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.
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, (1977) Roma oggi, Roma-BariR.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
L.Benevolo (1971): Roma da ieri a domani, editori Laterza, Bari. M. F. Boemi, C. M. Travaglini (a cura di, 2006): Roma dall’alto, Croma, Roma. G. Bonaccorso (a cura di, 2009): Le acque e la città (XV-XVI secolo), Università Roma Tre – Croma, Roma. B. Brizzi (2001): Il Tevere, un secolo di immagini, Editore Colombo, Roma. G. Caneva, C. M. Travaglini, C. Virlouvet (a cura di, 2017): Roma, Tevere, Litorale, Università Roma Tre- Ecole Française de Rome - Croma, Roma. L.Cardilli (a cura di, 1995): Gli anni del Governatorato (1926-1944), interventi urbanistici, scoperte archeologiche, arredo urbano, restauro, Edizioni Kappa, Roma. Centro Studi e Ricerche Ripa Grande (1984): Studio di navigabilità del Tevere, Agor, Pomezia. F.Coarelli (2008): Guida archeologica di Roma, Laterza, Roma-Bari. Comune di Roma-Autorità di Bacino del fiume Tevere (2006), Il Tevere a Roma: Portolano, Edizioni Ambiente, Milano. G.Ciucci, V. Fraticelli (a cura di, 1984): Roma Capitale. Uso e trasformazione della città storica, Marsilio, Venezia. L. Cupelloni (a cura di, 2001): Il mattatoio di Testaccio a Roma, Gangemi Editore, Roma. R. d’Errico, C. M. Travaglini (a cura di, 2014): Ricerche sul patrimonio urbano fra Testaccio e Ostiense Università Roma Tre – Croma, Roma. A. De Sanctis, B. Roma, G. Testa (1994): Evoluzione di una periferia: Borgo, Prati, Mazzini, Bonsignori Editore. C. D’Onofrio (1968): Il Tevere e Roma, Bozzi Editore, Roma. C. D’Onofrio (1980): IL Tevere: l’isola Tiberina, le inondazioni, i mulini, i porti, le rive, i muraglioni, i ponti di Roma, Romana Società Editrice, Roma. Due ponti perdonali sul Tevere. Concorso internazionale di progettazione (2001), Alinea Editrice, Firenze. J. Le Gall (2005): il Tevere, fiume di Roma nell’antichità, Edizioni Quasar, Roma. A. M. Ranieri (2003) I ponti di Roma, Colombo Editore, Roma. A. Rinelli (2002): Roma vista dal Tevere, Edizioni C. Lindbergh & P. M. M. Segarra Lagunes (2004): Il Tevere e Roma, Gangemi Editore, Roma. B. Ware Allen (2018): Tiber: Eternal river of Rome, Foredge.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 site visit. Site visits are conceived as experiences of investigation on field, with the intention to recognize, distinguish, identify, and measure the place. In the case of an extension of the health emergency by COVID-19 all the provisions governing the conduct of teaching activities and student evaluation will be implemented. In this case, in order to teach in remote mode, the Microsoft Teams platform will be used.Attendance
75% compulsoryType 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. In the case of an extension of the health emergency by COVID-19 the exams 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.