, ,

ORIGINS OF NEAPOLIS (NAPLES)

Cuma, the first “apoikìa” [from the verb “apoikèo” = “I live far away”] – Greek colony of the West, immediately after its foundation in the second half of the 8th century BC , expanded rapidly along the coast of the Gulf of Naples, founding fortress-ports, “epìneia”, such as Miseno, Pozzuoli, Pizzofalcone, Capri. It was a way to guard the territory and control it.

However, at the end of the 6th century B.C. Cuma also favoured the foundation of “Neapolis” (1), which was not only an emporium like many others, but a real city: this further expansion inevitably led to a clash with the Etruscans, another population which spread across the territory. From their cities in the Campania plain (Capua, Calatia, Nola) and the Salerno area (Pontecagnano, Fratte) they moved towards the coast contending with the Greeks the dominion over the indigenous people. (2) The naval battle of Cuma of 474 B.C. was won by the Greeks and it caused the beginning of the progressive decline of the Etruscans in Campania.

Although very little of the Greek-Roman “Neapolis” remains today, the historical center of Naples, entirely superimposed on the ancient city, has maintained its regular urban planning, articulated on 3 East-West “platèiai” [sing. platèia – main roads] and about twenty North-South “stenòpoi” [sing. stenòpos – secondary roads], forming rectangular blocks (35m x 160/180m). The city developed over about 70 hectares and was surrounded by gullies. It was also bordered by massive city walls of tufa blocks dating back to the 5th century BC, restored several times between the 4th century B.C. and the 5th century A.D. (3)

The very large “Agorà” [main square], was divided into two levels, separated by the median “platèia”, traced by the current “Via dei Tribunali”. This arrangement is known above all for the presence of remains of buildings from the Roman era, although it is a shared opinion that it may reflect a contemporary urban planning of the Greek Hippodamian style.
The upper agora, the mountain area, is characterized by the presence, of two big buildings for show side by side, the Theater and the Odèion (Small Theater). To the south is the great “Dioscuri” temple, also from the Imperial era, which dominated the median “platèia”. (4) Of this temple, two surviving Corinthian columns are still on the facade of the “Basilica of San Paolo Maggiore” in Naples.
The lower agora, however, narrower than the upper one, boasted the presence of the covered market and the shops of the Imperial era. The functional distinction between the two squares, which appeared evident in the Roman era, may have been realized as early as the 4th century BC, when the lower agorà assumed a commercial character, leaving the more purely political functions to the upper one. (5)

 

WHY IS THE HISTORICAL CENTER OF NAPLES SO INTERESTING ?

The historic center of Naples, entirely superimposed on the ancient Greek city, has perfectly preserved the regular urban planning of the Greek “Neapolis”, divided into 3 East-West platèiai (main roads) and about twenty North-South stenòpoi (secondary roads). The Greek city and, at a lesser depth, the Roman city are well preserved under the streets of the current historic center: in archaeological areas such as the excavations of the church of San Lorenzo, this phenomenon is very evident.

Furthermore, it seems that Akragas (Agrigento), in Sicily, was the only city of the colonial West to have developed duplication of the space destined to the ”Agorà” (main square) already in the classical era [480 B.C. – 323 B.C.], with a radical separation of administrative functions from commercial ones, according to a scheme which, in the motherland, took place in the late classical and Hellenistic period. (6). However, it seems that “Neapolis” soon followed the example of the illustrious polis (city) of Akragas, and this aspect is particularly interesting.

 

Bibliography:

1) See article: Daniela GIAMPAOLA, “Approdare”, pag 207, in Massimo OSANNA e Carlo RESCIGNO – Pompei e i Greci , Electa 2017
2) Stefano DE CARO “Le culture della Campania antica preromana: I I Greci (Pithekoussai, Cuma, Neapolis) in “Il Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli” – a cura di Stefano De Caro – Electa Napoli 1994. pag. 21
3) Gioacchino Francesco LA TORRE, Sicilia e Magna Grecia –– Editori Laterza – 2011 pag.210
4) Ivi, pag 260-261
5) Ivi, pag. 261
6) Ivi, pp. 258-260

  

 

For further info about our guided tours of Pompeii

/0 Comments/by
, ,

NAPOLEON AND HIS ART THEFTS

In the history of the western world the figure of Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France and King of Italy, is comparable only to that of Julius Caesar. Like him, Napoleon was an unparalleled military genius and a great legislator, in a moment of transition from one historical era to another, deeply marked by the upheavals of the French Revolution.

In 1796,  he was sent to fight on a front considered secondary, Italy, with an army of 38,000 poorly equipped soldiers, but the war results were extraordinary, so also were his “art thefts” (Wescher). Napoleon’s advance was favourably seen both in the cities submitted to Austria, and in the territories of the Papal State where Bologna, Ferrara, Ancona and the occupation of Rome itself were falling in rapid succession. In our country the Napoleonic commissioners were in charge of requisitions. In addition to the painter and collector Wicar, was the painter Antoine Gros, who had long stayed in Italy, the sculptor Jean-Baptiste Moitte, and the engraver Dutertre. Many of them already had a good knowledge of Italy but they used also guide books, collections of engravings as well as reports of travelers of the “Grand Tour” with their descriptions of the main masterpieces kept in churches and palaces.

Napoleon’s march met with no obstacles: even in the States of the Church the intolerance for the papal government was so strong as to make Napoleon appear to be a “liberator”, and as such he was greeted by Foscolo, who  in 1799 dedicated a famous ode to him (“To Napoleon Liberator “).

To give a semblance of legitimacy to the raids perpetrated by his armies, Napoleon had included the requisitions of works of art in the clauses of the armistices and peace treaties: the forced transfer of so many masterpieces would thus be included in the agreements and, instead of appearing as an abuse, it would have been accepted as part of the obligations of the vanquished.  As for the moral aspects, the Directoire justified itself by claiming that the works of art, as created by free spirits, had to be brought into the homeland of freedom, France,  which would also have provided for their better preservation.

The richest haul was collected in Rome, where French troops entered in February 1798.  Pope Pius VI Braschi – the great proponent of the “Pius Clementinus Museum” – was deposed, taken prisoner and sent to France where he died the following year. In the Papal States the Republic was proclaimed. The French commissioners then entered into action and dedicated themselves to the requisition of works of art, while assuring the population that the ancient monuments would not be touched. In reality they entertained the idea of ​​removing the two colossal statues of the “Dioscuri” in front of the “Quirinale” and of dismantling the “Trajan Column”, projects fortunately  abandoned  due to the impossibility of realizing them. On the other hand the sculptures, which had been admired in “The Courtyard of Statues” by Bramante since the Renaissance – such as the “Laocoon”, the “Apollo of the Belvedere”, the “Nile” and the “Tiber”, the “Sleeping Ariadne”, the “Torso” – or masterpieces of the Capitoline Museums as the “Spinario” (“Boy with Thorn”) donated by Sisto IV in 1471, the “Pudica Venus”, the “Discobolus”, all took the road to Paris. As it happens in the turbulent days of every occupation, there were countless episodes of vandalism. Furthermore, the French commissioners, once they had drawn up the list of works to be sent to Paris, began to trade, selling off a quantity of paintings and sculptures considered to be of lower quality.

On 27 and 28 July a very long procession paraded through the streets of Paris to reach the Louvre Museum and a shrewd and spectacular show renewed the glories of the Roman triumphs with an exhibition of the conquered treasures. The boxes were marked by large writings that indicated their contents, but the most famous “preys”, such as the “Laocoon” and the “Horses of San Marco”, were offered, unpacked, to the astonishment of the citizens. The great absentee from this grand parade was Napoleon Bonaparte, who had embarked for Egypt, opening a new front of hostility. Having abandoned the ideals of the “Musée Révolutionnaire”, the great French museum, renamed “Musée Napoléon” since 1803, now takes on the glorification aspect of Napoleonic power, an image of the political and cultural supremacy of France seen through the exhibition of the most representative masterpieces of the great traditions of European States.

So much power was identified in the Louvre Museum that in 1810, Napoleon’s wedding to Maria Luisa of Austria was celebrated in the “Grande Gallerie”, which was cleared of paintings and sculptures for the occasion.

In 1815 the Battle of Waterloo marked the end of the Napoleonic era, but some “art thefts” from the Italian Peninsula remained and are still in France today: the “Tiber” statue, The “Crowning of thorns”, painted by Titian and other relevant masterpieces.

 

Excerpt from: Maria Teresa Iorio, Il museo nella storia , Pearson, 2018, pp 76-81

  

 

For further info about our guided tours of Pompeii

/0 Comments/by
,

THE PARADOX OF MODERN MUSEUMS

 

Museums cost a lot of money, because they require qualified personnel, constant maintenance of the spaces, conservation and restoration of the artifacts, microclimatic control of the exhibition halls and repository, security systems, and so on. However, a museum (or an archaeological site) must be financed by the community because only in this way can it  carry out its “public service” of education, study and enjoyment (1) in a complete way and without external influences. On the other hand, the fact that a museum is “financed by the community” is also a litmus paper of the degree of civilization of a Country and its political maturity.

 

If the museum were to self-finance like any private company, that is, trying to be more and more appreciated by its customers/visitors, it would be forced to perform only (or above all) those activities of sure success for its visitors. But the orientation of the museum towards the visitors, if based on the satisfaction of their  needs as they result from the analysis of customer satisfaction, would reduce its capacity for experimentation and innovation.  Egyptian antiquities, the Impressionists and dinosaurs are themes of sure success, but the more exhibitions on these subjects are displayed, the more their contents tend to repeat themselves. So even if these exhibitions bring more public to the museum, that audience from that museum does not draw significant cultural content. (2) Therefore, the museum must be funded by the community.

The Great Paradox:

This institution has been called the “museum/rentier” because it lives on public funding, like the landowner who does not work, but merely manages his own income. The “museum-rentier”, being able to count on financial sources not directly related to the cultural activities carried out, lives – most of the time – a life coldly detached from the demand expressed by citizens, responding exclusively to those who provide the flow of public funding, the Public Administration.  The museum does not need to find sources of support by implementing a strategy of relationships “services offered/financing” with the different components of society (citizens, tourists, foundations and non-profit institutions, commercial operators, companies, business associations, public and private bodies, local authorities, etc.). So here is the paradox that the public functioning of the museum – which is born and justified to favour the use of the public service/museum by all citizens – risks distancing  from them rather than  drawing them in. (3)

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

(1)  ICOM (International Council of Museums) defines the museum as follows:

 It is an organization that was created in 1946 by and for museum professionals. A museum is a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment.

2) Maria Vittoria Marini Clarelli, Il Museo nel mondo contemporaneo, Carocci Editore, 2014, pag. 82

3) ibid. pp. 53-54

 

 

For further info about our guided tours of Pompeii

/0 Comments/by
,

79 A.D. ERUPTION OF MT VESUVIUS

79 A.D. ERUPTION OF MT VESUVIUS

 

A decade or two later the poet Statius lamented, “In the future, when crops grow again and this devastated wilderness blooms once more, will people believe that towns, people and estates are all buried beneath the soil?”(1).

 

August 24

At 1,00 pm, after a long rest, Mount Vesuvius suddenly began its explosive activity without any warning which could have given some clue to the inhabitants of Pompeii of what was to follow. Had there been such a warning then, perhaps such a huge loss of life could have been avoided. The telluric movements, which preceded the final disaster, were simply perceived as earthquakes, a typical feature of that territory. The eruption began with a terrifying noise: a lava cap was blown away.

Along the volcanic conduit molten magma came up, which, due to the abrupt release of the gas, became volcanic foam, expanding rapidly and rising to the surface up fragments. The column of gas, ash and pumice stones reached 15 km in height; the cloud, carried by winds in altitude, was dispersed over a very large area in South-East direction, with simultaneous rain of ash over Pompeii and Stabiae. Only a very small part of it rained over Herculaneum, where the volcanic stratigraphy reveals the presence of a thin layer of pumice stones. (2)

At 5,00 pm, The pumice stones, which reached a height of about 50 cm, destroyed the roofs of the houses with their weight. Some of the inhabitants began to flee from the city, searching in the dark “which hides things like when you are in a closed room with lights off” (Pliny the Younger, Letters to friends, VI, 20, 14) and they started to suffer from suffocation crisis due to the dense and warm air that accompanied the emission of ash. (3)

At Midnight, The volcanic column reached a height of 30 km: Mount Vesuvius started to emit 200,000 tons of fragmented magma per second.

 

August 25

At 1,00 – 2,00 am first collapse of a volcanic column took place, and its top lowered about 20 km. The first surge (incandescent cloud), with a temperature of about 400 degrees centigrade and a speed of about 80 kilometers per hour (10/20 meters per second) reached Herculaneum and caused instant death, by thermal shock, of its inhabitants who were seeking refuge at the beach. (4)

At 2.00 am – 6.00 am At dawn, the emission of pumice decreased, allowing the escape from the city of those who were still able to leave their homes or temporary shelters.

At 6.30 am A renewed eruptive activity caused a surge (S3) that reached Pompeii, stopping along the northern side of the walls; those people who were outside died, in the villas of the Mysteries and Diomedes and the fugitives outside of the Herculaneum Gate.

At 7.30 am Two surges (S4 and S5), which originated within a short time of each other, passed over the wall and hit the city. It was the moment of the death of the Pompeians who remained in the city or were surprised while escaping. Pyroclastic clouds also reached the Moregine area and the fluvial port of Pompeii, located at the mouth of the Sarno river. (5)

In about 20 hours of activity Mt Vesuvius spewed 10 billion tons of magma and hundreds of millions of water vapor and gases out, at a speed of 300 meters per second.

Ancient Herculaneum remained buried under a thick blanket of pyroclastic material, mud and surge between 16 and 30 meters high, above which, in the area of Villa dei Papiri, the lava of the 1631 eruption also overlapped. (6)
Pompeii was buried under a thick rain of ash and pumice stones up to 6-7 meters high.
Today, both of these Roman towns give us an amazing cross-section of all the everyday aspects of Roman civilization. (7)

 

Bibliography:

1) Statius, Silvae, IV,4, pp. 78-85
2) Maria Paola Guidobaldi – Ercolano – Electa Napoli 2012 – p. 7
3) Fabrizio Pesando Maria Paola Guidobaldi, Pompei, Oplontis, Ercolano, Stabiae, Guide Archeologiche Laterza 2018, p. 14
4) Maria Paola Guidobaldi, op.cit. p. 7
5) Fabrizio Pesando Maria Paola Guidobaldi, op.cit. , p. 15
6) Maria Paola Guidobaldi, op.cit. p. 8
7) A. Maiuri – Pompei – Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato – MCMLXIV – XI edizione – p. 5

 

 

For further info about our guided tours of Pompeii

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

THE ETRUSCANS, THE GREEKS AND THE PHOENICIANS

                                           

THE ETRUSCANS, THE GREEKS AND THE PHOENICIANS

In the eighth century BC, the Italian peninsula, except for the Southern part, where the Greeks began to found colonies (Cuma in the second half of the eighth century BC, Sybaris at the end of the eighth century BC, as well as a few others), was inhabited by the so-called Italic peoples: Latins, Umbrians, Sabines, Piceni, Samnites, Iapigi, Messapi, Equi, Veneti, Liguri, etc., where the economic and cultural influence of the Etruscans was strong. The Italian territory was composed of a network of indigenous villages. (1)

 

For a mere academic schematization, we can outline 3 models of occupation of the  Italian territory, which were applied by the Etruscans, Greeks and Phoenicians.

 

ETRUSCAN MODEL: The Etruscans, with their arrival, favored new forms of urbanization by aggregating small scattered villages. Thus the so-called “Etruscan synoecism” takes place: this term  indicates the process of unification (2). A probable example was Pompeii, where the mythical people of Sarrastri, who previously lived on the banks of the Sarno river in villages of huts, were urged by the Etruscans to “unify” by founding the famous town of Campania.

 

GREEK MODEL: The other model is the one that spread in Southern Italy, “Magna Graecia” [and Sicily ed.], where the urbanization process was the opposite, because it started from a global vision of the urban planning. (3)The Greek settlers considered the “fertile soil” as the most important criteria in the selection of the site, since in most cases, to look for new lands to be cultivated, they had abandoned the motherland, afflicted by the increase in population, by the low quantity of production and quality of its soils (poor, being superficial and stony) and their intensive exploitation, which lasted for centuries. (4)Therefore this will determine the acquisition, sometimes violent, of the land at the expense of the natives. (5) Archaeological research has almost always documented that the Greeks systematically destroyed the indigenous villages in order to establish their settlements in Magna Graecia and Sicily.

PHOENICIAN MODEL:  The Phoenicians tended only to found emporiums for their trade with the local populations, with whom they usually entertained peaceful relations. (6). A notable exception is Carthage, which, in its long history, assumed a hegemonic role in the western Mediterranean. It maintained its great power until the time when, in the III century B.C., it clashed with Rome (Punic Wars).

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

  1. Giuseppe Gisotti, La fondazione delle città, Carocci Editore 2016 – pag. 26
  2. Ibid. p. 26
  3. Ibid.  p. 26
  4. Ibid. p. 22
  5. Gioacchino Francesco La Torre, Sicilia e Magna Grecia, Editori Laterza, 2011, p. 24
  6. Giuseppe Gisotti, op. cit. p. 20

 

 

For further info about our guided tours of Pompeii

/0 Comments/by