Studies dedicated to ancient ‘space and place’ have become increasingly commonplace, in large part thanks to the so-called ‘spatial turn’, initiated during the 1990s, which continues to exert influence over studies of Roman urban settings. Related debates have focused on how to define specific spaces, not least the problematic dichotomy between ‘public’ and ‘private’. It is with the first of these terms that R. is concerned, taking issue with the simplistic ways in which the public spaces of Republican Rome have been approached, in contrast to a wealth of scholarship examining the gradations of private and semi-public spaces within domestic settings. Her book presents an argument for public spaces as inherently unstable, with specific locations and the very concept of space needing ‘to be constantly defined and redefined’ (p. 2) in order to move beyond their relatively meaningless designation as ‘non-residential’. R. also aims to ‘incorporate a larger range of actors into our calculations’ of the relationship between space and politics and the extent to which it can be considered gendered (p. ix). Via a series of case studies she demonstrates the complex role played by the intentional infiltration of so-called ‘public spaces’ by aspects of a more strictly private sphere.
Chapter 1 serves to orientate the reader both spatially and methodologically. R. neatly sets out the issues she intends to explore via what she terms ‘an extreme example: the Atrium Vestae’ (p. 2). By problematising just one feature of the Forum Romanum as neither strictly public (it included residential space and paralleled domestic architecture) nor private (it was the location for public ritual performances and the Vestals had a key role in public politics), she efficiently and effectively draws attention to the intricacies of trying to assign spaces to strict categories. There follows a brief, and sometimes rather selective, review of the key theoretical concepts and themes that have shaped studies of ancient space (notably movement, memory and performance). By the end of the chapter R. has established the route she will take through her exploration of public space: one which focuses on the control of particular types of behaviour, especially the deliberate manipulation of concepts of public and private, combined with the ambiguities imposed by the political and sacred role of these settings in the production of more subtle and meaningful public space(s).
The chapters which follow each address a key space or theme, beginning with an examination of the terms publicus and privatus (Chapter 2). This chapter adopts a more explicitly textual approach than others, and R. uses her scrutiny of the sources to demonstrate how violence and control were essential for ancient definitions of public space. Space, she asserts, could be divided into different types controlled by different people, both in reality and via rhetorical argument. Her analysis is compelling and underpins the arguments that follow, although the reader is left wondering about the implications of the temporality of these understandings and how, and why, they might change over time. Chapters 3 and 4 deal specifically with the public space par excellence of the city of Rome, the Forum Romanum. In the first R. develops her arguments relating to the control of behaviour in relation to architecture and the ways in which discrete political space was carved out of a more broadly multifunctional, and difficult to control, public space. The need to control space in order to render it political was accompanied by fears concerning disproportionate levels of control which might unduly influence political processes. In this instance ‘public space’ could mean very different, even competing things. Chapter 4 complicates this picture by drawing attention to the ways in which private space could spill over into the Forum via atria, basilicae and houses. This, R. suggests, is indicative of the elite seeking to extend their personal (i.e. private) influence over political space. This is a thought-provoking argument that forces the reader to question their assumptions. The blurring of private/public continues in Chapter 5 as R. tackles sacred space. Here the case studies work particularly well to highlight the varied ways in which objects and ideals associated more commonly with the private sphere could play a role in politicising public space. The conclusion that the tomb of the Scipios is best seen as a ‘mixed-use complex’ more akin to houses ‘where individual families put themselves on public display and surrounded the visitor with art and architecture pointing to a carefully curated image of themselves and their forebears’ (p. 114) is one that might be profitably extended to other funerary contexts. Here, however, a lack of confidence in working critically with archaeological evidence and a reliance upon secondary sources is evident, leading to some rather generalised assertions and statements taken at face value (‘Early Roman and Italic tombs looked like little houses’, p. 112). This is unfortunate, for it means that the implications of her otherwise persuasive points are not always followed through as rigorously as some of her other observations. Chapter 6 documents the role played by Greek art in the further clouding of private/public, largely in the form of booty and statues used to adorn temples and related spaces. The placing of private property in the form of collections of foreign art within ostensibly public spaces underpins R.’s central argument with more insightful and well-chosen examples. In the penultimate chapter (Chapter 7) our attention is shifted to one individual as R. examines Pompey's successful ‘privatisation’ of the Campus Martius and reflects upon his ‘theatre-portico-temple-garden-house complex [as] the most thorough integration of public and private space achieved in Rome until Augustus’ Palatium’ (p. 186). Again, the arguments are astute and thought-provoking, and the case study allows R. to gather the strands of each chapter and apply them all to a single context. Chapter 8 serves as a conclusion, acknowledging that understandings of private/public became fundamentally changed by the Principate, which had no place for the tensions that provided scope for the manipulation of that dichotomy under the Republic.
This is an engaging book that compels the reader to reflect upon their own assumptions in fresh and carefully nuanced ways and which strives to integrate textual and archaeological evidence where possible. Despite R.’s stated intent to consider a wider number of actors it is inevitably the (elite) male perspective which tends to dominate, although her analysis makes it possible to appreciate how political space might be especially masculine in character. There are perhaps a number of missed opportunities: it would have been profitable to explore alternative viewpoints and experiences, if not specifically those of women (or children) at least those of the collective non-elite who encountered these spaces on their own terms at different moments in time. Moreover, although movement and experience (including sensory perception) are flagged as guiding principles, the reader emerges from their visit to these more nuanced public spaces with an understanding that is fundamentally grounded in visual experience – one in which people uncritically ‘read off’ messages from architecture or in which ‘surveillance’ by others is fundamental. Whenever attention is drawn to navigating through spaces, it is what was seen that dominates, rendering this approach to spatial experience one that is really about experiences of seeing/being seen. However, such observations will undoubtedly prompt investigations of these spaces with reference to other sensory experiences. This book provides an important starting point for developing new ways of examining the complexities of public space, establishing definitively that it cannot be understood as something entirely separate from, or in opposition to, the private or semi-public domestic realm.
