Becoming Roman Again 547city that sucks the best blood from the nation” (quoted in Salvatori 2006: 762). Later
references to Rome assumed a more positive connotation to the point that, by 1922, the
name—together with its associated past—would undergo a complete restoration (Mus-
solini 1922: 412):
We are intent on fashioning Rome as a city after our own spirit, that is to say, a purified city
purged of all those elements that would corrupt and defile her; we shall endeavor to make
Rome our beating heart and quick spirit of the imperial Italy that we all dream of.Although Mussolini was a child of the Risorgimento, he did not slavishly adhere to the
Roman values it espoused, which largely pertained to the Republican period. Instead,
Fascism filtered Rome in such a way as to emphasize her imperial past. As such, Fascism
did not present itself as merely a new movement, but rather as the return of a glorious
past that had been revitalized through, most importantly, a “force which would unite
Italy and Italians after centuries of disunity and foreign occupation” (Stone 1999: 207).
Apart from the obvious visual references to ancient Rome, such as thefasci, the eagles,
and the Roman salute, many of which are frequently misinterpreted or decontextualized,
it is important not to lose sight of the unifying or cohesive power that was expected of the
ancient Roman Empire’s role in the Fascist present (Argenio 2008; Giardina and Vauchez
2008; Gentile 1993). The complex relationship between ancient Rome, or, more prop-
erly speaking, the notion of Roman qualities summed up by the termRomanitas,on
the one hand, and, on the other hand, Fascist ideology, has been thoroughly studied, in
relation to the impact of Fascism on Classical Studies (Cagnetta 1977; 1979; Canfora
1976; 1977; Visser 1992; Gentile 1990; 1993), and in relation to archaeology (Perelli
1977; Kostof 1978; Manacorda and Tamassia 1985; Belardelli 2002; Salvatori 2006;
Nelis 2007; Argenio 2008; Giardina and Vauchez 2008; Kallis 2011; Arthurs 2012).
Nevertheless, some clarification of what is meant byRomanitasis in order. When trans-
lated into English, the term may be defined as “the spirit or ideals of Ancient Rome”
(Speake 1999). In reality, only a single record of this word is known to exist in Latin
literature. Tertullian, in hisDe Pallio(4.1), writes:
Quid nunc, si est Romanitas omni salus, nec honestis tamen modis ad Graios estis? (However,
now, if Romanity is to the benefit of all, why are you nonetheless inclined to the Greeks,
even in less honourable matters?)Tertullian’s text refers to a recent change in attire in the city of Carthage: the choice
to don the Roman toga as opposed to the traditionalpallium.ThetermRomanitasis
therefore employed to set up a contrast or distinction, but rather than pointing to what
is specifically Roman, it denotes what is non-Punic; “an ethnic category distinct from
the Roman colonizers” (Wilhite 2007: 133). Tertullian does not go on to explain which
characteristics are representative ofRomanitas. Kramer (1998: 81–2) maintains that the
meaning of the word may be inferred from the context as signifying “römische Art,
Römertum.” While rarely used in classical Latin, this term acquired new layers of meaning
during the modern period, especially in relation to its Fascist use, which was charged with
references to Roman culture. The question then becomes which values of Roman culture