) ‘Fascism as ‘heritage’ in contemporary Italy’, in: A. Mammone and G.A. Veltri (eds.) Italy Today: The sick man of Europe. New York: Taylor&Francis, 114.

16 planning to reveal its original form by externally freeing the structure.31 Thus, we can question whether or not the plans conducted during the fascist era were purely expressions of fascism, since their roots lie in earlier periods. However, the existing plans were often altered by Mussolini to fit his own needs and were used for the regime’s propaganda. Despite of the critiques, I will still be using the term ‘fascist architecture’, because the term implies that the architecture has an ideological charge, which is exactly why fascist heritage is often the source of controversy, as we will encounter in the case-studies. Also, with the case studies I selected, there are several markers (mosaics, inscriptions and sculptures) that make it obvious to the beholder that the site is fascist and also in these instances, it is debated whether or not the site still carries out the message of fascism.

Divided Memory

On June 21st 1940, Italy joined the Second World War on the side of Nazi Germany. As the war turned out to be devastating for Italy, Mussolini’s popularity dropped rapidly and eventually, in July 1943, he was toppled by a group of fascists and imprisoned. After twenty years of fascism, this news was met with euphoria amongst most Italians, as it led Italy to believe that the end of the war was near. In this jubilation, many symbols and images of fascism were removed, especially the fasces and images of Mussolini.32 ‘Millions immediately took to the streets to join in exuberant celebrations and purge their communities of all traces of the fallen regime.’33 However, there were many Italians who sympathized with the regime and grieved the fall of fascism. If the Italians thought the war was over, they couldn’t be more mistaken. On September 8th 1943, Italy sided with the Allies, which led Germany to occupying the larger part of Italy. The Second World War was continued as a civil war, in which the population was divided between fascists fighting with the Nazi’s and the resistance movements that consisted of partisans. However, this division was not clear cut and many switched sides during the war. The nine months of German occupation were the most atrocious of the war. There were mass deportations and reprisals for partisans who had killed Nazi’s, such as the massacre at Fosse Ardeatine, where 335 civilians were killed. In the meantime, Hitler installed Mussolini as head of a new fascist puppet government, the Italian

31 S. Kostof (1978) ‘The Emperor and The Duce: The Planning of Piazzale Augusto Imperatore in Rome’, in: H. Millon and L. Nochlin (eds.) Art and Architecture in the Service of Politics. Cambridge: MIT Press, 271-272. 32 Painter (2005), xvi. 33 Arthurs (2015b), 286. 17

Social Republic or the Republic of Salò in Northern Italy. Il Duce died on April 28th 1945, as he was caught during his attempted escape to Switzerland. Mussolini was executed and his body was hung at a gas station at Piazzale Loreto in Milan, together with his mistress and other executed fascists. The war ended for Italy in April 1945, when the Germans capitulated, and the Italian liberation is celebrated on the 25th of April. With the change of regime, the newly founded Italian Republic’s government, consisting of the Democrazia Cristiana (DC) and the Partito Comunista Italiano (PCI), tried to eliminate the memory and traces of discomfort of the fascist regime. In order to move on, most Italians wanted to forget about the twenty years of fascism.34 However, after the war, there was no systematic removal of fascism. Streets and buildings were renamed in order to reuse them. Buildings that had important functions and offices often remained in use. Sometimes the fasces and fascist slogans were removed, but even this is not the case with most buildings in Rome.35 The transformation of the city was swift and incomplete and post- war Italy did not systematically distance itself from fascism. This goes for fascist architecture in particular, but also for society in general. Fascist officials were re-installed in to office after the war in all types of occupations, such as judges, bureaucrats, police officers etc. Furthermore, war crimes were not prosecuted, so that neither society nor the city were purged of remnants of the fascist era. 36 Because Italy was divided during the German occupation, there have been divided memories on what happened during the Second World War. The term ‘divided memory’ or memoria divisa has been in use since the 1990s. Foot (2009) explains that ‘divided memory’ is the emergence of contradicting narratives after events through forms of public and private commemoration. These contradictory narratives are often incompatible, but they exist parallel to each other.37 The post-war narrative focussed on the partisans as national heroes. Whereas many local groups see them as having provoked the Germans and as a reason why some of their relatives are dead. Also, where post-war Germany had to deal with the question of guilt and collective responsibility for the war and the Holocaust, Italy minimized its culpability and portrayed itself as a country of brava gente. Post-war Italy juxtaposed the ‘good Italian’ against the ‘bad German’, taking on a role as victim rather than perpetrator, as Italy had a

34 Painter (2005), xvii. 35 Foot (2009), 70. 36 For more information on not prosecuting Italian war crimes, see R. Ventresca (2006) ‘Debating the Meaning of Fascism in Contemporary Italy’, in: Modern Italy 11 (2), 189-209. 37 Foot (2009). 18 hand in arranging Mussolini’s fall and switched sides during the war. 38 Consequently, fascism, its violence and (colonial) repression have long been hidden under the façade of the German alliance. The Nazi regime was blamed for having corrupted the fascist dictatorship and introducing the racial laws. Even now, Italian Fascism is sometimes presented as a ‘a benevolent patriotic dictatorship that was polluted and led astray only by the alliance with Germany’39 The absence of culpability and the idea of brava gente are part of the reason why Italian society and Rome’s cityscape have not been purged from fascism, and why the divided memories have been allowed to exist in Italy. Also, in the light of the Cold War and the fear of the spread of communism, it was in America’s interest not to alienate Italy, who had one of the largest communist parties of Western Europe at the time.

Dissonant Heritage

A division of memory is also a division in how to interpret history and how to understand the past. Over the decades, the contradicting narratives of memory have led to an inability to create consensus about the past. On the one hand, this inability has led to conflict and fierce disagreements on how fascist heritage should be treated, while on the other hand the lack of consensus has led to inactivity in the management of heritage. The discordance on what happened during the fascist era and how it should be remembered has made fascist heritage ‘dissonant heritage’. Ashworth and Tunbridge (1996) introduce the concept of dissonant heritage in order to understand the discordance or lack of agreement on the meaning and interpretation of heritage. Heritage is a product of the present, and its meaning and use can be modelled after current needs and demands.40 Therefore, cultural heritage is intrinsically conflicted and dissonant, and often contested, because it is interpreted and used in different ways by different groups.41 Ashworth and Tunbridge argue that there are multiple ways in which the interpretation of heritage could create dissonance among different groups of recipients. Especially relevant to our case is the dissonance that may occur through obsolete transmission and undesirable transmission. Obsolete transmission deals with messages which ‘…may continue to be projected to a changed society, which has quite different policies and goals from those of the

38 Ventresca (2006), 192. 39 Quote from Prof. Emilio Gentile University of Rome, 24.13 min. Hewlett-Packard Documentary (2005) ‘Fascism in Italy’ See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDBOyhNn0sg 40 G.J. Ashworth and J.E Tunbridge (1996) Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 6. 41 Ibidem, 20. 19 society for which they were originally intended.’42 Obsolete heritage thus deals with messages that are no longer relevant, have a different meaning now than originally intended or are no longer understood. This may result in an irrelevant distraction or an embarrassing or destabilising contradiction. Fascist heritage is obsolete because the values of the fascist ideology are not in line with the democratic values that are currently dominant. Assuming that fascist architecture still carries out some ideological aspects, it means that the architecture carries out antidemocratic values that are no longer condoned and condemned. However, one can ask oneself whether fascist heritage is actually obsolete, since neo-fascist parties have emerged and are still present today. Despite the passing of several laws in the 1950s to prohibit open support of fascism, a neo-fascist (or post-fascist) party was created in 1946, called the Movimento Sociale Italiano (MSI). In 1970s and 1980s this was the fourth largest party of the country, until it was dissolved in the 1990s. The post-war order had been frozen by the Cold War, but with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the PCI was dissolved and this led Italy’s political life into a crisis, making room for the resurgence of far-right movements.43 The MSI was succeeded by the Alleanza Nazionale, a conservative party that distanced itself from Mussolini and fascism, and in the same decade, several neo-fascist and far-right parties were erected such as the Movimento Sociale –Fiamma Tricolore, Forza Nova and Fronte Nazionale. Also, the granddaughter of Mussolini, Alessandra Mussolini, is an active politician in the Italian senate. With the presence of extreme right groups in contemporary Italian society, we can wonder if the message of fascism is truly obsolete and if the fascist architecture still carries out the original message after all. Does it carry out a message of fascism or is it void of ideological message and does it become part of the contemporary cityscape? If it does carry out the message, however, we can ask ourselves if these fascist messages are to be called ‘irrelevant’. Undesirable heritage, on the other hand, are the parts of history which are still present, that society or a part thereof would rather not be confronted with or permit others to be in contact with. This type of heritage can create dissonance among previous victims, their children or those who fear they might be future victims. To the same extent, heritage can be dissonant to previous perpetrators and their descendants, or to society as a whole, ‘which would rather not be constantly reminded of the depths that can be reached by their shared flawed humanity.’ Often, this type of heritage is handled with ‘deliberate concealment or a

42 Ibidem, 29. 43 Arthurs (2015b), 283-84 and Carter (2010), 173-174. 20 reinterpretation to reduce dissonance’.44 Deliberate concealment can also be defined as a neglect of the physical state of the site, or the neglect of ideological markers. Reinterpretation, on the other hand, is often necessary when a site is being reused. Sharon MacDonald uses the concept of undesirable heritage and applies it to the case of the Nuremberg Nazi Party Rally Grounds and the Nazi past in Germany. MacDonald sets forth that heritage and identity are connected, in the sense that material cultural heritage, such as buildings and art works, reflect a sameness over time. Material culture does not only represent identity, but it is the materialisation or objectification of this identity.45 Identity is seen here as a sameness or homogeneity of a group that is in contact with the cultural heritage. Since buildings exist both in the past and in the present, it gives the illusion that this common identity or collectivity is also the same over time. Material cultural heritage is therefore a discourse and a set of practices that are concerned with continuity and the materialization of the collective identity.46 MacDonald argues that in the case of the Nazi past in Germany, this continuity between past and present as materialized in heritage is problematic. The remains of Nazi Germany reflect an identity that is no longer desirable in the present society, because it carries anti-democratic and violent values. Material culture thus becomes undesirable when a link is assumed between material culture and the sameness of a group over time. This is also the case with Italian fascist architecture, which is disapproved of by many because of its violence, antidemocratic nature and many victims in both Italy, South- Eastern Europe (Greece) and Africa (Libya and Ethiopia). Thus, fascist remains in contemporary Rome imply that the contemporary Italians are a homogenous group that by accepting this heritage, place themselves in line with the fascist past, therefore accepting the ideology. Fascist architecture in Rome, just as the Nazi Party Rally Grounds in Nuremberg, had been designed as part of an identity building propaganda project, which reflects a collective identity of empire, unity and nationalism. Does this collective identity still resonate in society or has this intended message become obsolete? Because fascist heritage is dissonant and Italian society still knows an ideological divided, the urban space in Rome has been ‘frozen’ for decades. Because the remnants are so ideologically charged and controversy and conflict have been suppressed so long for the sake of peace and unity, often the remains have been neglected, but simultaneously they have been

44 Ashworth and Tunbridge (1996), 29. 45 S. Macdonald (2006) ‘Undesirable Heritage: Fascist Material Culture and Historical Consciousness in Nuremberg’, in: International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12 (1), 11. 46 Ibidem, 11. 21 reused as well. Now, we will turn to the three case-studies to see how these remnants have been neglected and reused, what kind of public debate this neglect and reuse has triggered and how the Italians have attempted to deal with their divided memories and make dissonant heritage more concordant.

22

Figure 4. Benito Mussolini gives the first inaugural strike with the pickaxe in demolishing housing blocks in order to open up the ancient monuments in Rome, 19 February 1935. (Photo retrieved from Agenzia VEDO / Archivi Farabola http://roma.corriere.it/gallery/roma/04- 2013/porry/foto/porry-pastorel-padre-fotoreporter_4b3cbb70-9c26-11e2-aac9-bc82fb60f3c7.shtml#6 ).

Figure 5. Mosaics in the Foro Mussolini celebrate Italy's victory over Ethiopia in the Italo-Ethiopian war. Soldiers, tanks, aircraft, a victorious Italian flag, and eagles flank the central inscription: "IX Maggio XIV E. F. L'ITALIA HA FINALMENTE IL SUO IMPERO" (‘9th May, year 14 Era Fascista. Italy finally has its Empire’). Below, rows of fasces, representing Italy, cage a subdued lion, representing Ethiopia. (Photo by Avery Enderle Wagner, 2014. Retrieved from: http://romehistorymu.wix.com/romehistorymu#!foreign affairs/cach).

23

Chapter 2 - Case 1: Foro Italico

The Foro Italico, former Foro Mussolini, was built between 1928 and 1938 as the national athletics centre and a complex dedicated to sports, physical fitness and youth.47 The complex was designed by Enrico del Debbio as a ‘twentieth century version of the imperial fora’, while the construction was finished by Luigi Moretti, after Del Debbio passed away.48 The complex housed the headquarters of the fascist youth organisation Opera Nazionale Balilla, the Italian Olympic Committee and the Accademia fascista di educazione fisica or Accademia fascista della Farnesina. The forum thus had the purpose of educating Italy’s youth in a patriotic, unitarian and fascist manner. Furthermore, the complex functioned as a propaganda tool, heroizing Mussolini and the fascist regime. The Foro lies at the base of Monte Mario in the northwest of Rome on the left side of the Tiber River, in Municipio XV.49 The main entrance of the forum is situated across the Ponte Duca d’Aosta and is marked by a large obelisk made of Carrara marble with the inscription ‘Mussolini Dux’ (Mussolini Leader). After the entrance, a large avenue called the Piazzale dell’Impero leads to the Olympic Stadium. (Fig. 7.) The Piazzale is covered in 7000m2 black and white propaganda mosaics, designed by Gino Severini, Angelo Canevari, Giulio Rosso and Achille Capizzano and which glorify Mussolini and the Fascist regime. The mosaics portray images of physical education and sport, the conquest of power and the subjugation of Ethiopia, the industrialisation and modernization of Italy and the hard work of the Italians, and other achievements of the regime. Also, the grounds are covered in propaganda texts, such as ‘It is necessary to win, but more necessary to fight’, ‘Many enemies much honour’, ‘Leader, we dedicate our youth to you’ and 248 repetitions of ‘Il Duce’. 50 (Fig. 8. and 9.) Both sides of the Piazzale dell’Impero contain rows of marble slabs which record the great achievements of fascism, such as the March on Rome (22 October 1918), Mussolini founds the people of Italy (15 November 1914) and the proclamation of the Empire (9 May 1936).51 On the east side of the Olympic Stadium lies the Stadio dei Marmi (Stadium of Marbles), an oval athletic field surrounded by 60 marble neo-classical statues of nude male

47 Painter (2005), 14. 48 Valerie Higgins (2013) ‘Rome’s Uncomfortable Heritage: Dealing with History in the Aftermath of WWII’, in: Archaeologies 9 (1), 32. 49 Former Municipio XX. See: https://www.comune.roma.it/wps/portal/pcr?jp_pagecode=municipio_xx.wp&ahew=jp_pagecode 50 «Necessario è vincere, più necessario è combattere », « Molti nemici, molto onore », « Duce, a voi dedichiamo la nostra giovinezza » – translations by author. 51 «Marcia su Roma», «Mussolini fonda il Popolo d’Italia» and «La Proclamazione dell’Impero» – translations by author. 24 athletes, which represent different types of sport and the Italian provinces.52 The Foro Italico complex was inaugurated in 1938, marking the bimillenary of the birth of the first Roman emperor Augustus, as well as the first anniversary of the new Italian empire. The Piazzale dell’Impero (‘Square of the Empire’) symbolized the founding of a third Roman Empire, rivalling that of imperial Rome and celebrated the new Italian empire that was established under Mussolini’s regime.

Reuse without damnatio memoriae

In June 1944, the U.S. Army liberated Rome and soon after, the American troops occupied the Foro Italico and turned it into the Fifth Army Rest Centre. The rest centres allowed soldiers to recover from the battle fields, and allowed the armies to reorganize and retrain soldiers. During the Second World War, the sports facilities were used by the American army as well as Roman citizens. The Allied Administration in Rome organized matches between its staff and teams of Roman citizens, which were held at the Foro Italico. The reuse of the complex was practical, since a large and modern sports facility was at their disposal, and even a necessity. The Second World War had caused a lot of economic and infrastructural damage in Italy.53 The reuse of the sports facilities of the Foro Italico is unsurprising as it would be unpractical and costly to manufacture a new structure. What is, however, surprising is that the complex was not completely cleansed of iconography. After the fall of the fascist regime on the 25th of July, a number of the symbols of Mussolini and fascism in Rome were almost immediately erased and defaced. However, the iconoclasm of fascism was only partial as the Allied military administration repressed these anti-fascist tendencies with force, trying to prevent a revolution. The destructions were primarily motivated by the emotional release of the Italian people. They were reactions towards a regime that repressed the people and was violent. However, this reaction was not widespread and most importantly, it was void of legitimate civil authority. There was no organized campaign of damnatio memoriae in terms of physical removal.54 Against the backdrop of erasing fascist iconography and Mussolini remnants, one would expect the Foro Italico to be defaced of its fascist remnants as well, as these images and writings were one of

52 D. Maraniss (2008) Rome 1960: The Olympics that changed the world. New York and London: Simon & Schuster, 82-83. 53 Higgins (2013), 30. 54 Arthurs (2010), 119. 25 the most prominent expressions of fascism, but this was not the case. Because of the American occupation, the fascist architecture and iconography were saved from destruction and the Mussolini obelisk was prevented from being pulled down by an angry mob.55 Even after the war, the removal of fascist iconography was not really an issue and was not arranged by civil authority. Also, some Romans remained pro-Fascist, even after the fall of the regime. The authorities did rename many places with fascist names, in order to reuse them while simultaneously stripping them of their fascist connotation and ideological subtext. The practice of renaming happened all over Rome immediately after the war. Numerous roads were given a new name and structures that were named after Mussolini or achievements of the fascist regime were altered. For example, the Foro Mussolini was renamed the Foro Italico and the Via dell’Impero became the Via dei Fori Imperiali.56 This action is similar to the renaming that happened under Mussolini’s reign. Renaming can be seen as a form of damnatio memoriae, as it intends to strip any association with the regime. Since many places are invisibly and unobtrusively linked to fascism, removing the name would remove the fascist connotation and some of the dissonance. Since it was also highly unrealistic to demolishing the entire Foro Italico, the complex had to be appropriated in order to make it less dissonant. Thus, after the war the complex was physically reused, partly for the originally intended purpose; sports and physical training. Because the complex was physically reused and rendered in its original fashion, it is the question whether or not the site is ideologically reused as well. Did the Foro Italico still speak the ideological message of fascism? And did these messages still resonate in society? The iconographic messages inscribed in the imagery of the Foro Italico remained present and their power of expression was not publically discussed until the preparations from the Olympics, end 1950s.

The 1960 Olympics

The post-war period did not revolve around how the fascist past and its remainders should be handled. The fascist remnants of the Foro Italico became controversial in the build up to the Olympics of 1960s, when concerns were raised about the fascist writings and iconography

55 Painter (2005), 41 and 153. 56 T. Benton. (2010) ‘Heritage and Changes of Regime’, in: T. Benton (ed.) Understanding Heritage and Memory. Manchester: Manchester University Press in Association with the Open University, 141. For more examples on renaming fascist sites, read: Rerum Romanarum (6 October 2015) “Le strade che hanno cambiato nome dopo il Fascismo”. Retrieved from: http://rerumromanarum.blogspot.nl/2015/10/roma-strade-che-hanno- cambiato-nome-dopo-il-fascismo.html 26 and whether they should be allowed to remain on the Olympic site. In 1959, two socialist members of parliament, Mr. Lizzadri and Mr. Comaridini, made an interpellation, asking for the inscriptions to be removed.57 They argued that the fascist writings are a memory of a past that both the Italian people and the democratic world have condemned and that the guests of the Olympics could consider them as an acclamation expressed by the current Italian people. The Foro Italico still exalted Mussolini and his deeds and would thus be insulting to many of the athletes and spectators who had possibly suffered under Mussolini’s reign. Comaridini stated that: ‘The writings should be removed, not because they represent a threat to democracy, but because they are a rhetoric exaltation of a regime that deprived the Italian people of their freedom’.58 The Italian government declined the request to remove the fascist remnants. Domenico Magrì, undersecretary of the Ministero del Turismo e dello Spettacolo under the government of Segni II, explained that the presence of the fascist writings did not exalt the fascist message and did not undermine the Italian democracy. They were expressions of history and simultaneously contained a warning and a condemnation of fascism.59 Other, more ‘practical’ arguments were raised, for example the absence of objections to the fascist messages from foreign parties that would soon join the Olympics and objections to the costs of the removal, which would be millions of lira. Neo-fascists were rejoicing upon the refusal to remove the fascist remains: ‘[Lizzadri] wanted to remove the monolith from the Foro Mussolini, the arms and the words that remind one of the most splendid periods of our country.’60 Segni II’s center-right government did not last long and was eventually followed by Amintore Fanfani’s on 26th of July 1960. The leftist government Fanfani III undertook action and by August it was decided that the fascist writings were to be removed, after the mosaics and marbles were already restored by a team of specialists. In 1960, about three weeks before the opening of the Olympics, the Minister for Tourism and Entertainment arranged to erase some of the fascist writings, while the others that ‘have become part of Italian history’ would remain and would be professionally restored. A fascist oath captured in the mosaics on the

57 “Resteranno al Foro Italico le sessanta frasi ‘duce, a noi’” (7 November 1959) La Stampa, 10. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/action,viewer/Itemid,3/ page,10/articleid,0071_01_1959_0238_0010_16808394/ 58 Ibidem. «Le scritte vanno cancellate non perché costituiscano una minaccia per la democrazia, ma perché sono una retorica esaltazione di un regime che privò il popolo italiano della libertà». Translation by author. 59 “Resteranno al Foro Italico le sessanta frasi ‘duce, a noi’” (1959), 10. 60 N. Adelfi, “Imposte le scritte fasciste della Farnesina ai turisti ed agli atleti di tutto il mondo” (8 November 1959) La Stampa, 5. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/action,viewer/Itemid,3/ page,5/articleid,0071_01_1959_0239_0005_16531866/ «Voleva far rimuovere dal Foro Mussolini il monolito, gli stemmi e le scritte che ricordano uno dei periodi di maggior splendore della nostra patria. » 27 floor was covered up by concrete, while the inscriptions on the large marble block on the economic sanctions in Ethiopia were removed as well.61 This particular slab was removed, because the content could offend the participating nations at the Olympics.62 Two days after the decision of the government to erase all the writings, a group of hundred neo-fascists, supposedly from the MSI, demonstrated at the Foro Italico, singing hymns of the Ventennio and burning red socialist flags. The demonstrations led to scuffles between the police and youths, resulting in fourteen arrests. A day after this message, La Stampa reported that no further fascist writings would be removed from the site, according to a spokesman of the Ministry of Sport and Tourism.63 Only the ideological writings would be removed, those with an historic character would remain. We can distinguish two notable arguments in this debate. The first revolved around whether or not the fascist writings still exalted fascism, ‘the fascist message’, Mussolini or his deeds. The fascist remnants could be considered an acclamation of fascism, which is undesirable in a democratic society. They were a rhetoric exaltation of a regime that deprived the Italians of freedom. Also, the remnants were considered undesirable because of improper identification. In the previous chapter we have heard Macdonald’s arguments that material culture reflects a continuity and the materialization of the collective identity.64 In this discussion, there was a clash of people interpreting the presence of these fascist writings as a historical continuity and therefore a continuation of the Italian identity then and now, while others did not. The adversaries reacted by saying that the writings did not exalt this message, but that they were a warning and a condemnation. In this light, it is interesting to see the reaction of neo-fascists, who by demonstrating against the removal showed that they did still identify with the ideological message the writings and iconography represent. In this sense, the adversaries neglected the improper identification of the neo-fascists. The fascist remnants here were thus contested, because the presence of the iconography and writings in the Foro Italico assigned a collective identity of sameness over time to the Italians, which was embraced by neo-fascists, rejected by one group and ignored, neglected and downplayed by

61 The inscription on the marble slab: ‘Le sanzioni economiche all’Italia - 18 novembre 1935’. 62 “Chiassate di missini a Roma per le scritte al Foro Italico” (11 August 1960) La Stampa, 1. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/action,viewer/Itemid,3/ page,1/articleid,0075_01_1960_0192_0001_16952842/ «si è ritenuto che il suo contenuto avrebbe potuto offendere le nazioni partecipanti al Giochi olimpici » 63 “Nessun’altra scritta fascista sarà cancellata dal Foro Italico” (12 August 1960) La Stampa, 5. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/action,viewer/Itemid,3/ page,5/articleid,0075_01_1960_0193_0005_16591473/ «Saranno cancellate solo le scritte ideologiche, quelle a carattere storico rimarranno » 64 Macdonald (2016), 11. 28 the other. It is not about whether or not the writings exalted fascism, because this depends on the beholder. It is not a question about whether it does or it doesn’t, but to whom it exalts fascism and to whom it doesn’t. The second part of the debate concerns the distinction that is being made between ‘historical’ and ‘ideological’ writings. Some writings could be offensive to visitors and participants of the Olympics, because of the episodes in history they remind of. However, the selection of what is historical and what ideological is dubious. While removing some offensive writings, others - arguably equally offensive - have remained in place, for example, the inscription remembering the capture of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital. If the inscription of the sanctions was removed for offense, then surely Ethiopian athletes must find the loss of independence offensive, too. Furthermore, by claiming that some accounts on the marble blocks are ‘historical’ while others are ‘ideological’, is to accept the fascist representation of history. By leaving the inscription ‘Mussolini founded the Italian people’ and presenting it as an ‘historical’ account, the fascist connotation is surpassed.65 The fascist glorifications of certain events can hardly be called a neutral representation of history, if ever such a thing exists. Eventually, the site was restored and the ‘most offensive’ marble inscriptions, such as the inscription on the Ethiopian conquest, were removed and three new dates were inscribed on originally blank marble slabs: The fall of the fascist regime on July 25th 1943, the referendum for the Italian Republic on June 2nd 1946 and finally, the Italian Constitution on January 1st 1948. These new dates were added in order to emphasize the historic accounts that were mentioned there. ‘Instead of purging the site of fascist associations, the goal seems to have been to superimpose new layers of symbolism that supplemented, rather than replaced, its original iconography. In this way, the post-war Republic could lay claim to the Foro without engaging in a controversial and potentially revolutionary act of iconoclasm.’66 The Olympic authorities thereby ‘closed’ the debate on the fascist past.67 During the Olympics itself the controversy was not brought up again. The focus was put on the classical and Christian heritage of Rome, distracting the attention from the fascist heritage. The debate on the fascist remnants shows that the ideological aspect of the presence of the iconography and writings is neglected. The following compromise was not made out of a shared desire for historical inclusiveness or remorse or processing the past, but because many fascist supporters were proud of the ideology and removing its symbols would show this sentiment to the

65 « Mussolini fonda "Il popolo d'Italia » 66 Arthurs (2010), 120. 67 Arthurs (2010), 120. 29 international community.68 The removal of the remnants would trigger demonstrations from neo-fascists, and with the international spotlight focussed on Rome, the fascist past and neo- fascist present were not a desirable image to promote.

Physical neglect

The Foro Italico is a prominent example of physical neglect. In different elements of the complex, there are signs of physical neglect. First, the mosaics are decaying due to overuse and the lack of protection. Since the avenue is still in use as a route to the Olympic Stadium, where many matches and concerts are held, the mosaics suffer under the footsteps of millions of spectators a year. The mosaics are not actively preserved against this amount of use, since they are not being covered up to protect them and they are seemingly not being maintained. Also, the avenue is a popular skateboarding spot, which also leads to the destabilizations of the mosaics. Due to these circumstances, many mosaics are in a poor condition. (Fig. 10.) Second, the marble slabs and the fountain at the rotunda are often vandalized by graffiti. Third, the marble statues on the Stadio dei Marmi as well as the marble slabs often appear dirty and not properly maintained. Some of the statues do seem cleaned, while others are covered in a layer of moss and dirt. (Fig. 11.) However, several restoration works have been conducted in the past decades, most recently the renovation of the obelisk between 2006 and 2008, by CONI, the Italian Olympic Committee, which manages the Foro Italico complex. These restorations have been critiqued because they were poorly conducted and the restoration techniques have impaired the surface of the obelisk. Another point of critique on the management of the Foro Italico complex is the utter lack of surveillance and police forces in the area, which make the restorations, however executed, futile. The neglected state of the Foro Italico leads to a ‘problem of potential architectural agency’, which is described by Sharon Macdonald.69 She discusses the problems that architectural remnants of an undesirable regime (such as the Nazi regime in Germany) cause in our modern age. She states that ‘if the buildings remain intact, there is a risk that they continue to speak the words that [the maker] intended. In the language of heritage and identity, this material heritage risks generating an inappropriate identification.’70 This inappropriate identification is at stake, since the Foro Italico functions as a marker of identification for neo-fascists. For example, the Mussolini dux obelisk has functioned as a

68 Higgins (2013), 32. 69 Macdonald (2006), 16. 70 Macdonald (2006), 16. 30 shrine to right-wing extremists. On the Italian Liberation Day, April 25th, wreaths and flowers have been laid down at the obelisk. On a neo-fascist website, these commemorations say: ‘In memory of those who betrayed him and who fell for the honour of Italy’ and they call upon others to lay flowers at the monolith.71 (Fig. 12.) The decaying state of the complex seems to invigorate the claims that neo-fascist lay on the forum.72 Macdonald asserts that the architectural remnants of a contested regime can have ‘seductive allure as ruins’ and ‘if buildings are neglected they will become mythologised as ruins’.73 A similar allure has befallen the Foro Italico, as the ideological subtext of the site is intensified because of its decaying state. This sentiment is also found on the same neo-fascist website, which provides information on the Foro Mussolini. The website scolds the vandals and skateboarders, as well as the deteriorating state of the forum.74 In this example, the ruined form of the forum instigates neo-fascists to stand up for their heritage. Because the Foro Italico is neglected, there is space left for Mussolini’s ideological heirs and thus ‘for the re-emergence of illiberal, xenophobic and nihilistic currents in Italian society.’75

Removing fascist writings anno 2015

The ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk is probably the most ‘offensive’ and prominent marker of fascism in Rome. The obelisk, which has been in its current position for over 80 years, is prominently visible from the two main roads; the Via Capoprati and the Lungotevere Flaminio. As one of the most conspicuous fascist remnants, its presence is debated even now. On April 17th 2015, Laura Boldrini, president of the Chamber of Deputies, suggested to remove the writings on the obelisk, or at least the word ‘Dux’, which is an explicit symbol of fascism and of the personality cult of Mussolini. During a ceremonial event celebrating the 70th anniversary of the resistance, she reacted to the request of an elderly partisan to clean the streets of fascism and remove the writings on the obelisk, because ‘fascism is returning’.76

71 ‘Nel ricordo di coloro che non tradirono e che caddero per l'onore d'Italia’. See: http://www.foroitalico.altervista.org/secondapagina.html 72 S. van Doornmalen (January 2015) ‘The Foro Italico: neglecting present pasts’, unpublished paper for the course ‘Heritage Theory’, University of Amsterdam. 73 See: http://www.foroitalico.altervista.org/secondapagina.html 74 Ibidem. 75 Arthurs (2010), 120 and 125. 76 The partisan said to Boldrini: "After all that we said I think we should do something to clean up all the streets of Italy from fascism, that is coming back plus take down that column at the Foro Italico with the shameful inscription" Mussolini Dux ", it is time to break it down! ". (“Dopo tutto quello che ci siamo detti penso che dovremmo fare qualcosa per ripulire tutte le strade d’Italia dal fascismo che sta ritornando e oltretutto di abbattere quella colonna al Foro Italico con la vergognosa scritta “Mussolini Dux”, quella è ora di abbatterla!”.) To which Boldrini responded "Or at least it is time to remove the writing". (“O per lo meno è ora di togliere la 31

Boldrini reacted by saying that ‘By now it is the time to remove at least the word’, referring to the word ‘Duce’ on the obelisk.77 This remark by Boldrini was met with outrage, while the expressed concerns for the return of fascism by the veteran partisan were completely ignored. Many people have expressed their opposition towards the erasure of the writings. First, many deem erasure undesirable, since Italy is now an antifascist country and the messages of fascism are no longer relevant. Matteo Orfini, president of the Partito Democratico (PD), reacted by stating that:

‘We are an antifascist country, the principles of the antifascist battle are written in our Constitution. [..] We do not need to erase our memory [...] damnatio memoriae is an element of weakness and not strength on the part of those who practice it.’78

Orfini implies that because antifascism is in the Constitution, the remains of fascism should not be interpreted as messages that still resonate in society. On the contrary, the fascist remains are ‘a warning for future generations, because the errors of the past need not to be repeated.’79 Second, the writings must not be erased because fascism is too far in the past and its remnants have become a part of history. The time to erase fascism has passed, according to Philippe Daverio, art historian and writer. ‘It is one thing if, immediately after the fall of communism, a statue of Stalin is thrown down, but today no one would dare to remove the statue of Louis XIV by the Victory square in Paris in the name of the Republic. Now the French Revolution is over for centuries.’80 In this argument, fascism is perceived as belonging to the past and not relevant in the present, therefore not a threat to the Italian democratic society. The Foro Italico is perceived by many as part of Italy and Rome’s history and heritage, and it should be preserved because of its aesthetic and historical value. Third, the erasure of the writings is condemned, despite its representation of a violent and

scritta”.) For the video on the incident, see: “«Togliere la scritta Mussolini Dux»: bufera sulla Boldrini” (17 April 2015) Agenzia Dire. Retrieved from: http://video.corriere.it/togliere-scritta-mussolini-dux-bufera- boldrini/fe5f9d5a-e52e-11e4-845e-5bcd794907be 77 Ibidem. «È ormai il momento di togliere almeno la scritta». 78 “Boldrini: «Cancellare la scritta Dux dall’obelisco di Mussolini» Bufera sulla presidente della camera” (17 April 2015) Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://roma.corriere.it/notizie/politica/15_aprile_17/ripulire-l- obelisco-mussolini-bufera-parole-boldrini-079c8ae4-e50d-11e4-845e-5bcd794907be.shtml «Noi siamo un Paese antifascista - ha aggiunto Orfini - i principi della lotta antifascista sono scritti nella nostra Costituzione. Non abbiamo bisogno di cancellare la nostra memoria, seppur a tratti drammatica». «Credo- ha concluso - che la damnatio memoriae sia un elemento di debolezza e non di forza da parte di chi la esercita». Translation by the author 79 Reaction by Stefano Pedica (PD) “Boldrini: «Cancellare la scritta Dux dall’obelisco di Mussolini»Bufera sulla presidente della camera” (17 April 2015). 80 F. Curridori (17 April 2015) “Un coro di insulti per la Boldrini che vuole "cancellare" Mussolini”. Il Giornale. Retrieved from: http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/politica/coro-insulti-boldrini-che-vuole-cancellare-mussolini- 1117618.html 32 antidemocratic regime. These negative aspects of fascist heritage are downplayed and marginalized and equated to other heritage sites in Rome with an objectionable history. For example, Davide Bordoni and Vincenzo Leli (Forza Italia) state that: ‘The obelisk of the Foro Italico is a piece of the history of Italy, Rome and in particular Northern Rome. If you were to demolish every monument made by emperors, pharaohs and dictators, we would need to redesign Rome entirely.’81 It is rhetorically questioned if Rome should erase all heritage representing violence and antidemocratic values, such as heritage linked to the Egyptian obelisks, Emperor Nero or the Christian prosecutions in the Colosseum.82 In reaction to these critiques the spokesman of Boldrini, Roberto Natale, said: ‘The president of the House has never said she wants to tear down the monuments erected during the fascist era, to the unlikely imitation of Isis. The discussion on the legacy of April 25 deserves to be addressed on more serious issues.’83 Although the comment of Boldrini has been taken out of context, it has triggered a debate. Even the president of the Jewish Community of Rome, Riccardo Pacifici, has reacted by saying that the Foro Italico has probably solely been maintained for its aesthetic qualities, and that this is perhaps only problematic for tourists, who might think the presence of fascism is strange. He also called Boldrini’s observations relevant and acknowledged that she has the merit of having raised the issue.84 Others agree with Boldrini that the writings should be removed and stress that the monument glorifies Mussolini and is therefore not a historical reminder. Deleting the message would be a symbolic gesture that would show that Mussolini is not another great Italian character. 85 The controversy on the removal of the fascist writings has shown that the majority of the reactions perceive the Foro Italico as a part of history that is no longer ideologically

81 “Laura Boldrini: «Togliere la scritta "Mussolini dux" dall'obelisco del Foro Italico»” (17 April 2015) Il Messaggero. Retrieved from: http://www.ilmessaggero.it/roma/cronaca/laura_boldrini_obelisco_roma_foto_italico_musolini_dux- 983038.html «L'obelisco del Foro Italico è un pezzo di storia d'Italia, di Roma e in particolare di Roma Nord. Se dovessimo demolire tutti i monumenti fatti da imperatori, faraoni e dittatori bisognerebbe in pratica ridisegnare Roma intera.» 82 F. Curridori (17 April 2015). Antonio Pennacchi questions if we should also remove Nero from history. Also on social media, people mocked Boldrini. ‘Comunque nel Colosseo ci ammazzavano i cristiani, secondo il ragionamento della #Boldrini dovremmo abbatterlo. (‘However in the Colosseum they killed Christians, following the reasoning of #Boldrini we should bring it down.’) Twitter quote from Italian journalist Antonella Scutiero. 83 F. Curridori (17 April 2015). 84 “Laura Boldrini: «Togliere la scritta "Mussolini dux" dall'obelisco del Foro Italico»” (17 April 2015). 85 Gavrilovic, Vuk. (19 April 2015) “L’Obelisco di Mussolini? Io sto con la Boldrini”, 360 Giornale Luiss, Student Newspaper of Luiss University, Rome. Retrieved from: http://www.360giornaleluiss.it/attualita/19_04_2015/obelisco-di-mussolini-io-sto-con-la-boldrini/ 33 charged. The recent debate has a lot in common with the Olympics debate, and similar arguments have passed in review. Both debates deal with arguments on the historicity of the remnants and about whether or not the remnants still exalt fascism and glorify Mussolini. Only in the recent discussion, the negative aspects of fascism seem excused and they are compared to events a long time ago. Ideological neglect is still on the foreground, as the ‘historical’ aspect of the remnants is stressed and the ideological message is brushed aside. However, the physical reuse of the site combined with the ideological neglect does leave room for ideological reuse as well. As we have seen, the presence of iconography and writings in the Foro Italico leave room for far right tendencies as well and cannot be fully cleared of any ideological connotation.

34

Figure 6. ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk, Foro Italico. (Photo by author).

Figure 7. Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo by Mario Giannini, retrieved from: http://www.archidiap.com/opera/piazzale-del-monolite/).

35

Figure 8. ‘Molti Nemici, Molto Onore’, mosaics at the Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.romeingreek.eu/?p=12642).

Figure 9. ‘DUCE DUCE’ mosaics at the Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo by Mario Giannini).

36

Figure 10. Decaying mosaics and vandalism at the Foro Italico. (Photo retrieved from: http://folkestonejack.wordpress.com/tag/foro-italico/ and http://www.romanordnews.it/7372/foro-italico-addio-allo-stato-terminale/).

Figure 11. Dirty marbles at the Foro Italico. (Photo by author).

37

Figure 12. Neo-fascist wreaths in remembrance of the fascist regime at the Mussolini obelisk, 25 April 2013. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.foroitalico.altervista.org/secondapagina.htm).

38

39

Chapter 3 - Case 2: Piazza Augusto Imperatore

In the 1930s, many remains of the Augustan period were uncovered in order to honor the emperor’s 2000th birthday.86 One such a building project meant to open up an ancient monument to the city is the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, situated on the Via di Ripetta, which lies in between and parallel to the Tiber and the Via del Corso. The piazza was commissioned by Mussolini and constructed in 1937-1938, centralizing the Mausoleum of Augustus. (Fig. 13. and 19.) The mausoleum was the burial place of Emperor Augustus and it was Mussolini’s plan to be interred in the mausoleum as well. The square was intended as a mythological- historical area for ancient Roman memories and values inside the contemporary city.87 Similarly excavated was the Ara Pacis Augustae, Augustus’ altar of piece, which was found in de foundations of the Fiano-Almagià palace and reconstructed on the west side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore under Mussolini’s direct orders. (Fig.14.) The Ara Pacis, made in 13 BCE in honor of the peace emperor Augustus negotiated with Spain and Gaul, is a beautiful and unique altar, surrounded by decorative reliefs, depicting Rome’s founding legends, the Roman peace and a religious procession starring Augustus himself.88 The marble altar was regarded by the fascists as a very significant embodiment of romanità. In order to protect the restored and relocated altar, a new pavilion was built around it, designed by Vittorio Ballio Morpurgo. (Fig.13.) The classical and elegant structure was originally intended to be made of glass and marble, but due to time pressure because of the approaching celebration, the building was simplified and made of less durable material. On the façade facing the mausoleum, Augustus’ Res Gestae were inscribed, composed of seven panels which covered a surface of 40m2. The north and east side of the piazza are covered with modern office buildings featuring grand travertine arcades, dating 1937-1940.These office buildings were also designed by Morpurgo, consistent in the style of his Ara Pacis pavilion, and contain several fascist images. On the north side, office building B houses the Istituto Nazionale di Previdenza Sociale, formerly Istituto Nazionale Fascista della Previdenza Sociale, with continuity .89 On the façade of the building there is a large inscription accompanied by two

86 Professor Emeritus Charles S. Rhyne and Reed College (Portland, USA) (2011) http://cdm.reed.edu/ara- pacis/introduction.php This website is not affiliated with the Museo dell'Ara Pacis. And Higgins (2013), 38. 87 M.J. Strazzulla (2009) ‘War and Peace: Housing the Ara Pacis in the Eternal City’, in: American Journal of Archaeology 113 (2), 2. 88 Strazzulla (2009), 1-2. 89 Follo (2013), 48. 40 winged Victories holding fasces, which refers to the opening up of the ancient monument to the city and the link of romanità with fascism. (Fig.15.) The inscription reads:

‘This is the place where the soul of Augustus flies through the breezes, after the mausoleum of the emperor was extracted from the darkness of the ages and the scattered pieces of the altar of peace were restored, Mussolini the leader ordered the old narrow places to be destroyed and the location to be adorned with streets, buildings, and shrines fitting for the ways of humanity in the year 1940, in the eighteenth year of the Fascist Era.’90

The façade above the inscription is adorned with mosaics, divided in three panes, designed by Italian artist Ferruccio Ferrazzi. The mosaics depict the ‘birth of Rome’ with the female and youthful personification of the Tiber holding de babies Romulus and Remus. Underneath the Tiber is the she-wolf, looking up to the scene above her. The she-wolf is the earliest surviving piece of art made in Rome and it symbolizes the origins of Roman civilization.91 In antiquity it embodied the idea of Rome, while under fascism it also added a layer of symbolism representing the shared Roman origins of all Italian regions, encouraging Italian nationalist feelings based on this shared past, besides the differences that were (and are for that matter) present in Italian society. On the side panels of the main depiction are six figures, portraying heroic labors. The imagery of heroic labor returns on the façade of office building A, on the east side of the piazza. The relief on the central entrance of the building, designed by Alfredo Biagini, depicts noble labors and heroic lives of the great Italian people.92 On the ground floor of the north and east side are several restaurants, bars and shops. Finally, on the south side of the piazza, the last of the four fascist buildings surrounding the mausoleum, is the Collegia degli Illirici, a monastic structure belonging to the church San Girolamo degli Illirici (or San Girolamo dei Croati a Ripetta). The date ‘A XIX’ on the overpass (in photo below) refers to the 19th year of the Fascist Era, 1941.93 (Fig. 16) Next to this overpass are the two churches,

90 HUNC LOCUM UBI AUGUSTI MANES VOLITANT PER AURAS POSTQUAM IMPERATORIS MAUSOLEUM EX SAECULORUM TENEBRIS EST EXTRACTUM ARAEQUE PACIS DISIECTA MEMBRA REFECTA/ MUSSOLINI DUX VETERIBUS ANGUSTIIS DELETIS SPLENDIDIORIBUS VIIS AEDIFICIIS AEDIBUS AD HUMANITATIS MORES APTIS ORNANDUM CENSUIT ANNO MDCCCCXL A F. R. XVIII.

Translation by Walter Englert, Reed College. Retrieved from: http://cdm.reed.edu/ara-pacis/meier/piazza- augusto-imperatore/fabbricato%20B1/ 91 Lazzaro (2005), 16. 92 Rhyne (2011) http://cdm.reed.edu/ara-pacis/meier/piazza-augusto-imperatore/fabbricato%20A/ 93 Rhyne (2011) http://cdm.reed.edu/ara-pacis/meier/piazza-augusto-imperatore/collegio/ 41

94 the San Girolamo and the San Rocco, which were spared in the demolition of the quarter. Therefore, in the current piazza we see the idea of the Third Rome reoccur: Ancient Rome with the Mausoleum and the Ara Pacis, Catholic Rome with the monastery and the two churches and the Third Rome of Mussolini with the manufactured piazza and the Ara Pacis pavilion.

Erasure INI and fasces

After the fall of Mussolini, Rome was immediately flooded by outbursts of joy and enthusiasm, as is described in witness accounts.95 Millions took to the streets, singing, celebrating and destroying images of Mussolini. This act of iconoclasm was an emotional outing of disproval of the war and the violence of World War II, while simultaneously being an exclamation of joy as many thought that this was the end of the war for Italy. There were no organized responses from the anti-Fascist opposition, as they were caught off guard by the fast developments. 96 In these ‘Forty-Five Days’ days of celebration between 25 July and the capitulation to the Allies on 8 September, the future of Italy was very uncertain and the social order was completely turned upside down. Concerned for an anti-national uprising and a communist revolt, public assemblies were banned and military authorities were deployed to keep public order.97 All these events resulted in the fact that many fascist icons and writings are still to be seen today. Which remnants were destroyed, and which were saved from demolition, is often a matter of coincidence, practical opportunity and the chance of intervention by either the Italian or the Allied forces. As we have seen earlier, there was no structural damnatio memoriae. But where the Foro Italico remained unharmed, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore has known some damage. The destruction of fascist remains was mostly directed at images or inscriptions of Mussolini, as the propaganda and building program had been focussed on the cult of mussolinismo. In the days after July 25th 1943, an anonymous iconoclast removed the letters ‘–INI’ from the word MUSSOLINI on the northern inscription, leaving the word ‘MUSSO’, a vernacular term for ‘donkey’ or ‘jackass’.98 (Fig.17.) This ‘small act of damnatio memoriae’ mocked both il Duce

94 For more on the manufacturing of the piazza and the decisions made, read: S. Kostof. (1978) ‘The Emperor and The Duce: The Planning of Piazzale Augusto Imperatore in Rome’, in: Henry Millon and Linda Nochlin (eds.) Art and Architecture in the Service of Politics. Cambridge: MIT Press. 95 J. Arthurs (2015a) ‘Settling Accounts: Retribution, Emotion and Memory during the Fall of Mussolini’, in: Journal of Modern Italian Studies 20 (5), 621. 96 Arthurs (2015a), 621. 97 Ibidem. 98 Arthurs (2015b), 283. 42 and the fascist monumentalization of the Roman past.99 Another target of the temporary destruction of fascism were the fasces, the bundled rods with an axe. The fasces symbolized the ancient Roman symbols of state power and under fascism represented the unity of the Italian nation, authority and the exercise of power.100 Therefore, they were an excellent target for a mob wanting to distance itself from everything it represented. The fasces depicted on the arches on the southeast side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore were chiselled away and are still present in their damaged state. (Fig.16) Even more interesting, is that somewhere between 1990 and 2005, the INI was restored, once again anonymously and publicly undiscussed. According to Arthurs, the restoration occurred against a turbulent transition for Italy, in which the electoral resurgence of the extreme right took place, including the inclusion of the ‘post-fascist’ Alleanza Nazionale in Silvio Berlusconi’s governing coalition.101 These events are also the backdrop to the controversy of the new Ara Pacis Museum.

Manufacturing the new Ara Pacis Museum

Over the decades, Morpurgo’s structure around the Ara Pacis showed signs of deterioration. By the 1990s, the construction was not sufficiently protecting the Ara Pacis from the urban pollution, leading to the ordering of a new museum.102 In 1996 the project was given to the renowned American architect Richard Meier, commissioned by the Municipality of Rome, which was under the office of center-left mayor Francesco Rutelli (1993-2001). Meier, who had recently finished the Getty museum, has a long-standing international reputation as an architect of museum buildings. However, the museum was to be the first new largescale building project to occur in the city center since the fall of fascism and was always destined to be controversial.103 From the beginning, both the circumventing of the usual public design competition and the direct selection of Meier, a foreigner, for such an important public building, was critiqued. Also, the project was met with opposition from the right-wing, who delayed the process, but did not succeed in stopping the construction from taking place. In 1999, the pavilion was closed and the Morpurgo pavilion was torn down, except for the Res Gestae, the laws of Augustus inscribed on the east wall1938-39, which were left in place. Meier’s museum is a long building, preceded by a fountain, steps and a plaza.

99 Ibidem. 100 Lazzaro (2005), 16. 101 Arthurs (2015b), 283. 102 Higgins (2013), 39. 103 P. Singley (2007) ‘Roma Macchiata: The Stain of White.’, in: Log 10 (Summer/Fall), 131. 43

(Fig.18.) The structure is made of glass, white-painted concrete and travertine, offering the Ara Pacis a light and spacious surrounding. After seven years of construction, the Museo dell’Ara Pacis opened in September 2005 and was inaugurated on Rome’s birthday, 21st of April 2006.104 During the inauguration, a small group of the Italian neo-fascist party Movimento Sociale - Fiamma Tricolore demonstrated, waving black flags.105 They critiqued the amount of public money spent on the monument to ‘build a mess and make yet another foreign architect happy.’106 Many more critiques were expressed about the aesthetics of the building and the mismatch between the modern structure and the historical city center. Adversaries have likened the building to a petrol station, a pizzeria and a coffin, but it was right-winged art critic Vittorio Sgarbi who really took the cake in the bashing of the new museum. Sgarbi declared the building ‘an indecent cesspit by a useless architect’ and topped that with setting a model of the building on fire on the Piazza Augusto Imperatore.107 Severe critique also came from abroad, as New York Times architectural critic Nicolai Ouroussoff declared the building to be ‘a flop’ and: ‘Absurdly over scale, it seems indifferent to the naked beauty of the dense and richly textured city around it.’108 Not only art critics and architects have been displeased about the museum, but politicians as well. Silvio Berlusconi called the new museum a ‘monstrosity’ and in 2008, during the elections for Rome’s new mayor, Gianni Alemanno from the neo-fascist party Alleanza Nazionale, declared that he would tear down Meier’s museum.109 He stated that it was not a priority and that perhaps there could be a referendum to let the citizens decide.110 The reasons for tearing down the museum were not explicitly expressed, though it was supposedly about the aesthetics of the building and the fact

104 The celebration of the birth of Rome on the 21st of April was initiated under Mussolini. It was made a fascist national holiday, replacing the socialist Labor Day of May 1st. 105 “L'Ara Pacis riapre dopo sette anni ma è scontro sulla teca di Meier” (21 April 2006) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://www.repubblica.it/2006/04/sezioni/cronaca/apertura-ara-pacis/apertura-ara- pacis/apertura-ara-pacis.html 106 Ibidem. 107 S. Rose (1 May 2006) “When in Rome…”. The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/may/01/travelnews.museums 108 N. Ouroussoff (25 September 2006) “An oracle of modernism in ancient Rome” New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/arts/design/25paci.html?_r=0 109 R. Mambelli (4 May 2006) “Ara Pacis, è ancora scontro” La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2006/05/04/ara-pacis-ancora- scontro.rm_034ara.html?ref=search 110 “Alemanno, sicurezza e sviluppo "E via la teca dell'Ara Pacis"” (30 April 2008) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://www.repubblica.it/2008/04/sezioni/politica/roma-alemanno-sindaco/roma-alemanno-sindaco/roma- alemanno-sindaco.html "La Teca di Meier è un intervento da rimuovere. Non è ovviamente una priorità - ha detto Alemanno […]. E lancia l'idea di un riferendum: "Potrebbero decidere i cittadini”. And “Alemanno: «Via la teca dell'Ara Pacis»” (30 April 2008) Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://www.corriere.it/politica/08_aprile_30/alemanno_via_teca_ara_pacis_a600722c-16ca-11dd-8b67- 00144f02aabc.shtml 44 that it had been criticized a lot. Interestingly, the issue was revived two years after the opening of the museum, while the visitor’s numbers surpassed everyone’s expectations.111 As it goes with election promises, the museum was not actually torn down and is still in place. However, what is remarkable is that the removal of a building was such a pressing matter only two days after the elections. According to Arthurs, the controversy was not only about the aesthetics of the building, but more so on the political implications of the site which is related to Mussolini.112 The controversy is an expression on the longstanding debate on the significance of the fascist past in contemporary Italy. Interestingly, this fascist past has not been actively mentioned in the debate as presented in the newspapers. The arguments against the structure and the critiques were about the money spent, the fact that Meier is a foreigner and, most importantly, about the aesthetics of the building. The ideological charge of demolishing a structure built during the Ventennio and replacing it with a modern building was not mentioned. Strangely, it was not about the preservation of fascist remnants, while in the case of the Foro Italico the historical and aesthetical importance of fascist architecture has been explicitly pressed. Even so, while neo-fascists demonstrated and objected to the new Ara Pacis Museum, the fascist connotation attached to the act of objecting to the removal of the Morpurgo structure is striking, but it was not discussed in public debate. For some reason, the controversy of the Ara Pacis did not lead to a discussion on the significance of the fascist past, as it had with the Foro Italico controversies. The ideological connotation of the discussion had so far been neglected.

Remaking the piazza in 2015

For over 80 years, since the construction of the piazza under Mussolini, the mausoleum has been closed and in decaying state. Now the monument is severely neglected and barely visible. Fenced off and used as a dumping site and an unofficial public lavatory, the mausoleum is almost unnoticed by passersby, and is often mocked with the name ‘il dente cariato’ (the rotten tooth). Although the colonnades of the surrounding buildings have been filled with restaurants and shops, the area is quite lifeless and the Mausoleum has been abandoned. Plans were made to refurbish the piazza and the mausoleum for 2014, the 2000th death anniversary of August. However, the reconstructions did not take place and the

111 “Ara Pacis: 30 mila visitatori in 15 giorni” (6 May 2006) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2006/05/06/ara-pacis-30-mila-visitatori-in- 15.rm_021ara.html?ref=search 112 Arthurs (2010), 115. 45 celebration was described as ‘dismal’ and a ‘missed opportunity’.113 Then, to add insult to injury, the mausoleum and the entire moat around it were flooded by a breaking down of pipes on the day of the celebration. The disappointing festivities can be explained by a lack of funds, but the start of the celebration was already controversial beforehand, because of the abandoned state of the mausoleum. Also, Rutelli, the former mayor of Rome, explained that ‘[…] there is a kind of unuttered self-censorship which stems from Augustus’s preceding bimillennium, that of his birth, which fell in 1937. […] Benito Mussolini took it as an opportunity to promote and celebrate himself and fascism and the reborn empire.’114 The parallel between the fascist and modern celebrations are evident and were already controversial. Earlier in 2000s the municipality of Rome launched an international design competition for the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, the mausoleum and the immediate surrounding area, which was won by the Urbs et Civitas group, a team of well-known Italian architects led by Francesco Cellini.115 The area around the mausoleum will be turned into a pedestrian area. (Fig.20.) Since this year, the restoration of the mausoleum and the construction of the pedestrian area have started. Although the project is not yet finished, it is clear that some serious attempts are being made to revitalize the area and to get rid of the impasse that fascist heritage imposed on the historic city center. Looking at the foregoing changes made to fascist remnants and the controversies they triggered, it is surprisingly quiet around the remanufacturing of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. In the reports on the restructuring of the piazza, there is no mention, or only a factual mention of the fascist background of the piazza.116 Where the restructuring of the Ara Pacis pavilion and the possible alterations to the Foro Italico prompted heated debates and fierce opinions on the meaning and preservation of fascist remnants, the refurbishing of the mausoleum of Augustus and the Piazza Augusto Imperatore has not triggered any debate on the meaning of the fascist past. Moreover, this ideological neglect or indifference does not only concern the renovation of the mausoleum, but also the presence of the fascist mosaics,

113 L. Davies (19 August 2014) “Mausoleum of Augustus stands derelict on anniversary of emperor's death” The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/19/mausoleum-augustus-anniversary- rome-emperor 114 Ibidem. 115 See the website of Urbs et Civitas: http://divisare.com/projects/23580-francesco-cellini-renato-nicolini-mario- manieri-elia-alessandra-macchioni-vanessa-squadroni-maria-margarita-segarra-lagunes-giovanni-manieri-elia- dieter-mertens-i-carlo-gasparrini-elisabeth-kieven-jose-tito-rojo-giovanni-longobardi-renzo-candidi-andrea- mandara-urbs-et-civitas 116 See for example the report on the manufacturing in: “Pronta in 600 giorni la nuova piazza Augusto Imperatore, dall'autunno via al restyling” (16 April 2015) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/04/16/news/augusto_imperatore_restyling_autunno-112100344/

46 inscriptions and reliefs on the square. What should we make of their presence and the fact that their presence has not been actively debated when compared to the Foro Italico? First, the fascist layer imposed on the Piazza Augusto Imperatore is perhaps less prominent than in the case of the Foro Italico, because the piazza has been built in an urban area that already existed before the fascist era, and that has housed the Mausoleum for 2000 years. The mausoleum was an already existing site, whereas the Foro Italico was constructed under fascism. In the case of the mausoleum, the fascist alterations can be perceived as just one layer of its palimpsest. And just like during the fascist regime, now a new layer of symbolism is imposed on the urban site, overwriting the mark that Mussolini made on the area and partly removing the fascist connotation that this area of the cityscape has. This is, however, not the case with the buildings on the outskirts of the piazza, which are rendered in their original fashion. In the plans, the fascist structures remain intact, and only the area around the mausoleum is adapted. Second, I would like to suggest, based on my own observations, that there is less debate on the meaning of the fascist past compared to the Foro Italico, because the iconography and inscription on the Piazza Augusto Imperatore do not have such explicit expressive power as the Foro Italico. The fascist regime had appropriated this ancient heritage, just like it had been appropriated in the Risorgimento. The idea of romanità is thus not purely a fascist invention, but it draws on a tradition of using the ancient Roman past for identity building. Unlike the Foro Italico, which clearly venerates and expresses messages that are obsolete or undesirable, such as messages of violence, colonial rule, the glorification of the Duce and other markers of a totalitarian regime, the heritage on the Piazza Augusto Imperatore is not necessarily obsolete. The founding of Rome is still used today in the imagery of Rome, and is an important part in Rome still. Rome’s birthday on 21th of April is still being celebrated and the she-wolf with Romulus and Remus can be found all over Rome still. The mosaics on the Piazza Augusto Imperatore can be specified as quite general and not necessarily linked to fascism, because the fascist propaganda has drawn on antiquity as well as other rulers before Mussolini. This imagery can thus be interpreted in different manners, while mosaics portraying colonialism and war, writings shouting ‘Duce! Duce!’ and ‘leader we dedicate our youth to you’ are hardly multi-interpretable, even for the layman. There is, however, one part on the piazza that does directly refer to fascism and that is the inscription mentioning Mussolini. Despite this reference, the expressive power of the inscription is not so extensive as well, as its visibility and perception are impaired. The inscription is not on a very prominent location, as the square and the road that directly points at the inscription are quite

47 deserted, and often, cars are parked in front of the inscription. Also, the inscription is in Latin, which makes it not very readable to most beholders. Third, since the piazza does not have considerable expressive power, the fascist remnants have become quite invisible and perhaps do not have such a monumental status as the Foro Italico has obtained. Like many architectural details in Rome’s cityscape, it might not be entirely clear where it came from at first glance. If one would study the piazza, the name Mussolini can be seen in the inscription, the chiselled fasces and connoisseurs could identify the style as made during the fascist era. However, these details have become part of the decorum of the city and might not be as striking for the passer-by as intended. Hellmut Wohl discusses this particular tendency of monument to become invisible and disappear into the backdrop of the city. He states that ‘...the Western world has produced monuments in such numbers that they have ceased to fulfil their purpose. We no longer notice them, and have thereby, as it were, relegated the persons, actions, or events that they commemorate to oblivion.’117 Wohl further suggests that ‘monuments are “invisible” not only because we have become so accustomed to them that “they elude our perceptive faculties,” but also because they are unable to transmute the everyday, to raise it to a level beyond habit, routine, and the “backdrop of our consciousness.”’118 So the faint expressiveness of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore combine with the ‘invisibility’ of the mosaics and inscriptions could explain the absence of controversy concerning the fascist remnants and their meaning. Fourth, where the debates on the Foro Italico concerned adaptations or removal of the actual remnants of fascism, at the Piazza Augusto Imperatore only the area surrounding the mausoleum is being changed and not the fascist remnants. The ‘most neutral’ part of the piazza is being remanufactured, while the fascist remnants themselves – the architecture, iconography and inscriptions – are left unharmed and perhaps therefore undiscussed. In the conversation surrounding the remanufacturing of the piazza the fascist roots of the urban area are not openly discussed, and the fascist era is only mentioned in a factual sense. However, the fact that actual renovations are made to the area is striking, as the site has been abandoned for decades. This shows that the urban space of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, which has been frozen for decades since the fall of the fascist regime, is

117 H. Wohl (1999) ‘Memory, Oblivion, and the ‘Invisibility’ of Monuments’, in: W. Reinink and J. Stumpel (eds.) Memory & Oblivion. Proceedings of the XXIXth International Congress of the History of Art held in Amsterdam, 1-7 September 1996. Springer Netherlands, 926. 118 Ibidem. 48 beginning to defrost. The manufacturing of the piazza suggests a kind of moving on where the ideological subtext does not make urban planning passive, but makes the area adaptable.

49

Figure 13. The Piazza Augusto Imperatore surrounding the Mausoleum of Augustus. In the foreground, next to the river Tiber, the Ara Pacis pavilion by Vittorio Ballio Morpurgo. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.civilization.org.uk/augustus/ara-pacis-2).

Figure 14. Ara Pacis Augustae (Altar of Augustan Peace) in the Ara Pacis Museum by Richard Meier. (Photo by Steven Zucker. Retrieved from: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ancient-art- civilizations/roman/early-empire/a/ara-pacis).

50

Figure 15. Mosaics and inscription on the north side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. (Photo by author).

Figure 16. Relief ‘A XIX” (19th year of the Fascist Era, 1941) and chiseled fasces on the overpass on the south side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. (Photo by author).

51

Figure 17. Inscription on the north side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, with the –INI of Mussolini removed. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk/CSAD/Newsletters/Newsletter7/Newsletter7a.html).

Figure 18. Ara Pacis Museum by Richard Meier. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.wikiartis.com/en/richard-meier/works/ara-pacis-museum/).

52

Figure 19. The Mausoleum of Augustus. (Photo retrieved from: http://leonardrutgers.nl/het-mausoleum-van-augustus/).

Figure 20. Design for the new Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the mausoleum of Augustus. (By Alessandra Macchioni. Retrieved from: http://divisare.com/projects/23580-francesco-cellini-renato-nicolini- mario-manieri-elia-alessandra-macchioni-vanessa-squadroni-maria-margarita-segarra-lagunes-giovanni-manieri- elia-dieter-mertens-i-carlo-gasparrini-elisabeth-kieven-jose-tito-rojo-giovanni-longobardi-renzo-candidi-andrea- mandara-urbs-et-civitas).

53

Chapter 4 - Case 3: EUR

One of the largest building projects under Mussolini’s regime was the Esposizione Universale Roma, also referred to as EUR or E’42. This modern version of Rome was designed for the world exhibition, which would have taken place in 1942, were it not for the outbreak of the Second World War. The exhibition would have been held on the twentieth anniversary of the fascist regime, which started with the March on Rome in October 1922. The plans for EUR were initiated by Mussolini in 1935 as he envisioned the area to be a modern form of romanità. Also the project proposed the expansion of Rome towards the sea. Connected by the Via Imperiale, renamed the Via Cristoforo Colombo after 1945, the exhibition area would make a connection between the centre, the new exhibition buildings and the Lido di Roma (or Lido di Ostia), which was part of Mussolini’s project to enlarge Rome to the sea, also called the Roma al mare campaign. Mussolini envisioned EUR to be the ‘Third Rome’, the first Rome being the pagan Roman Empire under Emperor Augustus and the second Rome being the Christian Roman Empire under the popes. On the façade of the Palazzo Uffici, the supposed entrance of the exposition and the first building to be built in EUR, there is an inscription that reminds the reader of the idea of the Third Rome: ‘The Third Rome will expand on the other hills along the banks of the sacred river to the beaches of the Tyrrhenian Sea’. 119 (Fig.21.) To a viewer oblivious to the fascist past, this text might not particularly carry out fascist ideas. However, the inscription stems from a speech Mussolini held on December 31st 1925, in which he gave a brief account of the ancient monuments he wished to isolate within open piazzas in order to enter a new fascist era for Rome: The Third Rome. This idea is further portrayed on a large marble relief sculpture by Publio Morbiducci, covering the entrance of the Palazzo Uffici. (Fig. 22.) The sculpture portrays The History of Rome through its Built Works and follows scenes from Roman architectural history, beginning with Romulus and Remus and succeeded by Emperor Augustus, then the Rome of the Popes and culminating with Mussolini on horseback at the bottom.120 (Fig.23.) The area was also intended to foreground Mussolini’s imperialistic agenda and the fair was supposed to celebrate the successes in Ethiopia. The newly proclaimed empire

119 « La Terza Roma si dilaterà sopra altri colli lungo le rive del fiume sacro sino alle spiagge del Tirreno» Translations by the author. For more information on the Palazzo Uffici, see the official EUR S.p.A.: http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-uffici 120 H.A. Kessler (2015) ‘The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana: From Fascism to Fendi’. Electronic Thesis or Dissertation Bachelor of Arts (BA), Ohio University, Art History, 31. Retrieved from: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/

54

(proclaimed on 9 May 1936) was meant to be the ‘Olympics of Civilization’, supporting Italy’s claim to supremacy of civilization, while simultaneously demonstrating Italian Fascism’s peaceful intentions. 121 These messages were supposed to be supported by a permanent exhibition, the Mostra della Civiltà Italiana (Exhibition of Italian civilization), which would tell the story of the greatness of Italian culture.122 ‘The exhibition aimed to demonstrate the constant and enduring qualities of the Italian people from prehistoric times to Mussolini, even though the unifying theme of the continuity and primacy of Roman civilization coexisted uneasily with a linear narrative of history.’123 The exhibition would have been housed in the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana, one of the most iconic building in EUR and of fascist architecture in general.(Fig.24.) The building, also known as the Colosseo Quadrato (‘Square Colosseum’) was constructed between July 1938-1942 and designed by Giovanni Guerini, Ernesto Bruno La Padula and Mario Romano, while under the supervision Marcello Piacentini. It was inaugurated on 30th of November 1940, when it was still not completed. The Palazzo was intended as a modern celebration of the Roman Colosseum and is made of a concrete structure covered entirely in travertine marble slabs. It has the shape of a giant square cube, of which the sides are equal in length. The base of the palazzo is square and covers 8,400 m². The building itself is, including its podium, 68 m long and is made of six loggia’s with nine arches, so 54 arches per side. It is said that these loggias are an allusion to number of letters in the name ‘Benito Mussolini’. However, the building was originally intended to have eight stories and thirteen arches, so as to create a perfect square for the façade.124 On the façade of the building, there is an inscription which says ‘A people of poets, artists, heroes, saint, thinkers, scientists, navigators and transmigrators’.125 At the four corners of the podium there are equestrian sculptures made by Morbiducci e Felci, which represent the Dioscuri. On the ground floor of the Colosseo Quadrato, there are 28 more sculptures, each under one arch, which were added to the building in 1942. These sculptures are allegorical representations of various art and human crafts, industries and trades, for example, heroism, music, agriculture, commerce, archaeology, history, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, geography etc. The Palazzo was built in the classical tradition, but in a modern functional form, and manufactured of local materials. The building has purposefully

121 A. Notaro (2000) ‘Exhibiting the New Mussolinian City: Memories of empire in the World Exhibition of Rome (EUR)’, in: Geojournal 51, 17. 122 A. Kallis (2014) The third Rome, 1922-1943: the making of the fascist capital. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 253. 123 Lazzaro (2005), 30. 124 See: http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-della-civilt%C3%A0-italiana 125 « Un popolo di poeti di artisti di eroi di santi di pensatori di scienziati di navigatori di trasmigratori » 55 incorporated elements of classical building styles (romanità) and elements of Italian rural tradition, complementing both classical and vernacular tradition, just as the exhibition on Italian civilization was to represent Italy as monolithic from prehistoric to fascist times.126

The revitalization and reuse of EUR

The fall of the fascist regime and the Second World War had brought the construction of EUR to a halt. Until September 8th 1943, when the Italian head of the government, Pietro Badoglio, who was appointed by the surrendered king, read the Badoglio Proclamation and called a truce with the Allies, the Palazzo was used by the German occupier as a stronghold and a workshop to repair vehicles. The palace was damaged during the war, as it was hit by three grenades.127 Throughout the war and into the postwar period, the EUR area and its buildings remained unfinished and the area was completely abandoned after the German occupation. After the fall of the regime, in the late 40s and 50s, there were endless discussions on the new urban plans for Rome. The same people who managed the urban planning under the fascist regime remained in office under the now democratic municipal government, resulting in considerable local continuity. This continuity led to the finishing of several fascist projects, such as the Via della Conciliazione, the road leading to the St. Peter square, and the EUR area.128 In 1951, EUR came back to life with the instating of a local governing board called ‘Ente Autonomo dell’EUR’.129 An example of the continuity between fascist and postwar officials is Virgilio Testa, a government official under Mussolini, who was the lead figure in the Ente from 1951 until 1973 under the government of the Christian Democrat Andreotti. Under the influence of officials such as Testa, EUR was revived resulting in an urban expansion towards the sea, as originally intended by Mussolini, thereby continuing the fascist design for a ‘new’ Rome. 130Also, several infrastructural developments in the 1950s lead to the revival of EUR; the Via Cristoforo Colombo was completed in 1950 and a new subway opened in 1955 from Termini station to EUR, making the area well connected to the city center.131 Furthermore, the construction of facilities for the 1960 Olympics contributed to the re-emergence of the area ‘as a center of cultural, recreational and service activities’.132

126 Lazzaro (2005), 31. 127 http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-della-civilt%C3%A0-italiana 128 J.A. Agnew and C. Muscara. (1995) Rome. New York: Wiley-Academy, 51. 129 Ibidem, 82-85. 130 Ibidem, 162. 131 Ibidem, 53. 132 Ibidem, 84. 56

Eventually the buildings were completed as the EUR district was transformed into a business district for the city, containing centers for congress (Palazzo dei Congressi), government ministries and private business headquarters. In order to make EUR reusable as an urban area, several fascist elements have been altered. Again, the names of streets and buildings have been changes, such as the Via Imperiale becoming the Via Cristoforo Colombo and the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana becoming the Palazzo del Lavoro, although that name did not successfully replace the original one, since the name is hardly used in news articles, books and colloquial language. Also, the statue of the Genio dello fascismo (Spirit of fascism) was turned into the Genio dello Sport.133 (Fig. 26.) Standing in front of the Palazzo Uffici, this statue created by the sculptor Italo Griselli in 1939, represented the fascist spirit in the shape of a young man raising his arm in the Fascist salute. After the Second World War, the inscription on the pedestal was changed into ‘Genio dello Sport’, and sporting gloves were added to the hands of the statue. With this alteration, the Fascist values were ‘removed’ from the image and overwritten with the symbolism of athletic competition and victory. Other visible symbols of the regime were systematically removed from the Palazzo Uffici. Seven fasces disappeared from the entrance, as well as the eagles decorating the fountain. Even the bronze heads of Victor Emmanuel III and Benito Mussolini, which originally decorated the Hall of Fountains, were moved to the 134 basement of the Palazzo. While attempting to clean the site of its ideological markers, numerous remains linger at the site. What is quite remarkable is that the previously mentioned relief of ‘The History of Rome through its Built Works’ was not removed or altered, as the image of Mussolini features prominently and within reach of possible vandals. Since the images of Mussolini often fell prey to damnatio memoriae, one would have expected the relief to be damaged. It is unclear whether or not the relief had been damaged, but it has survived until present day, still to be seen in perfect state on the Palazzo Uffici, standing as a testament to the fallen dictator.

133 Arthurs (2015b, 292. 134 http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-uffici 57

Aestheticization of the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana

The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana was restored to its functionality in the 1950s, and housed the headquarters of the Knights of Labor in 1956.135 In 1953, the building opened its door to the public for the first time, hosting the international Exhibition of Agriculture (EA53), which showcased the potential of agriculture as a source for recovery, while simultaneously showing the public the potential of the EUR area. However, the Palazzo never gained a permanent function and eventually fell into disuse. Despite the desertion, the exterior of the building has regularly featured in Italian cinematography; it has provided a striking backdrop for many films, such as Federico Fellini’s The Temptation of Doctor Antonio (in Boccaccio ’70), Rossellini’s Roma Città Aperta, Antonioni’s l’Eclisse and the latest Paolo Sorrentino, La Grande Bellezza. In his article, Zambenedetti examines how four Italian films have used EUR and the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana as their decorum. He concludes that the Palazzo has been used to portray different virtues. For example, in Fellini’s Le Tentazioni del Dottor Antonio – starring the memorable Anita Ekberg as a giantess – the Palazzo has been used as part of a dreamlike city for ‘caustic and colourful social satire’ as it symbolizes the rigid moral order that the Christian Democrats imposed on society.136 (Fig.27.) Often, the Palazzo’s rectangular features have represented universal ‘socio-cultural orders characterized by rigidity, conservatism, close-mindedness, militarism, and so forth.’ In that sense, the Palazzo is intrinsically tied to the experience of Italian Fascism, while simultaneously, offering an extremely photogenic and ready-made decorum of astounding beauty. Director Fellini said the following about the EUR district:

‘Firstly that it is a work of artistic expression, recalling the Metaphysical paintings of de Chirico, this place has the same lightness. Like living within the space of a painting. It’s a liberating feeling, because paintings have no laws, they are just purely aesthetic and there are no relationships, if not just with things or with loneliness. So this quarter urges you to go and nourish your intellect, to stimulate yourself, to free yourself from hardship. It suspends on a horizontal plain, an improbability, of empty uninhabited spaces, buildings created for ghosts or for statues.’137

135 http://www.eurspa.it/archivi-fotografici/palazzo-civilt%C3%A0-italiana 136 A. Zambenedetti (2010) ‘Filming in Stone: Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana and Fascist Signification in Cinema’, in: Annali d’Italianistica 28, 213. 137 Federico Fellini quoted in H. McCafferty (9 November 2013) “EUR: Fellini’s Metaphysical Quarter of Rome,” Swide. Retrieved from: http://www.swide.com/art-culture/eur-rome-s-metaphysical-quarter-lovedby- fellini-history/2013/11/09 58

Fellini thus praised EUR for its aesthetic quality. Because the Palazzo was used in so many films, many people will have a different association with the building than merely fascism. The building is associated with art, film and aesthetics. This is also emphasized in the exhibition about EUR. In occasion of the Expo in Milan, the Ara Pacis museum housed an exposition on EUR called Esposizione Universale Roma. Una città nuova dal fascismo agli anni ‘60, and was on display from March 12th to June 14th 2015. The exhibition focussed on the history of the EUR district, the formation and transformation, and was made up of a selection of photographs, art works and film extracts. The exhibition stressed the present state of EUR as a ‘modern business and residential area’.138 The exhibition on EUR focusses on the art around the manufacturing of EUR and the inspiration it has brought, it is not about the fascist meanings. Also in the exhibition catalogue, EUR is presented in relation to all the art and architecture, aesthetics, and modernism, but does not turn to discuss its fascist roots.139 As the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana are appropriated by the filming and fashion industry, a new layer of meaning is imposed on the building, and it now carries both the original ideology of the Fascist period merged with those of consecutive periods. Or as Zambenedetti stated; the buildings in EUR are ‘portentous reminders of the dictatorship, they bear testimony to its ideologically bankrupt ambition by their very existence. Nonetheless, with their uncompromising grandiloquence and elegance, they also ferry Italian architecture into the future.’140

Fendi Headquarters 2015

In 2000, the Ente was replaced by the EUR S.p.A. (la Società per Azioni), a corporation that is 90% controlled by the Ministry of Economy and Finance and 10% by the Municipality of Rome (Comune di Roma). EUR S.p.A. deals with the management and development of the assets and property within the EUR district. Because of a financial crisis, the Colosseo Quadrato is being rented to Fendi, the Italian fashion warehouse, known for its cultural

138“‘Esposizione Universale Roma’, looking back at the story behind EUR42, Rome’s main business area.” (17 March 2015) Bigmat International Architecture Agenda. Retrieved from: http://www.bmiaa.com/esposizione- universale-roma-looking-back-at-the-story-behind-eur42-romes-main-business-area/ 139 V. Vidotto (12 March – 14 June 2015) Esposizione Universale Roma. Una Città Nuova dal fascism agli anni ’60, exhibition catalogue, De Luca Editori d’Arte. 140 Zambenedetti (2010), 15. 59 patronage and the sponsoring of the restauration of the Trevi fountain.141 After over 70 years of abandonment, the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana was reopened as the Fendi headquarters in 2015. The building is rented for 2, 8 million a year for a period of 15 years, including the restoration of the Palazzo by Fendi.142 The exterior of the Palazzo has been restored, leaving the original image unchanged, while workstations are distributed in the interior. The first floor houses an open exhibition area of 1200m2, which for its debut showcased a new exhibition called ‘A New Rome. EUR and the Palace of Italian Civilization’. The exhibition was shown until March 7 2015 and told the story of the history of the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana and the EUR district, emphasizing ‘excellence made in Italy in all its forms’. 143 For the next 15 years, Fendi will host a dynamic program of exhibitions to give voice to Italian excellence and young talents belonging to the world of design and contemporary art, while simultaneously creating opportunities for reflection on fashion and on issues linked to it.144 Fendi’s move to one of the most prominent fascist icons did not occur without critique, as the warehouse was accused of political insensitivity. Fendi’s chief executive, Pietro Beccari, stated that the reason that Fendi’s headquarters are now in the Square Colosseum is because the building is a symbol of Fendi’s Roman roots and of the continuous dialogue between tradition and modernity.145 In reaction to the accusations of disregarding the fascist history of the building he said:

‘...For me it is a non-issue. For the Romans it is a non-issue. For Italians it is a non-issue. This building is beyond a discussion of politics. It is aesthetics. It is a masterpiece of architecture. […] For Italians and for Romans, it is completely deloaded, empty of any significance of that period … there was no political activity that took place here. We never saw it through the lens of fascism.’146

First, the aesthetic value of the building is emphasized by Beccari, while the ideological

141 A. Capponi (15 February 2015) “Crisi dell’Eur: Colosseo quadrato a rischio vendita, l’offerta di Fendi” Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://roma.corriere.it/notizie/cronaca/15_febbraio_15/crisi-dell-eur- colosseo-quadrato-rischio-vendita-l-offerta-fendi-26aceb2c-b4de-11e4-b826-6676214d98fd.shtml 142 F. Fiorentino (23 October 2015) “Apre il «Colosseo quadrato», la sfida (vinta) di Fendi” Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://www.corriere.it/moda/news/15_ottobre_22/roma-apre-colosseo-quadrato-sfida-vinta- fendi-ff26d5e6-78ef-11e5-95d8-a1e2a86e0e17.shtml 143 Ibidem. 144 L. Barsottini (n.d.) “Il nuovo headquarter di Fendi all’EUR di Roma” Icon Design. Retrieved from: http://icondesign.it/news/headquarter-fendi-alleur-roma/ 145 C. Tosi Pamphili (31 October 2015) “Fendi, il Colosseo Quadrato e le polemiche” Artribune. Retrieved from: http://www.artribune.com/2015/10/fendi-polemica-palazzo-della-civilta-italiana-roma/ 146 S. Kirchgaessner (22 October 2015) “Fendi rejects criticism over new HQ in Mussolini propaganda building” The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/22/fendi-launches-hq-in-mussolini- propaganda-building 60 charge of the building is being downplayed. Regardless of the question whether or not the building is actually ideologically charged, Beccari fully denies any fascist connotation or ideological charge to the building, by stating that the Palazzo is ‘completely deloaded, empty of any significance of that period’. Beccari further implies that a building built during fascism can only have an ideological charge when political activity took place there, hereby overlooking the fact that the building itself, regardless of what activities happened there, was a tool of propaganda and therefore ideologically charged. Beccari continues with a suggestion; ‘Let’s talk about what is right and what works rather than what is not right in Italy. […] It is too reductive or diminishing to say that people should not profit or praise the beauty of this, because people do.’147 In his article ‘Fendi Vidi Vici, when fashion flirts with fascism’ in the Architectural Review, Owen Hatherly asks whether or not there is something to worry about in the re- appropriation of the aesthetics of an ideological building.148 He argues that to assume Fendi’s claim on the building ‘is little more than a game with aesthetics, a play on history, is to assume that fascism is ancient, dead history in Italy. It isn’t.’ As we have seen earlier, neo- fascism is very much present in Italy, and Hatherly implies that Fendi moving into this building is not merely for its aesthetics. He further argues that that Fendi using EUR is perhaps even worse, because ‘with the frisson of elegant evil it provides a normalization − ‘just another’ part of Italian history. However much the architecture of the era can be interesting and attractive, its values were deeply sick. It is right that its architecture remains tainted.’ The author asserts that architecture made under fascism, is always fascist, and that the building still acclaims the message of the regime. Once again, the debate on the presence and reuse of fascist architectural heritage is about the dichotomy between aesthetic and ideological value and whether or not the intended messages are still valid. Hatherly’s analysis that Fendi normalizes the fascist past is confirmed when looking at how the media discusses the fascist background of the building. The word ‘fascista’ or ‘fascist’ does definitely not have a negative connotation in most newspapers, and is named in a factual sense or admiring sense. For example, Vogue only tells its readers that the ‘Palazzo is widely regarded as one of the greatest examples of fascist architecture’,149 and Blouin Artinfo mentions that the building is

147 Ibidem. 148 A.O. Hatherly (3 March 2015) “Fendi Vidi Vici: when Fashion flirts with Fascism” Architectural Review. Retrieved from: http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/viewpoints/fendi-vidi-vici-when-fashion-flirts- with-fascism/8679074.article 149 S. Karmali (18 July 2013) “Fendi Relocates To A Roman Palace” Vogue. Retrieved from: http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2013/07/18/fendi-moves-headquarters-to-palazzo-della-civilta-italiano-in-rome 61

‘considered a symbol of and monument to Fascist architecture’ and that the building was conceived ‘during Mussolini's Fascist reign, with the intention of promoting Fascism on an international stage’, without further critical ad due.150 In this occasion, the inscription is mentioned, but not its context as an imperial and nationalist speech of Mussolini and is presented as devoid of the original meaning. Although the debate on the reuse of the Palazzo knows the same sort of arguments, the issue was mainly critiqued from abroad and was not an issue in local governmental spheres. Where the controversies surrounding the Foro Italico and the new Ara Pacis museum were matters of politics, the residency of Fendi in the Square Colosseum was not. Also, where the other debates triggered reactions from neo-fascist movements, this case did not. How can this relative calmness concerning the Palazzo be explained? First, the Square Colosseum was built from scratch during Mussolini’s reign, just like the Foro Italico. But unlike the Foro Italico, the Palazzo has had other layers of meaning imposed on itself, as the building figured in Italian cinema and fashion campaigns. Even more so than the Foro, its aesthetics are appraised and have inspired arts as well. This new symbolism has partly –though never fully - overwritten the fascist layer. Architectural historian Aldo Rossi scrutinizes the relation between architecture and the city and remarks that: ‘In an urban artefact, certain original values and functions remain, others are totally altered; about some stylistic aspects of the form we are certain, others are less obvious.’151 Urban artefacts both preserve memory and maintain an element of mystery by not fully exposing their past. Over the course of a building’s existence, it can take various usages by different tenants. Each transformation adds an additional layer, which in effect builds upon the collective memory of the space and establishes the aura of a city. Second, the iconography and inscription on the Palazzo have less expressive power than the Foro Italico. The expressive power of the Palazzo is in the inscription ‘A people of poets, artists, heroes, saint, thinkers, scientists, navigators and transmigrators’, which on first glance does not necessarily link to fascism, compared to the ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk and the ‘duce’ references at the Foro Italico, and can easily be interpreted as the praise of the Italian people. In light of the Fendi headquarters, an inscription that praises the inventiveness and creativity of the Italians, might not appear odd. However, the phrase is directly drawn from a speech Mussolini gave on October 2nd, 1935, directed to the Italian people. In this speech,

150 “Fendi’s New Headquarters Are a Fascist Icon (18 July 2013) Blouin Art Info. Retrieved from: http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/931167/fendis-new-headquarters-are-a-fascist-icon 151 A. Rossi (1982) The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: MIT Press, 28. 62 taking place on the eve of the invasion of Ethiopia, Mussolini justified the invasion and colonialism and also warned the League of Nations that Italy would take military sanctions at interference. Il Duce said:

‘Never before as in this historical epoch has the Italian people revealed the quality of its spirit and the power of its character. And it is against this people to whom humanity owes some of its greatest conquests and it is against this people of poets, of artists, of heroes, of saints, of navigators, of emigrants, it is against this people that one dares speak of sanctions.’152

The inscription is thus a testament to values and beliefs during fascism, that are no longer condoned and desirable, such as colonialism, the invasion of Ethiopia and the propagation of violence. On first sight, only people who remember or have knowledge of Mussolini’s speech will know the relation to fascism, but not a beholder who is unaware. Another example of a fascist marker, which does not have that much expressive power, are the number of arches, which supposedly stand for ‘Benito Mussolini’. Again, this is not directly visible but something depending on memory and knowledge. Fendi has made use of this invisibility of fascism regarding the information they provided during the exposition Una Nuova Roma. L’EUR e il Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. In the exhibition, partly taken over from the exhibition that was showcased in the Ara Pacis, it is made clear once more that the aesthetic value of the Palazzo is stressed, while the ideological demarcations are never even mentioned. For example, in an informative stencil that was available at the exhibition the words ‘fascism’ and ‘Mussolini’ are not even mentioned. On the same stencil it was written that: ‘Finally, a famous inscription was engraved on each side of the building: ‘A nation of poets artists heroes saints thinkers scientists navigators transmigrators’, words which enriched and completed the spirit of the whole monument.’153 The fascist past and initiative of the building seems deliberately concealed and is completely denied, while the inscription is appropriated to the building’s new function. Third, like the remanufacturing of the piazza around the mausoleum, there are no changes to the building itself. In fact, it was even fully restored by Fendi, which took all the costs of restoration and therefore helped preserve the building. Only the interior is adapted to create workspaces, but the exterior remains intact. Also, since Fendi’s residence in the Palazzo, the ground floor is open to visitors for the first time since decades. When fascist

152 Benito Mussolini, Scritti e Discorsi di Benito Mussolini, vol. IX (Milano, 1935), 218-220. For the online text see: http://users.dickinson.edu/~rhyne/232/EthiopiaSpeech.html 153 Information stencil ‘Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. The history’. Retrieved from the exhibition “Una nuova Roma. L’EUR e il Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana”, 23 January 2016. 63 architecture heritage is not threatened by explicit alterations or removal, the status quo of ignoring the presence of this fascist heritage, or at least its ideological connotation, is maintained. It thus seems as if people, whether they are neo-fascists or people appreciating its historicity and aesthetics, people revolt in an attempt to preserve this heritage. We could therefore wonder, what would happen if we the inscription on the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana would be threatened with removal or severe alteration? What kind of debate would we have and who would stand up for the preservation of this heritage?

64

Figure 21. Inscription on the Palazzo Uffici, EUR. « La Terza Roma si dilaterà sopra altri colli lungo le rive del fiume sacro sino alle spiagge del Tirreno». (Photo by author).

Figure 22. The History of Rome through its Built Works, Publio Morbiducci, 1939, marble relief, Palazzo Uffici, EUR. (Photo by author).

65

Figure 23. Close up of Mussolini at the relief The History of Rome through its Built Works. (Photo by author).

Figure 24. Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. (Photo by author).

66

Figure 26. Genio dello Sport, previous Genio del Fascismo, Figure 25. The exhibition Una Nuova Roma. L’EUR e il Palazzo Figure in front 25. of the Palazzo Uffici, EUR. della CiviltàFigure Italiana. 26. (Photo by author). (Photo by author).

Figure 27. Still of Anita Ekberg in Federico Fellini’s The Temptation of Doctor Antonio (in Boccaccio ’70)

67

Chapter 5 – Comparison of the case-studies

In this chapter, I will compare the three case-studies. How have the three cases been neglected and reused? What are the differences and similarities in the treatment of fascist architectural heritage and how have they been debated? I will analyse the cases per subcategory, namely: physical reuse, physical neglect, ideological reuse and ideological neglect. In all of the cases, the physical reuse of the site has known practical reasons and can even be considered a necessity, since after the Second World War resources were scarce and Italy was economically unstable. Although there were acts of damnatio memoriae after the fall of the regime, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore was the only case treated here that has some traces of iconoclasm. Both the Foro Italico and the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana have been renamed for the reuse of the building, in an effort to disengage the site from direct fascist connotation. In the case of the Palazzo Uffici even the Genio dello Fascismo statue was appropriated to represent the spirit of sports instead of fascism, and certain fascist markers in the interior of the Palazzo were removed. In all three of our cases, the sites have been conventionally reused, in some or all aspects. First, the Foro Italico is still being conventionally reused as a sporting facility and still trains youth there, although in a non- totalitarian way. The imagery on the Foro Italico, especially the statues of the athletes in the Stadio dei Marmi, are still appropriate, while others are not. Second, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore is also reused in the same manner, namely as a piazza that links the age of Augustus and romanità to the present city. Also, office building B is being reused by an institution that is an equivalent of the fascist institution previously housed there. Third, the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana serves some of the intended purposes, such as the exhibition on Italian civilization, but unlike the other cases, the Palazzo is also creatively reused, in the form of Fendi’s headquarters. Dissimilar to the other cases, the Square Colosseum thus has another layer imposed on its use and meaning, and moves even further away from fascism then is the case with the Foro Italico. The imposition of different layers of meaning diminishes the fascist connotation of the building and its expressiveness. The Foro Italico, conventionally reused, remains a source of controversy and governmental debate, while the Palazzo, partially conventionally reused, but imposed with different layers of meaning, has been aesthetically appropriated as a symbol of modernism, a decorum in Italian cinema and as a geometrical icon used for the fashion industry. The presence and reuse of the palazzo have not triggered any governmental debate and is less controversial than the Foro Italico.

68

Although all of the cases are physically and, at least in part, conventionally reused, they also have all known some form of physical neglect. The Foro Italico has been improperly maintained and has fallen in decay because of overuse and lack of protection of the site. The Piazza Augusto Imperatore has known both physical neglect due to the lack of maintenance of the Morpurgo pavilion, while the mausoleum in the centre of the piazza has fallen into disuse and is in decaying state. The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana has been abandoned for years, but there is little to be found on its maintenance during these years of disuse. The neglect and abandonment of these sites can partly be attributed to the political difficulty in changing this dissonant heritage, or even broaching the subject, which would only emphasize the ideological divide in Italy that is already present. However, the decaying state of the sites cannot merely be attributed to its ideological connotations, as Italy has known some financial problems as well as poorly executed heritage management, which has prevented proper maintenance of its heritage sites in general. Lately, Italy has concentrated on finding private funds for the preservation of its cultural heritage, of which the funding of the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana by Fendi is only one of the many examples. Even though all these sites know some physical neglect, they all have been rehabilitated, restored or replaced in the past decades. The previous frozen and even deteriorating state of this fascist heritage has been breached by the construction of the new Ara Pacis Museum in 2006, which was the first change in the city centre since the fascist regime. Also, the marble slabs and the obelisk at the Foro Italico were restored between 2006-2008, the Square Colosseum was restored by Fendi between 2013 and 2016, and the area surrounding the mausoleum is currently being refurbished. As we have seen, especially the Foro Italico has been subjected to ideological reuse, as neo-fascist groups have appropriated the complex as their heritage. The obelisk has been made into a shrine for Mussolini on various occasions, and when the complex was threatened with removal or alteration, neo-fascist have demonstrated. Also, neo-fascists demonstrated against the new Ara Pacis museum, which replaced the fascist Morpurgo pavilion. These demonstrations can be interpreted as an identification with and a sense of ownership of the heritage at stake. Interestingly, the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana is the only case-study that has not noticeably been acclaimed by neo-fascist parties. Also, the reconstructing of the area surrounding the mausoleum of Augustus was not critiqued or did not trigger reactions from neo-fascist movements or preservationists. I would like to suggest that this is because both in the reuse of the Palazzo by Fendi and the conducted restorations, as well as remaking the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, no prominent visible markers of fascism have been altered and

69 removed. When the fascist heritage sites are threatened with alteration and removal, it becomes clear who identifies with this heritage and who wants it to be preserved. The threat of alteration or removal of heritage triggers identification, which at times can be inappropriate of undesirable. In the case of the Foro Italico, the decay of the site has led to neo-fascist groupings taking care of its heritage and calling for its preservation. While, in the case of the Ara Pacis we have seen that the removal of fascist heritage, the Morpurgo structure, led to the identification as well through neo-fascist protests. It should be noted that the identification and call for preservation of the fascist heritage does not solely apply to the neo-fascists. In the public debates we have seen that many people, regardless of their political background, perceive fascist architecture as part of Rome’s artistic and historical cultural heritage. As long as fascist heritage is not directly threatened by removal or alteration, the status quo of ignoring both the presence and the ideological connotation of fascist heritage is maintained. Finally, we have seen that all three of the cases are ideologically neglected, meaning that the values and beliefs that fascist heritage symbolizes and are ingrained in the architecture, are being treated with indifference, unconcern or simply not treated at all. This ideological neglect expresses itself in two ways: 1. the denial of the existence of any ideological message that may speak through the fascist iconography and writings on architectural heritage and 2. the ignoring of and indifference towards the mere presence of this heritage. The neglect of the ideological message that fascist architecture might convey, is noticeable in several moments of debate. Most of these public debates have appeared since the 1990s, with the exception of the Olympics debate. This debate, which transpired among politicians and also brought about reactions from the public, revolved around two questions. One, did the fascist writings still glorify fascism and Mussolini, and do therefore the Italians? And two, are fascist remnants purely ‘historical’, or are they still ideologically charged? The debate was closed by removing some parts of the offensive writings and iconography, thus the matter was settled. The same two matters of dispute were at stake in the discussion on the Boldrini controversy. One notable difference is, however, that the time gap between the fall of the fascist regime and the time of public debate is much larger. Where the Olympics debate was only about a decade after the Second World War, now, it has been over 70 years. What has this enlargement of the time span done to the public opinion? In the Olympics debate, the opinions were much divided. There were politicians, who were strongly advocating for the removal of the remnants. The Boldrini controversy, however, was started by a casual remark and only lead to a load of criticism, instead of a constructive debate. Boldrini was scolded for

70 even suggesting such a thing, and was not taken even remotely seriously. In the meantime, of these two public ‘debates’, the nuances have been taken out of the discussion and in last year’s debate, it was clear that many perceived the remnants of the Foro Italico as part of Rome’s historical and artistic heritage. But especially remarkable in the last debate is that negative aspects of heritage are downplayed and marginalized. In the Olympics debate, at least critiques of insensitivity towards victims were to some extent taken seriously, as they intended to remove some parts, even though in the end the critiques were swept under the carpet out of fear of the exposure of the neo-fascist tendencies in society towards the international community. The reactions to the Boldrini controversy show that the ship of damnatio memoriae has sailed. In the reactions concerning Fendi’s headquarters, it also becomes apparent that critiques on political insensitivity were brushed aside and not even discussed. Fendi’s relocation generated some critiques, though most of those were from foreigners and it was also not a matter of political discussion, dissimilar to the other cases. In Beccari’s reaction to these critiques, we can see that the ideological presence in the Palazzo is denied, as the chief executive calls the situation a ‘non-issue’ and ‘deloaded’ of any significance of that era. Also, in Fendi’s exposition on EUR, the fascist past of the district or the Palazzo isn’t mentioned once. In all of these cases, the ideological aspect of the buildings is at one point being marginalized, downplayed or brushed aside. In the debates on fascist architecture, the people stressing the aesthetics or historicity of the sites often deny that the architecture, iconography or writings still exalt messages of fascism. Second, all the cases have explicit iconography that has never been discussed and has never been controversial, but instead, is being completely ignored. Apart from the 1960 Olympics debate, the three cases have been ignored in public debate and the presence of explicit iconography at the Foro Italico, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana have not been critiqued or under discussion. I have argued that the lack of public discussion can be explained through the varying level of expressive power of the iconography and writings. However, the Foro Italico arguably has more expressive power than the other cases, but has been undiscussed for an extensive period of time as well. Thus, the lack of debate can also be attributed to the fact that no fascist remnants have been threatened with alteration of removal, therefore not initiating the environment of ideological neglect that had been the norm until the 1990s.

71

Conclusion

Until a few decades ago, Rome’s city centre had been frozen in time, because of deeply rooted ideological divisions. The physical and ideological neglect of fascist architectural heritage is an expression of the inability to create a consensus on how to handle the fascist remnants in the cityscape, but also on how to remember the fascist past. This inability to achieve consensus seems to be breached, there is a shift in treating fascist heritage from both physical and ideological neglect and abandonment to the reuse and repurposing of this heritage. But while these sites are getting renewed attention, the ideological charge of this fascist architecture is being denied, deliberately concealed or detached. We can conclude that in the debates and treatment of heritage, the ideology is not only brushed aside, but the remnants have been de-ideologized, and some sort of normalization has become the norm since the 1990s. The development from neglect to reuse and from avoidance to normalization has emerged from changes in Italy’s political climate. As we have seen, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, many existing parties disappeared and many new right-wing parties emerged. Italy’s political landscape had completely changed and had put the left in an electoral and identity crisis. This internal political discord on the left might have played a role in the current insecure and ambiguous position on the fascist past, as the ideological insecurity of the left is confronted with a rise of a self-confident right. More importantly, however, this political shift to the right had caused a tendency to accept revised versions of what happened in the past and how the fascist past should be remembered. In his book The Legacy of the Italian Resistance, Cooke explains that the New Right, in search of political legitimacy, called for reconciliation between old rivals, putting anti-fascist and fascists on equal footing and emphasizing that both parties had been acting out of patriotic intentions.154 Cooke explains that this historical revisionism, inspired by the historiographical works of Renzo De Felice, who challenged previously held interpretations on the nature of fascism and Mussolini, and the novels of Giampaolo Pansa, found its way in the public sphere through television and newspapers as well. Max Pane, professor of architecture and history at the University of Massachusetts, explains that: ‘Many Italians, under the influence of post-war efforts (supported by the United States) to purge the far left from political life, argued that it was possible to separate out all that was good about Mussolini in his first decade or so from his ‘mistakes’ later in the 1930s. This oversimplified

154 P. Cooke (2011) The Legacy of the Italian Resistance. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 72 history was a convenient consensus that allowed Italians to avoid the political discord of real debate about the lasting legacy of Fascism.’155 These Mussolini apologists overlooked the atrocities of the fascist regime, such as ‘the murder and bullying of the opposition, the suppression of free speech and press, a brutal invasion of Ethiopia marked by the use of poison gas and concentration camps, and race laws’. The overlook of the brutality of fascism has been echoed by a statement of former prime-minister Berlusconi, who said that: ‘The racial laws were the worst fault of Mussolini as a leader, who in so many other ways did well.’156 The comment evoked global outrage, but it does reflect both the tendency of normalization as well as the presence of appreciation for Mussolini, as it is believed that the dictator brought renewal in facilities and infrastructure, employment and a restored grandeur and idea of the Roman Empire. There are still people who are thankful for his leadership. These revisionist developments have blurred the dividing lines between deeply rooted antitheses in Italy’s society. As we have seen, Italy’s memory of the fascist era and the Second World War have been heavily divided, which has also been expressed in the debates regarding fascist architecture. The narrative of memory of the Second World War that was presented in post-war Italy focussed around the Resistance and anti-fascism. Now, as deeply held beliefs and assumptions are revised, there seems to be an attitude of resignation and a restrain towards condemning the fascist past. This does not necessarily mean that the memory of fascism and the Second World War have become less divided, but a status quo of ‘agreeing to disagree’ seems to have been created. Foot addresses this in regard to the memory of the Second World War, with the example of the memory on the massacre in the cathedral of San Miniato, Tuscany, in 1944.157 There were different versions on who was responsible for the explosions on the church and there was a memorial plaque telling only one side of the story and attributing the massacre to the Germans. In 2008, about sixty years later, there was a second plaque unveiled, telling a revised story on what happened and who was responsible for the massacre, namely the Allies. This second plaque did not end the controversy, but it was a contribution to both a divided memory and to the acknowledgement of the parallel existence of both stories. We can see a similar acceptance in the division of memory in the case of fascist heritage. There is a division of perception between people who perceive the remnants

155 M. Page (13 July 2014) “The Roman architecture of Mussolini, still standing”. Boston Globe. Retrieved from: http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/07/12/the-roman-architecture-mussolini-still- standing/csZ70EN2fTnUUNqX0kRM9K/story.html 156 P. Ames (11 February 2013) “Fascism mounts a comeback in Italy”. Global Post. Retrieved from: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/italy/130208/fascism-mounts-comeback-italy

157 Foot (2009), 205-208. 73 as an exaltation of fascism, that still convey fascist ideological messages, and people who perceive the remnants as devoid of fascist ideology and part of Rome’s cultural heritage. Where this opposition led to heated debates, with arguments coming from both sides, in the 1960s, in the current state of affairs, the divided memories have not exactly dissolved, but the voices that speak of revisionism and heritagization are the loudest, while the aversion against the presence of fascist heritage is not prominently expressed. The normalization of the fascist past has gotten fascist heritage out of its frozen state, while simultaneously, it still is often ignored and ideologically neglected. The tendency of normalizing the fascist past and neglecting the ideological connotations of its heritage has both negative as positive effects. Arthurs (2010) argues that:

‘… “heritagizing” fascism’s monumental remains offers uncritical legitimation and the valorization of a deeply troubling past. More profoundly, it creates a space – both discursive, and, as we have seen, physical – for the re-emergence of illiberal, xenophobic and nihilistic currents in Italian society. While historical and aesthetic revisionism can usefully foster the critical re-examination of outdated orthodoxies, it also runs the risk of debilitating moral relativism and muddying the waters of public perception.’158

These concerns of recurring fascist tendencies were also expressed by the partisan reacting to Boldrini. The normalization of fascism opens up a climate of uncritical acceptance of a violent and anti-democratic past, and encourages the acceptance of fascist beliefs and values that are undesirable in a democratic, multicultural and peacekeeping society. However, the ideological neglect and normalization of fascist heritage has had positive effects as well. The word ‘negligence’ has a negative connotation and seemingly stands in contrast to ‘preservation’. Because fascist heritage has been so ideologically charged and difficult to address, both the physical neglect and neglect of any ideological connotation that is still attached to the site have made it possible for these sites to be remain present in the decorum of Rome’s contemporary cityscape. Because of the physical and ideological neglect, these buildings have been preserved and are being reused. In regard to Italy’s fascist heritage, negligence has become a dynamic of preservation.

158 Arthurs (2010), 124-125 and Mammone (2006). 74

75

Bibliography

Literature

Agnew, J.A. and C. Muscara. (1995) Rome. New York: Wiley-Academy.

Arthurs, J. (2015a) ‘Settling Accounts: Retribution, Emotion and Memory during the Fall of Mussolini’, in: Journal of Modern Italian Studies 20 (5), 617-639.

Arthurs, J. (2015b) ‘‘Voleva essere Cesare, morì Vespasiano’: The Afterlives of Mussolini’s Rome’, in: Civiltà Romana Rivista pluridisciplinare di studi su Roma antica e le sue interpretazioni 1, 283-302.

Arthurs, J. (2010) ‘Fascism as ‘heritage’ in contemporary Italy’, in: A. Mammone and G.A. Veltri (eds.) Italy Today: The sick man of Europe. New York: Taylor&Francis, 114-128. Ashworth, G.J. and J.E. Tunbridge (1996) Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Assmann, J. (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’, in: New German Critique 65, 126-130.

Benton, T. (2010) ‘Heritage and Changes of Regime’, in: Benton, T. (ed.) Understanding Heritage and Memory. Manchester: Manchester University Press in Association with the Open University, 126–163.

Carter, N. (2010) Modern Italy in Historical Perspective. London: A Hodder Arnold Publication.

Cooke, P. (2011) The Legacy of the Italian Resistance. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. van Doornmalen, S. (January 2015) ‘The Foro Italico: neglecting present pasts’, unpublished paper for the course ‘Heritage Theory’, University of Amsterdam.

Etlin, R.A. (1991) Modernism in Italian Architecture, 1890-1940. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press.

Follo, V. (2013) ‘The Power of Images in the Age of Mussolini’, Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertation, Paper 858, University of Pennsylvania, 88-122.

Foot, J. (2009) Italy’s Divided Memory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

76

Frampton, K. (1980) Modern architecture. A critical history. London: Thames and Hudson, 203-218.

Halbwachs, M. (1992) On Collective Memory. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Higgins, V. (2013) ‘Rome’s Uncomfortable Heritage: Dealing with History in the Aftermath of WWII’, in: Archaeologies, 9 (1), 29-55.

Huyssen, A. (2003) Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Kallis, A. (2014) The third Rome, 1922-1943: the making of the fascist capital. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kessler, H.A. (2015) ‘The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana: From Fascism to Fendi’. Electronic Thesis or Dissertation Bachelor of Arts (BA), Ohio University, Art History. Retrieved from: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/

Kostof, S. (1978) ‘The Emperor and The Duce: The Planning of Piazzale Augusto Imperatore in Rome’, in: H. Millon and L. Nochlin (eds.) Art and Architecture in the Service of Politics. Cambridge: MIT Press, 270-325.

Lazzaro, C. and R. J. Crum (eds.) (2005) ‘Introduction’, in: Donatello among the Blackshirts. History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

Lazzaro, C. (2005) ‘Forging a Visible Fascist Nation: Strategies for Fusing Past and Present’, in: C. Lazzaro and R. J. Crum (eds.) Donatello among the Blackshirts. History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 13-31.

Macdonald, S. (2006) ‘Undesirable Heritage: Fascist Material Culture and Historical Consciousness in Nuremberg’, in: International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12 (1), 9-28.

Mammone, A. (2006) ‘A Daily Revision of the Past: Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and Memory in Contemporary Italy’, in: Modern Italy 11 (2), 211-226.

Maraniss, D. (2008) Rome 1960: The Olympics that changed the world. New York and London: Simon & Schuster.

77

Mussolini, Benito (1935) Scritti e Discorsi di Benito Mussolini, vol. IX, 218-220. For the online text see: http://users.dickinson.edu/~rhyne/232/EthiopiaSpeech.html

Notaro, A. (2000) ‘Exhibiting the New Mussolinian City: Memories of Empire in the World Exhibition of Rome (EUR)’, in: Geojournal 51, 15-22.

Painter, B.W. (2005) Mussolini’s Rome: Rebuilding the Eternal City. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rossi, A. (1982) The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: MIT Press.

Singley, P. (2007) ‘Roma Macchiata: The Stain of White.’, in: Log 10 (Summer/Fall), 129- 136.

Strazzulla, M.J. (2009) ‘War and Peace: Housing the Ara Pacis in the Eternal City’, in: American Journal of Archaeology 113 (2), 1-10.

Van Osta, J. (1989) Geschiedenis van Het Moderne Italië : Tussen Liberalisme en Fascisme. Den Haag: Nijgh & Van Ditmar Universitair.

Ventresca, R. (2006) ‘Debating the Meaning of Fascism in Contemporary Italy’, in: Modern Italy 11 (2), 189-209.

Vidotto, V. (12 March – 14 June 2015) Esposizione Universale Roma. Una Città Nuova dal fascism agli anni ’60, exhibition catalogue, De Luca Editori d’Arte.

Wohl, H. (1999) ‘Memory, Oblivion, and the ‘Invisibility’ of Monuments’, in: W. Reinink and J. Stumpel (eds.) Memory & Oblivion. Proceedings of the XXIXth International Congress of the History of Art held in Amsterdam, 1-7 September 1996. Springer Netherlands, 925-928.

Zambenedetti, A. (2010) ‘Filming in Stone: Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana and Fascist Signification in Cinema’, in: Annali d’Italianistica 28, 199-215.

78

(Newspaper) Articles

Adelfi, N. (8 November 1959) “Imposte le scritte fasciste della Farnesina ai turisti ed agli atleti di tutto il mondo” La Stampa, 5. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/actio n,viewer/Itemid,3/page,5/articleid,0071_01_1959_0239_0005_16531866/

“Alemanno, sicurezza e sviluppo ‘E via la teca dell'Ara Pacis’” (30 April 2008) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://www.repubblica.it/2008/04/sezioni/politica/roma- alemanno-sindaco/roma-alemanno-sindaco/roma-alemanno-sindaco.html

“Alemanno: «Via la teca dell'Ara Pacis»” (30 April 2008) Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://www.corriere.it/politica/08_aprile_30/alemanno_via_teca_ara_pacis_a600722c- 16ca-11dd-8b67-00144f02aabc.shtml

“Ara Pacis: 30 mila visitatori in 15 giorni” (6 May 2006) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2006/05/06/ara-pacis-30-mila- visitatori-in-15.rm_021ara.html?ref=search

Barsottini, L. (n.d.) “Il nuovo headquarter di Fendi all’EUR di Roma” Icon Design. Retrieved from: http://icondesign.it/news/headquarter-fendi-alleur-roma/

“Boldrini: «Cancellare la scritta Dux dall’obelisco di Mussolini»Bufera sulla presidente della camera” (17 April 2015) Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://roma.corriere.it/notizie/politica/15_aprile_17/ripulire-l-obelisco-mussolini-bufera- parole-boldrini-079c8ae4-e50d-11e4-845e-5bcd794907be.shtml

Capponi, A. (15 February 2015) “Crisi dell’Eur: Colosseo quadrato a rischio vendita, l’offerta di Fendi” Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://roma.corriere.it/notizie/cronaca/15_febbraio_15/crisi-dell-eur-colosseo-quadrato- rischio-vendita-l-offerta-fendi-26aceb2c-b4de-11e4-b826-6676214d98fd.shtml

“Chiassate di missini a Roma per le scritte al Foro Italico” (11 August 1960) La Stampa, 1. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/actio n,viewer/Itemid,3/page,1/articleid,0075_01_1960_0192_0001_16952842/

Curridori, F. (17 April 2015) “Un coro di insulti per la Boldrini che vuole "cancellare" Mussolini”. Il Giornale. Retrieved from: http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/politica/coro-insulti- boldrini-che-vuole-cancellare-mussolini-1117618.html

Davies, L. (19 August 2014) “Mausoleum of Augustus stands derelict on anniversary of emperor's death” The Guardian. Retrieved from: 79 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/19/mausoleum-augustus-anniversary-rome- emperor

“Fendi’s New Headquarters Are a Fascist Icon (18 July 2013) Blouin Art Info. Retrieved from: http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/931167/fendis-new-headquarters-are-a- fascist-icon

Fiorentino, F. (23 October 2015) “Apre il «Colosseo quadrato», la sfida (vinta) di Fendi” Corriere della Sera. Retrieved from: http://www.corriere.it/moda/news/15_ottobre_22/roma- apre-colosseo-quadrato-sfida-vinta-fendi-ff26d5e6-78ef-11e5-95d8-a1e2a86e0e17.shtml

Gavrilovic, Vuk. (19 April 2015) “L’Obelisco di Mussolini? Io sto con la Boldrini”, 360 Giornale Luiss, Student Newspaper of Luiss University, Rome. Retrieved from: http://www.360giornaleluiss.it/attualita/19_04_2015/obelisco-di-mussolini-io-sto-con-la- boldrini/

Hatherly, A.O. (3 March 2015) “Fendi vidi vici: when Fashion flirts with Fascism” Architectural Review. Retrieved from: http://www.architectural- review.com/rethink/viewpoints/fendi-vidi-vici-when-fashion-flirts-with- fascism/8679074.article

Karmali, S. (18 July 2013) “Fendi Relocates To A Roman Palace” Vogue. Retrieved from: http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2013/07/18/fendi-moves-headquarters-to-palazzo-della-civilta- italiano-in-rome

Kirchgaessner, S. (22 October 2015) “Fendi rejects criticism over new HQ in Mussolini propaganda building” The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/22/fendi-launches-hq-in-mussolini-propaganda- building

“L'Ara Pacis riapre dopo sette anni ma è scontro sulla teca di Meier” (21 April 2006) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://www.repubblica.it/2006/04/sezioni/cronaca/apertura-ara- pacis/apertura-ara-pacis/apertura-ara-pacis.html

“Laura Boldrini: «Togliere la scritta "Mussolini dux" dall'obelisco del Foro Italico»” (17 April 2015) Il Messaggero. Retrieved from: http://www.ilmessaggero.it/roma/cronaca/laura_boldrini_obelisco_roma_foto_italico_musolin i_dux-983038.html

Mambelli, R. (4 May 2006) “Ara Pacis, è ancora scontro” La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2006/05/04/ara-pacis-ancora- scontro.rm_034ara.html?ref=search

McCafferty, H. (9 November 2013) “EUR: Fellini’s Metaphysical Quarter of Rome,” Swide. Retrieved from: http://www.swide.com/art-culture/eur-rome-s-metaphysical-quarter- lovedby-fellini-history/2013/11/09

80

“Nessun’altra scritta fascista sarà cancellata dal Foro Italico” (12 August 1960) La Stampa, 5. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/actio n,viewer/Itemid,3/page,5/articleid,0075_01_1960_0193_0005_16591473/

Ouroussoff, N. (25 September 2006) “An oracle of modernism in ancient Rome” New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/arts/design/25paci.html?_r=0 Page, M. (13 July 2014) “The Roman architecture of Mussolini, still standing”. Boston Globe. Retrieved from: http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/07/12/the-roman-architecture- mussolini-still-standing/csZ70EN2fTnUUNqX0kRM9K/story.html

“Pronta in 600 giorni la nuova piazza Augusto Imperatore, dall'autunno via al restyling” (16 April 2015) La Repubblica. Retrieved from: http://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/04/16/news/augusto_imperatore_restyling_autunno- 112100344/

“Resteranno al Foro Italico le sessanta frasi ‘duce, a noi’” (November 7, 1959) La Stampa, 10. Retrieved from: http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,com_lastampa/task,search/mod,libera/actio n,viewer/Itemid,3/page,10/articleid,0071_01_1959_0238_0010_16808394/

Rose, S. (1 May 2006) “When in Rome…”. The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/may/01/travelnews.museums

Tosi Pamphili, C. (31 October 2015) “Fendi, il Colosseo Quadrato e le polemiche” Artribune. Retrieved from: http://www.artribune.com/2015/10/fendi-polemica-palazzo-della-civilta- italiana-roma/

81

Additional sources

Dictionaries ‘Cityscape’ [Def. 1 and 3.0] (n.d.) Merriam Webster. Retrieved from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cityscape

‘Ideology’ [Def. ‘Simple’ and 2b]. (n.d.) Merriam Webster. Retrieved from: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ideology

‘Neglect’ [Def. 1]. (n.d.) Cambridge Dictionaries Online. Retrieved from: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/neglect

‘Neglect’ [Def. 1 and 6.]. (n.d.) Dictionary.com. Retrieved from: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/neglect?s=t

Video Hewlett-Packard Documentary (2005) ‘Fascism in Italy’ See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDBOyhNn0sg

“«Togliere la scritta Mussolini Dux»: bufera sulla Boldrini” (17 April 2015) Agenzia Dire. Retrieved from: http://video.corriere.it/togliere-scritta-mussolini-dux-bufera- boldrini/fe5f9d5a-e52e-11e4-845e-5bcd794907be

Websites https://www.comune.roma.it/wps/portal/pcr?jp_pagecode=municipio_xx.wp&ahew=jp_pagec ode http://divisare.com/projects/23580-francesco-cellini-renato-nicolini-mario-manieri-elia- alessandra-macchioni-vanessa-squadroni-maria-margarita-segarra-lagunes-giovanni-manieri- elia-dieter-mertens-i-carlo-gasparrini-elisabeth-kieven-jose-tito-rojo-giovanni-longobardi- renzo-candidi-andrea-mandara-urbs-et-civitas

““Esposizione Universale Roma”, looking back at the story behind EUR42, Rome’s main business area.” (17 March 2015) Bigmat International Architecture Agenda. Retrieved from: http://www.bmiaa.com/esposizione-universale-roma-looking-back-at-the-story-behind-eur42- romes-main-business-area/ http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-della-civilt%C3%A0-italiana http://www.eurspa.it/patrimonio/edifici-storici/palazzo-uffici http://www.foroitalico.altervista.org/secondapagina.html

82

Rerum Romanarum (6 October 2015) “Le strade che hanno cambiato nome dopo il Fascismo”. Retrieved from: http://rerumromanarum.blogspot.nl/2015/10/roma-strade-che- hanno-cambiato-nome-dopo-il-fascismo.html

Rhyne, Charles S. and Reed College (Portland, USA) (2011) http://cdm.reed.edu/ara- pacis/introduction.php

Additional

Information stencil ‘Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. The history’. Retrieved from the exhibition “Una nuova Roma. L’EUR e il Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana”, 23 January 2016.

83

List of Images

Cover Illustration: Jeroen Krul

Figure 1. Aerial view of the Foro Italico complex. (Photo retrieved from: http://tennisopolis.com/forum/topics/rome-foro-italio-men-s-main-draw)...... 12

Figure 2. Aerial view of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the mausoleum of Augustus. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.touringclub.it/notizie-di-viaggio/roma-mausoleo-di- augusto-aprira-mai-quella-tomba%20)...... 12

Figure 3. Aerial view of the EUR district being built in 1939. The Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana is on the center left of the photo. (Photo retrieved from: https://archiwatch.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/e42.jpg)...... 13

Figure 4. Benito Mussolini gives the first inaugural strike with the pickaxe in demolishing housing blocks in order to open up the ancient monuments in Rome, 19 February 1935. (Photo retrieved from Agenzia VEDO / Archivi Farabola http://roma.corriere.it/gallery/roma/04-2013/porry/foto/porry-pastorel-padre- fotoreporter_4b3cbb70-9c26-11e2-aac9-bc82fb60f3c7.shtml#6 )...... 23

Figure 5. Mosaics in the Foro Mussolini celebrate Italy's victory over Ethiopia in the Italo- Ethiopian war. Soldiers, tanks, aircraft, a victorious Italian flag, and eagles flank the central inscription: "IX Maggio XIV E. F. L'ITALIA HA FINALMENTE IL SUO IMPERO" (‘9th May, year 14 Era Fascista. Italy finally has its Empire’). Below, rows of fasces, representing Italy, cage a subdued lion, representing Ethiopia. (Photo by Avery Enderle Wagner, 2014. Retrieved from: http://romehistorymu.wix.com/romehistorymu#!foreign affairs/cach)...... 23

Figure 6. ‘Mussolini Dux’ obelisk, Foro Italico. (Photo by author)...... 35

Figure 7. Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo by Mario Giannini, retrieved from: http://www.archidiap.com/opera/piazzale-del-monolite/)...... 35

Figure 8. ‘Molti Nemici, Molto Onore’, mosaics at the Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.romeingreek.eu/?p=12642)...... 36

Figure 9. ‘DUCE DUCE’ mosaics at the Piazzale dell’Impero, Foro Italico. (Photo by Mario Giannini)...... 36

Figure 10. Decaying mosaics and vandalism at the Foro Italico. (Photo retrieved from: http://folkestonejack.wordpress.com/tag/foro-italico/ and http://www.romanordnews.it/7372/foro-italico-addio-allo-stato-terminale/)...... 37

Figure 11. Dirty marbles at the Foro Italico. (Photo by author)...... 37

84

Figure 12. Neo-fascist wreaths in remembrance of the fascist regime at the Mussolini obelisk, 25 April 2013. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.foroitalico.altervista.org/secondapagina.htm)...... 38

Figure 13. The Piazza Augusto Imperatore surrounding the Mausoleum of Augustus. In the foreground, next to the river Tiber, the Ara Pacis pavilion by Vittorio Ballio Morpurgo. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.civilization.org.uk/augustus/ara-pacis-2)...... 50

Figure 14. Ara Pacis Augustae (Altar of Augustan Peace) in the Ara Pacis Museum by Richard Meier. (Photo by Steven Zucker. Retrieved from: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ancient-art-civilizations/roman/early-empire/a/ara- pacis)...... 50

Figure 15. Mosaics and inscription on the north side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. (Photo by author)...... 51

Figure 16. Relief ‘A XIX” (19th year of the Fascist Era, 1941) and chiseled fasces on the overpass on the south side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore. (Photo by author)...... 51

Figure 17. Inscription on the north side of the Piazza Augusto Imperatore, with the –INI of Mussolini removed. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk/CSAD/Newsletters/Newsletter7/Newsletter7a.html)...... 52

Figure 18. Ara Pacis Museum by Richard Meier. (Photo retrieved from: http://www.wikiartis.com/en/richard-meier/works/ara-pacis-museum/)...... 52

Figure 19. The Mausoleum of Augustus. (Photo retrieved from: http://leonardrutgers.nl/het- mausoleum-van-augustus/)...... 53

Figure 20. Design for the new Piazza Augusto Imperatore and the mausoleum of Augustus. (By Alessandra Macchioni. Retrieved from: http://divisare.com/projects/23580-francesco- cellini-renato-nicolini-mario-manieri-elia-alessandra-macchioni-vanessa-squadroni-maria- margarita-segarra-lagunes-giovanni-manieri-elia-dieter-mertens-i-carlo-gasparrini-elisabeth- kieven-jose-tito-rojo-giovanni-longobardi-renzo-candidi-andrea-mandara-urbs-et-civitas). .. 53

Figure 21. Inscription on the Palazzo Uffici, EUR. « La Terza Roma si dilaterà sopra altri colli lungo le rive del fiume sacro sino alle spiagge del Tirreno». (Photo by author)...... 65

Figure 22. The History of Rome through its Built Works, Publio Morbiducci, 1939, marble relief, Palazzo Uffici, EUR. (Photo by author)...... 65

Figure 23. Close up of Mussolini at the relief The History of Rome through its Built Works. (Photo by author)...... 66

85

Figure 24. Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. (Photo by author)...... 66

Figure 25. The exhibition Una Nuova Roma. L’EUR e il Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. (Photo by author)...... 67

Figure 26. Genio dello Sport, previous Genio del Fascismo, in front of the Palazzo Uffici, EUR. (Photo by author)...... 67

Figure 27. Still of Anita Ekberg in Federico Fellini’s The Temptation of Doctor Antonio (in Boccaccio ’70) ...... 67

86