THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ, ANTICHISTICA AND AESTHETICS IN LIGHT OF THE FASCIST SACRALIZATION OF POLITICS, AND MODERNISM Jan Nelis hrough a variety of sources, both written and visual, this paper traces the means by which Italian fascism appropriated and propagandised the following three aspects of a purported heritage of Roman antiquity (the so-called myth of romanità): aspects of academic and popular discourse regarding the notion of empire; the omnipresence of the ‘revolutionary’ and combative Julius Caesar; and a generalised aesthetic use of antiquity. During the ventennio fascista, these latter themes were central to the way in which fascism actively appropriated the heritage of ancient Rome; they have been chosen in order to illustrate the applicability of two aspects of fascism which I would first like to discuss, i.e. the fascist ‘sacralization of politics’, and a certain fascist modernism. In this short study, I situate Italian fascism, both marked and shaped by its relationship with the past and the ensuing tension between epochs and historical protagonists, history and myth, as a ‘secular’ or ‘political religion’, as a ‘biopolitical’ ideology the purpose of which was – at least ideally –, the spiritual and physical renewal of the nation. Hence, before treating the aforementioned features of fascist romanità, I will provide a concise historiographical discussion of the in my opinion most fruitful recent movements in the historiography of fascism; in doing so, I will illustrate the way in which the regime’s religious thrust and ‘cultic outlook’, rooted in, and arguably created by, its mythical predisposition, generated a heightened interest in aesthetics, and a ‘biopolitical’ desire to ‘forge’ the bodies and minds of the Italian people. In this sense, fascism can be considered as a form of activist ‘culture’ in its own regard, a viewpoint rarely linked to the Italian fascist use of antiquity.1 T 1 This paper is a first, and preliminary, attempt to develop insights which I first applied to the study of the reception of antiquity under Nazism: J. Nelis, Modernist Neo-classicism and Antiquity in the Political Religion of Nazism: Adolf Hitler as Poietes of the Third Reich, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 9/4, 2008, 475-490. Part of an ongoing research project on fascism as a political religion, it also builds on the research which I have undertaken the last years; I presented a preliminary study of these and similar theses in the Festschrift which I edited for the supervisor of my earlier research activities, prof. dr. em. Freddy Decreus of Ghent University: J. Nelis, Le mythe de la romanité et la religion politique du fascisme italien: nouvelles approches méthodologiques, in Id. (Ed.), Receptions of antiquity, Gand 2012, 349-359, as well as, with a more narrow scope on the notion of biopolitics, in Id., When Antiquity Becomes Sacred, in N.C.J. Pappas (Ed.), History and Culture: Essays on the European Past, Athens 2012, 247- «mediterraneo antico», xvi, 1, 2013, 259-274 260 JAN NELIS The past two decades, scholarship on both the fascist interest in, and use of, aesthetics, and in particular fascism’s ‘aesthetic ideology’, has contributed to a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and of the importance attached to culture therein. As foreseen by George L. Mosse, this aspect of fascism «was bound sooner or later to have its political consequences».2 Specific studies in the current field of research highlight a growing awareness of the ‘cultic’ outlook of Italian fascism, and thus also the importance of both myth and discourse to the movement.3 While some scholars have treated various myths incorporated by fascism (war, nation, New Man and New State, the duce, the myth of a heritage from ancient Rome or romanità…),4 others have chosen to situate fascism as a ‘political religion’, an idea anticipated by Dante Germino in his 1959 study of the totalitarian fascist party.5 However, it was not until the work of George L. Mosse6 and Emilio Gentile that Italian fascism was coherently defined as possessing a highly cultic, religious character, and that most precisely in Gentile’s groundbreaking study Il culto del lit- 260. For a subsequent treatment of the manifestation of a fascist ‘modernism’, applied to the Istituto di Studi Romani, I refer to an article of mine which has now appeared in the journal «Studi Romani»: La «fede di Roma» nella modernità totalitaria fascista. Il mito della romanità e l’Istituto di Studi Romani tra Carlo Galassi Paluzzi e Giuseppe Bottai, StudRom 58, 1-4, 2010, 359-381. On a personal note, I would like to thank dr. Massimiliano Ghilardi and prof. dr. em. Mario Mazza for their friendship, and for allowing me to use the present platform to present my ideas to the wider public. 2 G.L. Mosse, Fascist Aesthetics and Society: Some Considerations, «Journal of Contemporary History» 31/2, 1996, 247. 3 For more information on such tendencies in scholarship on Italian fascism, see R. Griffin, The Primacy of Culture: The Current Growth (or Manufacture) of Consensus within Fascist Studies, «Journal of Contemporary History» 37/1, 2002, 21-43. A very interesting study was also written by the late N. Zapponi, Fascism in Italian Historiography, 1986-93: A Fading National Identity, «Journal of Contemporary History» 29/4, 1994, 547-568. In this context, see also S. Falasca-Zamponi, The Aesthetics of Politics: Symbol, Power and Narrative in Mussolini’s Fascist Italy, «Theory, Culture & Society» 9/4, 1992, 75-91, Ead., Fascist Spectacle. The Aesthetics of Power in Mussolini’s Italy, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1997, M. Berezin, Making the Fascist Self. The Political Culture of Interwar Italy, Ithaca-London 1997, and C. Lazzaro - R.J. Crum (Eds.), Donatello among the Blackshirts. History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy, IthacaLondon 2005. 4 On fascist myths, see, among others, P.G. Zunino, L’ideologia del fascismo. Miti, credenze e valori nella stabilizzazione del regime, Bologna 1995. 5 D.L. Germino, The Italian Fascist Party in Power. A Study in Totalitarian Rule, Minneapolis 1959. In 1938, Angelo Tasca (A. Tasca, Nascita e avvento del fascismo, Milano 1999 [19381], 553) already spoke of a «religion for the poor» (all translations in the present article are my own). The concept of political religion had also already been briefly introduced by Gurian: W. Gurian, Totalitarianism as Political Religion, in C.J. Friedrich (Ed.), Totalitarianism, New York 1954, 119-129. 6 Mosse, who mainly focused on German Nazism, illustrated how, through orchestration of the masses, a phenomenon which had roots going back to the French Revolution (G.L. Mosse, Fascism and the French Revolution, «Journal of Contemporary History» 24/1, 1989, 5-26), public life under fascism (in general) acquired a cultic, theatrical character. Central to Mosse’s thinking was also the process of ‘nationalization of the masses’ (G.L. Mosse, The Nationalization of the Masses, Ithaca-London 1974), the way in which the nation put itself to the fore, filling the existential void provoked by increasing liberalism and secularization. For the reception of the thought of Mosse in Italy, see the outstanding D. Aramini, George L. Mosse, l’Italia e gli storici, Milano 2010. THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 261 torio.7 Since that time, the concept of political religion has been more extensively developed and discussed. The discourse around this topic notably led to the creation of two thematic journals, Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions (2000, Routledge) and Political Religions Compass (2008, Blackwell Online Publishing).8 Interest in the religious character of fascism has developed closely alongside the study of fascism’s intimate relationship with modernity, and with modernism. In the context of this particular focus, it should be stressed that Italian fascism is in a sense conceived as a ‘world of words’, a discourse on the myth of the Italian nation, regenerated by fascism, bearing and replicating the heritage of past, ancient greatness. Within this framework, the idea of a heritage from Roman antiquity (romanità) was central, coexisting with an outspoken future-oriented discourse. Indeed fascism seems to have been deeply rooted in modernity, in so far as it could even be characterized a «politicization of Italian modernism»,9 or also a «political reaction to the shock of modernity».10 Many of its manifestations, such as the 1932 Mostra della Rivoluzione Fascista,11 the creation of the Roman EUR district, and even the 1937-8 antiquarian Mostra Augustea della Romanità (cf. infra), bear witness to the tension inherent within fascism, which combined a strong longing for past greatness with an outspoken future-oriented discourse. Indeed, just as Luigi Salvatorelli characterized fascism as a Janus-like «conservative revolution»,12 likewise the E. Gentile, Il culto del littorio, Roma-Bari 1993. Gentile already anticipated this synthesis in previous publications, notably with Fascism as Political Religion, «Journal of Contemporary History» 25/2-3, 1990, 229-251. 8 The academic discussion on the theme of the fascist development of a political religion, as well as on the totalitarian nature of fascism, has been widely publicized in a long series of articles and books. A selection: R. Griffin, Introduction: God’s Counterfeiters? Investigating the Triad of Fascism, Totalitarianism and (Political) Religion, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 5/3, 2004, 291-325; E. Gentile, Fascism, Totalitarianism and Political Religion: Definitions and Critical Reflections on Criticism of an Interpretation, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 5/3, 2004, 326-375; S. Payne, On the Heuristic Value of the Concept of Political Religion and its Application, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 6/2, 2005, 163-174; H. Maier, Political Religion: a Concept and its Limitations, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 8/1, 2007, 5-16; D.D. Roberts, ‘Political Religion’ and the Totalitarian Departures of Inter-war Europe: On the Uses and Disadvantages of an Analytical Category, «Contemporary European History» 18/4, 2009, 381-414 and D. Musiedlak, Fascisme, religion politique et religion de la politique. Généalogie d’un concept et de ses limites, «Vingtième Siècle. Revue d’histoire» 108/4, 2010, 71-84. For the most recent overview of this discussion, see J. Nelis, The Clerical Response to a Totalitarian Political Religion: La Civiltà Cattolica and Italian Fascism, «Journal of Contemporary History» 46/2, 2011, 245-270. 9 W.L. Adamson, Modernism and Fascism: The Politics of Culture in Italy, 1903-1922, «The American Historical Review» 95/2, 1990, 360. 10 E. Gentile, The Conquest of Modernity: From Modernist Nationalism to Fascism, «Modernism/Modernity» 1/3, 1994, 58. 11 On this exposition, organized at the occasion of the decennale of fascism (the celebration of ten years of fascist rule over Italy), see M. Stone, Staging Fascism: The Exhibition of the Fascist Revolution, «Journal of Contemporary History» 28/2, 1993, 215-243 and J.T. Schnapp, Anno X. La Mostra della rivoluzione fascista del 1932, Ghezzano 2003. 12 L. Salvatorelli, Nazionalfascismo, Torino 1977 (19231), 64. 7 262 JAN NELIS fascist reception of antiquity was rooted in both tradition and modernity, in past and present. Around the same time as Emilio Gentile, Roger Griffin developed a coherent methodological framework through which the fascist (and Nazi) reality and culture can be ‘read’.13 Griffin traces the roots of (Italian) fascism back to the vitalism of modern, ‘risorgimental’ Italy, as well as to the ‘palingenetic’ climate after World War I.14 In his analysis of fascism born «from Modernism»15 he investigates the various expressions of fascist modernism, identifying fascism’s readiness and willingness to create ex novo.16 By means of an ‘internal’ view, i.e. seen through the words and actions of the fascists themselves, and also through interpretations of works of art produced under fascism, Griffin argues that in essence, many acted ‘modernistically’: the fascist State desired to be dynamic and creative, to become the progenitor of a new, totalitarian, fascist, art and culture. In a time of ‘myth’, fascism did not propose a return to the past, but rather an alternative path into modernity, a terza via. By using this line of reasoning, it seems to have headed in the direction of, rather than away from, modernity. Thus in a certain sense, fascism first and foremost wanted to create, its intended creation being a new, fascist life, a new Italian identity which would both mirror, and be forged by, discourse and the diffusion of ‘myth’ in general, but also engage more directly with the arts, architecture, this engagement mediated and dispersed via a new symbolic language, that of stile, or aesthetics. The ultimate aim of the fascists thus was to intervene in life itself, a goal analogous to, but less radical than Nazi aspirations toward total control, characterized aptly as a ‘biopolitical’ drive. As will become clear in the subsequent analysis of certain themes linked to the concept of romanità, the mentioned diffusion of discourse and myth, as well as the heightened interest in the aesthetic field, were highly crucial to the inner functioning of the fascist culto di Roma. When combined with Gentile’s insights on the religious and cultic character of fascism, the above premises provide the framework by means of which some specific aspects of romanità might be investigated. Such scrutiny of romanità will highlight a number of elements situated both in the movement’s vitalistic, cultic and spiritual character, and, directly or indirectly, in its ‘futural’17 aspirations. R. Griffin, Modernism and Fascism. The Sense of a Beginning under Mussolini and Hitler, HoundmillsBasingstoke-Hampshire-New York 2007. See also Id., Cloister or Cluster? The Implications of Emilio Gentile’s Ecumenical Theory of Political Religion for the Study of Extremism, «Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions» 6/1, 2005, 33-52. 14 R. Griffin, Il nucleo palingenetico dell’ideologia del ‘fascismo generico’, in A. Campi (a cura di), Che cos’è il fascismo? Interpretazioni e prospettive di ricerca, Roma 2003, 97-122. 15 Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, cit., 191-218. 16 Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, cit., 219-249. 17 In the context of fascist modernism, see also N. Zapponi, La modernità deviante, Bologna 1993; R. Ben-Ghiat, Fascist Modernities. Italy, 1922-1945, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 2001, W.L. Adamson, Fascism and Culture: Avant-Gardes and Secular Religion in the Italian Case, «Journal of Contemporary History» 24/3, 1989, 411-435; Adamson, Modernism and Fascism, cit.; Id., The Language of Opposition in Early 13 THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 263 As said, a first element to be discussed in the context of ancient Rome and the fascist development of the myth of romanità is Roman imperialism and combativeness. As is known, fascism was born from so-called squadrismo.18 Squadre refers to the ‘fighting squads’ (who most literally fought their opponents) used to repress certain situations in the eventful years following World War I, such as socialist strikes and violence. As a direct consequence, the ranks of early fascism comprised mainly ‘angry young men’; they wanted to shake up society, start a ‘revolution’, and create a new, and in its turn elitarian, ruling class. In this particular context, the young movement presented itself as an army on the march, using the purported inheritance from Roman antiquity to reinforce this image. The auctoritas of Roman imperialism and, more concretely, of the Roman Empire, provided both form and content, a solid ideological and historical legitimization, for which there was great need. Thus the myth of Rome, of romanità, could act as a fully-fledged guideline for conduct, and it resonated in a plethora of publications, some of which we will refer to in the following pages.19 The work of Ettore Pais, an eminent historian of antiquity and a convinced ‘nationalist’, is clearly representative of this group.20 That his nationalism soon became fascism, is evidenced by a piece on Roman imperialism entitled Roma dall’antico al nuovo impero, first presented orally in 1924 and published in 1938. In a very lively Twentieth-Century Italy: Rhetorical Continuities between Prewar Florentine Avant-gardism and Mussolini’s Fascism, «Journal of Modern History» 64/1, 1992, 22-51 and Id., Avant-Garde Florence. From Modernism to Fascism, Cambridge (Mass.)-London 1993. 18 On squadrismo, see R. Suzi Valli, The Myth of Squadrismo in the Fascist Regime, «Journal of Contemporary History» 35/2, 2000, 131-150. On the origins of fascism, see for example E. Gentile, Le origini dell’ideologia fascista, Bari 1975. 19 Some of the more interesting general studies on these and other aspects of romanità are R. Visser, Fascist Doctrine and the Cult of the Romanità, «Journal of Contemporary History» 27/1, 1992, 522; M. Stone, A flexible Rome: Fascism and the cult of romanità, in C. Edwards (Ed.), Roman Presences. Receptions of Rome in European Culture, 1789-1945, Cambridge-New York 1999, 205-220; A. Giardina - A. Vauchez, Il mito di Roma (Da Carlo Magno a Mussolini), Roma-Bari 2000, 212-296; M.R. Chiapparo, Le mythe de la Terza Roma ou l’immense théâtre de la Rome fasciste, in R. Poignault (Éd.), Présence de l’Antiquité grecque et romaine au XXe siècle, Actes du colloque tenu à Tours 30 novembre - 2 décembre 2000, Tours 2002, 399-420; P. Foro, L’archéologie italienne durant l’entre deux-guerres: entre fouilles et politique, in A. Bianco - P. Foro (Éds.), Idée impériale et impérialisme dans l’Italie fasciste, Journée d’étude organisée par le groupe E.R.A.S.M.E. le 4 avril 2003 à Toulouse, Toulouse 2005, 103-114; and J. Arthurs, Excavating Modernity. The Roman Past in Fascist Italy, Ithaca-London 2012. For an extensive overview of scholarship on the myth of romanità under fascism, see J. Nelis, La romanité (romanità) fasciste. Bilan des recherches et propositions pour le futur, «Latomus» 66/4, 2007, 987-1006. The most recent bibliography can be found in Id., Quand paganisme et catholicisme se rencontrent: quelques observations concernant la nature du mythe de la romanité dans l’Istituto di Studi Romani, «Latomus» 71/1, 2012, 176-192, as well as in my paper La «fede di Roma» nella modernità totalitaria fascista, cit. 20 The following analysis will present a selection of source material intended at covering as wide as possible a receptional field. More in particular, it references sources whose natures range from the vulgarising to the purely scientific, in other words writings which targeted widely diverse groups. As such, the present paper further refines the methodology which I developed in J. Nelis, From ancient to modern: the myth of romanità during the ventennio fascista. The written imprint of Mussolini’s cult of the ‘Third Rome’, Turnhout 2011. 264 JAN NELIS manner, Pais expressed the climate of unrest, frustration and disillusion that reigned in Italy after World War I, arguably one of the factors expediting the fascist takeover in October 1922. Consequently, Pais called for military readiness and force, stating that Mussolini, whom he assisted as the ghostwriter of the duce’s speech on Roma antica sul mare,21 «has acknowledged that the State does not only have to provide intellectual, but also physical and moral education for future generations. And the latter, from a very young age, are now being trained in the use of weapons in order to defend the Fatherland».22 Such statements were readily found in fascist propaganda, but as is evidenced above by the work of Pais, and as will become clear in the following, they also infiltrated scientific publications, and not in the least those concerning antiquity. In this climate, a situation of unstable balance was maintained, and during the twenties, by means of a sustained discourse on the supposed threat posed by external (other countries and foreign ideologies), and internal (antifascists, and most particularly communists) enemies, fascism was able to project its ‘revolutionary’ ambitions onto civilians, creating a situation which combined the promise of stability while at the same time pushing for continuous mobilization. The government consequently enjoyed an elevated degree of popular consensus for some time.23 In this context, Italy was represented as a country in clear opposition to the rest of Europe, and of the world. Hence its civilians were alerted constantly to the need to prepare for imminent conflict. A further publication, Michele Campana’s L’impero fascista, which also contained numerous references to antiquity,24 reflects this E. Susmel - D. Susmel (a cura di), Opera Omnia di Benito Mussolini, XXII, Firenze 1957, 213-227. E. Pais, Roma dall’antico al nuovo impero, Milano 1938, 460. Here Pais obviously refers to the regime’s interest in education of the young, which in 1926 would lead to the creation of the youth organization Opera Nazionale Balilla, which effectively provided military training to youngsters. On Pais’s discourse on antiquity under fascism, see R. Visser, The Correspondence of Ettore Pais in the ‘Segreteria particolare del Duce, Carteggio ordinario’ (ACS, Roma), in L. Polverini (a cura di), Aspetti della storiografia di Ettore Pais, Napoli 2002, 159-170, and J. Nelis, Tra Pais e fascismo: Carolina Lanzani, la rivista Historia e il mito della romanità. Con fonti inedite, «Rivista Storica dell’Antichità» 36, 2006, 277-295. On Pais’s historiography in general, see Polverini (a cura di), Aspetti della storiografia di Ettore Pais, cit. 23 The so-called ‘consensus-debate’ has for a long period divided researchers of fascism, and in some cases still does. The controversy was started by Mussolini biographer Renzo De Felice, who stated that the success of fascism was mostly the consequence of a mutual symbiosis wherein regime and population lived alongside one another without serious tensions until the end of the thirties. Some of the most informative studies are R. De Felice, Fascism. An Informal Introduction to its Theory and Practice. An Interview with Michael A. Ledeen, New Brunswick 1976; M. Ledeen, Renzo De Felice and the Controversy over Italian Fascism, «Journal of Contemporary History» 11/4, 1976, 269-283; A. Gregor, Professor Renzo De Felice and the Fascist Phenomenon, «World Politics» 30/3, 1978, 433-449; A. Lyttelton - J. Petersen - G. Santomassimo, Il Mussolini di Renzo De Felice, «Passato e presente» 1, 1982, 5-30; B. Painter, Renzo De Felice and the Historiography of Italian Fascism, «The American Historical Review» 95/2, 1990, 391-405, E. Gentile, Renzo De Felice: A Tribute, «Journal of Contemporary History» 32/2, 1997, 139-151; D. Mack Smith, Mussolini: reservations about Renzo De Felice’s biography, «Modern Italy» 5/2, 2000, 193-210; and E. Gentile, Renzo De Felice: lo storico e il personaggio, Roma-Bari 2003. 24 In this context, see Nelis, From ancient to modern, cit., 63, 66. 21 22 THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 265 situation, depicting fascism as a «revolution marching forward, backed by a large, armed population. […] We should not illude ourselves […] War is in the air in Europe. Its threat has never been so real as in our days, after treaties have created the absurdity of a peace which is not peace, accompanied by the desperate necessity to defend and arm ourselves. […] Then we will, forcefully, claim Victory, and dictate fascist peace».25 Whereas Ettore Pais, in his discourse on Roman antiquity, referred to the fascist present, Campana reversed this notion, introducing antiquity in a somewhat propagandistic interpretation of contemporary fascist imperialism. He described the latter as a form of ‘domination’, and also utilised it in a calque conceptualising the idea of the ‘three Romes’,26 i.e. ancient, Catholic, and fascist: «Empire needs a chosen people and a force which will direct and fortify it. The chosen people is the Italian people, to which God has given its new mission. Fed by the juice of the most splendid Mediterranean civilizations, it has always had the function of saving, and governing, Europe in the most dire moments of its history. It has already ruled the world three times…».27 Such publications prefigure a type of military imperialism that, toward the end of the thirties, when concepts of ancient Rome were increasingly being used as means of illustration and legitimization, would become common. This can be seen for example in the ‘educative’ literary output of Armando Lodolini. This latter author tried to soften the aggressive, expansive outlook of Rome’s imperial drive by emphasising that the latter was above all the fruit of ‘laboriousness’. Following this line of reasoning, the Roman armies transformed into armed engineers and peasants, conquering parts of the African continent with the sole intent of offering the ‘gift’ of their elevated civilization. From the beginning, it is clear that the author refers as much to ancient Roman colonialism as he does to contemporary fascist colonial politics, which presented colonial aggression as the fulfilment of Italy’s missione civilizzatrice, of its ‘civilizing mission’: But within those boundaries […] offered itself to the rest of the world a remarkable spectacle: people worked. Everywhere around them, humanity was prey to its instincts […] nature delivered to itself […] The idea which fascinated people: work. Rome did not diffuse M. Campana, L’impero fascista, Firenze 1933, 175-176. This idea was above all developed by the Catholic and fascist Istituto di Studi Romani (from now on noted as ISR), the most important institution in the development of the myth of romanità. On the ISR, see, among others, A. La Penna, La rivista Roma e l’Istituto di Studi Romani. Sul culto della romanità nel periodo fascista, in B. Näf (Hrsg.), Antike und Altertumswissenschaft in der Zeit von Faschismus und Nationalsozialismus, Mandelbachtal-Cambridge 2001, 89-110 and A. Vittoria, L’Istituto di Studi Romani e il suo fondatore Carlo Galassi Paluzzi dal 1925 al 1944, in F. Roscetti (a cura di), Il classico nella Roma contemporanea. Mito, modelli, memoria, Atti del Convegno (Roma, 18-20 ottobre 2000), Roma 2002, 507-537. Lesser known because of the volume’s somewhat more general title is J.S. Perry, The Roman Collegia. The Modern Evolution of an Ancient Concept, Leiden 2006, 119-153. 27 Campana, L’impero fascista, cit., 165. 25 26 266 JAN NELIS itself by means of its soldiers’ rapacious excesses; on the contrary, its blades were soon transformed into ploughs and tools. When the civilized armies of the League of Nations28 conquer a country, they settle in and start a lazy, old school style of casern life. The Roman legions on the other hand went straight to work.29 In addition, and as eminent antichista Mario Attilio Levi had already predicted in 1936, armed conflict proved inevitable. Therefore, in his La politica imperiale di Roma, Levi invoked the inevitable fate of Rome, a city and an empire that, he stated, had to «defend itself by attacking».30 If necessary, in order to obtain peace, Rome would not hesitate to go to war. The same, of course, also applied to fascist Italy, in a clear reminder not so much of the Ethiopian conflict, as of the possibility of global war, in which some years later Levi would effectively try to participate.31 In 1937-1938, the year of the grand-scale bimillenary celebration of Roman emperor Augustus,32 statements of this aggressive nature appeared ever more frequently,33 and, as it became clear that war was unavoidable, were increasingly applied to the contemporary political situation. Indeed in 1939, none less than Augustus was seen as accompanying the Italian armies, or at least so opined Ettore Cozzani, author of Augusto: «I feel that today, amidst the drum of the passing of the young legions through Rome, the Emperor has been resurrected, and has asked: ‘Is it time?’ And a voice like a hurricane has replied: ‘It is time’. Time for what? Time for our race to once again create, in the name of Rome, the empire of peace…».34 Such peace and justice could, naturally, be attained only by means of a war until the bitter end. Present also until the bitter end was, at least in some cases, the sustained ideological use of antiquity in this contemporary political context. A final, but very typical example is seen in the work of Carlo Galassi Paluzzi, who of28 This is a direct reference to the sanctions imposed upon Italy by the League of Nations in 1935, after the start of Italian colonial aggression against Ethiopia. 29 A. Lodolini, La storia della razza italiana da Augusto a Mussolini, dedicata agli italiani di Mussolini e specialmente ai giovani e alle scuole, Roma 1939, 25-26. 30 M.A. Levi, La politica imperiale di Roma, Torino 1936, 9. 31 See a letter, dated April 25, 1940, and sent to Mussolini’s segreteria particolare, in which Levi asks to be enrolled in the army, if necessary (due to this Jewish roots) under the cover of a pseudonym. His request is refused by Mussolini’s secretary De Cesare. This information can be consulted in Rome’s Archivio Centrale dello Stato, segreteria particolare del duce, carteggio ordinario, busta 534.561. 32 A central event in this context was the mentioned Mostra Augustea della Romanità. On this antiquarian exposition, see F. Scriba, Augustus im Schwarzhemd? Die Mostra Augustea della Romanità in Rom 1937/38, Frankfurt a.M. 1993; Id., Il mito di Roma, l’estetica e gli intellettuali negli anni del consenso: la Mostra Augustea della Romanità 1937/38, «Quaderni di storia» 41, 1995, 67-84; Id., The sacralization of the Roman past in Mussolini’s Italy. Erudition, aesthetics, and religion in the exhibition of Augustus’ bimillenary in 19371938, «Storia della Storiografia» 30, 1996, 19-29; and A. Kallis, ‘Framing’ Romanità: The Celebrations for the Bimillenario Augusteo and the Augusteo-Ara Pacis Project, «Journal of Contemporary History» 46/4, 2011, 809-831. 33 In this context, see M. Cagnetta, Il mito di Augusto e la ‘rivoluzione’ fascista, «Quaderni di storia» 3, 1976, 139-181. 34 E. Cozzani, Augusto, «La parola nel mondo» 6, 1939, 215. THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 267 fered the services of his ISR (cf. supra) to the regime throughout the whole ventennio fascista (the twenty years during which fascism was in power, from 1922 until 1943): «One thing is sure: Rome has to return, and it will return free and as the Master of the sea that is by definition hers; Italy has to gain back the lands, which were undeniably assigned to her by Providence: and she will do so under the forceful guidance of the Roman Duce who leads her to her high destiny, ordered by the Victorious King who has started the new series of Emperors who rule and reign from Rome».35 Linked to the concept of empire and imperialism are the historical protagonists which incarnate these virtues. In this context, nearly without exception secondary studies on fascist romanità stress the propagandistic importance of Augustus to the fascist regime, often neglecting the status of Caesar’s role therein.36 One cannot deny that Rome’s first official emperor was lavishly celebrated on the occasion of his bimillenary birthday, as had been the case with Vergil in 1930,37 and Horace in 1935,38 although both to a lesser extent. However, in hindsight, it seems that Julius Caesar was as much a ‘hero’ of fascism as was Augustus. Indeed, many popularizing and scientific publications were dedicated to the dictator, including a series of plays, one of which was even co-written, in collaboration with Giovacchino Forzano, by Mussolini himself.39 The latter publications praised the qualities of the ancient Roman dictator as the man of revolution, a rather rough and rude, but honest statesman who had taken the power, retaining it in his own hands for the greater good of all. He was also the C. Galassi Paluzzi, Continuità di Roma, Estratto dalla rivista ‘Roma’ Anno 1940-XVIII - Fasc. Giugno, Roma 1940, 3. In addition to the present analysis of imperialism and romanità, see M. Cagnetta, Antichisti e impero fascista, Bari 1979; L. Ambrosoli, Recherches sur les thèmes impérialistes dans les programmes et les livres de textes de culture fasciste (1925-1941), «Guerres mondiales et conflits contemporains» 161, 1991, 51-61; and M. Cagnetta, ‘Mare Nostrum’: Roma e nazionalismo italiano fra Otto e Novecento, MNIR 53, 1994, 36-43. On Mussolini’s discourse on Julius Caesar, and in general on antiquity, see J. Nelis, Constructing fascist identity: Benito Mussolini and the myth of romanità, CW 100/4, 2007, 405-407. See also P. Foro, L’autorité de l’antiquité romaine dans le discours mussolinien, in D. Foucault - P. Payen (Éds.), Les Autorités. Dynamiques et mutations d’une figure de référence à l’Antiquité, Grenoble 2007, 75-83. 36 A single example among many: A.T. Wilkins, Augustus, Mussolini, and the Parallel Imagery of Empire, in Lazzaro - Crum (Eds.), Donatello among the Blackshirts, cit., 53-65. Exceptions are M. Wyke, Sawdust Caesar: Mussolini, Julius Caesar, and the drama of dictatorship, in M. Wyke - M. Biddiss (Eds), The Uses and Abuses of Antiquity, Bern-Berlin-Bruxelles-Frankfurt a.M.-New York-Wien 1999, 167-186; J. Nelis, Cesare in scena. Achter de schermen van theater ten tijde van het Italiaanse fascisme, «Documenta» 24/1, 2006, 3-22; and J. Dunnett, The Rhetoric of Romanità: Representations of Caesar in Fascist Theatre, in M. Wyke (Ed.), Julius Caesar in Western Culture, Malden-Oxford-Victoria 2006, 244-265. 37 On the bimillenary celebration of Virgil, see R. Faber, ‘Présence de Virgile’: Seine (pro)faschistische Rezeption, «Quaderni di storia» 18, 1983, 233-271; L. Canfora, Fascismo e bimillenario della nascita di Virgilio, «Enciclopedia virgiliana» 2, 1985, 469-472 and T. Ziolkowski, Virgil and the Moderns, Princeton 1993, 15-17. 38 On the bimillenary celebration of Horace, see F. Citti, Il bimillenario oraziano nell’era fascista, «Aufidus» 16, 1992, 133-142; and M. Cagnetta, Bimillenario della nascita oraziana, «Enciclopedia oraziana» 3, 1998, 615-640. 39 On this aspect, see Dunnett, The Rhetoric of Romanità, cit., and Nelis, Cesare in scena, cit. 35 268 JAN NELIS soldier, the imperator, and the quintessential symbol of ‘revolutionary’ times. Thus he was easily identified with militarist fascism, and portrayable as the incarnation of its spirit, as both an element and source of order in chaos. As a consequence, a significant series of publications went on to identify and discuss the close relationship between Caesar and Mussolini, the figureheads of ‘caesarism’ and fascism.40 A first study of note in this context is La figura storica di Giulio Cesare by Giuseppe Marra, a teacher at, not surprisingly in this context, a military school. Although not referring directly to fascism, Marra treats Caesar’s ‘genius’, as a statesman and as a military leader, focusing particularly on his De Bello Gallico. Initially, the book offers no surprises, its early pages covering rather familiar material, until Marra introduces, on page 48, a startling new idealized image of il duce Mussolini. From this point on, what one might term the ‘true authorial intention’ rapidly reveals itself, in what could be termed a ‘romanità insertion’ entitled Un salto nei secoli. La Marcia su Roma delle camicie nere d’Italia…41 A similar effect is achieved by Alberto Giaccardi’s Cesare e l’Impero. Whereas Marra pinpointed Caesar’s military qualities, Giaccardi also treats his more purely political, ideological side. In Giaccardi, the Roman dictator is the prototype of the soldier and the revolutionary, a new kind of leader desiring to create a New State (cf. supra). The tenor of Giaccardi’s entire discourse is a glorification of the fascist present, through the vehicle of praise directed towards Julius Caesar. At no point is this preoccupation made entirely explicit, except at the beginning of the text, where the author clarifies the interpretive lines to be pursued, introducing the following simile of Caesar and fascism: By a coincidence which, on taking a closer look, is not strange at all when we consider both situations, all that Caesar has achieved in the field of interior politics appears extraordinarily close to our times: constitutional reform, definition of the relationship between executive and legislative power, repression of political misuse of power, municipal and provincial organization, colonial politics and internal migration […]. The first example of Italian-Roman absolutism was at the same time the first example of a totalitarian State.42 Hereupon, Enrico Clausetti published a subsequent paper focusing on Caesar’s military qualities. Originally published in the journal of the Istituto Storico dell’Arma del Genio, it is no surprise that Clausetti’s discourse, after placing much emphasis on Caesar’s already mentioned military genius, ends in the following laudatio of the fascist war machine: «… today as well Italy has crafty military engineers in every 40 Apart from the sources I use in the present paper, in this context some highly interesting treatments can also be found in U. Silvagni, Giulio Cesare, Torino 1930; A. Capolunghi, C. Giulio Cesare. I suoi tempi. La sua vita. Il suo genio, Piombino 1933; F. Landogna, Giulio Cesare. Profilo Storico, Napoli 1934; R. Savarese, Caio Giulio Cesare, Milano 1934; C. Sada, Cesare, Piacenza 1936; and B. Fedi, Il dittatore perpetuo. Sunto critico comparato sulla vita e le opere di Giulio Cesare, Roma 1937. 41 G. Marra, La figura storica di Giulio Cesare, Napoli 1933, 52-56. 42 A. Giaccardi, Cesare e l’Impero. Estratto dalla Rassegna Italiana - Dicembre 1933 - XII, N. 187, Roma 1933, 3. THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 269 corner of this discipline, which […], especially after the fresh wind which Fascism also blew into the army […], have reached a high degree of perfection, maybe more than in any other civilized country».43 Towards the end of the thirties, Caesar, increasingly and almost exclusively, became a symbol of struggle, of battle, in short of all things military. In this symbolic state, he was totally co-opted into the service of fascism, which portrayed him as a direct forerunner to Mussolini, the warlord. Just as Mussolini pretended that his youthful years had been spent mainly in streetfights and quarrelling,44 in this highly particular discursive context Aristide Campanile, author of a Cesare, makes his young Caesar utter the following words at the beginning of this small book: «I will smash your heads in, cowards. I’ll teach you to respect my family! He has a rough time, is bruised; they scratch him; blood leaks out of his nose; but he keeps on kicking. It is he who seems to be the winner. What has happened? One of his friends has insulted Marius, uncle of Caius [Caesar], and he replies […] with the most efficient means possible».45 Modern readers might see this as simply a sample of pulp literature, which of course to a certain extent it was. However, we cite this particular, rather vulgar passage, as on a sociological, receptional level, the impact of this type of literature should not be underestimated, even more so when considered in combination with the plethora of then readily available propagandistic publications concerning Mussolini’s life, thoughts and deeds.46 A final example is Nello Lombardo’s Cesare e Mussolini, which is prefaced by none other than Roberto Farinacci, fascist boss (ras) of Cremona, renowned for attempting a return to the early, violent fascism. Farinacci, writing as though for a type of school manual, following a series of anecdotes from Caesar’s life, invokes Mussolini (Farinacci’s own true hero), stating that Lombardo’s publication is dedicated to the «youth of imperial Italy».47 By 1940, there seems to be not much room left for criticism; as in the case of fascism, romanità has taken on the status of a truth, something to be accepted without questioning. In addition to the above passage taken from Campanile, a taste of what Italian youths had immediate access to anno 1940: «Caesar has never been afraid, E. Clausetti, Giulio Cesare e la tecnica militare, Roma 1935, 21. For a good description of Mussolini’s childhood and the way in which it was officially portrayed, see R.J.B. Bosworth, Mussolini, London 2002, 37-55. 45 A. Campanile, Cesare, Napoli 1940, 9. 46 Concerning popular imagination on Mussolini, see, among others, A.M. Imbriani, Il mito di Mussolini tra propaganda e culto di massa. Le origini (1923-26), «Prospettiva sessanta» 20/2-3-4, 1988, 492-512; A.M. Imbriani, Gli italiani e il Duce: il mito e l’immagine di Mussolini negli ultimi anni del fascismo (19381943), Napoli 1992 and L. Passerini, Mussolini immaginario: storia di una biografia, 1915-1939, Roma-Bari 1991. Concerning the myth of Mussolini as a ‘Roman’, as the incarnation of romanità, see Giardina Vauchez, Il mito di Roma, cit., 241-248. 47 N. Lombardo, Cesare e Mussolini, Brescia 1940, 5. 43 44 270 JAN NELIS just like Mussolini is always right.48 […] ‘they themselves are law.’ This concept of Aristotelian ethics is […] a dogma which is part of our mysticism. He who wants to discuss this principle, or create doubt, is no fascist, nor is he an Italian. He who does not love Caesar,49 cannot understand him. He who does not love Mussolini, cannot understand Mussolini».50 As shown above, for a great part romanità was introduced and propagated into everyday life and culture by discursive means; it was a dominant constituent of the written culture under fascism and, through its omnipresence, functioned as an active, and in this sense quite ‘modern’, element in fascism’s development of a ‘discursive web’, of a new, fascist reality, or so at least was the intention. Apart from the written press however, the concept of an ideological identification between fascism and ancient Rome also penetrated aesthetics. In this context, the fascio littorio, a key symbol of the fascist regime to be seen in various forms on the façades of many government buildings, was a clear reference to the power over life and death held by ancient Roman consuls; and even the fascist salute was termed ‘Roman’.51 The most extreme form of the ‘Romanization’ of habits and exteriorities was the ‘Roman step’, the passo romano, which was introduced into the army at the end of the thirties. The latter was intended to function as a means of imposing discipline onto soldiers, or so in any case Mussolini.52 The fascist army would go to battle, marching the same way as had done ancient Roman legions, the formal structure of which was echoed within the fascist force. Whereas some forms of Roman symbolism such as the Roman salute and fasci littori were commonly accepted, the integration of the Roman step proved problematic. Indeed it was labeled the ‘goose step’ and, even more controversial in this country which, although allied politically to Germany, at times nurtured an outspoken antigermanism, became identified as being a direct copy of the German army’s ‘Prussian step’.53 Even so, the regime largely retained its popularity, while pointing its imperial, ‘Roman’ arrows at a more effective, scenographical target, i.e. the closely related Mussolini ha sempre ragione (‘Mussolini is always right’) was a very popular fascist slogan. On fascist slogans, see C. Galeotti, Mussolini ha sempre ragione. I decaloghi del fascismo, Milano 2000. 49 This is a clear reference to the interview Mussolini had at the beginning of the thirties with Emil Ludwig: «The murder of Caesar was a disgrace for humanity. […] I love Caesar. He was the only one who united in himself the will of the warrior and the genius of the wiseman. In the end he was a philosopher, who contemplated everything sub specie aeternitatis. Yes, he loved glory, but his pride didn’t divide him from humanity» (E. Ludwig, Colloqui con Mussolini, Milano 2001 [19321], 47-48). 50 Lombardo, Cesare e Mussolini, cit., 11. 51 On these aspects, see, among others, Stone, A flexible Rome, cit., and E. Gentile, Fascismo di pietra, Roma-Bari 2007. 52 E. Susmel - D. Susmel, Opera Omnia, cit., XXIX, Firenze 1959, 52-53. 53 In the Roman Central State Archive, I found a map containing some anonymous letters sent to Mussolini, in which people complained Italy, and its armies, were becoming the laughing stock of the rest of the world. See Rome, Archivio Centrale dello Stato, segreteria particolare del duce, carteggio ordinario, busta 183.708. 48 THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 271 fields of architecture and archaeology. To characterize the situation within these fields as one of total State control would be overstating the case; however, official governmental interest in artistic, and especially in architectural, life increased gradually and significantly. Within this context, an architectural style befitting the new Italy was developed, a formal stylistic language capable of incarnating the new spirit. Two major concepts guided the development of this so-called stile littorio: those of tradition and renewal; or romanità and fascism; or classicism and modernism. Architects such as Marcello Piacentini formulated an architectural language that adequately represented and to a certain extent resolved the tension between these two elements, resulting in a modern, functional architecture which both stressed the heritage of greatness passed down from ancient Rome along with the regime’s contemporary imperialistic ambitions. The resulting style, a sort of ‘fascist classicism’, was the mentioned stile littorio. It was, as Piacentini remarked, an architectural language that befitted an «era of forcefulness, and we want to, and will leave everlasting traces».54 The new buildings confirmed physically both the arrival of a new era, as well as the political movement that had brought this era about. Utilising the terms of this original formal language – cf. Rome’s EUR city quarter, partly created during the regime, as well as the foro Mussolini, today the foro italico –, fascist architects used their creations, which in a «stripped»55 sort of classicism incorporated marble arcades, inscriptions etcetera, to relate the story of their modern nation, inspired and prefigured by the force, strength and combativeness of ancient Rome. These efforts were accompanied by the prolific use of sculpture, both in combination with buildings, such as the EUR’s Palazzo della Civiltà del Lavoro, as well as in the creation of independent statuary. The massive scale of such sculptures, which incorporated an accentuated physical musculature of the subjects, mainly nudes, further contributed to an implicit identification of modern Italy with the ancient ‘idealistic’ physical canon, underlining the regime’s interest in forging not only people’s minds, but also, very actively or ‘biopolitically’, in forming their bodies.56 Finally, Roman-imperialistic symbolism was also supported by the physical ‘use’ of remnants of antiquity, such as archaeological remains. In light of our present focus, it is worth stressing the importance of this aspect, as it seems that, within this regime, rather than an antiquarian, or scientific, interest in antiquity driving such archaeological investigations, the ancient past was often made subject to a form of A. Muñoz, Marcello Piacentini parla di Roma e di architettura, «L’Urbe» 2/5, 1937, 25. I borrow this term from Griffin’s analysis of Nazi architecture: Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, cit., 286. 56 Arguably, this ‘biopolitical’ drive was even stronger under Nazism, which did not only want to create a sort of Aryan super-race, but even planned, and effectuated, the extermination of millions regarded as ‘unfitting’ to Nazi ‘ideal’ society. For more information on this aspect, see Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, cit., 310-335. Similar ideas to Griffin’s also seem to have inspired Gentile, Fascismo di pietra, cit. 54 55 272 JAN NELIS ‘brutalization’, in the sense that many of the criteria used in archaeological excavations were all but scientifically justifiable. The major concern seems to have been the recovery and display of remains that could in some way be said to incarnate the image of both past and present greatness as so often stressed in propaganda, whereas their intrinsic value was regularly ignored. Indeed archaeology became very important under the fascist regime, but only to the extent in which it had ‘scenographical’ value, in that it could incarnate the regime’s illustrated discourse on the relationship between empire, force, and other outstanding elements characterising ancient, and contemporary, Rome. As a direct consequence, vast monuments such as the theatre of Marcellus, as well as sections of the imperial fora, were excavated and when possible restored, whereas less ‘eloquent’ monuments were ignored, if not entirely destroyed. A noteworthy example of this is the Roman fountain Meta Sudans, a rare specimen of a surviving ancient structure: because it partially blocked the Via dell’Impero, which ran from Piazza Venezia, the nerve centre of fascist Italy, to the Colosseum, this fountain was demolished, and the avenue itself continued to be constructed in a hasty manner, resulting in the irretrievable loss of much valuable information concerning the imperial fora. This all was accomplished to the greater glory of fascist Italy and its duce, who with the construction of the Via dell’Impero had created the quintessential parade ground, at once iconically linking fascist and ancient Rome, while burying, and even literally crushing, the underlying remains of antiquity.57 By way of conclusion, let us recall the three features of the Italian fascist myth of romanità under investigation: the vitalistic discourse on empire; the use fascism made of the revolutionary, agonistic Julius Caesar; and the regime’s highly selective interest in aesthetics. As has been evidenced, these three aspects are linked in various ways to both antiquity and the fascist present, within which they are presented as both the forerunner of the new creation and, in a sense, as part of the creation itself. Indeed fascism’s relationship to the past was one of tension, tension between epochs and historical protagonists, history and myth. Romanità, an alternative, very particular episode in Italian fascist modernity, was for a great part the product of modern Italy. It was an idea and a tool, inserted into fascism’s development of a ‘political religion’, and put at the service of the projected new, totalitarian State. In this sense, it can rightly be argued that romanità was not the product of some kind of nostalgic longing for a faraway past, but rather the expression of an ideoloAll these aspects have been described in studies such as S. Kostof, The third Rome, Berkeley 1973; A. Cederna, Mussolini urbanista: Lo sventramento di Roma negli anni del consenso, Roma-Bari 1979 and A. Kallis, The ‘Third Rome’ of Fascism: Demolitions and the Search for a New Urban Syntax, «Journal of Modern History» 84, 2012, 40-79. Interesting studies on the aesthetic functionality of romanità are C. Brice, Les fastes impériaux, in F. Liffran (Éd.), Rome 1920-1945 (Le modèle fasciste, son Duce, sa mythologie), Paris 1991, 124-132; Gentile, Fascismo di pietra, cit., and Stone, A flexible Rome, cit. Furthermore, there is the projected publication of a book based on a conference which took place at the University of ToulouseLe Mirail in November 2011: L’Italie fasciste et l’Antiquité (conference organised by Philippe Foro, to be published by Privat, Toulouse). 57 THE MYTH OF ROMANITÀ 273 gy, regime and society in need of historical precedents, which could be used to underbuild contemporary ambitions of a very specific nature. This particular episode of reception of the ancient heritage can be used to underline once again the fact that the example of classical antiquity can serve the most divergent purposes, and can be inserted into ever so many ideological, social, temporal and spatial contexts. Ghent University jan_nelis@hotmail.com Abstract This study situates Italian fascism, both marked and shaped by its relationship with the past and the ensuing tension between epochs and historical protagonists, history and myth, as a ‘secular’ or ‘political religion’, as a ‘biopolitical’ ideology the purpose of which was – at least ideally –, the spiritual and physical renewal of the nation. After a concise discussion of the most fruitful recent movements in the relevant historiography of fascism, it applies these insights to the so-called myth of ‘Romanness’ or romanità. Through a variety of sources, both written and visual, this paper traces the means by which Italian fascism appropriated and propagandised the following three aspects of this purported heritage of Roman antiquity: aspects of academic and popular discourse regarding the notion of empire; the omnipresence of the ‘revolutionary’ and combative Julius Caesar; and a generalised aesthetic use of antiquity. During the ventennio fascista, these latter themes were central to the way in which fascism actively appropriated the heritage of ancient Rome; they have been chosen in order to illustrate the applicability of the mentioned ‘sacralization of politics’, and of a certain fascist modernism. Key-words: Fascism, political religion, romanità, modernism, aesthetics