sign in sign up
<<
Home , Argiletum, Arx (Roman), Comitium, Forum of Augustus, Forum of Caesar, Imperial fora

The area of between Modern and Ancient urban landscape1

Fabio Giorgio Cavallero

A story through images: compare to perceive It would be difficult to suppose the total destruction of a 100.000 sq. m. block, like the one that includes the area of Piazza Vittorio Emanuele II, for the construction of new public buildings nowadays. On the contrary, it wasn’t par- ticularly hard for and his successors the edification of monumental huge complexes in the heart of the ancient town, that caused the cancellation of the preexisting topographic arrangement. We can only imagine the impact that the Fora had on the previous urban texture, as we can simply suppose the change in the perception of the spaces after their construction. Of course, nobody has lived long enough to see how the shape of the town has changed during the near- ly two centuries from the edification of the of (46 B.C.) and the one (112-113 A.D.), and the following Temple (125-138 A.D.) dedicated to him by . But, trying to figure it out, we can understand how from a set full of footpaths, little streets, perhaps almost alleys among public buildings (“full urban”, in urban architectonic terms), it changed into big monumental squares (“urban void”). A heterogeneous landscape made of insulae, domus, workshops, streets, little squares and markets was indeed replaced by the mag- nificence and regularity of the Fora wanted by Caesar. 2 According to Paul Zanker “the overall image of a town in a particular historic situation represents an effective system of visual communication, that because of its continuous pres- ence can influence, also at an unconscious level, the inhabitants”.3 If it is true then, the heart of the town, at the end of this urban process, in addition to have been changed into a new showcase of the power, has become the place of the

1 This paper is part of a study on the Imperial Fora, whose first result was the reconstruction of the com- plexes present in the Atlante di Roma Antica (Carandini and Carafa, 2012). Now, all the authors are publishing the articles on each monument, where they explain all the choices that led to the different reconstructive hypothesis. 2 Their addition in the urban landscape meant also the upsetting of the “diversified series of boundaries that, during the different periods, marked and ruled” this area of the town (Palombi, 2008: 300). 3 Zanker, 1989: 23. The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

imperial memory.4 What Plato attributed to the Greek temple was similarly ap- plicable to the Fora complex.5 Indeed, they were the “canonized codification of the cultural (Roman) grammar”, that was able to influence both the “act” and the “behavior” of the Urbe inhabitants.6 In few words, the central area had be- come a subtle and effective way for selecting what should have been remem- bered. The royal power legitimized itself with a mythic and historic past, trans- forming the urban landscape into a tangible sign through great complexes that included, at the same time, both the cultural and the communicative memory.7 In short, the emperors had created an alliance between power and memory, taking possession not only of the mythic and historic past, but also of the future. In fact, if “the power is retrospectively legitimated and prospectively immortalized” then, in little more than two hundred years, they had settled the central area of the town “in view of the eternity”.8 Therefore, the imperial power generated, legitimized, celebrated and perpetuated itself with huge monuments of “propaganda”, set where the events of the city life, such as the processes in the court of the Forum of Augustus9 or the slaves liberations in Trajan one,10 used to take place. For nearly two hundred years, as it often happens, power and architecture, power and urbanity inter- twined with one another. Eighteen centuries later they retied again, when an op- eration which was similar in materials, but ideologically distant, took place in only nine years destroying the flesh of the urban texture that had started its for- mation in the end of the 16th century. It has already been recognized that: “in the history of the town, the impact that the insertion of the forensic squares had on the Ancient urban landscape, can be compared with the demolition and the excavation of Medieval and Modern blocks that was promoted by the Fascist regime for the monumental setting of Via dell’Impero and the archaeological area of the same forum”.11 Furthermore, also in this case, a long process had fin- ished with the construction of an urban landscape that, at the moment of the po- litical regime change, was sacrificed on behalf of its own exaltation in front of the history.12 So, if we compare to perceive, then it will be useful to take a “guided tour” in the area that underwent the deconstruction operations wanted

4 On the meaning of the memorial sites see Connerton, 2010. For an analysis of the meaning in ancient time see La Rocca, 2007; 2004, all with previous bibliography. 5 Assman, 1997: 247. 6 It is the same mechanism recognized by Assman (1997: 247) for the Egyptian temple. 7 On the concept of cultural and communicative memory see Assman, 1997. 8 Cic. de Orat. II.40, 196. 9 Svet. Aug. 29.1-2. 10 Hist. Aug. Comm. 2.1; Sid. Apol. Carm. 2.544-545. 11 Palombi, 2005a: 21. 12 See infra Carafa.

- 146 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

by Mussolini. That will make it possible the contemplation of the big heteroge- neity that was demolished by the “pickaxe of the Regime”, helping in a better comprehension of such a radical change like the one that brought to the “redis- covery” of the imperial squares. It is important in order to better perceive how their construction radically influenced the central area of the ancient town, where gradually toponyms and buildings, whose functions sometimes were transferred in each Forum, disappeared. So, the history of the central area will be reconstructed from the Pre-urban period up to the Late Republican one, when Iulius Caesar, with the construction of his Forum, started the demolition work of the old district that sprang up from the Middle- Republican period.13 Finally, we will try to define how people previously living in the de- stroyed districts, who had got to be re-located, reacted against the disappearance of places and buildings so deeply connected to their personal experience and every-day life until the appearance of the new landscape (Regret Process).

1. The Alessandrino district: a guided tour Arriving in Rome from they passed through the Corso up to . From here, taking Via di Macel de’ Corvi, where there was the little San Lorenzo ai church, they would enter the district getting to the Trajan’s Column square (Fig. 1). Passed the square there was the begin- ning of Via Alessandrina, the major road of the whole area. Here the tramlines were paved streets (Fig. 2) overlooked by three or four floor buildings hosting bars, dry cleaners, clobbers, dental offices, banks (Fig. 3) and the grand Medie- val complex of S. Urbano ai Pantani, firstly repaired in the 17th century and then demolished in 1933. Going on they crossed Via dei Carbonari, that would con- tinue on the Salita del Grillo, and Via Bonella. At this corner the first shop that they could see along Via di Tor dei Conti was a drugstore (Fig. 4), accessible crossing the arch of the Pantani (Fig. 5), one of the ancient gates of the . Then, after a grocer’s shop (Fig. 6), they could see the Church of the Annunziata, whose baroque portal opened in the ancient delimitation wall be- tween the Forum of Augustus and the Subura (Fig. 7) at the back. Going down towards the they would reach Via della Croce Bianca. The street used to pass behind the Southern exedra of the Forum of Augustus overlooked by humble multi storey houses with balconies and added storey in wood (Fig. 8).

13 For the report on the phases after the installation of the first Fora, from the Medieval and the Renais- sance period to the years of the Fascism, see Cavallero in preparation. For a reconstruction of Imperial Fora’s architectures, see Cavallero, 2012: 207-214 with previous bibliography.

- 147 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 1. Trajan’s Column square.

Fig. 2. Via alessandrina. Tram on paved street. Fig. 3. Via Alessandrina. From right: bank, block, shop.

- 148 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 4. Via Tor dei Conti, at the corner a Drugstore.

Fig. 5. Arch of the Pantani.

- 149 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 6. The grocer’s shop behind the Forum of Au- gustus.

Fig. 7. The baroque portal of the Church of the An- nunziata.

Fig. 8. Multi storey houses behind the southern exe- dra of the Forum of Augustus.

- 150 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 9. So called “Colonnacce”. At the end the tavern called “Tempio di ”.

Fig. 10. Multi storey houses in Via Cremona.

Then, retracing the old route of the the street used to cross Via Alessandrina, where high buildings would overlook and connect with the . The so-called “colonnacce” still held up the old frieze with the myth of Arachne, concluding the story near to the tavern called “Tempio di Nerva” (Fig. 9). Arrived in Via della Salara Vecchia it was possible to get to Via di San Lorenzo in Miranda, an axis placed between the and Via Ales- sandrina, that continuing towards Via del Tempio della Pace, finished at the feet of the Velia on which the gardens of Villa Rivaldi sprang up. On the other side, if they decided to go down the Roman Forum, once passed the Arch of Septimi- us Severus, they could turn into Via di , that would retrace the old clivus Argentarius. Going back they would have a look at the poorest areas of the district. These were located between Via della Chiave d’Oro and Via Bonella and between the same Via di Marforio and Via Alessandrina. Via Cremona, where some different kind of houses, that in time became multi storey (up to seven or eight floors) (Fig. 10), used to separate the blocks. Then, Via di Mar- forio ended again in Via Macel de’ Corvi, connecting in this way the area of the Roman Forum to that of Piazza Venezia and, from here, that of the Corso. Into the whole Alessandrino district many streets, smaller than the mentioned ones,

- 151 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 11. Alessandrino district before fascist works.

Fig. 12. Alessandrino district after the fascist works (Via dell’impero).

would complete then the urban grid, connecting even more the main road network.14 On April 21st 1932 this urban variety (Fig. 11) didn’t exist anymore. Via dell’Impero was officially opened to the public. In only eight years from the be- ginning of the first works a whole district, that would host 7000 people in 5500 habitable rooms, was demolished.15 The heterogeneity of the blocks, the admix- ture of ancient monumental buildings and modern life spaces, the variety of sa- cred and profane that would mix in the streets of the district were cancelled. Stores, taverns, drugstores and churches, everything had been surgically re- moved for the artificial construction of a new urban landscape, focused on only one road situated between the ancient bare and the isolated (Fig. 12). Therefore, this operation, that actually closed the long urban history of the Imperi- al Fora, sacrificed all the previous topography to a new reason of state, to a new

14 The minor road network, above others, included Via di Testa Spaccata, Via del Chettarello, Via Mar- morella, Via di Campo Carleo, Via del Priorato, Via del Lauro and Via dei Pozzi, that arrived to Piazza delle Carrette. 15 Insolera, 2011: 136; Insolera, 1983: 149.

- 152 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

political Regime that in order to celebrate itself chose the central areas of the town to proclaim the advent of the new Empire. For the rediscovery of the Impe- rial Fora they were proposing again the same processes that brought to their cre- ation.

2. The Imperial Fora: birth and destruction of an ancient urban landscape 2.1. The place of the story (Fig. 13) The Imperial Fora sprang up in contact with the old Roman Forum, part- ly in the valley where there were the Velia hill, the , the Viminale hill, the and the , and partly excavating and flattening the picks of these hills. The Quirinal and the Capitoline hills were connected by a “saddle” that divided this area from the . On its real extension it has long been debated. Recent excavations enriched the frame of the previous geomorphologic, topographic and architectural studies, allowing to reconstruct its appearance with greater precision:16 a relief whose North-Western slopes17 clambered up for at least 20 meters, going down again towards the area that will be taken by the Forum of Augustus, where they would stop nearly at the height of what will be the Southern of the complex. In the North the limit of the valley, marked by the slopes of the two hills (Viminale and Esqui- line) is partially still percepti- ble today. Here there will be the Subura district, whose in- clination went down through the roads Madonna dei Monti, Leonina and . On the other hand, in the North-East the valley met the slopes of the Fig. 13. The place of the story: an orographical reconstruction. C: Capitol; A: ; S: “Saddle”; Q: Quirinal; E: Esquiline; O: Velia and the Fagutal-Oppius Oppius; V: Velia; AR: Argiletum. connecting with the Carinae.18 The ancient autors thinked that

16 For a resume of the studies see Delfino, 2010 with previous bibliography. 17 They would finish in the area occupied by the Trajan’s Column at whose foot, indeed, they found a street overlooked by rooms in opus incertum (Boni, 1907: 399 ss.; Amici, 1982: 58 ss.; Tummarello, 1989: 121 and following). 18 For a different position of the Carinae see Jordan and Hülsen, 1871-1907; Platner and Ashby, 1929; Castagnoli, 1964; Castagnoli, 1988; Rodríguez Almeida, 1993; Palombi, 1997.

- 153 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

this name was assigned for the similary of this hill with a ship’s hull.19 The so delimited valley sloped North-Eastward to South-Westward (Viminale, Esquili- no – Roman Forum) and it used to turn into a marsh because of the waters flow- ing from the surrounding mounts.20

2.2. Pre- and proto- urban period (about 1000-750 B. C.) (Fig. 14) The archaeological discoveries, found on several occasions in the area of the and that of Augustus,21 made it possible to realize that in the 13th – 11th century B. C.22 the area of the two Fora was still travelled by char- iots and that, from the early 11th century B.C. small necropolises of the popula- tion of the Capitoline and Quirinale hills occupied respectively the area of the future Forum of Caesar and that of Augustus. The use of necropolises is certified until the 9th century B.C.23 and some ruins of a contiguous built-up area, includ- ed in the landscapes, dominated by trees, in particular oak grove,24 can be dated back to the same period. In this landscape the Ancient authors projected the events that would originate the names of the places used for the various areas in the Repub- lican period and that, then, were gradually substituted by new toponyms born with the construction of the Imperial Fora. The greek Argo arrived in the valley where then he Fig. 14. Pre and Proto-urban period (1000-750 B.C.). C: Capi- would be killed and buried tol; A: Arx; S: “Saddle”; Q: Quirinal; E: Esquiline; V: Velia. 25 giving the name Argiletum to

19 Serv. ad Aen. 8.361; Svet. De Gramm. 15; Dion. Al. 8.79.3; Flor. 2.18. 20 Tortorici, 1991: 85. 21 See Meneghini, 2009 with previous bibliography. 22 Meneghini, 2009: 12. 23 Meneghini, 2009: 16. 24 Meneghini, 2009: 17. 25 Var. De ling. Lat. V.157; Serv. ad Aen. VIII.345. Another tradition saw in the toponym a reference to the clay soil of the area, maybe somehow recalling the swampy feature of the area before the construc- tion of the (Tortorici, 1991, 85). Again in Servio’s opinion (ad Aen.8.345) the place was named Argiletum by anotherwise unknown certain Cassius Argillus, whose house was probably de- stroyed by command of the , because of the unworthiness of the owner. Var. De ling. Lat. V.157; Virg. Aen. VIII.345-348.

- 154 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

the area. Other sources,26 on the other hand, talk about a place called Corneta, whose name would have come from the Corniolo plant that used to grow there. Comparing Varro27 and Placidus’28 information it is possible to ap- proximately rebuilt its extension: from the caput of it probably arrived, at least, at the place that will be occupied by the Templum Pacis. Until the first drainages dated back to the 7th century B.C., we can sup- pose that the center of the valley, where the Forum of Nerva will be, underwent frequent waterlogging and it was likely to have no buildings. On the sides there were small necropolises and hilly people between oak groves and cornel trees. In this “pre-urban” landscape we could imagine the most ancient reali- ties of the Roman site, as those populi of the Roman site such as the Velienses and the Latinienses, that belonged to different hill and mountain communities29 and/or more ancient topographic-sacral ruins, like for example the door/temple placed in the walls that defended the Velia.30 It would have been opened in case of war and closed in times of peace31 and it is connected with the cult of Ianus Quirinus,32 the deity who protected boundaries.33 From here they would go to war (profectio) against the enemy, who was symbolically imagined on the colles.34 With the construction of the “proto-urban” big unified built-up area (?35) the landscape hasn’t largely changed, but for the extension in the inhabited areas nearer to the low slopes36 of the hills that crowned the valley.

26 See n. 27. 27 Var. De ling. Lat. V.146, 152. 28 Placid. C.G.L. VI, p. 278. 29 At this stage we can imagine that the border between the two populi is exactly the Argiletum valley. On the valley as urban boarder see Musti, 1975: 297-318, part. 313-316. 30 On Porta Ianualis see Palombi 2008, 305 with previous bibliography. On the other hand, in accord- ance with the academic, the Roman antiquarians could have projected the structure at an already urban stage, probably corresponding to Tatius settlement in the Campidoglio or the expansion of the realized by him until the achievement of the Forum and the Campidoglio. 31 Var. De ling. Lat. 5.165; Mac. Sat. 1.9.17-18; Tortorici, 1996; Carandini, 2003: 113-118. The gate was imagined exactly at the bottom of the valley (infimum Argiletum), in the point where it met the fu- ture Forum. 32 On the sacellum by Ianus Quirinus/Geminus: Liv. 1.19; Serv. ad Aen. 7.607; Cass. Dion. 84.13.3; Proc. Bell. Goth. 1.25; Sen. Apoc. 9; Plin. Nat. Hist. 34.33; Plut. Num. 20.1; Svet. Aug. 22; Ov. Fasti 1.258. Coarelli, 1983b: 89-97; Tortorici, 1996, with previous bibliography. 33 Holland, 1961. 34 Fraioli, 2012: 284. 35 For the Septimontium Capanna 2010. 36 It would be confirmed by the fact that all the small necropolis, as it has already been recognized, ceased to exist simultaneously with the birth of the big Esquiline necropolis. It was assumed that in the valley there was an external territorial district (pagus) with an artisan connotation (Filippi, 2012: 150).

- 155 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

2.3. First Royal Period (about 750-616 B. C.) (Fig. 15) The birth of the town is the beginning of a transformation that will be more and more radical. Today the beginning of this period is unanimously dated around the mid-8th century B.C.,37 when it seems possible to recognize the born of the urban form for the site of Rome.38 There aren’t many archaeological at- testations of the area that can be dated back to the First Royal period. The small village in the Forum of Caesar kept going. About in the mid- 8th- 7th century B.C. a forge, where many slags39 were found, was built here and it made it possible to suggest a handcrafted of this area. While, on the other side of the valley, along the Northern slopes of the Velia, there should have been high-ranking houses that went up to the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, where some objects imported from Greece were discove- red.40 In this period, accord- ing to the Ancients, some mo- numents, such as the porta Ia- nualis, the Temple of Janus41 and the Hostilia42 were already or about to be built. According to the tradition a bit more Eastward than the latter Fig. 15. First Royal Period (about 750-616 B.C.). 1. Domus 2. Infant’s tomb; 3. Lautolae? ; 4. Doliola ; 5. ; 6. Sacel- one, the rock caves named 43 lum ditis ; 7. Ianus Quirinus; 8, 10 Handcrafes area? ; 9: Resi- Lautumiae, from where they dential area?. would extract tuff blocks used in several monuments da-

37 Carandini, 1997; 2006. 38 This is the moment in which the ancient authors attribute a founding act of a character named Romu- lus. For a collection of sources concerning the birth of the town see Carandini, 2006: 155-221. 39 Meneghini, 2009: 17. 40 On the settlement see Modica, 1993, De Santis, 2001, Modica, 2007. On the fragment of the geomet- ric clay tripod in Greece pottery found “in front of the Temple of Antnoninus and Faustina see Colonna, 1977; Colonna, 1981 41 The construction of the temple is unanimously attributed to , who would have built it “in order to break the of the habit of the armies” (Liv. 1.19). The building was situated in the same place where it still was during the Imperial period: ad infimum Argiletum and it presumably institutionalized the most ancient cult of Ianus Quirinus, related to the porta Ianualis. On the Temple of see Coarelli, 1983b: 89-97; Tortorici, 1996, with previous bibliography. 42 Indeed, it had been founded by Tullius Hostilius for the meetings of the Senate (Var. De ling. Lat. 5.155; Cic. Rep. 2.17.31; Liv. 1.48.3; Hor. Carm. 4.7.15; Virg. III.4.3). 43 On the term see Pisani Sartorio, 1999: 187.

- 156 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

ted back to the Royal period,44 should have been working. Again according to the sources, some places of the area got the name from happenings, basically prodigious ones, that can be dated back to this period. For example the places where suddenly impetus and boiling waters that stopped the advancement of the Sabini would have flown out,45 would take the name of Lautolae.46 In this first urban landscape a valence craft area, near to the “saddle” of the Capitoline hill and the Quirinale one, took its shape. It was a new public zone, at the limits of the Curiae, in the Roman Forum, and on the Northern slopes of the Velia Hill and towards the Esquiline Hill, a basically residential ar- ea that got to the Sacra Via. In the bottom of the valley, which was probably still subject to waterlogging, there weren’t constructions yet.

2.4. The Second Royal Period (about 616- 509 B. C.) (Fig. 16) With the three last sovereigns the urban land- scape changed again. Tar- quinius would have started the reclamation of the low areas of the town,47 in- cluding also the valley going down towards the Forum. 48 Then, this work would have been finished by Tarquinius Superbus 49 who, with the construction of the Cloaca Maxima, made it possible Fig. 16. The second Royal period (about 616-509 B.C.). 1 Car- cer/Tullianum 2. Porta Fontinalis 3. Curia Hostilia 4. Space the final reclamation of the where will be the Septem tabernae Plebaie 5. Comitium 6. Sacel- bottom of the valley, open- lum Ditis 7. Lacus Curtius 8. Doliola 9. Ianus Quirinus 10. Lau- tolae? 11. Tabernae circa forum 12. Murus Servii Tulii 13. Pos- ing in this way the road to tern? the urban landscape that

44 According to Festus (Fest. 365L; Origo Rom. MGH, Chron. I.145.1; Isid. Orig. 5.27.23) the empty tunnels of the ancient tuff caves of the Capitoline hill were, indeed, used as prisons since or Tarquinius Superbus ages. 45 Mac. Sat. 1.9.17; Serv. ad Aen. 8.361. 46 Var. De ling. Lat. 5.156. 47 Liv. 1.38. 48 On an archaeological level, the identification of this process, as known, was a still open issue, alt- hough already with Pasquali we talk of the Great Rome of the Tarquini (Pasquali, 1936; 1942; 1968); see, for example, Gabba, 2000; Poucet, 2001. 49 Liv. 1.56.2; Plin. Nat. Hist. 36.24.

- 157 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

would have been set during Republican period. Above the channel50 there would be the road that will define the limit between two well defined sectors, with dif- ferent urban significances. During Servius Tullius reign the town was “refounded” by the king, who extended the Pomerium and built up a new city wall.51 The area of the future Imperial Fora was nearly completely absorbed both by the new wall and the Pomerium,52 leaving outside the area that went from the exedras of the of the square and that will be occupied by the Trajan’s Forum. The area inside the walls was in part attributed at the Servian Regions I and III (Suburana and Collina) and in part, by the area almost included between the walls and the Northern limit of the valley, that was excluded from the system of regions.53 In the Forum of Caesar, immediately behind the future so called Argen- taria, there was a gate in the new city walls in which it possible to recognize the Fontinalis door,54 while they are likely to suppose a postern opened along the road running through the “saddle”,55 Unfortunately, there is no archaeological proof of this and we can suggest its collocation only on the basis of the orogra- phy. Accepted the hypothesis, we can also imagine that a road would start from here and that, descending the slope of the “saddle”, it would connect it to the new residential area. Raised from the mid- 6th century B.C., it had to take a big part of the future Caesar’s Forum area.56 Indeed, here they found a 2.10 m long steep road (clivius), overlooked by two buildings that can be considered as do- mus of the court typology,57 that was divided by a small street (ambitus) paved with tiles and tuff fragments.58 Behind the residential area there had been installed the prison that, ac- cording to the tradition, from Ancus Marcius59 period was moved in the now empty galleries of the previously exploited tuff caves.60 Opposite there was the curia Hostilia, that makes reference to the Comitium-Forum system.

50 On the cover of the Cloaca Maxima already in this time see Zeggio, 2006: 68; Bauer, 1983. 51 On the walls path on the ridge of the pass see Cic. Rep. 2.6.11; Liv. 1.36.1; 1.44.3; Dion. Al. 3.67.4; 9.68.3; Strab. 5.3.7; Plin. Nat. Hist. 3.5.66-67; review in Begni, 1952. For the path of the walls on the crest of the “saddle” see Cifrani, 2012: 81 with previous bibliography. 52 On the path of the Pomerium in the area of the future Imperial Fora see Palombi, 2008: 308. 53 For the reconstruction of the boarders of the Servian Regions see Capanna, 2012, tavv. Ib e II. 54 Liv. 35.10. Valentini-Zucchetti, I: 297 ss. The gate leads to the Campus Martius. 55 Filippi, 2012: 155. 56 Delfino, 2011. 57 Delfino, 2011: 292. 58 Ibid. 59 Liv. 1.33.8. 60 According to Coarelli (1993: 236) Carcer and Lautumiae are two names used for the same building. The tullianum (a result of Servius Tullius intervention Var. De ling. Lat. 5.151; Festo 490 L) was the most hidden part of the prison, a kind of “maximum security prison”.

- 158 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

The residential area on the opposite side of the valley changed its look, too. Indeed, from the end of the 7th/beginning of the 6th century B. C. the huts started being replaced by brick houses with tiled roofs. They found some “wells” covered with tuff or devoid of coating, with some materials in their inside.61 These houses had to arrive as far as the Roman Forum, where now there are tabernae and porticos built in accordance with the tradition, thanks to the subdivision of the sites given by Taquinius Priscus to private citizens62 after the above mentioned reclamation works realized around the Fora and in those places where the cult of Janus Quirinus recalled the happenings of the early years of the monarchy. If we want to picture more in detail the urban landscape that is con- structible on the base of the few information we have, it would be interesting to catch a glimpse of the characteristic network of streets, little streets and little squares that later would characterize the landscape pictured by the Ancient au- thors and mentioned by the archaeological data.63 The roads (clivi) and little streets (ambitus), that had to go up along the artificial terracing64 situated on the pass between the Quirinale and the Capitoline hills, were the heart of this road network.

2.5. The Early and Mid- Republican period (509-210 B.C.) (Figg. 17-18) The early years of the Republic didn’t produce big changes in the area of the Imperial Fora, that had gradually to reinvent itself, maintaining the same characteristics of the urban landscape described above. The tabernae, that in ac- cordance with the tradition65 were built by Tarquinius Priscus and overlooking the Forum, were mostly designed for the sale of foodstuffs, in particular meat (tabernae laeniane). Exactly in one of these, along the Argiletum, and Dio- nysius of Halicarnassus recalled the episode of Virginius, who after pulling out a knife from a butcher with which the man was butting the meat, would have stabbed his daughter trying to protect her from the violence of the decimvir Appius Claudius.66 The beginning of the 4th century B.C. was a critical moment for the who- le area of the Imperial Fora. After only six years from Veii’s conquer (396 B.C.)

61 Magagnini 1990; Magagnini, Van Kampen, 2009. The “wells” are documented in the northern side, towards the Carinae. 62 Liv. 1.35.10; Dionigi di Alicarnasso, 3.67.4. 63 Cf. Palombi, 2005a. 64 Delfino, 2011: 294; Fortini, 1998: 46-50; Ead., 2000: 325-326. 65 Liv. 1.35.10; Dion. Al. 3.67.4. 66 Liv. 3.48.5; Dion. Al. 11.37.5.

- 159 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 17. 1. Carcer/Tullianum 2. Porta Fontinalis 3. Curia Hostilia 4. Space where will be the Septem tabernae Plebaie 5. Comitium 6. Aedes Concordi- ae 7. Lacus Curtius 8. Doliola 9. Ianus Quirinus 10. Lautolae? 11. Domus 12. Murus Servii Tulii 13 Postern? 14. Basili- ca Porcia? 15. Atrium Libertatis? 16. Atria Licinia? 17. Atrium Sutorium? 18. Domus.

Fig. 18. 1. Carcer/Tullianum 2. Porta Fontinalis 3. Curia Hostilia 4. Space where will be the Septem tabernae Plebaie 5,6. Comitium 7. Lacus Curtius 8. Doliola 9. Ianus Quirinus 10, 11. Ba- silica Paulli et tabernae Argentariae 12. Murus Servii Tulii 13 Postern? 14. Basi- lica Porcia? 15. Atrium Libertatis? 16. Atria Licinia? 17. Atrium Sutorium? 18. Domus.

- 160 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

the sources,67 indeed, put the famous Gallic . On July 18th 390 B.C. (dies Alliensis) they, headed by Brennus, would have eradicated the Roman ar- my 11 away from the town on the river Allia, a little branch of the .68 The few survivors and those who stayed in the city took refuge on the Capitoline Hill, the only area which hadn’t been conquered by the Gallic after they entered from Porta Collina. Once they arrived at the Forum they encamped there and started plundering, burning and destroying both neighboring and further houses, aristocratic and plebeian ones. Only after six or seven months the invaders would leave Rome. A part from the problems raised by the annalistic,69 more recent archaeo- logical excavations in Rome70 individuated levels with presence of systematic destructions that can be dated back to the beginning of the 4th century B.C. This data are not very clear on the Argiletum area, but for the zone of the future Fo- rum of Cesar, where a fire71 was the cause that determined the destruction of the two above mentioned court domus. These levels can probably be interpreted as the corresponding archaeological of the Gallic Roman sack narrated by the An- cient authors.72 Always they thought that the quick and chaotic reconstruction started after that the invaders left the town was the cause of the urban disorgani- zation of the Late-Republican/Early-Imperial Rome. In this case, indeed, it seems that the archaeological discoveries show a different story and they indi- cate that the process of urban re-organization wasn’t neither quick and probably nor completely chaotic.73 The area in the Forum of Caesar where there were the two domus, in- deed, received a first adjustment in the first decades of the 4th century B.C.,74 when the road axes were restored and the ruins of the two houses were eliminat- ed. Later, they raised the planking level to one meter with land and, only in the mid-4th century B.C., they realized restoration and reconstruction works of the two buildings.75 As it seems that there is congruence between these two build- ings and others found behind the Curia,76 we can suggest that the restoration

67 The main sources on the Gallic fire are Liv. 5.35-55; Polib. Hist. 2; Diod. Sic. Bib. 14; Plut. Cam. 68 According to Burnbury (1856: 104-105) the Allia river corresponds to today’s Fosso del Maestro. 69 See Ampolo, 1983: 12, n. 11 with previous bibliography. 70 Other data that would seem to agree with the literary tradition are those coming from the layers of the fire in the area of the Magna Mater sanctuary on the Palatine (Pensabene, 1983: 158) and those forth- coming on the excavation realized by C. Panella on the North-Eastern slopes of the Palatine. 71 Delfino, 2011: 294. 72 Delfino, 2011: 294 e n. 23 assumes that the demolition of the houses in the Forum of Caesar could have been caused in conjunction with the Gallic fire. 73 Filippi, 2012: 192, n. 346. 74 Delfino, 2011: 295. 75 Delfino, 2011: 295. 76 Amici, 2005: 369 and following.

- 161 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

works of the areas around the valley started immediately after the Gallic exit from the town and they didn’t finish before the mid-4th century B.C.,77 when also the walls were restored.78 Then, we can suggest that the operations in the area were part of a wider and long-lived urban project that also involved the “con- servative restoration of the (Capitoline) hill and of its functions”.79 This process probably finished with the operations of C. Maenio, consul in 338 B.C., to whom a big operation concerning a broad plain area between the Forum of Cae- sar area and the Curia80 is ascribed. So, if that is true it could be possible to sug- gest that the project of the Consul didn’t involve only this side of the valley. But, on the contrary, there are still problems on the years of the construction of the Macellum, the Roman foodstuff market, in the are immediately behind the tabernae that overlooked the Forum.81 Being assured that later it would have oc- cupied the space behind the Forum up to the one named Corneta,82 then we can probably advance a probable hypothesis on its construction. Assuming that most of the area had been involved in the destruction actuated by the Gallic gesture, it is easy to suppose that it was followed by a reconstruction and restoration work that lasted in time, as documented for the opposite side. The works of C. Maenio who transformed the tabernae Laeniane in the Argentarie ones, pushing the butchers and other foodstuff sellers away from the square, is the ideal way to end this process. So, probably in this moment they occupied the Corneta, establi- shing the first core of what the Macellum, which is archaeologically certified for the following century, will be.83 According to the Macella that are archaeological- ly certified in and in the same Rome since the 2nd century B.C., dimensions and shapes of the mid-Republican period can be assumed. The whole structure had to occupy the area between the forum Pacis and the Nervae one, in a North- South direction and between the porticus Absidata84 and the private buildings situated behind the tabarnae Argentariae in the East-West direction. For all this, the Gallic fire would seem to have represented a net caesura for the urban landscape of the area, because, in the previous reconstruction, the South-Western area of the Argiletum had an artisan-commercial connotation,85 cancelling in this way the previous residential areas that would have risen here.

77 Delfino, 2011: 301. 78 Filippi, 2012: 159. 79 Filippi, 2012: 159. 80 Delfino, 2011: 301. 81 The first mention of the macellum is present in a passage of Val. Max. (3.4.4), where is mentioned related to the taberna owned by Varro’s father, C. Terentius Varro. 82 Var. De ling. Lat. V.146; 152. 83 Tortorici, 1991: 37-55. See also Palombi, 2005a: 24. 84 Pisani Sartorio, 1997: 201-203. 85 Tortorici, 1991.

- 162 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Thus, at the end of the mid-Republican period the area of the future Im- perial Fora should have had a new face. Now the road that cutting the valley went down from the Subura was dividing the area in two parts with different functions. In the Northern area, down from the top of the “saddle” cut through by the new walls, a new residential area was characterizing the zone. The streets and the houses of this area had been rebuilt and a wide plain area went from the zone of the future Curia to that of the Forum of Caesar.86 In this urban landscape there still were public monuments of the previous period, such as the Carcer, used in 214 B.C for locking up the Campani, who were fighting for , during the conquest of Casilinum.87 Opposite to it, apart from the street coming out from the Fontinalis gate, there should be at least four tabernae and two pub- lic atria, known in the sources as the Maenium and the Titium.88 In the North of the area there was the atrium Libertatis,89 the official seat of the censors where their archive was guarded90 and where the lists of the free citizens91 and the maps of the Ager Pubblicus on bronze tablets92 were stored. On its walls there were posted penal laws and quaestiones.93 Here, in 212 B.C., the hostages cap- tured in Taranto and Thuri had been locked up.94 Furthermore, in the South-East there was the Curia Hostilia, whose opposite street arrived up to the Argiletum street. Here there were the seven taverns (Septem tabernae) denominated plebe- ian (Plebaiae) due to the fact that they had been built by two plebeian construc- tors, M. Iunius Brutus and Q. Oppius.95 However on the opposite side, the residential area of the previous period presumably hadn’t been completely rearranged. Probably the foodstuff shops, that in an indeterminable moment, were incorporated in one structure, which is the first Macellum of the town,96 were moved from the Forum to the area nearest

86 Delfino, 2011: 301. 87 Liv. 24.19.11. 88 This collocation is stated in Liv. 39.44.7. On the original belonging to the Maenia and Titia see Coarelli, 1985: 45. 89 On the Atrium Libertatis see Coarelli 1993: 133. 90 Liv. 43.16.13. 91 Ibid. 92 Gran. Lic. 28.35 s. 93 Fest. 277 L. 94 This is the first known mention of the monument (Liv. 25.7.12). 95 Fest., p. 258L. Filippi, 2012: 161. The tabernae are placed in a different location in Coarelli, 1985: 146-149. 96 It is interesting what comes out from a text of Varro (De ling. Lat. V.146-147) and from another one of the same author (Var. in Paul., Ex Festo p. 42), where the names Macellum and forum Cuppendinis (one of the markets that had to become part of the Macellum) come from two houses belonging to a cer- tain Macellus, for the first one, and for Cuppes the other. Indeed, the houses would have been seques- tered, because the two people were sentenced for banditry, and were used for the sale of foods and deli-

- 163 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

to the valley and on the first slopes of the Velia hill. In the Macellum arranged in different areas there were the forum Piscarium97 (the fish market), the forum Cuppendinis98 (the dainties market), the forum Coquinum99 (the market of the already cooked foods or where it was possible to find some professional chefs for dinners and feasts) and delicatessen seller shops (cetarii), butchers, sausage maker shops (fartores100 ), wine sellers and others. 101 At the entrance of the Macellum (fauces macelli), on the side of the Argiletum, perhaps there were al- ready the atria Licinia, one of the places where auctions took place102 and the atrium Sutorium where trumpets used to be polished before going to war (tubi- lustrium).103 The valley and the slopes of the contiguous mountains, then, were grad- ually changing and by now they were organized in, at least, four areas. The area from the bottom of the valley to the Forum was called Argiletum. Here the main road axe used to “saddle” and some of the minor streets of the surrounding areas would join it. Eastward it bordered on the Subura,104 the “working-class” area that probably inherited its name from the ancient pagus Succusanus.105 On the sides towards the slopes of the Velia, there was the Corneta, where the buildings of the Macellum were. Opposite to it there were the Lautumiae,106 where there was the residential area, that occupied the area of the Forum of Caesar and part of the Augustus one.

cacies. The story perhaps seems to reflect the evolution of the area that from a residential area became a zone aimed to the commerce of several kinds of foods and objects. 97 Liv. 26.27.2-3; 40.51.5; Plau. Curcul. 474. 98 Var. De Ling. Lat. V.146; Donat. Ad ter. Eunuch. II.2.25. 99 Paul. Pseudolus 790-791. 100 Eunuchus 255-258. 101 As documented by the potteries found during the excavations (Morselli and Tortorici, 1989) the wine sold at the macellum had to come mostly from the Syrian-Palestinian and Aegean areas. 102 Cic. Quinct. 3.12; Serv. Aen. 1.726. 103 We don’t know exactly which was the position of the atrium Sutorium. They suggested its position in the Argiletum, due to the connection that it would have had with the shoemaker shops, that as we know were present in the area (Marz. II.17.1-3.). If the position is correct, we would find in this area also an- other sacred-institutional element connect to the war: the tubilustrium. If so would, remain in this area a public-sacral element with warlike character in addition to those that they already thought it was possi- ble to recognize in the pre –urban period with the porta Ianualis and later, in the urban period, with the Temple of Janus. 104 On the boarders between the areas see Palombi, 2005 with previous bibliography. 105 Varro De ling. Lat. 5.48. Palombi, 2008: 303. 106 Palombi, 2005a: 24.

- 164 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

2.6 From the 210 B.C. fire to 54 B.C. (Fig. 19) Between March 18th-19th 210 B.C. a fire, considered an arson one, burned up in the whole Northern area at the borders of the Forum.107 All the fol- lowing places were destroyed: the Septem tabernae, the Argentariae, the Lau- tumiae, the forum Priscarium, and the atrium Regium aside from several “pri- vate edifice” that can probably be identified with the atria Maenium, Titium, Li- cinia, Sutorium,108 aside from the Libertatis109 and the buildings nearer to them. The fire reached even the walls and porta Fontinalis.110 So, this is a new starting point year for the Imperial Fora area. The subsequent year, under M. Cornelius Cethegus and P. Sempronius Tudianus’ censorship, the restoration works started. The tabernae Argentariae were rebuilt and took the name of Argentariae Novae. The last pillar of the front porch, towards the road that arrived at the Argiletum, was presumably the pila Horatia, where the weapons of the Curiatii, defeat- ed by the Oratii (spolia Curi- atiorum)111 were hung. The Septem tabernae 112 and also the Macellum were rebuilt. This latter was, if not completely, at least partially rebuilt and behind the new moneychanger tabernae113 they built the first basili- ca in Rome. The building, whose name is unknown, is documented in some ’ works, where it is 19. 1. Lacus Curtius, 2. Pavimento del Foro, 3. Dolio- la, 4. Spazio per le votazioni, 5. Graecostasis? 6. Co- placed very close to the fish markets mitium, 7. Carcer, 8. Basilica Porcia, 9. Porta Fonti- from where a nauseating smell, that nalis, 10. Curia Hostilia, 11. Domus? 12. Tabernae used to upset the visitors of the build- plebaiae septem? 13. Macellum 14. Basilica Fulvia, ing who had no other choice but pass 15. Ianus Quirinus (porta Ianualis?).

107 Liv. 26.27.1-5. For a commentary focused on the passage see Palombi, 2005a: 22-25 with previous bibliography. 108 Palombi, 2005a: 24. 109 Fest. p. 277L. 110 Filippi, 2012: 161. 111 Fraioli, 2012: 288. Dion. Al. 3.22.9; Liv. 1.26.10-11; Prop. 3.3.6-7. 112 Coarelli, 1985: 149-150. 113 Therefore, the basilica would occupy the place where there will be the Fulvia-Emilia. See Fraioli, 2012: 288. There is a different position in Gagiotti, 1985a; 1985b, where the atrium Regium is identified with the Basilica.

- 165 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

through it for reaching the forum square, came out.114 Later in 194 B.C., also the atrium Libertatis underwent a makeover. It was enlarged by the censors S. Ae- lius Paetus and C. Cornelius Cethegus.115 A few years after the restoration the atria Maenium and Titium were definitively demolished. In 184 B.C., indeed, M. Porcius Cato bought them for the State together with four tabernae located be- tween the Cacer and the Curia Hostilia.116 In their place, once he demolished them, he built the first Basilica that will carry the name of its builder: the basili- ca Porcia. This first kind of arrangement of the public monuments circa Forum ex- perienced a new phase in 179 B. C., when the censors M. Fulvius Nobiliores and M. Emilius Lepidus built a new basilica, the Fulvia,117 in the Northern sector of the Forum. Probably, in this way they undermined the behind Macellum that, in- deed, needed a restoration of the area occupied by the forum Piscarium.118 Due to the big flow of people, the building became also a place of “propaganda”. recalls how Alba Emilius didn’t hesitate to declare, while he was sitting at the entrance of the market, that he knew that Verro was already the winner of the case for having corrupted the judges, one with 400.000 sesterces, the other with 500.000 sesterces and the last one, the less expensive one, with 300.000 sesterces.119 Caesar had also the Macellum controlled in order to prevent the sale of prohibited goods.120 With this event the phase of big works, that mostly damaged the lower parts of the areas that overlooked the road coming from the Subura, finished. So, in this moment the urban landscape was already well-defined. The walls were still protecting the “saddle” between the Quirinal and the Capitoline hill. The area that went from here to the valley had gradually modified the orography, changing the part which was closest to the Forum into a plain area, going at least up to the back of the Curia Hostilia. Here there were several kind of residences overlooking public monuments like, for example, the atrium Libertatis and some workshops/storehouses that were found along a paved street, 121 in the place where the Trajan’s Column will be built and that probably can be identifiable with the vicus Insteianus.122

114 Plaut. Gorg. 470-474; Capt., 813-815. See Fraioli, 2012, 288. 115 Liv. 34.44.5. 116 Liv. 39.44.7; Plut. Cat.5.1; Ps. Aur. Vict. De vir.III.47.5; Asc., p. 27. 117 Liv. 40.51.4-6. From 159 B.C. they probably started calling the Basilica with the double name of Aemilia et Fulvia (Fraioli, 2012: 288). 118 Fest. p. 112L.; De Ruyt, 1983: 160. 119 Cic. pro Ver. 3.62.145; Cic. pro Quin. 6.25, 18.59. 120 Svet. Caes. 1.43.2. 121 Meneghini, 2009: 26-27. 122 Var. De lin. Lat. 5.52; Liv. 24.10.8; Filippi 2012: 163; Palombi, 2005b: 90.

- 166 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

On the other side of the street the building of the Macellum had already assumed a fixed connotation occupying part of the Corneta and arriving to the back of the basilica Fulvia. This building is an important element of this histori- cal moment, because it marks a more and more definitive separation between the neighborhood and the main public area of the Roman Forum, that presumably had already started with the Basilica quoted by Plautus and that will be ultimated with the construction of the basilica Paulli (34 B.C). Towards the Subura, the area that will be occupied by the porticus Absidata, there were shoemaker shops, bookstores, batchers and hairdressers, that will still be present in the first imperial period.123 We have a picture of this urban landscape in one of Terentius’ comedies, that was probably on stage in 160 B.C.124 Indeed, there is the description of the long pilgrimage of Demea, who cheated by the slave Siro, vainly searches for his brother Micione, along the streets of the areas where the Imperial Fora will be built. The landscape sketched by the author shows streets going up and down, public and private buildings, small chapels, hillocks, stalls. This was a real maze of alleyways and backstreets that included also the streets that were archaeologi- cally located between the houses of the Caesar’s Forum. In this streets there were the possessions of wealthy and/or top-rank people. In the Argiletum, indeed, Cicero125 and his brother Quintus,126 owned buildings127 intended to be rented,128 while Sextus Pompeus, the son of the more famous Pompeus Magnus, had his domus here.129 This landscape, now completely restored, will be firstly destroyed due to Caesar’s expropriations and constructions and then by Augustus who will start a transformation that can be compared to the quicker one realized during the Fascist era.

3. The result of the urban reorganization: the regret process (Figg. 20-21) The reorganization of the urban space, whenever it takes place and whatever its impetus, starts two different processes. The first one makes it possible

123 Mart. I.2; I.3.1-2; I.117.8-18; II.17.1-3. 124 Palombi, 2005a: 27. 125 Cic. ad At. XII.32.3. 126 Cic. ad At. I.14.7. From the passage it is possible to understand that Cicero’s brother bought a build- ing in the Argiletum paying less than one million sesterces (Tortorici, 1991: 86). 127 From a passage of Cicero (ad At. XVI.1.5) it is possible to understand that this buildings were insulae that were rented for an income of about 80.000 sesterces per year (Tortorici, 1991: 87). 128 Tortorici, 1991: 86, n. 12. 129 Ov. ex Pont. IV.5.9-10; IV.15-20.

- 167 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fig. 20. Paris after 1837.

Fig. 21. Paris in 1853. the transformation of the urban topography in a powerful tool that is able to in- fluence the inhabitants, also on an unconscious level.130 On the contrary the se- cond one, that can be defined as the regret process, concerns the emotional reac- tion of the inhabitants, who experienced the cancellation of places and buildings to whom they linked memories or events of their past. This one is going to dis-

130 See above Zanker (n. 3).

- 168 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

appear in less than a generation, because it only concerns eyewitnesses of the change, who were familiar with the places involved in the urban modification. Today, in Europe, big changes are unlikely to involve old town centers. There are less than ever complete revolutions and general demolitions. Even though, we are all witnesses of disappeared places, canceled roads, rural buildings trans- formed in modern residences or huge buildings, when the city started spreading devouring its own countryside. Probably, it is hard for us to figure out what would cause a total revolution of the central area of a town which is stratified in time. However, we don’t need to go so back in time for finding changes of this magnitude. Rome, London, Paris are only few examples of it. As a matter of fact, although they changed so much in the last three centuries, they have as witness of their changes literary giants, who fixed in masterpieces the feelings experi- enced seeing with their own eyes the change of the urban places of their memory. Among all, Victor Hugo’s are the most affecting words.131 “The author of this book, who regrets the necessity of mentioning him- self, has been absent from Paris for many years. Paris has been transformed since he quitted it. A new city has arisen, which is, after a fashion, unknown to him. There is no need for him to say that he loves Paris: Paris is his mind’s natal city. In consequence of demolitions and reconstructions, the Paris of his youth, that Paris which he bore away religiously in his memory, is now a Paris of days gone by. He must be permitted to speak of that Paris as though it still existed. It is possible that when the author conducts his readers to a spot and says, ‘In such a street there stands such and such a house,’ neither street nor house will any longer exist in that locality. Readers may verify the facts if they care to take the trouble. For his own part, he is unacquainted with the new Paris, and he writes with the old Paris before his eyes in an illusion which is precious to him. It is a delight to him to dream that there still lingers behind him something of that which he beheld when he was in his own country, and that all has not vanished. So long as you go and come in your native land, you imagine that those streets are a matter of indifference to you; that those windows, those roofs, and those doors are nothing to you; that those walls are strangers to you; that those trees are merely the first encountered haphazard; that those houses, which you do not enter, are useless to you; that the pavements which you tread are merely stones. Later on, when you are no longer there, you perceive that the streets are dear to you; that you miss those roofs, those doors; and that those walls are necessary to you, those trees are well beloved by you; that you entered those houses which you never entered, every day, and that you have left a part of your heart, of your blood, of your soul, in those pavements. All those places which you no longer

131 Victor Hugo, Les Miserables, IV, 5.

- 169 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

behold, which you may never behold again, perchance, and whose memory you have cherished, take on a melancholy charm, recur to your mind with the melan- choly of an apparition, make the holy land visible to you, and are, so to speak, the very form of , and you love them; and you call them up as they are, as they were, and you persist in this, and you will submit to no change: for you are attached to the figure of your fatherland as to the face of your mother”. Of course, we can’t pretend to make absolute subjective feelings, even less if we have to extend them to cultures that are different from ours. But, if we try to think of what the urban revolution gradually caused by the insertion of single imperial squares meant for the Roman citizens, maybe we can take the great French poet’s words as example. It is clear that one of the main requirements of the memory is its spatial- ization.132 Once the memories are topographically fixed they set in the space be- coming useful symbols for the transmission of messages. As shown by Hugo’s words, obviously this process isn’t limited only to the collective or public memory. The shape of the town somehow is the mnemonic part of the whole cit- izen body. The elements of the landscape that make it up are the single neurons. The synapsis of this brain mechanism of the memory are the single citizens who receive not only the “propaganda” contents transfused by the customers in the monuments, and in this specific case by the emperors, but who also project the important moments of their lives into them. Once the milestones of this system are cancelled a new process re-founds both collective and subjective memory leading to the regret process in those who experience the consequences of this inevitable moment of the city life, both the ancient or the modern ones.

Bibliography

Amici, C.M., 1982: Foro di Traiano: e biblioteche, Roma. Amici, C.M., 2005: “Evoluzione architettonica del Comizio di Roma”, RendPontAc 77, 351-379. Ampolo, C., 1983: “La storiografia su Roma arcaica e i documenti”, in: E. Gabba (ed.), Tria corda: scritti in onore di Arnaldo Momigliano, Como, 9-42. Assman, J., 1997: La memoria culturale. Scrittura, ricordo e identità politica nelle grandi civiltà antiche, Monaco. Bauer, H., 1983: “Porticus absidata”, RM 90, 111-184.

132 Assman, 1997: 7.

- 170 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Begni, G., 1952: Muri regum et liberae Rei publicae aetatis, in: G. Lugli (ed.), 1952- 1969: Fontes ad topographiam veteris urbis Romae pertinentes, I, Roma. Boni, G., 1907: Nsc, 399 ss. Burnbury, E.H., 1856: s.v. “Allia”, in: W. Smith (ed.), Dictionary of Greek and Roman geography: In two volumes, London, 104-105. Capanna, C., 2010: “Appendice VI 1 e VI 3”, in: Carandini 2010 (Id. 2006) vol. II, 341- 342, 345-346. Capanna, C., 2012: in: Carandini and Carafa 2012, vol. II, tavv. Ib e II. Carandini, A., 2003: La nascita di Roma: dèi, lari, eroi e uomini all’alba di una civiltà, Roma. Carandini, A. (ed.), 2006: La leggenda di Roma, Roma. Carandini, A. and Carafa, P. (eds.), 2012: Atlante di Roma antica, biografia e ritratti della città, Roma. Castagnoli, F., 1964: “Note topografia del Palatino e del Foro romano”, ArchCl 16, 173-199. Castagnoli, F., 1988: “Ibam forte Via Sacra”, QITUR X, 90-114. Cavallero, F., in preparation: Forum Augusti. Cavallero, F., 2012: “La ricostruzione dei Fori Imperiali”, in: Carandini and Carafa 2012, 207-214. Cifani, G., 2012: “Le Mura Serviane”, in: Carandini and Carafa 2012, 81-84. Coarelli, F., 1983: Il Foro Romano. I. Periodo arcaico, Roma. Coarelli, F., 1985: Il Foro Romano. II. Periodo repubblicano e Augusteo, Roma. Coarelli, F., 1993: s.v. “Carcer”, in: LTUR I, 236-237. Colonna, G., 1977: “Un tripode fittile geometrico dal Foro Romano”, MEFRA 89.2, 471- 491. Colonna, G., 1981: “Il frammento geometrico del Foro”, PP 36, 86-87. Connerton, P., 2010: Come la modernità dimentica, Torino. De Santis, A., 2001: “Le sepolture di età protostorica a Roma”, BCom CII, 269-280. Delfino, A., 2010: Le preesistenze del Foro di Augusto, in: R. Meneghini and R. Santan- geli Valenzani (eds.), Scavi dei Fori Imperiali. Il Foro di Augusto. L’area centra- le, BCom, Supp. 20, 11-31. Delfino, A., 2011: “Le fasi arcaiche e alto-repubblicane nell’area del Foro di Cesare”, ScAnt 16, 2010(2011), 285-302. Filippi, D., 2012: “Regione VIII. Forum Romanum Magnum”, in: Carandini and Carafa 2012, 143-214.0. Fortini, P., 1998: Carcer Tullianum: il Carcere Mamertino al Foro Romano, Milano. Fortini, P., 2000: Le difese del Colle Capitolino e l’area del Carcer-Tullianum, in: A. Carandini and R. Cappelli (eds.), Roma. Romolo, Remo e la fondazione della città, Catalogo della mostra (Roma, 28 giugno - 29 ottobre 2000), Milano, 325-326.

- 171 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Fraioli, F., 2012: “Regione IV, Templum Pacis”, in: Carandini and Carafa 2012, 281-306. Gabba, E., 2000: Roma arcaica: storia e storiografia, Roma. Holland, L.A., 1961: Janus and the Bridge, Roma. Insolera, I., 1983: Archeologia e città: storia moderna dei Fori di Roma, Bari. Insolera, I., 2011: Roma moderna. Da Napoleone I al XXI secolo, Bari. Jordan, H. and Hülsen, C., 1871-1907: Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum, I-II, Berlin. La Rocca, E., 2004: “Cantieri della conoscenza. Roma: archeologia nel centro storico e modifica del paesaggio urbano”, WAC 1. La Rocca, E., 2007: “The Rhetoric of Rome and the Reappropriation of the Ancient Monuments”, Fragmenta 1. Magagnini, A., 1990: “Materiale dai pozzi della Velia”, in: M. Cristofani (ed.), La gran- de Roma dei Tarquini, Roma, 105-107. Magagnini, R. and Van Kampen, I., 2009: “I pozzi della Velia: la lettura di un contesto”, in: M. Rendeli (ed.), Ceramica, abitati, territori nella bassa valle del Tevere e Latium vetus, Rome, 67-91. Meneghini, R., 2009: I Fori Imperiali e i Mercati di Traiano: storia e descrizione dei monumenti alla luce degli studi e degli scavi recenti, Roma. Modica, S., 1993: “Sepolture infantili nel Lazio protostorico”, BCom XCV, 7-18. Modica, S., 2007: Rituali e Lazio antico. Deposizioni infantili e abitati, Milano. Morselli, C. and Tortorici, E., 1989: Curia, Forum Iulium, forum Transitorium (=LSA, 14). Musti, D., 1975: “Varrone nell’insieme delle tradizioni su Roma quadrata”, in: S. Bol- drini, S. Lanciotti, C. Questa, R. Raffaelli (eds.), Gli storiografi latini tramandati in frammenti, StUrbin 9, n.s., B, 1, 297-329. Palombi, D., 1997: “Tra Palatino ed Esquilino: Velia, Carinae, Fagutal. Storia Urbana di tre quartieri di Roma antica”, RIASA, Suppl. 1, Roma. Palombi, D., 2005a: “Paesaggio storico e passaggio di memoria nell’area dei Fori Impe- riali”, in: R. Neudecker and P. Zanker (eds.), Lebenswelten: Bilder und Raume in derromischen Stadt der Kaiserzeit, Symposium am 24. Un 25. Januar 2002 zum Abschluss ds von der Gerda Henkel Stiftung geforderten Forschungs programms “Stadtkultur in der romischen Kaiserzeit”, Wiesbaden, 21-37. Palombi, D., 2005b: “Morfologia, toponomastica e viabilità prima dei Fori Imperiali”, in: X. Lafon, and G. Sauron (eds.), Théorie et pratique de l’architecture romaine: la norme et l’expérimentation, études offertes á Pierre Gros, Aix-en-Provence, 81- 92. Palombi, D., 2008: “Caratteri e trasformazioni dei confini urbani nell’area dei Fori Impe- riali”, in: M. Royo, E. Hubert, A. Bérenger (eds.), «Rome des quartiers». Des vici aux rioni, cadres institutionnels, pratiques sociales et requalifications entre anti- quité et époque moderne, Paris, 299-320.

- 172 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

Pasquali, G., 1936: “La grande Roma dei Tarquini”, in: Nuova Antologia 16 Agosto, 405-416. Pensabene, P., 1983: “Casa Romuli sul Palatino”, RendPontAc 63, 115-162. Pisani Sartorio, G., 1996: s.v. “Macellum”, LTUR III, 201-203. Platner, S.B. and Ashby, T., 1929: A Topographical Dictionary of , Oxford. Poucet, J., 2001: La fonction fondatrice dans la tradition sur les rois de Rome, Paris. Rodríguez Almeida, E., 1993: s.v. “Carinae”, LTUR I, 239-240. Tortorici, E., 1991: “Argiletum. Commercio, speculazione edilizia e lotta politica dall’analisi topografica di un quartiere di Roma di età repubblica”, BCom, suppl. 1. Tortorici, E., 1996: s.v. “Ianus Geminus, aedes”, LTUR III, 92-93. Tummarello, B.M., 1989: “Foro Traiano. Contributi per una ricostruzione storica e archi- tettonica. Preesistenze. Il problema del mons”, ArchCl 41, 121-124. Valentini, R. and Zucchetti, G. (eds.), 1940-1953: Codice topografico della città di Ro- ma, I-IV, Roma. Zanker, P., 1989: Augusto e il potere delle immagini, Torino. Zeggio, S., 2006: “Dall’indagine alla città: un settore del centro monumentale e la sua viabilità dalle origini all’età neroniana”, ScAnt 13, 61-122.

- 173 - The area of Imperial Fora F.G. Cavallero

- 174 -