Abstract:
The research explores the theme of urban street network of ancient Rome in a wide and
multidisciplinary perspective and it has been organized in three sections dedicated to administrative
and juridical matters (part I), archaeological aspects (part II) and topographical reconstruction (part
III).
In the first part (Administration and competences) have been contextualize the tasks of the
magistrates and officers responsible for the urban streets in a wide time span (4th cent. BC - 4th AD).
In the first chapter, organized in two main chronological phases (republican and imperial age), thank
to combination of literary and epigraphic sources, has been defined the role played by censors and
aediles in relation to the three main activities: construction of new streets, their maintenance and
cleaning. As far as the new republican construction is concerned (chap. 1.1), it has been underlined
an interference of the aedils in a field traditionally reserved to the censors. From this perspective, the
construction of the clivus Publicius – anomalous when evaluated whiting the frame of their activities
– has been justified from the strong bond of the aedils with Aventine Hill.
In the chapter 1.2, dedicated to the tuitio, before examining the tasks of the actors called to
collaborate to the maintenance of street network, has been necessary to define – by using the juridical
sources – which activities could be incorporate on the sphere of the tuitio. The documental analysis
has shown a circumscribed role of the censors, that intervene in extraordinary circumstances only,
because the ordinary activities are carried out by the aediles. Within this chapter, a pivotal role plays
the tabula Heracleensis, an epigraphic document, fundamental to reconstruct the administrative
procedures for the care of the streets. Some of the clauses of the inscription have been compared with
the Mονόβιβλος (chap. 2.2.2), a Greek severian piece flowed into the Digest.
As far as the purgatio is concerned, the topic has been debated in the chapters 1.3 (Republican
Age) and 2.3 (Imperial Age): here, the relationship between the aediles and the IIIIviri viarum
curandarum have been investigated in a diachronic perspective. The history of this minor magistrate
has been traced from the origins (chap. 1.3.2) up to their disappearance (chap. 2.3.1).
This tripartite structure has been replicated also for the Imperial Age (chap. 2): the main goal of the
chapter has been to highlight the activities carried out by the emperors. A special attention has been
paid to the appearance of the procuratores, special officers deputed to the works on the street network
(cap. 2.1.2). From the Costantinian Era, the urban prefect assumed all the responsibilities connected
with the urban street network, as attested by a famous rescriptus sent by emperors to the prefect
Sallustius in the year 386 AD (chap. 2.1.4).
The two chapters end with a paragraph dedicated to the financial issues. In Republican Age (chap.
1.5), the main difference between the interventions of censors and aediles is the nature of the money.
During the Agrippa’s aedilitas a significant modify in the management of urban street network is
recorded. Cassius Dio refers that Agrippa repaired the whole urban network µηδὲν ἐκ τοῦ δηµοσίου
λαβών: that means, without using public money.
For the Imperial Age (chap. 2.4), the attempt to define the nature of the funding has made
harder, from one side because of the thin dividing line between aerarium, fiscus and patrimonium,
from the other side because the available documentation is not rich enough.
In consideration of a sequence of inscriptions coming from Rome and attesting the presence
in the city of private streets, in the chapter 3.1 has been explored the theme of publicus and privatus
on the base of the juridical sources. Some important changes in the ancient tenet have been recorded,
especially starting from the Severian Age.
The chapter 3.2 is dedicated to the ambitus, investigated not only from a juridical perspective
(origin, evolution and disappearance of the institution), but also in reference to other regulatory
aspects (width, functions). The most important results have been acquired by comparing textual and
archaeological sources: the latter have confirmed that the ambitus was used before the compiling of
the XII Tables.
In the chapter 4, the toponymy of the ancient Rome has been explored. After a first catalogue
of street’s names (chap. 4.1), the second section is dedicated to a wider overview on the time (4.2).
The bulk of the argument is the attempt to overcome the current conviction that the street’s names
was used to guide the wayfarer within the urban space. However, the information provided by literary
and epigraphic sources reveal that 1. the street’s names were not exclusive of major streets and 2.
they were functional for administrative procedures. The presence of street’s names in official
documents seems to suggest their public use.
In the second section of the work (The archaeological aspects), the important theme of
construction techniques has been analysed. The main object was to verify when the construction
techniques could be used as a “chronological indicator” or, at the contrary, the compresence in the
same period of different construction techniques could be read as a differentiated employment of
streets in terms of functionality (vehicle accessible or pedestrian) and hierarchy (main and secondary
streets). In order to examine in depth the issue, the archaeological data have been accurately selected,
Abstract by giving priority to data coming from stratigraphic excavations or contexts for which was possible
to determine an affordable chronological framework. The results have shown that it is not possible to
create an evolutionary sequence and, as consequence, to use it as a chronological indicator.
In the third section (The topographical aspects) the ancient street network of an important
neighbourhood of the city (Forum Boarium, Forum Holitorium and Campus Martius) has been
reconstructed. Each source of information – archaeological data, textual sources, ancient cartography,
medieval itinerary – has been treated according its own “philology”, in order to avoid to overlap
dossier that are heterogeneous for chronology, nature and reliability.
The archaeological data (chap. 6.1), organized for main areas, have been acquired thanks to an
archival and bibliographical survey: about 160 archaeological contexts have been recognized (each
one has its own ID) and then positioned on the maps.
The literary sources are an instrumental tool for the comprehension of the ancient street
network and have been analysed in the chapter 6.2. As every other kind of source, also they have
limits. A special attention has been paid to the chronological stratification of information flowed into
the ancient authors. The topographical references provided by literary sources it has been possible to
reconstruct streets and paths, not always attested or confirmed by archaeological data.
The epigraphic documentation has been analysed in the chapter 6.2. Significant for the
purpose has been the inscription CIL VI, 37043, dated in Sullan period, used by R.E.A. Palmer to
propose a reconstruction of the street system of the Forum Boarium. As already underlined his work,
that lies on week elements, did not take into account the several archaeological data available for the
area.
A valuable tool for the reconstruction of the ancient street network of Rome is the Severan
Forma Urbis, a marble plan of the city (chap. 6.3). In order to use it as informative sources, it has
been necessary to overlap it to the modern cartography of the city thanks to a GIS system.
Subsequently all the streets represented, more than 40, have been crossed with the information
coming from other kind of sources.
The last chapter (6.4) is dedicated to the urban paths recorded in the Einsiedeln Code (VIII cent. AD).
The reference to the ancient city provided by the text has been analysed in order to investigate if the
ancient street were still in use during the Carolingian Age. The results have shown that the paths
followed the ancient street network, while on the contrary the later Ordo Benedicti (XII cent. AD)
reflects for the first time a “new” city, deeply influenced by the Christian topography
topography of ancient Rome