Could - and should - urban space be considered cultural heritage? If so, how can we reveal the hidden properties of the spatial system, so to turn it into a cultural landscape? And how could these properties be communicated in order to integrate space as cultural heritage into contemporary and social construction processes? How can cities integrate historic layers (palimpsests) into their urban development? The project aims at critically examining and synthesizing archaeological and urban artefacts, matching them with other memories of human experience in the urban landscape. Our intention is to analyze and interpret the city of Rome following roman aqueducts (from Porta Capena to Parco degli Acquedotti) with its surroundings, hypothetically made up of five distinguishable, interrelated layers: The original landscape: the topography of the ancient city; Classical Rome (a period of ca. twelve centuries); Medieval Rome (ca. ten centuries); the Rome of the Renaissance and Baroque (ca. four centuries); Modern and contemporary Rome (after 1871). These different layers have constantly interacted through the historical development of urbanism, and their existing elements in the urban landscape will be identified, studied and described by students in different ways such as mapping, storytelling collection, archivial research.
teacher profile teaching materials
Landscape coincides with these values, it can be considered as the connective tissue: a memories repository of the material and immaterial values.
In order to develop an experience of contemporary landscape and physical heritage we have to conduct a multidisciplinary analysis, both direct and indirect.
Landscape and its history can be investigated through the expressions of tangible and intangible culture, through the study of visible and invisible data.
Indirect and regressive analysis (archival studies, topography, geomorphology, historical and modern maps, iconography, etc.) will be integrated with the investigation on field, with the intention to recognize, distinguish, identify, and measure the place.
The different layers, which have constantly interacted through the historical development, will be identified, studied and described by students in different ways such as mapping, storytelling collection, archival research etc.
Diachronic analysis of the different layers will be essential to identify and distinguish shapes and permanent values compared to the structural changes introduced in the contemporary physical environment
From this analysis we will begin the representation and interpretation of the landscape aiming at critically examining and synthesizing archaeological and urban artefacts, matching them with other memories of human experience in the urban landscape.
L.Cardilli (a cura di, 1995): Gli anni del Governatorato (1926-1944), interventi urbanistici, scoperte archeologiche, arredo urbano, restauro, Edizioni Kappa, Roma 1995.
G.Ciucci, V. Fraticelli (a cura di, 1984): Roma Capitale. Uso e trasformazione della città storica, Marsilio, Venezia 1984.
F.Coarelli (2008): Guida archeologica di Roma, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2008
R.Funiciello, A.Praturlon, G.Giordano (2008): La geologia di Roma dal centro storico alla periferia. Memorie descrittive della carta geologica d’Italia, Firenze, S.EL.CA.
P.Handke, Canto della Durata, Einaudi Milano, 1995.
I.Insolera, (1965): Roma. Immagini e realtà dal X al XX secolo, Roma-Bari 1965 (Grandi opere. Le città nella storia d’Italia).
R.Lanciani, (1988): Forma Urbis Romae.
S.Muratori, R.Bollati, S.Bollati, G.Marinucci (1963): Studi per una operante storia urbana di Roma, Roma, Centro Studi di Storia Urbanistica, 1963.
L.Quaroni (1975), Immagine di Roma, Laterza
P.O.Rossi, (2009): Roma. Guida all’architettura moderna. 1909-2000, Roma-Bari.
S.Schama,(2004): Landscape and memory, Harper Perennial.
Programme
Thinking about heritage is thinking about time, identity, memory and storytelling.Landscape coincides with these values, it can be considered as the connective tissue: a memories repository of the material and immaterial values.
In order to develop an experience of contemporary landscape and physical heritage we have to conduct a multidisciplinary analysis, both direct and indirect.
Landscape and its history can be investigated through the expressions of tangible and intangible culture, through the study of visible and invisible data.
Indirect and regressive analysis (archival studies, topography, geomorphology, historical and modern maps, iconography, etc.) will be integrated with the investigation on field, with the intention to recognize, distinguish, identify, and measure the place.
The different layers, which have constantly interacted through the historical development, will be identified, studied and described by students in different ways such as mapping, storytelling collection, archival research etc.
Diachronic analysis of the different layers will be essential to identify and distinguish shapes and permanent values compared to the structural changes introduced in the contemporary physical environment
From this analysis we will begin the representation and interpretation of the landscape aiming at critically examining and synthesizing archaeological and urban artefacts, matching them with other memories of human experience in the urban landscape.
Core Documentation
L.Benevolo (1971): Roma da ieri a domani, editori Laterza, Bari 1971.L.Cardilli (a cura di, 1995): Gli anni del Governatorato (1926-1944), interventi urbanistici, scoperte archeologiche, arredo urbano, restauro, Edizioni Kappa, Roma 1995.
G.Ciucci, V. Fraticelli (a cura di, 1984): Roma Capitale. Uso e trasformazione della città storica, Marsilio, Venezia 1984.
F.Coarelli (2008): Guida archeologica di Roma, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2008
R.Funiciello, A.Praturlon, G.Giordano (2008): La geologia di Roma dal centro storico alla periferia. Memorie descrittive della carta geologica d’Italia, Firenze, S.EL.CA.
P.Handke, Canto della Durata, Einaudi Milano, 1995.
I.Insolera, (1965): Roma. Immagini e realtà dal X al XX secolo, Roma-Bari 1965 (Grandi opere. Le città nella storia d’Italia).
R.Lanciani, (1988): Forma Urbis Romae.
S.Muratori, R.Bollati, S.Bollati, G.Marinucci (1963): Studi per una operante storia urbana di Roma, Roma, Centro Studi di Storia Urbanistica, 1963.
L.Quaroni (1975), Immagine di Roma, Laterza
P.O.Rossi, (2009): Roma. Guida all’architettura moderna. 1909-2000, Roma-Bari.
S.Schama,(2004): Landscape and memory, Harper Perennial.
Reference Bibliography
AA.VV.(2002): Roma e il suo fiume fascicolo monografico allegato a “Il giornale dell’Arte”, edito da Umberto Allemandi &C., n.209 aprile 2002. AA.VV. (2009): Lungo il Tevere. Episodi di mutazione urbana, Franco Angeli 2009. AA.VV. (2013): Roma attraversa il Tevere. Roma nasce dal Tevere e il Tevere la fa moderna, Prospettive edizioni 2013. AA.VV. (2006): Il Tevere a Roma. Portolano. Autorità di bacino del fiume Tevere, Edizioni Ambiente 2006 T. Ashby (2010): The Aqueducts of Ancient Rome. Martino Publishing. C.Benocci, E.Guidoni (1983), Atlante storico delle città italiane, Roma, vol.2: IL GHETTO, Bonsignori Ed. C.Bernoni, R. Mammucari (2007): Roma scomparsa nelle fotografie di Ettore Roesler Franz, Newton Compton Editori V.Calzolari, (1999): Storia e natura come sistema. Roma, Argos. M.Caperna (2013) La Lungara. Vol. 1: Storia e vicende edilizie dell'area tra il Gianicolo e il Tevere. Edizioni Quasar 2013. A.Carandini (a cura di), Atlante di Roma antica, Electa, Milano 2012, 2 voll. S.Caviglia (2018): A proposito del Tevere. Storia, bellezza e futuro del fiume che ha fatto grande Roma, edizioni Intra Moenia. F.Del Prete (2002): Il fondo fotografico del Piano Regolatore di Roma 1883 – la visione trasformata, Gangemi editore, Roma 2002. H.Di Giuseppe (2018): Lungo il Tevere. Scorreva lento il tempo dei paesaggi tra XV e I Secolo a.C. Edizioni Scienze e Lettere, 2018. C.D’Onofrio, (1968): Il Tevere e Roma, Ugo Bozzi ed., Roma 1968. C.D’Onofrio, (1980): Il Tevere, Romana Società Editrice, Roma 1980. H.Kaufman, G.Lerner (1982): Hollywood sul Tevere, Ed. Sperling & K. 1982. R.Funiciello, A.Praturlon, G.Giordano (2008): La geologia di Roma. Dal centro storico alla periferia, Memorie descrittive della Carta Geologica d’Italia, vol. 80/2008 R.Funiciello, G.Heiken, D.De Rita, M.Parotto, (2006): I sette colli. Guida geologica a una Roma mai vista. Roma: Raffaello Cortina Editore. J.Garms (1997): Vedute di Roma dal Medioevo all'Ottocento, Electa Napoli, 1997. M.Guardo (ed., 2011): Sul Biondo Tevere, Nova Charta 2011. A.La Padula (1969), Roma e la regione nell’epoca napoleonica: contributo alla storia urbanistica della città e del territorio, Istituto Editoriale Pubblicazioni Internazionali, Roma 1969. M.G. Mian (2019): Tevere controcorrente, Neri Pozza, Vicenza 2019. L.Picone (ed., 1990): Ponti di Roma e vedute sul Tevere di Giuseppe Vasi, Editalia 1990. Maria Margarita Segarra Lagunes, (2006): “Il Tevere e Roma- Storia di una simbiosi”, Gangemi, Roma 2004, M.E.Tittoni, F.Pirani, P.Fornasiero (2007): Paesaggi della memoria. Gli acquerelli romani di Ettore Roesler Franz dal 1876 al 1895. Ediz. italiana e inglese, Edizioni Mandragora, 2007. “Ricerche di Storia dell’Arte” (2006), n.89, numero monografico dedicato a “Roma vs Tevere” 2006 Carocci editore, Roma. E.B.Van Deman (1934): The Building of the Roman Aqueducts, Washington. Cartography Frutaz, A.P. (1962): Le piante di Roma, Istituto di studi romani. Frutaz, A.P. (1972): Le piante del Lazio Istituto di studi romani.Type of delivery of the course
Lectures introduce the theoretical framework and the working methodology for research by students. Every lecture will introduce a specific stage of the work that will then be examined during the following virtual visit, which are conceived as experiences of investigation, with the intention to recognize, distinguish, identify, and measure the place. The group HERITAGE is on Microsoft Teams at the following link: https://teams.microsoft.com/l/team/19%3ae709859a49e14c8d8f48b6e09a2b8308%40thread.tacv2/conversations?groupId=cea122e5-acf3-4783-a374-cfdb2cfdc0ad&tenantId=ffb4df68-f464-458c-a546-00fb3af66f6aAttendance
Attendance is compulsory at 75% of the hoursType of evaluation
1. Analysis report (individual assignment) You will individually analyse the case study on the basis of a chosen theoretical perspective. The analysis report consists of • A written text of maximum 2000 words • A clear discussion of the theoretical aspects discussed in the module • A clear operationalisation of these aspects to the case study • A clear awareness of the target group of the document 2. Presentations • A 15 minute team presentation of the findings • A clear distribution of tasks during the presentation • Adequate use of visual support • Clear style and structure • Evaluation of learning points concerning the process. The summer session will be held in remote mode, via audio-video conference with the use of the software Microsoft Teams. The essays will be uploaded by the students on the same platform one week before the exam.